MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2768912066 · doi:10.7759/cureus.1858

A Dosimetric Comparison of Primary Chemoradiation Versus Postoperative Radiation for Locally Advanced Oropharyngeal Cancer

2017· article· en· W2768912066 on OpenAlexaff
Stanley K Woo, Brock Debenham

Bibliographic record

VenueCureus · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyNuclear medicineStage (stratigraphy)AdjuvantAdjuvant radiotherapyChemoradiotherapyCancerRadiologyOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Advanced-stage oropharyngeal cancer can be treated with primary chemoradiation (CRT) or primary surgery with adjuvant radiotherapy, both with similar survival outcomes. Though primary CRT prescribes a higher dose, adjuvant radiation requires irradiating the surgical bed, which may increase the high dose planned target volume (PTV). We hypothesize that the integral dose to the neck and dose to critical structures will be lower with primary CRT than adjuvant radiotherapy. Methods We selected the last 18 patients who underwent surgery and adjuvant radiotherapy at one institution between July 2015 and August 2016 with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage III or IVA oropharyngeal squamous cell cancer. Primary CRT treatment plans were created on the patients' preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans and prescribed 70 Gy in 33 fractions, while postoperative plans were prescribed 60 Gy in 30 fractions. The radiation doses received by organs at risk for each primary CRT plan were compared to the corresponding adjuvant radiation plan. Results Primary CRT plans had significantly smaller high dose PTV than adjuvant radiation plans (187.3 cc (95% CI 134.9-239.7) and 466.3 cc (95% CI 356.7-575.9), p<0.0001). The neck integral dose was lower in 14 of 18 plans using primary CRT, although this was not statistically significant (p=0.5375). The primary CRT plans had lower mean doses to ipsilateral (31.8 Gy (95% CI 27.5-36.0) vs 39.3 Gy (95% CI 35.4-43.1), p=0.0009)) and contralateral parotid glands (22.5 Gy (95% CI 22.1-22.8) vs 27.6 Gy (95% CI 23.4-31.8), p=0.0238) and larynx (20.7 Gy (95% CI 19.3-22.2) vs 40.2 Gy (95% CI 30.8-46.6), p<0.0001). Conclusion Primary CRT offered a decreased neck integral dose, though it was statistically insignificant. Primary CRT plans reduce mean dose to larynx and parotid glands in comparison to postoperative radiation, which may result in lower toxicities. Clinical trials comparing primary CRT and primary surgery are warranted to compare patient toxicities.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.332 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCureus→Same topicHead and Neck Cancer Studies→French-language works237,207→