MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

A retrospective analysis of adult head and neck rhabdomyosarcoma (HN RMS) from 1984-2017.

2018· article· en· W2890185811 on OpenAlexaff
Shivali Barot, David Shultz, Brian O’Sullivan, Abha A. Gupta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRhabdomyosarcomaUnivariate analysisRetrospective cohort studyRadiation therapyStage (stratigraphy)MalignancyChemotherapySarcomaSurgeryHead and neckInternal medicineMultivariate analysisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e18089 Background: Head and Neck Rhabdomyosarcoma (HN RMS) in adults is an aggressive and challenging approach to managing malignancy. Our goal was to describe the presentation, treatment, outcomes, patterns of failure, and prognostic factors of HN RMS patients treated at our institution between 1984 and 2017. Methods: A retrospective review of adult ( > 16 years) HN RMS patients registered in the multidisciplinary Sarcoma Clinic who received majority of their treatment at our institution was performed. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier Method. Prognostic variables including age, anatomic location, histologic subtype, radiation, and TNM stage were analyzed in univariate (UVA) Cox analyses. Results: Fifty-eight patients were identified, with a median age of 32 years (ranged 16 to 81); 26 were male. Seventy-six percent of tumors (n = 45) were parameningeal and 88% (n = 51) were > 5cm. Fifty percent of patients (n = 29) had clinical node positive disease and 15% (n = 9) had distant metastases at the time of diagnosis. Local treatment consisted of surgery and radiotherapy (RT) versus RT alone in 9% (n = 5), and 91% (n = 53) patients respectively; with 76% (n = 45) receiving chemotherapy. Local and regional control at 5 years was 64% and 73%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 18 months, 5-year Overall Survival (OS) was 34% (95% CI: 20%-48%) and 29% (95% CI: 17%-42%) for non-metastatic and metastatic patients, respectively. Patterns of failure were further analyzed in 49 non-metastatic patients. Sixty-seven percent (n = 30) patients relapsed, with median time to progression of 15 months. Median time to distant failure was 20 months. On UVA, concurrent chemotherapy (HR 2.3, p = 0.029) and tumor size (HR 2.6, p = 0.01) were associated with worse survival. Distant metastasis was the predominant mode of first failure (n = 16, 33%). This population was also enriched for patients with metastases in unusual locations, including testes (n = 2), breasts (n = 2), leptomeninges (n = 12), and bone marrow (n = 9). Conclusions: Adult HN RMS of the head and neck is an aggressive malignancy with an unfavorable prognosis, despite intensive treatment, but is potentially curable, particularly with modern radiotherapy techniques and chemotherapy.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→