MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899501326 · doi:10.21037/tlcr.2018.10.07

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for centrally located stage I non-small cell lung cancer

2018· review· en· W2899501326 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTranslational Lung Cancer Research · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLung Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLung cancerRadiation therapyStage (stratigraphy)RadiologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) has become the standard of care for the treatment of early stage non-small cell lung cancer in high risk or medically inoperable patients. It is very well tolerated when given to peripherally located tumors and is associated with high rates of local control. Centrally located tumors represent a bigger challenge as they are closer to a number of critical structures, namely the major bronchi, esophagus, large vessels and brachial plexus, that can be damaged by the high ablative doses of SBRT needed for optimal tumor control. Thus, the fractionation schedule for centrally located tumors needs to balance the need for tumor control while minimizing the risk of significant radiotherapy toxicity. In this article, we review the current evidence, summarize the prospective and retrospective studies of SBRT for centrally located tumors, and highlight several practical considerations.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.469
Teacher spread0.373 · 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