Radiation dose mapping and anastomotic complications after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is conflicting evidence with respect to the correlation between neoadjuvant chemoradiation and anastomotic complications following trimodality therapy in patients with esophageal cancer. We aimed to analyze the relationship between their dosimetry and any resulting anastomotic complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 51 consecutive patients who underwent trimodality therapy between 2007 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. We analyzed the differences in the mean dose received by regions of the esophagus relative to the landmark of the azygous vein and the stomach to correlate the development of an anastomotic complication using nonparametric rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage and stricture rates were 12% and 22%, respectively. Patients with anastomotic complications received a statistically significant higher mean dose to the esophagus at the level of the azygous vein (0.0 cm) and lower (up to -2.7 cm) (28.4-42.2 Gy vs. 10.3-27.6 Gy, p < 0.04). There were no differences noted in mean gastric doses. Median follow up time was 30.9 months. Median overall survival and disease free survival of our patient cohort was 34.4 months and 22.5 months, respectively. The development of an anastomotic complication did not affect survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients who experienced anastomotic complication after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer were more likely to have received a higher mean esophageal dose around the proximity of the azygous vein, where intrathoracic anastomoses most commonly occur. Communication between surgical and radiation oncologists regarding the anastomotic location may be an important consideration in planning for trimodality therapy in reducing potential anastomotic complications.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".