MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Changes in the proportion of squamous cell carcinoma in head and neck cancer in the United States and Canada, 1995-2015.

2019· article· en· W2946935240 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew E. Gaubatz, Aleksandr R. Bukatko, Katherine M. Polednik, Matthew C. Simpson, Eric Adjei Boakye, Kahee A. Mohammed, Nosayaba Osazuwa‐Peters

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead and neck cancerCancerIncidence (geometry)LarynxPopulationHead and neckHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaInternal medicineCohortCancer registryEpidemiologyBasal cellDemographySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

e17554 Background: There has been a shift in the epidemiologic landscape of head and neck cancer (HNC) with decreasing incidence of tobacco-related and increasing incidence of human papillomavirus (HPV)-related HNC. While it is often reported that ≥ 90% of HNC is considered squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), there is an apparent lack of recent population-based data to support this claim. This study aimed to estimate the current proportion and evaluate change in the proportion of SCC in HNC diagnoses in North America (United States and Canada) from 1995 to 2015. Methods: We queried the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) database for HNC cases that were of either squamous (SQ) (ICD-0-3: 8050-8089) or squamous plus unspecified epithelial (SQE) (ICD-0-3:8010-8089) origin in the United States and Canada ( n = 1,054,409). All HNC included in the analysis were microscopically confirmed, malignant head and neck primary tumor sites of the oral cavity, nasopharynx, hypopharynx, oropharynx, nasal cavity, and larynx. Sub-analyses were conducted across more extensive cohort restriction combinations (country specific, registry specific, and primary sequence of cancer). Results: The overall proportion of SCC in HNC in North America from 1995-2015 was 81.7% (95% CI: 81.7 – 81.8) for SQ and 84.9% (95% CI: 84.8 – 85.0) for SQE. The proportion of SCC in HNC peaked in 2015 with 83.3% (95% CI: 83.0 – 83.6) for SQ and 85.9% (95% CI: 85.6 – 86.2) for SQE; and was lowest in 2005 with 80.7% (95% CI: 80.4 – 81.1) for SQ and 84.3% (95% CI: 83.9 – 84.6) for SQE. In the time period of this study (1995 – 2015), there were no years for which SQ or SQE made up 90% or more of HNC for any of the HNC cohorts. Conclusions: The changing landscape of HNC risk factors in the United States and Canada warrants re-evaluation and update of HNC epidemiological literature with regards to the proportion of SCC in HNC.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.425
Teacher spread0.348 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicHead and Neck Cancer Studies→French-language works237,207→