High‐grade radiologic extra‐nodal extension predicts distant metastasis in stage II nasopharyngeal carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To investigate the prognostic value of radiologic extra-nodal extension (rENE) in stage II nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: Stage II NPC patients with N1 category (n = 365) were enrolled and divided into three groups according to the situation of rENE: without rENE, suspected rENE, and confirmed rENE (grades: A, infiltration into surrounding fat; B, matted nodes; C, infiltration into adjacent structures). RESULTS: Only high-grade rENE (including matted nodes and infiltration into adjacent structures) could significantly influence the survival outcomes, patients with high-grade rENE had significantly poorer survival than those without, with the 7-year distant metastasis-free survival and overall survival demonstrated to be 78.5% vs 93.0% (P < .001) and 81.9% vs 89.9% (P = .05), respectively. High-grade rENE, as defined in our study, is a stable criterion, with high intra-rater and inter-rater consistency. CONCLUSION: High-grade rENE was an evaluable predictor that could help with the selection of stage II patients with high risk of distant metastasis.
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) | 0.001 | 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".