Surveillance imaging for patients with head and neck cancer treated with definitive radiotherapy: A partially observed Markov decision process model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A possible surveillance model for patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) who received definitive radiotherapy was created using a partially observed Markov decision process. The goal of this model is to guide surveillance imaging policies after definitive radiotherapy. METHODS: The partially observed Markov decision process model was formulated to determine the optimal times to scan patients. Transition probabilities were computed using a data set of 1508 patients with HNC who received definitive radiotherapy between the years 2000 and 2010. Kernel density estimation was used to smooth the sample distributions. The reward function was derived using cost estimates from the literature. Additional model parameters were estimated using either data from the literature or clinical expertise. RESULTS: When considering all forms of relapse, the model showed that the optimal time between scans was longer than the time intervals used in the institutional guidelines. The optimal policy dictates that there should be less time between surveillance scans immediately after treatment compared with years after treatment. Comparable results also held when only locoregional relapses were considered as relapse events in the model. Simulation results for the inclusive relapse cases showed that <15% of patients experienced a relapse over a simulated 36-month surveillance program. CONCLUSIONS: This model suggests that less frequent surveillance scan policies can maintain adequate information on relapse status for patients with HNC treated with radiotherapy. This model could potentially translate into a more cost-effective surveillance program for this group of patients.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".