Pediatric Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Rare Tumor in a Developing Country—What Do We Learn?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIM: Nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) is rare in children, accounting for 1% of pediatric malignancies. The 5-fluorouracil Cisplatin regimen could be considered as a standard of care induction chemotherapy followed by concomitant chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed at detecting the survival outcome in correlation with different prognostic factors together with the toxicity of different treatment modalities. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective study carried out from 2007 to 2016 that included all NPC patients below 18 years treated at the National Cancer Institute, Egypt. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients were included with a median follow-up period of 33.9 months. The median age was 14.8 years (range: 9 to 18). All patients were treated by neoadjuvant chemotherapy with cisplatin and 5- fluorouracil, followed by concurrent radiotherapy (median dose: 61.2 Gy) and cisplatin as a radiosensitizer. After induction chemotherapy, the response rate was 53%. After completion of treatment, 67% had a complete response; partial response was seen in 14%; and progressive disease was seen in 19%. By the end of the study, 7 (33.3%) patients had progression/relapse; 4 of them died from disease. The 3-year overall survival and event-free survival were 85.7% and 66.7%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy was an effective strategy in the treatment of pediatric NPC with good overall survival and event-free survival. High systemic failure (33.3%) remains another challenge to solve. More efforts should be made to improve survival by developing more efficient systemic treatment modalities, especially for progressive/relapsed disease. Multicenter studies on a larger number of patients are needed to identify different prognostic factors and standardize treatment strategies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".