MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996879561 · doi:10.1002/hon.2708

Radiotherapy in mantle cell lymphoma: A literature review

2019· review· en· W2996879561 on OpenAlexaff
Sharon Ben Barouch, John Kuruvilla, Richard Tsang, Eva Yashphe, Nadav Sarid

Bibliographic record

VenueHematological Oncology · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMantle cell lymphomaRadiation therapyLymphomaMalignancyStage (stratigraphy)DiseaseOncologyInternal medicineSystemic therapyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a B-cell malignancy, comprising between 3% and 10% of all adult-onset non-Hodgkin lymphomas. MCL is considered incurable with current treatment modalities and most patients require multiple lines of treatment during their lifetime. MCL is very sensitive to radiotherapy (RT), even when delivered in low doses. In limited-stage MCL, RT can enable the de-escalation of systemic therapy. RT monotherapy is a valid option for frail patients. In advanced-stage disease, RT is very potent mode of palliation, even in heavily pretreated and chemo-resistant patients. Furthermore, it can provide a respite during which systemic treatment is unnecessary. In general, RT has a favorable toxicity profile and can be repeated as necessary for local relapse or distant disease. This effective, safe, and relatively inexpensive modality of therapy has been underutilized for patients with MCL. In this review, we will outline the use of RT for limited and advanced-stage disease and its potential application in combination with novel drugs.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.336 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHematological OncologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207