Using the revised Edmonton symptom assessment scale during neoadjuvant radiotherapy for retroperitoneal sarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS) is a rare, complex disease requiring multidisciplinary management. We have previously reported that use of the Revised Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS-r-CSS) allows for proactive symptom management, and we sought to report the results of ESAS-r-CSS screening during pre-operative radiotherapy (RT) for a cadre of patients with RPS. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We reviewed records of 47 patients with RPS evaluated at our institution between 2015 and 2018. Of this group, 29 non-metastatic patients were treated with definitive intent neoadjuvant RT with at least 2 weekly ESAS-r-CSS reports. A generalized estimating equation model was used to compare 13 symptoms during weekly on-treatment visits compared to baseline scores at week 1 of RT. Additionally, covariate effects of age, gender, dose, tumor size and location were assessed. RESULTS: = 0.02). In an exploratory covariate analysis, female gender, age, high dose, and larger tumor size were associated with worse ESAS scores across all time points. CONCLUSION: Patient reporting of symptoms during radiotherapy through weekly ESAS-r-CSS facilitates timely management in patients with this unique tumor type. Expectant care during RT offers the opportunity to minimize symptom progression or treatment interruptions in a population that generally has worsening side effects.
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) | 0.000 | 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".