MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3007541271 · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2020.01.007

European interdisciplinary guideline on invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the skin: Part 1. epidemiology, diagnostics and prevention

2020· article· en· W3007541271 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Alexander J. Stratigos, Claus Garbe, Clio Dessinioti, Célèste Lebbé, Véronique Bataille, Lars Bastholt, Brigitte Dréno, Maria Concetta Fargnoli, Ana‐Maria Forsea, Cecille Frenard, Catherine Harwood, Axel Hauschild, Christoph Höeller, Lidija Kandolf Sekulović, Roland Kaufmann, Nicole WJ. Kelleners-Smeets, Josep Malvehy, V. del Mármol, Mark R. Middleton, D. Moreno‐Ramírez, Giovanni Pellecani, Ketty Peris, Philippe Saïag, M.H.J. van den Beuken-van Everdingen, Ricardo Vieira, Iris Zalaudek, Alexander M.M. Eggermont, Jean‐Jacques Grob

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Cancer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Superior de AgronomiaMerck Sharp and DohmeSandozBristol-Myers Squibb CanadaGenentechSun PharmaGenesis PharmaEisaiSkylineDxPfizerBiogenIncyteLes Laboratories Pierre FabreRegeneron PharmaceuticalsMylanGaldermaUCBAbbVieHealth ResearchNovartisCelgeneLEO PharmaBayerWyethAgence Nationale de la RechercheRocheSanofiMerckAmgenEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsGuidelineEpidemiologyMedicineBasal cellDermatologyOncologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in the white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Factors implicated in cSCC etiopathogenesis include ultraviolet radiation exposure and chronic photoaging, age, male sex, immunosuppression, smoking and genetic factors. A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO) and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to update recommendations on cSCC classification, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention, based on current literature, staging systems and expert consensus. Common cSCCs are typically indolent tumors, and most have a good prognosis with 5-year cure rates of greater than 90%, and a low rate of metastases (<4%). Further risk stratification into low-risk or high-risk common primary cSCC is recommended based on proposed high-risk factors. Advanced cSCC is classified as locally advanced (lacSCC), and metastatic (mcSCC) including locoregional metastatic or distant metastatic cSCC. Current systems used for staging include the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition, the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) 8th edition, and Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) system. Physical examination for all cSCCs should include total body skin examination and clinical palpation of lymph nodes, especially of the draining basins. Radiologic imaging such as ultrasound of the regional lymph nodes, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), computed tomography (CT), positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) scans are recommended for staging of high-risk cSCC. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is currently not recommended. Nicotinamide, oral retinoids, and topical 5-FU have been used for the chemoprevention of subsequent cSCCs in high-risk patients but are not routinely recommended. Education about sun protection measures including reducing sun exposure, use of protective clothing, regular use of sunscreens and avoidance of artificial tanning, is recommended.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations240
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Cancer→Same topicNonmelanoma Skin Cancer Studies→French-language works237,207→