Phase II study of de‐intensified intensity‐modulated radiotherapy and concurrent carboplatin/5‐fluorouracil in lateralized p16‐associated oropharyngeal carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess cancer control and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after de-intensified intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in lateralized p16-associated oropharyngeal cancer (p16-OPC). METHODS: Lateralized p16-OPC treated with radiotherapy and concurrent Carboplatin/5-fluorouracil between 2011 and 2014 were enrolled. De-intensified IMRT consisted in elective neck dose of 43.2 Gy/24 fractions and omission of contralateral retropharyngeal/level IV nodes. PROs were assessed using the EORTC QLC-C30 and QLQ-HN35 scales. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients were included. Median follow-up was 44 months. As per AJCC 7th Ed, 7%, 83% and 10% of patients had stage III, IVa and IVb. 5-year locoregional control and overall survival rates were 100% and 100%, respectively. Rates of acute were 52% and 35%, respectively. At 2 years post-treatment, 50% and 14% of patients had grade 1 xerostomia and dysgueusia, respectively. Most PROs scores returned to baseline within 8 months post-treatment. CONCLUSION: De-intensified IMRT was associated with excellent cancer outcomes, and rapid recovery of PROs in lateralized p16-OPC.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".