Stereotactic Radiation Therapy for De Novo Head and Neck Cancers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for de novo (previously untreated) head and neck cancers (HNCs) is increasingly being used in medically unfit patients. A systematic review of SBRT was conducted for previously untreated HNCs. Methods and Materials: Medline (PubMed), excerpta medica database, and Cochrane Library databases were queried from inception until July 2020. Comparative outcome data were extracted where available up to 5 years. Results from random-effect models were presented in forest plots, with between-study heterogeneity evaluated by I 2 statistics and Q-tests. Results: Nine studies met inclusion criteria, representing 157 patients. Local control rates at 1, 2, and 3 years were as follows: 90.7% (95% confidence interval, 80.6%-95.6%), 81.8% (67.2%-90.7%), and 73.5% (40.4%-90.5%), respectively. Overall survival at 1, 2, and 3 years was 75.9% (75.1%-76.6%), 61.1% (60.3%-61.9%), and 50.0% (48.8%-51.4%), respectively. Late grade 3 to 4 toxicity rate was 3.3% (0.2%-10.2%), and late grade 5 toxicity rate was 0.1% (0.0%-1.0%). Conclusions: SBRT for de novo HNC is safe and effective in providing locoregional control, with acceptable toxicities in most subsites. This finding warrants broader validation to guide its scope.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".