Chemotherapy in Combination With Radiotherapy for Definitive-Intent Treatment of Stage II-IVA Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: CSCO and ASCO Guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this joint guideline is to provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and other healthcare providers on definitive-intent chemoradiotherapy for patients with stage II-IVA nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). METHODS: The Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) and ASCO convened an expert panel of radiation oncology, medical oncology, surgery, and advocacy representatives. The literature search included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and randomized controlled trials published from 1990 through 2020. Outcomes of interest included survival, distant and locoregional disease control, and quality of life. Expert panel members used this evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations. RESULTS: The literature search identified 108 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline. Five overarching clinical questions were addressed, which included subquestions on radiotherapy (RT), chemotherapy sequence, and concurrent, induction, and adjuvant chemotherapy options. RECOMMENDATIONS: Evidence-based recommendations were developed to address aspects of care related to chemotherapy in combination with RT for the definitive-intent treatment of stage II to IVA NPC.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/head-neck-cancer-guidelines.
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 | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".