Outcomes for the treatment of locoregional recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer: Systematic review and pooled analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Despite advances in the treatment of primary nasopharyngeal carcinoma, locoregional recurrence (lrNPC) occurs at 10%–50% at 5 years. This review aims to evaluate salvage treatment for locally recurrent nasopharyngeal cancer. A literature search for all original articles published on the treatment of lrNPC from January 1990 to January 2021 was conducted. Pooled analysis was performed using a random effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity of the combined results with I2 index. Overall, 66 studies were included for analysis. A total of 5286 patients treated with intensity‐modulated radiation therapy (39%), conformal radiotherapy (31%), open nasopharyngectomy (12%), endoscopic nasopharyngectomy (10%), stereotactic radiosurgery (4%), and brachytherapy (4%) were included. Surgical therapy has similar overall survival outcomes to re‐irradiation but with decreased treatment‐related morbidity and mortality. Both surgical and re‐irradiation for lrNPC have similar long‐term survival. Surgical approaches to lrNPC may offer similar survival while avoiding treatment‐associated morbidity and mortality.
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 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".