MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202592821 · doi:10.54434/candj.92

Hyperthermia in Cancer Care: A Literature Review

2021· review· en· W3202592821 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCAND Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUltrasound and Hyperthermia Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian College of Naturopathic Medicine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyCochrane LibraryCancerObservational studyHyperthermiaSystematic reviewMEDLINEOncologyInternal medicineBreast cancerHead and neck cancerQuality of life (healthcare)Intensive care medicineRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Hyperthermia (HT) in cancer management refers to the external application of heat to raise intratumoural temperature to between 39°C and 45°C. Locoregional hyperthermia (LRHT) is the most used and studied type of HT in cancer care. A literature search was conducted to produce a monograph to help clinicians and patients make informed choices in considering the application of this therapy.
 Methods: A search was performed in Medline and Cochrane library for LRHT and cancer in May 2020. Eligible studies were English-language clinical studies reporting on efficacy, quality of life (QoL), safety, or feasibility. Additional cursory literature scoping was performed to identify missing papers and background information. Papers were independently screened by two reviewers. Following development of a full monograph, a condensed version suitable for publication was created and is presented here.
 Results: A total of 980 articles were identified and 166 met inclusion criteria. Most were single-arm or observational. However, among the 166, there were 7 systematic reviews (including 37 RCTs) and 18 additional RCTs identified. Several mechanisms of action have been proposed for HT in cancer care including physiological changes, direct cytotoxic effects, chemosensitization and radiosensitization, and immune modulation. Locoregional HT is used primarily as an adjunct to chemotherapy and radiotherapy due to its possible synergistic effects. Various studies demonstrated improved outcomes for patients treated with LRHT and chemo-and/or-radiotherapy. The best evidence for improved disease control and survival is seen for breast cancer (locally recurrent), cervical cancer, esophageal and gastric cancers, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, and high-risk soft tissue sarcoma. Research related to quality of life (QoL) is limited and often focuses on pain. Hyperthermia with modern technology and treatment planning is generally well tolerated; the most common side effects are discomfort, mild pain, local erythema, skin burns, and, less commonly, subcutaneous burns. Trial heterogeneity and methodological concerns limit the strength of conclusions.
 Conclusions: Locoregional HT is a promising adjunct treatment to chemotherapy and radiotherapy for a variety of cancer types. To determine in what situations this therapy could be best applied, more high-quality well-controlled studies are needed.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.294 · 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