Avoidance of primary site adjuvant radiotherapy following transoral robotic surgery: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Post-operative radiotherapy (PORT) volumes and dose to target structures likely influence swallowing function and quality of life following transoral robotic surgery (TORS). The aim of this study is to analyse disease control and swallowing outcomes in patients undergoing TORS for oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) to determine the impact of omitting the primary site from the PORT treatment volume. METHODS: Prospectively collected data from patients that underwent TORS between March 2013 and April 2021 were reviewed. Patients were categorized into three groups: (1) no PORT, (2) PORT to the neck alone or (3) PORT to the primary site and neck. Survival curves were generated according to the Kaplan-Meier method and swallowing was assessed using the Functional Oral Intake Scale, Public Status Scale Head and Neck, MD Anderson Dysphagia Inventory and feeding tube/gastrostomy dependence. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients underwent TORS, of which 103 met inclusion criteria with a median follow up of 2.6 years. No patients developed local recurrence. The 3-year regional control rates were 90%, 100% and 100% for groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Disease-specific survival was 97% over the study period. Patients that received PORT to both the primary site and the neck (group 3) had worse swallowing outcomes at 12 months. CONCLUSION: Following TORS for OPSCC, avoiding PORT to the primary site, in appropriately selected patients, appears to be oncologically safe and is associated with superior swallowing outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".