Prospective, Multi‐Center Study of the Anatomic Distribution of Recurrent Respiratory Papillomatosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To create a model of the anatomic distribution, recurrence, and growth patterns of recurrent respiratory papillomatosis (RRP). STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, multi-institutional cohort study. METHODS: Adult patients with a diagnosis of RRP evaluated between August 1, 2018 and February 1, 2021 at six participating centers were invited to enroll. At each office or operating room encounter, laryngologists recorded the location and size of RRP lesions using a 22-region schematic. A generalized linear mixed effects model was used to compare region variations in lesion prevalence and recurrence. RESULTS: The cohort comprised 121 patients: 74% were male, 81% had been diagnosed with adult-onset RRP, and a plurality (34%) had undergone 0 to 3 RRP interventions prior to enrollment. Across the study period, the odds of a lesion occurring in the glottis was significantly higher (odds ratio [OR]: 26.51; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 11.76-59.75, P < .001) compared with all other areas of the larynx and trachea. Within the true vocal folds, the membranous vocal folds had significantly higher odds (OR: 6.16; 95% CI: 2.66-14.30, P < .001) of lesion occurrence compared to the cartilaginous vocal folds. Despite these strong trends in lesion distribution, there were no differences in the odds of lesion recurrence, growth, or in the time to recurrence, between anatomic subsites. CONCLUSIONS: RRP lesions are most likely to occur in the glottis, particularly the membranous vocal folds, compared with other regions of the larynx or trachea. However, all lesions demonstrate similar behavior with respect to recurrence, growth, and time to recurrence regardless of anatomic location. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 132:2403-2411, 2022.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".