Influence of Tumor Site on Survival in Young Patients with Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of patients under the age of 45 diagnosed with head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCC) is increasing, probably due to the incidence of oropharyngeal cancers. Comparisons of HNSCC in young and old patients regarding tumor site and survival in sample sizes of relevance are rarely published. The aim of the study was to analyze the differences in survival between age groups dependent on tumor site and the influence of oropharyngeal cancers on the rising rates of HNSCC in the young. The records of 4466 patients diagnosed with HNSCC were reviewed retrospectively. Patients younger than 45 years were divided further into four subgroups for specific age differences in the young. The influences of patient and clinicopathological characteristics on survival were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses. Among the patient cohort, 4.8% were younger than 45 years. Overall survival (OS) in these patients was better, with a 5-year OS of 66.1% (vs. 46.4%), while relapse-free survival (RFS) was better in the older patient population, with a 5-year RFS of 74.9% (vs. 68.1%). Decreased RFS in the young was found for advanced tumor stages and tumor sited at the larynx. Hypopharynx and advanced stages were independent risk factors for OS under 45 years. Overall, 44.4% of all HNSCC in patients under 30 years were nasopharyngeal cancers, and incidence decreased with age. The incidence of oropharyngeal cancers increased significantly with age. Better OS in the young may be explained by lower tumor and disease stages, whereas oropharyngeal tumors and HPV were not found to cause rising rates of HNSCC. Laryngeal malignancies in young patients might be related to an increased malignant potential and should, consequently, be treated as such.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 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".