MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ASTRO Publishes Evidence-Based Guideline for Thoracic Radiotherapy

2011· article· en· W4213006561 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology Times · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvances in Oncology and Radiotherapy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGuidelineRadiation therapyMedicineMedical physicsLibrary scienceComputer scienceRadiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ImageThe American Society for Radiation Oncology has a new guideline for use of external-beam radiation therapy, endobronchial brachytherapy, and concurrent chemotherapy to palliate thoracic symptoms caused by advanced lung cancer. Although many patients whose lung cancer has spread receive radiation therapy to treat symptoms such as cough, shortness of breath, bronchial obstruction, and chest pain, there has been no one specific treatment approach. This variation, a news release notes, prompted the Guidelines Subcommittee of ASTRO's Clinical Affairs and Quality Committee to identify the use of palliative thoracic radiation therapy as a high-priority topic needing an evidence-based guideline. This panel was co-chaired by George Rodrigues, MD, MSc, a radiation oncologist and clinician scientist at London Health Sciences Centre in Ontario, and Benjamin Movsas, MD, chairman of radiation oncology at Henry Ford Health System in Detroit. ASTRO's Board of Directors then put together a multidisciplinary task force that was charged with reviewing and synthesizing the current evidence to develop such a guideline. The task force's main findings are: Various regimens of thoracic external-beam radiation therapy are very effective for palliation of symptoms, with moderately higher-dose regimens associated with a modest improvement in survival for selected patients primarily with good performance status. There is no evidence to recommend the use of endobronchial brachytherapy in the routine initial palliative management of lung cancer. There is no added benefit to patients to use chemotherapy at the same time as radiation therapy in the relief of thoracic symptoms for lung cancer patients. However, optimally integrating sequential chemotherapy and radiation therapy is important in the management of lung cancer symptoms. “It is our hope that this evidence-based guideline will help doctors determine the optimal palliative radiation treatments for lung cancer patients, thereby yielding improved quality of life,” Dr. Movsas said in a statement. The guideline is now available online ahead of print in Practical Radiation Oncology.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.355 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology TimesSame topicAdvances in Oncology and RadiotherapyFrench-language works237,207