Did the Addition of Concomitant Chemotherapy to Radiotherapy Improve Outcomes in Hypopharyngeal Cancer? A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For oncologists and for patients, no site-specific clinical trial evidence has emerged for the use of concurrent chemotherapy with radiotherapy (ccrt) over radiotherapy (rt) alone for cancer of the hypopharynx (hpc) or for other human papilloma virus-negative head-and-neck cancers. METHODS: This retrospective population-based cohort study using administrative data compared treatments over time (1990-2000 vs. 2000-2010), treatment outcomes, and outcomes over time in 1333 cases of hpc diagnosed in Ontario between January 1990 and December 2010. RESULTS: The incidence of hpc is declining; the use of ccrt that began in 2001 is increasing; and the 3-year overall survival for all patients remains poor at 34.6%. No difference in overall survival was observed in a comparison of patients treated in the decade before ccrt and of patients treated in the decade during the uptake of ccrt. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of ccrt to the armamentarium of treatment options for oncologists treating head-and-neck patients did not improve outcomes for hpc at the population level.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".