Radiotherapy for small cell lung cancer in current clinical practice guidelines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several guidelines including radiotherapy recommendations exist worldwide for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). To evaluate the differences in radiotherapy recommendations we conducted a systematic review. PubMed and the sites of medical societies were searched for SCLC guidelines published in either English, Chinese, or Dutch. This was limited to January 2018 till February 2021 to only include up-to-date recommendations. Data was extracted and compared regarding the guideline's development method and radiotherapy recommendations. Eleven guidelines were identified (PubMed n=4, societies n=7) from Spain (n=1), Canada (n=1), America (n=3), United Kingdom (n=1), the Netherlands (n=1), and China (n=3), respectively. Nine guidelines assessed the strength of evidence (SOE) and specified the strength of recommendation (SOR), although methods were different. The major radiotherapy recommendations are similar although differences exist in thoracic radiotherapy (TRT) dose, time, and volume. Controversial areas are TRT in resected stage I-IIA (pN1), prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in resected as well as unresected stage I-IIA, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in unresected stage I-IIA, PCI time, and PCI versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance in stage IV. The existence of several overlapping guidelines for SCLC treatment indicates that guideline development is (unnecessarily) repeated by different organizations or societies. Improvement could be made by better international collaboration to avoid duplicating unnecessary work, which would spare a lot of time and resources. Efforts should be made to work together on controversial or unknown fields.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".