MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4239588467 · doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2020.05.012

Practice Recommendations for Lung Cancer Radiotherapy During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An ESTRO-ASTRO Consensus Statement

2020· article· en· W4239588467 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Gückenberger, Claus Belka, Andrea Bezjak, Jeffrey D. Bradley, Megan E. Daly, D Deruysscher, Rafał Dziadziuszko, Corinne Faivre‐Finn, Michael Flentje, Elizabeth Gore, Kristin Higgins, Puneeth Iyengar, Brian D. Kavanagh, Sameera Kumar, C. Le Péchoux, Yolande Lievens, Karin Lindberg, Fiona McDonald, Sara Ramella, Ramesh Rengan, Umberto Ricardi, Andreas Rimner, George Rodrigues, Steven E. Schild, Suresh Senan, Charles B. Simone, Ben J. Slotman, Martin Stuschke, G.M. Videtic, Joachim Widder, Sue S. Yom, David A. Palma

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCOVID-19 and healthcare impacts
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteEMD SeronoViewRayRefleXion MedicalVarian Medical SystemsBoston Scientific CorporationAmgenPfizerGenentechCelgeneAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicStatement (logic)Lung cancer2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)MedicineBetacoronavirusRadiation therapyMedical physicsIntensive care medicineVirologyPathologyPolitical scienceRadiologyInfectious disease (medical specialty)Outbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The COVID-19 pandemic has caused radiotherapy resource pressures and led to increased risks for lung cancer patients and healthcare staff. An international group of experts in lung cancer radiotherapy established this practice recommendation pertaining to whether and how to adapt radiotherapy for lung cancer in the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods For this ESTRO & ASTRO endorsed project, 32 experts in lung cancer radiotherapy contributed to a modified Delphi consensus process. We assessed potential adaptations of radiotherapy in two pandemic scenarios. The first, an early pandemic scenario of risk mitigation, is characterized by an altered risk–benefit ratio of radiotherapy for lung cancer patients due to their increased susceptibility for severe COVID-19 infection, and minimization of patient travelling and exposure of radiotherapy staff. The second, a later pandemic scenario, is characterized by reduced radiotherapy resources requiring patient triage. Six common lung cancer cases were assessed for both scenarios: peripherally located stage I NSCLC, locally advanced NSCLC, postoperative radiotherapy after resection of pN2 NSCLC, thoracic radiotherapy and prophylactic cranial irradiation for limited stage SCLC and palliative thoracic radiotherapy for stage IV NSCLC. Results In a risk-mitigation pandemic scenario, efforts should be made not to compromise the prognosis of lung cancer patients by departing from guideline-recommended radiotherapy practice. In that same scenario, postponement or interruption of radiotherapy treatment of COVID-19 positive patients is generally recommended to avoid exposure of cancer patients and staff to an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. In a severe pandemic scenario characterized by reduced resources, if patients must be triaged, important factors for triage include potential for cure, relative benefit of radiation, life expectancy, and performance status. Case-specific consensus recommendations regarding multimodality treatment strategies and fractionation of radiotherapy are provided. Conclusion This joint ESTRO-ASTRO practice recommendation established pragmatic and balanced consensus recommendations in common clinical scenarios of radiotherapy for lung cancer in order to address the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.109
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.113
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1090.113
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.005
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0060.010
Research integrity0.0140.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

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 head0.127
GPT teacher head0.504
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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

Citations58
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*PhysicsSame topicCOVID-19 and healthcare impactsFrench-language works237,207