Revisiting the Role of Radiation Treatment for Non-serous Subtypes of Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Except for its palliative use, radiation has been largely abandoned in the management of ovarian cancers because of the recognized efficacy of chemotherapy agents. Whole abdominal irradiation (WAR), however, has been shown to be of adjuvant and curative value in ovarian cancer with microscopic or minimal residual disease in the pelvis, the so-called “intermediate risk group.” Recent hypothesis generating data from the use of adjuvant radiation following adjuvant chemotherapy in ovarian cancer has shown an incremental survival benefit for the rarer non-serous ovarian subtypes including clear cell, endometrioid, and mucinous. No incremental benefit was observed for the more common serous subtype. A retrospective examination of early trials using WAR as the sole postoperative treatment in ovarian cancer has determined that the majority of patients in these studies and cured by radiation actually had the non-serous subtypes. The recognition that the non-serous subtypes differ from the serous cancers in their stage of presentation, their molecular characteristics, their response to classic chemotherapy, and their outcomes suggest the non-serous subtypes should be treated as rare and different cancers. In addition to specific targeting therapies that may be developed, radiation should be reconsidered as part of the treatment armamentarium for these diseases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".