Ecthyma gangréneux, manifestation cutanée d’une infection systémique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: To determine the proportion of patients with tumor response, the proportion who survived progression-free for at least 6 months (progression-free survival ≥ 6 months), and the frequency and severity of toxicities of patients with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix treated with erlotinib. Methods: This was a multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial evaluating the toxicity and efficacy of oral erlotinib at an initial dosage of 150 mg daily until progressive disease or adverse effects prohibited further therapy. Results: Twenty-eight patients with squamous cell carcinoma were enrolled onto this trial. Twenty-five patients were evaluable. There were no objective responses, with 4 (16%) patients achieving stable disease; only 1 patient had a progression-free survival of 6 months (4%) or more. The 1-sided 90% confidence interval for response was 0.0% to 8.8%. The 2-sided 90% confidence interval for the proportion of patients surviving progression-free for at least 6 months is 0.2% to 17.6%. Erlotinib was well tolerated, with the most common drug-related adverse events being gastrointestinal toxicities, fatigue, and rash. Conclusions: Erlotinib is inactive as monotherapy in patients with recurrent squamous cell carcinoma of the uterine cervix.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".