Contralateral Neck Irradiation Can Be Omitted for Selected Lateralized Oral Cancer in Locally Advanced Stage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
(1) Background: To investigate the contralateral neck failure (cRF) rates and outcomes among patients with well-lateralized locally advanced oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) with/without ipsilateral or bilateral neck adjuvant irradiation. (2) Methods: Patients with lateralized OSCC diagnosed between 2007 and 2017 were retrospectively enrolled. Patients who had undergone curative surgery with pathologically proven pT3/4 or pN0-2b without distant metastasis were included, while those with cross-midline, neck-level 1a involvement and positive extra-nodal extension (ENE) were excluded. The primary endpoint was the cumulative incidence of 5-year cRF as the first site of failure. The secondary endpoints included cancer-specific survival (CSS), local-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and contralateral-regional recurrence-free survival (cRRFS). (3) Results: In total, 149 patients were analyzed with a median follow-up time of 5.2 years (range, 2.91-7.83). Pathological stages T3 and T4 were 22.7% and 56.8%, respectively. Pathologically negative and positive lymph nodes were 61.4% and 38.6%, respectively. The cumulative 5-year cRF rate was 3.6% (95% CI, 1.3-7.7%). No significant differences in the 5-year CSS, LRRFS, DMFS, and cRRFS were observed among those undergoing unilateral or bilateral neck irradiation. Five patients (3.4%) had contralateral neck recurrence, all simultaneously with local recurrence. No isolated contralateral neck recurrence was identified. (4) Conclusions: The cRF rate was acceptably low in patients with well-lateralized advanced OSCC with the initially uninvolved contralateral neck. Omitting contralateral neck irradiation with active surveillance could be considered without compromising the cure rate in locally advanced OSCC patients.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".