MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308119005 · doi:10.3390/curroncol29110655

Magnetic Resonance-Guided Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Cancers

2022· review· en· W4308119005 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Danny Lavigne, Sweet Ping Ng, Brian O’Sullivan, Phuc Félix Nguyen‐Tan, Édith Filion, Laurent Létourneau‐Guillon, Clifton D. Fuller, Houda Bahig

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead and neck cancerMagnetic resonance imagingHead and neckRadiation therapyRadiation treatment planningRadiologyMedical physicsNuclear medicineSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite the significant evolution of radiation therapy (RT) techniques in recent years, many patients with head and neck cancer still experience significant toxicities during and after treatments. The increased soft tissue contrast and functional sequences of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are particularly attractive in head and neck cancer and have led to the increasing development of magnetic resonance-guided RT (MRgRT). This approach refers to the inclusion of the additional information acquired from a diagnostic or planning MRI in radiation treatment planning, and now extends to online high-quality daily imaging generated by the recently developed MR-Linac. MRgRT holds numerous potentials, including enhanced baseline and planning evaluations, anatomical and functional treatment adaptation, potential for hypofractionation, and multiparametric assessment of response. This article offers a structured review of the current literature on these established and upcoming roles of MRI for patients with head and neck cancer undergoing RT.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.283
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations17
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207