MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4313260272 · doi:10.3390/curroncol30010020

Variation in Body Mass and Skeletal Muscle Indices in Head and Neck Cancer Patients Undergoing (Chemo)Radiotherapy and Nutritional Intervention

2022· article· en· W4313260272 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Carla Pisani, Federico Mastroleo, Alessandro Collo, Daniela Ferrante, Greta Carabelli, Pierfrancesco Franco, Sergio Riso, Valeria Dell’Era, Massimiliano Garzaro, Paolo Aluffi Valletti, Marco Krengli

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHead and neck cancerRadiation therapyHead and neck squamous-cell carcinomaBody mass indexWilcoxon signed-rank testCancerHead and neckInternal medicineSurgeryMann–Whitney U test

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to analyze variation in body mass index (BMI) and skeletal muscle index (SMI) in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patients who underwent exclusive radiotherapy (RT) or concurrent chemo-radiotherapy (RT-CHT). We enrolled 73 HNSCC pts treated with definitive or post-operative RT (14 pts) or RT-CHT (59 pts). At the time of diagnosis (t0) and 3 months after treatment completion (t3), CT scans were retrieved to measure skeletal muscle at the level of the C3 vertebra. Median follow-up was 16 months. Nine disease progressions with distant metastases and eleven local relapses were observed. Fifty-three pts were free from progression at 1 year. At t0, average BMI was 25.8 (SD 4.1), while at t3 it was 24.5, with no reduction in 54 pts. A BMI decrease of −1.3 (p-value < 0.0001) between t0 and t3 was found with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test. SMI was 57.1 and 59.2 at t0 and t3, respectively (p-value = 0.005). According to our analysis, SMI variation seems to reflect the effect of an appropriate nutritional intervention and may represent a reliable, simple tool for muscle mass analysis.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.357 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→