A Phase II Study of Optimized Individualized Adaptive Radiotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We hypothesized that optimizing the utility of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) based on the individual patient's probability for tumor control and risk of liver injury would decrease toxicity without sacrificing local control in patients with impaired liver function or tumors not amenable to thermal ablation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with Child-Pugh (CP) A to B7 liver function with aggregate tumor size >3.5 cm, or CP ≥ B8 with any size tumor were prospectively enrolled on an Institutional Review Board-approved phase II clinical trial to undergo SBRT with baseline and midtreatment dose optimization using a quantitative, individualized utility-based analysis. Primary endpoints were change in CP score of ≥2 points within 6 months and local control. Protocol-treated patients were compared with patients receiving conventional SBRT at another cancer center using overlap weighting. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients with 80 treated tumors were analyzed with a median follow-up of 11.2 months. Two-year cumulative incidence of local progression was 6.4% [95% confidence interval (CI, 2.4-13.4)]. Twenty-one percent of patients experienced treatment-related toxicity within 6 months, which is similar to the rate for SBRT in patients with CP A liver function. An analysis using overlap weighting revealed similar local control [HR, 0.69; 95% CI (0.25-1.91); P = 0.48] and decreased toxicity [OR, 0.26; 95% CI (0.07-0.99); P = 0.048] compared with conventional SBRT. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of individuals with impaired liver function or tumors not amenable to thermal ablation with a treatment paradigm designed to optimize utility may decrease treatment-related toxicity while maintaining tumor control.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".