Lung Cancer Staging: Imaging and Potential Pitfalls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in men and women in the United States. Accurate staging is needed to determine prognosis and devise effective treatment plans. The International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) has made multiple revisions to the tumor, node, metastasis (TNM) staging system used by the Union for International Cancer Control and the American Joint Committee on Cancer to stage lung cancer. The eighth edition of this staging system includes modifications to the T classification with cut points of 1 cm increments in tumor size, grouping of lung cancers associated with partial or complete lung atelectasis or pneumonitis, grouping of tumors with involvement of a main bronchus regardless of distance from the carina, and upstaging of diaphragmatic invasion to T4. The N classification describes the spread to regional lymph nodes and no changes were proposed for TNM-8. In the M classification, metastatic disease is divided into intra- versus extrathoracic metastasis, and single versus multiple metastases. In order to optimize patient outcomes, it is important to understand the nuances of the TNM staging system, the strengths and weaknesses of various imaging modalities used in lung cancer staging, and potential pitfalls in image interpretation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".