“STUDY OF METRONOMIC CHEMOTHERAPY IN HEAD AND NECK CANCER PATIENTS AT A TERTIARY CARE CENTRE: BARPETA DISTRICT, ASSAM”.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Ever since Cancer Chemotherapy was introduced there have been remarkable advances in the eld of oncology. Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) chemotherapy has been shown to be successful in achieving cure in Haematological malignancies but has failed to show consistency in the case of advanced solid tumours. Metronomic chemotherapy is dened as administration of low dose chemotherapy at frequent intervals without prolonged drug free periods. The aim of this therapy is to achieve sustained blood levels of the chemotherapeutic drug, without the severe toxicity prole or the prolonged drug free breaks as seen in case of MTD chemotherapy. We aim to assess the role of metronomic chemotherapy in Hea AIMS & OBJECTIVES: d and neck cancer patient and to analyse the response and toxicity to treatment. We did a retrospective analysis of METHODS: 43 patients diagnosed with Head and neck cancer who received Metronomic chemotherapy in a tertiary cancer care centre from the month of September 2022 to August 2023. The data collected was as follows: Age, Sex, Diagnosis with staging, Sequence of prior treatment received, Duration of metronomic chemotherapy, Reason for stoppage of metronomic chemotherapy, Response, Toxicity prole, and outcome. Degree of toxicity was assessed using the Common Terminology criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. The subjective response was assessed based upon the patient's symptoms and clinical examination, and objective response was assessed using radiological modality wherever available. The Data was introduced and analysed by computer program (SPSS version 17). Out of 43 Head & Neck cancer patients receivi RESULTS: ng metronomic chemotherapy, 32 were male and 11 female patients with mean age of 53.75years (ranges from 32-92 Yrs.). Among which 66% belongs to Stage IV, 28% belongs to Stage III, 4% belongs to Stage II & 2% belongs to Stage I. Out of 43 patient, 37 patient received metronomic chemotherapy with palliative intent, 4 patients received as Neoadjuvant, and 2 patients received as adjuvant chemotherapy with Objective response of Progressive Disease-46.5%, partial response-23.5%, complete response-4.5%, No response-4.5% and stable disease-21%. Toxicity experienced during treatment like mucositis, leukopenia, skin rashes, vomiting and diarrhoea. Majority of them experienced Grade I/II toxicity with fewer Grade III toxicity. More than 70% of the patient had symptomatic benet. Metronomic chemotherapy is good option in i CONCLUSION: mproving Quality of life with better Overall survival and lesser side effect in economically backward countries especially in advanced cancers or metastatic and recurrent Head and Neck cancer individuals who are poor candidates for conventional chemotherapy
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".