Prognostic Value of Anteroposterior Extension in Oral Tongue and Floor Squamous Cell Carcinoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: The tongue and oral floor represent the most involved subsite by oral cancer, and there are no reported systems to classify anteroposterior tumor extension with prognostic effect. In other cancers, the anterior vs posterior tumor extension is a relevant prognostic factor. Objective: To establish whether anterior vs posterior tumor extension may represent a prognostic factor in oral tongue and floor squamous cell carcinoma (OTFSCC). Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent surgery for OTFSCC from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2021, at 2 tertiary-level academic institutions in Italy (University of Padua and University of Brescia). Patients eligible for the study had histologically proven primary OTFSCC; underwent surgery-based, curative treatment; and had available preoperative contrast-enhanced imaging. Exposures: Four anatomical lines were designed to assess tumor extension: (1) chin-palate line (CPL), (2) chin-basion line, (3) Stensen duct line, and (4) lingual septum line. Preoperative imaging was re-evaluated, and tumor extension was classified as either anterior or posterior according to the lines. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival and time to recurrence (TTR) were evaluated according to tumor extension. These outcomes were reported as 5-year survival rates with 95% CIs. Results: Of the 133 patients included, 79 (59.4%) were male, and the mean (SD) age was 62.7 (15.4) years. The 5-year TTR difference was higher for posterior vs anterior OTFSCC classified according to CPL (21.0%; 95% CI, 8.3%-33.7%), Stensen duct line (15.5%; 95% CI, 1.0%-30.0%), and lingual septum line (17.2%; 95% CI, 2.2%-32.3%). Overall survival analysis showed similar results. At the multivariable analysis on TTR, N status (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 3.0; 95% CI, 1.2-7.1) and anteroposterior classification according to CPL (adjusted HR, 7.1; 95% CI, 0.9-54.6) were the variables associated with the highest adjusted HRs. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, OTFSCC with a posterior extension to the CPL was associated with a higher risk of recurrence and death. This analysis suggests that the poor prognosis conveyed by the posterior tumor extension is independent of other relevant prognosticators except for the burden of nodal disease. This estimate is not precise and does not allow for definitive clinically important conclusions; therefore, further prospective studies are necessary to confirm these data.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".