MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391747934 · doi:10.1002/hed.27656

Lymph node yield: Impact on oncologic outcomes in oral cavity cancer

2024· article· en· W4391747934 on OpenAlexaffabout
Carlos Khalil, Mark Khoury, Kevin Higgins, Danny Enepekides, Irene Karam, Zain Husain, Andrew Bayley, Ian Poon, Tra Truong, Kelvin Chan, Martin Smoragiewicz, Rui Fu, Antoine Eskander

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHead and Neck Cancer Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLymph nodeConcordanceProportional hazards modelNeck dissectionLymphRetrospective cohort studyCohortCancerInternal medicineCarcinomaDissection (medical)Primary tumorSurgeryOncologyPathologyMetastasis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lymph node metastases are associated with poor prognosis in oral cavity squamous cell carcinoma (OCSCC). In other cancers, clinical guidelines on the number of lymph nodes removed during primary surgery, lymph node yield (LNY), exist. Here, we evaluated the prognostic capacity of LNY on regional failure, locoregional recurrence, and disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with OCSCC treated by primary neck surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study took place at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada and involved a chart review of all adult patients with treatment-naive OCSCC undergoing primary neck dissection. For each outcome, we first used the maximally selected rank statistics and an optimism-corrected concordance to identify an optimal threshold of LNY. We then used a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to assess the association between high LNY (>threshold) and each outcome. RESULTS: Among the 579 patients with OCSCC receiving primary neck dissection, 61.7% (n = 357) were male with a mean age of 62.9 years (standard deviation: 13.1) at cancer diagnosis. When adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical factors, LNY >15 was significantly associated with improved DFS (adjusted HR [aHR]: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.54-0.98), locoregional recurrence (aHR: 0.68, 95% CI: 0.49-0.95), and regional failure (aHR: 0.61, 95% CI: 0.39-0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Our study findings suggested high LNY to be a strong independent predictor of various patient-level quality of surgical care metrics. The optimal LNY we found (15) was lower than the conventionally recommended (18), which calls for further research to establish validity in practice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.414
Teacher spread0.346 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicHead and Neck Cancer StudiesFrench-language works237,207