MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391821752 · doi:10.1002/hed.27688

Sarcopenia predicts short‐term treatment‐related toxicity in patients undergoing curative‐intent therapy for head and neck cancer: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

2024· review· en· W4391821752 on OpenAlexaff
Marco A. Mascarella, Jannatul Ferdus, Varun Vendra, Shaum Sridharan, Khalil Sultanem, Christina Tsien, George Shenouda, Nathaniel Bouganim, Khashayar Esfahani, Keith Richardson, Alex Mlynarek, Nader Sadeghi, Michael P. Hier, Marie‐Jeanne Kergoat

Bibliographic record

VenueHead & Neck · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire de Gériatrie de MontréalCentre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux du Centre-Sud-de-l'Île-de-MontréalUniversité de MontréalMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSarcopeniaMedicineToxicityMeta-analysisOdds ratioInternal medicineHead and neck cancerOncologyRadiation therapyCancerConfidence intervalSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sarcopenia is an increasingly recognized biomarker associated with poorer outcomes. The objective of this study was to ascertain the effect of sarcopenia on treatment tolerance and short-term toxicity in head and neck cancer (HNC). A systematic review was performed using multiple databases. An inverse-variation, random-effects model was used to perform the meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of sarcopenia on severe treatment toxicity and poor treatment tolerance. Sixteen observational studies, including 3187 patients with HNC, were analyzed. The combined odds ratio (OR) for severe treatment toxicity and tolerance was 2.22 (95%CI 1.50-3.29) and 1.40 (95%CI 0.84-2.32), respectively. The effect of sarcopenia on short-term severe treatment toxicity was similar with upfront surgery (OR 2.03, 95%CI 1.22-3.37) and definitive radiotherapy (OR 2.24, 95%CI 1.18-4.27) Patients with sarcopenia are more than twice as likely to suffer a short-term treatment-related toxicity when undergoing curative-intent HNC treatment.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.482
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.151
GPT teacher head0.439
Teacher spread0.288 · 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.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHead & NeckSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207