The Association of Change in Weight During Radiotherapy Treatment With Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Stage I–III Esophageal Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Esophageal carcinoma (EC) and nutritional status are strongly linked due to swallowing disruptions and treatment-related toxicities. Therefore, malnutrition and weight loss (WL) occur in 85% and 79% of EC patients, respectively. WL is frequently associated with worse EC patient outcomes, however, WL during radiation therapy (RT) and EC patient outcomes have not been well established. The purpose of this study is to retrospectively review the association of WL during RT treatment of EC with clinical outcomes. Non-metastatic EC patients from our institution treated between 2010 and 2018, receiving total prescribed dose >40 Gy and aged >18 years, were included. Patients were analyzed by WL during RT, with categories of ≥5% vs. <5% and ≥10% vs. <10%. Patient characteristics and treatment regimens were similar across all WL groups. In univariate analysis, ≥5% and ≥10% WL were significantly associated with both worse overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and ≥10% WL was significantly associated with increased local recurrence. In multivariate analysis, ≥5% WL was significantly associated with OS and PFS. With both ≥5% and ≥10% WL throughout the radiation treatment being detrimental to OS and PFS. The importance of nutritional support in EC patients receiving radiotherapy is further validated.
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) | 0.000 | 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".