MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396582198 · doi:10.1016/s0167-8140(24)00588-7

259 Acute swallowing outcomes in oropharyngeal cancers following clinical introduction of dysphagia-optimised IMRT (DO-IMRT) at a single tertiary centre

2024· article· en· W4396582198 on OpenAlexaff
Karen M. K. Chan, Teresa GuereroUrbano, Anthony Kong, Mary Lei, Miguel Reis Ferriera, Imran Petkar

Bibliographic record

VenueRadiotherapy and Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicDysphagia Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSwallowingOropharyngeal dysphagiaDysphagiaRadiologyTertiary careInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Swallowing dysfunction following curative (chemo) radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancers (HNC) is a significant treatment-related morbidity. Dysphagia-optimised IMRT (DO-IMRT) has recently shown to improve patient-reported swallowing outcomes, by reducing RT dose to dysphagia and aspiration -related structures. We implemented DO-IMRT in HNC patients undergoing primary radical RT-based treatment at our institution in August 2021. The objective of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate patient-reported and physician-scored acute swallowing toxicities in oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma (OPSCC) treated with DO-IMRT. Eligibility criteria included newly diagnosed OPSCC, treatment with primary radical DO-IMRT to the oropharynx and bilateral neck, alive and with no evidence of loco-regional recurrence at a minimum of 6 months following treatment completion. All patients received 65 Gy/30 fractions/6 weeks to the planning target volume (PTV1) of the tumour and involved nodes and 54 Gy/30 fractions/6 weeks to regions at risk of microscopic disease (PTV2) +/- chemotherapy as per institutional guidelines. Volumes of extended oral cavity, superior pharyngeal constrictor (PC), middle PC, inferior PC and larynx lying outside the PTVs were set optimal mean dose constraints of < 40 Gy, < 50 Gy, < 50 Gy, < 50 Gy, and < 30 Gy respectively during the optimisation process. Under-dosage of PTVs was not permitted to meet optimal dose constraints. Patients prospectively completed MD Anderson dysphagia inventory (MDADI), a patient-reported swallowing questionnaire, at baseline, week 6, 3 –, 6 –, 12 – and 24 months following treatment completion and a composite MDADI score for each point was generated. Prospective physician-scored toxicities using CTCAE v5.0 were also recorded at the above timepoints. This analysis evaluated swallowing outcomes measures upto 6 months post-RT. Descriptive statistics were used to report results. 47/56 OPSCC patients treated between August 2021 and February 2023 met the eligibility criteria. Baseline patient and tumour characteristics are presented in table 1. Majority of tumours were stage IV (AJCC 7thedition), human papillomavirus-associated, and treated with concomitant CRT. Mean (SD) composite MDADI scores at baseline, week 6, 3- and 6- months post treatment were 84 (15.0), 55.4 (12.8), 66.1 (18.3) and 73.1 (19.1) respectively (Table 2). Compared to baseline, 7 % and 11 % of patients reported a 10-point (clinically significant) improvement in composite MDADI score at 3 and 6 months respectively. The proportion of patients recording a clinically significant worse score was 87 %, 67 % and 53 % at week 6, and at 3- and 6 – months. 18 (38 %) patients required feeding tube (FT) insertion. 2 (4 %) patients were FT- dependent at 6 months. Majority of patients (81 %) had < grade 2 dysphagia at 6 months. FT-dependence in this initial cohort of OPSCC patients treated with DO-IMRT at our centre is low and compares favourably to contemporary data. Swallowing-related quality of life outcomes appear promising, with incremental improvements at 3- and 6-months post treatment. Future work includes assessment of longitudinal toxicity data, and the relationship between RT dose swallowing structures and toxicity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.397 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRadiotherapy and OncologySame topicDysphagia Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207