Lung Cancer Surveillance for Patients With Head and Neck Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: Patients with head and neck squamous cell cancer (HNSCC) are at a greater risk of developing pulmonary metastases and/or second primary lung cancer. However, it remains uncertain whether lung screening in these patients, when the initial staging studies are negative, confers any survival benefit. Objective: To evaluate long-term cancer survival outcomes in patients with HNSCC undergoing chest radiography vs low-dose computed tomography screening for pulmonary metastasis and/or second primary lung cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized parallel trial was conducted at a large academic hospital in Canada enrolling treatment-naive patients with de novo HNSCC from September 2015 to December 2022. Eligible patients did not meet the criteria for lung screening established by the US National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines. Participants were randomized to chest radiography or low-dose computed tomography screening groups. Data were analyzed from March to August 2024. Intervention or Exposure: Comparison of chest radiography vs low-dose computed tomography screening methods. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were the lung cancer detection rate measured by comparing the sensitivity and specificity of low-dose computed tomography with chest radiography. Secondary outcomes were overall survival and disease-free survival. Results: A total of 137 patients (mean [SD] age, 65.1 [14.1] years; 34 [24.8%] females and 103 [75.2%] males) were included and randomized, 68 (49.6%) to chest radiography and 69 (50.4%) to low-dose computed tomography. Nine of 137 patients (6.5%) developed a second primary lung cancer (6 patients) or lung metastases (3 patients). There were no clinically meaningful differences in survival outcomes between the 2 groups (hazard ratio, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.4-3.9). Chest radiography exhibited a relatively low sensitivity of 66.7% but a specificity of 100%. Low-dose computed tomography demonstrated both high sensitivity (100%) and specificity (100%), for an overall accuracy of 100%. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this randomized parallel trial indicate that low-dose computed tomography exhibits statistically significant superior sensitivity compared with chest radiography for diagnosing lung metastases and second primary lung cancer. However, there were no important differences in survival rates. These results hold practical significance, offering valuable insights to clinicians who are guiding decisions regarding lung screening protocols. Trial Registration: ISRCTN10954990.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".