Outcomes of Reduced Elective Nodal Radiation Dose and Volume for Laryngeal, Hypopharyngeal, and p16‐Negative Oropharyngeal Cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reducing elective nodal irradiation dose can decrease treatment toxicity and improve quality of life for head and neck cancer patients. METHODS: We determined the effectiveness of reducing elective radiotherapy doses to 40 Gy for a consecutive cohort of laryngeal, hypopharyngeal, and p16-negative oropharyngeal or unknown primary squamous cell carcinomas treated with concurrent chemoradiation. The primary outcome measure was solitary elective nodal recurrence. RESULTS: The cohort included 73 consecutive patients with a median follow up of 23.3 months. There were no cases of solitary elective nodal recurrence. Six patients had locoregional recurrence, eight had distant recurrence, and two had simultaneous locoregional and distant recurrence. All locoregional recurrences occured in the 70 Gy target volume (three in the primary tumor target, three in the involved node target, and two in both). CONCLUSIONS: Reduction in elective nodal radiation dose did not lead to solitary elective nodal recurrences for laryngeal, hypopharyngeal, and p16-negative oropharyngeal cancers.
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) | 0.001 | 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".