MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412193111 · doi:10.1002/oto2.70147

Carcinoma ex Pleomorphic Adenoma: Multi‐Institutional Retrospective Cohort Study

2025· article· en· W4412193111 on OpenAlexaff
Bryce Kassalow, Andrew D.P. Prince, Martin Bullock, Molly E. Heft Neal, Robert D. Hart, Ayham Al Afif, David Forner

Bibliographic record

VenueOTO Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSalivary Gland Tumors Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioCarcinoma ex pleomorphic adenomaLymphovascular invasionCohortOncologyRetrospective cohort studyInternal medicineProportional hazards modelUnivariate analysisSurgeryConfidence intervalMultivariate analysisMetastasisCancerPleomorphic adenomaSalivary gland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective Carcinoma ex pleomorphic adenoma (CXPA) is a rare malignancy and survival rates vary throughout literature. The primary objectives are to study overall survival (OS), disease‐specific survival (DSS), locoregional recurrence‐free survival (LRFS), and secondarily margin status. Study Design Multi‐institutional retrospective cohort study. Setting Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Center (QEII HSC) from 2006 to 2023 and the University of Michigan (UM) from 2017 to 2023. Methods An institutional pathology database (QEII HSC) and parotidectomy database (UM) were used to identify 37 patients with CXPA who underwent surgical resection. Results Most cases were locoregionally advanced with 51% being ≥T3 and 32% being cervical node positive. All cases were treated with surgery, 78% received adjuvant radiation. Overall, 2‐year survival was 82% and 5‐year survival was 61.7%. In univariate analysis, tumor size >4 cm, pathologic nodal stage ≥1, pathologic overall stage 4 disease, lymphovascular invasion, extranodal extension, and positive margins were associated with increased risk of death. In adjusted multivariable analysis, only pathologic nodal stage ≥1 (hazard ratio [HR] 9.474, confidence interval [CI] 1.19‐75.41, P = .034) remained statistically significant. The 2‐year LRFS was 80% and the 5‐year LRFS was 75%. Of the 7 patients with locoregional recurrence, 6 had prior adjuvant radiation, and 4 recurred locally. Multivariable cox models for LRFS were not significant. Conclusion Patients with CXPA that metastasize to the neck have a worse prognosis. LRFS after surgery is 75% with high rates of adjuvant radiation. Further research on prognostic factors of LRFS and adjuvant radiation outcomes is required.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.332
Teacher spread0.299 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOTO OpenSame topicSalivary Gland Tumors Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207