Comparative evaluation of local control strategies in localized Ewing sarcoma of bone: A report from the Children's Oncology Group
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with Ewing sarcoma require local primary tumor control with surgery, radiation, or both. The optimal choice of local control for overall and local disease control remains unclear. METHODS: Patients with localized Ewing sarcoma of bone who were treated on 3 consecutive protocols with standard-dose, 5-drug chemotherapy every 3 weeks were included (n=465). Propensity scores were used to control for differences between local control groups by constructing multivariate models to assess the impact of local control type on clinical endpoints (event-free survival [EFS], overall survival, local failure, and distant failure) independent of differences in their propensity to receive each local control type. RESULTS: Patients who underwent surgery were younger (P=.02) and had more appendicular tumors (P<.001). Compared with surgery, radiation had higher unadjusted risks of any event (hazard ratio [HR], 1.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.18-2.44), death (HR, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.18-2.85), and local failure (HR, 2.57; 95% CI, 1.37-4.83). On multivariate analysis, compared with surgery, radiation had a higher risk of local failure (HR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.24-4.68), although there were no significant differences in EFS (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.94-2.14), overall survival (HR, 1.37; 95% CI, 0.83-2.26), or distant failure (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.70-1.84) between local control groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this large group of similarly treated patients, choice of the mode of local control was not related significantly to EFS, overall survival, or distant failure, although the risk of local failure was greater for radiation compared with surgery. These data support surgical resection when appropriate, whereas radiotherapy remains a reasonable alternative in selected patients.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 it