MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1590859099 · doi:10.5539/cco.v4n2p13

A Phase II Study of Antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 Injections in Adult Patients With Recurrent Anaplastic Astrocytoma—Final report (Protocol BT-15)

2015· article· en· W1590859099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stanisław R. Burzyński, Tomasz J. Janicki, Gregory S. Burzynski

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer and Clinical Oncology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnaplastic astrocytomaTemozolomideChemotherapyToxicityInternal medicineSurgeryRefractory (planetary science)CohortRadiation therapyPhases of clinical researchGastroenterologyHypokalemiaOncologyAstrocytomaGlioma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recommended treatment for recurrent anaplastic astrocytoma (AA) consists of chemotherapy with temozolomide. There is an urgent need for new therapies for such patients. This phase II study evaluates efficacy and safety of a different form of cancer therapy that consists of antineoplastons A10 and AS2-1 (ANP). 27 patients, ages 19 to 57 years (median, 41) with recurrent AA were treated. All patients previously underwent surgery, all received radiation therapy, and 16 underwent chemotherapy. The patients received treatment with ANP administered daily every four hours (median dose of A10 6.0 g/kg/d and AS2-1 0.25 g/kg/d). All patients were included in efficacy and safety analysis. The median duration of ANP was 23.1 weeks. A complete response was documented in 7%, partial response in 11%, and stable disease in 22% of patients. Progression-free survival and overall survival at 12 months was 26% and 41% respectively. The only serious toxicity was Grade 3 reversible hypokalemia in 7% of patients. There was no chronic toxicity and there was a high quality of life. ANP shows efficacy with very good toxicity profile in this cohort of patients with recurrent AA.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.381 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer and Clinical OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207