A randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial of megestrol acetate as an appetite stimulant in children with weight loss due to cancer and/or cancer therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Megestrol acetate (MA) is an appetite stimulant with efficacy in promoting weight gain in adults with cancer-associated anorexia-cachexia. Studies documenting MA efficacy in children, however, are limited. We present the first randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of MA versus placebo in children with cancer and weight loss. METHODS: Subjects <18 years of age with weight loss (minimum 5% from highest previous weight; or %ideal body weight <90%) due to cancer and/or cancer therapy were randomized to either MA (7.5 mg/kg/day) or placebo for a planned study duration of 90 days. Primary outcome was the difference between groups in mean percent weight change from beginning to end of the study period. Secondary outcomes included effects on anthropometrics, body composition, need for tube feeding or parenteral nutrition, and toxicities. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were randomly assigned (13 MA, 13 placebo). The MA group experienced a mean weight gain of +19.7% compared to a mean weight loss of -1.2% in the placebo group, for a difference of +20.9% (95%CI: +11.3% to +30.5%, P = 0.003) in favor of MA over placebo. MA subjects experienced significant increases in weight for age z-scores, body mass index z-scores, and mid upper arm circumference compared to placebo. DXA scanning suggested disproportionate increases in fat accrual. Adrenal suppression was the main toxicity of MA. CONCLUSION: In children with high-risk malignancies, MA resulted in significant increases in mean percent weight change compared to placebo. Further studies of MA should be pursued to better delineate the effect on nutritional status.
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) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".