Initial Surgery in Tailoring Treatment for Children With Stage II and III Wilms’ Tumor: An Experience From Resource Challenged Settings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although Wilms' tumor (WT) is ranked first among primary childhood's renal neoplasm, controversy still exists regarding the best approach for its management. The study aimed at evaluating the role of initial surgery in treatment of stage II and III pediatric WT as a part of the short administration schedule as in National Wilms' Tumor Study (NWTS)-4 and evaluating its effectiveness compared to the long administration schedule. METHODS: The study included 30 children who were primarily diagnosed as stage II and III WT. They were divided into two equal groups. Group I (n = 15) included those children who had undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by surgery and postoperative chemotherapy, while group II (n = 15) included those children who had undergone primary surgery as an initial management followed by chemotherapy. After a mean postoperative follow-up period of 14 ± 5 months, clinical and radiological evaluation was performed to all patients. RESULTS: In group I, 10 patients were preoperatively diagnosed as stage II and five patients as stage III while in group II, 11 patients were proved to be stage II and four patients were stage III. After a follow-up period, clinical and radiological evaluation using CT was performed to all patients. In patients with stage II, evidence of recurrence was noted in three patients of group I whereas no patient showed any evidence of recurrence in group II. In patients with stage III, rebound increase in size was seen in two patients in group I and only one patient in group II. CONCLUSIONS: Initial surgical intervention with appropriate adjuvant therapy has better outcomes than the neoadjuvant chemotherapy and delayed surgery for children primarily diagnosed as stage II and III WT. Moreover, it may act as a short administration schedule for the treatment as it is not less effective than the long administration schedule and can be administered at a substantially lower total treatment cost.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".