MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969036848 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2013-958

Abstract 958: Improving survival of extraocular, metastatic and trilateral retinoblastoma patients with combined intensive therapy.

2013· article· en· W1969036848 on OpenAlexaff
Helen S. L. Chan, Élise Héon, Tal Schechter, Helen Dimaras, Brenda L. Gallie, John Doyle

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenCancerCare ManitobaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTopotecanEtoposideVincristineSurgeryCarboplatinRadiation therapyOncologyCyclophosphamideChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract PURPOSE: Most extraocular, metastatic and trilateral retinoblastoma (RB) patients manifest multidrug resistance due to P-glycoprotein and few survive beyond a year when treated with conventional chemotherapy and radiation. We report results of cyclosporine circumvention of multidrug resistance to carboplatin, etoposide and vincristine (CEV), combined with consolidation with a myeloablative conditioning regimen (high-dose carboplatin, etoposide and cyclophosphamide), with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for stem cell rescue. METHOD: Since 1998, we treated 9 such young children: three (ages 6.3, 1.3 and 2.3 years) with non-germline RB with massive optic nerve/optic chiasm involvement (resection and orbital radiation), one (age 4.8 years) with germline RB and mandibular metastasis (totally resection after CEV-response avoiding radiation), one (age 5 months) with germline RB and leptomeningeal disease (intraventricular cytarabine/topotecan-response avoiding craniospinal radiation), one (age 2.6 years) with non-germline RB with orbital/intracranial/leptomeningeal recurrence (intraventricular cytarabine/topotecan and orbital radiation), and three (ages 3, 5 and 27 months) with germline trilateral RB with leptomeningeal disease (intraventricular cytarabine/topotecan-response avoiding craniospinal radiation). RESULTS: Eight children have completed therapy, and one child with trilateral suprasellar RB and leptomeningeal disease is still on treatment prior to ASCT. Two patients died: one child with orbital/intracranial/leptomeningeal recurrence died of disease 1.8 years post-metastasis (1.4 years post ASCT); one child with trilateral suprasellar RB with leptomeningeal disease died of disease 2.7 years post-diagnosis (2 years post ASCT), resulting from a local recurrence along the needle track site of the original suprasellar biopsy. Six children of the 8 children who completed therapy are alive at a median of 12.5 years from diagnosis (range 5.3-13.3 years): 3 children with massive optic nerve involvement are relapse-free 12.7, 13.3 and 12.6 years post-diagnosis (12.3, 12.8, 12.3 years post ASCT); one child with mandibular recurrence is relapse-free 12.4 years post-metastasis (11.7 years post ASCT); one child with leptomeningeal RB is relapse-free 12.1 years post-diagnosis (11.6 years post ASCT); and one child with trilateral suprasellar RB with leptomeningeal disease is relapse-free 5.3 years post-diagnosis (4.8 years post ASCT). CONCLUSION: Six of eight children who have completed therapy for extraocular, metastatic and trilateral retinoblastoma, who in the past would have died, may be cured by intensive multimodality therapy. Citation Format: Helen SL Chan, Elise Héon, Tal Schechter, Helen Dimaras, Brenda L. Gallie, John J. Doyle. Improving survival of extraocular, metastatic and trilateral retinoblastoma patients with combined intensive therapy. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 104th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2013 Apr 6-10; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2013;73(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 958. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-958

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207