One Compared with Two Cycles of Mitomycin C in Chemoradiotherapy for Anal Cancer: Analysis of Outcomes and Toxicity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Concurrent chemoradiation with fluorouracil (5fu) and mitomycin C (mmc) is standard treatment for anal canal carcinoma (acc). The current protocol in Alberta is administration of 5fu and mmc during weeks 1 and 5 of radiation. However, administration of the second bolus of mmc has been based largely on centre preference. Given limited published data on outcomes with different mmc regimens, our objective was to compare the efficacy and toxicity of 1 compared with 2 cycles of mmc in acc treatment. METHODS: Our retrospective study evaluated 169 acc patients treated with radical chemoradiotherapy between 2000 and 2010 at two tertiary cancer centres. All patients were treated with 2 cycles of 5fu and with 1 cycle (mmc1) or 2 cycles (mmc2) of mmc. Acute toxicities, disease-free (dfs) and overall survival (os) were analyzed. RESULTS: Baseline demographics, performance status, and stage were similar in the groups of patients who received mmc1 (52%) and mmc2 (48%). Before treatment, median hematologic parameters were comparable, except for white blood cell count, which was higher in the mmc2 group, but within normal range. The 5-year os and dfs were similar (75.1% and 54.2% for mmc1 vs. 70.7% and 44.2% for mmc2, p = 0.98 and p = 0.63 respectively). On multivariate analysis, mmc2 was the factor most strongly associated with specific acute toxicities: grade 3+ leukopenia (hazard ratio: 4.82; p < 0.01), grade 3+ skin toxicity (hazard ratio: 4.76; p < 0.001), and hospitalizations secondary to febrile neutropenia (hazard ratio: 9.91; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In definitive chemoradiotherapy for acc, 1 cycle of mmc appears to offer outcomes similar to those achieved with 2 cycles, with significantly less acute toxicity.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".