The Use and Effectiveness of Temozolomide in Children with Central Nervous System Tumours: A Survey from the Canadian Paediatric Brain Tumour Consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe the use of temozolomide (tmz) in Canadian children treated for brain tumours and to evaluate survival and predictors of survival for children treated with this agent. METHODS: A survey was conducted within the Canadian Paediatric Brain Tumour Consortium (cpbtc), a group of tertiary care centres in pediatric neuro-oncology (n = 16) in Canada that are involved in the treatment of children with central nervous system tumours. RESULTS: In 10 of the 16 participating pediatric oncology centres of the cpbtc, 137 children with brain tumours were treated with tmz between January 2000 and March 2006. Although 33% of the children were enrolled into a clinical trial, 67% were treated outside open studies. Most patients (72%) received tmz treatment on recurrence of their brain tumour (first or subsequent). The most commonly administered regimen was single-agent tmz 150-200 mg/m(2) administered on 5 consecutive days every 28 days. The median duration of tmz treatment was 141 days (range: 4-1102 days). Response data were provided for 127 of the 137 patients, of whom 6 showed a complete response. Sixteen patients experienced a minor or partial response, 53 had stable disease, and 52 had progressive disease. Of 32 patients alive at last follow-up, 19 had a diagnosis of low-grade glioma. CONCLUSIONS: Temozolomide is used in a variety of pediatric brain tumours, often at the time of recurrence. The lack of insight into clear indications for this agent in pediatric brain tumours-used either alone or in combination therapy-may be a result of suboptimal design of phase i and ii studies and a lack of phase iii trials in the pediatric brain tumour population.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".