MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1985912955 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2011-694

Abstract 694: Cyclosporin-modulated intensified dosage chemotherapy well-tolerated for saving eyes with intraocular retinoblastoma

2011· article· en· W1985912955 on OpenAlexaff
Helen S. L. Chan, Élise Héon, Helen Dimaras, Brenda L. Gallie

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarboplatinEtoposideVincristineEnucleationSurgeryChemotherapyRetinoblastomaCyclophosphamideCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract PURPOSE: Cyclosporin inhibits the multidrug resistance P-glycoprotein. Since 2000, we tested increased carboplatin and increased etoposide dosages in a cyclosporin-modulated carboplatin-etoposide-vincristine protocol, followed by focal laser/cryotherapy consolidation, to avoid elective radiation of newly diagnosed retinoblastoma (RB) patients, since radiation increases the secondary cancer risk in patients with heritable RB. We report the results for International Classification Groups A, B, C and D eyes. METHOD: Since Neupogen support became available, we increased the mainly myelotoxic carboplatin to 28 mg/kg (from 18.7 mg/kg in a previous trial) and etoposide to 12 mg/kg (from 7.7 mg/kg in a previous trial), but kept the mainly neurotoxic vincristine unchanged at 0.05 mg/kg, modulated by the same cyclosporin schedule (33 mg/kg over 3 hours on each of the 2 days per cycle). We treated 35 eyes in 23 patients: 2 A eyes, 8 B eyes, 8 C eyes and 17 D eyes. Radiation or enucleation for recurrence was considered failure. RESULTS: We report the long-term results at median followup of 8.1 years (range 1.7-10.5 years). Eye event-free rates were 100% for both Groups A and B eyes, and 50% for Group C (4/8) and 47% for Group D (8/17) eyes. Four C eyes failed and all had enucleation only. Nine D eyes failed and 6 were enucleated and 3 radiated. No child lost both eyes. Toxicity rates were acceptable with 15.7% fever-and-neutropenia, 0.7% bacterial sepsis, 9.7% blood transfusion and 27.6% platelet transfusion, and no long-term renotoxicity or ototoxicity. CONCLUSION: This protocol was well well-tolerated, with no child losing both eyes, and most avoiding radiation. The same protocol is being tested in a multicenter trial. Citation Format: {Authors}. {Abstract title} [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 102nd Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2011 Apr 2-6; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2011;71(8 Suppl):Abstract nr 694. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2011-694

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.085
GPT teacher head0.387
Teacher spread0.302 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicOcular Oncology and Treatments→French-language works237,207→