Twenty years of follow‐up of survivors of childhood osteosarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Osteosarcoma survivors have received significant chemotherapy and have undergone substantial surgeries. Their very long-term outcomes (20 year) are reported here. METHODS: The authors assessed the long-term outcomes of 733 5-year survivors of childhood osteosarcoma diagnosed from 1970 to 1986 to provide a comprehensive evaluation of medical and psychosocial outcomes for survivors enrolled in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS). Outcomes evaluated included overall survival, second malignant neoplasms (SMNs), recurrent osteosarcoma, chronic health conditions, health status (general and mental health and functional limitations), and psychosocial factors. Outcomes of osteosarcoma survivors were compared with general-population statistics, other CCSS survivors, and CCSS siblings. RESULTS: Survivors had a mean follow-up of 21.6 years. The overall survival of children diagnosed with osteosarcoma who survived 5 years at 20 years from original diagnosis was 88.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 86.6%-90.5%). The cumulative incidence of SMNs at 25 years was 5.4%, with a standardized incidence ratio of 4.79 (95% CI, 3.54-6.33; P<.01). Overall, 86.9% of osteosarcoma survivors experienced at least 1 chronic medical condition, and >50% experienced ≥2 conditions. Compared with survivors of other cancers, osteosarcoma survivors did not differ in their reported general health status (odds ratio [OR], 0.9; 95% CI, 0.7-1.2), but were more likely to report an adverse health status in at least 1 domain (OR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.6-2.2), with activity limitations (29.1%) being the most common. CONCLUSIONS: Childhood osteosarcoma survivors in this cohort did relatively well, considering their extensive treatment, but are at risk of experiencing chronic medical conditions and adverse health status. Survivors warrant life-long follow-up.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".