Pediatric sarcoma in Central America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Children with cancer in middle-income countries have inferior outcomes compared with similar children in high-income countries. The magnitude and drivers of this survival gap are not well understood. In the current report, the authors sought to describe patterns of clinical presentation, magnitude of treatment abandonment, and survival in children with sarcoma in Central America. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of hospital-based registries from national pediatric oncology referral centers. Patients with newly diagnosed osteosarcoma, Ewing sarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS), and soft tissue sarcoma (STS) between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2009 were included. Survival analyses were performed first using standard definitions of overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) and then with abandonment included as an event (abandonment-sensitive OS and abandonment-sensitive EFS). RESULTS: In total, 785 new cases of pediatric sarcoma were reported (264 diagnoses of osteosarcoma, 175 diagnoses of Ewing sarcoma, 240 diagnoses of RMS, and 106 diagnoses of STS). The rate of metastatic disease at presentation was high (osteosarcoma, 38%; Ewing sarcoma, 39%; RMS, 29%; and STS, 21%). The treatment abandonment rate also was high, particularly among patients with extremity bone sarcomas (osteosarcoma, 30%; Ewing sarcoma, 15%; RMS, 25%; and STS, 15%). Of 559 patients who experienced a first event, 59% had either recurrent or progressive disease. The 4-year OS rate (±standard error) was 40% ± 3%, and the EFS rate was 30% ± 2%; however, these rates decreased further to 31% ± 2% and 24% ± 2%, respectively, when abandonment was taken into account. CONCLUSIONS: The current results indicated that high rates of metastases and treatment abandonment and difficulty with upfront treatment effectiveness are important contributors to the poor survival of children with pediatric sarcomas in Central America. Initiatives for early diagnosis, psychosocial support, quality improvement, and multidisciplinary care are warranted to improve outcomes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".