Ifosfamide and Etoposide Are Superior to Vincristine and Melphalan for Pediatric Metastatic Rhabdomyosarcoma When Administered With Irradiation and Combination Chemotherapy: A Report From the Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study was designed to estimate the partial and complete response rates (CR and PR) of two novel drug pairs (vincristine and melphalan vs. ifosfamide and etoposide) and to improve overall survival of previously untreated patients with metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-eight patients were randomly assigned to phase II window therapy consisting of vincristine and melphalan (VM-containing regimen) or ifosfamide and etoposide (IE-containing regimen). Brief window therapy (12 wks) was immediately followed-up by vincristine, dactinomycin, and cyclophosphamide (VAC), chemotherapy, surgery, and irradiation, with continuation of either VM or IE in patients with initial response. Major endpoints were initial CR and PR rates after the phase II window phase of therapy, failure-free survival (FFS), and survival. RESULTS: Patients who received the VM-containing regimen experienced significantly more anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and had more cyclophosphamide dose reductions. The initial PR and CR rates were not significantly different for patients treated with either regimen (VM, 74%; IE, 79%; P = 0.428). However, FFS and overall survival (OS) at 3 years were significantly better with the IE-containing regimen (FFS: 33% vs. 19%; P = 0.043; OS: 55% vs. 27%; P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: Although the VM-containing regimen produced a high response rate, inclusion of melphalan appeared to limit the cyclophosphamide dose that could be administered, and ultimately, this regimen was associated with a significantly worse outcome than was the IE-containing regimen. Also, the IE-containing regimen was associated with a gratifyingly high survival rate at 3 years (55%), which is significantly higher than has been observed on any previous Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group regimen for similar patients. We believe that this promising outcome indicates that this drug pair merits further randomized testing in metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".