Phase II study of high‐dose chemotherapy before radiation in children with newly diagnosed high‐grade astrocytoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-grade astrocytomas (HGA) carry a dismal prognosis and compose nearly 20% of all childhood brain tumors. The role of high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) in the treatment of HGA remains unclear. METHODS: In a nationwide study, The Children's Cancer Group (CCG) prospectively evaluated 102 children with HGA and postoperative residual disease for efficacy and toxicity of four courses of HDCT before radiotherapy (RT). Patients were randomly assigned to one of three couplets of drugs: carboplatin/etoposide (Regimen A), ifosfamide/etoposide (Regimen B), or cyclophosphamide/etoposide (Regimen C). After HDCT, all patients were to receive local RT followed by lomustine and vincristine. Twenty-six patients were excluded after central neuroradiographic review (n = 8) or pathology review (n = 18). RESULTS: Of 76 evaluable patients (median age, 11.95 yrs; range, 3-20 yrs), 30 patients relapsed during HDCT, and 11 others did not complete HDCT because of toxicity. Nonhematologic serious toxicities were common (29%), and 21% of patients did not receive RT. Objective response rates were not associated with amount of residual disease and did not statistically differ between regimens: 27% (Regimen A), 8% (Regimen B), and 29% (Regimen C). Overall survival (OS) was 24% +/- 5% at 5 years and did not differ between groups. Median time to an event was longest for Regimen A (283 days compared with 83 and 91 days for Regimens B and C, respectively). The five-year, event-free survival (EFS) rate for all patients was 8% +/- 3% and 14% +/- 7% for Regimen A (P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: OS and EFS were not affected by histologic grade. Patients who responded to HDCT had a nominally higher survival rate (P = 0.03 for trend). The authors conclude that these commonly used HDCT regimens provide no additional clinical benefit to conventional treatment in HGA, regardless of the amount of measurable residual tumor.
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) | 0.000 | 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".