Metastatic Rhabdomyosarcoma: A Retrospective Review of Patients Treated at the Hospital for Sick Children Between 1989 and 1999
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Children with metastatic rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) continue to fare poorly (3-year survival 20-30%). Various therapies, including end-intensification with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell support, have been used in an attempt to improve the outcome of these patients. The authors reviewed their clinical experience over a 10-year period to identify predictors of outcome in these patients. The authors reviewed the clinical characteristics, treatment, and outcome of all patients with metastatic RMS diagnosed and treated at the Hospital for Sick Children between 1989 and 1999. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated to compare survival and failure-free survival of different subgroups of patients. Differences between groups were analyzed using univariate analysis and the log-rank test. Seventeen patients with metastatic RMS were identified. Thirteen patients were treated with standard chemotherapy +/- radiotherapy and four received high-dose end-intensification therapy with stem cell support. The estimated 3-year overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival rates for all patients were 35% (95% CI 13-58) and 29% (95% CI 18-40), respectively. Patients with embryonal histology, metastases confined to the lung, and age younger than 10 years had a 3-year OS of 100%, compared with an OS of 0% for the remaining patients (P < 0.0006). The median follow-up for the five survivors was 5.5 years. The authors have identified a subset of children with metastatic RMS having embryonal histology, age less than 10 years, and only pulmonary metastases who have favorable survival outcomes when treated with chemotherapy with or without stem cell support.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".