Extended Adjuvant Temozolomide with cis-Retinoic Acid for Adult Glioblastoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the toxicity and effectiveness of 24 months of adjuvant temozolomide (tmz) with cis-retinoic acid (cra) for patients with glioblastoma. METHODS: This retrospective population-based review considered the charts of all patients diagnosed with glioblastoma in Manitoba and referred to a provincial cancer centre during 2002-2008. Consecutive patients came from a population-based referral centre and provincial cancer registry. All patients were treated according to the local standard of care with surgical resection followed by concurrent radiotherapy and tmz 75 mg/m(2) daily, followed by tmz 150-200 mg/m(2) for days 1-5, repeated every 28 days for up to 24 cycles, and cra 50 mg/m(2) twice daily for days 1-21, repeated every 28 days. The main outcome measures were safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of long-term tmz and cra. RESULTS: Of 247 patients diagnosed with glioblastoma in Manitoba during the study period, 116 started concurrent chemoradiotherapy, and 80 received adjuvant tmz. Of the patients who started concurrent chemoradiotherapy, 80 began adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients completed a median of 5.5 cycles of tmz and 3 cycles of cra. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity was noted in 16% of patients. Median overall survival was 15.1 months, and 26.7% of patients remained alive at 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Extended adjuvant tmz and cra is well tolerated. However, the population-based effectiveness of this regimen is similar to the clinical trial efficacy of 6 months of adjuvant tmz. Future studies in glioblastoma should incorporate duration of adjuvant chemotherapy into the study design.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".