Intra‐lesional interleukin‐2 for the treatment of in‐transit melanoma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To investigate the role of intra-lesional interleukin-2 (IL-2) injection for treatment of in-transit melanoma metastases. METHODS: Consecutive patients with in-transit metastases were treated with intra-lesional IL-2 injections. Two independent observers evaluated response to treatment using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. A blinded pathologist confirmed clinical response with post-treatment biopsies. RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients were included. Patients received biweekly IL-2 injections. At each treatment session, a mean of 2.08 ml (5 µ/ml) of IL-2 were distributed amongst a mean of 12 (range 1-57) in-transit lesions. Patients were followed for an average of 30.4 months (range 2.2-66.6 months). The overall patient response rate was 82%. A complete response was obtained in 20 patients (51%), a partial response in 12 (31%), and no response in seven (18%). Of the 629 in-transit metastases, 479 (76%) completely resolved. Complete responders had a significant in transit-free (P = 0.0005) and an overall (P = 0.012) survival advantage compared with partial responders. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of in-transit metastatic melanoma with intra-lesional IL-2 resulted in a 76% percent clearance of lesions. Complete response is associated with superior in transit-free and overall survival when compared with partial response.
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.
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 it