Doxorubicin‐Based Chemotherapy for the Palliative Treatment of AdultPatients with Locally Advanced or Metastatic Soft‐Tissue Sarcoma:A Meta‐Analysis and Clinical Practice Guideline
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose. To make recommendations for the use of doxorubicin-based chemotherapy in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma.Patients. The recommendations apply to patients with symptomatic unresectable locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma who are candidates for palliative chemotherapy.Methods. A systematic review of the published literature was combined with a consensus process around the interpretation of the evidence in the context of conventional practice to develop an evidence-based practice guideline.Results. Eight randomized trials comparing doxorubicin-based combination versus doxorubicin single-agent chemotherapy were reviewed. Response rates and overall survival were evaluated using pooled statistical analysis.The pooled response data in 2281 patients showed a slight trend favouring the combination therapy, although this did not reach statistical significance (odds ratio (OR), 0.79; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.60-1.05; p=0.10). Survival data could only be abstracted from six studies involving 2097 patients, and showed no significant advantage for combination therapy (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67-1.06; p=0.13). Data on adverse effects could not be combined in a meta-analysis; however nausea, vomiting and myelosuppression were consistently more severe with combination chemotherapy than with single-agent chemotherapy.Discussion. Single-agent doxorubicin is an appropriate first-line chemotherapy option for advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. Some doxorubicin-based combination chemotherapy regimens, given in conventional doses, produce only marginal increases in response rates, at the expense of increased adverse effects, and with no improvements in overall survival. Future randomized clinical trials should compare new regimens, whose activity has been established in single-arm studies, with single-agent doxorubicin, and include quality of life as an outcome measure.
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 | 0.031 | 0.056 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.011 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".