MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118875599 · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.15.1001

Involved-Nodal Radiation Therapy As a Component of Combination Therapy for Limited-Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Question of Field Size

2008· article· en· W2118875599 on OpenAlexaff
Belinda A. Campbell, Nick Voss, Tom Pickles, James Morris, Randy D. Gascoyne, Kerry J. Savage, Joseph M. Connors

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRadiation therapyDacarbazineStage (stratigraphy)ABVDVinblastineVincristineChemotherapyBleomycinHodgkin's lymphomaSurgeryNuclear medicineCyclophosphamide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: Combined-modality therapy is the standard of care for limited-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). Radiation therapy has evolved from extended-field radiation therapy (EFRT) to involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT), reducing toxicity while maintaining high cure rates. Recent publications recommend a further reduction to involved-nodal radiation therapy (INRT), however, this has not been clinically validated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified 325 patients with limited-stage HL, diagnosed between May 1, 1989 and April 1, 2005, and treated with chemotherapy and radiation therapy following era-specific guidelines: EFRT until 1996; IFRT from 1996 to 2001; INRT < or = 5 cm from 2001 to the present. INRT < or = 5 cm was defined as the prechemotherapy nodal volume with margins < or = 5 cm to account for physiological movement, set-up variation, and the limitations of conventional simulation and radiation therapy techniques. Exclusion criteria were age younger than 16, fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, non-doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine-like chemotherapy, and/or more than four chemotherapy cycles. RESULTS: At diagnosis, median age was 35 years; 52% male; stage IA 29%; stage IIA 71%. Ninety-five percent of patients received two chemotherapy cycles. The three radiation therapy groups were: EFRT, 39%; IFRT, 30%; and INRT < or = 5 cm, 31%. Median follow-up of living patients was 80 months. Median time to relapse was 37 months. Twelve relapses occurred: four after EFRT (3%); five after IFRT (5%); and three after INRT < or = 5 cm (3%; P = .9). No marginal recurrences occurred after INRT < or = 5 cm. Locoregional relapse (LRR) occurred in five patients: three after EFRT; two with IFRT; and none with INRT < or = 5 cm. At 5 years, progression-free survival (PFS) was 97%, and overall survival (OS) was 95%. At 10 years, PFS and OS were 95% and 90%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Reduction in field size appears to be safe, without an increased risk of LRR in patients receiving INRT < or = 5 cm.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.513
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.111
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations147
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207