Surgery With or Without Preoperative Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in Early-Stage Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Southwest Oncology Group Trial S9900, an Intergroup, Randomized, Phase III Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Patients with early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have a poor prognosis even after complete resection. Earlier studies of preoperative (induction) chemotherapy in resectable NSCLC demonstrated feasibility and encouraging survival data. This randomized phase III trial compared overall survival (OS) for preoperative paclitaxel and carboplatin followed by surgery with surgery alone in patients with early-stage NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with clinical stage IB-IIIA NSCLC (excluding superior sulcus tumors and N2 disease) were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to surgery alone or to three cycles of paclitaxel (225 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin (area under curve, 6) followed by surgical resection. The primary end point was OS; secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), chemotherapy response, and toxicity. RESULTS The trial closed early with 354 patients after reports of a survival benefit for postoperative chemotherapy in other studies. The median OS was 41 months in the surgery-only arm and 62 months in the preoperative chemotherapy arm (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.06; P = .11.) The median PFS was 20 months for surgery alone and 33 months for preoperative chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.04; P = .10.) Major response to chemotherapy was seen in 41% of patients; no unexpected toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION This trial closed prematurely after compelling evidence supporting postoperative chemotherapy emerged. Although OS and PFS were higher with preoperative chemotherapy, the differences did not reach statistical significance. At present, stronger evidence exists for postoperative chemotherapy in early-stage NSCLC.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".