Phase III Randomized Trial of Weekly Cisplatin and Irradiation Versus Cisplatin and Tirapazamine and Irradiation in Stages IB2, IIA, IIB, IIIB, and IVA Cervical Carcinoma Limited to the Pelvis: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: This prospective, randomized phase III intergroup trial of the Gynecologic Oncology Group and National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group was designed to test the effectiveness and safety of adding the hypoxic cell sensitizer tirapazamine (TPZ) to standard cisplatin (CIS) chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced cervix cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with locally advanced cervix cancer were randomly assigned to CIS chemoradiotherapy versus CIS/TPZ chemoradiotherapy. Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and tolerability. RESULTS: PFS was evaluable in 387 of 402 patients randomly assigned over 36 months, with enrollment ending in September 2009. Because of the lack of TPZ supply, the study did not reach its original target accrual goal. At median follow-up of 28.3 months, PFS and OS were similar in both arms. Three-year PFS for the TPZ/CIS/RT and CIS/RT arms were 63.0% and 64.4%, respectively (log-rank P = .7869). Three-year OS for the TPZ/CIS/RT and CIS/RT arms were 70.5% and 70.6%, respectively (log-rank P = .8333). A scheduled interim safety analysis led to a reduction in the starting dose for the TPZ/CIS arm, with resulting tolerance in both treatment arms. CONCLUSION: TPZ/CIS chemoradiotherapy was not superior to CIS chemoradiotherapy in either PFS or OS, although definitive commentary was limited by an inadequate number of events (progression or death). TPZ/CIS chemoradiotherapy was tolerable at a modified starting dose.
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 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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".