MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Single versus sequential high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) in patients with relapsed or refractory germ-cell tumors (GCT)

2006· article· en· W2244533749 on OpenAlexaff
Anja Lorch, Oliver Rick, J.T. Hartmann, Christian Kollmannsberger, Bernd Metzner, Ingo GH Schmidt-Wolf, W. E. Berdel, Rebekka Schirren, J. Beyer, Carsten Bokemeyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarboplatinEtoposideIfosfamideClinical endpointChemotherapyRefractory (planetary science)Internal medicineCyclophosphamidePhases of clinical researchSurgeryRandomizationUrologyGastroenterologyCisplatinRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

4511 Background: Patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory GCT may be cured by HDCT. It is unknown whether single or sequential HDCT is superior. Methods: Between 11/99 and 11/04, 216 pts with relapsed or refractory GTC were treated in a prospective, randomized, multicenter phase III trial with either one cycle of cisplatin 100 mg/m2, etoposide 375 mg/m2 and ifosfamide 6 g/m2 (VIP) plus three cycles of high-dose carboplatin 1500 mg/m2 and etoposide 1500 mg/m2 (CE, arm A) or three cycles of VIP plus one cycle of high-dose carboplatin 2200 mg/m2, etoposide 1800 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 6400 mg/m2 (CEC, arm B) followed by reinfusion of autologous peripheral blood progenitor cells. Primary study endpoint was the event-free survival (EFS) one year after randomization. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicities. An event was defined as any deviation from the planned treatment, relapse, progression or death from any cause. The planned study size was 230 pts to detect a difference of 15% with an alpha error of 5% and a power of 80%. Results: The study was stopped after recruitment of 216 pts due to excess treatment-related mortality in arm B: 111 pts were randomized in arm A and 105 pts in arm B. Due to non-GCT histologies at review 5/216 pts had to be excluded from further analysis. With a median follow-up of 36 months, 109/211 (52%) evaluable pts are still alive and 91/211 (43%) are progression-free. At one year EFS; PFS and OS are 40%, 55% and 80% in arm A as compared to 37%, 49% and 61% in arm B. Treatment-related deaths mainly due to sepsis and cardiac toxicity were less frequent in arm A (4/111 pts, 4%) as compared to arm B (15/105 pts, 14%) (p = 0.01). Severe non-hematologic organ toxicities were also less frequent in arm A. Conclusions: Treatment with sequential high-dose carboplatin and etoposide is at least as effective but less toxic than single HDCT with carboplatin, etoposide and cyclophosphamide. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations6
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicTesticular diseases and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207