MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (CT-RT) versus RT alone for patients with anaplastic oligodendroglioma: Long-term results of the RTOG 9402 phase III study.

2012· article· en· W2338824946 on OpenAlexaff
J. Gregory Cairncross, Meihua Wang, Edward G. Shaw, Robert B. Jenkins, Bernd W. Scheithauer, David Brachman, Jan C. Buckner, Karen Fink, Luís Souhami, Normand Laperrière, Walter J. Curran, Minesh P. Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreMcGill UniversityUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProcarbazineLomustineInternal medicineHazard ratioOligodendrogliomaVincristineConfidence intervalRadiation therapyOligodendroglial TumorOncologyGastroenterologyProgression-free survivalChemotherapyGliomaAstrocytomaCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2008b Background: Anaplastic oligodendrogliomas, pure (AO) and mixed (AOA), are chemosensitive tumors, especially if co-deleted for chromosomes 1p and 19q, but whether addition of CT to RT prolongs overall survival (OS), is unknown. Methods: In the RTOG 9402 Phase III trial, patients (pts) with AO/AOA were randomly assigned to PCV [procarbazine, CCNU (lomustine) and vincristine] followed by immediate RT vs. immediate RT alone. Early analysis showed no OS benefit for the PCV+RT group but combined therapy was associated with a longer progression-free survival (PFS). It also showed that the finding of 1p/19q co-deletion was associated with a longer OS independent of treatment. The current analysis has a median follow up of 11.3 years (yrs). Results: Two hundred ninety-one patients were randomized, 148 to PCV+RT and 143 to RT. PCV+RT was associated with longer PFS [2.5 vs. 1.7 yrs, hazard ratio (HR) 0.68, 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.53, 0.88), P = 0.003] and the 1p/19q co-deletion with a longer Median Survival Time (MST) [8.7 vs. 2.7 yrs, HR 0.41, 95% CI (0.30, 0.55), P < 0.001]. For the entire cohort, there was no difference in MST by treatment [4.6 yrs for PCV+RT vs. 4.7 yrs for RT, HR 0.79, 95% CI (0.60, 1.04), P = 0.1]. However, patients with 1p/19q co-deleted tumors lived much longer after PCV+RT (n = 59) than after RT (n = 67) [14.7 vs. 7.3 yrs, HR 0.59, 95% CI (0.37, 0.95), P = 0.03]. There was no difference in MST by treatment in pts without the 1p/19q co-deletion [n=137; 2.6 vs. 2.7 yrs, HR 0.85, 95% CI (0.58, 1.23), P = 0.39]. Re-operation rates upon progression were similar between treatment arms in co-deleted pts (43%, PCV+RT vs. 54%, RT) but salvage CT rates were higher in the RT arm [57% vs. 81% (P = 0.04)]. Conclusions: PCV followed by immediate RT was a highly effective therapy for patients with 1p/19q co-deleted AO/AOA. In this setting, 1p/19q co-deletion was both prognostic and predictive, and the early PFS benefit in co-deleted cases was a harbinger of their longer OS. [This work was supported by RTOG grants U10 CA21661 and U10 CA32115, NCCTG grant U10 CA25224, ECOG grants CA17145 and CA21115, SWOG grant CA32102, and CCOP grant U10 CA37422 from the National Cancer Institute (NCI)]

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→