TOPGEAR: An international randomized phase III trial of preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus preoperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer (AGITG/TROG/EORTC/NCIC CTG).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS4141 Background: Optimal management of patients with resectable gastric cancer remains unknown. Since the INT0116 and MAGIC trials, there are 2 standards of care for adjuvant therapy: postoperative chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and perioperative ECF chemotherapy. The important question arising from these studies is whether CRT is superior to chemotherapy alone as adjuvant therapy. This randomized phase II/III trial will compare CRT to chemotherapy alone in the preoperative setting. Methods: Patients with resectable adenocarcinoma of the stomach or gastroesophageal junction will be randomized to receive either preoperative chemotherapy alone (ECFx3 as per MAGIC regimen) or preoperative CRT (ECFx2 followed by 45Gy of radiation with concurrent 5-FU). Following surgery, both groups will receive 3 further cycles of ECF. The trial is being conducted in two Parts; Part I (phase II component) will recruit 120 patients with the aim of demonstrating sufficient efficacy and safety of preoperative CRT, as well as trial feasibility. Part II (phase III component) will recruit a further 632 patients to provide a total of 752. The primary endpoint for Part I is pathological complete response rate, and for Part 2 it is overall survival. The trial includes formal quality of life and biological sub-studies. In addition, the trial incorporates a rigorous quality assurance program that includes real time central review of radiotherapy plans and central review of surgical technique. Current status: This study is an international, intergroup trial led by the Australasian Gastro-Intestinal Trials Group (AGITG), in collaboration with the Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (TROG), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) and the NCIC Clinical Trials Group. To date, 36 patients have been recruited from 20 sites in Australia and New Zealand; European and Canadian sites will commence recruitment in 2012.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".