MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A randomized trial of single versus multiple fractions (Fx) for re-irradiation (RE-RT) of painful bone metastases (PBM): NCIC CTG SC.20.

2013· article· en· W2601804042 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Chow, Yvette M. van der Linden, Daniel Roos, William F. Hartsell, Peter Hoskin, Jackson Wu, Michael Brundage, Abdenour Nabid, Carolyn F. Wilson, Ralph M. Meyer, Bingshu E. Chen, Rebecca Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicManagement of metastatic bone disease
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreOntario Institute for Cancer ResearchSunnybrook Health Science CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de SherbrookeQueen's UniversityBaker Hughes (Canada)Health Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectClinical endpointRandomized controlled trialSurgeryAnesthesiaInternal medicineUrology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

9502 Background: The optimal RE-RT dose and fractionation schedule for PBM is uncertain. Methods: Patients (pts) with PBM after previous radiation (RT) to the same site were stratified by previous Fx schedule and pain response and randomized to 8 Gy in 1 Fx or 20 Gy in 5 Fx (8 Fx if previous RT was to spine/whole pelvis in multiple Fx). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (RR) at 2 months using the International Consensus schema (Chow 2002) which combines Brief Pain Inventory worst pain score and opioid analgesic use. We tested if 8Gy was non-inferior (NI), analyzed by intention to treat (ITT) and a per-protocol (PP) sensitivity analysis excluding those who were ineligible, inevaluable or received non-allocated therapy. Sample size was calculated using an expected RR of 70% with 20Gy and a NI margin of 10% (i.e. upper boundary of 1-sided 95% CI for the RR difference). Pts reported adverse events (AEs) by questionnaire on Day 14. Quality of life (QoL) was assessed using the EORTC QLQ C30. Results: Between 01/2004 and 06/2012, we enrolled 850 pts from 9 countries. Most common cancers were prostate (27%), breast (26%) and lung (22%). Before the 2 month assessment, 98 (11%) pts died. By ITT, the 2-month RR was available in 66% (557/850) and was 119/425 (28%) with 8Gy and 136/425 (32%) with 20Gy (P=0.2); the upper boundary of the 95% CI for RR difference = 9.2% and is less than the pre-specified NI margin. By PP analysis, 2-month RR was available in 521 and was 117/258 (45.3%) with 8Gy and 135/263 (51.3%) with 20Gy (P=0.17); the upper boundary of the 95% CI for RR difference = 13.2%, which exceeds 10% non-inferiority boundary. Day 14 AEs differing by treatment were: lack of appetite (P=0.01), vomiting (P= 0.001), diarrhea (P=0.02) and skin reddening (P=0.002); all were worse with 20Gy. There were 30 vs 20 pathological fractures and 7 vs 2 spinal cord compressions with 8Gy and 20Gy, respectively (P=NS). No difference in QoL existed between arms. Conclusions: In pts with PBM receiving RE-RT, the 2-month RR obtained with 8Gy is non-inferior to 20 Gy when assessed by ITT but findings were not robust to a PP sensitivity analysis. When choosing between options tested, trade-offs exist between pain response and acute toxicity. Clinical trial information: NCT00080912.

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)0.003
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.220
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations4
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicManagement of metastatic bone diseaseFrench-language works237,207