VIncristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide in children and adolescents with relapsed rhabdomyosarcoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The combination of vincristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide (VIT) is often used to treat children and adolescents with relapsed rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS); however, the outcome of these patients has not been previously described. PROCEDURES: We sought to determine the response rate (RR) and progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with relapsed RMS treated with VIT by retrospective review of patients treated at five tertiary care hospitals. Prior treatment with irinotecan was permitted. RESULTS: Among 19 patients with a median age of 8 years (range 2-17 years), 12 (63%) were males and 12 (63%) had embryonal histology. Median time to relapse from initial diagnosis was 16 months (range 2.8-45 months). VIT was used as first, second, third, or fourth line of therapy in four (21%), seven (37%), six (32%), and two (10%) patients, respectively. Four patients received VIT as adjuvant therapy following radiation and/or surgery. Therefore, among 15 evaluable patients, the best response to VIT was 0 (complete response, CR), 0 (partial response, PR), 4 (stable disease, SD), and 11 (progressive disease, PD) for an overall clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) of 26.7% (95% CI: 7.8-55.1%). After a median follow-up of 8 months, 2 (10%) patients were alive without disease, 3 (16%) were alive with disease, and 14 (74%) patients died of PD. PFS at 3 months was 23% (95% CI: 5.7-46.7%). CONCLUSIONS: VIT therapy in combination with adequate local control is associated with some disease control in patients with first relapse RMS and may be another reasonable option to offer patients as salvage therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".