Treatment of Stage IV Favorable Histology Wilms Tumor With Lung Metastases: A Report From the Children’s Oncology Group AREN0533 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The National Wilms Tumor Study (NWTS) treatment of favorable histology Wilms tumor with lung metastases was vincristine/dactinomycin/doxorubicin (DD4A) and lung radiation therapy (RT). The AREN0533 study applied a new risk stratification and treatment strategy to improve event-free survival (EFS) while reducing exposure to lung RT. Methods Patients with favorable histology Wilms tumor and isolated lung metastases showing complete lung nodule response (CR) after 6 weeks of DD4A continued receiving chemotherapy without lung RT. Patients with incomplete response (IR) or loss of heterozygosity at chromosomes 1p/16q received lung RT and four cycles of cyclophosphamide/etoposide in addition to DD4A drugs (Regimen M). AREN0533 was designed to preserve a 4-year EFS of 85% for lung nodule CR and improve 4-year EFS from 75% to 85% for lung nodule IR. Results Among 292 assessable patients, 133 had CR and 159 had IR. For patients with CR, 4-year EFS and overall survival (OS) estimates were 79.5% (95% CI, 71.2% to 87.8%) and 96.1% (95% CI, 92.1% to 100%), respectively. Expected versus observed event rates were 15% and 20.2% ( P = .052), respectively. For patients with IR, 4-year EFS and OS estimates were 88.5% (95% CI, 81.8% to 95.3%) and 95.4% (95% CI, 90.9% to 99.8%), respectively. Expected versus observed event rates were 25% and 12.2% ( P < .001), respectively. Overall, 4-year EFS and OS were 85.4% (95% CI, 80.5% to 90.2%) and 95.6% (95% CI, 92.8% to 98.4%) compared with 72.5% (95% CI, 66.9% to 78.1%; P < .001) and 84.0% (95% CI, 79.4% to 88.6%; P < .001), respectively, in the predecessor NWTS-5 study. Conclusion Excellent OS was achieved after omission of primary lung RT in patients with lung nodule CR, although there were more events than expected. EFS was significantly improved, with excellent OS, in patients with lung nodule IR using four cycles of cyclophosphamide/etoposide in addition to DD4A drugs. The overall AREN0533 treatment strategy yielded EFS and OS estimates that were superior to previous studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".