Outpatient High-dose Methotrexate for Osteosarcoma: It’s Safe and Feasible, If You Want It
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: High-dose methotrexate (HD MTX) is usually administered as an inpatient to those with osteosarcoma. We prospectively tested the safety and feasibility of administering HD MTX in the ambulatory setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this single arm prospective observational study, eligible patients had previously completed 2 courses of HD MTX as an inpatient. On study, patients received MTX in hospital, discharged home and returned for daily assessment. Criteria to determine safety and feasibility included: (1) parent compliance with home instructions, (2) pump functioning/failure, and/or (3) admission for toxicity/noncompliance. Outpatient therapy was deemed feasible if <25% courses resulted in study event. Patient satisfaction was assessed. RESULTS: Six patients (median age, 13.5 y) with extremity osteosarcoma completed 35 courses of MTX. There were no study events-no hospitalizations or pump failures and all parents were compliant. The Data and Safety Committee concluded that with zero events in 35 courses, it was unlikely for outpatient MTX to be infeasible; study was thus terminated early. Participants reported value to stay out of hospital, permitted life to feel "more normal"; however, burden of daily commute to hospital was cited. CONCLUSIONS: The delivery of HD MTX is safe and feasible in patients with osteosarcoma.
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 | 0.004 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".