Impact of cyclophosphamide and etoposide on outcome of clear cell sarcoma of the kidney treated on the National Wilms Tumor Study‐5 (NWTS‐5)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To improve the event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) for patients with clear cell sarcoma of the kidney (CCSK) by incorporating cyclophosphamide and etoposide into treatment on National Wilms Tumor Study (NWTS)-5. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients less than 16 years of age with a centrally confirmed pathological diagnosis of CCSK were eligible for treatment on this prospective single-arm study conducted between August 1995 and June 2002. Staging consisted of CT scans of chest, abdomen, pelvis, bone scan, skeletal survey, and CT or MRI of the head. Treatment consisted of vincristine/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide alternating with cyclophosphamide/etoposide for 24 weeks and radiation to sites of disease. RESULTS: One hundred eight eligible patients were enrolled on study (69% males, 63% Caucasian), with a median age of 22 months. Stage distribution was as follows: stage I, 12; II, 44; III, 45; IV, 7. Median follow-up was 9.7 years. Five-year EFS and OS were 79% (95% CI: 71%-88%) and 90% (95% CI: 84%-96%). Five-year EFS for stage I-IV was 100%, 88%, 73%, and 29%, respectively. Twenty of the 23 disease-related events occurred within three years of initial treatment. The most common site of recurrence was brain (12/23). CONCLUSION: The outcome for patients with CCSK treated on NWTS-5 was similar to NWTS-4 and accomplished over a shorter treatment duration. Stage was highly predictive of outcome. Brain metastases occurred more frequently than on NWTS-4. Regimen I showed more benefit for patients with stage I and II disease as compared with higher stages of disease where new therapies are needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".