MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899995714 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noy148.039

ACTR-02. NRG ONCOLOGY/RTOG 0424: LONG-TERM RESULTS OF A PHASE II STUDY OF TEMOZOLOMIDE-BASED CHEMORADIOTHERAPY REGIMEN FOR HIGH-RISK LOW-GRADE GLIOMAS

2018· article· en· W2899995714 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Fisher, Jianwen Zhang, David Macdonald, Arnab Chakravarti, Glenn J. Lesser, Sherry Fox, Stephen W. Coons, Leland Rogers, Maria Werner‐Wasik, Thomas J. Doyle, Jean-Paul Bahary, John B. Fiveash, Joseph Bovi, Steven Howard, Michael Yu, David D’Souza, Nadia N. Laack, Mack Roach, Young Kwok, Daniel Wahl, John Stasser, Minhee Won, Minesh P. Mehta

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCancer Care Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemozolomideMedicineInternal medicineOncologyChemoradiotherapyHazard ratioRegimenPopulationGliomaClinical endpointRadiation therapyPhases of clinical researchChemotherapyConfidence intervalClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To report the long-term outcomes and MGMT analysis of temozolomide (TMZ) and radiotherapy (RT) in a high-risk low-grade gliomas (LGG) population. PATIENTS/ For this single-arm phase II study, LGG patients with ≥3 risk factors (age ≥40, astrocytoma, bi-hemispheric tumor, size ≥6 cm or preoperative neurologic function status >1) received RT (54 Gy/30 fractions) with TMZ and up to 12 cycles of post-RT TMZ. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) at 3 years after registration. A one-sided Z-test was used to test the hazard rate based on the observed 3-year OS rate versus a prespecified historical control from the EORTC high-risk LGG population. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), and the association of survival outcomes with MGMT methylation status, for which the MGMT-STP27 prediction model was used based on 450k data. The initial report of this study was published in 2015, when the results of the MGMT analysis were unavailable. The study accrued 129 analyzable patients. The median follow-up for surviving patients was 9 years (range: 0.4–11.8), 4 years longer than previously reported. The 3-year OS rate was 73.5% (95% CI: 65.8–81.1%), superior to the historical control of 54% (p

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207