MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911309315 · doi:10.5539/cco.v8n1p1

Treatment of Recurrent Glioblastoma Multiforme (rGBM) with Antineoplaston AS2-1 in Combination with Targeted Therapy

2019· article· en· W2911309315 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Stanisław R. Burzyński, Tomasz J. Janicki, Samuel W. Beenken

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer and Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBevacizumabAdverse effectSurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingGlioblastomaToxicityProgressive diseaseInternal medicineChemotherapyRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (rGBM) poses a difficult challenge. Therefore, the purpose of this report was to evaluate objective response (OR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the incidence of adverse events (AEs) in rGBM patients, age 19-70 years, who were treated with antineoplaston AS2-1 (Astugenal) plus targeted therapy. A retrospective analysis was performed. Tumor response was assessed by gadolinium-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Twenty-nine adult rGBM patients were treated between 9/11/2015 and 06/23/2018. Seven had no prior treatment with bevacizumab elsewhere, had radiologic evidence of rGBM, and had MRI assessment of tumor response. The median treatment time was 101 days (range: 55-208 days). OR was seen in six patients (85.7%) with complete disappearance of gadolinium enhancement in four patients (57.1%) and a 50% or greater reduction in gadolinium enhancement in two patients (28.6%). Progressive disease was seen in one patient (14.3%). The median time to first response was 29 days (range: 22-96 days) while the median duration of response was 141 days (range 55-739+ days). Six- and 12-month PFS was 57% and 19%, respectively while 6- and 12-month OS at was 86% and 54%, respectively. Treatment was well-tolerated with no patients experiencing grade 3 or 4 antineoplaston-related toxicity. Regarding response to treatment and toxicity, AS2-1 plus targeted therapy compares favorably with other reported rGBM therapies. Duration of response was shortened by the ill-advised decision of some patients to discontinue treatment after a tumor response was achieved.  

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.347 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer and Clinical OncologySame topicGlioma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207