MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Outcome of children with malignant germ cell tumors by response status at the end of induction chemotherapy.

2019· article· en· W2947059980 on OpenAlexaff
Adriana Fonseca, Doojduen Villaluna, Mark Krailo, A. Lindsay Frazier, Furqan Shaikh

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInduction chemotherapyEtoposideChemotherapyGerm cell tumorsBleomycinCisplatinInternal medicineOncologyComplete responseSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10023 Background: The management of pediatric malignant germ cell tumors (MGCTs) includes induction therapy with 3-4 cycles cisplatin, etoposide, bleomycin (PEb). The current practice recommends 2-3 cycles of PEb (total 6 cycles) as consolidation therapy if response is not complete at the end of induction, a significantly different approach than that used in adult patients who receive a standard number of cycles. Furthermore, there is no evidence supporting the addition of a consolidation phase with PEb in pediatric patients with MGCTs. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all patients enrolled in a phase III, single-arm trial for low-risk and intermediate-risk MGCTs (AGCT0132). All patients received 3 cycles of PEb and underwent response assessment at the end of induction. Complete Response (CR) was defined as negative tumor markers and no viable residual lesion. Patients in CR were not to receive any further chemotherapy. Patients not in CR were prescribed 3 additional cycles of PEb as consolidation. Event-free survival (EFS) and Overall survival (OS) was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Among 210 patients enrolled, 193 patients had CR after 3 cycles of induction chemotherapy, and their post-induction 4yr-EFS and OS was 93% and 99%. Fifteen patients were not in CR at the end of the first 3 cycles and received additional chemotherapy, and their 4yr-EFS and OS was 51% and 60%. Conclusions: Children with MGCTs who have a partial response after the first 3 cycles of chemotherapy had an inferior outcome compared to those with a CR, despite receiving additional cycles of PEb chemotherapy. Thus, we conclude that consolidation is of unclear benefit. Although our results are limited by small sample size and lack of comparator, we propose that pediatric MGCT patients who fail to achieve a CR after standard induction chemotherapy should receive a salvage regimen with different agents rather than consolidation with more cycles of the same chemotherapy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicTesticular diseases and treatments→French-language works237,207→