Outcomes of adolescent males with extracranial malignant germ cell tumors compared with children and young adults: A report from the Malignant Germ Cell Tumors International Consortium (MaGIC) group.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
10022 Background: Adolescents with extracranial malignant germ cell tumors (GCTs) are often treated on the same regimens developed for children, but more closely resemble the clinical characteristics of young adult patients. We sought to determine whether event-free survival (EFS) for adolescents with GCTs was more like that of children or young adults. Methods: We assembled an individual patient database of ten GCT trials: seven conducted by pediatric cooperative groups and three by an adult group. We selected male patients aged 0-30 years old treated with platinum-based chemotherapy for non-seminomatous malignant GCTs of the testis, retroperitoneum, or mediastinum. We categorized age-group as children (0 to < 11 years), adolescents (11 to < 18 years), or young adults (18 to < 30 years old). We compared EFS among age groups, and adjusted for calculated IGCCCG risk-group using Cox proportional hazards analysis. Results: 593 patients met inclusion criteria, of whom 90 were children, 109 were adolescents, and 394 were young adults. The 5-year EFS for adolescents (72%; CI = 62-79%) was significantly lower than for children (90%; CI = 81-95%, p = 0.003) and for young adults (88%; CI = 84-91%, p < 0.001). Risk-group was significantly associated with EFS in the adolescent age-group (p = 0.002). In a Cox multivariable analysis, the difference between adolescents and children remained statistically significant (HR = 0.30, p = 0.001), but the difference between adolescents and young adults did not (HR 0.66, p = 0.114). Conclusions: EFS for adolescent patients with extracranial malignant GCTs was similar to young adults but significantly worse than children. This finding may have important implications for how adolescent patients are treated.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".