MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

STRASS (EORTC 62092): A phase III randomized study of preoperative radiotherapy plus surgery versus surgery alone for patients with retroperitoneal sarcoma.

2019· article· en· W2964312447 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sylvie Bonvalot, Alessandro Gronchi, C. Le Péchoux, Carol J. Swallow, D. Strauß, Pierre Méeus, Frits van Coevorden, Stephan Stoldt, Eberhard Stoeckle, Piotr Rutkowski, Claudia Sangalli, Charles Honoré, Marco Rastrelli, Chandrajit P. Raut, Peter Chung, Marco Fiore, Saskia Litière, Sandrine Marréaud, Hans Gelderblom, Rick L. M. Haas

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineClinical endpointSurgeryPerioperativeRadiation therapyRandomized controlled trialSarcoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

11001 Background: The predominant pattern of failure of retroperitoneal sarcoma (RPS), frequently associated with subsequent death, is locoregional recurrence. Unlike in limbs, the efficacy of radiotherapy (RT) combined with surgery is not established. Methods: STRASS is a randomized, multicentre, international trial. Eligible patients had histologically-proven localized primary RPS, operable and suitable for radiotherapy. Patients were randomized 1:1 to preoperative RT (3D-CRT or IMRT) 50.4 Gy followed by surgery (RT/S group) or surgery alone (S group), stratified by hospital and performance status (0-1 vs 2). Primary endpoint is abdominal recurrence-free survival (ARFS; local relapse after complete resection, peritoneal sarcomatosis, R2 surgery, progressive disease during RT or unresectable disease). IDMC recommended a sensitivity analysis in which local progression on RT is not regarded as an event for patients who subsequently achieve complete surgical resection. Secondary endpoints were recurrence-free survival, overall survival, acute toxicity profile of RT, perioperative and late complications, and QoL. The study was designed to provide 90% power to show an increase of 20% in the 5-year ARFS rate, from 50% to 70% (corresponding to a HR of 0.52) at 2-sided 5% significance level. Results: 266 patients from Europe, USA and Canada were randomized between January 2012 and April 2017; 198 patients (74.5 %) had liposarcoma (LPS). Eighteen patients were designated ineligible. Overall rate of re-operation for any complication was 10.1%: 13 (10.9%) and 12 (9.4%) patients in RT/S versus S groups. 19 pts (14%) progressed during RT, 4 of whom did not undergo surgery. 3-year ARFS was 60.4% (95% Confidence interval (CI) 51.4-68.2%) and 58.7% (49.5- 66.7%) (HR = 1.01, 95%CI 0.71-1.44, p=0.954) in RT/S versus S groups. In the sensitivity analysis, 3-year ARFS was 66.0% (57.1-73.5%) and 58.7% (49.5-66.7%) in RT/S versus S groups (HR = 0.84, 95% CI 0.58-1.21, p=0.340). In the LPS subgroup, 3-year ARFS (sensitivity analysis) was 71.6% (61.3-79.6%) and 60.4% (49.8-69.5%) in RT/S versus S groups (HR = 0.64, 95%CI 0.40-1.01, p =0.049). Conclusion: STRASS failed to demonstrate a benefit of pre-operative RT for RPS. In the exploratory analysis, preoperative RT may benefit the LPS subgroup. Funding Source: EORTC and EUROSARC FP7 278472. Clinical trial information: EORTC 62092.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.214
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.001
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.342 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations87
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207