MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Temporal trends among survivors of rhabdomyosarcoma: A report from the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS).

2019· article· en· W2969366525 on OpenAlexaff
Pooja Hingorani, Mingjuan Wang, Deo Kumar Srivastava, Paul C. Nathan, Kevin C. Oeffinger, Yutaka Yasui, Wendy M. Leisenring, Rebecca M. Howell, Emily L. Mueller, Todd M. Gibson, Suzanne L. Wolden, Kari Bjornard, William H. Meyer, Carola A.S. Arndt, Leslie L. Robison, Daniel M. Green, Gregory T. Armstrong, Kirsten K. Ness

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioCumulative incidenceConfidence intervalRhabdomyosarcomaInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)Cancer registryCancerGastroenterologyPediatricsCohortSarcomaPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

11570 Background: Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma Study Group (IRSG) protocols included treatment modifications, which may have ameliorated late health outcomes for rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) survivors treated in more recent era. Methods: We evaluated chronic health conditions (CHCs) and late mortality ( > 5 years from diagnosis) among survivors treated 1970-1990 (IRSG I-III) and 1991-1999 (IRSG IV), and associations with specific treatments to identify treatment-related factors for adverse outcomes. Associations between treatments and CHCs and mortality were evaluated using Fine and Gray’s proportional hazards method accounting for competing risks. Results: 856 survivors treated 1970-90 (median diagnosis age 5.4 years [0- 20]) and 306 treated 1991-99 (median diagnosis age 5.5 years [0-20]) were included. Significant exposure differences between eras included higher percentage (53% vs. 17%, p < 0.01) receiving ≥ 20gm/m2 cumulative alkylators in 1991-99, but more receiving platinums (13% vs 5%, p < 0.01) and abdomen/ pelvis radiation (29% vs. 23%, p = 0.04) in 1970-90. 20-year cumulative incidence for any (40% vs. 28%, p < 0.01), ≥2 (16% vs. 7%, p < 0.01), and endocrine (8% vs. 2.5%, p < 0.01) grade 3-5 CHCs was higher in 1970-90 compared to 1991-99. The hazard ratio (HR) for any (HR 0.7, 95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.55-0.9), ≥2 (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.22-0.66) and endocrine (HR 0.25, 95% CI 0.09-0.67) grade 3-5 CHC was lower for 1991-99 survivors than 1970-90. The effect of era (1991-99 vs 1970-90, HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59-0.91) on CHC was not attenuated when treatment variables were added to multivariable model. Exposures with increased risk of grade 3-5 CHC included platinums (hearing, HR 2, 95% CI 1.07-3.8), anthracycline ≥250mg/m2 (cardiovascular, HR 2.7, 95% CI 1.2-6) and abdomen/ pelvis radiation (second malignant neoplasms, HR 2.1, 95% CI 1.1-4, gastrointestinal, HR 7.4, 95% CI 3.5-16 and endocrine, HR 2.5, 95% CI 1.4-4.4). Gonadal dysfunction was the most common endocrine CHC. There was no difference in all cause or cause-specific mortality between the two cohorts. Conclusions: RMS survivors from the IRSG IV era are at reduced risk for late onset chronic health conditions compared to previous era.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.361 · 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 topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→