High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (HDC-ASCT) for relapsed metastatic germ cell tumors (mGCTs): The Alberta experience from 2001 to 2018.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
406 Background: HDC-ASCT is a standard therapy for patients (pts) with mGCTs whose disease progresses on or after conventional dose chemotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of HDC-ASCT in pts with relapsed mCGT in Alberta over the past two decades. Methods: Pts with mGCTs who received HDC-ASCT at two provincial referral cancer centers in Alberta, Canada from 2001-2018 were identified. Baseline clinical and treatment characteristics were collected as well as overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Relevant prognostic variables were analyzed. Results: Forty three pts were identified. Median age was 28 years (range 19 – 56). Majority (95%) had non-seminoma histology and testis/retroperitoneal primary (84%). Twenty pts (47%) had poor risk disease as per IGCCC at start of first-line chemotherapy. HDC-ASCT was used as second-line therapy in 65% and 58% received tandem HDC-ASCT. Median follow-up from ASCT was 22 months (range 2 – 181). At last follow-up, 42% of pts are alive without disease, including 3/7 (43%) of pts with primary mediastinal disease. Two-year and 5-year DFS/OS were 44%/51% and 41%/43%, respectively. Median OS and DFS for all pts were 27.9 months (10.2 – NR) and 9.3 months (4.2 – 124), respectively. Conclusions: We found that HDC-ASCT is an effective salvage therapy in mGCT, consistent with existing literature. Pts appeared to benefit regardless of primary site. Though limited by small sample size, we found a numerical difference in DFS and OS between 2nd and 3rd line HDC-ASCT and single vs. tandem ASCT.[Table: see text]
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".