Efficacy of High-Dose Chemotherapy and Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiation for Atypical Teratoid/Rhabdoid Tumor: A Report From the Children’s Oncology Group Trial ACNS0333
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE Atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (AT/RT) is an aggressive, early-childhood brain tumor without standard effective treatment. To our knowledge, we conducted the first AT/RT-specific cooperative group trial, ACNS0333, to examine the efficacy and safety of intensive postoperative chemotherapy and focal radiation to treat AT/RT. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients from birth to 22 years of age with AT/RT were eligible. After surgery, they received 2 courses of multiagent chemotherapy, followed by 3 courses of high-dose chemotherapy with peripheral blood stem cell rescue and involved-field radiation therapy. Timing of radiation was based on patient age and disease location and extent. Central testing of tumor and blood for SMARCB1 status was mandated. Tumor molecular subclassification was performed retrospectively. The primary analysis was event-free survival (EFS) for patients < 36 months of age compared with a cooperative groups’ historical cohort. Although accrual was based on the therapeutic question, potential prognostic factors, including age, tumor location, M stage, surgical resection, order of therapy, germline status, and molecular subtype, were explored. RESULTS Of 65 evaluable patients, 54 were < 36 months of age. ACNS0333 therapy significantly reduced the risk of EFS events in patients < 36 months of age compared with the historical cohort ( P < .0005; hazard rate, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.66). Four-year EFS and overall survival for the entire cohort were 37% (95% CI, 25% to 49%) and 43% (95% CI, 31% to 55%), respectively. Timing of radiation did not affect survival, and 91% of relapses occurred by 2 years from enrollment. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 4 patients. CONCLUSION The ACNS0333 regimen dramatically improved survival compared with historical therapies for patients with AT/RT. Clinical characteristics and molecular subgrouping suggest prognostic differences. ACNS0333 results lay a foundation on which to build future studies and incorporate testing of new therapeutic agents.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".