Maximum tumor dimension and tumor volume as prognostic factors in patients with newly diagnosed localized Ewing sarcoma (ES)- a report from the Children’s Oncology Group (COG).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
11529 Background: Maximum tumor dimension > 8 cm. and large tumor volume have been reported to be adverse prognostic factors in patients with ES but have not been prospectively evaluated in the context of a phase 3 clinical trial with interval compressed chemotherapy. Methods: COG AEWS1031 (NCT01231906) was a randomized phase 3 clinical trial comparing interval compressed chemotherapy regimens in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES of bone and soft tissue. A correlative objective of AEWS1031 was to evaluate tumor size and volume as prognostic factors. Institution-reported dimensions of the primary tumor from baseline imaging were prospectively collected. For inclusion in this analysis, patients had to have at least 1 tumor dimension reported for tumor size analyses and dimensions in 3 axes for tumor volume analyses. Maximum dimension was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 8cm. Tumor volume was dichotomized as less than vs. > / = 200 mL. Event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) from enrollment were calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared between groups using a two-sided log-rank test. Hazard ratios (HR) and confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using the Cox model. Results: The 5-year EFS and OS of the 629 eligible patients was 78% (95% CI: 75-81%) and 87% (95% CI: 84-90%) respectively and there was no significant difference in both EFS and OS between the randomized interval compressed chemotherapy arms of AEWS1031. 590 of 629 (94%) patients were evaluable for maximum tumor dimension and 307 (52%) had tumors > / = 8 cm. Patients with tumors > / = 8 cm were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.016) with estimated 5-year EFS of 73.7% (95% CI: 68.1 vs.78.4%) vs. 82.9% (95% CI 77.7-87.1%) for patients with tumors < 8 cm [HR: 1.53 (1.08-2.17)]. For tumor volume, 586 of 629 patients (93%) were evaluable and 180 (31%) had tumors > / = 200 mL. Patients with tumor volume > / = 200 mL were at significantly increased risk for EFS events (p = 0.003) with estimated 5-year EFS of 70% (95% CI: 62.3-76.4%) vs. 81.6% (95% CI: 77.2-85.2%) for patients with tumors < 200 mL [HR: 1.69 (1.2-2.39)]. Conclusions: Maximum tumor dimension and tumor volume as defined are both prognostic in patients with newly diagnosed localized ES treated with interval compressed chemotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01231906 .
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| 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".