Tailoring Therapy for Children With Neuroblastoma on the Basis of Risk Group Classification: Past, Present, and Future
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For children with neuroblastoma, the likelihood of cure varies widely according to age at diagnosis, disease stage, and tumor biology. Treatments are tailored for children with this clinically heterogeneous malignancy on the basis of a combination of markers that are predictive of risk of relapse and death. Sequential risk-based, cooperative-group clinical trials conducted during the past 4 decades have led to improved outcome for children with neuroblastoma. Increasingly accurate risk classification and refinements in treatment stratification strategies have been achieved with the more recent discovery of robust genomic and molecular biomarkers. In this review, we discuss the history of neuroblastoma risk classification in North America and Europe and highlight efforts by the International Neuroblastoma Risk Group (INRG) Task Force to develop a consensus approach for pretreatment stratification using seven risk criteria including an image-based staging system-the INRG Staging System. We also update readers on the current Children's Oncology Group risk classifier and outline plans for the development of a revised 2021 Children's Oncology Group classifier that will incorporate INRG Staging System criteria to facilitate harmonization of risk-based frontline treatment strategies conducted around the globe. In addition, we discuss new approaches to establish increasingly robust, future risk classification algorithms that will further refine treatment stratification using machine learning tools and expanded data from electronic health records and the INRG Data Commons.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it