MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3113002109 · doi:10.1093/neuonc/noaa215.190

CTNI-23. IDH1/2wt ANAPLASTIC GLIOMAS OF THE EORTC RANDOMIZED PHASE III INTERGROUP CATNON TRIAL: OVERALL SURVIVAL RELATED TO TREATMENT, MGMT STATUS AND MOLECULAR FEATURES OF GLIOBLASTOMA

2020· article· en· W3113002109 on OpenAlexaff
C. Mircea S. Tesileanu, Pim J. French, S. C. Erridge, Michael A. Vogelbaum, Anna K. Nowak, Marc Sanson, Alba A. Brandes, Wolfgang Wick, Paul M. Clément, Jean Français Baurain, Warren Mason, Helen Wheeler, Michael Weller, Kenneth Aldape, Pieter Wesseling, Johan M. Kros, Vassilis Golfinopoulos, Thierry Gorlia, Brigitta G. Baumert, Martin J. van den Bent

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuro-Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIDH1Anaplastic astrocytomaInternal medicineGliomaMedicineOncologyAstrocytomaAdjuvant therapyIsocitrate dehydrogenaseMethylationCancer researchBiologyChemotherapyMutationGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND The phase III CATNON trial randomized 751 adult patients with newly diagnosed 1p/19q non-codeleted anaplastic glioma to 59.4 Gy radiotherapy +/- concurrent and/or adjuvant TMZ. Here, we present the molecular analysis of the IDH1/2wt subgroup, and associations between molecular characteristics and patient outcomes. METHODS CNV data and MGMT promoter methylation status were assessed from EPIC methylation array data. IDH1/2 and H3F3A mutation status were determined with a glioma tailored next-generation sequencing panel and TERT promoter mutation status using a SNaPshot assay. Overall survival (OS) was measured from date of randomization. RESULTS Of 654 assessed tumors, 211 (32%) were IDH1/2wt. An H3F3A mutation was present in 14 tumors (K27M: n=10; G34R: n=4). Of the remaining 197 patients, 154 tumors had molecular features of glioblastoma according to cIMPACT-NOW 3 criteria (‘IDH1/2wt astrocytomas WHO IV’), 39 tumors did not (‘IDH1/2wt astrocytomas WHO III’), and 4 had inconclusive molecular data. IDH1/2wt astrocytomas WHO III patients had significantly better survival than WHO IV patients: median OS of 2.83 yrs vs 1.43 yrs respectively [log-rank test: p< 0.001]. Of the 154 IDH1/2wt astrocytoma WHO IV, 55 (36%) were found MGMT promoter methylated. MGMT promoter methylation was prognostic in IDH1/2wt astrocytomas WHO IV patients, with a median OS of 1.86 yrs for methylated vs 1.34 yrs for unmethylated [HR 1.62, p=0.006]. In the IDH1/2wt astrocytomas WHO IV, no effect of concurrent and/or adjuvant TMZ was observed; the HR for OS after RT with any TMZ vs RT alone was 1.31 [95% CI 0.73–2.36, p=0.4] for MGMT promoter methylated and 0.90 [95% CI 0.55–1.45, p=0.7] for unmethylated glioma patients. CONCLUSIONS Our study validated the prognostic value of the cIMPACT-NOW 3 criteria. MGMT promoter methylation is prognostic but not predictive for outcome to TMZ treatment in this cohort of IDH1/2wt anaplastic gliomas with molecular features of glioblastoma.

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)0.001
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuro-Oncology→Same topicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→