GCT-33. A PHASE 2 TRIAL OF RESPONSE-BASED RADIATION THERAPY FOR PATIENTS WITH LOCALIZED CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM GERM CELL TUMORS: A CHILDREN’S ONCOLOGY GROUP (COG) STUDY. IMPACT OF RAPID CENTRAL RADIOTHERAPY REVIEW ON RADIOTHERAPY QUALITY AND PATTERN OF FAILURE FOR NON-GERMINOMATOUS GERM CELL TUMORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND COG ACNS 1123 tested reduced radiotherapy (RT) for non-metastatic, non-germinomatous germ cell tumor (NGGCT) patients. The impact of central review on quality of RT and pattern of failure for NGGCT patients is evaluated. METHODS Patients who achieved a complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to induction chemotherapy were eligible for reduced dose and field RT of 30.6 Gy whole ventricular field (WVI) and 54 Gy tumor-bed total dose. An online contouring atlas was available. Within three days of RT start, WVI plans were submitted for rapid central review. Within one week of RT completion, the complete RT record was submitted. Brain and spine MRIs of relapsed patients were centrally reviewed. RESULTS Between 5/2012–9/2016, 107 eligible patients were accrued and 70 met reduced RT criteria. Rapid RT review was performed for 49 (70%) of 70 patients. Forty-four (89.8%) required no modification. All modifications were completed and plans became compliant. Final central review was performed for 66 evaluable patients: 62 (94%) were per protocol; there were 2 major (1 dose and 1 target) and 2 minor deviations. Eight patients progressed; none had deviations. Median time to progression was 3.54 months (range: 1.7–19.1) from RT start. All failures had a spine component; two also had cranial component: one local progression (within the RT boost volume) and one leptomeningeal disease. CONCLUSION Providing an online contouring atlas and performing a rapid central review lead to high quality radiotherapy on this prospective trial. The deviations did not contribute to the pattern of failure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".