Results of the ADIUVO Study, the First Randomized Trial on Adjuvant Mitotane in Adrenocortical Carcinoma Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: The ESE-ENSAT guidelines on the management of adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) suggest adjuvant mitotane for patients at high risk of recurrence following radical surgery. This indication has a limited evidence base, lacking results from randomized controlled trials. No suggestion for or against adjuvant mitotane in low-risk patients was given, since studies did not stratify patients for prognosis. The randomized controlled study ADIUVO compared the efficacy of adjuvant mitotane treatment vs. observation in prolonging recurrence-free survival (RFS) in ACC patients at low-intermediate risk of recurrence. Methods: The main inclusion criteria were: stage I-III ACC, R0 surgery, and Ki-67 ≤10%. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to adjuvant mitotane (MIT) or observation (OBS). The primary endpoint of the study was RFS. Patients who refused randomization were offered inclusion in the ADIUVO OBSERVATIONAL study. In this prospective, observational study, patients were managed as in the ADIUVO study. A total of 91 patients were enrolled in ADIUVO, 45 in the MIT and 46 in the OBS arm. Baseline characteristics of patients were perfectly matched between the 2 arms: median age, 51 vs. 50.5 years; female, 73% vs. 67%; stage I, 20% vs. 26%; stage II, 67% vs. 63%, stage III, 13% vs. 11%; ACC secretion 44% vs. 36%; Weiss 5 vs. 5; respectively. In ADIUVO OBSERVATIONAL, 42 patients were treated with mitotane and 53 were untreated. Baseline characteristics of patients were matched between the 2 groups and with MIT and OBS groups in ADIUVO. Thus, the ADIUVO OBSERVATIONAL cohorts could be analyzed in parallel to those of ADIUVO. Results: In the ADIUVO study, recurrences were 8 in the MIT and 11 in the OBS arm, while deaths were 2 and 5, respectively. RFS and overall survival (OS) did not significantly differ between the 2 arms. Tumor size was a predictor of RFS in multivariable analysis. In the OBS arm, the HR for recurrence was 1.321 (95%CI, 0.55–3.32, p=0.54) and HR for death 2.171 (95%CI, 0.52–12.12, p=0.29). The survival analysis in the ADIUVO OBSERVATIONAL study confirmed the findings of ADIUVO. Given the outcome of both studies, the NNT is 55. Conclusions: ACC patients at low-intermediate risk of recurrence after surgery are a minority; however, they show a far better prognosis than expected (5-year RFS is about 75%) and do not benefit significantly from adjuvant mitotane. The results of the ADIUVO study do not support routine use of adjuvant mitotane in this subset of patients, who may thus avoid a potentially toxic treatment. This is an important step toward personalization of ACC care.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".