Impact of the First Generation of Children’s Oncology Group Clinical Trials on Clinical Practice for Wilms Tumor
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
Refinements in surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy since the mid-20th century have resulted in a survival rate exceeding 90% for patients with Wilms tumor (WT). Although this figure is remarkable, a significant proportion of patients continue to have event-free survival (EFS) estimates of <75%, and nearly 25% of survivors experience severe chronic medical conditions. The first-generation Children's Oncology Group (COG) renal tumor trials (AREN '0'), which opened to enrollment in 2006, focused on augmenting treatment regimens for WT subgroups with predicted EFS <75% to 80%, including those with the adverse prognostic marker of combined loss of heterozygosity (LOH) at chromosomes 1p/16q, pulmonary metastasis with incomplete lung nodule response after 6 weeks of chemotherapy, bilateral disease, and anaplastic histology. Conversely, therapy was reduced for patient subgroups with good outcomes and potential for long-term toxicity, such as those with lung metastasis with complete lung nodule response after 6 weeks of chemotherapy. This article summarizes the key findings of the first-generation COG renal tumor studies and their implications for clinical practice.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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