MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3196649086 · doi:10.1101/2021.08.29.21261962

SIOP Ependymoma I: Final results, long term follow-up and molecular analysis of the trial cohort: A BIOMECA Consortium Study

2021· preprint· en· W3196649086 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Ritzmann, Rebecca Chapman, John‐Paul Kilday, Nicky Thorp, Piergiorgio Modena, Robert A. Dineen, Donald Macarthur, Conor Mallucci, T. Jaspan, Kristian W. Pajtler, Marzia Giagnacovo, Thomas S. Jacques, Simon Paine, David W. Ellison, Éric Bouffet, Richard G. Grundy

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNIHR Great Ormond Street Hospital Biomedical Research CentreAssociazione Bianca GaravagliaBrain Tumour CharityGreat Ormond Street Hospital CharityCHILDREN with CANCER UKUniversity of BirminghamGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child HealthJames Tudor FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchCancer Research UK
KeywordsMedicineEpendymomaInternal medicineOncologyHazard ratioEtoposideVincristineRadiation therapyChemotherapyConfidence intervalSurgeryCyclophosphamide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background SIOP Ependymoma I was a non-randomised trial assessing event free and overall survival (EFS/OS) from non-metastatic intracranial ependymoma in children aged 3 to 21 years, treated with a staged management strategy. Chemotherapy efficacy in ependymoma is debated and therefore the response rate (RR) of subtotally resected (STR) ependymoma to vincristine, etoposide and cyclophosphamide (VEC) was an additional primary outcome. We report final results with 12-year follow-up and post hoc analyses of recently described biomarkers. Methods 74 participants were eligible. Children with gross total resection (GTR) received radiotherapy, whilst those with STR received VEC before radiotherapy. DNA methylation and 1q status were evaluated, alongside hTERT , ReLA, Tenascin-C, H3K27me3 and pAKT expression. Results Five- and ten-year EFS was 49.5% and 46.7%, OS was 69.3% and 60.5%. GTR was achieved in 33/74 (44.6%) and associated with improved EFS (p=0.003, HR=2.6, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.4-5.1). Grade 3 tumours were associated with worse OS (p=0.005, HR=2.8, 95%CI 1.3-5.8). 1q gain and hTERT expression were associated with poorer EFS (p=0.003, HR=2.70, 95%CI 1.49-6.10 and p=0.014, HR=5.8, 95%CI 1.2-28 respectively) and H3K27me3 loss with worse OS (p=0.003, HR=4.6, 95%CI 1.5-13.2). DNA methylation profiles showed expected patterns. 12 participants with STR did not receive chemotherapy; a protocol violation. However, chemotherapy RR was 65.5% (19/29, 95%CI 45.7-82.1), exceeding a prespecified 45% RR. Conclusions RR of STR to VEC exceeded the pre-specified criterion for efficacy. However, cases of inaccurate treatment stratification highlighted the need for rapid central review. Prognostic associations for 1q gain, H3K27me3 and hTERT were confirmed.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designNon-randomized 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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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