First‐line chemotherapy in advanced intra‐abdominal well‐differentiated/dedifferentiated liposarcoma: An EORTC Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group retrospective analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No prospective trial with anthracycline-based chemotherapy has individually assessed response in a well-differentiated (WD)/dedifferentiated (DD) liposarcoma patient cohort. We conducted a retrospective analysis of first-line chemotherapy in liposarcoma of intra-abdominal origin (IA-LPS) in patients who had entered the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC)/Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group (STBSG) trials. METHODS: We searched for all adult patients treated with first-line chemotherapy for advanced IA-LPS in the EORTC STBSG phase 2 and 3 trials from 1978. Treatment was aggregated into 5 groups: anthracycline alone, ifosfamide alone, doxorubicin plus ifosfamide (D+IFO), doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/dacarbazine, and "other" (brostallicin, trabectedin). Response was assessed prospectively by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or World Health Organization criteria. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were computed by Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 109 patients with IA-LPS from 13 trials were identified (104 evaluable for response). Overall, there were 10/109 (9.2%) responders: 3/48 (6.3%) in the anthracycline alone group, 2/15 (13%) in the ifosfamide alone group, and 4/18 (22%) in the D+IFO group. At the 10-month median follow-up (interquartile range, 6-24), the median OS was 19 months (95% CI, 15-21) and median PFS 4 months (95% CI, 3-6). D+IFO achieved a not statistically significant longer median PFS (12 months) and median OS (31 months) than observed with other regimens. Univariate/multivariate analysis did not identify prognostic factors. CONCLUSIONS: Cytotoxic chemotherapy, in particular anthracycline alone, had marginal activity in advanced IA-LPS. Ifosfamide-containing regimens showed higher activity, although it was not statistically significant and in a small number of cases, with the combination of doxorubicin and ifosfamide appearing to be the more active regimen available in fit patients. This series provides a benchmark for future trials on new drugs in WD/DD liposarcoma.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".