MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4283701656 · doi:10.1182/blood.2022016098

Targeted radiotherapy for early-stage, low-risk pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma slow early responders: a COG AHOD0431 analysis

2022· article· en· W4283701656 on OpenAlexafffund
Akash D. Parekh, Frank G. Keller, Kathleen M. McCarten, Sandy Kessel, Steve Cho, Qinglin Pei, Yue Wu, Sharon M. Castellino, Louis S. Constine, Cindy L. Schwartz, David Hodgson, Kara M. Kelly, Bradford S. Hoppe

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institutes of HealthChildren’s Oncology GroupNational Cancer InstitutePrincess Margaret Cancer FoundationSt. Baldrick's Foundation
KeywordsCogMedicineOncologyHodgkin lymphomaInternal medicineStage (stratigraphy)Radiation therapyLymphomaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children's Oncology Group (COG) trial AHOD0431 reduced systemic therapy and used response-adapted involved-field radiotherapy (IFRT) in early-stage pediatric classic Hodgkin lymphoma. We investigated the impact of positron emission tomographic response after 1 cycle (PET1) and on IFRT outcomes and pattern of relapse. Patients in AHOD0431 underwent PET1 response assessment after AVPC (doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, and cyclophosphamide). "Rapid early responders" (RERs) had a negative PET1 (PET1-); "slow early responders" (SERs) had a positive PET1 (PET1+). Patients with a partial response by computed tomographic and functional imaging after 3 chemotherapy cycles received 21-Gy IFRT, whereas complete responders had no IFRT. Progression-free survival (PFS) was evaluated for RERs and SERs treated with or without IFRT. Recurrence sites were initial, new, or both. Relapses involving initial sites were characterized as "within the PET1+ site" or "initially involved but outside the PET1+ site." Median follow-up was 118 months. The 10-year PFS rate among RERs was 96.6% with IFRT and 84.1% without IFRT (P = .10), whereas SERs were 80.9% with IFRT and 64.0% without IFRT (P = .03). Among 90 RERs who did not receive IFRT, all 14 relapses included an initial site. Among 45 SERs receiving no IFRT, 14 of 16 relapses were in the initial site (9 PET1+ site only). Among 58 patients receiving IFRT, 5 of 10 relapses were in the PET1+ site. After 3 cycles of AVPC alone, RERs showed favorable results. Conversely, SERs had unfavorable outcomes with AVPC alone, although they improved with 21-Gy IFRT. RT remains an important component of treatment for SERs. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00302003.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→