MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ARST2031: A study to compare early use of vinorelbine and maintenance therapy for patients with high risk rhabdomyosarcoma.

2022· article· en· W4286294249 on OpenAlexaff
Wendy Allen‐Rhoades, Leo Mascarenhas, Wei Xue, Sarah S. Donaldson, Dana L. Casey, John Shern, Erin R. Rudzinski, Stephen X. Skapek, David A. Rodeberg, Timothy B. Lautz, Archana Shenoy, Irit Maianski, Sireesha Yedururi, Kim Maxa, Brian D. Crompton, Lindsey Fricke, Zhong Su, Douglas J. Harrison, Rajkumar Venkatramani

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsIzaak Walton Killam Health Centre
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineVinorelbineCyclophosphamideVincristineMaintenance therapyRhabdomyosarcomaSurgeryInternal medicineChemotherapyRandomized controlled trialSarcomaPathologyCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TPS11591 Background: Patients with high-risk rhabdomyosarcoma (HR-RMS) continue to have poor outcomes with 3-year event free survival (EFS) rates of 30% or less despite chemotherapy dose intensification on recent cooperative group RMS trials. Vinorelbine (VINO) has demonstrated clinical activity in RMS patients with relapsed/refractory disease and shown to provide a survival benefit when given with oral cyclophosphamide as maintenance chemotherapy for a select group of patients that achieved first complete remission. Methods: ARST2031 is a randomized Phase 3 trial with the primary aim to compare event-free survival (EFS) of patients with HR-RMS treated with vincristine, dactinomycin and cyclophosphamide (VAC) followed by maintenance with vinorelbine and oral cyclophosphamide (VINO-CPO) or vinorelbine, dactinomycin and cyclophosphamide (VINO-AC) followed by maintenance with VINO-CPO. Patients are stratified by histology and randomly assigned to VAC followed by VINO-CPO maintenance or VINO-AC followed by VINO-CPO maintenance. To be eligible, patients must be ≤ 50 years of age at the time of enrollment with newly diagnosed RMS except adult-type pleomorphic, based upon institutional histopathologic classification. All patients must have Stage 4 disease and patients diagnosed with embryonal RMS (ERMS) must be ≥ 10 years of age. Patients with malignant cytology in cerebrospinal fluid, intra-parenchymal brain metastases, or diffuse leptomeningeal disease are excluded. The study was activated on September 13, 2021 and is anticipated to enroll approximately 4 patients per month. The planned sample size is 100 patients, with approximately 50 patients randomized to each arm. Safety and feasibility of VINO-AC will be assessed in the first 8 patients prior to randomization. The study will have power of 0.8 to detect a hazard ratio of 0.61 (74 events in total) when the one-sided Type I error rate is 0.10, with 30 months of accrual and 2 years of follow-up. The hazard ratio of 0.61 was determined by assuming piecewise exponential distributions and specifying the 2-year EFS of 46% vs. 28% and long-term EFS of 32% vs. 16%, based on prior outcome data. Biospecimens will be collected and banked for future use. Clinical trial information: NCT04994132.

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)0.003
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.103
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207