BIOS-02. CLINICAL OUTCOMES OF OVER 600 PATIENTS WITH GLIOBLASTOMA TREATED AT A CANADIAN TERTIARY CENTER IN THE PAST 15 YEARS: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS WITH THE PIVOTAL STUPP TRIAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Glioblastoma is the most common malignant primary central nervous system tumor in adults and is associated with a poor prognosis. The benefit of adding concomitant followed by adjuvant temozolomide to radiotherapy after maximal safe resection was demonstrated by Stupp and colleagues in 2005 and has since remained the standard of care. This regimen conferred a statistically significant benefit with a 2-year survival rate of 26.5% compared to 10.4% in patients treated with radiotherapy alone. Our primary goal was to retrospectively assess the clinical outcomes of patients with glioblastoma treated at our institution over the past 15 years by comparing the overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from our cohort to data from the pivotal trial. Our secondary objective was to create a comprehensive database with clinical and pathological information in order to identify predictive and prognostic factors. We reviewed the clinical records of patients treated for glioblastoma from January 2005 to November 2019 at our center. We extracted data on survival and calculated OS and PFS using the Kaplan-Meier method. 617 patient charts were reviewed, out of which 17 were excluded because of missing data. The remaining 600 patients were included. Baseline demographic information was similar to that of the Stupp cohort, with the exception of a larger proportion of patients aged 50 or above (76% versus 69%, respectively). The median OS at our center was 14.3 months, 95% confidence interval [12.8-15.2], which was comparable to that of the original trial (14.6 months [13.2-16.8]). PFS was better in our cohort at 6 months (74.2% [70.7-77.7] versus 53.9% [48.1-59.6]) and 12 months (36.3% [32.5-40.2] versus 26.9% [21.8-32.1]), and comparable thereafter. Our study confirms that the data from the Stupp trial are reproducible in a Canadian academic center setting. Our database will allow us to explore potentially new predictive factors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".