Survival effect of complete surgical resection of the primary tumor in patients with metastatic, high‐risk neuroblastoma in a large Canadian cohort
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine whether extent of surgical resection of the primary tumor correlates with survival in patients with International Neuroblastoma Staging System (INSS) stage 4, high-risk neuroblastoma. METHODS: Data were extracted for patients with newly diagnosed INSS stage 4, high-risk neuroblastoma between 2001 and 2019 from the national Cancer in Young People in Canada (CYPC) database. Complete resection was defined as gross total resection of primary tumor based on operative reports. Primary endpoints were 3 and 5-year event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS). Survival analyses were completed using log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards regression including covariates of age, sex, decade of treatment (2001-2009 vs. 2010-2019), immunotherapy, and tandem stem cell transplant (SCT). RESULTS: One-hundred and forty patients with complete surgical data were included. On univariate analysis, 3-year EFS and OS for patients that had complete versus incomplete resection was 71% (95% CI 57-80%) vs. 48% (36-60%) and 86% (75-93%) vs. 64% (51-74%), p = .008 and p = .002, respectively. 5-year EFS and OS for patients with complete resection also demonstrated significantly improved survival. On Cox Proportional Hazards models adjusted for age, immunotherapy, tandem SCT, and surgical resection, only complete resection was associated with statistically significant improved 3 year EFS and OS, HR = 0.48 (0.29-0.81; p = .006) and HR = 0.42 (0.24-0.73; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: In a large Canadian INSS stage 4 high-risk neuroblastoma cohort, complete surgical resection was associated with increased EFS and OS. Within the constraints of a retrospective study, these results suggest that the ability to achieve primary tumor complete resection in patients with metastatic high-risk disease is associated with improved survival.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".