MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A multicenter cooperative group study of late effects after high-risk neuroblastoma: COG ALTE15N2—LEAHRN study.

2023· article· en· W4379283403 on OpenAlexaff
Tara O. Henderson, Jenna K. Bardwell, Pei‐Chi Kao, Paul C. Nathan, Wendy Landier, Sogol Mostoufi‐Moab, Tara M. Brinkman, Julie R. Park, Saro H. Armenian, Arlene Naranjo, Meera Subramaniam, Araz Marachelian, Sharon J. Diskin, Wendy B. London, Lisa Diller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersSt. Baldrick's Foundation
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMelphalanCarboplatinBusulfanThioTEPATransplantationOncologySurgeryChemotherapyCyclophosphamideHematopoietic stem cell transplantationCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10002 Background: Aggressive therapies for high-risk neuroblastoma (HRNBL) have resulted in increased survival, but late effects have not been well-characterized. Methods: Comprehensive cross-sectional evaluation of health outcomes in HRNBL survivors enrolled on the COG Neuroblastoma Biology Study after 1/1/2000 and ≥ 5 years from primary diagnosis, using medical record abstraction and in-person clinical assessments. Descriptive and multivariable analyses identified extent of and risk factors for late toxicity. Results: There were 375 participants from 88 COG centers, 205 (55%) male; 92 (26%) non-white; 45 (13%) Hispanic. Median age at neuroblastoma diagnosis was 2.5 years (range: 0.2-15.8), at enrollment was 12.0 years (range: 5.0-24.0). All had received chemotherapy; 94% received cisplatin (median dose: 398 mg/m2). Other exposures included: radiation (95%), isotretinoin (91%), anti-GD2 antibody therapy (64%), MIBG (7%), single (79%) or tandem autologous transplantation (ASCT; 20%). ASCT conditioning included: Busulfan/Melphalan (BuMel) (18%), Carboplatin/Etoposide/Melphalan (CEM) (73%), Thiotepa/Cytoxan (19%), and total body irradiation (5%). Severe ototoxicity (requiring hearing aids) was observed in 58% of participants. Physician-reported late effects included hypothyroidism (17%), pulmonary hypertension (1%), congestive heart failure (2%), and hypertension (6%). Pulmonary Function Studies revealed restrictive lung disease [RLD - Total Lung Capacity < 70% predicted] in 8% of subjects. Laboratory study showed elevated creatinine in 7% and Hemoglobin A1c in 7%. Growth failure (height Z-score < -1.7) was observed in 34%. Subsequent malignant neoplasms (SMN) developed in 15 participants (4%; 4 sarcomas, 3 MDS/t-AML, single instance of 8 other malignancies). Adjusting for sex, follow-up time, age, and race, there were no differences in risk of SMN, severe ototoxicity, growth failure, or RLD for participants who received BuMel vs. CEM-based condtioning, or among those who received anti-GD2 antibody therapy vs. those who did not. Use of carboplatin during ASCT was not assocoiated with increased ototoxicity risk for any category of cisplatin induction dose. Comparing subjects who received CEM as a component of tandem ASCT (vs. single CEM), there was increased risk of growth failure [OR (95%CI) = 4.2(2.1, 8.4); p < 0.0001], but not RLD. Exposure to isotretinoin was not associated with increased risk of growth failure. Further multivariable analyses will be presented, exploring risks for late toxicity associated with conditioning regimens, radiation therapy, surgical approaches, and acute and chronic complications of therapy. Conclusions: The burden of late toxicity in HRNBL survivors is substantial. Anti-GD2 immunotherapy and isotretinoin do not appear to be associated with SMN, ototoxicity, growth failure, or RLD.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.460
Teacher spread0.396 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicNeuroblastoma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207