MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Survival outcomes in pediatric patients with metastatic Ewing sarcoma who achieve a rapid complete response of pulmonary metastases.

2023· article· en· W4379338742 on OpenAlexaff
Audra J. Reiter, Lynn Y.L. Huang, Brian T. Craig, Lindsay J. Talbot, Jennifer H. Aldrink, Stephanie F. Polites, Roshni Dasgupta, Marcus M. Malek, Nelson Piché, Harold N. Lovvorn, Robin T. Petroze, Hau D. Le, Barrie S. Rich, Natashia M. Seemann, Jonathan P. Roach, Zachary J. Kastenberg, Brian A. Coakley, Christa N. Grant, Elisabeth T. Tracy, Timothy B. Lautz

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProportional hazards modelSarcomaUnivariate analysisChemotherapyInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyCohortInduction chemotherapyLungProgressive diseaseOncologySurgeryRadiologyGastroenterologyMultivariate analysisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

11535 Background: Twenty-five percent of patients with Ewing Sarcoma (EWS) have metastatic disease at diagnosis, most commonly in the lungs. Our objectives were to compare overall (OS) and pulmonary disease-free survival (PDFS) between patients with metastatic EWS at diagnosis who achieve rapid complete response (RCR), defined as radiographic resolution of all pulmonary nodules at the end of induction chemotherapy, and those with residual pulmonary nodules after induction chemotherapy (non-RCR). Methods: This multi-center, retrospective cohort study included children under 20 years of age with metastatic EWS treated from 2007-2020 at 19 institutions participating in the Pediatric Surgical Oncology Research Collaborative. Chi-square tests were conducted for differences among groups, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Kaplan-Meier curves were generated for OS and PDFS. Cox regression was performed for OS, controlling for whole lung irradiation (WLI), extrapulmonary metastases, and age. Results: Among 153 patients with metastatic EWS at diagnosis, 61 (40%) achieved RCR, and 87 (57%) did not (5 unknown). The median number of pulmonary nodules was 3.5 in the RCR vs 5 in the non-RCR groups (p = 0.02), while bilateral disease was present in 44 (72%) RCR vs 75 (86%) non-RCR patients (p = 0.03). Pulmonary relapse occurred in 58 (38%) patients, including 18 (29%) in the RCR and 36 (41%) in the non-RCR groups (p = 0.14). Factors associated with pulmonary relapse in the univariate analysis include median age [15 years (IQR: 12-17) with pulmonary relapse vs 12 years (IQR: 9-16) without (p = 0.03)] and extrapulmonary metastases at diagnosis [24 (41%) patients with pulmonary relapse vs 26 (27%) patients without pulmonary relapse (p = 0.05)]. WLI was performed in 100 patients and was not associated with a reduction in pulmonary relapse (p = 0.93). Complete surgical clearance of pulmonary disease was attempted in 29 (19%) patients, including 17 of the patients who met the criteria for RCR. On Kaplan-Meier analyses, 5-year PDFS did not significantly differ based on RCR (67%) vs. non-RCR (53%, p = 0.13), or WLI (61%) vs. no WLI (54%, p = 0.32). However, 5-year OS did vary significantly between patients with RCR and WLI (85%), RCR without WLI (55%), non-RCR with WLI (60%), and non-RCR without WLI (25%; p < 0.01). In Cox regression analysis, RCR was associated with improved OS after controlling for WLI, extrapulmonary metastases, and patient age (HR 0.51, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Patients with EWS who had pulmonary metastases at diagnosis had improved OS if they achieved RCR and received WLI, despite having no significant differences in rates of pulmonary relapse. Further research is needed to determine whether clearance of pulmonary disease achieved through surgical metastasectomy provides a comparable survival benefit and if any subsets of patients have a reduced risk of pulmonary relapse after resection.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.283 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→