Race and Ethnic Group Enrollment and Outcomes for Wilms Tumor: Analysis of the Current Era Children’s Oncology Group Study, AREN03B2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To review race and ethnic group enrollment and outcomes for Wilms tumor (WT) across all 4 risk-assigned therapeutic trials from the current era Children's Oncology Group Renal Tumor Biology and Risk Stratification Protocol, AREN03B2. STUDY DESIGN: For patients with WT enrolled in AREN03B2 (2006 to 2019), disease and biologic features, therapeutic study-specific enrollment, and event-free (EFS) and overall (OS) 4-year survival were compared between institutionally reported race and ethnic groups. RESULTS: Among 5,146 patients with WT, no statistically significant differences were detected between race and ethnic groups regarding subsequent risk-assigned therapeutic study enrollment, disease stage, histology, biologic factors, or overall EFS or OS, except the following variables: Black children were older and had larger tumors at enrollment, whereas Hispanic children had lower rates of diffuse anaplasia WT and loss of heterozygosity at 1p. The only significant difference in EFS or OS between race and ethnic groups was observed among the few children treated for diffuse anaplasia WT with regimen UH-1 and -2 on high-risk protocol, AREN0321. On this therapeutic arm only, Black children showed worse EFS (hazard ratio = 3.18) and OS (hazard ratio = 3.42). However, this finding was not replicated for patients treated with regimen UH-1 and -2 under AREN03B2 but not on AREN0321. CONCLUSIONS: Race and ethnic group enrollment appeared constant across AREN03B2 risk-assigned therapeutic trials. EFS and OS on these therapeutic trials when analyzed together were comparable regarding race and ethnicity. Black children may have experienced worse stage-specific survival when treated with regimen UH-1 and -2 on AREN0321, but this survival gap was not confirmed when analyzing additional high-risk AREN03B2 patients.
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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".