MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impact of an objective scoring system on initiation of therapy in patients with International Neuroblastoma Risk Group Staging System (INRGSS) stage MS neuroblastoma: A report from the Children’s Oncology Group.

2024· article· en· W4399281547 on OpenAlexaff
Leonora R. Slatnick, Navin Pinto, Arlene Naranjo, Jed G. Nuchtern, Edward F. Attiyeh, Rochelle Bagatell, Clare J. Twist, Meredith S. Irwin, Steven G. DuBois, John M. Maris, Mary Lou Schmidt, Araz Marachelian, Michael B. Armstrong, Peter E. Zage, Christopher B. Weldon, Julie R. Park, Holly J. Meany

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeuroblastoma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineNeuroblastomaStage (stratigraphy)Staging systemOncologyInternal medicinePediatric oncologyCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10003 Background: A subset of children with INRGSS Stage MS neuroblastoma (NBL) may be observed without treatment, while others have rapidly evolving symptoms that can be life-threatening. ANBL1232 adapted a previously developed semi-quantitative objective scoring system (OSS) to assign a numeric value to symptoms and laboratory abnormalities. The goal was to standardize monitoring, therapy initiation, and treatment duration in this cohort. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed Stage MS NBL were eligible for this prospective trial. An OSS score (OSSS) was assigned at enrollment; the total number was based on scoring in 5 systems: gastrointestinal (GI), respiratory, circulatory, renal, and hepatic. Within the 5 systems, individual clinical and laboratory parameters were scored as not present = 0, mild/moderate = 1 [Grade 2 CTCAEv4.0 adverse event (AE)] or severe = 2 (Grade ≥3 AE). The OSSS was the sum of highest score within each organ system (maximum score: 2 per system, 10 total). Asymptomatic MS patients with an OSSS < 2 who were either < 3 months (mo) of age without hepatomegaly or 3-18 mo of age with favorable biology tumors were eligible for observation without initial treatment. Observed patients underwent monthly physical examinations and laboratory assessments for the first 6 mo following diagnosis. Tumor imaging was performed every 3 mo for 1 year, then every 6-12 mo through 36 mo. An OSSS ≥2 or a protocol-defined increase in primary tumor size prompted initiation of therapy. Results: From July 2014 to February 2021, 89 eligible and evaluable patients with newly diagnosed stage MS NBL enrolled. Among these, 18 (20.2%; 5 male and 13 female) were eligible for observation. Observed patients were older at diagnosis (median age: 2.87 vs. 1.81 mo, p = 0.23) and more likely to have primary tumors without image-defined risk factors (62.5% vs. 30.0%, p = 0.0166) than those assigned to therapy up front. Nearly all observed patients (17/18) had abdominal/adrenal primaries. The initial OSSS was 0 in all observed patients. Median reported observation time was 36 mo (range: 1-36 mo); 13 patients completed all required monthly assessments for the first 6 mo. No patients in the observation cohort required initiation of therapy for an increase in OSSS. One patient with OSSS = 1 at mo 3 had complete GI symptom resolution by mo 5. Conclusions: An OSSS of 0 at diagnosis can aid in identifying a favorable group of patients with stage MS NBL who can be safely observed. No patients in the observation cohort developed evidence of organ dysfunction or OSSS > 1 despite frequent physical examination and comprehensive laboratory testing, suggesting that follow up may be safely liberalized in this population over time. Clinical and laboratory criteria implemented at diagnosis could be used to identify patients requiring prompt treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT02176967 .

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)0.004
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.371 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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