MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Marrow-ablative consolidation chemotherapy (HDCT) to decrease the development of choroid plexus carcinoma (CPC) specific relapse in high-risk TP53-mutated (germline or somatic) young children with newly diagnosed CPC.

2024· article· en· W4399325178 on OpenAlexaff
Diana S. Osorio, Maxim Yankelevich, Wafik Zaky, Lucie Lafay‐Cousin, Ashley Margol, Stephanie Toll, Lina Quiroz, Javier E. Fox, Derek Hanson, Sharon L. Gardner, Michael Prados, Sabine Mueller, Jonathan L. Finlay

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAblative caseGermline mutationGermlineChemotherapySomatic cellEtoposideOncologyInternal medicineSurgeryRadiation therapyMutation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

2088 Background: Choroid plexus carcinomas (CPC) are highly malignant, early childhood cancers in which the loss of TP53 function is a central element of their development and defines unfavorable disease. To date, CPC-free survival rates have remained poor; recent data from St. Jude including complete TP53 mutation status, yielded CPC-free survival of only 29% with a non-marrow-ablative chemotherapy strategy. The rarity of CPC has constrained the ability to explore the role of HDCT with autologous hematopoietic progenitor cell rescue (AuHPCR). Previously reported results of the "Head Start" (HS) HDCT approach showed some promise of cure, but were limited by small patient numbers, short follow-up and incomplete TP53 mutation data. Consequently, the role of HDCT and AuHPCR in TP53-mutated CPC remains unclear. Methods: We have analyzed data on TP53 status, therapy, treatment responses, CPC-free and overall survivals (OS) and second cancers from the largest cohort of such patients, all who received initial therapy with the intent/consideration of undergoing consolidative HDCT. Results: Twenty-seven children with CPC (median age, 16 months) received HS-like induction chemotherapy regimens or ICE with the intent of utilizing consolidative HDCT. Twenty-three of 27 completed HDCT consolidation; the remaining 4 patients did not proceed with HDCT due to parental choice. Somatic or germline TP53 mutations were identified in 17 patients, while 4 patients exhibited TP53 wild type (TP53wt); TP53 status remains untested or unavailable in 6 patients. Five-year CPC-free survival and OS for the entire cohort were 47.8% and 44.4%. CPC-free survival for those with TP53 germline mutations (n=12) was 66%, for those with somatic tumor TP53 mutations (n=5) was 40% and for those with confirmed TP53wt (n=4) was 50%. The 5-year CPC-free survival for all 23 patients who underwent HDCT and AuHPCR was 52%, comprising 3/4 TP53wt patients, 10/12 TP53 germline mutated patients and all 5 TP53 somatic tumor mutated patients. Notably, all six survivors with TP53 mutations had undergone HDCT with AuHPCR, and all but one avoided irradiation. Eight out of 12 patients with documented genotypic (TP53 germline mutated) Li-Fraumeni Cancer Predisposition Syndrome (LFS) developed second malignancies. Conclusions: Our data indicate that HDCT with AuHPCR consolidation is associated with improved CPC-free survival compared with historical reports in young children with high-risk TP53 mutated CPC. However, the ultimate development of second cancers substantially affects outcomes for those with LFS, irrespective of HDCT treatment. These data justify the inclusion of HDCT and AuHPCR in the prospective international trial under development for young children with newly diagnosed TP53 mutated CPC.

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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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