CTNI-14. RADIOTHERAPY VERSUS TMZ FOR HIGH-RISK LOW-GRADE GLIOMA. FINAL RESULTS AFTER MEDIAN FOLLOW-UP OF 13 YEARS OF PHASE III EORTC/NCIC-CTG/TROG/MRC-CTU (EORTC 22033-26033) STUDY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND We previously reported on progression-free survival of our randomized phase 3 trial [Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:1521-1532]. Here we report results of long-term follow-up (FU) including overall survival (OS) and molecular subgroup analyses. METHODS 487 patients were randomized between 2005-2012 to either standard radiotherapy (RT, 50.4 Gy/ 28 fractions) or primary dose-dense temozolomide [TMZ] chemotherapy (75 mg/m² daily x 21/28 days, up to 12 cycles). Treatment at progression was at investigators discretion and commonly included cross-over to the alternative treatment modality. RESULTS At a median follow-up of 13 years, 68% of patients had died. Median age at inclusion was 45 years (range 18-75), 96% had a performance status of 0-1. There was no significant difference in PFS nor OS: PFS was 3.6 years (95% CI: 3.0-4.1) and 3.1 years (95% CI: 2.7-3.6), HR 1.12 (95% CI: 0.92-1.36); OS 6.6 years (95% CI: 5.8-7.5) and 8.0 years (95% CI: 6.9-9.1), HR 0.87 (95% CI: 0.69-1.09), for RT or TMZ, respectively. Subgroup analyses were performed for patients when available tissue allowed for molecular analyses (n=351/487,73%). In astrocytoma, IDHmt/1p/19q non-codeleted (n = 178), median OS with RT was 6.6 years (95% CI: 5.3-7.6) and with TMZ was 6.7 years (95% CI: 5.7-8.0); HR 0.98 (95% CI: 0.67-1.44). For oligodendroglioma, IDHmt/codeleted (n = 109) median OS with RT was 12.9 years (95% CI: 9.4 - NE) and with TMZ 14.9 years (95% CI: 10.1 - NE); HR 1.01 (95% CI: 0.56-1.81). For a heterogenous group of IDHwt tumors (n = 64), median OS with RT was 2.5 years (95% CI: 1.8-3.3) and with TMZ 4.7 years (95% CI: 2.2-7.2); HR 0.37 (95% CI: 0.18-0.77). CONCLUSIONS Primary treatment with RT or TMZ provided comparable PFS and OS. Choice of primary treatment can be tailored to individual tumor characteristics and patient preference.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".