MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Five-Day Preoperative Radiation Therapy for Patients With High-Risk Soft Tissue Sarcoma

2025· article· en· W4417436062 on OpenAlexaff
John Nikitas, Joseph K. Kendal, Ricky R. Savjani, Nicholas Jackson, Nicholas Peterson, Jie Deng, Jackie Hernandez, Natalie Chong, Arun S. Singh, Bartosz Chmielowski, Noah Federman, Joseph G. Crompton, Brian E. Kadera, Lauren E. Wessel, Alexander B. Christ, Scott D. Nelson, Sarah Dry, Joanne B. Weidhaas, Michael L. Steinberg, Nicholas M. Bernthal, Fritz C. Eilber, Anusha Kalbasi, Vishruth K. Reddy

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Network Open · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSarcoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiation therapySoft tissue sarcomaSarcomaSoft tissueRadiation injury

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Standard preoperative radiotherapy (RT) for high-risk soft tissue sarcoma (STS) is delivered over 5 weeks, which can be a logistical challenge for patients. Objective: To evaluate the long-term toxic effects and clinical outcomes associated with a shorter 5-day, dose-equivalent preoperative RT regimen. Design, Setting, and Participants: Phase 2, single-group nonrandomized trial with an initial cohort (April 2016 to May 2018) and expansion cohort (October 2018 to May 2023) at a single academic center in the US. Participants were patients with histologically confirmed extremity or trunk STS recommended to undergo standard preoperative RT and surgery. Patients with planned neoadjuvant systemic therapy who were enrolled in the expansion group were excluded from this analysis. Analysis was conducted September 2024 to August 2025. Intervention: A total of 30 Gy in 5 fractions were delivered preoperatively. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was 2-year grade 2 or higher radiation toxic effects. Secondary end points included major wound complications (MWC), local failure, distant progression, and overall survival. Results: A total of 110 patients were treated with preoperative RT and surgery (42 patients [38%] were aged 65-79 years; 64 [58%] were male; 75 had tumors of the lower extremity [68%], and 64 patients [58%] had high-grade disease). The initial cohort accrued 50 patients who underwent surgery. The expansion cohort accrued 83 patients; 60 of 83 were treated without neoadjuvant chemotherapy and were included. Median (IQR) follow-up was 37.3 (20.1-60.6) months, including 64.2 (36.3-74.1) months for the initial cohort and 30.0 (13.5-40.2) months for the expansion cohort. At 2 years, 14 of 74 evaluable patients (18.9%) developed grade 2 or higher toxic effects (10 patients [25.0%] for the initial cohort and 4 patients [11.8%] for the expansion cohort). MWCs occurred in 33 of 110 patients (30.0%); (17 [34.0%] for the initial cohort and 16 [26.7%] for the expansion cohort). Time to wound closure exceeded 6 months for 15 patients (13.6%), including 12 of 29 patients (41.4%) who underwent local tissue advancement flaps. Two-year local control adjusting for competing risk of death was 92.4% (95% CI, 86.3%-96.5%). There were 3 (2.7%) bone fractures and 5 (4.5%) amputations. Conclusions and Relevance: This nonrandomized clinical trial of ultrahypofractionated preoperative RT identified durable local control with MWC and favorable late grade 2 or higher toxic effects rates. Randomized data are necessary to differentiate the safety profiles of various fractionation regimens, especially duration of wound healing. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02701153.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA Network OpenSame topicSarcoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207