MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7009578976

Effects of sodium thiosulfate versus observation on development of cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children with cancer (ACCL0431): a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial

2017· article· en· W7009578976 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSodium thiosulfateClinical endpointHearing lossConfidence intervalOtotoxicityPhases of clinical researchAudiometryCancer
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

© 2017 Elsevier Ltd Background Sodium thiosulfate is an antioxidant shown in preclinical studies in animals to prevent cisplatin-induced hearing loss with timed administration after cisplatin without compromising the antitumour efficacy of cisplatin. The primary aim of this study was to assess sodium thiosulfate for prevention of cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children and adolescents. Methods ACCL0431 was a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial that enrolled participants at 38 participating Children's Oncology Group hospitals in the USA and Canada. Eligible participants aged 1–18 years with newly diagnosed cancer and normal audiometry were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive sodium thiosulfate or observation (control group) in addition to their planned cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen, using permuted blocks of four. Randomisation was initially stratified by age and duration of cisplatin infusion. Stratification by previous cranial irradiation was added later as a protocol amendment. The allocation sequence was computer-generated centrally and concealed to all personnel. Participants received sodium thiosulfate 16 g/m2intravenously 6 h after each cisplatin dose or observation. The primary endpoint was incidence of hearing loss 4 weeks after final cisplatin dose. Hearing was measured using standard audiometry and reviewed centrally by audiologists masked to allocation using American Speech-Language-Hearing Association criteria but treatment was not masked for participants or clinicians. Analysis of the primary endpoint was by modified intention to treat, which included all randomly assigned patients irrespective of treatment received but restricted to those assessable for hearing loss. Enrolment is complete and this report represents the final analysis. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00716976. Findings Between June 23, 2008, and Sept 28, 2012, 125 eligible participants were randomly assigned to either sodium thiosulfate (n=61) or observation (n=64). Of these, 104 participants were assessable for the primary endpoint (sodium thiosulfate, n=49; control, n=55). Hearing loss was identified in 14 (28·6%; 95% CI 16·6–43·3) participants in the sodium thiosulfate group compared with 31 (56·4%; 42·3–69·7) in the control group (p=0·00022). Adjusted for stratification variables, the likelihood of hearing loss was significantly lower in the sodium thiosulfate group compared with the control group (odds ratio 0·31, 95% CI 0·13–0·73; p=0·0036). The most common grade 3–4 haematological adverse events reported, irrespective of attribution, were neutropenia (117 [66%] of 177 participant cycles in the sodium thiosulfate group vs 145 [65%] of 223 in the control group), whereas the most common non-haematological adverse event was hypokalaemia (25 [17%] of 147 vs 22 [12%] of 187). Of 194 serious adverse events reported in 26 participants who had received sodium thiosulfate, none were deemed probably or definitely related to sodium thiosulfate; the most common serious adverse event was decreased neutrophil count: 26 episodes in 14 participants. Interpretation Sodium thiosulfate protects against cisplatin-induced hearing loss in children and is not associated with serious adverse events attributed to its use. Further research is needed to define the appropriate role for sodium thiosulfate among emerging otoprotection strategies. Funding US National Cancer Institute.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designRandomized 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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)→Same topicHearing, Cochlea, Tinnitus, Genetics→French-language works237,207→