previously untreated patients with extensive small cell lung cancer: a study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Thirty-four previously untreated patients with extensive small cell lung cancer were treated with a combination of carboplatin 300mgm-2 i.v. on day 1 and etoposide 100mgm-2 i.v. on days 1, 2 and 3 every 28 days. Thirty-two patients were assessable for response. Eighteen patients (56%) achieved an objective response (95 % confidence limits 38%-73%). Five (16%) had a complete response and 13 (41.0%) had a partial response. The median time to response was 7.8 weeks and the median duration of response was 23.1 weeks (range 6.2 to 54 weeks). The median survival of all 34 extensive disease patients was 34.7 weeks (range 1.3-59.3 weeks). Myelosuppression (leukopenia) was the main toxicity. There was one early death that may have been treatment-related. Biochemical renal dysfunction was noted in two patients. Paresthesiae and tinnitus/hearing loss were described by three and two patients respectively. Serious gastrointestinal toxicity was infrequent. This and other studies have shown this combination to be active and well tolerated in small cell lung cancer; however, it is not yet clear if it is as efficacious as the more commonly used VP-16-cisplatin regimen. The combination of VP- 16 and cisplatin has proven to be an active chemotherapy regimen against small cell lung cancer (SCLC) that has failed primary therapy with cyclophosphamide,
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".