MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2781514472 · doi:10.1182/blood.v128.22.761.761

Excellent Outcome of Children with Down Syndrome (DS) and Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) Treated on Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) ALL Consortium Protocols 00-001 and 05-001

2016· article· en· W2781514472 sur OpenAlexaff
Uma H. Athale, Mäneka Puligandla, Kristen E. Stevenson, Barbara L. Asselin, Luis A. Clavell, Peter D. Cole, Kara M. Kelly, Caroline Laverdière, Jean‐Marie Leclerc, Bruno Michon, Marshall A. Schorin, Maria Luisa Sulis, Jennifer Welch, Marian H. Harris, Donna Neuberg, Stephen E. Sallan, Lewis B. Silverman

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Établissements canadiensCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecMcMaster Children's HospitalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMcMaster UniversityHamilton Health SciencesUniversité de Montréal
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCumulative incidenceInternal medicinePopulationCancerOncologyPediatricsCohort

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Children with Down syndrome (DS) and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) are shown to have increased therapy-related morbidity and mortality. Hence, therapy modifications and/or dose-reductions are common treatment strategies for this patient (pt) population. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) ALL Consortium protocols have used same risk-stratified treatment for children with and without DS and ALL. Aim: To define the toxicity profile and outcome of children with DS and de novo ALL treated on DFCI ALL Consortium therapy protocols 00-001 and 05-001 using therapy identical to non-DS patients. Methods: Demographic, clinical and outcome data of DS and non-DS patients enrolled on the DFCI ALL protocols 00-001 (2000-2004) and 05-001 (2005-2011) were analyzed. Risk categorization and protocol therapy have previously been described (J Clin Oncol 2013; 31:1202-10; Lancet Oncol 2015;16:1677-90). On both protocols, DS ALL pts were treated identically to non-DS pts without any dose reduction or modification, except for the option for DS ALL pts to receive 3 doses of leucovorin after IT methotrexate. Fisher's exact test was used to compare toxicities in the DS and non-DS pts and Gray test was used to compare the cumulative incidence of fracture and osteonecrosis. Overall survival (OS) was defined as time from registration to death. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as time from registration to first event (defined as induction failure, relapse, second malignant neoplasm (SMN) or death due to any cause). Induction failure and induction death were included as events at time zero. Disease-free survival (DFS) was defined as time from complete remission (CR) to relapse, SMN or death. Pts without an event were censored at the last known follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival estimation and Greenwood's formula for calculation of 95% confidence interval (CI) of survival estimates. Outcome of DS patients was also examined using Ponte di Legno (PdL) risk group [Low risk (LR) was defined as age at diagnosis ≤ 6 yr. and white cell count < 10X109/L and, remainder as high risk (HR)].(Blood 2014;123:70-7). Two-sided p values <0.05 were considered significant. Results: Of 1286 eligible pts aged 1-18 yrs. with de novo ALL enrolled on protocols 00-001 and 05-001, 38 (3%) had DS. There was no difference in demographic or presenting clinical features between DS and non-DS ALL pts except immunophenotype (absence of T-ALL in DS vs 11.7% in non-DS, p=0.017) and presence of high hyperdiploidy (51-65 chromosomes) (8.8% in DS vs 25.1% in non-DS, p=0.027) (Table 1). Two DS-ALL pts withdrew from the study after achieving CR. There was no difference in the CR rates (DS: 100% vs non-DS: 95.2%, p=0.47) or proportion of pts with low end of induction minimal residual disease (MRD) between DS and non-DS groups (p=0.73). Toxicities were comparable except DS pts had significantly higher rates of ≥Grade 3 mucositis (data available for protocol 05-001 only) (DS: 52.0% vs. non-DS: 12.0%, p<0.001), non-CNS thrombosis/bleed (18.4% vs. 8.2%; p=0.036), and seizure (15.8% vs. 4.7%, p=0.010). DS pts also had marginally higher rate of bacterial and fungal infections (55.3% vs. 41.3%, p=0.096) (Table 2). All 38 DS pts achieved a CR and there were 4 relapses with 1 death due to disease. There were no treatment-related deaths in DS-ALL pts. With a median follow-up of 6.2 yrs. the 5-yr EFS, DFS, and OS of DS pts were similar to non-DS pts (90.7% [81.1-100.0] vs. 83.7% [81.7-85.9]; 90.7% [81.1-100.0] vs. 87.4% [85.5-89.3]; 97.1% [91.8-100.0] vs. 91.4% [89.8-93.0]), with the 95% CI overlapping for each comparison (Figures 1a and 1b). There was no difference in outcomes of DS-ALL PdL LR pts (n=13) compared to PdL HR pts (n=25) (5-yr EFS 90.0% [73.2-100.0]. vs. 91.0% [79.9-100.0]; 5-yr OS 100.0% [100.0-100.0] vs. 95.8% [88.2-100.0]). Conclusion: DS pts treated on DFCI ALL Consortium protocols without dose reduction or modifications achieved similar outcomes to non-DS pts. DS pts had a higher frequency of mucositis, infection, and seizures, but did not experience any treatment-related deaths. Other than a higher risk of thrombotic complications, they did not develop excessive toxicity to asparaginase. The low rates of relapse and toxicity-related mortality support the approach of unified therapy protocol for DS and non-DS ALL pts with emphasis on supportive care interventions to prevent toxicities. Overall and event free survival Overall and event free survival Disclosures Asselin: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sigma Tau Pharamceuticals: Consultancy.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,014

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,300
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchTravaux en français237 207