Timely Molecular Monitoring and Achievement of Major Molecular Response in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Timely molecular monitoring is the cornerstone of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treatment guidelines. These guidelines are based on the design of clinical trials, but none have been validated prospectively. We hypothesized that timely molecular monitoring in routine patient care increases the likelihood of achieving major molecular response (MMR) in CML. Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study using the Québec CML Registry, which comprises 713 patients from 16 hospitals. Patients with newly-diagnosed CML (2009-2014) and measurable disease by quantitative PCR were followed from tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) initiation. Timely PCR (tPCR) was defined as a PCR performed at 2-4, 11-13, and 17-19 months. (Figure). Study outcome was the achievement of MMR at 25 months, defined as international scale ratio (IS) <0.1% or a 3-log reduction in BCR-ABL1 copy number. Achievement of MMR was determined using any PCR during follow-up. Generalized estimating equations (GEE) using an exchangeable correlation structure, to account for patient clustering by center, were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of achieving MMR comparing adherence and nonadherence to tPCR. The models were adjusted for age, sex, first-line TKI, year of study entry, and Charlson comorbidity index. Results: A total of 246 patients with 25 months of follow-up were included in the analysis (Table 1). Patients were excluded due to diagnoses before 2009 (350), insufficient follow-up (76), and other (41). The mean (standard deviation) age was 56.1 (15.5), 43.9% were female; 67.5% were started on imatinib, and 47.6% were treated in higher-volume (>50 CML patients) centers. Timely PCRs were performed in 76.3%, 69.5%, and 61.0% of patients at 2-4, 11-13, and 17-19 months, respectively. When compared with not performing tPCRs, performing one and two tPCRs were associated with achieving an MMR by 25 months (OR: 17.05, 95% CI: 5.18-56.09 and OR: 14.96, 95% CI 3.63-61.73, respectively, Table 2). The highest OR of achieving MMR was observed among those who underwent three tPCRs (OR: 24.02, 95% CI: 7.07-81.55). Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess clinical outcomes associated with timely molecular monitoring in early CML. While performing one and two tPCRs was associated with achieving MMR at 25 months, the point estimate for performing three tPCRs was the highest. These findings indicate that timely monitoring may allow for faster switching of TKI, which ultimately permits patients with early failure to "catch up." Alternatively, more regular testing may increase patient adherence to therapy. If replicated, these findings support routine and punctual monitoring of patients on TKI therapy. Disclosures Assouline: Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».