MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2983205654 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-123684

Persistent Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusion Is Associated with Increased Mortality Risk in Transfusion-Dependent (TD) Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) with Ring Sideroblasts (RS+)

2019· article· en· W2983205654 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Rena Buckstein, Nancy Zhu, Mary‐Margaret Keating, Brian Leber, Lisa Chodirker, Mitchell Sabloff, Grace Cristou, Heather A. Leitch, Eve St. Hilaire, Nicholas Finn, Karen Yee, Mohamed Elemary, Versha Banerji, Martha Lenis, Aksharh Kirubananthaan, Fei‐Fei Liu, Derek Tang, Chris Westcott, Vicky Huang, Di Wang, Chris Cameron, Jessica Morison, Paul Spin, Alexandre Mamedov

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreAlberta Hospital EdmontonUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of OttawaDr. Georges-L.-Dumont University Hospital CentreSt. Paul's HospitalMcMaster UniversityQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreCancerCare ManitobaUniversity of Alberta HospitalHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoJuravinski Cancer CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineInternational Prognostic Scoring SystemInternal medicineMyelodysplastic syndromesComorbidityBlood transfusionAnemiaPopulationBone marrow

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Patients with lower-risk (LR) MDS, defined as very low-, low-, and intermediate-risk by the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R), have a reduced risk of progressing to acute myeloid leukemia compared with higher-risk patients, but a shortened overall survival (OS) compared with age-matched controls. MDS patients with RS have a better prognosis than those without RS, but may experience extended periods of RBC transfusion dependence. RBC transfusion dependence is associated with reduced OS in patients with LR-MDS, but studies focusing on RBC transfusion dependence and OS in RS+ MDS patients are lacking. To address this gap, data from the Canadian MDS Registry were used to assess the relationship between RBC transfusion dependence patterns and OS in this patient population. Methods: Patients with a diagnosis of RS+ MDS who were identified as transfusion dependent (TD) in the Canadian MDS Registry from 2008 to 2019 were included. Patients were considered TD if they received ≥ 1 RBC transfusion in at least one 8-week cycle. A sensitivity analysis was conducted wherein patients were considered TD if they received ≥ 1 RBC transfusion for 2 consecutive 8-week cycles. Patients were considered persistently TD (PTD) if they were TD throughout follow-up, or intermittently TD (ITD) if they were transfusion independent for periods of ≥ 8 weeks after an initial onset of TD. Covariates that were assessed included age, sex, IPSS-R risk score at enrollment, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score at enrollment, ferritin level at first TD onset, Charlson Comorbidity Index at first TD onset, and receipt of iron chelation and anemia-treating therapies at first TD onset. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to test the association between PTD and mortality risk. Treatment patterns during follow-up were also examined. Results: Between 2008 and 2019, 191 patients had a diagnosis of RS+ MDS, of which 107 required ≥ 1 RBC transfusion over at least one 8-week cycle during follow-up. Of the 107 patients who received ≥ 1 RBC transfusion, 71 had ≥ 2 assessments for transfusion dependence and complete data on all outcomes and covariates, 36 (50.7%) of whom were classified as PTD (Table 1). Compared with ITD patients, PTD patients were older (mean age ± standard deviation [SD]: 75.11 ± 8.34 vs 69.59 ± 13.33 years) and had higher IPSS-R risk (17% of PTD patients were intermediate- or higher-risk compared with 3% of ITD patients). Median OS from first TD onset was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.3-46.9) for PTD patients, compared with 48.7 months (95% CI 39.0-not evaluable) for ITD patients (Figure). After adjusting for baseline covariates, being PTD was associated with significantly greater mortality risk than being ITD (hazard ratio [HR] 2.24, 95% CI 1.18-4.25). Similar results were observed for the sensitivity analysis requiring ≥ 1 RBC transfusion for 2 consecutive 8-week cycles prior to the onset of TD (HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.13-4.21). Compared with ITD patients, PTD patients were less likely to receive iron chelation therapies (42% vs 54%), erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (25% vs 40%), and lenalidomide (14% vs 20%) during follow-up (Table 2). Conclusions: In this study, we extracted Canadian MDS Registry data on RBC transfusions and OS for MDS patients with RS+ MDS. More than half (50.7%) of the identified cohort became TD during follow-up. Among those who received RBC transfusions, PTD patients had significantly shorter OS and increased mortality risk compared with ITD patients, and RBC transfusion dependence independently predicted inferior outcomes. These conclusions are consistent with previous findings on the relationship between RBC transfusions and OS in all patients with LR-MDS. Disclosures Buckstein: Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Keating:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Hoffman La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Leber:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alexion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sabloff:Pfizer Canada:: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Canada: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASTX: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharma Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Leitch:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Otsuka: Honoraria; Alexion: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. St. Hilaire:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Finn:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ipsen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Lundbeck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astra Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yee:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Hoffman La Roche: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Banerji:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Research Manitoba: Research Funding; CAPhO: Honoraria; BIOGEN: Other: Licensing fee; CancerCare Manitoba/University of Manitoba: Employment; CIHR: Research Funding; Dana-Farber Cancer Institute: Other: Licencing fee; CCMF: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; LLSC: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Licensing fee, Research Funding. Liu:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Tang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Westcott:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Wang:Cornerstone Research Group: Employment. Cameron:Cornerstone Research Group: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morison:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Spin:Cornerstone Research Group: Employment.

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)0,000
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 enseignants0,111
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,221

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,002
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 ouverte0,0000,000
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 Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,215
Écart entre enseignants0,206 · 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
Publié2019
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→Travaux en français237 207→