Outcome Among Adolescents and Young Adults with Acute Myeloid Leukemia at Pediatric Versus Adult Centers: A Population-Based Study Using the IMPACT Cohort
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Survival outcomes among adolescents and young adults (AYA) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) remain poor. In AYA with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, outcomes differ between patients treated in pediatric vs. adult centers. This has not been well evaluated in AML. We therefore compared outcomes between AYA with AML treated at pediatric vs. adult centers using a population-based clinical database. In addition, we determined other predictors of outcome within this population. Methods: The IMPACT Cohort comprises all Ontario, Canada AYA aged 15-21 years diagnosed with one of six common cancers (including AML) between 1992-2012. Detailed demographic, disease, treatment, and outcome data were collected through chart abstraction and validated by content experts. Locus of cancer care (LOC - pediatric vs. adult center) was determined based on where the majority of therapy was delivered in the first three months after diagnosis. Linkage to population-based health administrative data identified additional cancer events (second cancers, relapse, death). Event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined using Kaplan-Meier methods. The impact of LOC on EFS and OS was determined using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for demographic, disease, and treatment variables. Events included disease progression, relapse, death, and second malignancies. Results: Among 140 AYA with AML, 89 (63.6%) received therapy at an adult center. AYA treated in pediatric centers were younger than those treated at adult centers (median 16 years vs. 19 years; p<0.001) and were more likely to live in higher-income neighborhoods [37/51 (72.5%) vs. 47/89 (52.8%); p=0.02]. Disease markers such as presenting white blood cell count and AML subtype did not differ by LOC. The 5-year EFS and OS for the whole cohort were 35.0%±4.0% and 53.6%±4.2%. Neither EFS nor OS differed by LOC (Table 1). In multivariable analyses adjusting for disease characteristics, LOC was not predictive of either EFS [adult vs. pediatric center hazard ratio (HR) 1.3, 95thconfidence interval (CI) 0.8-2.2, p=0.27] or OS (HR 1.0, CI 0.6-1.6, p=0.97). AYA with AML living in rural areas however experienced significantly inferior outcomes as compared to their urban counterparts (EFS: HR 2.5, CI 1.3-4.7, p=0.005; OS: HR 2.0, CI 1.1-3.8, p=0.04). Conclusions: In this population-based cohort, outcomes did not differ between AYA with AML treated at pediatric vs. adult centers, unlike what has been previously shown in AYA with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. However, rural AYA experienced substantially inferior outcomes than urban AYA, suggesting that even within a universal single payer system of healthcare, socioeconomic disparities persist in this population. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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 | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 ».