MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2993079484 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-131227

Occurrence and Resolution of Anthracycline Cardiotoxicity and Impact on Treatment Outcomes Among Children Treated on the AAML1031 Clinical Trial: A Report from the Children's Oncology Group

2019· article· en· W2993079484 sur OpenAlexaff
Kelly Getz, Lillian Sung, Robert B. Gerbing, Todd A. Alonzo, Yimei Li, Yuan‐Shung Huang, Kasey J. Leger, Jessica A. Pollard, E. Anders Kolb, Alan S. Gamis, Richard Aplenc

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life
Établissements canadiensSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineCardiotoxicityAnthracyclineInternal medicineEjection fractionProportional hazards modelChemotherapyCancerHeart failureBreast cancer

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: Children treated for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receive high doses of anthracyclines. Anthracycline cardiotoxicity causes significant short and long term morbidity and mortality, thus it is crucial to understand its risk factors, natural history, and impact on treatment outcome. Methods: Between June 2011 and September 2018, AAML1031 enrolled patients aged <30 years for treatment of de novo AML. Echocardiographic evaluations (echo) were required before each treatment course, at the end of protocol therapy, and at yearly intervals during off-protocol follow-up. The lowest shortening fraction (SF) and ejection fraction (EF) in each reporting period were prospectively collected. Cardiotoxicity was defined as SF <28% or EF <55% which represent the protocol-mandated thresholds at which anthracyclines were to be withheld. Higher-grade toxicity (SF <24%, EF <50%) consistent with grade 2 or higher left ventricular systolic dysfunction (grade 2+ LVSD) per CTCAE v3 definitions, and its resolution were also assessed. Resolution was defined as SF returning to baseline or >30% and EF returning to baseline or >60%. Resource utilization (RU) data for patients enrolled at hospitals contributing to the Pediatric Health Information Systems database (PHIS) were merged with AAML1031 study data. Cox regressions were used to assess risk factors for incident cardiotoxicity and recovery among cases, as well as to compare event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with and without cardiotoxicity. Poisson regressions were used to compare on-protocol RU. Cardiotoxicity was treated as a time-varying exposure introduced at time of documented onset in comparisons of EFS, OS and RU. Patients with high allelic ratio FLT3/ITD+ AML were excluded from analyses. Results: 1092 patients were treated on AAML1031 and included in the primary analyses. Echo compliance was high overall (mean ±sd: 74.5% ±19.6), but lower and more variable during off-protocol (mean ±sd: 58.1%, ±31.0) than on-protocol (mean ±sd: 90.6% ±19.5) reporting periods. Over a median follow-up of 3.5 years, 39% (n=428) of patients experienced protocol-defined cardiotoxicity, of whom 54% (n=232) suffered grade 2+ LVSD. Cumulative incidence was higher among patients randomized to receive bortezomib, non-infants, females, and patients with low risk disease who receive more cumulative anthracycline during frontline therapy (Table 1). Patients treated with dexrazoxane were less likely to develop cardiotoxicity. Among patients with grade 2+ LVSD, 49% experienced recovery of cardiac function within a median of 14 months (IQR: 9-20) from initial detection. High risk disease classification and dexrazoxane exposure were associated with LVSD recovery (Table 1). Both EFS (HR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.01-1.50) and OS (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.15-1.84) were significantly worse in patients with cardiotoxicity meeting per-protocol thresholds for treatment modification. The magnitude of the association with EFS (HR 1.24, 95% CI: 0.98, 1.58) was similar when restricting to grade 2+ LVSD, but more pronounced for OS (HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.38, 2.34). A subset of 389 patients (23% suffered grade 2+ LVSD) were treated at PHIS hospitals and contributed to RU analyses. Cardiotoxicity was associated with greater cardiac ICU requirements, increased use of cardiac-directed interventions including antihypertensives, vasopressors, and heart failure medications, and reduced cardioprotection (Table 2). Conclusions: Echo compliance and cardiotoxicity rates were higher than previously described due in part to more frequent echoes and required reporting of raw echo results. Approximately 20% of pediatric AML patients on AAML1031 developed grade 2+ LVSD, only half of whom had documented resolution of LVSD. Dexrazoxane was strongly associated with reduced LVSD risk and potentially superior recovery. Our results offer further evidence that early cardiotoxicity decreases EFS/OS and that cumulative anthracycline dose is the principal predictor of LVSD. These data argue for comparative effectiveness studies of cardiac-directed interventions after LVSD, and identification of clinical and genetic risk factors for anthracycline cardiotoxicity and its recovery. Such studies may allow for anthracycline de-escalation in select patient populations. Work is ongoing to inform optimal supportive care practices for patients with LVSD using clinical data merged with PHIS. Disclosures Leger: Abbott: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BTG Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

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)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,012
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 enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,049

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,012
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0000,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
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 Opus0,048
Tête enseignante GPT0,384
Écart entre enseignants0,336 · 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

Citations3
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetChildhood Cancer Survivors' Quality of Life→Travaux en français237 207→