MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405039748 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-207936

Identification of High-Risk Patients and Establishment of a Clinical Prediction Model for Frontline Steroid Failure in Chronic Graft-Versus-Host-Disease

2024· article· en· W4405039748 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Arjun Pandey, Ivan Pašić, Igor Novitzky‐Basso, Arjun Law, Wilson Lam, Fotios V. Michelis, Armin Gerbitz, Auro Viswabandya, Rajat Kumar, Jonas Mattsson, Dennis Dong Hwan Kim

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineHealth Professions
ThématiquePressure Ulcer Prevention and Management
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineHost (biology)DiseaseGraft-versus-host diseaseSteroidIdentification (biology)Intensive care medicineInternal medicineBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Introduction: Contemporary practice for frontline chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) treatment predominantly involves the use of systemic corticosteroids. Treatment with newer agents for cGvHD including ruxolitinib, belumosudil or axatilimab may benefit patients at high risk of treatment failure. We aimed to delineate high risk characteristics associated with frontline systemic steroid treatment failure in patients with cGvHD. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of 267 consecutive patients who were diagnosed with cGvHD and were treated with frontline systemic corticosteroids after allogenic stem cell transplant (allo-SCT) at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre in Toronto, Canada. We collected data including demographics, disease and transplant characteristics as well as characteristics and classification of cGvHD using NIH Consensus Criteria. The primary outcome of this analysis was failure free survival (FFS); failure was defined as 1) systemic treatment change, 2) relapse or 3) non-relapse mortality. We used the Kaplan-Meier method with log rank test for univariate analysis and the Cox proportional hazard regression model for multivariate analysis using a modified version of R. Results: The median age of the 267 included patients was 51 (range: 19-71); 107 patients (40%) were female. 186 patients (70%) had a myeloid malignancy. With regards to transplant characteristics, 171 patients (64%) had a matched related donor, and 249 patients (93%) received stem cell transplant from a peripheral blood source. 48 patients (20%) underwent T-cell depletion and 94 patients (35%) underwent reduced intensity conditioning. The proportion of patients with mild, moderate and severe cGvHD according to NIH criteria was 82 (31%), 140 (52%) and 45 (17%) respectively. More than one organ was involved in 226 patients (85%), with the skin (n=167, 63%), liver (n=163, 61%) and mouth (n=131, 49%) being the most common organs involved. The median follow-up duration was 2.6 years amongst survivors. FFS was 61.7% [95% CI: 55.6-67.3] at 6 months, 37.8% [31.7-43.8] at 1 year, and 26.6% [20.9-32.5] at two years; median time to failure among the 267 patients was 252 days [217, 321]. Age, sex, and type of underlying condition were not significant predictors of FFS. With regards to transplant characteristics, no significant association was observed between FFS and any of: stem cell source (bone marrow vs. peripheral blood), donor-to-recipient sex or donor/recipient CMV status, T-cell depletion, reduced-intensity conditioning or type of GvHD prophylaxis. On univariate analysis, history of acute GvHD grade III-IV, severe cGvHD NIH global score at time of initial diagnosis, involvement of more than one organ, and mouth or GI involvement were each associated with shorter median time to failure; of these, acute GvHD grade III-IV (140 days vs. 291 days; HR: 1.46, [1.01, 2.13], p=0.047), severe cGvHD at initial diagnosis (164 days vs. 294 days, HR: 1.75, [1.20, 2.55], p=0.004) and involvement of more than one organ (226 days vs. 508 days, HR: 1.75, [1.11, 2.75], p=0.02) were each associated with significantly shorter median time to failure on multivariate analysis. Matched related donor status was associated with significantly longer median time to failure on both univariate and multivariate (329 days vs. 189 days, HR: 0.63, [0.47, 0.85], p=0.02) analysis. We developed a risk score, assigning one point for each of the high-risk characteristics associated with frontline steroid treatment failure (severe acute or chronic GvHD, involvement of more than one organ and unrelated donor). With increasing points on the score, a progressively shorter median time to failure was observed: risk score 0-1 (n=136: 346 days [291, 673]), 2 (n=85: 217 days [164, 304]), 3-4 (n=36: 103.5 days [59-179], p<0.001). Increasing points on the score were also associated with reduced FFS at 1 (data not shown) and 2 years: risk score 0-1 (n=136: 38.3% [29.5, 47.0]), 2 (n=85: 16.1% [8.3-26.2]), 3-4 (n=36: 8.5% [1.8-22.1], p<0.001). Conclusion: Unrelated donor use, severe acute/chronic GvHD and ≥2 involved organs are high risk characteristics for frontline steroid failure. Future research should assess interventions including incorporation of newer agents such as ruxolitinib, belumosudil or axatilimab in addition to corticosteroids in these high-risk patients.

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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

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 Opus0,040
Tête enseignante GPT0,387
Écart entre enseignants0,347 · 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'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
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
Publié2024
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetPressure Ulcer Prevention and ManagementTravaux en français237 207