Prediction of high- and low-risk multiple myeloma based on gene expression and the International Staging System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Patients with multiple myeloma have variable survival and require reliable prognostic and predictive scoring systems. Currently, clinical and biological risk markers are used independently. Here, International Staging System (ISS), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) markers, and gene expression (GEP) classifiers were combined to identify novel risk classifications in a discovery/validation setting. We used the datasets of the Dutch-Belgium Hemato-Oncology Group and German-speaking Myeloma Multicenter Group (HO65/GMMG-HD4), University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences-TT2 (UAMS-TT2), UAMS-TT3, Medical Research Council-IX, Assessment of Proteasome Inhibition for Extending Remissions, and Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome (IFM-G) (total number of patients: 4750). Twenty risk markers were evaluated, including t(4;14) and deletion of 17p (FISH), EMC92, and UAMS70 (GEP classifiers), and ISS. The novel risk classifications demonstrated that ISS is a valuable partner to GEP classifiers and FISH. Ranking all novel and existing risk classifications showed that the EMC92-ISS combination is the strongest predictor for overall survival, resulting in a 4-group risk classification. The median survival was 24 months for the highest risk group, 47 and 61 months for the intermediate risk groups, and the median was not reached after 96 months for the lowest risk group. The EMC92-ISS classification is a novel prognostic tool, based on biological and clinical parameters, which is superior to current markers and offers a robust, clinically relevant 4-group model.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".