Imatinib 800 mg daily induces deeper molecular responses than imatinib 400 mg daily: results of <scp>SWOG</scp> S0325, an intergroup randomized <scp>PHASE II</scp> trial in newly diagnosed chronic phase chronic myeloid leukaemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The standard dose of imatinib for newly diagnosed patients with chronic phase chronic myeloid leukaemia (CP-CML) is 400 mg daily (IM400), but the optimal dose is unknown. This randomized phase II study compared the rates of molecular, haematological and cytogenetic response to IM400 vs. imatinib 400 mg twice daily (IM800) in 153 adult patients with CP-CML. Dose adjustments for toxicity were flexible to maximize retention on study. Molecular response (MR) at 12 months was deeper in the IM800 arm (4-log reduction of BCR-ABL1 mRNA: 25% vs. 10% of patients, P = 0·038; 3-log reduction: 53% vs. 35%, P = 0·049). During the first 12 months BCR-ABL1 levels in the IM800 arm were an average 2·9-fold lower than in the IM400 arm (P = 0·010). Complete haematological response was similar, but complete cytogenetic response was higher with IM800 (85% vs. 67%, P = 0·040). Grade 3-4 toxicities were more common for IM800 (58% vs. 31%, P = 0·0007), and were most commonly haematological. Few patients have relapsed, progressed or died, but both progression-free (P = 0·048) and relapse-free (P = 0·031) survival were superior for IM800. In newly diagnosed CP-CML patients, IM800 induced deeper MRs than IM400, with a trend for improved progression-free and overall survival, but was associated with more severe toxicity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".