Advanced-stage nodular lymphocyte predominant Hodgkin lymphoma compared with classical Hodgkin lymphoma: a matched pair outcome analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to disease rarity, there is limited information regarding the optimal therapy and outcome for patients with advanced-stage nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL). Forty-two patients with NLPHL by the Revised European-American Lymphoma/World Health Organization classification with advanced-stage disease were identified and paired 1:2 with a matched control with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) matched by age, gender, stage, decade of diagnosis, and treatment received. The median follow-up was 11.3 years (range, 1.9 to 35.5 years) for NLPHL patients and 10.7 years (range, 1.6 to 26.3 years) for CHL patients. The majority received doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD)-like chemotherapy. Although the 10-year overall survival (OS) (P = .579) and HL freedom from treatment failure (HL-FFTF) were similar between NLPHL and CHL patients (75% vs 73%; P = .610), the time to progression (TTP), which also includes the development of secondary aggressive lymphoma, was inferior in NLPHL (10-year, 63% vs 73%; P = .040). Splenic involvement was associated with an inferior 10-year TTP in patients treated with ABVD (48% vs 71%; P = .049) and an increased cumulative incidence of secondary aggressive lymphoma (P = .014) providing a rationale for further evaluation of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) with rituximab in NLPHL.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".