The Sequence of Cyclophosphamide and Myeloablative Total Body Irradiation in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Patients with Acute Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited clinical data are available to assess whether the sequencing of cyclophosphamide (Cy) and total body irradiation (TBI) changes outcomes. We evaluated the sequence in 1769 (CyTBI, n = 948; TBICy, n = 821) recipients of related or unrelated hematopoietic cell transplantation who received TBI (1200 to 1500 cGY) for acute leukemia from 2003 to 2010. The 2 cohorts were comparable for median age, performance score, type of leukemia, first complete remission, Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia, HLA-matched siblings, stem cell source, antithymocyte globulin use, TBI dose, and type of graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis. The sequence of TBI did not significantly affect transplantation-related mortality (24% versus 23% at 3 years, P = .67; relative risk, 1.01; P = .91), leukemia relapse (27% versus 29% at 3 years, P = .34; relative risk, .89, P = .18), leukemia-free survival (49% versus 48% at 3 years, P = .27; relative risk, .93; P = .29), chronic GVHD (45% versus 47% at 1 year, P = .39; relative risk, .9; P = .11), or overall survival (53% versus 52% at 3 years, P = .62; relative risk, .96; P = .57) for CyTBI and TBICy, respectively. Corresponding cumulative incidences of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome were 4% and 6% at 100 days (P = .08), respectively. This study demonstrates that the sequence of Cy and TBI does not impact transplantation outcomes and complications in patients with acute leukemia undergoing hematopoietic cell transplantation with myeloablative conditioning.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".