MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990418413 · doi:10.1111/ejh.12455

How we manage <scp>JAK</scp> inhibition in allogeneic transplantation for myelofibrosis

2014· review· en· W1990418413 on OpenAlexaff
Tarah J. Ballinger, Bipin N. Savani, Vikas Gupta, Nicolaus Kröger, Mohamad Mohty

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal Of Haematology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuxolitinibMyelofibrosisMedicineDiscontinuationJanus kinaseTransplantationTofacitinibHematopoietic stem cell transplantationAdverse effectStem cellConstitutional symptomsInternal medicineImmunologyOncologyCytokineDiseaseBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) is currently the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis (MF), but this option is complicated by high incidences of associated morbidity and mortality. Ruxolitinib, a janus-activated kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, has proven to be beneficial in reduction of splenomegaly, improvement of constitutional symptoms, and possibly in overall survival. However, use of JAK inhibitors in the peritransplant period has been complicated by unpredictable response, return of MF symptoms or cytokine storm reaction upon discontinuation, and lack of long-term response data. This review considers the current limited available data on JAK inhibitor use prior to HCT, including common side effects and possible impact of severe adverse events on discontinuation of the drug. We provide our experience and recommendations regarding use of JAK inhibition in patients undergoing HCT. Additional studies are needed to determine the optimal schedule of JAK inhibitors in the transplant protocols and their impact on engraftment, graft-versus-host disease, and survival.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.264 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal Of HaematologySame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207