Results of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute ALL Consortium Protocol 95-01 for children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (DFCI) Childhood ALL Consortium Protocol 95-01 was designed to minimize therapy-related morbidity for children with newly diagnosed ALL without compromising efficacy. Patients participated in randomized comparisons of (1) doxorubicin given with or without dexrazoxane, a cardioprotectant (high-risk patients), (2) intensive intrathecal chemotherapy and cranial radiation (standard-risk patients), and (3) Erwinia and Escherichia coli asparaginase (all patients). Between 1996 and 2000, 491 patients (aged 0-18 years) were enrolled (272 standard risk and 219 high risk). With a median of 5.7 years of follow-up, the estimated 5-year event-free survival (EFS) for all patients was 82%+/-2%. Dexrazoxane did not have a significant impact on the 5-year EFS of high-risk patients (P=.99), and there was no significant difference in outcome of standard-risk patients based on type of central nervous system (CNS) treatment (P=.26). Compared with E coli asparaginase, Erwinia asparaginase was associated with a lower incidence of toxicity (10% versus 24%), but also an inferior 5-year EFS (78%+/-4% versus 89%+/-3%, P=.01). We conclude that (1) dexrazoxane does not interfere with the antileukemic effect of doxorubicin, (2) intensive intrathecal chemotherapy is as effective as cranial radiation in preventing CNS relapse in standard-risk patients, and (3) once-weekly Erwinia is less toxic than E coli asparaginase, but also less efficacious.
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 | 0.061 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.009 |
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".