Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Advanced Polycythemia Vera and Essential Thrombocythemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is curative for selected patients with advanced essential thrombocythemia (ET) or polycythemia vera (PV). From 1990 to 2007, 75 patients with ET (median age 49 years) and 42 patients with PV (median age 53 years) underwent transplantations at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center (FHCRC; n = 43) or at other Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) centers (n = 74). Thirty-eight percent of the patients had splenomegaly and 28% had a prior splenectomy. Most patients (69% for ET and 67% for PV) received a myeloablative (MA) conditioning regimen. Cumulative incidence of neutrophil engraftment at 28 days was 88% for ET patients and 90% for PV patients. Acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) grades II to IV occurred in 57% and 50% of ET and PV patients, respectively. The 1-year treatment-related mortality (TRM) was 27% for ET and 22% for PV. The 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse was 13% for ET and 30% for PV. Five-year survival/progression-free survival (PFS) was 55%/47% and 71%/48% for ET and PV, respectively. Patients without splenomegaly had faster neutrophil and platelet engraftment, but there were no differences in TRM, survival, or PFS. Presence of myelofibrosis (MF) did not affect engraftment or TRM. Over 45% of the patients who undergo transplantations for ET and PV experience long-term PFS.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".