Providing Personalized Prognostic Information for Adult Leukemia Survivors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prediction of subsequent leukemia-free survival (LFS) and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) in adults with acute leukemia who survived at least 1 year after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation is difficult. We analyzed 3339 patients with acute myeloid leukemia and 1434 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who received myeloablative conditioning and related or unrelated stem cells from 1990 to 2005. Most clinical factors predictive of LFS in 1-year survivors were no longer significant after 2 or more years. For acute myeloid leukemia, only disease status (beyond first complete remission) remained a significant adverse risk factor for LFS 2 or more years after transplantation. For lymphoblastic leukemia, only extensive chronic GVHD remained a significant adverse predictor of LFS in the second and subsequent years. For patients surviving for 1 year without disease relapse or extensive chronic GVHD, the risk of developing extensive chronic GVHD in the next year was 4% if no risk factors were present and higher if noncyclosporine-based GVHD prophylaxis, an HLA-mismatched donor, or peripheral blood stem cells were used. Estimates for subsequent LFS and extensive chronic GVHD can be derived for individual patients or populations using an online calculator (http://www.cibmtr.org/LeukemiaCalculators). This prognostic information is more relevant for survivors than estimates provided before transplantation.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
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".