The Development of Marked Elevation in White Blood Cell Count Does Not Predict Inferior Outcome in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although elevation of the white blood cell (WBC) count at diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) appears to predict shortened survival, its significance later in the course of the disease remains unclear. We reviewed all cases of CLL seen in our center between 1980 and 1999 to evaluate the frequency and clinical significance of WBC elevation > 100 x 10(9)/L. CLL was confirmed according to standard diagnostic criteria and data was collected from diagnosis, occurrence of WBC > 100 x 10(9)/L, and last follow-up. 235 consecutive patients with CLL were identified; 94 were excluded. 141 included patients had a median age of 61 years and median WBC 19.7 x 10(9)/L at diagnosis. Median follow-up for all patients was 56 months, and median survival was 104 months. 41 patients (29%) had > or = 1 episode of WBC > 100 x 10(9)1/L, occurring at a median of 38 months from diagnosis. Compared to controls matched for modified Rai stage, development of a WBC > 100 x 10(9)/L did not predict inferior survival (median 107 vs. 101 months, p = 0.72). We conclude that the occurrence of a WBC count > 100 x 10(9)/L in patients with CLL does not shorten the survival, and patients require therapy only if other indications for treatment are present.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".