Effect of acute graft-versus-host disease on the outcome of second allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant in children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Studies have shown second allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) to have a potential role in treating relapse after HSCT. We sought to evaluate the outcome of second allogeneic HSCT for children with relapsed leukemia with focus on factors that potentially improve outcome. Thirty-eight children were identified. The median time between transplants was 18.6 months (range 6.7-50.1 months). With median follow-up of 44 months the 2-year overall survival (OS) was 59.1 ± 8.2%. The leukemia-free survival was 51.8 ± 8.2% and the non-relapse mortality 30.8 ± 7.9%. Eleven patients (30%) died of non-relapse mortality at a median of 37 days (range 16-260 days) from second HSCT. Twenty-one patients developed acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD) after second HSCT. Patients who developed aGVHD had lower risk for mortality compared to patients who did not have aGVHD, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.27 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.095-0.788, p-value 0.0163). Similarly, patients who developed aGVHD following second HSCT had lower risk for relapse (HR = 0.21, 95% CI 0.051-0.857, p-value 0.0297). Patients who developed aGVHD after first HSCT were less likely to benefit from second HSCT compared to patients without aGVHD after first HSCT. Our experience suggests that second HSCT for pediatric relapsed leukemia can result in acceptable survival and aGVHD is associated with improved outcome.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".