Analysis of risk factors influencing outcomes after cord blood transplantation in children with juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia: a EUROCORD, EBMT, EWOG-MDS, CIBMTR study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We retrospectively analyzed 110 patients with juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia, given single-unit, unrelated donor umbilical cord blood transplantation. Median age at diagnosis and at transplantation was 1.4 years (age range, 0.1-6.4 years) and 2.2 years (age range, 0.5-7.4 years), respectively. Before transplantation, 88 patients received chemotherapy; splenectomy was performed in 24 patients. Monosomy of chromosome 7 was the most frequent cytogenetic abnormality, found in 24% of patients. All but 8 patients received myeloablative conditioning; cyclosporine plus steroids was the most common graft-versus-host disease prophylaxis. Sixteen percent of units were HLA-matched with the recipient, whereas 43% and 35% had either 1 or 2 to 3 HLA disparities, respectively. The median number of nucleated cells infused was 7.1 × 10(7)/kg (range, 1.7-27.6 × 10(7)/kg). With a median follow-up of 64 months (range, 14-174 months), the 5-year cumulative incidences of transplantation-related mortality and relapse were 22% and 33%, respectively. The 5-year disease-free survival rate was 44%. In multivariate analysis, factors predicting better disease-free survival were age younger than 1.4 years at diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; P = .005), 0 to 1 HLA disparities in the donor/recipient pair (HR, 0.4; P = .009), and karyotype other than monosomy 7 (HR, 0.5; P = .02). Umbilical cord blood transplantation may cure a relevant proportion of children with juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia. Because disease recurrence remains the major cause of treatment failure, strategies to reduce incidence of relapse are warranted.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".