Role of Cytotoxic Therapy with Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Update of the 2005 Evidence-Based Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical research published since the first evidence-based review on the role of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) in the treatment of pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is presented and critically evaluated in this update. Treatment recommendations are provided by an expert panel. Allogeneic SCT is recommended for children who: are in second complete remission (CR2) after experiencing an early marrow relapse for precursor-B ALL; experienced primary induction failure, but subsequently achieved a CR1; have T-lineage ALL in CR2; or have ALL in third or greater remission. Although the 2005 pediatric ALL evidence-based review (EBR) recommended allogeneic SCT for children with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) ALL in CR1, preliminary tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) data demonstrate that early outcomes are comparable for allogeneic SCT and chemotherapy + imatinib. Based on the evidence, autologous SCT is not recommended for ALL in CR1. Allogeneic SCT is not recommended for: T-lineage ALL in CR1; mixed-lineage leukemia (MLL)+ ALL when it is the sole adverse risk factor; isolated central nervous system (CNS) relapse in precursor-B ALL. Based on expert opinion, allogeneic SCT may be considered for hypodiploid ALL and persistent minimal residual disease [corrected] (MRD) positivity in ALL in CR1 or greater, although these are areas that need further study. Treatment recommendations pertaining to various transplantation techniques are also provided, as are areas of needed future research.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".