Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) with a conditioning regimen of busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide for children with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML): A phase I study of the pediatric blood and marrow transplant consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an important treatment modality for children with AML. The optimal conditioning regimen is unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the appropriate dosing of etoposide in combination with busulfan and cyclophosphamide in this setting. PROCEDURE: Twenty patients with a diagnosis of AML in first or second remission, or myelodysplasia scheduled for bone marrow transplantation, were included in this study. Patients received busulfan 640 mg/m(2) in 16 doses, cyclophosphamide 120 to 150 mg/kg in two doses, and etoposide from 40-60 mg/kg as a single dose. Extensive toxicity data was collected. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were evaluable for toxicity. Mucositis was seen in all patients. Four patients developed bacteremia and one patient died from overwhelming sepsis on day +3. Four patients developed moderate to severe skin toxicity. The major dose-limiting +3 toxicity was hepatic toxicity, which occurred in 14 of 19 patients. Eight patients developed clinical veno-occlusive disease, including three patients at dose level 4, two of whom had life-threatening disease. This hepatic toxicity defined the MTD of 640 mg/m(2) busulfan, 120 mg/kg of cyclophosphamide, and 60 mg/kg of etoposide. Overall, 9 of 20 patients enrolled in the study survive in remission, 8/14 allogeneic (median follow-up 44 months), and one of six autologous patients (follow-up, 54 months). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the combination of busulfan, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide at the doses defined above has activity in the treatment of children with high-risk AML/MDS undergoing allogeneic HSCT. Whether it offers an advantage over other conditioning regimens will require a randomized trial with a larger cohort of patients.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".