Continuous Versus Bolus Infusion of Doxorubicin in Children With ALL: Long-term Cardiac Outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Doxorubicin, effective against many malignancies, is limited by cardiotoxicity. Continuous-infusion doxorubicin, compared with bolus-infusion, reduces early cardiotoxicity in adults. Its effectiveness in reducing late cardiotoxicity in children remains uncertain. We determined continuous-infusion doxorubicin cardioprotective efficacy in long-term survivors of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). METHODS: The Dana-Farber Cancer Institute ALL Consortium Protocol 91-01 enrolled pediatric patients between 1991 and 1995. Newly diagnosed high-risk patients were randomly assigned to receive a total of 360 mg/m(2) of doxorubicin in 30 mg/m(2) doses every 3 weeks, by either continuous (over 48 hours) or bolus-infusion (within 15 minutes). Echocardiograms at baseline, during, and after doxorubicin therapy were blindly remeasured centrally. Primary outcomes were late left ventricular (LV) structure and function. RESULTS: A total of 102 children were randomized to each treatment group. We analyzed 484 serial echocardiograms from 92 patients (n = 49 continuous; n = 43 bolus) with ≥1 echocardiogram ≥3 years after assignment. Both groups had similar demographics and normal baseline LV characteristics. Cardiac follow-up after randomization (median, 8 years) showed changes from baseline within the randomized groups (depressed systolic function, systolic dilation, reduced wall thickness, and reduced mass) at 3, 6, and 8 years; there were no statistically significant differences between randomized groups. Ten-year ALL event-free survival rates did not differ between the 2 groups (continuous-infusion, 83% versus bolus-infusion, 78%; P = .24). CONCLUSIONS: In survivors of childhood high-risk ALL, continuous-infusion doxorubicin, compared with bolus-infusion, provided no long-term cardioprotection or improvement in ALL event-free survival, hence provided no benefit over bolus-infusion.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".