Comparison of 200 mg/m2 melphalan and 8 Gy total body irradiation plus 140 mg/m2 melphalan as conditioning regimens for peripheral blood stem cell transplantation in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: final analysis of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myelome 9502 randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
High-dose therapy has become a common treatment for myeloma. The objective of this study (Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome [IFM] 9502 trial) was to compare in a prospective and randomized trial the 2 most widely used conditioning regimens before autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed symptomatic patients younger than 65 years old: 8 Gy total body irradiation plus 140 mg/m(2) melphalan (arm A) versus 200 mg/m(2) melphalan (arm B). A total of 282 evaluable patients were compared--140 in arm A and 142 in arm B. Baseline characteristics and disease response to 4 cycles of the VAD regimen performed before randomization and autologous stem cell transplantation were identical in the 2 treatment arms. In arm B, hematologic recovery was significantly faster for both the duration of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, transfusion requirements were also significantly lower, and the median duration of hospitalization was significantly shorter. In arm A, the incidence of severe mucositis was significantly increased. The median duration of event-free survival was similar in both arms (21 vs 20.5 months, P =.6), but the 45-month survival was 65.8% in arm B versus 45.5% in arm A (P =.05). This difference might be attributed in part to better salvage regimens after relapse in arm B compared with arm A. We conclude that 200 mg/m(2) melphalan is a less toxic and at least as effective conditioning regimen when compared with 8 Gy total body irradiation with 140 mg/m(2) melphalan. This regimen should be considered as the standard of care before autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.
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) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".