Thalidomide and rituximab in Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thalidomide enhances rituximab-mediated, antibody-dependent, cell-mediated cytotoxicity. We therefore conducted a phase 2 study using thalidomide and rituximab in symptomatic Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia (WM) patients naive to either agent. Intended therapy consisted of daily thalidomide (200 mg for 2 weeks, then 400 mg for 50 weeks) and rituximab (375 mg/m(2) per week) dosed on weeks 2 to 5 and 13 to 16. Twenty-five patients were enrolled, 20 of whom were untreated. Responses were complete response (n = 1), partial response (n = 15), and major response (n = 2), for overall and major response rate of 72% and 64%, respectively, on an intent-to-treat basis. Median serum IgM decreased from 3670 to 1590 mg/dL (P < .001), whereas median hematocrit rose from 33.0% to 37.6% (P = .004) at best response. Median time to progression for responders was 38 months. Peripheral neuropathy to thalidomide was the most common adverse event. Among 11 patients experiencing grade 2 or greater neuropathy, 10 resolved to grade 1 or less at a median of 6.7 months. Thalidomide in combination with rituximab is active and produces long-term responses in WM. Lower doses of thalidomide (ie, <or= 200 mg/day) should be considered given the high frequency of treatment-related neuropathy in this patient population. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00142116.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it