Fate of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia Who Fail Primary Induction Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to describe the fate of patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who did not achieve an initial remission while being treated on a contemporary cooperative group trial. We analyzed the outcome of patients entered into S0106, a recently reported cooperative group trial for patients with newly diagnosed AML. A total of 589 eligible patients was treated, of whom 150 (25%) did not achieve a remission while on study and were available for further analysis. The 4-year survival rate for the entire cohort of 150 patients was 23%. Among the 64 patients who received an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant, the 4-year survival rate was 48% compared with 4% for the 86 patients who did not undergo transplantation. Among those transplanted, we could not detect a difference in outcome according to remission status, donor source, type of preparative regimen, or cytogenetic risk category. More than 20% of patients with newly diagnosed AML who fail induction therapy can still be cured, particularly if they are able to receive an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant. These results suggest that early HLA typing and donor identification are important components of the initial therapy of AML.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".