Treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma with adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine without routine granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support does not increase the risk of febrile neutropenia: a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although patients with Hodgkin lymphoma treated with adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) chemotherapy frequently develop neutropenia, febrile neutropenia is uncommon. Three retrospective trials reported that ABVD could be safely administered without dose delays or granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) support. We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 89 patients treated with ABVD and found that the incidence of febrile neutropenia was 0.5% (five of 927 treatments). This prompted a change to our institutional policy so that patients receiving ABVD no longer receive routine G-CSF for uncomplicated neutropenia. We then prospectively assessed the safety of this policy change. Thirty-three patients received a total of 327 ABVD treatments, 185 (57%) of which were administered with a neutrophil count <1.5 × 10(9)/L. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 2/33 patients (6%), complicating 0.6% of chemotherapy treatments (2/327). Eliminating routine G-CSF saved $10 241 per patient. Omission of G-CSF for uncomplicated neutropenic patients receiving ABVD for Hodgkin lymphoma is cost-saving and safe.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".