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
Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) are a rare and heterogeneous group of disorders that, for the most part, are associated with a very poor prognosis. The standard therapy for PTCLs is CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) or a comparable CHOP-like regimen that incorporates anthracyclines. With the exception of anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALK(+) ALCL), the cure rate for PTCLs with CHOP is low, and limited evidence suggests that anthracyclines do not improve the prognosis. However, there is no compelling evidence that any other regimen or approach is superior. It remains challenging to compare alternative therapies or treatment strategies with CHOP because the majority of data are retrospective and include diverse patient populations. Recently, prospective studies have been initiated exclusively for PTCL, and in some, select histologic subtypes are evaluated in an effort to remove heterogeneity. Encouragingly, there have been several new therapies emerging with activity in PTCLs and exciting novel combinations under consideration that will hopefully move the field forward and improve outcome in this challenging group of diseases.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 it