Treatment of patients with secondary central nervous system lymphoma with high-dose busulfan/thiotepa-based conditioning and autologous stem cell transplant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the survival rates are extremely low for patients with secondary central nervous system lymphoma (SCNSL) treated with conventional chemotherapy and radiotherapy, more encouraging outcomes have recently been reported in small series with high-dose (HD) therapy and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). The optimal HD regimen for SCNSL is unknown. Despite reports of thiotepa/busulfan-based conditioning for primary CNS lymphoma, very little data exist regarding the use of this regimen for SCNSL. We analyzed 23 patients with SCNSL (median age 62 years) who underwent ASCT at two Alberta centers using thiotepa, busulfan, cyclophosphamide (TBC) in six patients prior to 2011 and rituximab-busulfan, melphalan, thiotepa (R-BuMelTt) in 17 patients after 2011. At a median follow-up of 27.8 months (4.2-113.6), the 2-year actuarial rate of progression-free survival was 76.1%. In conclusion, our results demonstrate encouraging survival outcomes for patients with SCNSL treated with R-BuMelTt and ASCT.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".