MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160746673 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1010222

Cytarabine Dose for Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2011· article· en· W2160746673 on OpenAlexaff
Bob Löwenberg, Thomas Pabst, Edo Vellenga, Wim van Putten, Harry C. Schouten, Carlos Graux, Augustin Ferrant, Pieter Sonneveld, Bart J. Biemond, Aloïs Gratwohl, Georgine E. de Greef, Leo F. Verdonck, M Schaafsma, Michael Gregor, Matthias Theobald, Urs Schanz, Johan Maertens, Gert J. Ossenkoppele

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsHôpital Saint-LucInstitut du Savoir Montfort
FundersSchweizerische Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Klinische Krebsforschung
KeywordsCytarabineMedicineMyeloid leukemiaLeukemiaMyeloidBody surface areaChemotherapyOncologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Cytarabine (ara-C) is an important drug in the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML). High-dose cytarabine (2000 to 3000 mg per square meter of body-surface area) is toxic but results in higher rates of relapse-free survival than does the conventional dose of 100 to 400 mg per square meter. Intermediate dose levels have not been thoroughly evaluated. METHODS: We compared two induction regimens in patients 18 to 60 years of age (median, 49) who had newly diagnosed AML. The intermediate-dose group, totaling 431 patients, received cytarabine at a dose of 200 mg per square meter given by continuous intravenous infusion for 24 hours during cycle 1 of induction therapy and 1000 mg per square meter by infusion for 3 hours twice daily during cycle 2 of induction therapy. The high-dose group, totaling 429 patients, received a dose-escalated regimen of 1000 mg of cytarabine per square meter every 12 hours in cycle 1 and 2000 mg per square meter twice daily in cycle 2. Patients with a complete response did not receive additional cytarabine but received consolidation therapy in a third cycle of chemotherapy (mitoxantrone-etoposide) or underwent autologous or allogeneic stem-cell transplantation. Complete remission rates, survival rates, and toxic effects were assessed for each treatment group. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 5 years, no significant differences were noted between the intermediate-dose group and the high-dose group with respect to complete remission rates (80% and 82%, respectively), probability of relapse, event-free survival at 5 years (34% and 35%), or overall survival (40% and 42%). High-dose cytarabine provided no clear advantage in any prognostic subgroup. The high-dose treatment resulted in higher incidences of grade 3 and grade 4 toxic effects (in cycle 1), prolonged hospitalization, and delayed neutrophil recovery (in cycle 2) and platelet recovery (in cycles 2 and 3). CONCLUSIONS: Induction therapy with cytarabine at the lower dose already produced maximal antileukemic effects for all response end points, suggesting a plateau in the dose-response relationship above this dose level. High-dose cytarabine results in excessive toxic effects without therapeutic benefit. (Netherlands Trial Register number, NTR230.).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations407
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207