Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Adult Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is potentially curative for patients with chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML); however, few data exist regarding prognostic factors and transplantation outcomes. We performed this retrospective study to identify prognostic factors for post-transplantation outcomes. The CMML-specific prognostic scoring system (CPSS) has been validated in subjects receiving nontransplantation therapy and was included in our study. From 2001 to 2012, 209 adult subjects who received HCT for CMML were reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research. The median age at transplantation was 57 years (range, 23 to 74). Median follow-up was 51 months (range, 3 to 122). On multivariate analyses, CPSS scores, Karnofsky performance status (KPS), and graft source were significant predictors of survival (P = .004, P = .01, P = .01, respectively). Higher CPSS scores were not associated with disease-free survival, relapse, or transplantation-related mortality. In a restricted analysis of subjects with relapse after HCT, those with intermediate-2/high risk had a nearly 2-fold increased risk of death after relapse compared to those with low/intermediate-1 CPSS scores. Respective 1-year, 3-year, and 5-year survival rates for low/intermediate-1 risk subjects were 61% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52% to 72%), 48% (95% CI, 37% to 59%), and 44% (95% CI, 33% to 55%), and for intermediate-2/high risk subjects were 38% (95% CI, 28% to 49%), 32% (95% CI, 21% to 42%), and 19% (95% CI, 8% to 29%). We conclude that higher CPSS score at time of transplantation, lower KPS, and a bone marrow graft are associated with inferior survival after HCT. Further investigation of CMML disease-related biology may provide insights into other risk factors predictive of post-transplantation outcomes.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".