Oral fludarabine and rituximab as initial therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma: population-based experience matches clinical trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clinical trials report that fludarabine and rituximab (FR) as initial therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) improves progression-free and overall survival (OS) when compared historically to fludarabine alone. To determine whether similar results are achievable with oral FR in a community-based setting, we conducted a population-based analysis of patients treated for CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) in British Columbia, where FR is standard initial therapy. Ninety-eight patients received FR for CLL/SLL from 2004 to 2009. Two- and 4-year OS was 90% and 73%, respectively (median not reached); 2- and 4-year treatment-free survival (TFS) was 69% and 54% (median 4.0 years). Age ≥ 60 years or ≥ 70 years had no effect on OS or TFS. Toxicity led to treatment discontinuation in 13%. FR with oral fludarabine was safely, conveniently and successfully given to community-based patients, irrespective of age, for first-line therapy for CLL/SLL, achieving OS and TFS similar to those in clinical trials.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".