Comparison of Outcomes of Allogeneic Transplantation for Chronic Myeloid Leukemia with Cyclophosphamide in Combination with Intravenous Busulfan, Oral Busulfan, or Total Body Irradiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyclophosphamide (Cy) in combination with busulfan (Bu) or total body irradiation (TBI) is the most commonly used myeloablative conditioning regimen in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). We used data from the Center for International Bone Marrow Transplantation Research to compare outcomes in adults who underwent hematopoietic cell transplantation for CML in first chronic phase after myeloablative conditioning with Cy in combination with TBI, oral Bu, or intravenous (i.v.) Bu. Four hundred thirty-eight adults received human leukocyte antigen (HLA)-matched sibling grafts and 235 received well-matched grafts from unrelated donors (URD) from 2000 through 2006. Important differences existed between the groups in distribution of donor relation, exposure to tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and year of transplantation. In multivariate analysis, relapse occurred less frequently among patients receiving i.v. Bu compared with TBI (relative risk [RR], .36; P = .022) or oral Bu (RR, .39; P = .028), but nonrelapse mortality and survival were similar. A significant interaction was detected between donor relation and the main effect in leukemia-free survival (LFS). Among recipients of HLA-identical sibling grafts, but not URD grafts, LFS was better in patients receiving i.v. Bu (RR, .53; P = .025) or oral Bu (RR, .64; P = .017) compared with TBI. In CML in first chronic phase, Cy in combination with i.v. Bu was associated with less relapse than TBI or oral Bu. LFS was better after i.v. or oral Bu compared with TBI.
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) | 0.001 | 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".