Optimizing Outcomes with Azacitidine: Recommendations from Canadian Centres of Excellence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Myelodysplastic syndromes (mdss) constitute a heterogeneous group of malignant hematologic disorders characterized by marrow dysplasia, ineffective hematopoiesis, peripheral blood cytopenias, and pronounced risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia. Azacitidine has emerged as an important treatment option and is recommended by the Canadian Consortium on Evidence-Based Care in mds as a first-line therapy for intermediate-2 and high-risk patients not eligible for allogeneic stem cell transplant; however, practical guidance on how to manage patients through treatment is limited. This best practice guideline provides recommendations by a panel of experts from Canadian centres of excellence on the selection and clinical management of mds patients with azacitidine. Familiarity with the referral process, treatment protocols, dose scheduling, treatment expectations, response monitoring, management of treatment breaks and adverse events, and multidisciplinary strategies for patient support will improve the opportunity for optimizing treatment outcomes with azacitidine.
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 | 0.021 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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.
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".