Prediction of response and survival in patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia treated with omacetaxine mepesuccinate: logistic regression and landmark analyses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although many chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients initially do well with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), some patients develop resistance or intolerance to multiple TKIs and need further therapy. Omacetaxine mepesuccinate (omacetaxine), a protein synthesis inhibitor, represents a new class of treatment that can produce major cytogenetic response (MCyR) in patients with CML who have developed resistance or intolerance to TKIs. The US Food and Drug Administration approved subcutaneous omacetaxine for treatment of CML in chronic-phase (CP) and accelerated-phase patients, with resistance or intolerance to two or more TKIs based on efficacy analysis of a subset of patients from two phase 2, open-label, international, multicenter studies. 1 , 2 Among the 76 evaluable patients with CML-CP in the efficacy analysis, MCyR was reported in 14 patients (18.4%), including confirmed complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) in six patients (7.9%), with a median MCyR duration of 12.5 months. 2 , 3 Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in CML-CP patients were 9.6 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 6.8–11.3 months) and 40.3 months (95% CI 23.8 months–not reached), respectively.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".