Pediatric‐inspired therapy compared to allografting for <scp>P</scp>hiladelphia chromosome‐negative adult ALL in first complete remission
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For adults with Philadelphia chromosome-negative (Ph-) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first complete remission (CR1), allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is an established curative strategy. However, pediatric-inspired chemotherapy may also offer durable leukemia-free survival in the absence of HCT. We compared 422 HCT recipients aged 18-50 years with Ph-ALL in CR1 reported to the CIBMTR with an age-matched concurrent cohort of 108 Ph- ALL CR1 patients who received a Dana-Farber Consortium pediatric-inspired non-HCT regimen. At 4 years of follow-up, incidence of relapse after HCT was 24% (95% CI 19-28) versus 23% (95% CI 15-32) for the non-HCT (chemo) cohort (P=0.97). Treatment-related mortality (TRM) was higher in the HCT cohort [HCT 37% (95% CI 31-42) versus chemo 6% (95% CI 3-12), P<0.0001]. DFS in the HCT cohort was 40% (95% CI 35-45) versus 71% (95% CI 60-79) for chemo, P<0.0001. Similarly, OS favored chemo [HCT 45% (95% CI 40-50)] versus chemo 73% [(95% CI 63-81), P<0.0001]. In multivariable analysis, the sole factor predictive of shorter OS was the administration of HCT [hazard ratio 3.12 (1.99-4.90), P<0.0001]. For younger adults with Ph- ALL, pediatric-inspired chemotherapy had lower TRM, no increase in relapse, and superior overall survival compared to HCT. Am. J. Hematol. 91:322-329, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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; 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".