[Feasibility study of application of international prognostic score on prediction of prognosis for advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma].
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVE: Currently, 60% patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma could be cured by receiving standard treatments. The international prognostic factor project on advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma has developed a concept of international prognostic score (IPS) based on seven adverse prognostic factors consisting of male sex, age 45 years or older, stage IV disease, leukocytosis, lymphocytopenia, low hemoglobin and low serum albumin for newly diagnosed advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma patients. This study was to explore the feasibility of the international prognostic score in advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 141 patients with untreated advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma in Cancer Center of Sun Yat-sen University between January 1980 and December 2004. IPS was defined as the number of adverse prognostic factors presented at diagnosis. The rates of failure free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the method of Kaplan-Meier and compared according to IPS by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazard model was used in multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The 5-year FFS and OS for 141 advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma patients were 57.6%, 68.1% respectively. Estimated 5-year FFS was 67.7%, 63.2%, 61.8%, 34.9% for patients with 0-1, 2, 3, > or =4 of the adverse prognostic factors respectively. Estimated 5-year OS was 81.0%, 75.5%, 70.3%, 42.3% for patients with 0-1, 2, 3, > or =4 of the adverse prognostic factors respectively. The 5-year FFS for low risk patients with IPS=0-2 and high risk patients with IPS> or =3 were 65.4%, 48.9% respectively (log-rank test: P=0.012); the 5 year OS for patients with IPS=0-2 and IPS> or =3 were 78.4%, 57.1% respectively (log-rank test: P=0.004). Low risk patients with IPS=0-2 had superior overall survival than high risk patients with IPS> or =3 when treated with ABVD or MOPP. The FFS and OS of the advanced HL patients at high risk treated with ABVD were better than those treated with MOPP. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that B symptoms, extranodal disease and MOPP chemotherapy were independent adverse prognostic factors for FFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS: The IPS shows good prognostic power in advanced HL. High risk advanced HL patients treated with MOPP have inferior survival than those treated with ABVD, thus we recommend patients to be treated with ABVD or more intensive regimen.
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 | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".