Economic Burden of High Risk Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) in Adults and Children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia is a hematological malignancy, characterized by overproduction of immature white blood cells in the bone marrow. Highrisk forms of ALL are typically characterized by poor treatment response, short remission duration, poor survival with conventional chemotherapy and incur high disease-related costs. The most common form of high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia in adults is Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) ALL. Objectives: This study investigated the treatment costs of high-risk ALL from a Canadian perspective. Methods: Costs for the induction phase of ALL treatment (inpatient costs and length of stay in hospital) were obtained from the Ontario Case Costing Initiative (OCCI) acute inpatient databases. Drug costs for outpatient treatment were obtained from the Ontario Drug Benefit Program and the medical literature. Since no published Canadian guidelines were available treatment pathways and costs for consolidation and maintenance phases of chemotherapy, broken down by age and risk level of disease, were based on the medical literature and expert opinion. Results: The average total cost of inpatient ALL treatement (induction phase) was $31,694 for both adults and children. The cost for consolidation therapy was $29,244 and $12,753 in adults and children, respectively. The maintenance therapy cost was $7,288 and $3,452 in adults and children, respectively. The high-risk therapy following relapse was $17,100 and $12,000 in adults and children, respectively. The total treatment cost for ALL is estimated at $85,326 in adults and $59,899 in children. Conclusions: In canada, high-risk ALL exacts a substantial economic burden as a result of rapid disease progression and decreased survival duration. Imatinib (Gleevec®) in Ph+ALL has produced superior results in terms of clinical response, disease-free survival, and overall survival with a good safety and tolerability profile. More comprehensive research is recommended to investigate the economic and humanistic benefits of imatinib as compared to the current therapies in the treatment of Ph+ ALL.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".