MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Treatment of Adult T-ALL with a Pediatric Asparaginase-Intensive Protocol Results in Survival Benefit When Compared to Other Adult Based Protocols

2008· article· en· W2566853909 on OpenAlexaff
Murtadha Al‐Khabori, Mark D. Minden, Vikas Gupta, Aaron D. Schimmer, Andre C. Schuh, Karen Yee, Wei Xu, Joseph Brandwein

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAsparaginaseRegimenChemotherapy regimenChemotherapyTransplantationAcute lymphocytic leukemiaInternal medicineSurgeryPediatricsLymphoblastic LeukemiaLeukemia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) accounts for 14–22% of adult ALL. No prospective comparisons between different chemotherapy protocols have been done. Since 2000 a modified DFCI protocol (Silverman et al, Blood2001;97:121–1218) has been used as standard treatment for all newly diagnosed patients with T-ALL at Princess Margaret Hospital (PMH). This protocol includes a remission induction phase, a CNS prophylaxis phase with intrathecal chemotherapy and 12 Gy cranial irradiation, a 30-week intensification phase including weekly asparaginase, and a 72-week maintenance phase. We compared outcomes using this regimen to previous results for all newly diagnosed T-ALL from 1990 – 2000 at PMH using the standard institutional protocol in use at the time. Between 1990–2000, 44 patients (Group 1) were treated with a variety of protocols, including 9203ALL PMH protocol (11 patients), L10 (2 pts), Protocol C (7 pts), HyperCVAD (15 pts) and ECOG E2993 (9 pts). From 2000–2007, 33 T-ALL patients were treated with modified DFCI protocol (Group 2). The median age for all patients was 31 years (range 14–69 years). There was no significant difference between the two groups with respect to age at diagnosis, presenting WBC (median or percent > 100 ×109/L), CSF positivity, or cytogenetics. More patients from Group 1 underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (BMT) in CR-1 (54%) as compared to those in Group 2 (54% vs. 14%, P = 0.001), primarily due to a change in BMT policy in 2002. The median follow up was 23 months (range 1–161 months) for the entire group and 53 months (range 14–161 months) for the surviving patients. Sixty-nine patients (90%) achieved complete remission, and 37 patients have relapsed. The CR rates were not significantly different between the two groups. The 3-year failure-free survival (FFS) was significantly higher in Group 2 (DFCI protocol) as compared with Group 1 (other protocols) (89% vs. 27%, P = 0.0001). Multivariate analysis using Cox proportional hazard model showed only the treatment regimen received (DFCI vs. others) to have a statistically significant impact on FFS (P = 0.0001). The 3-year overall survival (OS) was significantly higher in the DFCI group compared to the group receiving the other protocols (81% vs. 45%, P = 0.0006). On multivariate analysis, only the treatment regimen received (P=0.001) and the CSF status (P=0.014) had a significant impact on OS; BMT did not have a significant impact on OS. When patients were censored at the time of transplant, the FFS and OS analyses still showed statistically significant benefit for patients treated on DFCI protocol (P = 0.0001 and 0.03, respectively). In summary, treatment outcomes have markedly improved from 2000 onward as compared to the previous decade. Although improvements in supportive care and reduced use of allogeneic BMT may have been factors, it is likely that the institution of the DFCI pediatric protocol was the primary factor in the improved outcome. These results support the use of such pediatric asparaginase-intensive pediatric protocols for adult T-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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207