MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Disease Status Is the Major Prognosis Factor for Allogenic Transplantation Outcome for Hodgkin Lymphoma: a Retrospective Study From the French Society of Bone Marrow Graft Transplantation and Cellular Therapy (SFGM-TC)

2010· article· en· W2580964459 on OpenAlexaff
Ambroise Marçais, Karin Bilger, Raphaël Porcher, Marie Robin, Mohamad Mohty, Mauricette Michalet, Didier Blaise, Stéphane Vigouroux, Pierre Bordigoni, Patrice Céballos, Éric Deconinck, Nathalie Dehdin, Bernard Rio, Jacques‐Olivier Bay, Cécile Pautas, Frédéric Garban, Norbert Ifrah, Felipe Suárez, Gaëlle Guillerm, Nathalie Contentin, Jean Bourhis, Marc Bernard, Jérôme Cornillon, Anne Huynh, Ibrahim Yakoub‐Agha, Anne Sîrvent, L Fouillard, Agnès Buzyn

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsHotel Dieu Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCumulative incidenceTransplantationInternal medicineSurgeryHematopoietic stem cell transplantationIncidence (geometry)Retrospective cohort studyAutologous stem-cell transplantationGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 2359 Background: The role of allogenic stem cell transplantation (SCT) for the treatment of relapsed/refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) remains controversial. Patients and Methods: we retrospectively analyzed 227 patients who underwent alloSCT between April 1998 and December 2008 for relapsed HL and whose data were reported in the French Society of Marrow Transplantation and Cellular Therapy registry. Thirty-six patients underwent alloSCT with Myeloabaltive Conditioning (MAC) and 191 with Reduced Intensity Conditioning (RIC). Median age was 31 years (13-63 years). Median number of previous therapy regimens was 4. Eighty-nine percent of patients had received a previous Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT). Results: Median follow up was 36 months (2-103 months). The 1-year cumulative incidence of non-relapse mortality (NRM) was 17%. Estimated 3 years Overall Survival (OS), Progression free Survival (PFS) and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) were 55%, 36%, 47%, respectively for the entire cohort. In multivariate analysis, there was no difference in outcome between patients in CR and PR at time of transplantation for OS (67% vs 68% at 3 years) and PFS (50% vs 40% at 3 years, p=ns). However, patients with chemoresistant disease (stable or progressive) at time of transplantation had a significantly shorter PFS (13% at 3 years p<0.0001) and OS (30% at 3 years p<0.0001) than patients with chemosensitive disease (CR and PR). Moreover, patients with chemoresistant disease have a higher CIR and NRM compared to patients with chemosensitive disease: 62% versus 40% (p<0.0001) and 28% versus 13% (p=0.015) at 3 years. Interestingly, in multivariate analysis for OS, previous ASCT occurring less than 3 months before allogenic stem cell transplantation was found to be associated with better outcome (HR=0.51 (0.27 to 0.99, 95% CI), p=0.046). Use of cord blood was associated with poor outcome (HR =2.74 (1.12 to 6.71, 95%CI), p=0.027). However, there was no impact of chronic Graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) on outcome when cGVHD was studied as a time-dependent covariate. Conclusion: This study shows that Allogenic SCT especially following reduced intensity conditioning is a feasible option for relapsed HL. Disease status at transplantation remains the major risk factor for outcome. In addition our data suggest that allogenic SCT should be performed as early as possible after ASCT. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→