MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2590520833 · doi:10.1182/blood.v112.11.920.920

Pediatric Patients with Extramedullary Leukemia Involving the Central Nervous System Have a Superior Outcome.

2008· article· en· W2590520833 on OpenAlexaff
Donna L. Johnston, Todd A. Alonzo, Robert B. Gerbing, Beverly J. Lange, William G. Woods

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLeukemiaCentral nervous systemBone marrowChemotherapyPathologyInternal medicineOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Purpose: Extramedullary leukemia (EML), formally known as chloroma, is discrete collections of leukemia cells outside of the bone marrow. EML is often seen within the central nervous system (CNS) and these are often treated in a similar fashion as leukemia cells within the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF). We previously demonstrated that the presence of leukemia cells within the CSF (CNS leukemia) does not affect overall survival. We sought to determine the outcome of patients with central nervous system EML and compare these patients with those with CNS disease and non CNS EML. Methods: Patients enrolled on Children’s Cancer Group protocols 2861, 2891, 2941 and 2961 being treated for de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with intensive timing chemotherapy were classified for the presence of CNS disease as CNS1 (<5 wbc in the CSF without blasts), CNS2 (<5 wbc in the CSF with blasts), or CNS3 (≥ 5 wbc in the CSF with blasts), as well as EML in the CNS (eg orbit, brain, etc) or non-CNS EML (eg skin, lung, etc). These patient’s outcomes were then analyzed. Results: A total of 1459 patients treated with intensive timing chemotherapy were analyzed in this study. At diagnosis, 1113 (76%) were CNS1, 143 (13%) CNS2, 154 (11%) CNS3, 48 (3%) had CNS EML, 57 (4%) had a non-CNS EML, and only 6 patients (0.4%) with CNS EML had CNS3 status. Patients with CNS EML had a significantly higher overall survival from study entry compared to patients with non-CNS EML (83% vs 38%, p<0.001), and compared to CNS3 patients (83% vs 50%, p<0.001). The patients with CNS EML also had a significantly higher event free survival compared to patients with non-CNS EML (65% vs 34%, p<0.001), and compared to CNS3 patients (65% vs 34%, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in relapse risk, bone marrow relapse, isolated CNS relapse, or EML relapse comparing patients with CNS EML and non-CNS EML. CNS EML patients had a significantly lower relapse risk compared to CNS3 patients (29% vs 49%, p=0.025). There was not a significant difference in bone marrow relapse, isolated CNS relapse, or EML relapse comparing these 2 groups of patients. Conclusion: Patients with extramedullary leukemia involving the CNS had a significantly better survival than patients with non-CNS EML or patients with CNS leukemia at diagnosis. This should reassure clinicians caring for these often challenging patients.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.217 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→