ASCO 2017 Meeting Summary: Updates to Practice-Changing Studies in Untreated Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2017 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology took place in Chicago, Illinois, 2–6 June. At the meeting, results from key studies in the first-line treatment of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL) were presented. Of those studies, two were selected for oral presentations: 9-year follow-up data from the STiL NHL1 trial, which compared the efficacy and safety of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) with those of rituximab plus cyclophosphamide–vincristine–prednisone–doxorubicin (R-CHOP); and 5-year follow-up data from the bright study, which compared BR with R-CHOP and R-CVP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide–vincristine–prednisone) combined. Our meeting report describes the foregoing studies and includes interviews with key investigators, plus commentaries from three Quebec hematologists on the potential effects for Canadian practice.
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 | 0.154 | 0.257 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.012 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.006 |
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".