Osteonecrosis in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia: a national questionnaire study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To establish prevalence, management and long-term outcomes of osteonecrosis (ON) in young people diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) between 2003 and 2011. DESIGN SETTING PARTICIPANTS: This study assessed ON in 3113 patients aged 1-24 years who participated in the UK national leukaemia study UKALL 2003. UKALL 2003 recruited patients in 40 UK hospitals between 2003 and 2011 and included patients between ages 1 and 25 diagnosed with ALL. RESULTS: 170 patients were diagnosed with ON, giving a prevalence of 5.5%. The multivariable analysis showed that the risk of ON was highest for children aged between 10 and 20 years (ages 10-15 years, OR 23.7, 95% CI 14.8 to 38.0; ages 16-20 years, OR 22.5, 95% CI 12.7 to 39.8, compared with age <10 years). Among ethnic groups, Asian patients had the highest risk of ON (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.6, compared with White patients). Eighty-five per cent of patients with ON had multifocal ON. Thirty-eight per cent of patients with ON required surgery and 19% of patients with ON required a hip replacement. Fifteen per cent of patients who had surgery still describe significant disability or use of a wheelchair. CONCLUSIONS: ON has considerable morbidity for patients being treated for ALL, with a high burden of surgery. Age and ethnicity were found to be the most significant risk factors for development of ON, with Asian patients and patients aged 10-20 years at diagnosis of ALL at greatest risk. These results will help risk stratify patients at diagnosis of ALL, and help tailor future prospective studies in this area.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".