Genotype-Specific Minimal Residual Disease Interpretation Improves Stratification in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose Minimal residual disease (MRD) and genetic abnormalities are important risk factors for outcome in acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Current risk algorithms dichotomize MRD data and do not assimilate genetics when assigning MRD risk, which reduces predictive accuracy. The aim of our study was to exploit the full power of MRD by examining it as a continuous variable and to integrate it with genetics. Patients and Methods We used a population-based cohort of 3,113 patients who were treated in UKALL2003, with a median follow-up of 7 years. MRD was evaluated by polymerase chain reaction analysis of Ig/TCR gene rearrangements, and patients were assigned to a genetic subtype on the basis of immunophenotype, cytogenetics, and fluorescence in situ hybridization. To examine response kinetics at the end of induction, we log-transformed the absolute MRD value and examined its distribution across subgroups. Results MRD was log normally distributed at the end of induction. MRD distributions of patients with distinct genetic subtypes were different ( P < .001). Patients with good-risk cytogenetics demonstrated the fastest disease clearance, whereas patients with high-risk genetics and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia responded more slowly. The risk of relapse was correlated with MRD kinetics, and each log reduction in disease level reduced the risk by 20% (hazard ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.83; P < .001). Although the risk of relapse was directly proportional to the MRD level within each genetic risk group, absolute relapse rate that was associated with a specific MRD value or category varied significantly by genetic subtype. Integration of genetic subtype-specific MRD values allowed more refined risk group stratification. Conclusion A single threshold for assigning patients to an MRD risk group does not reflect the response kinetics of the different genetic subtypes. Future risk algorithms should integrate genetics with MRD to accurately identify patients with the lowest and highest risk of relapse.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".