MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Secondary CNS relapse in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: defining high-risk patients and optimization of prophylaxis strategies

2017· review· en· W2778392516 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHematology · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaLymphomaOncologyInternal medicineCentral nervous systemIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite improvement in survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with the introduction of rituximab, central nervous system (CNS) relapse continues to represent a clinical challenge. A number of studies have evaluated clinical risk factors in an attempt to identify high-risk patients to direct CNS staging investigations and consider prophylaxis strategies. The CNS International Prognostic Index is a robust and reproducible risk model that can identity patients at high risk of CNS relapse, but its specificity remains limited. Studies are emerging of biomarkers that predict CNS relapse that can be integrated with clinical risk models to better identify high-risk patients for CNS-directed prophylaxis strategies. Because CNS parenchymal disease is the predominant compartment, prophylaxis should include deeply penetrant drugs such as high-dose methotrexate. However, this has been associated with toxicity and has limited use in older patients. Novel therapies are being tested in primary CNS lymphoma with encouraging results and may represent rational strategies to be further explored in the prophylaxis setting.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.918
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.274 · 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