Second Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Post-Transplantation Relapsed Acute Leukemia in Children: A Retrospective EBMT-PDWP Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Outcome data were collected from the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry on 373 children from 120 centers with relapsed leukemia (214 with acute lymphoblastic leukemia [ALL] and 159 with acute myelogenous leukemia [AML]) who underwent second allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) between 2004 and 2013. Overall survival (OS) was 38% at 2 years and 29% at 5 years, and leukemia-free survival (LFS) was 30% at 2 years and 25% at 5 years. Median follow-up after second HSCT was 36.4 months in the ALL group and 50.2 months in the AML group. In the ALL group, OS was 43% at 2 years and 33% at 5 years, and LFS was 34% at 2 years and 31% at 5 years. In the AML group, OS was 32% at 2 years and 24% at 5 years, and LFS was 24% at 2 years and 17% at 5 years. The 2-year nonrelapse mortality (NRM) rate was 22% in the ALL group and 18% in the AML group. Favorable prognostic factors (P < .05) for OS and LFS included >12 months between transplantations and chronic graft-versus-host disease after the first HSCT (in both groups), complete response before the second HSCT (ALL group only), and age >12 years (AML group only). Findings were more consistent over time in the ALL group, with no significant differences between 2-year and 5-year rates of relapse, NRM, and LFS. Children with relapsed acute leukemias have a substantial likelihood of long-term survival following second HSCT. Given the many novel targeted and immunomodulation therapies currently under development, it is important to identify specific patient subpopulations that may benefit from a second HSCT compared with those better suited to new approaches.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".