Practice Patterns of Physician Treatment for Pediatric Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) is a rare disease in children for which pediatric evidence-based guidelines are lacking. We designed an anonymous survey for practicing pediatric oncologists and bone marrow transplantation (BMT) physicians to assess their willingness to recommend BMT for a patient with CML based on various clinical scenarios. A total of 274 physicians responded to the survey (13.4% response rate). Nearly all pediatric oncologists and BMT physicians recommended against BMT at time of diagnosis of CML in the chronic phase, with only 8.0% and 1.9% recommending BMT if a matched sibling donor (MSD) and a matched unrelated donor (MUD), respectively, was available. Similarly, after a first poor response to tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy or hematologic relapse, physicians continued to recommend against BMT (39.5% and 23.3% recommended BMT in patients with a matched sibling donor and matched unrelated donor, respectively). However, 81.7% and 69.8% of respondents would recommend BMT after 2 hematologic relapses on TKI therapy, if an MSD and an MUD, respectively, were available. In addition, there was great interest in developing a clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of stopping TKIs in children with CML who achieve and maintain a deep molecular response, with 86.7% of respondents stating they would offer such a trial to their pediatric patients. This survey highlights the need for evidence-based, pediatric-specific guidelines for the management of children and adolescents with CML.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".