Quality of life in pediatric acute myeloid leukemia: Report from the Children's Oncology Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Objectives were used to describe guardian proxy-report and child self-report quality of life (QoL) during chemotherapy for pediatric acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. METHODS: Patients enrolled on the phase 3 AML trial AAML1031 who were 2-18 years of age with English-speaking guardians were eligible. Instruments used were the PedsQL Generic Core Scales, Acute Cancer Module, and Multidimensional Fatigue Scale. Assessments were obtained at the beginning of Induction 1 and following completion of cycles 2-4. Potential predictors of QoL included the total number of nonhematological grade 3-4 Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE) submissions. RESULTS: There were 505 eligible guardians who consented to participate and 348 of their children provided at least one self-report assessment. The number of submitted CTCAE toxicities was significantly associated with worse physical health summary scores (β ± standard error (SE) -3.00 ± 0.69; P < 0.001) and general fatigue (β ± SE -2.50 ± 0.66; P < 0.001). Older age was significantly associated with more fatigue (β ± SE -0.58 ± 0.25; P = 0.022). Gender, white race, Hispanic ethnicity, private insurance status, risk status, bortezomib assignment, and duration of neutropenia were not significantly associated with QoL. DISCUSSION: The number of CTCAE toxicities was the primary factor influencing QoL among children with AML. Reducing toxicities should improve QoL; identifying approaches to ameliorate them should be a priority.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".