MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Treatment outcomes in patients older than age 60 with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the nonclinical trial setting.

2012· article· en· W2965591646 on OpenAlexaff
Steven M. Duffy, Puneet Bains, Brian Pavlovitz, Neerja Vajpayee, Nancy Newman, Ajeet Gajra

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsLions Gate Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineMyeloid leukemiaInduction chemotherapyChemotherapyCohortCytarabinePopulationMultivariate analysisLeukemiaOncologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6572 Background: Optimal treatment of older adults with AML remains challenging. While AML tends to be a disease of older adults, this population experiences greater treatment-related toxicity and worse overall survival than younger patients. Only fit older adults enter clinical trials and thus the results may not apply to the entire population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients > 60 years with AML (APL excluded) diagnosed prior to 2008 with IRB approval. The association of clinical factors (age, sex, comorbidities, prior chemotherapy), leukemia (prior myelodysplastic syndrome or myeloproliferative neoplasm, cytogenetics, WBC count), and therapy (induction chemotherapy, palliative chemotherapy, and best supportive care) as they relate to overall survival was evaluated using bivariate and multivariate regression analyses. Results: Of 87 patients (median age 73), 45% were male, 58% had high risk cytogenetics, 38% had prior MDS/MPD, 92% were chemotherapy naive, and 21% were in the high/very high Charlson risk class. The majority (67%) received standard dose induction chemotherapy (IC), 9% received (palliative intent) low-dose chemotherapy (LDC), and 24% received best supportive care (BSC). The median overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was 2.5 months. On bivariate analysis high WBC (>50,000 at presentation) was negatively associated (1.0 vs 2.7 months p <0.01) with survival. OS for IC, LDC, and BSC were 3.1, 2.8, and 0.7 months, respectively (p=0.001). On multivariable analysis, IC conferred longer survival when compared to LDC and BSC combined (OR 0.33 CI 0.2-0.6, p<0.001). High WBC was associated with a decreased survival time (OR 2.96 CI 1.6-5.5, p=0.02). Mortality during induction or consolidation chemotherapy was 38%. At 5-year follow-up, only 4 patients were alive. Conclusions: In a non-clinical trial setting, OS of older adults with AML remains dismal. While IC offers a chance of longer survival, mortality with IC is unacceptably high. Further studies are required to identify and validate tools for risk stratification in older adults with AML as well as to utilize therapies with an improved toxicity profile.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.464
Teacher spread0.371 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→