Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in the Treatment of Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Updated 2019 Evidence-Based Review from the American Society for Transplantation and Cellular Therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The role of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is reviewed and critically evaluated in this systematic evidence-based review. Specific criteria were used for searching the published literature and for grading the quality and strength of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations. A panel of ALL experts developed consensus on the treatment recommendations based on the evidence. Allogeneic HCT offers a survival benefit in selected patients with ALL, and this review summarizes the standard indications as well as the areas of controversy. There is now greater experience with pediatric-inspired chemotherapy regimens that has transformed upfront therapy for adult ALL, resulting in higher remission rates and overall survival. This in turn has increased the equipoise around decision making for ALL in first complete remission (CR1) when there is no measurable residual disease (MRD) at the end of induction and/or consolidation. Randomized studies are needed for adults with ALL to compare allogeneic HCT in CR1 with pediatric-inspired chemotherapy alone. Indications for transplantation in the evolving landscape of MRD assessments and novel targeted and immune therapeutics remain important areas of investigation.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".