MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2979588198 · doi:10.1182/blood.v104.11.915.915

A Prospective Phase II Comparison of Stem Cell Source Using Rituximab, Ifosfamide, Carboplatin, Etoposide (RICE) RE—Induction, Then High Dose Fludarabine, Busulfan (FLUBU) and Autologous (ASCT) or Allogeneic (AlloSCT) Hematopoietic Blood Stem Cell Transplantation for Mantle Cell (MCL) and Relapsed Low-Grade B-Cell Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL).

2004· article· en· W2979588198 on OpenAlexaff
Douglas A. Stewart, Michael Voralia, Ahsan Chaudhry, Oluyemi Jeje, Donald G. Morris, Lynn Savoie, Chris Brown, Wanda Hasagawa, Nizar J. Bahlis, James R. Russell

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCarboplatinInternal medicineIfosfamideEtoposideFludarabineBusulfanSurgeryFollicular lymphomaHematopoietic stem cell transplantationGastroenterologyRituximabUrologyChemotherapyTransplantationOncologyLymphomaCyclophosphamideCisplatin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: A “genetically-randomized” prospective phase II study was designed to compare stem cell source following novel, uniform, and expected low toxicity re-induction and high dose chemotherapy for indolent B-cell NHL. Patients and Methods: Pts with MCL in 1st remission or 1st relapse, or other indolent B-cell lymphoma in 1st or 2nd relapse were eligible providing adequate organ function and age <65 years. Pts received RICE (Rituximab 375mg/m2 d1,8,15,22, Ifosfamide 1.67g/m2 d16-18, Carboplatin AUC=5 d17, Etoposide 100mg/m2 d16-18), with G-CSF d22-30, and apheresis d29-31 if ASCT, then FluBu (Fludarabine 50mg/m² d-6to-2, Busulfan 3.2 mg/kg IV daily d-5to-2) and SCT d0. GVHD prophylaxis for AlloSCT involved ATG 4.5mg/kg, MTX and CSA. Results: The initial 43 pts accrued from 06/2001-03/2004 included Follicular=30, MCL=7, SLL=4, other histology=2. Disease status was 1st remission=2, 1st relapse=18, 2nd relapse=12, 10 refractory=11. The median EFS following most recent prior chemotherapy was 7 mos. RICE resulted in an overall RR of 72%. Blood stem cell source was ASCT=27, donor SCT=16 (related=14, unrelated=1, syngeneic=1). For ASCT, a median of 5.9 (1–14.5) x106 CD34+ cells/kg were collected from 1 (n=17) or 2 (n=10) 15-25L aphereses. Three pts required a second mobilization procedure. 16/24 pts converted from positive to negative marrow biopsies post-RICE. Two pts had NHL detected in the autograft. FluBu resulted in no acute Bearman grade 3-4 RRT(overall 100d non-relapse mortality (NRM)=0% for both ASCT and donor SCT). Median engraftment times were slightly longer post AlloSCT than ASCT (ANC>0.5 = 15 vs 11d, and platelets>20 = 12 vs 9d, respectively). Of 15 AlloSCT pts, grade 3–4 aGVHD occurred in 5 (33%), cGVHD occurred in 64%, and death from extensive cGVHD + infection occurred in 5 pts from 7-13mo post-AlloSCT (overall NRM=33% for AlloSCT). With a median follow-up of 22mo, the 2 year projected outcome of ASCT vs Allo/Syngeneic-SCT for relapse-free survival (RFS) was 64% vs 87% (logrank p=0.48), event-free survival (EFS) 63% vs 52% (logrank p=0.38), and overall survival (OS) 86% vs 46% (logrank p=0.0018), respectively. For relapsed follicular lymphoma only, the 2yr EFS was 61% vs 59% (logrank p=0.49) and OS 100% vs 51% (logrank p=0.0009) for ASCT (n=19) vs Allo/Syngeneic SCT (n=11), respectively. Conclusion: These preliminary results suggest that RICE can "in-vivo" purge autografts but mobilizes blood stem cells only moderately well. RICE-FluBu/ASCT may result in prolonged EFS with significantly less NRM than AlloSCT.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→