MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979597473 · doi:10.1182/blood.v108.11.566.566

Preliminary Results from the North American Acute Promyelocytic Leukemia (APL) Study C9710.

2006· article· en· W2979597473 on OpenAlexaff
Bayard L. Powell, Barry Kurt Moser, Wendy Stock, Robert E. Gallagher, Cheryl L. Willman, Richard M. Stone, Jacob M. Rowe, Steven Coutré, James H. Feusner, John Gregory, Stephen Couban, Frederick R. Appelbaum, Martin S. Tallman, Richard A. Larson

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processes
Canadian institutionsOntario Institute for Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCytarabineInternal medicineAcute promyelocytic leukemiaAdverse effectGastroenterologyDaunorubicinArsenic trioxideRandomized controlled trialLeukemiaSurgeryRetinoic acidChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This randomized phase III clinical trial was designed to evaluate the potential benefit and toxicity of giving two 25-day courses of arsenic trioxide as a first consolidation (0.15 mg/kg/d for 5d each wk for 5 wk) to half of newly diagnosed patients with APL who achieved remission (CR or PR) after induction with oral tretinoin (ATRA; 45 mg/m2/d), daunorubicin (50 mg/m2 IV × 4d), and cytarabine (200 mg/m2 CIV × 7d). Subsequent consolidation included 2 courses of ATRA (45 mg/m2 × 7d) + daunorubicin (50 mg/m2 × 3d; 2d for age < 15 yr) on both arms. CR patients were then randomized to 1 yr of maintenance with ATRA (7d repeated every other wk) with or without 6-mercaptopurine (daily) + methotrexate (wkly). 518 adults (15–79 yr) and 64 children (<15 yr; 11%) with untreated APL were enrolled by one of 5 cooperative groups (CALGB, ECOG, SWOG, COG, NCIC-CTG). Eligibility required demonstration of PML-RARA in one of 3 central labs. 52% were male; 73% were 15–60 yr old and 16% >60 yr old; 81% were white, 7% African American, 4% Hispanic, and 3% Asian. Performance status (PS) was 0 in 48%, 1 in 37%, 2 in 9%, and 3/4 in 6%. Body surface area (BSA) ranged from 0.37 to 3.19 m2. Results by treatment arm have not yet been released by the DSMB. There were 10 lethal adverse events among adults during induction that were either possibly, probably or definitely due to treatment; there were no lethal induction events among children. Maximum hematologic adverse events due to induction treatment were 7% grade (gr) 3 and 78% gr 4; maximum non-hematologic events due to treatment were 62% gr 3 and 23% gr 4. During consolidation therapy, there were no lethal events. Maximum hematologic adverse events due to treatment were 21% gr 3 and 58% gr 4 on the control arm, and 22% gr 3 and 54% gr 4 on the arsenic trioxide containing arm. Maximum non-hematologic adverse events due to consolidation treatment were 28% gr 3 and 5% gr 4 for the control arm and 43% gr 3 and 5% gr 4 for the arsenic trioxide containing arm. No gr 3/4 cardiac QTc prolongation was observed on the arsenic trioxide arm. Overall results confirm the validity of the European risk stratification scheme: Low (WBC ≤10,000 and platelets > 40,000); Intermediate (WBC ≤ 10,000 and platelets ≤40,000); High (WBC >10,000). Death during induction occurred in 2%, 4%, and 16%, respectively, in the 3 risk groups (p<0.0001). Among those who survived induction, relapses occurred within 1 yr in 2%, 3%, and 7%, respectively, by the same risk groups (p=0.07). Results were similar when only adult patients were analyzed (p=0.03 for relapse within first yr). The following factors had no significant relationship with death during induction or relapse within the first yr: PS, gender, extent of infection or bleeding at diagnosis, BSA, creatinine, hemoglobin, %CD56 positivity, and age. In conclusion, the induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapies evaluated in study C9710 were generally well tolerated overall and highly effective over the first year on study. High risk patients with WBC >10,000 require better therapy to reduce both induction mortality and early relapses. Reporting on differences between treatment arms on this trial must await more events and further follow-up.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicRetinoids in leukemia and cellular processesFrench-language works237,207