Bone Marrow Features in Patients With Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treated With Novel Targeted Isocitrate Dehydrogenase 1/2 Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This case report aimed to review the bone marrow features of patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treated with isocitrate dehydrogenase 1/2 ( IDH1/2 ) inhibitors. Five patients with AML treated with an IDH1/2 inhibitor were identified and retrospectively reviewed. We described the morphologic and immunophenotypic findings in the bone marrow, as well as ancillary study results. Two patients showed a hypercellular bone marrow with morphologic and immunophenotypic differentiation of blasts. The bone marrow of one patient displayed a hypoplastic phase. Four of the five patients demonstrated unusual morphologic and/or immunophenotypic populations, including basophilia with mild alterations on the myeloid blasts, a small subset of blasts with expression of T-cell markers not seen in the original immunophenotype, a cluster of differentiation 117 (CD117)-positive progenitor population with erythroid differentiation, and another population reminiscent of erythroid differentiation. Unusual morphologic and immunophenotypic populations can be seen in the bone marrows of patients treated with IDH1/2 inhibitors in the presence or absence of definite residual disease. The significance of these populations is uncertain, but further studies could be helpful to understand the meaning of these findings. World J Oncol. 2019;10(6):226-230 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/wjon1231
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".