A validated novel continuous prognostic index to deliver stratified medicine in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Risk stratification is essential for the delivery of optimal treatment in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. However, current risk stratification algorithms dichotomize variables and apply risk factors independently, which may incorrectly assume identical associations across biologically heterogeneous subsets and reduce statistical power. Accordingly, we developed and validated a prognostic index (PIUKALL) that integrates multiple risk factors and uses continuous data. We created discovery (n = 2405) and validation (n = 2313) cohorts using data from 4 recent trials (UKALL2003, COALL-03, DCOG-ALL10, and NOPHO-ALL2008). Using the discovery cohort, multivariate Cox regression modeling defined a minimal model including white cell count at diagnosis, pretreatment cytogenetics, and end-of-induction minimal residual disease. Using this model, we defined PIUKALL as a continuous variable that assigns personalized risk scores. PIUKALL correlated with risk of relapse and was validated in an independent cohort. Using PIUKALL to risk stratify patients improved the concordance index for all end points compared with traditional algorithms. We used PIUKALL to define 4 clinically relevant risk groups that had differential relapse rates at 5 years and were similar between the 2 cohorts (discovery: low, 3% [95% confidence interval (CI), 2%-4%]; standard, 8% [95% CI, 6%-10%]; intermediate, 17% [95% CI, 14%-21%]; and high, 48% [95% CI, 36%-60%; validation: low, 4% [95% CI, 3%-6%]; standard, 9% [95% CI, 6%-12%]; intermediate, 17% [95% CI, 14%-21%]; and high, 35% [95% CI, 24%-48%]). Analysis of the area under the curve confirmed the PIUKALL groups were significantly better at predicting outcome than algorithms employed in each trial. PIUKALL provides an accurate method for predicting outcome and more flexible method for defining risk groups in future studies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".