Cyclophosphamide-glucocorticoids versus lenalidomide-dexamethasone as treatment for multiple myeloma at first relapse after autologous stem cell transplantation – a retrospective analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There have been significant improvements in therapeutic options for relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) over the past two decades, with many novel agents including proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory agents, and more recently monoclonal antibodies demonstrating efficacy in this setting. However, there is a paucity of real-world data comparing outcomes seen in patients treated with novel agents as opposed to older agents. We report a historical single center cohort of patients diagnosed with myeloma between the years 1991-2012 in order to explore possible differences in outcomes. A total of 139 patients who underwent stem cell transplantation were included in our study. In our study, 88 patients were treated with cyclophosphamide and steroids alone at relapse whereas 51 patients were treated with Len-Dex. In the multivariate analysis, TTNT was shorter for patients who received Cyclo compared to Len-Dex (HR=1.74; 95% CI, 1.01-2.99; p=0.04); however, we could not detect an overall survival benefit (HR=1.20; 95% CI 0.63-2.29; p=0.57). Adverse event rates were similar in the two groups. In this retrospective single center analysis, Len-Dex was associated with longer TTNT compared with Cyclo at first relapse following autoSCT in MM; however its effect on overall survival in this setting was less clear.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it