Selection and management of older patients with acute myeloid leukemia treated with glasdegib plus low-dose cytarabine: expert panel review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Glasdegib, in combination with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC), is the first smoothened inhibitor approved for treatment of acute myeloid leukemia. Glasdegib plus LDAC is indicated for patients in whom therapy options are limited, e.g. older patients and those ineligible for intensive chemotherapy due to preexisting comorbidities. This review summarizes the recommendations of a panel of hemato-oncologists regarding the selection of patients best suited for treatment with glasdegib plus LDAC and the management during therapy with this combination. The panel considered the impact of concomitant medications and comorbidities during treatment with glasdegib plus LDAC, and discussed common adverse events (AEs) associated with glasdegib plus LDAC. Management strategies for AEs discussed by the panel included dose modifications, supportive care therapies, and prophylactic treatments. Finally, the panel highlighted the importance of patient communication and education regarding the possible AEs that may occur during treatment.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".