Age no bar: A CIBMTR analysis of elderly patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation for multiple myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Upfront autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHCT) remains an important therapy in the management of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), a disease of older adults. Methods The authors investigated the outcomes of AHCT in patients with MM who were aged ≥70 years. The Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) database registered 15,999 patients with MM in the United States within 12 months of diagnosis during 2013 through 2017; a total of 2092 patients were aged ≥70 years. Nonrecurrence mortality (NRM), disease recurrence and/or progression (relapse; REL), progression‐free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were modeled using Cox proportional hazards models with age at transplantation as the main effect. Because of the large sample size, a P value <.01 was considered to be statistically significant a priori. Results An increase in AHCT was noted in 2017 (28%) compared with 2013 (15%) among patients aged ≥70 years. Although approximately 82% of patients received melphalan (Mel) at a dose of 200 mg/m2 overall, 58% of the patients aged ≥70 years received Mel at a dose of 140 mg/m2. On multivariate analysis, patients aged ≥70 years demonstrated no difference with regard to NRM (hazard ratio [HR] 1.3; 99% confidence interval [99% CI], 1‐1.7 [P = .06]), REL (HR, 1.03; 99% CI, 0.9‐1.1 [P = 0.6]), PFS (HR, 1.06; 99% CI, 1‐1.2 [P = 0.2]), and OS (HR, 1.2; 99% CI, 1‐1.4 [P = .02]) compared with the reference group (those aged 60‐69 years). In patients aged ≥70 years, Mel administered at a dose of 140 mg/m2 was found to be associated with worse outcomes compared with Mel administered at a dose of 200 mg/m2, including day 100 NRM (1% [95% CI, 1%‐2%] vs 0% [95% CI, 0%‐1%]; P = .003]), 2‐year PFS (64% [95% CI, 60%‐67%] vs 69% [95% CI, 66%‐73%]; P = .003), and 2‐year OS (85% [95% CI, 82%‐87%] vs 89% [95% CI, 86%‐91%]; P = .01]), likely representing frailty. Conclusions The results of the current study demonstrated that AHCT remains an effective consolidation therapy among patients with MM across all age groups.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".