A risk model for relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL integrating clinical risk factors and pretransplant Deauville score
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are limited data regarding the combined value of the pretransplant Deauville score (DS) from a positron emission tomography scan and clinical risk factors in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). We performed a retrospective analysis to assess the prognostic role of pretransplant DS in patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive NHL who underwent salvage chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We identified 174 eligible patients between January 2013 and March 2019. In multivariable analysis, pretransplant DS, B symptoms, and secondary International Prognostic Index (sIPI) were independent risk factors for event-free survival (EFS). These variables were used to derive an integrated risk score that categorized 166 patients with available information for all risk factors into 3 groups: low (n = 92; 55.4%), intermediate (n = 48; 28.9%), and high (n = 26; 15.7%). The new prognostic index showed a strong association with EFS (low-risk vs intermediate-risk hazard ratio [HR], 3.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.16-7.17; P < .001; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.83; 95% CI, 5.81-20.19; P < .001) and outperformed models based on clinical risk factors or DS alone. These results were validated in 60 patients from an independent external cohort (low-risk vs intermediate-risk HR, 4.04; 95% CI, 1.51-10.82; P = .005; low-risk vs high-risk HR, 10.49; 95% CI, 4.11-26.73; P < .001). We propose and validate a new prognostic index that risk-stratifies patients undergoing salvage chemotherapy followed by ASCT, thereby identifying patients at high risk for posttransplant treatment failure.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".