MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Prognosis and Application of Day 14 Bone Marrow Results in Acute Myeloid Leukemia Induction

2017· article· en· W3103885896 on OpenAlexaffabout
James T. England, Lalit Saini, Donna E. Hogge, Artur Szkotak, Joseph Brandwein, Monika Hudoba, Nadejda Medvedev, Tyler Smith, Roland Kristine, David Sanford

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematological disorders and diagnostics
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyLeukemia & Lymphoma Society of CanadaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineBone marrowGastroenterologyUnivariate analysisEtoposideMyeloidMyeloid leukemiaMitoxantroneLeukemiaOncologyChemotherapyMultivariate analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: The 2017 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines for Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) recommend performing a bone marrow aspirate (BMA) and trephine biopsy (BMTB) 14-21 days after starting induction therapy (commonly referred to as a “Day 14 [D14] marrow”). Those who do not achieve a hypoplastic marrow, with cellularity Methods: Patients with AML aged 18-70 years undergoing induction therapy with standard “7+3” regimens at Vancouver General Hospital or University of Alberta Hospital from 2007-2015 and 2005-2015 respectively were included. D14 cellularity was determined on BMTB and blast percentage (blast %) was assessed by morphology on BMA and BMTB. We examined outcomes by three D14 risk categories: 1. blast % ( Results: 546 patients were identified with 486 (89.0%) undergoing a D14 BM (Table 1). On the D14 BM, 190 patients had blasts ≥5%, 96 had cellularity ≥20% (with 12 patients also having blasts In univariate analysis, D14 low-risk categories were associated with higher CR/CRi rates (D14 blasts 131 patients (27%) underwent a second IC, most commonly with etoposide/cyclophosphamide (n=48) or mitoxantrone/etoposide (n=48) regimens based upon the results of the D14 BM. CR/CRi rates for patients receiving 1 vs. 2 ICs in high risk D14 groups were: 43% vs. 62%, p=0.01 (D14 blasts ≥ 5%), 67% vs. 55%, p=0.33 (D14 cellularity >20%) and 38% vs. 55%, p=0.35 (D14 blasts ≥5% and cellularity ≥20%). In patients with ≥5% residual blasts on D14 marrow but Conclusion: D14 BM results are prognostic for achievement of CR/CRi following induction therapy for AML. D14 blasts Download : Download high-res image (227KB) Download : Download full-size image Disclosures Hogge: Novartis, Roche, and Sanofi: Consultancy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHematological disorders and diagnosticsFrench-language works237,207