PROGNOSIS OF PEDIATRIC NON HODGKIN LYMPHOMAS TREATED WITH FAB/LMB96 IN TERTIARY CENTER, SAUDI ARABIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed at describing prognosis of pediatric B-NHL patients treated with FAB LMB-96 based protocol without dose modification, and to identify possible prognostic factors influencing the outcome and the treatment related toxicities.Methodology: Through a retrospective study design, the researchers traced 48 pediatric cases who had been diagnosed with Mature B-NHL and treated at Prince Nora Oncology Center (PNOC) in the period from January 2007 to December 2016. Data were retrieved from the medical records, radiology images and pathology specimen for cases who met the inclusion criteria. For operational definition, cases were defined according to WHO classification, while staging was performed according to Murphy’s classification. Kaplan Meier survival function analysis was used to determine overall survival and Event Free Survival; and Chi Square test was used to verify significance in the differences according to characteristics of the cases. Findings: Out of all cases (n=48), Saudis formed (85.4%) and male to female ratio was 2.4:1, with a median age at diagnosis of 5.6 years. Most of the cases were diagnosed as Burkitt’s lymphoma (87.5%), mainly in stage III (37.5%) and stage IV (39.6%), chiefly as primary abdominal retro-peritoneal tumors (47.9%). Almost all cases (97.9%) developed chemotherapy related hematologic toxicity and fever neutropenia, and one third (34.8%) had septic shock. At the end of follow-up (median=112 months), there were 40 patients (83.3%) achieved remission, out of them, 6 (12.5%) relapsed. Death was attributed to disease recurrence (3 cases) and treatment related toxicities (4 patients). No statistically significant difference detected in the overall and Event Free survival rates according to their age, gender, histology, biochemical markers, disease locations, staging and FAB group classifications (P >0.05).Conclusion and recommendations: Childhood non-Hodgkin lymphomas are almost all high grade and frequently extranodal. They fall mainly into the categories Burkitt lymphoma, lymphoblastic lymphoma and anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Our findings are comparable with those reported in other international trials
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".