MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prognostic factors of overall (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in remission after intensive chemotherapy (IC): Multivariate analyses from the QUAZAR AML-001 trial of oral azacitidine (Oral-AZA).

2021· article· en· W3168345821 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gail J. Roboz, Andrew H. Wei, Farhad Ravandi, Christopher Pocock, Pau Montesinos, Hervé Dombret, Kimmo Porkka, Ignazia La Torre, Barry Skikne, C.L. Beach, Hartmut Döhner

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBristol-Myers Squibb Canada
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineProportional hazards modelMultivariate analysisMyeloid leukemiaNeutropeniaInduction chemotherapyUnivariate analysisChemotherapyGastroenterologyOncology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7014 Background: Demographic and disease factors influence outcomes for patients (pts) with AML. In the phase 3 QUAZAR AML-001 trial, Oral-AZA significantly prolonged OS and RFS vs. placebo (PBO) for pts with AML in first remission after IC (Wei, NEJM, 2020). Univariate analyses showed OS and RFS benefits with Oral-AZA vs. PBO across pt subgroups defined by baseline (BL) characteristics. MV analyses were performed to identify BL characteristics independently predictive of OS/RFS in QUAZAR AML-001, and to assess Tx effects of Oral-AZA vs. PBO on survival when adjusted for BL factors. Methods: Pts were aged ≥55 yrs with AML in complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) after induction ± consolidation. Within 4 months of CR/CRi, pts were randomized 1:1 to receive Oral-AZA 300 mg or PBO for 14d/28d cycle. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate Tx effects of Oral-AZA vs. PBO on OS and RFS, adjusting for BL age, sex, ECOG PS score, cytogenetic risk at diagnosis (Dx), prior MDS, geographic region, CR/CRi after induction (per investigator) and at BL (per sponsor), MRD status, receipt of consolidation, number of consolidation cycles, platelet count, and ANC. In a stepwise procedure, randomized Tx and BL variables were selected incrementally into a Cox model if P ≤ 0.25. After each addition, the contribution of the covariate adjusted for other covariates in the model was evaluated and retained in the model if P ≤ 0.15. Results : Oral-AZA Tx remained a significant independent predictor of improved OS (HR 0.70) and RFS (HR 0.57) vs. PBO after controlling for BL characteristics (Table). MRD status, cytogenetic risk, and pt age were each also independently predictive of OS and RFS. Response after induction (CR vs. CRi) and BL ANC were predictive of OS but not RFS, whereas prior MDS, CR/CRi at BL, and number of consolidation cycles were only predictive of RFS. Conclusions: Tx with Oral-AZA reduced the risk of death by 30% and risk of relapse by 43% vs. PBO independent of BL characteristics. Cytogenetic risk at Dx, MRD status, and pt age also independently predicted survival outcomes. Clinical trial information: NCT01757535. [Table: see text]

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.111
GPT teacher head0.441
Teacher spread0.330 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical Oncology→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→