Prognostic value of disease risk score versus gait speed in older adults with lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Measures of physical function predict survival in older patients with lymphoma but their prognostic ability has not been compared to disease-specific risk scores. We prospectively recruited patients ≥75 years with lymphoma. Patients underwent a frailty screen including 4-m gait speed. Disease-specific risk scores were obtained retrospectively. Among 168 patients, there was no association between disease-specific risk score and survival. Conversely, faster gait speed was significantly associated with survival in the entire cohort (HR = 0.16; 95%CI, 0.06–0.42; p = 0.0003) indicating a HR of 0.63 for an increase in gait speed of 0.25 m/s. When gait speed was added to the DLBCL IPI and FLIPI separately, it was significantly associated with OS (p = 0.004 for DLBCL, p = 0.03 for FLIPI) which increased its predictive power. Our study of older lymphoma patients demonstrates gait speed may improve outcome prediction beyond standard prognostic scores.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".