MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3206296081 · doi:10.1182/blood.2021011941

A gene expression–based model predicts outcome in children with intermediate-risk classical Hodgkin lymphoma

2021· article· en· W3206296081 on OpenAlexafffund
Rebecca L. Johnston, Anja Mottok, Fong Chun Chan, Aixiang Jiang, Arjan Diepstra, Lydia Visser, Adèle Telenius, Randy D. Gascoyne, Debra L. Friedman, Cindy L. Schwartz, Kara M. Kelly, David W. Scott, Terzah M. Horton, Christian Steidl

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSpinal Cord Injury BC
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthBC Cancer FoundationMichael Smith Health Research BCGenome British ColumbiaChildren’s Oncology GroupPaul G. Allen Frontiers GroupCanadian Cancer Society Research InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGenome CanadaSt. Baldrick's Foundation
KeywordsOncologyInternal medicineMedicineCohortGene expression profilingLymphomaBiologyGene expressionGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is a common malignancy in children and adolescents. Although cHL is highly curable, treatment with chemotherapy and radiation often come at the cost of long-term toxicity and morbidity. Effective risk-stratification tools are needed to tailor therapy. Here, we used gene expression profiling (GEP) to investigate tumor microenvironment (TME) biology, to determine molecular correlates of treatment failure, and to develop an outcome model prognostic for pediatric cHL. A total of 246 formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue biopsies from patients enrolled in the Children's Oncology Group trial AHOD0031 were used for GEP and compared with adult cHL data. Eosinophil, B-cell, and mast cell signatures were enriched in children, whereas macrophage and stromal signatures were more prominent in adults. Concordantly, a previously published model for overall survival prediction in adult cHL did not validate in pediatric cHL. Therefore, we developed a 9-cellular component model reflecting TME composition to predict event-free survival (EFS). In an independent validation cohort, we observed a significant difference in weighted 5-year EFS between high-risk and low-risk groups (75.2% vs 90.3%; log-rank P = .0138) independent of interim response, stage, fever, and albumin. We demonstrate unique disease biology in children and adolescents that can be harnessed for risk-stratification at diagnosis. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00025259.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→