MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3212959964 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-146838

A Validated Risk Prediction Model for Bone Fragility in Children with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

2021· article· en· W3212959964 on OpenAlexaffabout
Emma J. Verwaaijen, Jinhui Ma, Hester A. de Groot‐Kruseman, Rob Pieters, Inge M. van der Sluis, Jenneke E. van Atteveld, Jacqueline Halton, Conrad V. Fernandez, Annelies Hartman, Róbert de Jonge, Maarten Lequin, M.L. te Winkel, Stephanie A. Atkinson, Nathalie Alos, Ronald D. Barr, Ronald Grant, John Hay, Adam M. Huber, Josephine Ho, Jacob L. Jaremko, Khaldoun Koujok, Bianca Lang, Mary‐Ann Matzinger, Nazih Shenouda, Frank Rauch, Celia Rodd, Marry M. van den Heuvel‐Eibrink, Saskia M.F. Pluijm, Leanne M. Ward

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaMcMaster UniversityBrock UniversityUniversity of AlbertaUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoDalhousie UniversityUniversity of OttawaMcGill UniversityUniversity of CalgaryChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBone mineralOsteoporosisCohortPediatricsOsteopeniaLogistic regressionBone densityPopulationStandard scoreInternal medicinePhysical therapySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Due to bone fragility, children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have a 6-fold greater fracture risk during therapy compared to peers. Osteoporotic fractures are a concern, as they lead to adverse health outcomes including pain, loss of height due to vertebral deformity, and (transient) disability. In previous studies, lower lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS BMD) at ALL diagnosis was found to be prognostic for the occurrence of future fractures. However, routinely performing dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) in each newly diagnosed child is not universally feasible. The aim of this study is to develop and validate an easy to use clinical risk prediction model for low lumbar spine bone mineral density (LS BMD Z-score ≤-2.0) at diagnosis, as an important indicator for fracture risk and further treatment-related BMD aggravation. Methods Children treated for ALL according to the Dutch Childhood Oncology Group (DCOG-ALL9; model development) protocol (n=249; median age: 7.6 years [range: 4.0-16.6 years]) and children from the Canadian STeroid-Associated Osteoporosis in the Pediatric Population (STOPP; model validation) cohort (n=99; median age: 7.3 years [range: 4.0-16.6 years]) were included in this study. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop the prediction model for low LS BMD at diagnosis, defined as a Z-score ≤-2.0 (evaluated with DXA). Candidate predictors included sex, age, height and weight Z-scores at diagnosis of ALL. The receiver operating characteristic area under the curve (AUC) was assessed for model performance. To confirm the association between low LS BMD at diagnosis and bone fragility during and shortly following ALL therapy, we performed multivariable logistic regression analyses. The dependent variables were: one or more symptomatic fractures from ALL diagnosis to 12 months following treatment cessation and low LS BMD at cessation of treatment. In addition, because of homogeneity in the intended glucocorticoid doses, we combined data from the DCOG-ALL9 and STOPP cohorts and performed multivariable pooled cohort analyses (meta-analysis). Potential associations between the six-month cumulative glucocorticoid dose and fractures that occurred in the first year of therapy, were explored. Furthermore, we assessed potential associations between the cumulative glucocorticoid dose at cessation of therapy, and the endpoints 'low LS BMD at therapy cessation' and 'fractures that occurred during treatment and within 12 months following treatment cessation'. Results The prediction model for low LS BMD at diagnosis included weight Z-scores (β = -0.70) and age (β = -0.10) at diagnosis. This model had an AUC of 0.71 (0.63 to 0.78) in the DCOG-ALL9 cohort, and resulted in correct identification of 71% of patients with low LS BMD at ALL diagnosis. Validation on the STOPP cohort showed an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI = 0.63 to 0.84). To calculate the probability of low LS BMD at ALL diagnosis for an individual patient, an online calculator is available at http://lsbmd-risk-calculator.azurewebsites.net/ We confirmed that low LS BMD at diagnosis is associated with LS BMD at treatment cessation (OR = 5.9; 95% CI = 3.2 to 10.9) and with symptomatic fractures (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3 to 2.4) that occurred from diagnosis until 12 months following treatment cessation. In pooled meta-analysis, lower LS BMD at diagnosis (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.1 to 2.4) and six-month cumulative glucocorticoid dose (OR = 1.9, 95% CI = 1.1 to 3.3, for every gram increase) were associated with symptomatic fractures that occurred in the first year of therapy. Higher cumulative glucocorticoid dose at cessation of therapy (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.2 to 2.0, for every gram increase), lower LS BMD Z-scores at diagnosis (OR = 7.9, 95% CI = 4.8 to 13.1) and higher age at diagnosis (OR = 1.6, 95% CI = 1.4 to 1.8), were associated with low LS BMD at cessation of therapy. Conclusion We developed and successfully validated a risk prediction model for low LSBMD at diagnosis in children aged 4-18 years with ALL. This is important because low LS BMD at diagnosis was strongly associated with bone fragility and fractures during and shortly following treatment for ALL. Our easy to use prediction model, can facilitate awareness and early identification of bone fragility in individual pediatric ALL patients, without performing DXA examination. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207