Relaps/Refrakter Lenfoma (Mantle Hücreli Lenfoma Hariç) Hastalarında Lenalidomid Bazlı Tedavi Sonuçları: Çok Merkezli Sonuçlar
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relaps/Refrakter Lenfoma (Mantle Hücreli Lenfoma Hariç) Hastalarında Lenalidomid Bazlı Tedavi Sonuçları: Çok Merkezli Sonuçlar Lenalidomide-Based Treatment Results in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Lymphoma (Excluding Mantle Cell Lymphoma): A Multi-Centre ExperienceÖZ Amaç: Lenfomalar, çoğunlukla B hücre kökenli heterojen bir hastalık grubunu temsil eder.Lenalidomid, kemo-immünoterapötik ajanlara talidomidin yapısal bir analoğu olarak dahil edilmiştir.Bu çalışmada amaç, mantle hücreli lenfoma dışı lenfomalarda, lenalidomid ile ilgili gerçek yaşam verilerimizi ortaya çıkarmaktır.Hastalar ve Yöntem: Ocak 2018-Ocak 2020 tarihleri arasında lenfoma tanısı alan hastalar geriye dönük olarak incelendi.Lenalidomid kombine rejimleri şu şekilde gruplandırılmıştır: Lenalidomi -deksametazon (Len-D); lenalidomid-bendamustin (Len-B); lenalidomid-rituksimab (Len-R).Bulgular: On beş (%60.9)hasta Len-D, 6 (%30.4)hasta Len-B ve 2 (%8.7) hasta Len-R aldı.En yaygın yanıt 13 (%56.5)hasta ile progresif hastalık idi, sadece 2 (%8.7) hastada tam yanıt vardı.Sonuç: Lenalidomid, diffüz büyük B hücreli lenfomalar (DBBHL), folliküler lenfoma (FL) ve indolen relaps/refrakter lenfomalar ile relaps/refrakter Hodgkin lenfomada (HL) yeni tedavi seçenekleri arasında yer almaktadır.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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.
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".