MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4245051263 · doi:10.1182/blood-2020-134622

Does Upfront Autologous Stem Cell Transplant at First Relapse Improve Outcome in Transplant Eligible Follicular Lymphoma Patients Who Relapse within 24 Months

2020· article· en· W4245051263 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ayel Yahya, D. Blair Macdonald, Osman Radhwi

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineFollicular lymphomaInternal medicineRituximabChemoimmunotherapyOncologyHematopoietic stem cell transplantationTransplantationLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canadian adults, Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common subtype of NHL, Approximately 20% of patients with FL experience progression of disease (POD) within 2 years of first line chemoimmunotherapy. Those patients have an expected overall survival of less than 5 years.The optimal second-line treatment for these high-risk patients is unclear. We analyzed data from the blood and bone marrow transplantation Center at the Ottawa Hospital (TOH) to determine whether autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (ASCT) as upfront therapy for first relapse can improve outcomes in this high-risk FL subgroup. We identified 17 patients who underwent upfront ASCT between February 2012 and February 2019. All of them had relapsed within 24 months after their 1st Rituximab-based chemotherapy. The OS at 2-year and 5-year was 86.2% (95% CI: 55-96) and 71.8% (95% CI: 31-91) respectively. The PFS at 2 year and 5 year was 62.6% (95% CI: 35-81) and 53.6% (95% CI: 25-75) respectively. We demonstrate improved OS when receiving autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant as up front at first relapse in transplant eligible follicular lymphoma who relapse within 24 months of first line therapy. However; the sample size considerably small but the results look promising. Combining other center experience the confidence intervals are wide, indicating that the sample size was too small. Considering a single center, the result looks promising, but the data need to be replicated with a larger sample size. Disclosures MacDonald: Roche Canada: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria.

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)0.002
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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