MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

AAML0523: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group On the Efficacy of Clofarabine in Combination with Cytarabine in Pediatric Patients with Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

2012· article· en· W4248279213 on OpenAlexaff
Todd Cooper, Todd A. Alonzo, Robert B. Gerbing, John P. Perentesis, James A. Whitlock, Jeffrey W. Taub, Terzah M. Horton, Alan S. Gamis, Bassem I. Razzouk

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClofarabineMedicineInternal medicineCytarabineGastroenterologyNeutropeniaRibonucleotide reductaseOncologySurgeryMyeloid leukemiaToxicityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3604 Background: Clofarabine is a nucleoside analog that potently inhibits ribonucleotide reductase and DNA polymerase α. The biochemical modulation of cytarabine by clofarabine via inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase is well established, and this combination has been studied in adults with relapsed AML1, 2. We have previously reported the toxicity profile of the Phase I portion of AAML05233. Here, we report the Phase II portion of AAML0523 in children with relapsed AML. Study Design: Clofarabine and cytarabine were administered on days 1–5. Cytarabine (1 gm/m2) was given 4 hours after the start of clofarabine to optimize the biochemical modulation of ara-CTP. Patients were encouraged to receive 2 cycles of induction therapy, based on previous trials demonstrating response after a second cycle in those without response after the first4. The Phase I portion of AAML0523 determined that clofarabine at a dose of 52 mg/m2/day can be given safely in combination with cytarabine3. Results: 47 eligible AML patients were enrolled at the dose of 52 mg/m2 of clofarabine. One patient did not have bone marrow evaluation after course 1 and therefore was not evaluable for response. The median age at study entry was 14.1, the median length of CR1 was 306 days (range 35–2212), 44 patients were in first relapse, and 3 were primary refractory. Only 4 had prior stem cell transplant. The most common toxicities grade 3 or higher were: febrile neutropenia (36%), diarrhea (12%), nausea (11%), infection (51%), and hypokalemia (24 %). Four patients had capillary leak syndrome after the first cycle. There were no treatment-related deaths in AML patients. Response was measured as best response after up to 2 cycles of Induction. Of the 46 patients evaluable for response, 16 (35%) had complete response (CR), 5 (11%) CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp), 14 stable disease (SD), and 11 had progressive disease (PD). Of the 21 responders, 11 had SD after induction course 1 but then achieved CR or CRp after course 2. However, 8 non-responders who achieved SD after course 1 were then taken off study, mostly at physician's discretion to pursue other therapy. Four patients met conventional criteria for CRi (complete response with incomplete count recovery) and then received stem cell transplant, but this was not included among the study response definitions. Among all responders, median time to relapse was 374.5 days (range 42–2212), 16 went on to HSCT, and 3-year overall survival was 51±34%. Conclusions: The overall response rate (ORR) of 46 % (21 patients) did not meet the statistical threshold for efficacy of 50% (23 patients) developed for this study. Factors involving study compliance (8 SD patients did not receive course 2; 4 CRi patients did not await count recovery) may have affected the ORR. However, this non-anthracycline salvage regimen may be effective as a bridge to potentially curative HSCT in this high risk patient population. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Clofarabine is approved for use in ALL in second relapse. This presentation will discuss a clinical trial using clofarabine for children with AML in first relapse.

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research→French-language works237,207→