MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Minimal residual disease comparison between Ig/TCR PCR versus NGS assays in children with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia: A report from the COG AALL1631 study.

2022· article· en· W4281848198 on OpenAlexaff
Thai Hoa Tran, Shalini C. Reshmi, Ilan R. Kirsch, John A. Kairalla, Sarah K. Tasian, Kirk R. Schultz, Elizabeth A. Raetz, Mary Shago, Andrew J. Carroll, Meenakshi Devidas, Stephen P. Hunger, Mignon L. Loh, Lewis B. Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenBC Children's HospitalUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinimal residual diseaseMedicineConcordanceT-cell receptorInternal medicineOncologyImmunologyAcute lymphocytic leukemiaInduction chemotherapyLeukemiaChemotherapyLymphoblastic LeukemiaT cellImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

10023 Background: Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment by immunoglobulin/T-cell receptor (Ig/TCR) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is currently being used in the international pediatric Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ALL) trial EsPhALL2017/AALL1631 for risk stratification. MRD concordance has previously been demonstrated between Ig/TCR PCR and flow cytometry in Ph+ALL. We sought to assess concordance of MRD assessment between conventional Ig/TCR PCR and next-generation sequencing (NGS) assays. Methods: MRD was assessed in all pts on AALL1631 by Ig/TCR PCR at end-induction IB; those with MRD <5x10-4 were classified as standard-risk (SR) and randomized to treatment with imatinib and one of two chemotherapy regimens without hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT), whereas pts with end-induction 1B MRD ≥ 5x10-4 were considered high-risk (HR) and assigned to HSCT after consolidation chemotherapy. Residual diagnostic and end-induction IB samples from consenting pts were assessed for NGS MRD by the clonoSEQ assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies) in blinded fashion and subsequently compared to Ig/TCR MRD to determine concordance as related to MRD-based HSCT recommendations ( ie, MRD ≥ 5x10-4 consistent with HR group assignment). MRD values were calculated using the kappa statistic for agreement above chance. Results: Sixty-seven pts had matched samples available for MRD assessment at end-induction 1B by both Ig/TCR PCR and NGS (Table). NGS MRD was evaluable for all 67 pts and stratified as 62 SR (<5x10-4) and 5 HR (≥5x10-4). In contrast, Ig/TCR PCR results were inevaluable for 3 pts (unsatisfactory sample quality) and indeterminate (positive, but not quantifiable) in 4 pts. Of the remaining 60 pts, 55 met SR and 5 HR criteria using Ig/TCR PCR. There was only 1 discordant case between the two methods for MRD-based HSCT recommendation among these 60 pts with a kappa statistic for agreement above chance of 0.88. Conclusions: NGS and Ig/TCR PCR assays were highly concordant in MRD assessment for risk stratification at a threshold of 5x10-4 in pediatric pts with Ph+ALL enrolled on AALL1631. Of note, the NGS assay yielded MRD results amenable for risk stratification in 100% pts compared to 89.6% for the Ig/TCR PCR methodology. These data support the use of NGS MRD testing for risk stratification in pediatric Ph+ALL.[Table: see text]

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207