MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4308721350 · doi:10.3390/curroncol29110670

Assessing Pretransplant and Posttransplant Therapy Response in Multiple Myeloma Patients

2022· article· en· W4308721350 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cristina Potre, Ema Borsi, Ovidiu Potre, Miruna Samfireag, Dan Costăchescu, Felix Bratosin, Cristina Secoșan, Rodica Anamaria Negrean

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineThalidomideMultiple myelomaLenalidomideDexamethasoneBortezomibInternal medicineAutologous stem-cell transplantationCyclophosphamideOncologyTransplantationHematologySurgeryChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic cancer defined by an abnormal development of clonal plasma cells in the bone marrow, releasing vast quantities of immunoglobulins and different proteins. In the majority of patients, MM remains incurable despite decades of medical improvement and a number of treatment breakthroughs. Frontline standard-of-care has little long-term success, with the majority of patients eventually relapsing, although the overall progression-free survival (PFS) has improved significantly in the last ten years. Patients who are eligible for a transplant have the highest PFS rate at 5 years, depending on medication response and other various factors that are yet to be discovered. Therefore, the current study aimed to evaluate the response to VCD (bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone) and VTD (bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone) used as pretransplant regimens, as well as to compare responses between thalidomide and lenalidomide used as maintenance therapy posttransplant. This retrospective study was performed on a group of 105 hospitalized patients in the Hematology Department of the Timisoara Municipal Emergency Clinical Hospital between January 2016 and December 2021. Data was collected from the paper records of patients with MM who were under-followed. The treatment regimens used as induction therapy were either VCD or VTD if cyclophosphamide was contraindicated. Of the 105 patients, 27 became eligible for bone marrow transplantation. Furthermore, they received maintenance therapy which was based on either lenalidomide with dexamethasone or thalidomide with dexamethasone. Of the 62 patients treated with VTD, 17.7% were in complete remission before stem cell transplantation. Of the 43 patients treated with VCD, 37.2% were in complete remission. The 5-year mean progression-free survival (PFS) in the entire cohort was better in the group treated with the VTD regimen (31.6 vs. 27.2 months). However, in the 27 patients undergoing maintenance after ASCT, the PFS with thalidomide was 35.5 months (95% CI = 27-42), while the PFS rate in those receiving maintenance treatment with lenalidomide was 46.1 months (95% CI = 20-73). VCD proved to be superior to VTD in inducing complete pretransplant responses. Regarding maintenance therapy, patients from the lenalidomide group had superior responses compared with those under thalidomide.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.274 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Oncology→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→