Population-based real-world registry study to evaluate clinical outcomes of chronic graft-versus-host disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) is a serious immune-mediated complication after allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), but in patients with malignancy, cGVHD development is associated with superior survival. Lack of reliable biomarkers and clinical underreporting means there is insufficient understanding of cGVHD clinical outcomes and balance between cGVHD treatment and maintaining beneficial graft-versus-tumour effects. METHODS: We performed a Swedish population-wide registry study following patients who underwent allogeneic HSCT 2006-2015. cGVHD status was retrospectively classified using a real-world method based on the timing and extent of systemic immunosuppressive treatment. RESULTS: cGVHD incidence among patients surviving ≥6 months post-HSCT (n = 1246) was 71.9%, significantly higher than previously reported. 5-year overall survival in patients surviving ≥6 months post-HSCT was 67.7%, 63.3%, and 65.3%, in non-, mild, and moderate-severe cGVHD, respectively. Non-cGVHD patients had a mortality risk almost five-fold higher compared to moderate-severe cGVHD patients 12-months post-HSCT. Moderate-severe cGVHD patients had greater healthcare utilization compared with mild and non cGVHD patients. CONCLUSION: cGVHD incidence was high among HSCT survivors. Non-cGVHD patients had higher mortality during the first 6 months of follow-up; however, moderate-severe cGVHD patients had more comorbidities and healthcare utilization. This study highlights the urgent need for new treatments and real-time methods to monitor effective immunosuppression after HSCT.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".