Treatment patterns and outcomes in adolescents and young adults with nodular lymphocyte‐predominant Hodgkin lymphoma: an <scp>IMPACT</scp> cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We leveraged population-based clinical and healthcare data to identify treatment patterns and long-term outcomes among adolescents and young adults (AYA) with nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL). All Ontario, Canada, AYA aged 15-21 years at diagnosis with NLPHL between 1992 and 2012 were identified, and their detailed clinical data were collected. Linkage to healthcare databases identified additional events (subsequent malignant neoplasms [SMN], relapses and deaths). Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared by locus of care (adult vs. paediatric) and predictors of outcomes determined. Of 1014 AYA with Hodgkin lymphoma, 54 (5.3%) had NLPHL; 15 (27.8%) were treated at a paediatric centre. No paediatric centre patient received radiation only versus 16 (41.0%) of adult centre patients. Excision only was more common in paediatric centres (p < 0.001). The 20-year EFS and OS rates were 82.9% ± 5.2% and 100% respectively. Advanced stage (hazard ratio: 4.9, 95% CI: 1.3-18.4; p = 0.02) was associated with inferior EFS. Although the 25-year cumulative incidence of SMN was 19.3% ± 9.6% for the entire cohort, there were no SMN among the patients treated with excision only. AYA with NLPHL have outstanding long-term survival. Resection alone was rare outside of paediatric institutions but associated with excellent outcomes. Given substantial SMN risks, chemotherapy-sparing and radiation-sparing strategies for appropriate subsets of patients are warranted.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".