MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384134344 · doi:10.58931/cht.2023.2232

Cellular therapy in CLL/iNHL: Therapeutic agents in the pipeline

2023· article· en· W4384134344 on OpenAlexaffabout
Christopher Lemieux

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Hematology Today · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineChimeric antigen receptorMantle cell lymphomaLymphomaChronic lymphocytic leukemiaOncologyRefractory (planetary science)ImmunologyInternal medicineImmunotherapyLeukemiaImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advanced cellular therapies have been introduced in Canada over the past two years. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is the current standard of care for third-line large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), relapsed/ refractory (RR) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in patients < 26 years old and, more recently, in third-line mantle cell lymphoma. These novel therapies are now gaining more prominence in the treatment of LBCL with recent FDA approval for the second line in patients eligible for stem cell transplant, based on recent Phase 3 trials. Another class of novel immunotherapy agents are bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs) which have been studied in many B-cell malignancies but are not yet approved in Canada. The indolent non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (iNHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) landscape have been evolving over the past few years with many novel therapies being studied and becoming available. However, patients with RR iNHL, as well as patients using Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) and B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL2) inhibitors for refractory CLL continue to have an unmet need for treatment. This article will focus on cellular therapy that will likely be available for use by Canadian clinicians in the near future to treat patients with iNHL and CLL.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.103
Threshold uncertainty score0.205

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 studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Hematology TodaySame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207