Low rate of nonrelapse mortality in under-4-year-olds with ALL given chemotherapeutic conditioning for HSCT: a phase 3 FORUM study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is highly effective for treating pediatric high-risk or relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). For young children, total body irradiation (TBI) is associated with severe late sequelae. In the FORUM study (NCT01949129), we assessed safety, event-free survival (EFS), and overall survival (OS) of 2 TBI-free conditioning regimens in children aged <4 years with ALL. Patients received fludarabine (Flu), thiotepa (Thio), and either busulfan (Bu) or treosulfan (Treo) before HSCT. From 2013 to 2021, 191 children received transplantation and were observed for ≥6 months (median follow-up: 3 years). The 3-year OS was 0.63 (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.52-0.72) and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.64-0.84) for Flu/Thio/Bu and Flu/Thio/Treo (P = .075), respectively. Three-year EFS was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.41-0.61) and 0.51 (95% CI, 0.39-0.62), respectively (P = .794). Cumulative incidence of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) and relapse at 3 years were 0.06 (95% CI, 0.02-0.12) vs 0.03 (95% CI: <0.01-0.09) (P = .406) and 0.42 (95% CI, 0.31-0.52) vs 0.45 (95% CI, 0.34-0.56) (P = .920), respectively. Grade >1 acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) occurred in 29% of patients receiving Flu/Thio/Bu and 17% of those receiving Flu/Thio/Treo (P = .049), whereas grade 3/4 occurred in 10% and 9%, respectively (P = .813). The 3-year incidence of chronic GVHD was 0.07 (95% CI, 0.03-0.13) vs 0.05 (95% CI, 0.02-0.11), respectively (P = .518). In conclusion, both chemotherapeutic conditioning regimens were well tolerated and NRM was low. However, relapse was the major cause of treatment failure. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01949129.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".