Frontline therapy with bendamustine rituximab (BR) and rituximab cyclophosphamide vincristine prednisone (RCVP) confers similar long-term outcomes in patients with treatment naïve Waldenström macroglobulinemia in a real-world setting: a population-based analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report on outcomes of 111 patients with treatment naïve Waldenström macroglobulinemia (TN WM) treated with frontline bendamustine–rituximab (BR) (n = 57) or rituximab–cyclophosphamide–vincristine–prednisone (RCVP) (n = 54). Median follow-up was 60.7 months (range 1.9–231.6). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 60.5 months (95% CI 47.6–73.4) for BR and 79.0 months (95% CI 31.3–126.8) for RCVP (p = .96). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached for BR and 153.4 months (95% CI 114.5–192.4) for RCVP (p = .37). While overall and major response rates did not differ between treatment groups, BR had numerically higher rate of very good partial response or better response (51% vs. 37%, p = .30) and complete response (26% vs. 13%, p = .13). RCVP confers comparable outcomes to BR in a real-world population of TN WM patients and remains an effective regimen, particularly when tolerance or frailty is an issue, or in resource-limited settings.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".