Subjective Oral Dryness following Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation: A Report from the Orastem Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Xerostomia, or subjective oral dryness, is a serious complaint after hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Xerostomia is rated as one of the most bothersome symptoms by HCT recipients, negatively affecting quality of life. This substudy of the Orastem study, a prospective longitudinal, international, observational, multicenter study, aimed to describe the prevalence and severity of xerostomia following HCT. Furthermore, the effect of the conditioning regimen, type of transplantation, and oral mucosal changes related to chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) in the development of xerostomia were studied. All HCT recipients rated xerostomia on a scale of 0 to 10 before the conditioning regimen, several times early post-HCT, and at 3 months post-HCT, and only allogeneic HCT recipients also rated xerostomia at 6 and 12 months post-HCT. In addition, stimulated whole mouth saliva was collected several times. Linear regression models and longitudinal mixed-effects models were created to investigate the influence of risk indicators on xerostomia. A total of 99 autologous and 163 allogeneic HCT recipients were included from 6 study sites in Sweden, Canada, the Netherlands, and the United States. The prevalence of xerostomia was 40% before the conditioning regimen, 87% early post-HCT, and 64% at 3 months post-HCT. Complaints after autologous HCT were transient in nature, while the severity of xerostomia in allogeneic HCT recipients remained elevated at 12 months post-HCT. Compared to autologous HCT recipients, allogeneic HCT recipients experienced 1.0 point more xerostomia (95% confidence interval [CI], .1 to 2.0) early post-HCT and 1.7 points more (95% CI, .4 to 3.0) at 3 months post-HCT. Allogeneic HCT recipients receiving a high-intensity conditioning regimen experienced more xerostomia compared to those receiving a nonmyeloablative or reduced-intensity conditioning regimen. The difference was 2.0 points (95% CI, 1.1 to 2.9) early post-HCT, 1.8 points (95% CI, .3 to 3.3) after 3 months, and 1.7 points (95% CI, .0 to 3.3) after 12 months. Total body irradiation as part of the conditioning regimen and oral mucosal changes related to cGVHD did not significantly influence the severity of xerostomia. Conditioning regimen intensity was a significant risk indicator in the development of xerostomia, whereas total body irradiation was not. Allogeneic HCT recipients experienced more xerostomia than autologous HCT recipients, a difference that cannot be explained by a reduction in stimulated salivary flow rate or the development of oral mucosal changes related to cGVHD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".