Outcomes for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients with intestinal perforation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Intestinal perforation during acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) treatment in children is rare, but represents a severe complication with possible long-term consequences. In this study, we aim to provide an overview of the epidemiology and clinical characteristics of these patients; analyze surgical pathology findings for possible causes; and determine its impact on patients' therapy, nutritional status, and outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Historical chart review from January 2000 to October 2020 of children with ALL and intestinal perforation during therapy diagnosed at a single institution. Data collected included patient demographics, anthropometric measurements, ALL characteristics, diagnosis and surgery of intestinal perforation, pathology, adjustments to treatment plan, and outcome. RESULTS: Of 1840 ALL patients, 13 (0.7%) presented with intestinal perforation during treatment. Perforation occurred during induction phase in 91% of cases. Most patients underwent laparotomy with ostomy creation, and no patient died from the intervention or developed malnutrition. Pathology mainly revealed inflammation at the perforation site. Two samples showed leukemic infiltration and presence of microorganisms. Patients were able to resume ALL therapy in all cases. A total of eight patients (73%) were in first remission at last follow-up, with a median follow-up time of 42 months (interquartile range = 42). CONCLUSION: Early surgical intervention is a successful treatment approach for intestinal perforation in ALL patients. There is a clear predilection for induction phase in the occurrence of intestinal perforation in ALL patients. No specific cause was identified. Patients can receive bridging chemotherapy during surgical recovery and proceed with their treatment without apparent impact on outcome.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".