A Day 14 Endpoint for Acute GVHD Clinical Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The overall response rate (ORR) 28 days after treatment has been adopted as the primary endpoint for clinical trials of acute graft versus host disease (GVHD). However, physicians often need to modify immunosuppression earlier than day (D) 28, and non-relapse mortality (NRM) does not always correlate with ORR at D28. We studied 1144 patients that received systemic treatment for GVHD in the Mount Sinai Acute GVHD International Consortium (MAGIC) and divided them into a training set (n=764) and a validation set (n=380). We used a recursive partitioning algorithm to create a Mount Sinai model that classifies patients into favorable or unfavorable groups that predicted 12 month NRM according to overall GVHD grade at both onset and D14. In the Mount Sinai model grade II GVHD at D14 was unfavorable for grade III/IV GVHD at onset and predicted NRM as well as the D28 standard response model. The MAGIC algorithm probability (MAP) is a validated score that combines the serum concentrations of suppression of tumorigenicity 2 (ST2) and regenerating islet-derived 3-alpha (REG3α) to predict NRM. Inclusion of the D14 MAP biomarker score with the D14 Mount Sinai model created three distinct groups (good, intermediate, poor) with strikingly different NRM (8%, 35%, 76% respectively). This D14 MAGIC model displayed better AUC, sensitivity, positive and negative predictive value, and net benefit in decision curve analysis compared to the D28 standard response model. We conclude that this D14 MAGIC model could be useful in therapeutic decisions and may offer an improved endpoint for clinical trials of acute GVHD treatment.
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 | 0.057 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".