MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391518814 · doi:10.1016/j.jtct.2024.01.079

A Day 14 Endpoint for Acute GVHD Clinical Trials

2024· article· en· W4391518814 on OpenAlexaff
Nikolaos Spyrou, Yu Akahoshi, Steven Kowalyk, George Morales, Rahnuma Beheshti, Paibel Aguayo‐Hiraldo, Monzr M. Al Malki, Francis Ayuk, Peter Bader, Janna Baez, Alexandra Capellini, Hannah Choe, Zachariah DeFilipp, Matthias Eder, Gilbert Eng, Aaron Etra, Sigrun Gleich, Stephan A. Grupp, Elizabeth O. Hexner, Matthias Hoepting, William J. Hogan, Stelios Kasikis, Nikolaos Katsivelos, Alina Khan, Carrie L. Kitko, Sabrina Kraus, Deukwoo Kwon, Pietro Merli, Joseph Portelli, Muna Qayed, Ran Reshef, Tal Schechter, Ingrid Vášová, Matthias Wölfl, Kitsada Wudhikarn, Rachel Young, Ernst Holler, Yi‐Bin Chen, Ryotaro Nakamura, John E. Levine, James L.M. Ferrara

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation and Cellular Therapy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
FundersNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteJosé Carreras Leukämie-Stiftung
KeywordsClinical endpointMedicineInternal medicineOncologyClinical trialGastroenterologyImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.183
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.315 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantation and Cellular TherapySame topicPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchFrench-language works237,207