Ruxolitinib in patients with graft versus host disease (GvHD): findings from a compassionate use program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ruxolitinib compassionate use (CU) program offered ruxolitinib to patients ≥2 years of age with confirmed steroid-resistant acute or chronic graft-versus-host disease (aGvHD and cGvHD, respectively). Data from 1180 patients (n = 775, 370 and 35 with cGvHD, aGvHD, and non-specified GvHD, respectively) were analyzed. Most patients had severe cGvHD (56%) or stage III/IV aGvHD (70%) disease and had previously received corticosteroids ( > 80%); ruxolitinib was requested primarily as a second-/third-line option. Patients <12 and ≥12 years old most often received the recommended ruxolitinib doses (5 mg twice daily [BID] and 10 mg BID, respectively); however, 23% and 30% of ≥12 year olds with cGvHD and aGvHD, respectively, received the lower dose of 5 mg BID. Notably, corticosteroid usage decreased with ruxolitinib treatment; at the initial ruxolitinib request, 81% and 91% of patients with cGvHD and aGvHD, respectively, were receiving corticosteroids whereas at resupply, 62% and 64%, respectively, were receiving corticosteroids. Eighty two percent of evaluable patients with cGvHD had a complete or partial response to treatment and 56% of evaluable patients with aGvHD had a best response of grade 0/I. These findings demonstrate the rapid and positive effects of ruxolitinib in patients with GvHD in a real-world setting.
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".