Validation of the 2022 European LeukemiaNet risk stratification for acute myeloid leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to validate the 2022 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) risk stratification for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). A total of 624 newly diagnosed AML patients from 1998 to 2014 were included in the analysis. Genetic profiling was conducted using targeted deep sequencing of 45 genes based on recurrent driver mutations. In total, 134 (21.5%) patients had their risk classification reassessed according to the 2022 ELN risk stratification. Among those initially classified as having a favorable risk in 2017 (n = 218), 31 and 3 patients were reclassified as having intermediate risk or adverse risk, respectively. Among the three subgroups, the 2022 ELN favorable-risk group showed significantly longer survival outcomes than the other groups. Within the 2017 ELN intermediate-risk group (n = 298), 21 and 46 patients were reclassified as having favorable risk or adverse risk, respectively, and each group showed significant stratifications in survival outcomes. Some patients initially classified as having adverse risk in 2017 were reclassified into the intermediate-risk group (33 of 108 patients), but no prognostic improvements were observed in this group. A multivariable analysis identified the 2022 ELN risk stratification, age, and receiving allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation as significant prognostic factors for survival. The 2022 ELN risk stratification enables more precise decisions for proceeding with allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for AML patients.
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".