Treatment characteristics and outcomes in lower-risk, non-del(5q) myelodysplastic syndromes: findings from a medical record review in the USA, Canada and Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim: To assess treatment patterns and outcomes in patients with non-del(5q) lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Methods: Patient medical records were reviewed in the USA, Canada (CAN), UK and the EU. Results: Analysis included 119 patients in the USA/CAN (median age, 61.5 years) and 245 patients in the UK/EU (median age, 67.3 years). Most patients received erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) as first-line (1L) therapy (USA/CAN: 89.0%; UK/EU: 90.2%). A substantial proportion of 1L erythropoiesis-stimulating agent-treated patients were transfusion dependent before 1L (USA/CAN: 37.1%; UK/EU: 51.2%); a small percentage of these patients achieved transfusion independence during 1L therapy (USA/CAN: 2.8%; UK/EU: 14.4%). Conclusion: These findings highlight an unmet need for more effective treatments among patients with non-del(5q) lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".