Predictive Models for Long Term Survival of AML Patients Treated with Venetoclax and Azacitidine or 7+3 Based on Post Treatment Events and Responses: Retrospective Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in older or unfit patients typically involves a regimen of venetoclax plus azacitidine (ven/aza). Toxicity and treatment responses are highly variable following treatment initiation and clinical decision-making continually evolves in response to these as treatment progresses. To improve clinical decision support (CDS) following treatment initiation, predictive models based on evolving and dynamic toxicities, disease responses, and other features should be developed. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to generate machine learning (ML)-based predictive models that incorporate individual predictors of overall survival (OS) for patients with AML, based on clinical events occurring after the initiation of ven/aza or 7+3 regimen. METHODS: Data from 221 patients with AML, who received either the ven/aza (n=101 patients) or 7+3 regimen (n=120 patients) as their initial induction therapy, were retrospectively analyzed. We performed stratified univariate and multivariate analyses to quantify the association between toxicities, hospital events, and short-term disease responses and OS for the 7+3 and ven/aza subgroups separately. We compared the estimates of confounders to assess potential effect modifications by treatment. 17 ML-based predictive models were developed. The optimal predictive models were selected based on their predictability and discriminability using cross-validation. Uncertainty in the estimation was assessed through bootstrapping. RESULTS: The cumulative incidence of posttreatment toxicities varies between the ven/aza and 7+3 regimen. A variety of laboratory features and clinical events during the first 30 days were differentially associated with OS for the two treatments. An initial transfer to intensive care unit (ICU) worsened OS for 7+3 patients (aHR 1.18, 95% CI 1.10-1.28), while ICU readmission adversely affected OS for those on ven/aza (aHR 1.24, 95% CI 1.12-1.37). At the initial follow-up, achieving a morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS) did not affect OS for ven/aza (aHR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94-1.05), but worsened OS following 7+3 (aHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.01-1.31) compared to that of complete remission (CR). Having blasts over 5% at the initial follow-up negatively impacted OS for both 7+3 (P<.001) and ven/aza (P<.001) treated patients. A best response of CR and CR with incomplete recovery (CRi) was superior to MLFS and refractory disease after ven/aza (P<.001), whereas for 7+3, CR was superior to CRi, MLFS, and refractory disease (P<.001), indicating unequal outcomes. Treatment-specific predictive models, trained on 120 7+3 and 101 ven/aza patients using over 114 features, achieved survival AUCs over 0.70. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that toxicities, clinical events, and responses evolve differently in patients receiving ven/aza compared with that of 7+3 regimen. ML-based predictive models were shown to be a feasible strategy for CDS in both forms of AML treatment. If validated with larger and more diverse data sets, these findings could offer valuable insights for developing AML-CDS tools that leverage posttreatment clinical data.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".