MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402184323 · doi:10.1182/blood.2024025679

Clinical features, pathophysiology, and management of acute myelopathy following CAR T-cell therapy

2024· review· en· W4402184323 on OpenAlexafffund
Xavier Deschênes‐Simard, Bianca Santomasso, Parastoo B. Dahi

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
KeywordsCytokine release syndromeMedicineChimeric antigen receptorMyelopathyCell therapyPathophysiologyImmunologyImmunotherapyIntensive care medicineMyelitisImmune systemInternal medicineCellSpinal cordBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT: Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has revolutionized the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory hematologic malignancies, but it comes with unique toxicities, notably cytokine release syndrome and ICANS (immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome). As experience with CAR T-cell therapy grows, distinct and infrequent neurologic complications are becoming increasingly evident. Recently, reports of acute myelopathy after the administration of CAR T-cell therapies have been accumulating. Despite the establishment of consensus guidelines for managing ICANS, there remains limited guidance on the appropriate investigations and treatments for this rare complication. In this manuscript, we delve into the clinical features, pathophysiology, and strategies for the optimal management of acute myelitis after CAR T-cell therapy and draw insights from reported cases in the literature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.404
Teacher spread0.349 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations23
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207