MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405758735 · doi:10.35509/01239015.986

Multiple myeloma in Latin America: Are we moving at the same pace as other regions?

2023· article· en· W4405758735 on OpenAlexaffabout
Víctor H. Jiménez‐Zepeda

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Colombiana de Cancerología · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Health Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell disorder that has recently experienced a dramatic improvement in clinical outcomes mainly due to the advent of novel drugs and the implementation of better supportive care strategies (1). Recently available combinations of proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulators (IMiDs), and monoclonal antibodies like daratumumab and isatuximab are shifting the MM therapeutic landscape (2-4). Nonetheless, MM still remains incurable, with an estimated 5-year survival of 55% and an estimated death rate of 2% in 2021 (% of all cancer deaths) (5). In Latin America (LATAM), the Hemato-Oncology Latin America (HOLA) study was recently designed to evaluate the epidemiology of hematologic malignancies in the real-world setting (6). In some countries from LATAM, stage III MM was the most frequently observed disease stage, with Mexico (62.5%), Chile (60.0%), Brazil (49.3%), and Colombia (45.8%) being the regions where MM patients presented with a more advanced stage. This is in contrast with the original report of revised staging criteria, where stage III MM represented 22% of the cases (7). In the entire cohort of the HOLA study, 497 patients with MM (32.7%) underwent autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT); however, the proportion of patients submitted to ASCT varied among countries, ranging from 3% to 69%. The 497 patients who underwent ASCT had received induction chemotherapy predominantly based on thalidomide (151; 30.4%) and bortezomib (125; 25.2%) regimens. This is quite different when compared to countries like Canada, where in a recent study by Mian et al. (8), a total of 5,154 patients with MM were identified, among which 3,030 patients (58.8%) received an upfront ASCT and 2,124 (41.2%) did not. Bortezomib and lenalidomide were the most frequently used agents (>50%) in first- and second-line treatment, respectively, in both the ASCT and non-ASCT cohorts. In Colombia, Abello et al. (9) reported on the outcomes of 890 patients with MM from a real-world registry. Most patients in this group received bortezomib and thalidomide-based therapies with a 65% response rate for CyBorD (cyclophosphamide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone) and 79% for VTD (bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone), which is in contrast with 78.1-84.3% and 85-94% reported in other series treated with similar regimens (10-12).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Colombiana de Cancerología→Same topicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→