Impact of Day 11 Methotrexate Dose Adjustments due to Mucositis on the Outcomes Following Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplant in the Setting of Anti Thymocyte Globulin (<scp>ATG</scp>) Based <scp>GVHD</scp> Prophylaxis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Dose adjustments of Day 11 Methotrexate (MTx) for GVHD prophylaxis after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT) are common due to mucositis, renal injury, or other reasons. The impact of omitting or adjusting doses of MTx in the era of ATG-based GVHD prophylaxis remains unexplored. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the outcomes of all adult patients undergoing allogeneic HCT who received ATG-based GVHD prophylaxis at The Ottawa Hospital from January 2019 to December 2022. We compared outcomes of patients having only Day 11 MTx dose reductions due to mucositis(MTxRD group) with patients receiving full dose MTx on all 4 days (MTxFD group). The impact of Day 11 MTx dose reduction on outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier analyses and log rank test. RESULTS: Three hundred and four patients (median age 58 [17-74] years; 64% male) underwent allogeneic HCT during the study period. Baseline characteristics were similar between the MTxRD group (n = 69) and MTxFD group (n = 199) except for an increased proportion of MAC regimens in MTxRD group. The incidence of severe aGVHD (7.2% vs. 7.5%; p = 0.96) and chronic GVHD (15.9% vs. 15.6%; p = 0.89) were not different between the two groups. The 2-year OS (59% vs. 69.8%; p = 0.11), GRFS (42.4% vs. 47.6%; p = 0.32), NRM (17.7% vs. 12.2%; p = 0.45) or relapse/progression (CIR 27.4 vs. 26.6%; p = 0.55) were also similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients receiving ATG-based GVHD prophylaxis regimens, there were similar GVHD and survival outcomes in patients who received no or reduced D11 MTx when compared to full dose MTx. Dose adjustments of D11 MTx due to mucositis appear to be safe in the era of ATG-based GVHD prophylaxis regimens.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".