MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406108299 · doi:10.1111/ejh.14380

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

2025· article· en· W4406108299 on OpenAlexaffabout
Vinita Dhir, Connor Prince, David Allan, Harold Atkins, Christopher Bredeson, Natasha Kekre, Michael Kennah, Ashish Masurekar, Ram Vasudevan Nampoothiri

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal Of Haematology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnti-thymocyte globulinMucositisMethotrexateGlobulinStem cellImmunologyThymocyteMedicineT cellInternal medicineBiologyToxicityImmune system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal Of HaematologySame topicHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationFrench-language works237,207