MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410266714 · doi:10.1002/jha2.70045

A Single‐Center Study on Frontline Treatment for Multiple Myeloma Patients With 1q Abnormalities

2025· article· en· W4410266714 on OpenAlexaff
Ashish Patel, Esther Masih‐Khan, Adam C. Smith, Katherine Lajkosz, Sita Bhella, Christine Chen, Anca Prica, Donna Reece, A. Keith Stewart, Rodger E. Tiedemann, Suzanne Trudel, Chloe Yang, Guido Lancman, Vishal Kukreti

Bibliographic record

VenueeJHaem · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Myeloma Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAbnormalityInternal medicineMultiple myelomaCohortOncologyCancerGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Introduction Chromosome 1q copy gains (with‐1q‐gain) is a frequently observed genetic abnormality in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Recent research has demonstrated that 1q gain is a prognostic factor, linked to poorer clinical outcomes. Methods This study was conducted at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre to examine the clinical outcomes of newly diagnosed MM patients’ with‐1q‐gain or without‐1q‐gain abnormality. The study included 275 patients, with 161 (58.5%) with‐1q‐gain abnormality. The median follow‐up time for the cohort was 94.3 months (95% CI 30.1–38.6). Results The patients’ with‐1q‐gain when compared to without‐1q‐gain were more likely to have other high‐risk cytogenetic abnormalities (34.8% vs. 14.0%, p < 0.001) and more advanced disease according to the International Staging System (ISS III, p < 0.014). Furthermore, a relatively higher proportion of with‐1q‐gain patients received tandem autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as frontline therapy (36.2% vs. 8.7%, p ≤ 0.001). To assess the impact of 1q copy number, patients with 3 copies of 1q (1q‐gain3) were compared to those with ≥4 copies (1q‐Amp). No significant differences were observed between the two groups. Conclusion In conclusion, our study provides insight into the clinical significance of 1q gain abnormality in MM patients at a single center, and highlights its association with adverse prognostic features and treatment outcomes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.676

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeJHaemSame topicMultiple Myeloma Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207