549 | PROSPECTIVE PATIENT PREFERENCE STUDY FOR CHRONIC LYMPHOCYTIC LEUKEMIA TREATMENT ATTRIBUTES IMPACTING PATIENT SHARED‐DECISION MAKING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: CLL is the most common leukemia in adults in Western countries, incidence 5/100,000 in US/Europe, and significantly lower in Asia (0.48).Latin America (LATAM) presents a complex and variable landscape for CLL incidence, with some countries like Uruguay and Argentina exhibiting rates similar to Europe, while others (Mexico, Peru, Chile) reporting lower incidences.The region's ethnic, cultural, and economic heterogeneity leads to disparities in access to diagnostic and prognostic tools, as well as therapeutic options, especially with the increasing use of targeted agents.In 2022, the GELL-CLL cohort presented initial data from 459 patients across six countries, here, we provide an updated analysis, expanding the cohort.Methodology: retrospective cohort study of CLL patients aged ≥ 18 years, diagnosed and treated between 2010 and 2024, or diagnosed since 2000 and treated from 2010 onwards, from centers participating in the GELL-CLL registry.Results: 981 patients from ten countries (Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Guatemala, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela) were included, with 883 eligible.Of these, 66% were treated in private institutions.Median age 68 years (30-95), 40.4% female.Racial distribution: 89.8% White, 1.5% Africanancestry, 1.2% Indigenous, 7.2% mixed-race, and 0.1% Asian.At diagnosis, 91.4% ECOG 0-1, 46% Rai 0; III-IV: 14.2%.Key prognostic factors revealed that 13.8% were CD38þ, and elevated B2 was found in 28%.IgVH mutational status was studied in 29.6% of patients, with 47% unmutated.At diagnosis, 77% of patients were under observation, with 51% requiring treatment after a median of 9 months.Of those treated, only 33% underwent cytogenetic or FISH analysis prior to therapy.Del17p was identified in 3.7% of patients, while P53 mutations were found in 1.5%.First-line treatment included chemo-immunotherapy (55.2%), chemotherapy (28.4%), iBTK (12.3%), and Venetoclax-based (4.1%).Remarkably, 70% of patients receiving chemotherapy had no prior cytogenetic or FISH testing.Differences in biomarker testing between countries were stark, ranging from 0% in Venezuela to 45% in Uruguay.Median follow-up 67 months (0-362), overall survival (OS) differed significantly by treatment era: OS was 116 months for 2010-2014, 127 months for 2015-2019, and was not reached for 2020-2024 (p = 0.015).Four-year OS rates were 65% for chemotherapy, 81% for chemo-immunotherapy, 84% for iBTK, and 90% for Venetoclax-based.Conclusions: This real-world analysis highlights significant disparities in CLL management across LATAM.Despite recent shifts toward targeted therapies, many patients still lack access to essential prognostic testing, potentially leading to suboptimal treatment choices.Efforts to improve biomarker availability and targeted therapy access are crucial for enhancing outcomes across the region.Expanding this cohort will further elucidate regional variations and support initiatives to address treatment inequities.
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 | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".