Improving chronic myeloid leukemia management and quality of life: patient and physician survey on unmet needs from the CML SUN survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP), disease management, treatment experiences, and decisions around switching therapies due to resistance or intolerance can have significant impacts on their lives. Experiences and perspectives regarding the roles of patients and treating physicians in shared decision-making are poorly understood. The CML Survey on Unmet Needs (CML SUN), the largest CML survey to date, was initiated to gather insights from patients with CML-CP and physicians on disease management, including treatment goals, decision-making, satisfaction, tolerability, and the impact of CML on daily life. The survey was deployed in 11 countries with 361 patient and 198 physician participants and comprised separate questionnaires for each group. Results indicated that nearly three-quarters of physicians saw themselves as the ultimate initial treatment decision-makers; only a quarter of patients reported that these decisions were discussed and decided together with their physician. Nearly half of physicians reported making treatment decisions across all lines of therapy with little to no input from the patient. Disparities between patient and physician opinions were observed regarding treatment goals, especially the balance between efficacy and tolerability. The CML SUN highlights the need for improvements in communication about treatment options and the importance of shared treatment decision-making to unify treatment goals.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".