Real-world validation study of the LSC17 score for risk prediction in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients exhibit diverse molecular and cytogenetic changes with heterogeneous outcomes. The functionally-derived LSC17 gene expression score has demonstrated strong prognostic significance in retrospective analyses of adult and pediatric AML cohorts, where above-median scores are associated with worse outcomes compared to below-median scores in intensively-treated patients. Here we used a laboratory-developed clinically-validated NanoString-based LSC17 assay to test the prognostic value of the LSC17 score in a prospective multicenter study of 276 newly-diagnosed AML patients. Each patient's score was classified as high or low by comparison to a previously-established reference score. In the entire cohort, a high LSC17 score was associated with poor risk features, including advanced age and unfavorable genetic mutations. In the subset of 190 patients treated intensively, a high LSC17 score was associated with lower remission rates (63% vs. 94% after induction; P<0.0001), presence of measurable residual disease (46% vs. 10%; P<0.0001), and shorter overall survival (OS, 606 days vs. not reached; P=0.0004; hazard ratio [HR] =2.16; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.39-3.35) and relapse-free survival (RFS, 541 days vs. not reached; P=0.001; HR=1.99; 95% CI: 1.29-3.08). In multivariable analysis considering age, white blood cell count and European LeukemiaNet 2022 risk groups, the LSC17 score remained an independent predictor of RFS and OS. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation improved OS for patients with a high but not a low LSC17 score. This study establishes the real-world value of the LSC17 score as a robust tool for risk assessment in AML and paves the way for its incorporation into routine clinical practice.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".