MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417010151 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-8199

Estimating incident and prevalent essential thrombocythemia patients eligible for cytoreductive therapies in the US and Canada

2025· article· en· W4417010151 on OpenAlexaffabout
Paul D. Walden, Craig Zimmerman, Noemi Hummel, Alekhya Lavu

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsTheratechnologies (Canada)Forming Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEssential thrombocythemiaEpidemiologyMedical prescriptionAnagrelidePopulationIncidence (geometry)MEDLINEMyelofibrosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Essential thrombocythemia (ET) is a rare type of myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) characterized by elevated platelet counts an elevated risk of thromboembolic events, bleeding and potential progression to myelofibrosis or acute myeloid leukemia. The current treatment landscape for ET remains limited, further complicated by historically non-specific ICD-10 diagnosis codes and ET patients incurring 2.3 times higher medical costs compared to matched controls. This study aimed to estimate the incidence and prevalence of ET patients eligible for National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guideline-directed treatments within major U.S. health plans and in Canada. Methods: The literature was assessed systematically to gather epidemiological data on ET prevalence and incidence, determine the distribution of patients according to the revised IPSET-thrombosis risk stratification (rIPSET-T), and identify those eligible for NCCN 1.2025-recommended cytoreductive therapies. Membership data for the eight largest U.S. commercial health plans were sourced from earnings reports, annual filings, and 10-K reports. These data were used in Microsoft Excel to develop model inputs and conduct a base-case analysis estimating the size of the clinically treatment-eligible population potentially receiving NCCN-recommended therapies. Results: Sixteen references were identified across systematic literature searches detailing ET epidemiology, rIPSET-T risk distributions, and the use of NCCN-recommended treatments. For the eight health plans analyzed, the average (median) number of covered lives in the U.S. was 38,725,462 (27,847,800). In Canada, prescription drug coverage is limited to 79%, representing 25,557,474 covered lives in 2024. The analysis identified an average of 426 (SD±362) incident ET patients and 16,915 (SD±14,379) prevalent ET patients across U.S. health plans, while Canada had 281 incident and 11,164 prevalent ET patients. Among these, a mean of 192 (SD±109) incident high-risk and 8,797 (SD±7,479) prevalent intermediate- and high-risk rIPSET-T eligible patients were estimated for U.S. health plans, with corresponding figures for Canada being 127 incident high-risk and 5,806 prevalent intermediate- and high-risk patients. Cytoreductive therapy usage was found to be 72.5%, translating to an average of 128 (SD±109) incident and 5,101 (SD±3,690) prevalent patients for U.S. health plans, and 85 incident and 3,366 prevalent patients in Canada. Conclusion: There is significant variability in the estimates of both incident and prevalent ET populations eligible for NCCN-recommended cytoreductive therapies across U.S. commercial health plans and in Canada, which may influence formulary policy decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0150.025
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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 venueBlood→Same topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→