The efficacy of rituximab in high-grade pediatric B-cell lymphoma/leukemia: a review of available evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review evaluates whether rituximab has efficacy in high-grade pediatric B-cell lymphoma/leukemia. Current pediatric protocols for CD20+ B-cell lymphoma/leukemia significantly improve survival, but with major morbidity. To assess whether rituximab has efficacy in very high-grade pediatric disease, all published data on rituximab therapy for Burkitt's lymphoma/B acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (B-ALL) and pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma were reviewed. RECENT FINDINGS: Three trials in adult Burkitt's/B-ALL showed a significant survival advantage when rituximab was added to standard chemotherapy. Minimal pediatric data have been published, but 19 children with mature B-cell lymphoma/B-ALL received rituximab, alone or in combination with chemotherapy, as salvage therapy, after failure of intensive chemotherapy. Fifteen of 19 (79%) responded, 12 (63%) remained alive in continuous complete remission at 5+ to 48+ months of follow-up. Two patients were alive in partial remission. Five patients died, four of progressive disease. Only one patient had no response to rituximab. SUMMARY: Rituximab has demonstrated efficacy in Burkitt's disease in adults. Although positive reporting bias is suspected, it appears that rituximab, even as monotherapy, has efficacy in heavily pretreated pediatric patients with high-grade B-lymphoma/B-ALL. Rituximab use can be justified in a prospective controlled chemotherapy dose-reduction study.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".