Introduction of Combined CHOP Plus Rituximab Therapy Dramatically Improved Outcome of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: For more than two decades, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) has been the standard therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The addition of rituximab to CHOP has been shown to improve outcome in elderly patients with DLBCL. We conducted a population-based analysis to assess the impact of this combination therapy on adult patients with DLBCL in the province of British Columbia (BC). METHODS: We compared outcomes during a 3-year period; 18 months before (prerituximab) and 18 months after (postrituximab) institution of a policy recommending the combination of CHOP and rituximab for all patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage (stage III or IV or stage I or II with "B" symptoms or bulky [> 10 cm] disease) DLBCL. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients were evaluated; 140 in the prerituximab group (median follow-up, 42 months) and 152 in the postrituximab group (median follow-up, 24 months). Both progression-free survival (risk ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.81; P = .002) and overall survival (risk ratio, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.61, P < .0001) were significantly improved in the postrituximab group. After controlling for age and International Prognostic Index score, era of treatment remained a strong independent predictor of progression-free survival (risk ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.85; P = .005) and overall survival (risk ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.66; P < .001). The benefit of treatment in the postrituximab era was present regardless of age. CONCLUSION: The addition of rituximab to CHOP chemotherapy has resulted in a dramatic improvement in outcome for DLBCL patients of all ages in the province of BC.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".