MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rituximab with High Dose Methotrexate in the Management of Primary Central Nervous System Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

2014· article· en· W2219644495 on OpenAlexaff
Roopesh Kansara, Tamara Shenkier, Joseph M. Connors, Alina S. Gerrie, Richard Klasa, Kerry J. Savage, Laurie H. Sehn, Diego Villa

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaSpinal Cord Injury BCBC Cancer Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePrimary central nervous system lymphomaRituximabMethotrexateDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaLymphomaChemotherapyInternal medicineSurgeryGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction: Outcomes of patient with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) remain poor despite high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX)-based chemotherapy regimens. The addition of rituximab (R) to chemotherapy improves response rates and outcomes in patients with systemic B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas. However, R does not penetrate the blood-brain barrier, and therefore its impact in patients with PCNSL is unknown. With disappointing outcomes, in 2006, we routinely started adding R to HDMTX for the treatment of PCNSL. Herein, we evaluated the outcome of patients receiving HDMTX with or without R. Methods: Patients diagnosed with PCNSL (DLBCL histology only) between January 2000 and December 2013, and who were treated with at least one cycle of HDMTX, were identified in the Lymphoid Cancer Database. Since January 2000, patients with PCNSL in British Columbia have been treated with HDMTX 8 g/m2 every 2 weeks, pro-rated for creatinine clearance. Responding patients received a maximum of 10 cycles. Beginning in December 2006, rituximab 375 mg/m2 is given every 2 weeks with HDMTX for a total of 4 doses. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time interval from date of diagnosis to first evidence of progression/relapse, death or last follow-up. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time interval from date of diagnosis to death or last follow-up. Results: A total of 82 patients were identified. Median age at diagnosis was 61years (range 18-80), 42 (51%) were >60 years old, 48 (59%) were male, 18 (23%) had elevated LDH and 50 (61%) had performance status > 1. Median largest mass size was 4cm (range 1-9). Concurrent ocular (7 patients), leptomeningeal (3 patients), and spinal cord (1 patient) involvements were seen. For treatment, 55 (67%) received HDMTX and 27 (33%) received HDMTX+R. Patients received a median of 4 (range 1-9) HDMTX cycles, with no difference between R versus no R groups. Ten (12%) patients (6 HDMTX, 4 HDMTX+R) received whole brain radiotherapy (RT), as part of initial treatment due to chemo-intolerance. In 79 patients evaluable for response, the overall response rate to initial treatment was 55%: CR 40%, PR 15%, SD 5%, and PD 41%. There were no significant differences in the baseline characteristics or response rates between the two groups. A total of 14/32 patients (44%) relapsed after CR (all in the brain, including 1 to the contralateral eye) and 8/12 (67%) relapsed after PR (7 in brain, 1 to bilateral eyes). At 1st relapse/progression (N = 56), 39 (69%) patients received RT, 4 received repeat courses of HDMTX, 2 received high dose chemotherapy/autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and 1 received temozolamide + R. 10 patients were managed supportively. Four patients had a systemic relapse without involvement of the CNS (1 Breast, 1 testis, 1 axilla and 1 scalp). They received R-CHOP (3), CHOP then R-GDP and ASCT (1). After a median follow-up of 5 years (range 0.1 to 12.7) in living patients, the 5-year OS was 38% (SE 6%), with no difference between patients treated with or without R (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.40, 1.63; p= 0.55). The 5-year PFS was 20% (SE 5%), again with no difference between the two groups (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.47, 1.48; p= 0.54). In the subset of 50 patients receiving > 4 cycles of chemotherapy (34 HDMTX, 16 HDMTX+R), the addition of rituximab did not impact PFS (p= 0.36) or OS (p= 0.08). In the subset of 72 patients who did not receive WBRT as part of initial therapy (49 HDMTX, 23 HDMTX + R), the addition of rituximab did not impact PFS (p= 0.48) or OS (p= 0.47). Conclusions: Our preliminary data shows no advantage to the addition of systemic R on the outcomes of PCNSL, consistent with its known poor CNS penetrance. Improved treatment modalities for PCNSL are still warranted. Disclosures Shenkier: F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Connors:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Gerrie:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Klasa:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Savage:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Sehn:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other. Villa:F Hoffmann-La Roche: Other.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207