Effect of the addition of rituximab to salvage chemotherapy prior to autologous stem cell transplant in aggressive CD20+ lymphoma: a cohort comparison from the NCIC Clinical Trials Group Study LY.12<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of the addition of rituximab to salvage chemotherapy prior to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) was evaluated in a retrospective subgroup analysis of NCIC CTG LY.12. Among 414 patients who relapsed following R-CHOP, 96 received salvage chemotherapy alone [R - cohort]; and 318 received rituximab with chemotherapy [R + cohort] following a protocol amendment. The R-cohort had a higher proportion of patients with PS ≥2 and relapse <1 year after R-CHOP. The response rate (45.6% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.0003), CR/CRu (15.7% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.003) and transplantation rate (51.9% vs. 31.3%, p = 0.0004) was higher in the R + cohort. Event-free (27% vs. 22%, p = 0.0954) and overall survival at four years (43% vs. 31%; p = 0.045) were greater in the R + cohort when the patients with best response SD/PD to R-CHOP were excluded. Addition of rituximab to salvage therapy before ASCT appears to improve the response rate, transplantation rate, and overall survival in patients with CD20+ lymphoma who responded to R-CHOP.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".