High Dose Chemotherapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in the Primary Therapy of Advanced Follicular Lymphoma in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract 2314 Poster Board II-291 Background: The impact of high dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in the upfront management of adults with advanced follicular lymphoma (FL) on overall survival remains uncertain. A number of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) compared ASCT to conventional dose chemotherapy regimens. We performed a systematic review to address this question. Objective: To compare the overall survival (OS), event free survival (EFS), treatment related mortality (TRM), incidence of secondary myelodysplasia/acute myeloid leukemia (t-MDS/AML) and secondary solid tumors within the ASCT strategy and chemotherapy. Methods: We performed a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, American Society of Hematology (ASH), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), BIOSIS, PAPERSFIRST, PROCEEDINGS, clinical trials registries (National Cancer Institute, clinicaltrials.gov) and bibliographies of relevant studies for randomized controlled trials comparing myelo-ablative chemotherapy with ASCT to any chemotherapy in adults with untreated advanced (Ann Arbor stage III-IV) FL. Two reviewers recorded study characteristics, methodology and outcomes. Disagreement was resolved by discussion. Results: Seven trials were identified and included in the systematic review but only four with available data reporting 941 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Three trials excluded: one was never reported; the second was stopped early due to the increased toxicities in the transplant arm; and the third showed no significant difference in EFS or OS at an interim analysis with insufficient data for the meta-analysis. None of these studies has been published. In one of the 7 trials patients in both arms received rituximab during the induction treatment. High dose therapy and ASCT did not result in improved OS compared to standard therapy, Hazard Ratio (HR) 1.15 (0.85, 1.55). The HR for EFS was 0.61 (0.34, 1.11) with substantial heterogeneity, I2 =91%, Chi2 p value <0.00001. Only the duration of the follow up could explain this heterogeneity with statistically significant subgroup interaction, P <0.00001. The incidence of t-MDS/AML ranged from 1% to 7% in the ASCT arms of the four studies, with a difference in favour of standard chemotherapy, Risk Difference (RD) 4% (95%CI: -1%, 8%), and significant heterogeneity (Chi2 p value of 0.008, I2=75%) due to difference in duration of follow up (p=0.005 for the subgroup differences).There was no increase in mortality directly attributable to treatment (RD 0%, 95%CI: -2%, 1%) nor in secondary solid tumors (RD 1%, 95%CI: -2%, 4%). Conclusions: High dose therapy and ASCT as part of initial does not improve overall survival despite a trend towards better disease control, likely because of the effectiveness of second and subsequent lines of treatment for FL. T-MDS/AML occurs more commonly following ASCT and represents a significant risk to patients. With one exception, these studies were conducted before the introduction of monoclonal B cell antibodies. Future trials of ASCT in the context of current chemo-immunotherapy approaches to FL would further inform this issue. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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 | 0.015 | 0.036 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.026 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".