PC3 - 130 A Meta-Analysis on the use of High-Dose Methotrexate Only Versus Combination Chemotherapy for the Treatment of Newly-Diagnosed Patients with Primary CNS Lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary CNS Lymphoma (PCNSL) is an unusual extranodal form of Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma with a locally aggressive course but a rare tendency to disseminate systemically. There are various modalities available for the treatment of PCNSL which include chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery and immunotherapy. The effectiveness of adding another anti-neoplastic agent to HD-MTX have been optimized in small scale studies yet the “ perfect combination” has yet to be elucidated Objectives: This study aims to 1) compare the response to treatment of monotherapy with high-dose Methotrexate (HD-MTX) versus HD-MTX and an additional anti-neoplastic agent by evaluating complete response, partial response, stable disease and disease progression and 2) to compare the hematologic and non-hematologic side effects among patients subjected to monotherapy vs combination chemotherapy. Methodology: Journals from Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL) and other relevant websites (www.clinicaltrials.org) without any restrictions in the year, language and status of publication were searched. Literatures cited by eligible studies and systemic reviews were also checked to identify useful articles. The following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) were used: ‘primary CNS lymphoma’, ‘treatment’, ‘chemotherapy’ and ‘randomized control trial’. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan software version 5.1. Odds ratio (OR) and 95 % confidence interval (95% CI) were used as summary statistics. Results and Conclusion: The use of high-dose methotrexate and another anti-neoplastic agent showed benefit in terms of achieving complete response and delaying disease progression among patients diagnosed with PCNSL. However, the risks of hematologic toxicities such as anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and infection was higher in patients treated with the combination chemotherapy. Significant non-hematologic side effects such as mucositis was also observed in patients receiving an add-on to high dose methotrexate.
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 | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.053 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".