Efficacy and Toxicity of Treatments for Primary Central System Lymphoma: Review of the Recent Literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Primary Central Nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is an uncommon type of central nervous system lymphoma, most commonly presenting as hemiparesis and headache. Currently, there is a wide range of treatments for PCNSL, consisting of various permutations between chemotherapy, radiation and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Although the backbone of PCNSL treatment consists of High-dose Methotrexate (HD-MTX), the role of combination versus single agent chemotherapy, combined modality (chemotherapy + radiation) versus chemotherapy or radiation alone, and the use of consolidative ASCT are contested. Surgery does not have a role in the treatment of PCNSL although stereotactic biopsies tend to help with symptomatic relief. Radiation monotherapy is generally reserved for patients with contraindications to chemotherapy or as a palliative measure. Combined chemotherapy and radiation treatment has been shown to have a great efficacy, although its increased neurotoxicity compared to chemotherapy alone is a major drawback. A growing body of research is focused on comparing the efficacy of various chemotherapeutic regimens. Currently, the MATRix regimen comprising of HD-MTX(3.5g/m2)-cytarabine/rituximab/thiotepa is widely used. The additional survival benefit of ASCT is contested although its role in the treatment of refractory or relapsed PCNSL is generally agreed upon. Finally, intrathecal HD-MTX has been shown to have added survival benefit when added to the standard therapies. Further retrospective and prospective studies are required to compare the efficacy and toxicity of various treatment options, with a focus on different chemotherapeutic agents and ASCT.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".