MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Prior Rituximab Reduces Relapse and Improves Survival Following High Dose Chemotherapy and Stem Cell Transplantation for Relapsed Composite Low and Intermediate Grade (Including Transformed) Lymphoma.

2006· article· en· W2979544794 on OpenAlexaff
Khaled M. A. Ramadan, Joseph M. Connors, Abdulwahab J. Al-Tourah, Randy D. Gascoyne, Kevin Song, Michael J. Barnett, Stephen H. Nantel, Thomas J. Nevill, John D. Shepherd, Heather J. Sutherland, Julye C. Lavoie, Donna L. Forrest, Donna E. Hogge, Nicholas Voss, Ryan R. Brinkman, Clayton A. Smith, Cynthia L. Toze

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsBC Cancer AgencyVancouver General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabInternal medicineTransplantationAutologous stem-cell transplantationChemotherapyLymphomaGastroenterologySurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The effect of prior exposure to rituximab (ritux) on relapse (REL) and survival following stem cell transplantation (SCT) in patients (pts) with REL composite low and intermediate grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma (L/I-NHL) is unknown. Fifty-four pts with REL L/I-NHL underwent high-dose chemotherapy (CT) and SCT Jan ’89 to June ’05. Follow-up is complete to April ’6 with a median of 32 mo. Ritux was added to CT regimens since 2001 and given at 375 mg/m2. Eighteen pts received ritux at initial diagnosis of NHL or after REL with salvage CT prior to SCT. Pts proceeded to high dose CT with allogeneic (allo) (n=12) or autologous (auto) SCT (n=6). This group was compared with a group of pts not receiving ritux pre-SCT (n=36)(Table 1). Eleven pts (61%) are alive in the ritux group compared with 11 pts (31%) in the non-ritux group. The 2 and 4-y OS for pts who received ritux were 52% and 52%, vs 36% and 24% (p=.12, RR=.52) for pts who did not receive ritux. The EFS were significantly different with 2 and 4-y EFS for the ritux group 56% and 56% vs 24% and 18% (P=.038, RR=.42) for the non-ritux group (figure 1). No effect was seen on TRM. The risk of REL post SCT was significantly lower in the ritux group (p=.017)(figure 2). Two of 18 pts (11%) had NHL REL in the ritux vs 18 of 36 (50%) in the non-ritux group. The hazard rate of REL in pts who received ritux was 20% that of pts in the non-ritux group. Significance maintained in multivariate analysis (p=.016). No impact was seen on graft-versus-host disease (GVHD). Fifty percent and 61% of pts developed acute GVHD grades 2–4 and 50% and 64% of pts developed chronic GVHD in the ritux and non-ritux groups respectively. In conclusion, prior treatment with ritux in pts with relapsed composite L/I-NHL undergoing SCT was associated with reduced risk of REL and improved survival without associated increase in toxicity. Further analysis is underway to clarify the nature of this important finding. Table 1: Clinicopathological characteristics of ritux and non-ritux groups Parameter$ Rituximab group, n=18 (%) Non-rituximab group, n=36 (%) $ all p values are >0.1. *at diagnosis Median age at SCT 48 y 44 y M:F 2.6:1 1.6:1 Allo-SCT 12(67) 28(78) BM involvement* 10(56) 22(61) B symptoms* 7(39) 10(28) Prior purine analogue therapy 8(44) 11(31) Residual disease prior to SCT 9(50) 14(39) TBI in conditioning 13(72) 30(83) Figure Figure Figure Figure

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→