Pulmonary Toxicity of Hodgkin Lymphoma Treatment: A Prospective Single-Center Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Standard bleomycin-containing first-line therapy and/or irradiation may cause pulmonary toxicity in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients. Our aim was to prospectively assess effects of chest irradiation, bleomycin administration, and other factors on lung function in the treatment of patients with HL. METHODS: Pulmonary function of newly diagnosed HL patients was assessed via a St. George Respiratory Questionnaire, dynamic inhalation lung scintigraphy, spirometry, and an assessment of the diffusion capacity of the lung for carbon monoxide (DLCO) before, during, and after treatment. RESULTS: This prospective study was conducted at the University of Debrecen. The study included 84 patients with classical HL. Most patients received standard doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine chemotherapy. Both intramuscular and intravenous administrations of bleomycin were used. Brentuximab vedotin combination chemotherapy was administered to 12 patients. Mediastinal involved-field irradiation therapy (IFRT) was used to treat 16 patients. Lung scintigraphy revealed pulmonary toxicity more sensitively than DLCO. Intravenous bleomycin administration decreased diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid clearance. Intramuscular bleomycin had the lowest level of pulmonary toxicity among considered treatments. Currently used, mediastinal IFRT had a lower level of pulmonary toxicity than bleomycin. The current prospective evaluation confirmed previous results that determined that cumulative bleomycin dose and administration are major risk factors for pulmonary toxicity, while the currently used treatment method, mediastinal irradiation, was determined to be relatively safe for treating for HL patients. CONCLUSION: We agree with decreasing bleomycin dosage and number of cycles administered and we do not recommend avoiding mediastinal IFRT, unless multiple pulmonary risk factors are present.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".