MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4213439089 · doi:10.51626/ijor.2021.02.00008

The Role of Radiotherapy in Relapse/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the Rituximab Era: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2021· review· en· W4213439089 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal on Oral Health · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRituximabMedicineInternal medicineOncologyDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaRadiation therapyAdverse effectRefractory (planetary science)Salvage therapyLymphomaChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: The role of radiotherapy (RT) in the salvage setting for patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is unclear in the rituximab era. We sought to determine the efficacy and toxicity of RT for this group of patients. Methods: We searched various biomedical databases, including conference proceedings, for eligible studies where patients were treated with salvage radiotherapy for r/r DLBCL after receiving rituximab based chemotherapy regime. Random-effects meta-analysis with inverse variance weighting to pool prevalence data was performed. Outcomes of interest were 2 and 5-year overall survival (OS-2, OS-5), 2 and 5-year progression free survival (PFS-2, PFS-5) and Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AE). Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scoring system. Results: We found 12 eligible non-comparative studies including 387 patients who received rituximab based chemotherapy as first line treatment and subsequently relapsed or had residual disease on post treatment restaging imaging. The OS-2 and OS-5 was 90% (95% CI, 84 – 95%) and 83% (95% CI, 76 – 89%) respectively. Similarly, PFS-2 and PFS-5 were 81% (95% CI, 72 – 90%) and 74% (95% CI, 65 – 82%) respectively. Sub-group analysis showed that studies with prospective design had higher rates of OS-2 and OS-5 compared with studies of retrospective design (OS-2: 97% vs 81%, interaction P (IP) = 0.009; OS-5: 95% vs 75%, IP = 0.003). and studies with peri-transplant RT had lower rates of OS-5 compared to studies with salvage RT alone (59% vs 77%, IP = 0.03). Conclusion: The available evidence, albeit low quality, suggests that salvage radiotherapy provides encouraging disease control and survival rates. It also emphasizes the need for high-quality randomized trials to establish how RT can be integrated optimally in this setting. Keywords: Radiotherapy; Relapsed; Refractory; Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; Salvage

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0170.031
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.344 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal on Oral Health→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→