131I–Tositumomab in Lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Radioimmunoconjugates are radioisotope-bound monoclonal antibodies that target radiation specifically to sites of lymphoma involvement. Initial studies of (131)I-tositumomab in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) have suggested benefit in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent disease. However, the routine adoption of this agent is tempered by concerns about associated toxicities and unclear long-term benefit. Based on a comprehensive search for studies on (131)I-tositumomab use in lymphoma, this systematic review summarizes and evaluates the evidence on the benefits and risks of this novel therapy,the predictors for response and toxicity, and the role of dosimetry and imaging studies before treatment.We identified 18 trials investigating the use of (131)I-tositumomab for the treatment of adult patients with nhl. In trials of patients with relapsed or refractory indolent nhl, overall response rates ranged from 67% to 83%. In patients with follicular nhl refractory to the monoclonal antibody rituximab, response rates remained high (65%-72%). However, in rituximab-naïve patients with relapsed or refractory indolent or transformed nhl, improvements in time to progression or survival have not been clearly established. (131)I-Tositumomab is an active agent in relapsed and refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma that should be considered in selected patients.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".