Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2008
Patterns of mortality after prolonged follow-up of a randomised controlled trial using granulocyte colony-stimulating factor to maintain chemotherapy dose intensity in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.
Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The dark side of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor: a supportive therapy with potential to promote tumour progression.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2018Review
- Re: personalized medicine and cancer supportive care: appropriate use of colony-stimulating factor support of chemotherapy.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2011Article
- A prospective study of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in the South West London Cancer Network. Interpretation of study results in light of NCAG/NCEPOD findings.British journal of cancer · 2011Article
- Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors: where are we now?Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The effect of utilising granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to maintain chemotherapy dose intensity in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) on long-term mortality patterns has not been formally evaluated. We analysed prolonged follow-up data from the first randomised controlled trial investigating this approach. Data on 10-year overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), freedom from progression (FFP) and incidence of second malignancies were collected for 80 patients with aggressive subtypes of NHL, who had been randomised to receive either VAPEC-B chemotherapy or VAPEC-B+G-CSF. Median follow-up was 15.7 years for surviving patients. No significant differences were found in PFS or OS. However, 10-year FFP was better in the G-CSF arm (68 vs 47%, P=0.037). Eleven deaths from causes unrelated to NHL or its treatment occurred in the G-CSF arm compared to five in controls. More deaths occurred from second malignancies (4 vs 2) and cardiovascular causes (5 vs 0) in the G-CSF arm. Although this pharmacovigilance study has insufficient statistical power to draw conclusions and is limited by the lack of data on smoking history and other cardiovascular risk factors, these unique long-term outcome data generate hypotheses that warrant further investigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.