ReviewLeukemia & lymphoma2011
Current concepts and controversies in the management of early stage Hodgkin lymphoma.
Review in Leukemia & lymphoma, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Imaging Surveillance of Limited-stage Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients After PET-CT-documented First Remission.Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Over the past three decades, due to the recognition of late effects related to high-dose extended field radiotherapy and heavy alkylator chemotherapy, combined modality therapy with abbreviated chemotherapy and limited field radiotherapy has emerged as the standard of care for early stage Hodgkin lymphoma, with cure rates in excess of 80%. Currently, however, controversy remains over identifying the most appropriate criteria to risk-stratify patients with early stage disease, so that those with a favorable prognosis receive limited treatment without compromising cure rates and those with unfavorable risk receive more intensified therapy. The optimal risk stratification system remains unclear, with variable definitions of favorable and unfavorable disease used by research groups in North America and Europe. Thus, comparison of clinical trial results has been challenging, and additional controversies persist regarding optimal chemotherapy regimens, duration of therapy, and the role of radiotherapy. Investigations are ongoing to assess the potential of functional imaging and biomarkers as tools for risk stratification. The collective goal is to further refine current stratification strategies to allow for an individualized, risk-adapted treatment approach that minimizes long-term late effects without compromising high cure rates.
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.