ArticleCurrent treatment options in neurology2011
Treatment and prophylaxis of hematologic malignancy in the central nervous system.
Article in Current treatment options in neurology, 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, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differentiating central nervous system infection from disease infiltration in hematological malignancy.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Evaluation of standardized triple intrathecal therapy toxicity in oncohematological pediatric patients.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2017Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
opinion statementCentral nervous system (CNS) involvement is a serious, and frequently fatal, complication of acute leukemias and very aggressive lymphomas. In patients with no evidence of CNS involvement at the time of diagnosis, the decision to include CNS prophylaxis in the treatment regimen should be based on cytologic diagnosis and other risk factors. Patients with a risk of CNS relapse greater than 10% should receive CNS prophylaxis with high-dose systemic chemotherapy, intrathecal therapy, radiation, or a combination thereof. The most commonly used systemic and intrathecal chemotherapies are methotrexate and cytarabine. Liposomal cytarabine, which increases CNS bioavailability and decreases the number of lumbar punctures needed, is our preference for intrathecal therapy. We usually reserve radiation therapy for patients who may not tolerate other forms of CNS prophylaxis. Patients with evidence of CNS involvement, either at diagnosis or relapse, should be treated until CNS disease clearance or dose-limiting toxicity is reached. Recent studies suggest that autologous stem cell transplantation may offer longer survivals for patients with CNS involvement and should be considered for patients who can tolerate the procedure. The use of rituximab in CNS prophylaxis and treatment has not yet been clearly delineated, but initial reports indicate that this agent and others may soon be available as an effective and tolerable CNS-directed therapy for lymphomas.
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.