SynthesisInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2013
Pharmaceutical follow-up for patients on rituximab therapy for non-Hodgkin lymphoma: what is the evidence?
Synthesis in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIntroduction of the monoclonal antibody rituximab to chemotherapy regimens has substantially improved disease-free and overall survival in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). The short-term safety of this drug has been widely reported, but there are few data on long-term safety, which suggests that these patients require prolonged follow-up. AIM OF THE REVIEW: To review the literature on follow-up models, with a focus on the safety of rituximab therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma.
methodThe Cochrane Library, Embassy, Lilacs, Medline, and Scirus databases were searched for systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials. Furthermore, textbooks and journals on pharmaceutical care and institutional websites were searched for patient management recommendations. The outcomes were follow-up models and grade 3, 4, and 5 adverse reactions.
resultsFive systematic reviews and eight clinical trials or updates describing patient follow-up or reporting adverse reactions were identified. Only one systematic review and seven clinical trials reported follow-up routines for patients receiving rituximab, including information on staging, frequency of reassessment, and laboratory tests, as well as pre-infusion care and management of acute or delayed adverse reactions. Five systematic reviews and four clinical trials reported data on statistically significant adverse reactions (fever, leukopenia, infection). Four guidelines or institutional protocols for treatment and follow-up were identified, as well as seven studies describing experiences in the implementation of pharmaceutical care for oncology patients, but none were specifically focused on follow-up of patients receiving rituximab for NHL.
conclusionAlthough some systematic reviews and clinical trials contain guidance on follow-up of patients receiving rituximab for NHL, there are no validated strategies for systematic follow-up of these patients with a focus on safety. As there are few data on long-term safety profile of these novel treatments, monitoring strategies should be developed and implemented to ensure safe and optimized use of drugs recently added to the therapeutic arsenal of clinical oncology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23737385What 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.