ArticlePediatric hematology and oncology2014
Pediatric Burkitt's lymphoma and diffuse B-cell lymphoma: are surveillance scans required?
Article in Pediatric hematology and oncology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cumulative radiation doses due to nuclear medicine examinations: a systematic review.The British journal of radiology · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of evidence for and against routine surveillance imaging after completing treatment for childhood extracranial solid tumors.Cancer medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Current Treatment Strategies and Supportive Care Practices in the Care of Children and Adolescents With Mature B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Survey of Children's Oncology Group Institutions.Pediatric blood & cancer · 2025Article
- Patients undergoing multipleThe British journal of radiology · 2022Article
- Surveillance imaging in pediatric lymphoma.Pediatric radiology · 2019Review
- An update on Burkitt lymphoma: a review of pathogenesis and multimodality imaging assessment of disease presentation, treatment response, and recurrence.Insights into imaging · 2019Review
- Impact of Surveillance Imaging Modality on Survival After Recurrence in Patients With Favorable-Histology Wilms Tumor: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2018Article
- Cancer research in India: Challenges & opportunities.The Indian journal of medical research · 2018Article
- Imaging of primary pediatric lymphoma of bone.Pediatric radiology · 2016Article
- Pediatric lymphomas and histiocytic disorders of childhood.Pediatric clinics of North America · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Outcomes in pediatric B-Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (B NHL) have improved with intensive chemotherapy protocols, with long-term survival now over 80%. However, long-term adverse effects of therapy and poor outcomes for patients who relapse remain challenges. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the potential risks and benefits of routine relapse surveillance imaging after the completion of therapy. We reviewed 44 B NHL patients diagnosed and treated at Texas Children's Cancer Center in the period between 2000 to 2011. All cross-sectional diagnostic imaging examinations performed for disease assessment after completion of chemotherapy were reviewed and cumulative radiation dosage from these examinations and the frequency of relapse detection by these examinations were recorded. Only 3 patients of the 44 relapsed (6.8%), though none of the relapses were initially diagnosed by computed tomography (CT) or fludeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) scans. Median effective dose of ionizing radiation per patient was 40.3 mSv with an average of 49.1 mSv (range 0-276 mSv). This single-institution study highlights the low relapse rate in pediatric B-NHL with complete response at the end of therapy, the low sensitivity of early detection of relapse with surveillance CT or FDG-PET imaging, and the costs and potential increased risk of secondary malignancies from cumulative radiation exposure from surveillance imaging. We propose that routine surveillance CT or FDG-PET scans for these patients may not be necessary.
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.