Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25034148›Full record

ArticleLeukemia2015

The EBMT/EMCL consensus project on the role of autologous and allogeneic stem cell transplantation in mantle cell lymphoma.

S Robinson, P Dreger, D Caballero, P Corradini, C Geisler, M Ghielmini, S Le Gouill, E Kimby, S Rule, U Vitolo and 3 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Leukemia, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 69 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.

S RobinsonBMT Unit, University Hospital Bristol, Bristol, UK.
P DregerUniversity of Heidelberg, Medizinische Klinik, Heidelberg, Germany.
D CaballeroHospital Clínico Servicio de Hematologica, Salamanca, Spain.
P CorradiniDivision of Hematology, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, University of Milano, Milano, Italy.
C GeislerBMT Unit, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark.
M GhielminiOncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland.
S Le GouillCHU Nantes, Nantes, France.
E KimbyDepartment Of Haematology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
S RulePlymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Hospital, Plymouth, UK.
U VitoloDepartment of Oncology and Hematology, 'Città della Salute e della Scienza' University Hospital, Torino, Italy.
M DreylingDepartment of Haemato-Oncology, University of Munich, Munich, Germany.
O HermineHôpital Necker, Service Hematologie Adulte, Paris, France.
European MCL Network and the Lymphoma Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation
Azienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · ITCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRHeidelberg University · DEHôpital Necker-Enfants Malades · FRInstitute of Oncology Research · CHKarolinska University Hospital · SERigshospitalet · DKUniversity Hospitals Plymouth NHS Trust · GBUniversity of Milan · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The role of both autologous (autoSCT) and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT) in the management of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) remains to be clarified. We conducted a consensus project using the RAND-modified Delphi consensus procedure to provide guidance on how SCT should be used in MCL. With regard to autoSCT, there was consensus in support of: autoSCT is the standard first-line consolidation therapy; induction therapy should include high-dose cytarabine and Rituximab; complete or partial remission should be achieved before autoSCT; Rituximab maintenance following autoSCT is not indicated; and omission of autoSCT in 'low-risk' patients is not indicated. No consensus could be reached regarding: autoSCT in the treatment of relapsed disease following non-transplant therapy; the value of positron emission tomography scanning and minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring; in vivo purging with Rituximab; total body irradiation conditioning for autoSCT; and preemptive Rituximab after autoSCT. For alloSCT, consensus was reached in support of: alloSCT should be considered for patients relapsing after autoSCT; reduced intensity conditioning regimens should be used; allogeneic immunotherapy should be used for MRD eradication after alloSCT; and there is a lack of prognostic criteria to guide the use of alloSCT as first-line consolidation. No consensus was reached regarding the role of alloSCT for relapsed disease following non-transplant therapy.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedConsensus Statements as TopicCytarabineEuropeHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansImmunotherapyLymphoma, Mantle-CellNeoplasm, ResidualPositron-Emission TomographyRecurrenceRemission InductionRituximabTransplantation, AutologousTransplantation ConditioningTransplantation, HomologousAntibodies, Monoclonal, Murine-DerivedCytarabineRituximab

Identifiers

PMID25034148
OpenAlexW2043562148

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.