Trial reportBritish journal of haematology2016
The long-term outcome of patients in the LRF CLL4 trial: the effect of salvage treatment and biological markers in those surviving 10 years.
Trial report in British journal of haematology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ibrutinib versus bendamustine plus rituximab for first-line treatment of 65 or older patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia without del(17p)/TP53 mutation in China: a lifetime economic research study.BMC health services research · 2023Article
- A laboratory-based scoring system predicts early treatment in Rai 0 chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Haematologica · 2020Article
- On the architecture of translational research designed to control chronic lymphocytic leukemia.Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program · 2018Review
- Cost-effectiveness of ibrutinib as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia in older adults without deletion 17p.Blood advances · 2018Article
- Prognostic Factors in the Era of Targeted Therapies in CLL.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2018Review
- Ofatumumab plus chlorambucil as a first-line therapy in less fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: analysis of COMPLEMENT1 and other monoclonal antibodies association data.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
With 10+ years follow-up in the Leukaemia Research Fund (LRF) CLL4 trial, we report the effect of salvage therapy, and the clinical/biological features of the 10-year survivors treated for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL). Overall survival (OS) was similar in the three randomized arms. With fludarabine-plus-cyclophosphamide (FC), progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer (P < 0.0001), but OS after progression significantly shorter, than in the chlorambucil or fludarabine arms (P < 0.0001). 614/777 patients progressed; 524 received second-line and 260 third-line therapy, with significantly better complete remission (CR) rates compared to first-line in the chlorambucil arm (7% vs. 13% after second-, 18% after third-line), but worse in the FC arm (38% vs. 15% after both second and third-line). OS 10 years after progression was better after a second-line CR versus a partial response (36% vs. 16%) and better with FC-based second-line therapy (including rituximab in 20%) or a stem cell transplant (28%) versus all other treatments (10%, P < 0.0001). The 176 (24%) 10-year survivors tended to be aged <70 years, with a "good risk" prognostic profile, stage A-progressive, achieving at least one CR, with a first-line PFS >3 years and receiving ≤2 lines of treatment. In conclusion, clinical/biological features and salvage treatments both influence the long-term outcome. Second-line therapies that induce a CR can improve OS in CLL patients.
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.