ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2016
Evaluation of a method for calculating carboplatin dosage in DeVIC ± R therapy (combination therapy of dexamethasone, etoposide, ifosfamide and carboplatin with or without rituximab) as a salvage therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comprehensive assessment of DeVIC therapy for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.International journal of hematology · 2026Article
- Association between Area under the Curve Estimated from Carboplatin Dose and Incidence of Severe Thrombocytopenia in Patients with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma on DeVIC Therapy.Asian Pacific journal of cancer prevention : APJCP · 2023Article
- Evaluation of calculating carboplatin dosage in carboplatin-pemetrexed therapy as the first-line therapy for Chinese patients with advanced lung adenocarcinoma.Thoracic cancer · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral studies have evaluated the utility of extrapolating the Calvert formula in calculating carboplatin (CBDCA) dosages in solid tumours; however, data regarding haematological cancers are less. Therefore, we conducted a preliminary study of the utility of extrapolating the Calvert formula in calculating CBDCA dosages for DeVIC ± R therapy.
methodsA retrospective study on 57 non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients who had received DeVIC ± R therapy was conducted. The area under the curve (AUC) of CBDCA was back-calculated from actual dosages using the Calvert formula. Patients were divided into two groups according to an AUC ≥ 4 or an AUC < 4, respectively. The Revised Response Criteria of the International Working Group and CTCAE version 4.0 were used for assessing the treatment efficacy and adverse events, respectively.
resultsThe use of AUC instead of body surface area had greater utility in calculating CBDCA dosage, with a response rate of greater than 50 % in patients receiving DeVIC ± R therapy with an AUC ≥ 4 for CBDCA. The response rate of the AUC ≥ 4 group was significantly higher than that of the AUC < 4 group. Decreased platelet and neutrophil counts of grade ≥3 occurred at higher rates in the AUC ≥ 4 group.
conclusionThe extrapolation of the Calvert formula has utility in calculating the CBDCA dosage for DeVIC ± R therapy, and therapeutic efficacy was increased by maintaining the AUC of CBDCA at ≥4.
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.