Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31560165›Full record

Observational studyCancer medicine2019

Clinical outcomes for ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma in real-world experience.

Young-Woo Jeon, Seugyun Yoon, Gi June Min, Sung-Soo Park, Silvia Park, Jae-Ho Yoon, Sung-Eun Lee, Byung-Sik Cho, Ki-Seong Eom, Yoo-Jin Kim and 5 more

Abstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

15 authors.

Young-Woo JeonDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-3362-8200
Seugyun YoonDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Gi June MinDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Sung-Soo ParkDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Silvia ParkDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Jae-Ho YoonDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-2145-9131
Sung-Eun LeeDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-9810-2050
Byung-Sik ChoDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0002-4524-6616
Ki-Seong EomDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Yoo-Jin KimDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Hee-Je KimDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Seok LeeDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Chang-Ki MinDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.
Jong Wook LeeDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.ORCID 0000-0003-2949-4166
Seok-Goo ChoDivision of Lymphoma-Myeloma, Catholic Hematology Hospital, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

National Research Foundation of Korea(NRF) grant funded by the Korea government NRF-2016R1A2B4007282The Korean Association of Internal Medicine grant 2016-144
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Ibrutinib is highly effective in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) in major clinical trials. Although there has been a dramatic improvement in survival outcomes in the salvage setting, nonresponders to ibrutinib have a bleak prognosis. Therefore, this retrospective study was conducted to identify the most appropriate therapeutic strategy and prognosis-related factors to predict the response of patients with relapsed or refractory MCL to ibrutinib monotherapy. Thirty-three consecutive refractory or relapsed MCL patients treated with ibrutinib were analyzed in this study. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after initiation of ibrutinib were 35.1 months and 27.4 months, respectively. Risk factor analysis showed that high risk according to the Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI) and nonresponse to ibrutinib at the first three cycles were significantly associated with inferior OS. Poor PFS was associated with high-risk biologic MIPI, prior bendamustine exposure, and nonresponse to ibrutinib during the first three cycles. After ibrutinib failure, primary nonresponders had poorer OS and PFS than inconsistent responders. The overall response rate for the first salvage therapy was only 33%, with a median TTP of 3.2 months. There was no effective therapeutic strategy except for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Although ibrutinib responders exhibited favorable survival outcomes, nonresponders had a dismal prognosis. To overcome these limitations, it may be necessary to modify therapeutic strategies, such as selecting inconsistent responders for earlier allo-HSCT.

Indexed as

Salvage TherapyAdenineAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsFemaleHumansLymphoma, Mantle-CellMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalPiperidinesProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrazolesPyrimidinesTreatment OutcomeAdenineAntineoplastic AgentsibrutinibPiperidinesProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrazolesPyrimidinesallogeneic stem transplantationbendamustineibrutinibmantle cell lymphomanonresponder

Identifiers

PMID31560165
PMCPMC6853811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.