ArticleEuropean radiology2020
Interim response in diffuse large B cell lymphoma on CT: what is the optimal size reduction (ΔSPD) for predicting outcome?
Article in European radiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
objectivesTo investigate whether there was an optimal interim size reduction (iΔSPD) cutoff value that could discriminate diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients with poor prognosis.
methodsThis retrospective study enrolled 265 newly diagnosed DLBCL patients with baseline and interim (after 3 cycles) contrast-enhanced computed tomographic scan (CECT) available. Two radiologists evaluated CECT images and selected target lesions according to the Lugano Response Criteria. Lymph nodes greater than 15 mm in longest diameter (LDi) and extra-nodal lesions with LDi greater than 10 mm could be chosen as target lesions and used to calculate iΔSPD. A software tool, X-Tile, was used to calculate the optimal iΔSPD cutoff value to differentiate patients with good vs. poor prognosis. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, Cox regression analysis, and Kaplan-Meier analyses were further used to validate the optimal cutoff value.
resultsThe optimal cutoff value of iΔSPD calculated by X-tile was 80%. Compared with 50% and 100%, 80% cutoff value had the intermediate sensitivity and specificity (57.75% and 86.69% for overall survival (OS), 48.98% and 92.22% for progression-free survival (PFS), respectively), but the maximal Youden index (0.4744 for OS, 0.4120 for PFS, respectively) and areas under the curve (0.737 [0.680, 0.789] for OS). Cox regression analysis also revealed that iΔSPD < 80% could independently predict an inferior OS and PFS (both p < 0.001) while neither iΔSPD < 50% nor iΔSPD = 100% could.
conclusionsiΔSPD with the cutoff value 80% is an independent predictor of PFS and OS for patients with DLBCL. Results suggest that treatment should be modified for patients with iΔSPD < 80%. KEY POINTS: • The aim of interim response assessment is to identify patients whose disease has not responded to or has progressed on induction therapy. • A cutoff value of 80% in size reduction (ΔSPD) is an independent predictor of PFS and OS for DLBCL patients and is better than 50%. • In DLBCL patients with interim ΔSPD < 80%, a change to a more efficient therapy should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32065283What 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.