ArticleLeukemia & lymphoma2020
Potential impact of consolidation radiation therapy for advanced Hodgkin lymphoma: a secondary analysis of SWOG S0816.
Article in Leukemia & lymphoma, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 12 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The role of radiotherapy (RT) in the management of advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) is inadequately defined in this era of functional imaging with PET scan. SWOG-S0816 treated advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with ABVD+/- escBEACOPP and no RT. We queried whether RT might have benefited patients in S0816 who would have met the GHSG-HD15 criteria for RT by simulating RT use as per HD15 criteria of PET + residual disease ≥2.5 cm. Receiver-operating-characteristics analyses were performed by varying disease-control rates within radiation fields and size cutoffs for residual disease. Among the 49 PET3+ S0816 patients, RT would have raised the 2-year PFS from 30.6% to 50.2-58.1% using three residual disease cutoffs (1.5, 2.0 and 2.5 cm) and assuming 80 and 90% in-field control rates . Although there may be improvement in PFS as size cutoff point is lowered, consequential toxicities from RT require further definition to assess relative benefits.
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.