ArticleTranslational cancer research2021
RCHOP-14 therapy versus RCHOP-21 therapy for people with aggressive or advanced-stage indolent B-cell non-Hodgkins lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in Translational cancer research, 2021. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Frontline Therapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Evolving Standards, Biological Insights, and Future Directions.European journal of haematology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the advent of rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (RCHOP) treatment has become considered the appropriate chemotherapy treatment for aggressive or advanced-stage indolent B-cell non-Hodgkins lymphoma (NHL). In recent years, RCHOP-14 seems to have achieved better outcomes in patients with aggressive or advanced-stage indolent B-cell NHL than RCHOP-21.
methodsTo verify the befitting chemotherapy regimens for patients with B-cell NHL, we searched the electronic databases for relevant English-language literature published in January 2020. The primary outcomes were complete response (CR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse events (AEs). Six eligible Phase II and III randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) and two high-quality observational comparative studies (OCSs) were extracted, with 5,565 patients with B-cell NHL involved in the evaluation.
resultsThe analysis demonstrated no significant difference in RCHOP-14 and RCHOP-21 CR rates [odds ratio (OR) =0.98, 95% CI: 0.77-1.24, P=0.85]. Compared with RCHOP-21, the merged hazard ratio (HR) after treatment with RCHOP-14 for PFS and OS was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.84-1.06, P=0.32) and 0.91 (95% CI: 0.83-1.01, P=0.08), respectively. A subgroup analysis based on the international prognostic index (IPI) score showed that both chemotherapy regimens were applicable in B-cell NHL patients with different prognoses. The frequency of toxic side-effects was similar between schemes.
conclusionsThe data presented suggest that the efficacy and safety of both regimens are comparable and that RCHOP-14 remains a viable plan in patients with B-cell NHL who prefer a shorter therapy course.
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.