Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35129305›Full record

ReviewCancer medicine2022

The outcome of watchful waiting in patients with previously treated follicular lymphoma.

Takahiro Fujino, Dai Maruyama, Akiko-Miyagi Maeshima, Yo Saito, Hanae Ida, Rika Hosoba, Sayako Yuda, Shinichi Makita, Suguru Fukuhara, Wataru Munakata and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancer medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

13 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Takahiro FujinoDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-7817-093X
Dai MaruyamaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0003-0654-6920
Akiko-Miyagi MaeshimaDepartment of Pathology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yo SaitoDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Hanae IdaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8705-7143
Rika HosobaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Sayako YudaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Shinichi MakitaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6609-8088
Suguru FukuharaDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-2423-9978
Wataru MunakataDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsuya SuzukiDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Junya KurodaDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-6130-1550
Koji IzutsuDepartment of Hematology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.ORCID 0000-0001-9129-8057
Tokyo National Hospital · JPKyoto Prefectural University of Medicine · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Watchful waiting (WW) is one of the standard approaches for newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma (FL) patients with low-tumor burden. However, the impact of WW in FL patients at the first progression, remains unclear. We reviewed 206 FL patients who experienced the first progression after responding to the initial treatment at our institution between 1998 and 2017. Patients were classified into either the WW cohort (132 patients) or the immediate treatment cohort (74 patients). Overall, the median follow-up from the first progression was 79.8 months (range, 2.1-227.0 months). In the WW cohort, the estimated median time to next treatment (TNT) was 19.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.4-30.2), and 76.5% (95% CI, 68.0-84.1) of the patients subsequently underwent the second-line treatment at 5 years. There was a significant difference in the median time to treatment failure in the WW cohort (72.8 months; 95% CI, 64.6-94.0) compared to the immediate treatment cohort (23.3 months; 95% CI, 13.4-38.8) (HR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.48-3.06), whereas overall survival and the cumulative incidence of histological transformation were not significantly different between two cohorts. In a multivariate analysis, rituximab refractory status, progression of disease within 24 months from the induction of first-line therapy, and a high Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score at diagnosis were significantly associated with shorter TNT. Interestingly, 15 patients (11%) of the WW cohort experienced spontaneous tumor regression during WW, and their TNT (median, 82.1 months, 95% CI, 11.7-NA) was longer than that of the remaining patients in the WW cohort (median, 16.5 months, 95% CI, 13.0-25.4), with a significant difference (p = 0.01). The results of the present study suggested that WW could be a safe and reasonable option even at the first progression for the selected FL patients, without a negative impact on clinical outcomes.

Indexed as

Lymphoma, FollicularAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCohort StudiesHumansIncidenceRituximabWatchful WaitingRituximablymphoma, follicularlymphoma, non-Hodgkinneoplasm regression, spontaneousrituximabwatchful waiting

Identifiers

PMID35129305
PMCPMC9119349
OpenAlexW4210509030

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.