Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36266325›Full record

ReviewLeukemia2022

Central nervous system involvement in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia: challenges and solutions.

Maria Thastrup, Alasdair Duguid, Christian Mirian, Kjeld Schmiegelow, Christina Halsey

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Leukemia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 66 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
66citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
17.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

66 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 91 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Maria ThastrupDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Alasdair DuguidCentre for Regenerative Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8821-8607
Christian MirianDepartment of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Kjeld Schmiegelow *Department of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, Rigshospitalet, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0829-4993
Christina Halsey *Wolfson Wohl Cancer Research Centre, School of Cancer Sciences, College of Medical Veterinary and Life Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. chris.halsey@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5449-5246
University of Copenhagen · DKMRC Centre for Regenerative Medicine · GBUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK C60521/A31315
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Delivery of effective anti-leukemic agents to the central nervous system (CNS) is considered essential for cure of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Current CNS-directed therapy comprises systemic therapy with good CNS-penetration accompanied by repeated intrathecal treatments up to 26 times over 2-3 years. This approach prevents most CNS relapses, but is associated with significant short and long term neurotoxicity. Despite this burdensome therapy, there have been no new drugs licensed for CNS-leukemia since the 1960s, when very limited anti-leukemic agents were available and there was no mechanistic understanding of leukemia survival in the CNS. Another major barrier to improved treatment is that we cannot accurately identify children at risk of CNS relapse, or monitor response to treatment, due to a lack of sensitive biomarkers. A paradigm shift in treating the CNS is needed. The challenges are clear - we cannot measure CNS leukemic load, trials have been unable to establish the most effective CNS treatment regimens, and non-toxic approaches for relapsed, refractory, or intolerant patients are lacking. In this review we discuss these challenges and highlight research advances aiming to provide solutions. Unlocking the potential of risk-adapted non-toxic CNS-directed therapy requires; (1) discovery of robust diagnostic, prognostic and response biomarkers for CNS-leukemia, (2) identification of novel therapeutic targets combined with associated investment in drug development and early-phase trials and (3) engineering of immunotherapies to overcome the unique challenges of the CNS microenvironment. Fortunately, research into CNS-ALL is now making progress in addressing these unmet needs: biomarkers, such as CSF-flow cytometry, are now being tested in prospective trials, novel drugs are being tested in Phase I/II trials, and immunotherapies are increasingly available to patients with CNS relapses. The future is hopeful for improved management of the CNS over the next decade.

Indexed as

Central Nervous System NeoplasmsPrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaCentral Nervous SystemChildHumansProspective StudiesRecurrenceTumor Microenvironment

Identifiers

PMID36266325
PMCPMC9712093
OpenAlexW4306882692

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.