Observational studyBMJ open2022
Risk and outcome of acute myeloid leukaemia among survivors of primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a retrospective observational study based on SEER database.
Observational study in BMJ open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Causes of excess nonlymphoma death in 58 000 patients with DLBCL diagnosed during 1997 to 2020 and followed for up to 25 years.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Specific mortality in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a retrospective analysis based on the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results database.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesSurvivors of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are at an increased risk of developing second primary malignancies. However, the risk of secondary acute myeloid leukaemia (sAML) has not been previously described in detail, and the outcomes of patients with sAML are also undiscovered compared with their de novo counterparts (de novo acute myeloid leukaemia, dnAML).
designThis study is a retrospective database study. SETTING AND
participantsA total of 70 280 patients with primary DLBCL, diagnosed between 2000 and 2016, were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Another cohort with dnAML matching with sAML was also obtained from SEER database.
resultsThe standardised incidence ratio was 6.23 (95% CI: 5.50 to 7.03) for sAML among survivors of DLBCL. The estimated cumulative incidence of sAML was 0.61% 15 years after the diagnosis of DLBCL. Patients aged 60-74 years were more likely to have sAML than those <60 years (subdistribution HR (sHR)=1.417; 95% CI: 1.087 to 1.850), whereas patients aged ≥75 years were less likely to have sAML (sHR=0.648; 95% CI: 0.452 to 0.930). Patients with advanced-stage DLBCL were more prone to sAML than those with early-stage disease (sHR=1.307; 95% CI: 1.012 to 1.690). There was a significant difference of survival between patients with dnAML and those with sAML (HR=1.25; 95% CI: 1.01 to 1.53).
conclusionsThe risk of developing sAML after DLBCL is substantial. Patients aged 60-74 years and with advanced-stage are more prone to sAML. And, compared with their dnAML counterparts, patients with sAML have a worse prognosis.
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.