ArticleFrontiers in oncology2023
Comparison of first-line treatment with CHOP versus ICED in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma eligible for upfront autologous stem cell transplantation.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of the efficacy and safety of first-line therapies for peripheral T-cell lymphoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been recommended for patients who are newly diagnosed with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), and CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), an anthracycline-based chemotherapy has been the frontline chemotherapy for PTCL. However, it is not clear whether anthracycline-based chemotherapies such as CHOP could be standard induction therapy for PTCL. Methods: We conducted a randomized phase II study to compare CHOP with fractionated ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide, and dexamethasone (ICED) for patients eligible for ASCT. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and safety profiles. Results: Patients were randomized into either CHOP (n = 69) or ICED (n = 66), and the characteristics of both arms were not different. PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS, n = 60) and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL, n = 53) were dominant. The objective response rate was not different between CHOP (59.4%) and ICED (56.1%), and the 3-year PFS was not different between CHOP (36.7%) and ICED (33.1%). In AITL patients, CHOP was favored over ICED whereas ICED was associated with more cytopenia and reduced dose intensity. Patients who received upfront ASCT after achieving complete response to CHOP or ICED showed 80% of 3-year OS. Discussion: In summary, our study showed no therapeutic difference between CHOP and ICED in terms of response and PFS. Thus, CHOP might remain the reference regimen especially for AITL based on its better outcome in AITL, and upfront ASCT could be recommended as a consolidation of complete response in patients with PTCL.
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.