ArticleScientific reports2023
Comparison of the prognostic impact of IPI and PIT in peripheral T-cell lymphoma in real-world practice with a large elderly population.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Synergistic adverse prognostic impact of CD30 and Epstein-Barr virus in peripheral T-cell lymphoma: CD30 identifies a high-risk subgroup in Epstein-Barr virus-encoded RNA -positive patients.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Epstein-barr virus-encoded small RNA incorporated prognostic model enables precision risk stratification and guides treatment decisions in peripheral t-cell lymphoma: a multicenter retrospective cohort.Annals of hematology · 2025Article
- A New Histology-Based Prognostic Index for Aggressive T-Cell lymphoma: Preliminary Results of the "TCL Urayasu Classification".Journal of clinical medicine · 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
20 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared the predictive ability of the International Prognostic Index (IPI), a frequently used prognostic model for peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), with that of a type-specific prognostic model, the Prognostic Index for PTCL-U (PIT). We retrospectively analyzed 113 patients diagnosed with PTCL. The median age was 67 years (range, 16-88 years), 75 patients (66%) were male, and the most common disease type was PTCL, not otherwise specified (69%). With a median follow-up of 6.8 years (interquartile range, 2.7-9.9 years), 5-year survival rates for the four groups in IPI were 85%, 62%, 49%, and 13%, respectively. Similarly, 5-year survival rates for the four groups in PIT were 83%, 64%, 49%, and 19%, respectively. The area under the receiving operating characteristic curve for predicting mortality from PIT (0.725) was not significantly different from that from the IPI (0.685, P = 0.134). Multivariable analysis showed that performance status ≥ 2 (P < 0.0001) and extranodal lesions ≥ 2 (P = 0.029) were significantly associated with lower overall survival. The present study found no significant difference in prognostic ability between the IPI and PIT for PTCL, and both models appear useful as predictive models.
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.