ReviewBlood reviews2024
Harnessing multi-source data for individualized care in Hodgkin Lymphoma.
Review in Blood reviews, 2024. 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.
- Hodgkin lymphoma: great progress with room for improvement.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Newly Diagnosed Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma: Optimizing Outcomes in a New Therapeutic Era.Hematological oncology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Hodgkin lymphoma is a rare, but highly curative form of cancer, primarily afflicting adolescents and young adults. Despite multiple seminal trials over the past twenty years, there is no single consensus-based treatment approach beyond use of multi-agency chemotherapy with curative intent. The use of radiation continues to be debated in early-stage disease, as part of combined modality treatment, as well as in salvage, as an important form of consolidation. While short-term disease outcomes have varied little across these different approaches across both early and advanced stage disease, the potential risk of severe, longer-term risk has varied considerably. Over the past decade novel therapeutics have been employed in the retrieval setting in preparation to and as consolidation after autologous stem cell transplant. More recently, these novel therapeutics have moved to the frontline setting, initially compared to standard-of-care treatment and later in a direct head-to-head comparison combined with multi-agent chemotherapy. In 2018, we established the HoLISTIC Consortium, bringing together disease and methods experts to develop clinical decision models based on individual patient data to guide providers, patients, and caregivers in decision-making. In this review, we detail the steps we followed to create the master database of individual patient data from patients treated over the past 20 years, using principles of data science. We then describe different methodological approaches we are taking to clinical decision making, beginning with clinical prediction tools at the time of diagnosis, to multi-state models, incorporating treatments and their response. Finally, we describe how simulation modeling can be used to estimate risks of late effects, based on cumulative exposure from frontline and salvage treatment. The resultant database and tools employed are dynamic with the expectation that they will be updated as better and more complete information becomes available.
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.