Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38598710›Full record

Trial reportBlood advances2024

Myeloablative vs nonmyeloablative consolidation for primary central nervous system lymphoma: results of Alliance 51101.

Tracy T Batchelor, Sharmila Giri, Amy S Ruppert, Susan M Geyer, Scott E Smith, Nimish Mohile, Lode J Swinnen, Jonathan W Friedberg, Brad S Kahl, Nancy L Bartlett and 6 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase II
In one paragraph

Trial report in Blood advances, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01511562 (A Randomized Phase II Trial of Myeloablative Versus Non-Myeloablative Consolidation Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Primary CNS B-cell Lymphoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT01511562 phase2active not recruitingnot on this map

A Randomized Phase II Trial of Myeloablative Versus Non-Myeloablative Consolidation Chemotherapy for Newly Diagnosed Primary CNS B-cell Lymphoma

TypeinterventionalSponsorAlliance for Clinical Trials in OncologyRan2012 to 2027Enrolled113ConditionsLymphomaArmscarmustine, cytarabine, etoposide, thiotepa, stem cell transplant
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed.

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

16 authors.

Tracy T BatchelorBrigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
Sharmila GiriAlliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Amy S RuppertAlliance Statistics and Data Management Center, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Susan M GeyerAlliance Statistics and Data Management Center, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN.
Scott E SmithCardinal Bernardin Cancer Center, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, IL.
Nimish MohileUniversity of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Lode J SwinnenJohns Hopkins University/Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center, Baltimore, MD.
Jonathan W FriedbergUniversity of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY.
Brad S KahlWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.ORCID 0000-0003-0459-6609
Nancy L BartlettWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.ORCID 0000-0001-8470-394X
Eric D HsiWake Forest University Health Sciences, Winston-Salem, NC.ORCID 0000-0001-8623-4067
Bruce D ChesonMedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC.
Nina Wagner-JohnstonWashington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.ORCID 0000-0001-6529-9793
Lakshmi NayakBrigham and Women's Hospital, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA.
John P LeonardWeill Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY.
James L RubensteinUCSF Medical Center, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, San Francisco, CA.

Funding

Member Site CoreU10CA180821 · NCI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI Evanthia Galanis · 2014 to 2026
$177.3M
Project-006U10CA180820 · NCI · ECOG-ACRIN MEDICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION · PI Peter J ODwyer, MITCHELL D. SCHNALL · 2014 to 2026
$167.6M
SWOG Network Group Operations Center of the NCTNU10CA180888 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS · PI PRIMO N. LARA · 2014 to 2026
$152.1M
Statistics CoreU10CA180882 · NCI · MAYO CLINIC ROCHESTER · PI Sumithra Jay Mandrekar · 2014 to 2026
$115.0M
WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY / SITEMAN CANCER CENTER LEAD ACADEMIC SITEUG1CA233339 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI NANCY L BARTLETT, Clifford Grant Robinson · 2019 to 2026
$11.3M
NCTN Lead Academic Participating Site at Dana-Farber/Partners Cancer CareUG1CA233180 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI Harold John Burstein · 2019 to 2026
$8.6M
Rochester Network Lead Academic Participating SiteUG1CA233230 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI Paul M Barr · 2019 to 2026
$6.9M
NCTN LAPS at Johns HopkinsUG1CA233196 · NCI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI DEBORAH K ARMSTRONG, Julie Renee Brahmer · 2019 to 2026
$4.6M
NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180820NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180821NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180882NCI NIH HHS U10 CA180888NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233180NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233196NCI NIH HHS UG1 CA233230
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractAlthough it is evident that standard-dose whole-brain radiotherapy as consolidation is associated with significant neurotoxicity, the optimal consolidative strategy for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is not defined. We performed a randomized phase 2 clinical trial via the US Alliance cancer cooperative group to compare myeloablative consolidation supported by autologous stem cell transplantation with nonmyeloablative consolidation after induction therapy for PCNSL. To our knowledge, this is the first randomized trial to be initiated that eliminates whole-brain radiotherapy as a consolidative approach in newly diagnosed PCNSL. Patients aged 18 to 75 years were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to induction therapy (methotrexate, temozolomide, rituximab, and cytarabine) followed by consolidation with either thiotepa plus carmustine and autologous stem cell rescue vs induction followed by nonmyeloablative, infusional etoposide plus cytarabine. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 113 patients were randomized, and 108 (54 in each arm) were evaluable. More patients in the nonmyeloablative arm experienced progressive disease or death during induction (28% vs 11%; P = .05). Thirty-six patients received autologous stem cell transplant, and 34 received nonmyeloablative consolidation. The estimated 2-year PFS was higher in the myeloablative vs nonmyeloablative arm (73% vs 51%; P = .02). However, a planned secondary analysis, landmarked at start of the consolidation, revealed that the estimated 2-year PFS in those who completed consolidation therapy was not significantly different between the arms (86% vs 71%; P = .21). Both consolidative strategies yielded encouraging efficacy and similar toxicity profiles. This trial was registered at www.clininicals.gov as #NCT01511562.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsLymphomaAdolescentAdultAgedCombined Modality TherapyConsolidation ChemotherapyCytarabineFemaleHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationHumansMaleMiddle AgedTransplantation, AutologousTreatment OutcomeCytarabine

Identifiers

PMID38598710
PMCPMC11225669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.