Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39516683›Full record

ReviewBJC reports2024

CNS prophylaxis is (mostly) futile in DLBCL.

Kevin Shieh, Elizabeth Brem

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BJC reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors.

Kevin ShiehUniversity of California, Irvine; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Orange, CA, USA.
Elizabeth BremUniversity of California, Irvine; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Orange, CA, USA. ebrem@hs.uci.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is associated with a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival of approximately five months [1]. The risk for CNS disease has been estimated to be about 5% overall [2], but it is significantly higher in certain high-risk groups [3]. CNS prophylaxis is often administered to patients felt to be at high risk for CNS recurrence. Options for CNS prophylaxis include high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) and intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy with methotrexate and/or cytarabine. However, a number of recent retrospective analyses have called into question the efficacy of prophylaxis. Here, we aim to review the literature regarding CNS prophylaxis with HD-MTX or IT chemotherapy in DLBCL. Our review and discussion exclude Burkitt lymphoma and lymphoblastic leukemia/lymphoma, for which standard treatment protocols include CNS prophylaxis. We also exclude double and triple hit lymphoma (DHL, THL) as it is generally accepted that these patients are at a high risk of CNS relapse. Based on the results of several recent studies, we recommend consideration of IT chemotherapy instead of HD-MTX if prophylaxis is desired due to better tolerability. If HD-MTX is desired, it should be done after systemic therapy is completed to avoid treatment delays. We provide an algorithm to guide decision making. However, our review of the literature suggests that CNS prophylaxis by either means has no clear benefit.

Identifiers

PMID39516683
PMCPMC11523957

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.