Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39699653›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hematology2025

Defining MRI-based follow-up protocol for primary central nervous system lymphoma.

Inka K Puhakka, Kaisa L Sunela, Aino L Rönkä, Aino M Rajamäki, Ulla-Mari Arkko, Tuula M Klaavuniemi, Milla E L Kuusisto, Pekka A Jäkälä, Tuomas A Selander, Hanne K Kuitunen and 2 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

12 authors.

Inka K PuhakkaDepartment of Neurology, Kuopio University Hospital, Puijonlaaksontie 2, 70210, Kuopio, Finland. inka.puhakka@pshyvinvointialue.fi.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3387-9192
Kaisa L SunelaDepartment of Oncology, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland.
Aino L RönkäDepartment of Oncology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland.
Aino M RajamäkiDepartment of Oncology, Hospital Nova of Central Finland, Jyväskylä, Finland.
Ulla-Mari ArkkoDepartment of Oncology, North Karelia Central Hospital, Joensuu, Finland.
Tuula M KlaavuniemiDepartment of Oncology, Mikkeli Central Hospital, Mikkeli, Finland.
Milla E L KuusistoBiomedicine and Internal Medicine Research Unit, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Pekka A JäkäläDepartment of Neurology, Kuopio University Hospital, Puijonlaaksontie 2, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
Tuomas A SelanderScience Service Center, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland.
Hanne K KuitunenCancer Centre, Oulu University Hospital, Oulu, Finland.
Anne-Mari KantanenDepartment of Neurology, Kuopio University Hospital, Puijonlaaksontie 2, 70210, Kuopio, Finland.
Outi M KuittinenDepartment of Oncology, Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe optimal follow-up protocol for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is unclear. This is the first study to evaluate the benefit of structured follow-up imaging of PCNSL with respect to the timing of relapse.

methodsA total of 198 PCNSL patients (57.1% males) diagnosed between 2003 and 2020 were included. The data were collected retrospectively from 8 hospitals in Finland. Relapse detection details included structured follow-up imaging (sMRI) studies, additional imaging (aMRI) studies based on patients' new symptoms, and all outpatient and emergency visits. Overall survival (OS) with respect to the relapse detection method, sMRI versus aMRI, was also evaluated.

resultsRelapse was diagnosed in 71 patients (35.9%), 66.1% of whom experienced relapse during the first 2 years after diagnosis. During the first year, 48.3% (14/29) of the relapses were detected via sMRI, and 51.7% (15/29) via aMRI. During the second year, the percentages were 33.3% and 66.7%, respectively. More than 5 years after the diagnosis, all the relapses were detected via aMRI. To observe one relapse during the first year, 9.4 sMRI studies were needed. Overall survival after relapse (OS2) was 4.0 months for the patients whose first relapse was detected via sMRI and 3.0 months for those whose first relapse was detected via aMRI (P = 0.203).

conclusionsWe found that structured imaging was beneficial for relapse detection during the first year after PCNSL diagnosis. A minor trend towards better survival after relapse was observed for patients who experienced relapse according to structured imaging.

Indexed as

Central Nervous System NeoplasmsLymphomaMagnetic Resonance ImagingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFinlandFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalRetrospective StudiesFollow-upImagingPCNSLPrimary CNS lymphomaRelapse

Identifiers

PMID39699653
PMCPMC11868308

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.