ArticleScientific reports2025
Evaluation of treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma using plasma D-dimer levels.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- A multicenter retrospective study of plasma d‑dimer levels for evaluating treatment response in multiple myeloma.Scientific reports · 2026Article
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
It has been documented that D-dimer levels have potential utility as a measure of tumor activity in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), however whether it can be used as a predictive marker of treatment outcome has not been established. This study means to retrospectively evaluate the role of D-dimer in prediction of treatment efficacy in patients with DLBCL. 151 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were enrolled. Blood samples were taken from those patients during the initial visit to our hospital and again after two cycles of chemotherapy to measure D-dimer levels. The link between plasma D-dimer concentrations and patients' clinical characteristics was explored before and after treatment. D-dimer levels within the range of 0-1 µg/mL were considered negative, while readings above this range were considered positive. D-dimer difference percentage (Ddp) represents the percentage change in D-dimer levels before and after chemotherapy, calculated as (post-chemotherapy D-dimer minus pre-chemotherapy D-dimer) / pre-chemotherapy D-dimer × 100. Patients showed statistically different plasma D-dimer levels at initial consultation across treatment-response groups: CR (0.63 µg/mL [0.43-1.27]), PR (1.39 µg/mL [0.73-2.46]), SD (0.89 µg/mL [0.59-1.24]), and PD (1.34 µg/mL [0.67-2.62]). After chemotherapy, the PR group exhibited a mean D-dimer level of -0.38 µg/mL (range - 1.64 to -0.11), which was significantly lower than that of the PD group (mean 0.04 µg/mL, range - 0.40 to 0.79; p < 0.05). The CR group revealed significantly lower initial D-dimer levels (median 0.63 µg/mL) and greater reductions after chemotherapy compared to the non-CR group (median 1.17 µg/mL, p < 0.05). Patients with coagulation disorders such as DIC, DVT, or PE were excluded to minimize confounding factors. While this study demonstrates the utility of D-dimer in predicting short-term treatment response, the relationship with long-term outcomes such as PFS and OS requires further investigation. Patients who respond well to chemotherapy typically exhibit lower D-dimer levels at the initial diagnosis. Those in the SD or PD groups usually experience a greater increase in D-dimer levels following chemotherapy. Consequently, variations in plasma D-dimer levels before and after treatment may offer valuable insights for evaluating the efficacy of chemotherapy treatment.
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.