ArticleOncology research2025
Comparison of pegaspargase with concurrent radiation
Article in Oncology research, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: The optimal treatment strategy for early-stage natural killer/T-cell lymphoma (NKTCL) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes and adverse events (AEs) associated with two treatment regimens for early-stage NKTCL: pegaspargase with concurrent radiation therapy (P+CCRT) and pegaspargase, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin (P-GEMOX) with sequential radiation therapy (SERT). Propensity score matching (PSM) was employed to ensure balanced comparison between these regimens. Methods: We assessed the efficacy of P+CCRT from a phase II trial and P-GEMOX combined with SERT using real-world data. PSM was conducted at a 1:1 ratio with a caliper of 0.18 to align baseline characteristics between the treatment groups. Key outcomes analyzed included overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and AEs. Results: Following PSM, the study included 52 patients, with 26 in each treatment group. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the cohorts. The ORR for P+CCRT group was 100.0% compared to 88.5% for P-GEMOX+ SERT group, and the CR rates was 100.0% Conclusion: P+CCRT is associated with comparable clinical outcomes compared to P-GEMOX + SERT in early-stage NKTCL, with comparable adverse events. Additionally, P+CCRT offers the benefit of a more streamlined treatment regimen with a shorter cycle. Given these encouraging results, further cohort studies are needed to validate these results.
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.