ArticleBritish journal of haematology2025
Forecasting optimal treatments in relapsed/refractory mature T- and NK-cell lymphomas: A global PETAL Consortium study.
Article in British journal of haematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- On the RAdR in relapsed T-cell lymphoma.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Current status of hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma including adult T-cell leukemia-lymphoma.International journal of hematology · 2026Review
- Unraveling the many faces of angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma: clinical, pathological, and molecular heterogeneity.Annals of hematology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
80 authors.
Funding
Abstract
There is no standard of care in relapsed/refractory T-cell/natural killer-cell lymphomas. Patients often cycle through cytotoxic chemotherapy (CC), epigenetic modifiers (EM) or small molecule inhibitors (SMI) empirically. Ideal therapy at each line remains unknown. We conducted a retrospective, multiple intervention, 'target-trial' using the PETAL global cohort. Patients received front-line CC, then second and third line (2L and 3L) with either CC again, EM or SMI (12 possible treatment scenarios). Overall survival (OS; 2L or 3L to death) was compared across treatment sequences using Cox, reinforcement learning and synthetic intervention methods adjusting for age, histology, primary refractory disease, prognostic index for T-cell lymphoma (PIT) score, response to 2L, and receipt of 2L transplant consolidation. Five hundred and forty received 2L (EM = 101, SMI = 45, CC = 394), and 290 received 3L (EM = 65, SMI = 44, CC = 181). 2L SMI then 3L EM improved OS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR]: 0.29, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.11-0.74; p = 0.010) versus 2L-3L CC-CC, and consistently across most other sequential strategies. In 2L stability analyses, benefit was notable with 2L SMI in angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (vs. CC: aHR: 0.23, 95% CI: 0.10-0.4; p < 0.001); vs. EM: aHR: 0.32, 95% CI: 0.12-0.82; p = 0.020), and both SMI and EM in PIT-stratified high-risk groups (SMI: aHR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.21-0.76; p = 0.005; EM: aHR: 0.60, 95% CI: 0.39-0.92; p = 0.020) versus 2L CC. Results were consistent across all other independent stability and causal inference analyses providing a treatment selection framework.
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.