ArticleCancer medicine2026
Real-World Outcomes of Polatuzumab Vedotin Plus R-CHP Versus R-CHOP-Based Regimens in Japanese Patients With Untreated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Real-World Outcomes of Polatuzumab Vedotin Plus R-CHP Versus R-CHOP-Based Regimens in Japanese Patients With Untreated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- Interim efficacy and preliminary survival outcomes of polatuzumab vedotin in combination for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a retrospective real-world study.Frontiers in oncology · 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
backgroundPV-R-CHP (polatuzumab vedotin, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone) is a recently introduced regimen for untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, real-world data comparing its efficacy and safety with those of R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) remain limited.
aimsThis study aimed to evaluate the real-world efficacy and safety of PV-R-CHP compared with R-CHOP-based regimens in patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of patients with DLBCL who received PV-R-CHP or R-CHOP-based treatment as first-line therapy at Kansai Medical University Hospital between January 2020 and August 2023. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Other outcomes included overall survival (OS), treatment response, subgroup analyses, and adverse events. Propensity score matching was performed, and prespecified subgroup analyses were conducted in the matched cohort.
resultsA total of 153 patients were included: 53 received PV-R-CHP and 100 received R-CHOP. At 1 year, both PFS and OS were significantly higher in the PV-R-CHP group than in the R-CHOP group (PFS: 89.3% vs. 70.9%, hazard ratio [HR] 0.30 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12-0.78], p = 0.013; OS: 92.5% vs. 80.0%, HR 0.28 [95% CI: 0.08-0.95], p = 0.041). Complete response rates were comparable between the groups (81.1% vs. 76.0%, p = 0.543). In propensity score-matched analyses, PV-R-CHP was associated with improved PFS in patients with non-germinal center B-cell-like (non-GCB) DLBCL. The incidence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events was similar between the regimens, with lymphopenia being the most frequent toxicity.
conclusionPV-R-CHP may offer improved survival outcomes compared with R-CHOP in newly diagnosed DLBCL, particularly in patients with non-GCB, with an acceptable safety profile in a real-world setting. Although longer follow-up is required to confirm durability, these findings support the use of PV-R-CHP as a frontline treatment option.
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.