ArticleAnnals of hematology2026
Addition of rituximab to CEAC conditioning for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation provides no survival benefit in diffuse large B-Cell lymphoma: A propensity score-matched cohort study.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
High dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard of care for relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Rituximab has significantly improved outcomes of DLBCL patients when incorporated into first-line or second-line chemotherapy. However, whether its addition to conditioning regimens further improves efficacy remains controversial. In this study, we explored the efficacy and safety of Rituximab with CEAC conditioning, a regimen previously reported by our center. We compared the CEAC regimen with or without Rituximab in 80 DLBCL patients with propensity score matching method at a ratio of 1:1 (40 CEAC, 40 R-CEAC). The objective response rate (ORR) was 95% in the CEAC cohort compared to 93% in the R-CEAC cohort (P = 0.615). The complete response (CR) rate was 70% versus 60%, respectively (P = 0.348). The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) of the CEAC cohort and the R-CEAC cohort were 73% (95% CI 61%-89%) versus 61% (95% CI 47%-79%) (HR 1.706, 95%CI 0.774–3.763, P = 0.178). The 3-year overall survival (OS) of the CEAC cohort and the R-CEAC cohort were both 79% (95% CI 67%-93%) (HR 1.083, 95%CI 0.418–2.808, P = 0.869). And 3-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 21% (95% CI 6.8%-33%) and 38% (95% CI 18%-50%) (HR 1.842, 95%CI 0.779–4.339, P = 0.162) in the CEAC cohort and the R-CEAC cohort. For the safety profile, no difference was observed in adverse events. In conclusion, the addition of rituximab to the CEAC conditioning regimen did not improve survival outcomes and is not recommended for DLBCL patients undergoing ASCT.
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.