ArticleBMC cancer2026
Real-world outcome and dose intensity of Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP/R-THP-COP in newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a single-center, retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC cancer, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFollowing POLARIX, Pola-R-CHP has been increasingly adopted as frontline therapy for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, real-world evidence comparing Pola-R-CHP with conventional regimens regarding dose-intensity profiles, toxicity, and survival outcome remains limited.
methodsWe performed a single-center retrospective study with de novo DLBCL treated between 2014 and 2025. Initial dose intensity (IDI) was calculated for each chemotherapeutic agent delivered at the first cycle, and relative dose intensity (RDI) was calculated for each chemotherapeutic agent through the entire treatment period. Average IDI and average RDI were calculated by average values across cyclophosphamide (CPA), doxorubicin or THP (DXR/THP), and the microtubule inhibitor (vincristine [VCR] or polatuzumab vedotin [Pola]). Primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). PFS was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier estimates and multivariable Cox hazards models, including both the conventional proportional model and a restricted cubic spline (RCS)–based model.
resultsAmong the enrolled 112 patients, forty-seven patients were received Pola-R-CHP regimen. Median age was 76 years; 37 patients (33%) were aged ≥ 80 and 27 patients (24.1%) had ECOG PS ≥ 2. For CPA and DXR/THP, mean IDI and RDI were similar between groups; in contrast, Pola maintained higher IDI and RDI than VCR, with density peaks near 100%, indicating more consistent delivery. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events, including febrile neutropenia (FN) and non-hematologic toxicities, and treatment-related mortality were comparable. Any-grade PN leading to dose reduction/discontinuation of microtubule inhibitors occurred in 13.9% with conventional therapy versus 2.1% with Pola-R-CHP (p = 0.043). Over a median follow-up of 17.5 months (range, 0.03–132.7), 36 patients (32.1%) died and 8 (7.2%) relapsed/progressed. In multivariable analysis, International Prognostic Index and average RDI were independent predictors of PFS, whereas treatment regimen was not. An RCS-Cox model showed no significant regimen–RDI interaction (p for interaction = 0.761), indicating that higher average RDI was associated with improved PFS irrespective of regimen.
conclusionsPola-R-CHP demonstrated comparable efficacy and safety to conventional regimens while maintaining higher dose intensity as a microtubule inhibitor. Sustaining adequate treatment intensity was independently associated with improved PFS, underscoring the clinical relevance of Pola-R-CHP for optimizing real-world DLBCL management, including older or frail patients.
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.