ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2026
Beyond Survival: Measuring Treatment Tolerability with Patient-Reported Outcomes in the Lymphoma Immunotherapy Era.
Review in Current hematologic malignancy reports, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewImmunotherapeutic strategies for the treatment of lymphomas are rapidly expanding and can deliver durable remissions to patients with historically limited treatment options. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) provide direct measurement of symptoms, functioning, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL), complementing physician-assessed toxicities and enabling a more comprehensive assessment of "treatment tolerability," defined as the willingness of patients to adhere to treatment dose and schedule based on symptom burden and functioning. In this review, we demonstrate that when PROs are incorporated into clinical research, we gain a better understanding of treatment tolerability, particularly of novel immunotherapies, which confer distinct toxicity profiles compared with traditional chemoimmunotherapy. As survival improves, we argue that PROs should be incorporated as a primary or co-primary endpoint in most modern clinical trials, rather than as a point of interest in exploratory analyses. RECENT
findingsIn patients with lymphoma, baseline and longitudinal HRQoL are prognostic of progression-free and overall survival. However, persistent discordance between clinician-graded adverse events (AEs) and patient-reported symptomatic AEs suggests that current trial endpoints focused primarily on safety and survival incompletely capture the patient experience, particularly in the context of novel immunotherapy-related toxicities. PROs are essential for interpreting modern lymphoma immunotherapies, where acute and chronic toxicities coexist with the promise of long-term remissions. Despite broad consensus of their utility, PRO analysis from seminal lymphoma immunotherapy trials remains inconsistent, and there remain significant gaps in the literature regarding the true patient-reported tolerability of emerging therapeutic regimens. Future trials should adopt harmonized PRO strategies (including symptom and functional domains), define meaningful thresholds for minimally important differences, and integrate real-world PRO data prospectively to better align clinical trial data with patient-centered treatment tolerability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42565955What 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.