1,720,999 research outputs found
Four versus six cycles of CHOP chemotherapy in combination with six applications of rituximab in patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma with favourable prognosis (FLYER): a randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial
No full textTherapy of nodal Follicular Lymphoma (WHO grade 1/2) in clinical stage I/II using response adapted Involved Site Radiotherapy in combination with Obinutuzumab (Gazyvaro) - GAZAI Trial (GAZyvaro and response adapted Involved-site Radiotherapy): a study protocol for a single-arm, non-randomized, open, national, multi-center phase II trial
No full textTreatment of Early Stage Nodal Follicular Lymphoma Using Involved-Field Radiotherapy and Rituximab: Preliminary Results of the Mir Trial (phase II study of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG))
No full textTreatment of Early Stage Nodal Follicular Lymphoma Using Involved-Field Radiotherapy and Rituximab: Preliminary Results of the Mir Trial (phase II study of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG))
No full textSignificant reduced loss of bone mineral density after four vs. six cycles of R-CHOP: an analysis of the FLYER-trial
No full textRadiation and Dose-densification of R-CHOP in Aggressive B-cell Lymphoma With Intermediate Prognosis: The UNFOLDER Study
No full textUNFOLDER (Unfavorable Young Low-Risk Densification of R-Chemo Regimens) is an international phase-3 trial in patients 18–60 years with aggressive B-cell lymphoma and intermediate prognosis defined by age-adjusted International Prognostic Index (aaIPI) of 0 and bulky disease (≥7.5 cm) or aaIPI of 1. In a 2 × 2 factorial design patients were randomized to 6× R-CHOP-14 or 6× R-CHOP-21 (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prediso[lo]ne) and to consolidation radiotherapy to extralymphatic and bulky disease or observation. Response was assessed according to the standardized response criteria published in 1999, not including F-18 fluordesoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography (FDG-PET). Primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). A total of 695 of 700 patients were eligible for the intention-to-treat analysis. Totally 467 patients qualified for radiotherapy of whom 305 patients were randomized to receive radiotherapy (R-CHOP-21: 155; R-CHOP-14: 150) and 162 to observation (R-CHOP-21: 81, R-CHOP-14: 81). Two hundred twenty-eight patients not qualifying for radiotherapy were randomized for R-CHOP-14 versus R-CHOP-21. After a median observation of 66 months 3-year EFS was superior in the radiotherapy-arm versus observation-arm (84% versus 68%; P = 0.0012), due to a lower rate of partial responses (PR) (2% versus 11%). PR often triggered additional treatment, mostly radiotherapy. No significant difference was observed in progression-free survival (PFS) (89% versus 81%; P = 0.22) and overall survival (OS) (93% versus 93%; P = 0.51). Comparing R-CHOP-14 and R-CHOP-21 EFS, PFS and OS were not different. Patients randomized to radiotherapy had a superior EFS, largely due to a lower PR rate requiring less additional treatment (NCT00278408, EUDRACT 2005-005218-19)
Optimization of Rituximab for the Treatment of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (II): Extended Rituximab Exposure Time in the SMARTE-R-CHOP-14 Trial of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group
No full textPurpose To study pharmacokinetics, toxicity, and efficacy of prolonged rituximab exposure in elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Patients and Methods In the SMARTE-R-CHOP-14 trial, rituximab 375 mg/m(2) was administered, together with six cycles of rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone on a 14-day schedule (6xR-CHOP-14), on days -4, 0, 10, 29, 57, 99, 155, and 239. Pharmacokinetics and outcome were to be compared with those of patients who had received 6xR-CHOP-14 in combination with eight 2-week applications of rituximab in the RICOVER-60 (Rituximab With CHOP Over Age 60 Years) trial. Results The complete response (CR)/unconfirmed CR rate was 85% in 189 evaluable patients, 90% for 90 good-prognosis patients (International Prognostic Index [IPI], 1 or 2), and 81% for 99 poor-prognosis patients (IPI, 3 to 5); 3-year event-free survival (EFS) was 71%, 75%, and 67%, respectively; and 3-year overall survival (OS) was 84%, 88%, and 80%, respectively, with no differences between men and women. The preplanned historical comparison with 306 RICOVER-60 patients (good prognosis, n = 183; poor prognosis, n = 123) revealed no outcome differences for all and good-prognosis patients; however, the longer exposure time in SMARTE-R-CHOP-14 compared with RICOVER-60 was associated with better 3-year EFS (67% v 54%) and OS (80% v 67%) in poor-prognosis patients. Conclusion Extended rituximab exposure compared with eight 2-week applications in combination with 6xR-CHOP-14 significantly improved outcome of elderly poor-prognosis patients without increasing toxicity. To our knowledge, results obtained with the SMARTE-R-CHOP-14 rituximab schedule are the best reported for elderly patients with DLBCL to date. In the subgroup of poor-prognosis patients treated with extended rituximab exposure, the outcome seemed superior to that of a similar historical cohort of patients treated with 6xR-CHOP-14 plus 2-week rituximab, with similar toxicity. A randomized comparison of the two schedules is warranted. (C) 2014 by American Society of Clinical OncologyDeutsche Krebshilfe; Roch
Optimization of rituximab for the treatment of DLBCL (I): dose-dense rituximab in the DENSE-R-CHOP-14 trial of the DSHNHL
No full textBackground: To improve outcome of elderly patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, dose-dense rituximab was evaluated in the prospective DENSE-R-CHOP-14 trial. Patients and methods: Rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) was given on days 0, 1, 4, 8, 15, 22, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, and 99 together with six CHOP-14 cycles. Results were to be compared with patients who had received the same chemotherapy in combination with eight 2-week applications of rituximab in RICOVER-60. Results: One hundred twenty-four patients are assessable. Dose-dense rituximab resulted in considerably higher serum levels during the first 50 days of treatment, but rituximab exposure time was not prolonged. Grade 3 and 4 infections were exceptionally high in the first 20 patients without anti-infective prophylaxis, but decreased after introduction of prophylaxis with aciclovir and cotrimoxazole in the remaining 104 patients (from 13% to 6% per cycle and from 35% to 18% per patient; P = 0.007 and P = 0.125, respectively). Patients with international prognostic index = 3-5 had higher complete response/ complete response unconfirmed rates (82% versus 68%; P = 0.033) than in the respective RICOVER-60 population, but this did not translate into better long-term outcome, even though male hazard was decreased (event-free survival: from 1.5 to 1.1; progression-free survival: from 1.7 to 1.1; overall survival: from 1.4 to 1.0). Conclusions: Dose-dense rituximab achieved higher rituximab serum levels, but was not more effective than eight 2-week applications in the historical control population, even though minor improvements in poor-prognosis and male patients cannot be excluded. The increased, though manageable toxicity, precludes its use in routine practice. Our results strongly support anti-infective prophylaxis with aciclovir and cotrimoxazole for all patients receiving R-CHOP.Deutsche Kerbshilfe; Roch
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
- …
