| Title |
Central nervous system prophylaxis with intrathecal liposomal cytarabine in a subset of high-risk patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma receiving first line systemic therapy in a prospective trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Hematology, March 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00277-016-2648-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
E. González-Barca, M. Canales, A. Salar, J. J. Ferreiro-Martínez, S. Ferrer-Bordes, J. A. García-Marco, J. J. Sánchez-Blanco, J. García-Frade, J. Peñalver, J. L. Bello-López, J. M. Sancho, D. Caballero, on behalf of the GELTAMO group |
| Abstract |
The dissemination in the central nervous system (CNS) is an uncommon but fatal complication occurring in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Standard prophylaxis has been demonstrated to reduce CNS relapse and improve survival rates. Intrathecal (IT) liposomal cytarabine allows maintaining elevated drug levels in the cerebrospinal fluid for an extended period of time. Data on the efficacy and safety of liposomal cytarabine as CNS prophylaxis in patients with DLBCL are still insufficient. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the prophylaxis with IT liposomal cytarabine in prevention of CNS relapse in high-risk patients with DLBCL who were included in a trial of first line systemic therapy with 6 cycles of dose-dense R-CHOP every 14 days. Twenty-four (18.6 %) out of 129 patients were identified to have risk factors for CNS involvement, defined as follows: >30 % bone marrow infiltration, testes infiltration, retroperitoneal mass ≥10 cm, Waldeyer ring, or bulky cervical nodes involvement. Liposomal cytarabine (50 mg) was administered by lumbar puncture the first day of the 1st, 2nd, and 6th cycle of R-CHOP14 scheme. Among 70 IT infusions, grade 3-4 adverse events reported were headache (one patient) and nausea/vomiting (one patient). With a median follow-up of 40.1 months, no CNS involvement by DLBCL was observed in any patient. In conclusion, IT liposomal cytarabine is safe, feasible, and effective for CNS prophylaxis, causing few associated risks and little discomfort to patients with DLBCL. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 47 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 7 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 15% |
| Researcher | 5 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 23% |
| Unknown | 11 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 16 | 34% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 6% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 6% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 3 | 6% |
| Unknown | 16 | 34% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 30 January 2017.
All research outputs
#17,813,370
of 22,884,315 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#1,367
of 2,175 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#206,102
of 300,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#19
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,884,315 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,175 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 300,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.