ArticleHaematologica2025
CODOX-M/IVAC-R
Article in Haematologica, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The GMALL B ALL/NHL 2002 protocol yields high rates of durable response in high grade B cell lymphoma.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- 2026 Update on the Management of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.American journal of hematology · 2026Review
- Current treatment algorithm: diffuse large B cell lymphoma.Blood cancer journal · 2026Review
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
Intensified chemoimmunotherapy regimens are often used in young patients with double-hit and triple-hit lymphoma (DHL/ THL) despite no survival benefit compared to R-CHOP. Favorable retrospective reports on the application of CODOX-M/IVAC-R are subject to selection bias as only young fit patients can tolerate this treatment. We conducted a retrospective analysis to investigate outcome differences between CODOX-M/IVAC-R and DA-EPOCH-R in DHL/THL patients aged 60 years or younger. One hundred and thirteen patients were identified; CODOX-M/IVAC-R (N=49) and DA-EPOCH-R (N=64). Eighty percent (39/49) achieved complete (CR) after completing CODOX-M/IVAC-R compared to 58% (37/64) with DA-EPOCH-R. The median follow-up was 5.3 years and 3.3 years for the CODOX-M/IVAC-R and DA-EPOCH-R group respectively. CODOX-M/IVAC-R demonstrated superior event-free survival (EFS) on univariate (hazard ratio [HR]=0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.31-0.97) and multivariable analysis adjusted for age, BCL translocation (BCL2 vs. BCL6 vs. both), International Prognostic Index score and receipt of autologous stem cell transplant (adjusted HR [aHR]=0.52, 95% CI: 0.29-0.93); however there was no significant influence on OS (aHR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.46-1.84). The 1, 2 and 5 years EFS in the CODOX-M/IVAC-R group was 68.3%, 64.1% and 61.5%, respectively compared to 52.4%, 48.9% and 39.5%, respectively in the DA-EPOCH-R group. Primary refractory disease or relapse (R/R) occurred in 33% (16/49) of CODOX-M/IVAC-R and 54% (35/64) of DA-EPOCH-R recipients, and produced median OS of 10.3 months and 33.7 months, respectively, indicating poor outcomes in the CODOX-M/IVAC-R subgroup with R/R disease. More patients were able to receive subsequent salvage therapies in the DA-EPOCH-R group. No patients died of regimen toxicity and the rates of central nervous system relapse and therapy related hematologic neoplasms were similar in both groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.