ArticleAnnals of hematology2026
Superiority of high-dose cytarabine-based mobilisation over cyclophosphamide or plerixafor in primary CNS lymphoma.
Article in Annals of hematology, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
High-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a key consolidative therapy for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL). However, the optimal regimen for mobilizing haematopoietic stem cells remains undefined in this population, leading to unpredictable failure rates and suboptimal cell yields. We retrospectively analysed data from 142 patients with histologically confirmed PCNSL who underwent stem-cell mobilisation before ASCT. Three mobilisation strategies were compared: high-dose cytarabine (HD-Ara-C)-based mobilisation (n = 64), plerixafor plus G-CSF (n = 60), and cyclophosphamide (CTX, n = 18). Mobilisation success, CD34⁺ cell yield, toxicity, and predictors of collection outcomes were evaluated. Patients in the HD-Ara-C-based mobilisation group achieved a 100% success rate, significantly outperforming CTX (77.8%) and steady-state mobilisation (98.3%) while delivering a markedly superior median CD34⁺ cell yield (20 × 10⁶/kg vs. 12.7 and 10 × 10⁶/kg, p < 0.001). Notably, 79.7% of patients in the HD-Ara-C-based mobilisation group were classified as "very good" mobilisers,with all "poor" mobilisers confined to the other groups. Crucially, we identified and validated the first-day peripheral blood CD34⁺ cell count as a powerful predictor of collection outcome. A threshold of > 31 cells/µL predicted successful collection (> 2 × 10⁶/kg) with an AUC value of 0.94 (98.6% specificity, 78.6% sensitivity). Higher thresholds predicted optimal and high-yield collections. Although grade 4 thrombocytopenia was more common with HD-Ara-C, it was manageable with supportive care. HD-Ara-C-based mobilisation is a highly effective strategy for PCNSL, ensuring universal success and maximizing CD34⁺ cell yields. The first-day CD34⁺ cell count provides a robust, real-time tool for guiding apheresis. HD-Ara-C-based mobilisation should be considered the preferred regimen for fit patients, with steady-state mobilisation as an alternative for selected cases.
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.