A survey evaluating hematology physiciansE perspectives on central nervous system prophylaxis

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridDemirci, Ufuk/0000-0001-6923-1470
dc.contributor.authorDemirci, Ufuk
dc.contributor.authorYuksel, Meltem Kurt
dc.contributor.authorIzlar, Hakki Onur Kirk
dc.contributor.authorAtesolu, Elif Birtas
dc.contributor.authorMehtap, Ozgur
dc.contributor.authorSalim, Ozan
dc.contributor.authorDemir, Ahmet Muzaffer
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-12T11:12:57Z
dc.date.available2024-06-12T11:12:57Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentTrakya Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractBackground Central nervous system (CNS) prophylactic options for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are administered differently in most centers. Unfortunately, there is still not a consensus on which patients, which regimen, for how many cycles, and when prophy-laxis should be administered. Thus, this remains an unmet clinical need. Methods We administered a survey study under the Lymphoma Scientific Subcommittee of the Turkish Society of Haematology. The questions were directed to hematologists through the monkey survey system. Results The CNS International Prognostic Index score is a factor that clinicians frequently use when deciding on prophylaxis and is considered reliable. Although the perspective on anatomical risk factors is similar to that reported in the literature, breast involvement is still considered a critical risk factor in Turkey. Participants considered double or triple hit and double/triple expressor lymphoma as significant risk factors. Various methods have been used to demonstrate CNS relapses. Intrathecal prophylaxis is the preferred method. Conclusion There are diverse methodological and technical ideas. The controversial results reported in the literature on the effectiveness of CNS prophylaxis may explain this finding. Although CNS prophylactic methods for patients with DLBCL are still controversial, the effect of secondary CNS involvement on survival is inevitable. Standard practices followed by na-tional guidelines may be effective in reducing the variety of application methods and creat-ing homogeneous results for efficacy and survival follow-up studies.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.5045/br.2023.2023066
dc.identifier.endpage104en_US
dc.identifier.issn2287-979X
dc.identifier.issn2288-0011
dc.identifier.issue2en_US
dc.identifier.pmid37292008en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85175444780en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage99en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.5045/br.2023.2023066
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14551/23373
dc.identifier.volume58en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001024167700003en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherKorean Soc Hematologyen_US
dc.relation.ispartofBlood Researchen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.subjectProphylaxisen_US
dc.subjectDiffuse Large B -Cell Lymphomaen_US
dc.subjectHigh Dosage Methotrexateen_US
dc.subjectSecondary Central Nervous System (CNS) Involvement Negen_US
dc.subjectB-Cell Lymphomaen_US
dc.subjectNon-Hodgkin-Lymphomaen_US
dc.subjectRetrospective Analysisen_US
dc.subjectElderly-Patientsen_US
dc.subjectCns Prophylaxisen_US
dc.subjectRisk-Factorsen_US
dc.subjectInvolvementen_US
dc.subjectRelapseen_US
dc.subjectRituximaben_US
dc.subjectChemotherapyen_US
dc.titleA survey evaluating hematology physiciansE perspectives on central nervous system prophylaxisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu