COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA
A retrospective comparison was made of three methods of central-nervous-system prophylaxis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukæmia; (1) intrathecal methotrexate only; (2) intermediate-dose methotrexate infusion and intrathecal methotrexate and; (3) 2400 rads cranial irradiation and intrathecal met...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The Lancet (British edition) 1980-06, Vol.315 (8183), p.1398-1402 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 1402 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8183 |
| container_start_page | 1398 |
| container_title | The Lancet (British edition) |
| container_volume | 315 |
| creator | Green, DanielM Freeman, ArnoldI Sather, HarlandN Sallan, StephenE Nesbit, MarkE Cassady, J.Robert Sinks, LuciusF Hammond, Denman Frei, Emil |
| description | A retrospective comparison was made of three methods of central-nervous-system prophylaxis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukæmia; (1) intrathecal methotrexate only; (2) intermediate-dose methotrexate infusion and intrathecal methotrexate and; (3) 2400 rads cranial irradiation and intrathecal methotrexate. The incidence of primary meningeal relapse was statistically significantly lower in both standard-risk patients (age >24 months and ≤120 months white-cell count 120 months and/or white-cell count >20 000) whose central-nervous-system prophylaxis included cranial irradiation. The disease-free and overall survival of irradiated increased-risk patients was significantly better than that of unirradiated increased-risk patients. The disease-free survival of standard-risk patients who received intermediate-dose methotrexate was statistically superior to that of the remaining standard-risk patients. There were no significant differences in overall survival between the three groups of standard-risk patients. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0140-6736(80)92664-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2155893643</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0140673680926641</els_id><sourcerecordid>2155893643</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c250t-2bef95ff19de714e0e26b93aa85ad1431e698db6791741e2e7a5bd50407bcbf93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkN1OgzAYhhujiXN6CSZNPNEDtIW2wJFB1gkRKAFmtqOGn5KwzDFhM_EGvDFvTLYZTz36kjfvT74HgGuM7jHC7CFFmCCNmQa7tdCdrTNGNHwCRpiYRKPEnJ-C0Z_lHFz0_RIhRBiiI7ByRRg7iZ-KCIopzLyEcxjyzBOTdC-4PMoSJ9AinryKWaqlizTjIYwTEXuLwJn7KfQj6Hp-MPGEmEDHnWUcBosw9sRT4KSZ78KAz16-v0LfuQRndb7q1dXvHYPZlGeupwXi2XeHlVKnaKvphaptWtfYrpSJiUJKZ4Vt5LlF8woTAytmW1XBTBubBCtdmTktKooIMouyqG1jDG6OvZuufd-pfiuX7a5bD5NSx5RatsGIMbjo0VV2bd93qpabrnnLu0-JkdyDlQewck9NWkgewEo85B6POTW88NGoTvZlo9alqppOlVtZtc0_DT8iFnel</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2155893643</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Green, DanielM ; Freeman, ArnoldI ; Sather, HarlandN ; Sallan, StephenE ; Nesbit, MarkE ; Cassady, J.Robert ; Sinks, LuciusF ; Hammond, Denman ; Frei, Emil</creator><creatorcontrib>Green, DanielM ; Freeman, ArnoldI ; Sather, HarlandN ; Sallan, StephenE ; Nesbit, MarkE ; Cassady, J.Robert ; Sinks, LuciusF ; Hammond, Denman ; Frei, Emil</creatorcontrib><description>A retrospective comparison was made of three methods of central-nervous-system prophylaxis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukæmia; (1) intrathecal methotrexate only; (2) intermediate-dose methotrexate infusion and intrathecal methotrexate and; (3) 2400 rads cranial irradiation and intrathecal methotrexate. The incidence of primary meningeal relapse was statistically significantly lower in both standard-risk patients (age >24 months and ≤120 months white-cell count <20 000) and increased-risk patients (age ≤24 months or >120 months and/or white-cell count >20 000) whose central-nervous-system prophylaxis included cranial irradiation. The disease-free and overall survival of irradiated increased-risk patients was significantly better than that of unirradiated increased-risk patients. The disease-free survival of standard-risk patients who received intermediate-dose methotrexate was statistically superior to that of the remaining standard-risk patients. There were no significant differences in overall survival between the three groups of standard-risk patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0140-6736</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1474-547X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(80)92664-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Acute lymphoblastic leukemia ; Age ; Cancer therapies ; Chemotherapy ; Childhood ; Children ; Disease prevention ; Irradiation ; Leukemia ; Methotrexate ; Oncology ; Patients ; Pediatrics ; Prophylaxis ; Radiation ; Radiation therapy ; Risk ; Skull ; Survival</subject><ispartof>The Lancet (British edition), 1980-06, Vol.315 (8183), p.1398-1402</ispartof><rights>1980</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited Jun 28, 1980</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c250t-2bef95ff19de714e0e26b93aa85ad1431e698db6791741e2e7a5bd50407bcbf93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c250t-2bef95ff19de714e0e26b93aa85ad1431e698db6791741e2e7a5bd50407bcbf93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673680926641$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65534</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Green, DanielM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, ArnoldI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sather, HarlandN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sallan, StephenE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nesbit, MarkE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cassady, J.Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinks, LuciusF</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hammond, Denman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frei, Emil</creatorcontrib><title>COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA</title><title>The Lancet (British edition)</title><description>A retrospective comparison was made of three methods of central-nervous-system prophylaxis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukæmia; (1) intrathecal methotrexate only; (2) intermediate-dose methotrexate infusion and intrathecal methotrexate and; (3) 2400 rads cranial irradiation and intrathecal methotrexate. The incidence of primary meningeal relapse was statistically significantly lower in both standard-risk patients (age >24 months and ≤120 months white-cell count <20 000) and increased-risk patients (age ≤24 months or >120 months and/or white-cell count >20 000) whose central-nervous-system prophylaxis included cranial irradiation. The disease-free and overall survival of irradiated increased-risk patients was significantly better than that of unirradiated increased-risk patients. The disease-free survival of standard-risk patients who received intermediate-dose methotrexate was statistically superior to that of the remaining standard-risk patients. There were no significant differences in overall survival between the three groups of standard-risk patients.</description><subject>Acute lymphoblastic leukemia</subject><subject>Age</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Childhood</subject><subject>Children</subject><subject>Disease prevention</subject><subject>Irradiation</subject><subject>Leukemia</subject><subject>Methotrexate</subject><subject>Oncology</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>Pediatrics</subject><subject>Prophylaxis</subject><subject>Radiation</subject><subject>Radiation therapy</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Skull</subject><subject>Survival</subject><issn>0140-6736</issn><issn>1474-547X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1980</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkN1OgzAYhhujiXN6CSZNPNEDtIW2wJFB1gkRKAFmtqOGn5KwzDFhM_EGvDFvTLYZTz36kjfvT74HgGuM7jHC7CFFmCCNmQa7tdCdrTNGNHwCRpiYRKPEnJ-C0Z_lHFz0_RIhRBiiI7ByRRg7iZ-KCIopzLyEcxjyzBOTdC-4PMoSJ9AinryKWaqlizTjIYwTEXuLwJn7KfQj6Hp-MPGEmEDHnWUcBosw9sRT4KSZ78KAz16-v0LfuQRndb7q1dXvHYPZlGeupwXi2XeHlVKnaKvphaptWtfYrpSJiUJKZ4Vt5LlF8woTAytmW1XBTBubBCtdmTktKooIMouyqG1jDG6OvZuufd-pfiuX7a5bD5NSx5RatsGIMbjo0VV2bd93qpabrnnLu0-JkdyDlQewck9NWkgewEo85B6POTW88NGoTvZlo9alqppOlVtZtc0_DT8iFnel</recordid><startdate>19800628</startdate><enddate>19800628</enddate><creator>Green, DanielM</creator><creator>Freeman, ArnoldI</creator><creator>Sather, HarlandN</creator><creator>Sallan, StephenE</creator><creator>Nesbit, MarkE</creator><creator>Cassady, J.Robert</creator><creator>Sinks, LuciusF</creator><creator>Hammond, Denman</creator><creator>Frei, Emil</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>ASE</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FPQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K6X</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB~</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19800628</creationdate><title>COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA</title><author>Green, DanielM ; Freeman, ArnoldI ; Sather, HarlandN ; Sallan, StephenE ; Nesbit, MarkE ; Cassady, J.Robert ; Sinks, LuciusF ; Hammond, Denman ; Frei, Emil</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c250t-2bef95ff19de714e0e26b93aa85ad1431e698db6791741e2e7a5bd50407bcbf93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1980</creationdate><topic>Acute lymphoblastic leukemia</topic><topic>Age</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Childhood</topic><topic>Children</topic><topic>Disease prevention</topic><topic>Irradiation</topic><topic>Leukemia</topic><topic>Methotrexate</topic><topic>Oncology</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>Pediatrics</topic><topic>Prophylaxis</topic><topic>Radiation</topic><topic>Radiation therapy</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Skull</topic><topic>Survival</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Green, DanielM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Freeman, ArnoldI</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sather, HarlandN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sallan, StephenE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nesbit, MarkE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cassady, J.Robert</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinks, LuciusF</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hammond, Denman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Frei, Emil</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Calcium & Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>British Nursing Index (BNI) (1985 to Present)</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>British Nursing Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Newsstand Professional</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Green, DanielM</au><au>Freeman, ArnoldI</au><au>Sather, HarlandN</au><au>Sallan, StephenE</au><au>Nesbit, MarkE</au><au>Cassady, J.Robert</au><au>Sinks, LuciusF</au><au>Hammond, Denman</au><au>Frei, Emil</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA</atitle><jtitle>The Lancet (British edition)</jtitle><date>1980-06-28</date><risdate>1980</risdate><volume>315</volume><issue>8183</issue><spage>1398</spage><epage>1402</epage><pages>1398-1402</pages><issn>0140-6736</issn><eissn>1474-547X</eissn><abstract>A retrospective comparison was made of three methods of central-nervous-system prophylaxis in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukæmia; (1) intrathecal methotrexate only; (2) intermediate-dose methotrexate infusion and intrathecal methotrexate and; (3) 2400 rads cranial irradiation and intrathecal methotrexate. The incidence of primary meningeal relapse was statistically significantly lower in both standard-risk patients (age >24 months and ≤120 months white-cell count <20 000) and increased-risk patients (age ≤24 months or >120 months and/or white-cell count >20 000) whose central-nervous-system prophylaxis included cranial irradiation. The disease-free and overall survival of irradiated increased-risk patients was significantly better than that of unirradiated increased-risk patients. The disease-free survival of standard-risk patients who received intermediate-dose methotrexate was statistically superior to that of the remaining standard-risk patients. There were no significant differences in overall survival between the three groups of standard-risk patients.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/S0140-6736(80)92664-1</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0140-6736 |
| ispartof | The Lancet (British edition), 1980-06, Vol.315 (8183), p.1398-1402 |
| issn | 0140-6736 1474-547X |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2155893643 |
| source | Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete |
| subjects | Acute lymphoblastic leukemia Age Cancer therapies Chemotherapy Childhood Children Disease prevention Irradiation Leukemia Methotrexate Oncology Patients Pediatrics Prophylaxis Radiation Radiation therapy Risk Skull Survival |
| title | COMPARISON OF THREE METHODS OF CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM PROPHYLAXIS IN CHILDHOOD ACUTE LYMPHOBLASTIC LEUKÆMIA |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-20T21%3A08%3A42IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=COMPARISON%20OF%20THREE%20METHODS%20OF%20CENTRAL-NERVOUS-SYSTEM%20PROPHYLAXIS%20IN%20CHILDHOOD%20ACUTE%20LYMPHOBLASTIC%20LEUK%C3%86MIA&rft.jtitle=The%20Lancet%20(British%20edition)&rft.au=Green,%20DanielM&rft.date=1980-06-28&rft.volume=315&rft.issue=8183&rft.spage=1398&rft.epage=1402&rft.pages=1398-1402&rft.issn=0140-6736&rft.eissn=1474-547X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0140-6736(80)92664-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2155893643%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2155893643&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0140673680926641&rfr_iscdi=true |