Weekly versus biweekly bortezomib given in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma: A meta-Analysis
PLoS ONE, ISSN: 1932-6203, Vol: 12, Issue: 5, Page: e0177950
2017
- 4Citations
- 18Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations4
- Citation Indexes3
- CrossRef3
- Policy Citations1
- Policy Citation1
- Captures18
- Readers18
- 18
Article Description
Background Bortezomib is recently studied as a novel agent in indolent lymphoma. The optimal schedule of bortezomib used in indolent lymphoma is still uncertain. Methods We did a systematic review and meta-Analysis of the clinical trials comparing the efficacy and toxicity of the weekly and biweekly schedules of bortezomib in patients with indolent lymphoma. We searched Pubmed, Cochrane Library and Emabase from inception to July 29, 2016. The primary outcome was the overall response rate including the complete response rate and the partial response rate. The secondary outcomes were the proportions of patients in each group experiencing the adverse events including the neutropathy, fatigue, diarrhea, nausea and neutropenia. Findings After final screening, six trials were considered eligible for analysis. The results showed that the overall response rate of biweekly schedule was higher than that of weekly schedule in indolent lymphoma (OR 1.691;95%CI 1.02±2.80). Furthermore, there were no significant differences between the two schedules of bortezomib for the main adverse events. Interpretation The biweekly schedule of bortezomib was more effective than the weekly schedule in indolent lymphoma, with similar proportion of toxicities.
Bibliographic Details
10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; 10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85019852190&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28531181; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; https://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950&type=printable; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; http://www.plosone.org/article/metrics/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950&type=printable; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g001; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g003; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t002; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g004; http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.g002; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/figure?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177950.t001; http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0177950
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know