We thank Ferreri and colleagues for their comments and interest in our article 'Trials and tribulations in primary CNS lymphoma'.1 We recognize that in the absence of randomized phase III trials there will be disagreements on proposed treatment algorithms, which are based on lower levels of evidence, institutional experience, and opinion. In this regard, the algorithm proposed by Ferreri et al.2 is certainly a reasonable alternative to the one we suggested.
Our algorithm reflects the treatment approach we have chosen based on our interpretation of the data. In primary central nervous system CNS lymphoma (PCNSL), as in other hematologic malignancies, the level of evidence required to pursue autologous stem-cell transplantation in clinical practice varies across institutions, as well as between Europe and the USA. However, we concur with the authors that enrollment of patients to randomized clinical trials such as the one designed by the International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group (the IELSG #32 trial) is very important, and preferred over off-study treatment approaches.
References
Ansell, S. M. & Rajkumar, S. V. Trials and tribulations in primary CNS lymphoma. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 7, 125–126 (2010).
Ferreri, A. J. M. et al. Flows and flaws in primary CNS lymphoma. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.9-c1
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ansell, S., Rajkumar, S. Author reply: Flows and flaws in primary CNS lymphoma. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 7, 1 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.9-c2
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrclinonc.2010.9-c2