Gemcitabine-based salvage therapy is considered an effective treatment for relapsed and refractory Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). We analyzed the outcome of 41 consecutive NHL patients treated with gemcitabine-based regimens between January 2007 and October 2015. Twenty-eight males and 13 females (median age 66.4 years) were included. The median follow-up from gemcitabine initiation was 7.3 months. Thirty patients (73%) had B-cell, and eleven (27%) had T-cell, lymphoma. All patients received a median of 2 prior regimens, of which at least 1 was anthracycline based. Twenty-eight patients (78%) received full-dose while 9 (22%) received reduced-dose regimens. The overall response rate was 37%, with 24% (n = 10) complete response, 12% (n = 5) partial response, and 63% (n = 22) progressive disease or stable disease. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 47 days (range 12-1,318), the median overall survival (OS) was 1.9 years. Twenty patients (49%) died during follow-up. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity was reported in 21 patients (51%). Relapsed vs. refractory disease, as well as a response to gemcitabine, predicted better PFS and OS. Use of a full-dose regimen predicted a better OS. Compared to previously published data, we observed less favorable outcomes. The administration of gemcitabine-based therapy as a salvage regimen for patients with relapsed or refractory NHL had limited success. Innovative therapies for these patients are an unmet need.
Test score interpretation plays a central role in test validity. Nonetheless, the relevant understanding and process of interpretation remains undertheorized in
Patrick Mair: Modern Psychometrics with R. Cham, Switzerland, SS: Springer, 464 pp., 2018, € 51,16. ISBN: 978-3-319-93175-3 - Volume 85 Issue 2
The present study employed multivariate genetic item-level analyses to examine the ontology and the genetic and environmental etiology of the Big Five pers
In September 1888, Francis Ysidro Edgeworth read a paper before Section F of the British Association at Bath, in which he unfolded some ideas that would profoundly influence psychology. In this paper, he suggested that the theory of errors, at that point mainly used in physics and astronomy, could also be applied to mental test scores. The paper's primary example concerned the evaluation of student essays. Specifically, Edgeworth (1888, p. 602) argued that ‘… it is intelligible to speak of the mean judgment of competent critics as the true judgment; and deviations from that mean as errors’. Edgeworth's suggestion, to decompose observed test scores into a ‘true score’ and an ‘error’ component, was destined to become the most famous equation in psychological measurement: Observed = True + Error.
No abstract is provided for this article.
The association between autism and obsessive–compulsive disorder (OCD) seems largely dependent upon observed similarities in the repetitive behaviors
That the conceptual problems inherent in measurement in general, and psychological measurement in particular, are poorly understood is obvious from the lack of agreement on the meaning of the term 'measurement', the multitude of conceptually different models for implementing it, and the fact that no psychologist can point to a field where psychological measurement has succeeded without eliciting an immediate claim to the contrary from another psychologist. Given that virtually all aspects of the measurement problem are the subject of ongoing debates, many of which have been discussed in previous chapters, one would expect these debates to culminate in fierce discussions on the most central question one can ask about psychological measurement, which is the question of validity. It is therefore an extraordinary experience to find that, after proceeding up through the turmoil at every fundamental level of the measurement problem, one reaches this conceptually highest and presumably most difficult level only to find a tranquil surface of relatively widespread consensus (Kane, 2001; Shepard, 1993).
Kyngdon argues that psychometricians have erroneously claimed the Rasch model to be an instance of representational measurement, because the Rasch model does not map a bona fide empirical relational system (ERS) into a numerical relational system (NRS). While we agree that one does not automatically achieve a conjoint measurement representation upon fitting a Rasch model, we do not agree that the Rasch model could not in principle yield such a representation. In our view, whether this is possible depends on what one is prepared to accept as an empirical relational system. This is a philosophical question that extends beyond the scope of the formal structures advanced in representationalism and psychometrics; a question, moreover, that is not currently settled. We examine some of the ways in which one may react to this question, and conclude that Kyngdon's argument depends on a specific, and perhaps too strong, interpretation of representationalism and psychometric models.