Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Narrative review evaluates treatment paradigms in primary vitreoretinal lymphoma, highlighting targeted therapies alongside local control to prevent central nervous system spread.
This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the currently available therapies for primary vitreoretinal lymphoma (PVRL) and to evaluate emerging therapeutic strategies that may improve patient outcomes. A comprehensive literature search was conducted in databases including PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Scopus for studies published up to 2026. Search terms included “primary vitreoretinal lymphoma”, “intravitreal methotrexate”, “rituximab”, “radiotherapy”, “targeted therapy”, and “immunotherapy”. Eligible publications included randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies, observational studies, systematic reviews, relevant clinical guidelines, case series, and case reports. Studies were independently screened and assessed by two reviewers. Current therapeutic strategies include intravitreal chemotherapy, systemic high-dose methotrexate-based regimens, and radiotherapy, either as monotherapy or in combination. While intravitreal approaches provide effective local disease control, they fail to address occult or subsequent central nervous system (CNS) dissemination, necessitating the use of systemic treatments in selected patients. In recent years, significant progress in the understanding of PVRL pathophysiology, including the role of MYD88 mutations and interleukin-10 signaling, has paved the way for the development of targeted and immunomodulatory therapies. Agents such as Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and immune checkpoint inhibitors have demonstrated promising results in early clinical studies, particularly in relapsed or refractory disease. Despite advances in diagnostic techniques, the management of PVRL remains challenging due to its heterogeneous presentation, high relapse rates, and frequent progression to CNS involvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cioboată et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: