MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2232969484 · doi:10.1182/blood.v124.21.1624.1624

Cell-of-Origin Assignment in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Determined By Gene Expression in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue Has Prognostic Significance Independent of IPI and MYC/BCL2 Immunohistochemistry

2014· article· en· W2232969484 sur OpenAlexaffabout
David W. Scott, Anja Mottok, Daisuke Ennishi, George W. Wright, Pedro Farinha, Susana Ben‐Neriah, Robert Kridel, Garrett Barry, Christoffer Hother, Kerry J. Savage, Laurie H. Sehn, Louis M. Staudt, Joseph M. Connors, Lisa M. Rimsza, Randy D. Gascoyne

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCAR-T cell therapy research
Établissements canadiensSpinal Cord Injury BCBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaTissue microarrayImmunohistochemistryConcordanceLymphomaPathologyGene expression profilingBiologyGerminal centerCancer researchMedicineGene expressionGeneB cellBioinformaticsImmunologyAntibodyGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract The molecularly defined cell-of-origin (COO) subtypes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), activated B-cell like (ABC) and germinal center B-cell like (GCB), have distinct underlying biology and outcomes in the R-CHOP treatment era. The recent advent of therapeutic agents that show subtype-specific activity has made the robust assignment of COO increasingly important for identifying patients that will respond to these agents. Although it has become common practice to use widely applicable immunohistochemistry-based algorithms to assign COO, these methods are reported to have widely variable concordance with COO as determined by gene expression profiling (GEP). Furthermore, using these IHC-based algorithms, the relationship between COO and treatment outcome to R-CHOP has been very inconsistent. We recently described an accurate and robust gene expression based assay for determining COO applicable to formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) biopsies. Here we sought to determine the prognostic significance of COO assigned using this assay and the relationship with other established prognostic factors. The Lymph2Cx assay, a 20 gene assay based on NanoString technology, was applied, as previously described (Scott et al Blood 2014;123:1214-17), to RNA extracted from the diagnostic FFPE biopsies (tumor content ≥ 60%) of 274 patients with de novo DLBCL. The median follow-up of living patients within this cohort, uniformly treated with R-CHOP at the BC Cancer Agency (Vancouver, Canada) was 6.1 years (range 1.2 – 13.2). Tissue microarrays of duplicate 0.6mm cores were stained for MYC and BCL2 (DAKO 124) to assess the proportion of tumor cells that expressed these proteins. Identification of MYC+/BCL2+ tumors (as described in Johnson et al J Clin Oncol 2012; 30: 3452-9; cut-offs: MYC ≥ 40%, BCL2 ≥ 50%) was performed independently by two expert hematopathologists (AM and PF) with consensus on discordant cases reached with a third hematopathologist (RDG). GEP data of sufficient quality was obtained from 271/274 (99%) of the biopsies, assigning the following COOs: 90 (33%) ABC, 153 (56%) GCB and 28 (10%) were unclassifiable. In comparison with the GCB group, the ABC group had a greater proportion of patients with stage III/IV disease (63% vs 45%, P=0.01) and higher IPI scores (P=0.03). The ABC subtype was associated with significantly inferior outcomes compared with the GCB group (Figure 1). This association was independent of IPI groupings (low (0-1), intermediate (2-3) and high (4-5)) in multivariate analyses. The prognostic significance of the COO was most evident in the intermediate IPI group (5 year time-to-progression (TTP) ABC 45% vs GCB 71%; log-rank P=0.001, HR 2.7 (95% CI 1.6 – 6.3)). It has been proposed that the prognostic power of COO is largely attributable to the greater proportion of MYC+BCL2+ cases within the ABC subtype (Hu et al Blood 2013; 121: 4021-31). We confirm that the proportion of tumors that are MYC+/BCL2+ by IHC is significantly higher in the ABC vs GCB subtype (57% vs 21%, P<0.001). However, multivariate analyses demonstrated that COO was significantly associated with TTP and disease specific survival, independent of MYC/BCL2 IHC. The significant association between MYC+/BCL2+ IHC and inferior outcomes was only observed in the GCB group, while the association between COO and treatment outcomes was observed only in the non-MYC+/BCL2+ group (Figure 2). When multivariate analyses were performed including the IPI groupings, MYC/BCL2 IHC and COO as variables, only the IPI and COO were significantly associated with TTP. We have previously shown the accuracy of the Lymph2Cx assay at assigning COO, establishing its potential as a predictive biomarker. This large study of R-CHOP treated patients demonstrates that this assay separates patients into groups with significantly different outcomes, recapitulating the results of COO assigned using GEP on frozen tissue (Lenz et al N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 2313-23). Furthermore, the prognostic significance is independent of established and recently described prognostic factors providing additional support for its use in clinical trials and, ultimately, routine clinical practice. Figure 1: Treatment outcomes according to COO. Log-rank P values are for the comparison between ABC and GCB subgroups. HR: hazard ratio with the 95% CI in brackets. Figure 1:. Treatment outcomes according to COO. Log-rank P values are for the comparison between ABC and GCB subgroups. HR: hazard ratio with the 95% CI in brackets. Figure 2: Treatment outcomes according to COO and MYC/BCL2 immunohistochemistry. Figure 2:. Treatment outcomes according to COO and MYC/BCL2 immunohistochemistry. Disclosures Scott: NIH: Patents & Royalties. Wright:NIH: Patents & Royalties. Staudt:NIH: Patents & Royalties. Connors:NIH: Patents & Royalties. Rimsza:NIH: Patents & Royalties. Gascoyne:NIH: Patents & Royalties; Celgene: Consultancy.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,003

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,258 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2014
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetCAR-T cell therapy researchTravaux en français237 207