An International Assessment of Event-Free Survival at 24 Months (EFS24) and Subsequent Survival in Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) comprise a group of non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs) of mature T-cell origin with generally aggressive clinical behavior. Most systemic PTCLs are treated with anthracycline-based combination chemotherapy; however, outcomes remain relatively poor for most subtypes except ALK-positive anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL). We have used landmark analyses based on event-free survival (EFS) to identify clinically useful endpoints in B-cell NHLs, with EFS at 24 (EFS24) months identified to stratify overall survival (OS) in aggressive B-cell NHL. Here we examined the ability of EFS24 to predict subsequent OS in a large, multinational PTCL cohort. Methods: A cohort of newly diagnosed PTCL patients treated with curative intent combination chemotherapy regimens was assembled from the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER), Swedish Lymphoma Registry (SWE), and British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA). Subtypes included ALK-negative ALCL, angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL), PTCL, not otherwise specified (NOS), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (EATL), extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type (ENKTL), and hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma (HSTCL). Patients were followed based on local institution guidelines, and EFS was defined as time from the date of pathologic diagnosis to progression, re-treatment, or death due to any cause. EFS24 was defined as being alive and event-free 24 months from diagnosis. Subsequent OS was defined as time from achieving EFS24 (24 months from diagnosis) or time from progression in patients failing to achieve EFS24 (progression within 24 months of diagnosis). OS was compared to the age-, sex-, and country-matched general population using United States, Sweden, and British Columbia rate tables via standardized mortality ratios (SMR) and expected survival. Results: 775 patients diagnosed from 2000-2012 were included in the combined analysis with diagnosis by the WHO classification at the respective institutions (MER=138, SWE=422, BCCA=215). Median age at diagnosis was 64 years (range 18-89) and 63% were male. Patient characteristics are summarized in the table. 736 (95%) received anthracyline-based therapy at diagnosis. At a median follow-up of 77 months (range 1-185), 516 patients (67%) had died. The percentage of patients achieving EFS24 was similar across the 3 cohorts (MER=39%, SWE=35%, BCCA= 36%, combined=36%). Median survival after progression within the first 24 months was only 4.9 months (95% CI: 3.8-5.9), with a 5-year OS of 11% and SMR of 46.4 (95% CI: 41.8-51.3). In contrast, median survival after achieving EFS24 was not reached, with a 5-year OS of 78% (95% CI: 73%-84%). This was inferior to the expected survival of 92% in the age-, sex-, and country matched population (SMR=3.16; 95% CI: 2.48-3.98). In EFS24 subgroup analyses, more favorable outcomes were observed in younger patients (age <=60 years, N=137, 5-year survival of 91% vs. 98% expected) and in patients receiving autologous stem cell transplant in first remission (N=72, 5-year survival of 88% vs. 96% expected). Patients achieving EFS24 who were not transplanted in first remission (N=189) had a 5-year survival of 74% vs. 90% expected. Conclusions: Assessment of EFS24 stratifies subsequent outcome in PTCL. Patients with early relapse from PTCL have extremely poor outcomes. However, over one-third of patients with PTCL remain in remission two years from diagnosis after initial chemotherapy and have encouraging OS rates, although survival remains significantly worse than the matched general population. Subset analysis suggests that younger patients and patients who receive autologous stem-cell transplant in first CR have 5-year survival rates that approach 90%, though still below the expected survival of the background population. The marked differences in OS after failing or achieving EFS24 in PTCL patients suggest that this endpoint may be useful for patient counseling, as a clinical trial endpoint, and as an endpoint to assess novel biomarkers for risk stratification. Table Table. Figure 1. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Maurer: Celgene: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Jerkeman:Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Connors:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squib: Research Funding. Ansell:BMS, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Celldex and Affimed: Research Funding.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».