MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2904699949 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-113368

Prognostic Significance of MYC Single, Double, Triple Hit and MYC-Translocation Partner Status in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma - a Study By the Lunenburg Lymphoma Biomarker Consortium (LLBC)

2018· article· en· W2904699949 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Andreas Rosenwald, Laurie H. Sehn, Delphine Maucort‐Boulch

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBCL6Diffuse large B-cell lymphomaLymphomaTissue microarrayCancer researchMedicineChromosomal translocationOncologyContext (archaeology)Internal medicineBiologyB cellCancerImmunologyAntibodyGeneGerminal centerGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction MYC-rearrangement (MYC-R) occurs in approximately 10-15% of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCL) and several studies suggest an inferior progression free (PFS) as well as overall survival (OS) compared to DLBCL without MYC-R. However, the prognostic significance of MYC single-hit (MYC-SH), MYC double/triple-hit (MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 translocation; MYC-DH/TH) in the context of the MYC translocation partner (MYC-IG versus MYC-non-IG) is less clear due to relatively small sample sizes in prior studies. The Lunenburg Lymphoma Biomarker Consortium (LLBC) set out to address these questions in a large number of DLBCL treated uniformly with rituximab (R)-CHOP- or R-CHOP-like chemotherapy. Methods Relevant clinical data (IPI factors, PFS, OS) from patients with aggressive B-cell lymphomas with confirmed DLBCL morphology derived from registry cohorts (Canada: British Columbia Cancer, UK: Leeds/HMRN, Barts, USA: Stanford) and prospective clinical trials (Germany: RICOVER, MegaCHOEP, France: LNH01-5B and LNH03-B, HOVON: HO 46 and 84) were pooled in the LLBC database (n=5118). Interphase FISH analysis (mostly on tissue microarrays) was used to determine the MYC-, BCL2- and BCL6-rearrangement status. All DLBCL with available tissue underwent break-apart testing for MYC (Vysis, LSI, Abbott). Identified MYC-R cases were subjected to FISH break-apart testing for the BCL2- and BCL6 loci as well as to MYC/IGH fusion testing and, if negative, to MYC/IGK and MYC/IGL testing to allow designation of the final MYC-R status (MYC-IG versus MYC-non-IG). Information on the cell of origin (COO) was generated using immunohistochemistry (Hans classifier) and/or gene expression based methods. Survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan Meier method and survival curves were compared with the log-rank test. The effects of variables of interest were estimated using univariate and multivariate Cox models stratified on the variable 'cohort' and 'trial'. Results 2380 DLBCL patients with full data on PFS, OS, IPI factors and MYC FISH results were available for analysis. 263 DLBCL cases (11%) had MYC-R which was associated with inferior PFS and OS compared to DLBCL patients without MYC-R (59% versus 72% OS at five years; log-rank <0.001; 56% versus 64% PFS at five years; log-rank <0.002). This effect was observed in both COO subgroups (GCB and non GCB). Out of 163 MYC-R patients with complete FISH data, 40 were MYC-SH with an IG partner (24.5%) and 17 (10.5%) with a non-IG partner. 53 patients had a MYC DH/TH constellation with an IG partner (32.5%) and 53 patients (32.5%) with a non-IG partner. The MYC-DH/TH group with an IG partner had the worst OS at 24 months: (50.9% compared to 76.4% for the remaining MYC-R DLBCL patients and to 82.4% for patients without MYC-R) (fig1). Similar results were obtained for PFS. In the MYC-DH group, there were no differences in OS and PFS between MYC/BCL2 and MYC/BCL6 'double hits'. Multivariate Cox models adjusting for the IPI and including a time-dependent effect showed, that the impact on outcomes was mainly seen in the first 24 months post therapy (hazard ratio (HR) of 2 [1.59-2.53] for MYC-R DLBCL patients compared to patients without MYC-R and a HR of 3.12 [2.09-4.64] for MYC-DH/TH tumors in which MYC is translocated to IG). In contrast, in MYC-R patients including MYC-SH and MYC-DH/TH without an IG partner, the HR was lower at 1.5 [1.01-2.24]. Conclusion This study by the LLBC in a very large cohort of DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP or R-CHOP-like therapy confirms previous reports on the negative prognostic impact of an underlying MYC-translocation for both PFS and OS. This impact is predominantly observed in the first two years post therapy. Further, the large sample size extends previous observations that the partner gene of MYC (IG versus non-IG) also has prognostic impact. MYC-DH/TH DLBCL with an IG partner gene have the worst OS and PFS, while impact is moderate in other constellations (MYC-SH and MYC-DH/TH with a non-IG partner). Additionally, no differences between MYC/BCL2 and MYC/BCL6 'double hits' are seen in PFS and OS. Our results suggest that along with MYC testing in routine clinical practice, identification of the MYC partner gene (IG versus non-IG) is also warranted to identify further DLBCL subsets with poor outcomes which may have implications in the design and interpretation of future clinical trials. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Sehn: Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria.

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)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,002
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 enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,009

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0000,001
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 Opus0,021
Tête enseignante GPT0,266
Écart entre enseignants0,245 · 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

Citations13
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBlood→Même sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→Travaux en français237 207→