MYC/BCL2 protein coexpression contributes to the inferior survival of activated B-cell subtype of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and demonstrates high-risk gene expression signatures: a report from The International DLBCL Rituximab-CHOP Consortium Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is stratified into prognostically favorable germinal center B-cell (GCB)-like and unfavorable activated B-cell (ABC)-like subtypes based on gene expression signatures. In this study, we analyzed 893 de novo DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone). We show that MYC/BCL2 protein coexpression occurred significantly more commonly in the ABC subtype. Patients with the ABC or GCB subtype of DLBCL had similar prognoses with MYC/BCL2 coexpression and without MYC/BCL2 coexpression. Consistent with the notion that the prognostic difference between the 2 subtypes is attributable to MYC/BCL2 coexpression, there is no difference in gene expression signatures between the 2 subtypes in the absence of MYC/BCL2 coexpression. DLBCL with MYC/BCL2 coexpression demonstrated a signature of marked downregulation of genes encoding extracellular matrix proteins, those involving matrix deposition/remodeling and cell adhesion, and upregulation of proliferation-associated genes. We conclude that MYC/BCL2 coexpression in DLBCL is associated with an aggressive clinical course, is more common in the ABC subtype, and contributes to the overall inferior prognosis of patients with ABC-DLBCL. In conclusion, the data suggest that MYC/BCL2 coexpression, rather than cell-of-origin classification, is a better predictor of prognosis in patients with DLBCL treated with R-CHOP.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".