BCL2 Predicts Survival in Germinal Center B-cell–like Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma Treated with CHOP-like Therapy and Rituximab
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We have previously shown the prognostic significance of BCL2 expression in the activated B-cell-like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (ABC-DLBCL) patients treated with cyclophosphamide-Adriamycin-vincristine-prednisone (CHOP) or CHOP-like therapy. However, after the inclusion of rituximab (R) in the CHOP regimen, several conflicting observations about the prognostic value of BCL2 expression have been reported. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We evaluated the R-CHOP cohort of 221 DLBCL cases with gene expression profiling data. BCL2 protein (n = 169), mRNA (n = 221) expression, and t(14;18) (n = 144) were correlated with clinical outcome. The CHOP cohort (n = 181) was used for comparative analysis. RESULTS: BCL2 protein expression has significant impact on overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in DLBCL (OS, P = 0.009; EFS, P = 0.001) and GCB-DLBCL (OS, P = 0.03; EFS, P = 0.002) but not in ABC-DLBCL in the R-CHOP cohort. The survival differences for EFS in GCB-DLBCL were still observed in multivariate analysis. At the mRNA level, this correlation was observed in EFS in DLBCL (P = 0.006), but only a trend was observed in GCB-DLBCL (P = 0.09). The t(14;18) was detected in 34% of GCB-DLBCL but was not associated with significant differences in survival. Gene enrichment analysis identified significant enrichment of the DLBCL "stromal-1" signatures and hypoxia-inducible factor 1 (HIF1-α) signature in BCL2(-)GCB-DLBCL, whereas T(FH) cell signatures were enriched in BCL2(+)GCB-DLBCL. CONCLUSION: The prognostic significance of BCL2 has changed after inclusion of rituximab in the treatment protocol and is observed in the GCB-DLBCL rather than the ABC-DLBCL. Although rituximab has benefited patients in both DLBCL subgroups, the BCL2(+)GCB-DLBCL seems to receive less benefit from this treatment and may require other novel therapeutic intervention.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".