Isolated<i>MYC</i>cytogenetic abnormalities in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma do not predict an adverse clinical outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigated the significance of MYC, BCL2 and BCL6 gene abnormalities in a cohort of 205 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients studied by conventional and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization cytogenetic analysis. Combining these methods, 172 cases (84%) were classified as MYC-, 17 (8%) were MYC+/BCL2-/BCL6-, and 16 (8%) were double/triple-hit lymphomas (i.e. MYC+/BCL2+, MYC+/BCL6+, or MYC+/BCL2+/BCL6+). We found a significant difference in event-free survival (EFS) among the three groups (p = 0.02), with the double/triple-hit group having the worst EFS. Patients who were MYC+, but BCL2- and BCL6-, had the best EFS. We conclude that patients with MYC+ DLBCL, but without BCL2 or BCL6 abnormalities, do not have a worse outcome when compared to those who are MYC-. However, patients with double/triple-hit DLBCL have a very poor outcome and should be treated with aggressive or novel therapies.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".