High Relapse Rate in Patients with MALT Lymphoma Warrants Lifelong Follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: B-cell lymphoma of the mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT lymphoma) is thought to be an indolent disease, with a good prognosis following various forms of treatment. Little, however, is known about the rate and pattern of relapse following successful treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We have analyzed time to and pattern of relapse in patients with MALT lymphoma, along with investigation of t(11;18)(q21;q21), t(1;14)(p22;q32), and t(14;18)(q32;q21) involving IGH/MALT1, trisomy 3, and trisomy 18. Eighty-six patients achieving complete remission (CR) after initial therapy with sufficient follow-up data were available. Primary site of disease was the stomach (n = 36), salivary gland (n = 19), ocular adnexa/orbit (n = 12), lung (n = 8), thyroid (n = 5), breast (n = 3), liver (n = 2), and skin (n = 1). RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (37%) relapsed between 14 and 307 months (median 47 months) after initial CR. Ten relapses were local, whereas the remaining patients relapsed in a distant organ. Eight of 36 gastric versus 24 of 50 nongastric MALT lymphomas (P = 0.02) relapsed. Five patients had a second recurrence 26 to 56 months after a second CR. Relapse rates were not related to forms of initial treatment. Chromosomal aberrations were detected in 14 of 28 (50%) relapsing patients, and chromosomal alterations were identical at diagnosis and relapse. No significant association of any of the genetic changes investigated with relapse was found. Interestingly, patients with t(11;18)(q21;q21) had a significantly longer median time to relapse (76 months) than patients without this translocation (29 months; P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: In view of the late relapses seen in our series, lifelong observation of all patients treated for MALT lymphoma seems to be required.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".