CD38 Expression above 20% Predicts Disease Progression in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Is a Useful Prognostic Marker Where Cytogenetic and Molecular Markers Are Not Available
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The prognostic significance of CD38 expression and the cut off value has not been fully investigated. As CD38 is readily available test in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), we investigated its role in prediction of disease progression when a cut off value of 20% is used. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from diagnosis to first treatment or last follow up. An electronic database search of pts with CLL who presented at St Paul’s Hospital between 1969 and 2007 was performed. Among 465 pts with CLL, 161 pts (35%) had their CD38 expression measured by flow cytometry. CD38 expression and its association with other prognostic factors such as age, Rai stage, lymphocyte count at diagnosis, gender and other immunophenotypic makers were analyzed. Out of 161 pts, positive CD38 expression (>20%) was found in 36 patients (22%). Comparing the baseline characteristics of the CLL pts with CD38+ and negative disease, we found CD38 positivity more common in male pts than in female pts (p=0.03). Also patients with CD38 positive disease tend to present with more advanced stage disease (p=0.056). Progression free survival at 2, 5 and 10y for the CD38+ CLL pts was 89%, 61% and 41% respectively compared with 95%, 81% and 62% for the CD38 negative group (p=0.03). Univariate analysis revealed the following factors as significant or marginally significant for disease progression: CD38+ (p=0.03), male gender (p=0.07), Rai stage (p<0.0001), lymphocyte count above 20 ×109/l at diagnosis (p<0.0001), CD5 expression <10% (p=0.01). On multivariate analysis, only disease stage at diagnosis (p<0.0001) and CD38 expression above 20% (p=0.04) retained significant and were predictive for disease progression. We conclude that CD38 expression above 20% at the time of diagnosis can be prognostically useful and predicts for disease progression and along with Rai staging can provide inexpensive tool to follow and monitor patients with CLL. Table: Characteristics of patients with CLL based on CD38 ≥20% and <20% Parameter CD38 ≥20% (%) CD38<20% (%) p value* *for differences between the groups. Number 36 125 Sex: M/F (ratio) 22/14 (1.6:1) 66/60 (1.1:1) 0.03 Age above 60 y 21 (58) 81 (65) 0.2 Rai stage: 0, 1+2, 3+4 20, 11, 5 (55, 31, 14) 100, 17, 1 (80, 14, 0) 0.056 Lymphocyte count above 20×109/l 9 (25) 23 (18) 0.3 CD5 <10% 6 (16) 29 (23) 0.3 Fig: Progression free survival for patients with CLL based on CD38 expression, cut off level 20%. Fig:. Progression free survival for patients with CLL based on CD38 expression, cut off level 20%.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".