Plasma viral DNA as a marker of tumor response in EBV(+) Hodgkin lymphoma in a phase III study (E2496).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
8003 Background: Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) is associated with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and can be detected by in situ hybridization (ISH) of viral nucleic acid (EBER) in tumor cells. Studies have suggested a correlation in HL between plasma EBV DNA and EBER ISH. We previously studied the DNase sensitivity of plasma EBV DNA and found plasma EBV of patients with EBV(+) HL was not protected from DNase digestion, consistent with tumor-derived DNA, while plasma EBV of patients with HIV without EBV(+) tumors was protected from DNase digestion, consistent with virion DNA. We sought to determine whether plasma EBV could serve as a surrogate for EBER ISH and whether reappearance of plasma EBV predicts treatment failure. Methods: Specimens from a Cancer Cooperative Intergroup Trial (E2496/Stanford V versus ABVD for HL) were used to compare pretreatment plasma EBV DNA copy number, assessed by real-time quantitative PCR, with EBV status by EBER ISH. An ROC analysis was performed using patients with both pretreatment plasma EBV and EBER results (n=121), identifying a cutoff of 60 viral copies/100 µL plasma (95% concordance, 92% sensitivity, 96% specificity for EBV status by EBER). Using this cutoff, pretreatment plasma specimens (n=274) were designated EBV(+) (n=54) or EBV(-) (n=220), as were serial follow-up specimens. Cox proportional hazard models were constructed to evaluate plasma EBV as a prognostic factor for failure-free survival (FFS). FFS was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Pretreatment EBV(+) plasma was associated with treatment failure with a hazard ratio of 2.1 (95% CI 1.2-3.6, p=0.01) after adjusting for International Prognostic Score, treatment arm, and histology. Of the EBV(+) patients with follow-up specimens (n=45), patients with EBV(+) plasma beyond 1 month of therapy (n=9) had inferior FFS compared to those who cleared their plasma of EBV (n=36), (3-year FFS 44% versus 69%, respectively; log rank p=0.03). Conclusions: HL patients with EBV(+) plasma at baseline have inferior FFS compared to others. Among patients with EBV(+) plasma at baseline, those in whom plasma EBV persists or reappears after initiation of therapy have inferior FFS. Such patients may benefit from experimental or intensified 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".