COO and MYC/BCL2 status do not predict outcome among patients with stage I/II DLBCL: a retrospective multicenter study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In advanced-stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the presence of an activated B-cell phenotype or a non–germinal center (GCB) phenotype, coexpression of MYC and BCL2 by immunohistochemistry, and the cooccurrence of MYC and BCL2 or BCL6 rearrangements are associated with inferior outcomes. It is unclear whether these variables remain prognostic in stage I/II patients. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the prognostic impact of cell of origin (COO), as well as dual-expressor (DE) status and molecular double-hit (DH) status, in stage I/II DLBCL by positron emission tomography with computed tomography (PET-CT). A total of 211 patients treated with R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone)–like regimens, with or without radiotherapy, was included. The median follow-up in the entire cohort was 4 years (range, 0.4-9.4), with estimated 4-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 79-89) and 88% (95% CI, 83-92), respectively. By univariable analysis, DE (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 1.27; 95% CI, 0.58-2.81, P = .55 and OS: HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 0.60-3.30; P = .44), DH (PFS: HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.27-5.31; P = .80 and OS: HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.08-4.73; P = .64), and non-GCB status (PFS: HR, 1.59; 95% CI, 0.83-3.03; P = .16 and OS: HR, 1.80; 95% CI, 0.89-3.67; P = .10) were associated with poorer outcomes. In patients with PET-CT–defined stage I/II DLBCL treated with R-CHOP–like therapy, with or without radiation, COO and DE and DH status were not significantly associated with inferior PFS or OS.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".