Outcome of relapsed and refractory nodular lymphocyte‐predominant Hodgkin lymphoma: a North American analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL) is a rare entity, with limited data on the outcome in the relapsed/refractory setting. We evaluated the outcome of all patients diagnosed between 04/1979 and 01/2019 with relapsed or progressive NLPHL after initial active therapy at two institutions, refractory disease being defined as lack of response to treatment and/or relapse within three months of treatment. NLPHL patients with histological evidence of transformation at time of first relapse or progression were excluded. In total, 69 patients with recurrent NLPHL were included in the study. After a median follow-up after initial diagnosis of 14 years (range, 0·5-46 years), median progression-free survival after front-line treatment (PFS-1) was four years. Second-line therapy included chemotherapy in 28 (41%) patients, biological therapy (rituximab, lenalidomide or brentuximab vedotin) in 14 (20%), high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in 14 (20%) and radiation therapy (RT) alone in 10 (15%). The five-year PFS after second-line therapy (PFS-2) was 68% [95% confidence interval (CI), 54-79%] but the five-year overall survival (OS) after second-line therapy (OS-2) remained excellent, at 94% (95% CI, 85-99%). Due to excellent outcome in case of recurrence, studies aimed at characterizing its biology to guide therapy de-escalation are needed.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".