MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4417020800 · doi:10.1182/blood-2025-897

Machine learning-based body composition analysis for risk stratification in newly diagnosed diffuse large B cell lymphoma

2025· article· en· W4417020800 on OpenAlexaff
Fabian Ullrich, René Hosch, Emre Kocakavuk, Hans Christian Reinhardt, Ulrich Dührsen, Andreas Hüttmann, Felix Nensa, Bastian von Tresckow

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaRisk stratificationInternational Prognostic IndexInterim analysisLymphomaComputed tomographyInterim

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Frailty is an adverse prognostic factor in cancer, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Although frailty is common among DLBCL patients, there is no consensus on how it can be accurately measured, and it is not included in standard risk assessment. Body composition analysis (BCA) is a promising method for estimating frailty using imaging data. To enable high-throughput BCA based on routine clinical imaging, we developed the Body and Organ Analysis (BOA) pipeline, which allows high-fidelity BCA from computed tomography (CT) data acquired during routine clinical care (Haubold et al., Invest Radiol, 2024). Using BOA, the prognostic impact of body composition in various solid tumors has been demonstrated (Keyl et al., Nat Cancer, 2025). The consensus method for risk assessment in DLBCL is the International Prognostic Index (IPI), which relies on easily accessible clinical features. Although widely accepted, the IPI remains limited in accurately identifying both high-risk and low-risk DLBCL patients. Here, we assessed the utility of BCA using the BOA pipeline to enhance risk stratification in newly diagnosed DLBCL. We computed body composition data for patients from the phase 3 PETAL trial, which evaluated interim PET (iPET) imaging for risk assessment (Dührsen et al., J Clin Oncol, 2018), based on the CT component of PET/CT scans. Patients with a confirmed diagnosis of DLBCL and available imaging data from both initial diagnosis and interim staging were included (n = 291). The median age was 62 years (range: 18–80), and 133 patients (45%) were female. Total metabolic tumor volume (MTV), determined using the ACCURATE tool (Boellaard, J Nucl Med, 2018), was available for all patients. Using BCA, we calculated a sarcopenia index (SI; skeletal muscle volume normalized to bone volume) and a visceral fat index (VFI; ratio of visceral adipose tissue volume to subcutaneous adipose tissue volume) for each patient. Univariable analysis revealed significantly shorter overall survival (OS) in patients with baseline SI in the lowest tertile (log-rank p = 0.002). Furthermore, a greater decrease in SI between baseline imaging and iPET - i.e., during the first two cycles of immunochemotherapy - was associated with shorter OS in the entire cohort (log-rank p = 0.0007) and in the iPET-negative subgroup (log-rank p = 0.0053). Baseline VFI showed a significant association with OS in iPET-negative patients (log-rank p = 0.0432), and a similar trend in the overall cohort (log-rank p = 0.0631). In multivariable analysis using Cox proportional hazards regression, we included SI, VFI, IPI, and MTV as covariates. SI, but not VFI, was confirmed as an independent prognostic variable for OS (HR 0.38, 95% CI 0.18 - 0.79, p = 0.01). To further validate the predictive value of BCA, we trained machine learning models to classify patients into high-risk and low-risk groups based on SI, VFI, MTV, IPI, and gender. Eighty percent of patients were used for training, and the remaining 20% for validation. Among iPET-negative patients, a machine learning model was able to identify a low-risk group comprising one-third of patients with a 5-year OS of 100% (baseline BCA only: log-rank p = 0.026; including iPET BCA: p = 0.0198). Feature importance analysis identified MTV as the most informative feature, followed by SI and VFI. Notably, similar stratification accuracy was achieved with a model using only SI, VFI, IPI, and gender (log-rank p = 0.0222), with SI and VFI ranked as the most important features. In contrast, a model using only IPI and gender failed to meaningfully distinguish risk groups. Altogether, our findings establish sarcopenia as an independent prognostic factor in newly diagnosed DLBCL. Combining BCA with clinical parameters enables the identification of a low-risk subgroup with excellent long-term outcomes. In conclusion, machine learning approaches based on data obtained in routine clinical care can support risk stratification in newly diagnosed DLBCL.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicNutrition and Health in Aging→French-language works237,207→