Alexander Kaminsky, Lauren M Fahmy, Zaid Bilgrami, Hye Ryung Yang, Volkan Beylergil, Mengxi Zhou, Sara Suhl, Susan E Bates, Tito Fojo, Hao Yang, Lawrence H Schwartz, Larisa J Geskin
{"title":"从维度到动态到结果-淋巴结和皮肤评估预测CTCL的结果。","authors":"Alexander Kaminsky, Lauren M Fahmy, Zaid Bilgrami, Hye Ryung Yang, Volkan Beylergil, Mengxi Zhou, Sara Suhl, Susan E Bates, Tito Fojo, Hao Yang, Lawrence H Schwartz, Larisa J Geskin","doi":"10.1080/10428194.2025.2553863","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Radiologic nodal staging in CTCL traditionally uses a 1.5 cm longest diameter (LDi) cutoff; however, this lacks validation and may misclassify risk. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 6,095 CT scans from 262 CTCL patients in the MAVORIC trial using unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric LN measurements and mSWAT scores. Optimal cutoffs were determined <i>via</i> ROC analysis and landmarking adjusted for informative censoring. Additionally, kinetic modeling growth rates (<i>g</i>) were calculated for both LN and skin scores. We demonstrated that LDi > 1.5 cm did not predict OS (<i>p</i> = 0.8). However, baseline volumetric cutoffs (3,945 mm<sup>3</sup>; AUC = 0.67) stratified OS (median 43.6 months vs NA, log-rank <i>p</i> = 0.035); post‑landmark analysis (6,930 mm<sup>3</sup>) enhanced discrimination. High <i>g</i> (volumetric or mSWAT) independently predicted shorter OS/PFS/TTF (<i>p</i> < 0.05). A combined model (volume + g) had C‑index 0.63 versus 0.60 for volume alone. We conclude that volumetric and dynamic metrics outperform conventional measures in predicting CTCL outcomes. Incorporating these methods into staging and trial criteria is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":18047,"journal":{"name":"Leukemia & Lymphoma","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From dimensions through dynamics to outcomes - lymph nodes and skin assessments predict CTCL outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Alexander Kaminsky, Lauren M Fahmy, Zaid Bilgrami, Hye Ryung Yang, Volkan Beylergil, Mengxi Zhou, Sara Suhl, Susan E Bates, Tito Fojo, Hao Yang, Lawrence H Schwartz, Larisa J Geskin\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10428194.2025.2553863\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Radiologic nodal staging in CTCL traditionally uses a 1.5 cm longest diameter (LDi) cutoff; however, this lacks validation and may misclassify risk. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 6,095 CT scans from 262 CTCL patients in the MAVORIC trial using unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric LN measurements and mSWAT scores. Optimal cutoffs were determined <i>via</i> ROC analysis and landmarking adjusted for informative censoring. Additionally, kinetic modeling growth rates (<i>g</i>) were calculated for both LN and skin scores. We demonstrated that LDi > 1.5 cm did not predict OS (<i>p</i> = 0.8). However, baseline volumetric cutoffs (3,945 mm<sup>3</sup>; AUC = 0.67) stratified OS (median 43.6 months vs NA, log-rank <i>p</i> = 0.035); post‑landmark analysis (6,930 mm<sup>3</sup>) enhanced discrimination. High <i>g</i> (volumetric or mSWAT) independently predicted shorter OS/PFS/TTF (<i>p</i> < 0.05). A combined model (volume + g) had C‑index 0.63 versus 0.60 for volume alone. We conclude that volumetric and dynamic metrics outperform conventional measures in predicting CTCL outcomes. Incorporating these methods into staging and trial criteria is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18047,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leukemia & Lymphoma\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-9\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leukemia & Lymphoma\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10428194.2025.2553863\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leukemia & Lymphoma","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10428194.2025.2553863","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
From dimensions through dynamics to outcomes - lymph nodes and skin assessments predict CTCL outcomes.
Radiologic nodal staging in CTCL traditionally uses a 1.5 cm longest diameter (LDi) cutoff; however, this lacks validation and may misclassify risk. We conducted a retrospective analysis of 6,095 CT scans from 262 CTCL patients in the MAVORIC trial using unidimensional, bidimensional, and volumetric LN measurements and mSWAT scores. Optimal cutoffs were determined via ROC analysis and landmarking adjusted for informative censoring. Additionally, kinetic modeling growth rates (g) were calculated for both LN and skin scores. We demonstrated that LDi > 1.5 cm did not predict OS (p = 0.8). However, baseline volumetric cutoffs (3,945 mm3; AUC = 0.67) stratified OS (median 43.6 months vs NA, log-rank p = 0.035); post‑landmark analysis (6,930 mm3) enhanced discrimination. High g (volumetric or mSWAT) independently predicted shorter OS/PFS/TTF (p < 0.05). A combined model (volume + g) had C‑index 0.63 versus 0.60 for volume alone. We conclude that volumetric and dynamic metrics outperform conventional measures in predicting CTCL outcomes. Incorporating these methods into staging and trial criteria is warranted.
期刊介绍:
Leukemia & Lymphoma in its fourth decade continues to provide an international forum for publication of high quality clinical, translational, and basic science research, and original observations relating to all aspects of hematological malignancies. The scope ranges from clinical and clinico-pathological investigations to fundamental research in disease biology, mechanisms of action of novel agents, development of combination chemotherapy, pharmacology and pharmacogenomics as well as ethics and epidemiology. Submissions of unique clinical observations or confirmatory studies are considered and published as Letters to the Editor