国际预后模型作为选择高风险弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤患者的工具

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEMATOLOGY
Jelena Jelicic, Karen Juul-Jensen, Zoran Bukumiric, Mikkel Runason Simonsen, Michael Roost Clausen, Ahmed Ludvigsen Al-Mashhadi, Robert Schou Pedersen, Christian Bjørn Poulsen, Anne Ortved Gang, Peter Brown, Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly, Thomas Stauffer Larsen
{"title":"国际预后模型作为选择高风险弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤患者的工具","authors":"Jelena Jelicic, Karen Juul-Jensen, Zoran Bukumiric, Mikkel Runason Simonsen, Michael Roost Clausen, Ahmed Ludvigsen Al-Mashhadi, Robert Schou Pedersen, Christian Bjørn Poulsen, Anne Ortved Gang, Peter Brown, Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly, Thomas Stauffer Larsen","doi":"10.1016/j.clml.2025.08.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The International prognostic index (IPI) is a widely used model for identifying trial-eligible patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the applicability of prognostic models in identifying trial-eligible high-intermediate (HI) and high-risk (H), particularly younger patients, has not been extensively studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were identified in the Danish Lymphoma Registry (LYFO). To evaluate the impact of IPI and age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) on identifying higher-risk (HI and H-risk) trial-eligible patients, we retrieved the eligibility criteria for the frontMIND trial (NCT04824092).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 6252 patients with DLBCL registered in the LYFO, 3725 (59.6%) were trial-eligible. The dataset included all IPI/aaIPI groups. However, 46% of 3725 patients would meet trial eligibility if IPI and aaIPI higher-risk patients were selected. The 5-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 61.7% and 70.5%, respectively. Among patients aged ≤ 60 years (35.5%; 1321/3725), 29.5% were frontMIND-eligible based on aaIPI, with 5-year PFS and OS of 72.3% and 82.8%, respectively. Combining IPI and aaIPI did not improve the identification of patients who did not respond to standard treatment, and utilizing this strategy for trial selection was not superior to using IPI or NCCN-IPI alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prognostic models can help in selecting trial-eligible HI and H-risk patients, thereby increasing the chances of identifying those who do not respond to standard treatment. However, the currently used prognostic indices fail to accurately recognize some high-risk patients, particularly young patients. Therefore, additional risk factors beyond prognostic models are needed to improve patient selection for trial participation.</p>","PeriodicalId":10348,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"International Prognostic Models as Tools for Selection of Higher-risk Trial-eligible Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell lymphoma.\",\"authors\":\"Jelena Jelicic, Karen Juul-Jensen, Zoran Bukumiric, Mikkel Runason Simonsen, Michael Roost Clausen, Ahmed Ludvigsen Al-Mashhadi, Robert Schou Pedersen, Christian Bjørn Poulsen, Anne Ortved Gang, Peter Brown, Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly, Thomas Stauffer Larsen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.clml.2025.08.020\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The International prognostic index (IPI) is a widely used model for identifying trial-eligible patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the applicability of prognostic models in identifying trial-eligible high-intermediate (HI) and high-risk (H), particularly younger patients, has not been extensively studied.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were identified in the Danish Lymphoma Registry (LYFO). To evaluate the impact of IPI and age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) on identifying higher-risk (HI and H-risk) trial-eligible patients, we retrieved the eligibility criteria for the frontMIND trial (NCT04824092).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 6252 patients with DLBCL registered in the LYFO, 3725 (59.6%) were trial-eligible. The dataset included all IPI/aaIPI groups. However, 46% of 3725 patients would meet trial eligibility if IPI and aaIPI higher-risk patients were selected. The 5-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 61.7% and 70.5%, respectively. Among patients aged ≤ 60 years (35.5%; 1321/3725), 29.5% were frontMIND-eligible based on aaIPI, with 5-year PFS and OS of 72.3% and 82.8%, respectively. Combining IPI and aaIPI did not improve the identification of patients who did not respond to standard treatment, and utilizing this strategy for trial selection was not superior to using IPI or NCCN-IPI alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prognostic models can help in selecting trial-eligible HI and H-risk patients, thereby increasing the chances of identifying those who do not respond to standard treatment. However, the currently used prognostic indices fail to accurately recognize some high-risk patients, particularly young patients. Therefore, additional risk factors beyond prognostic models are needed to improve patient selection for trial participation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10348,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clml.2025.08.020\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clml.2025.08.020","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:国际预后指数(IPI)是一种广泛使用的模型,用于识别符合试验条件的弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)患者。然而,预后模型在确定符合试验条件的中高(HI)和高危(H)患者,特别是年轻患者方面的适用性尚未得到广泛研究。方法:在丹麦淋巴瘤登记处(LYFO)中确定新诊断的DLBCL患者。为了评估IPI和年龄调整IPI (aaIPI)对识别高风险(HI和H-risk)试验合格患者的影响,我们检索了frontMIND试验(NCT04824092)的资格标准。结果:在LYFO登记的6252例DLBCL患者中,3725例(59.6%)符合试验条件。数据集包括所有IPI/aaIPI组。然而,如果选择IPI和aaIPI高风险患者,3725例患者中有46%符合试验资格。5年无进展(PFS)和总生存期(OS)分别为61.7%和70.5%。年龄≤60岁的患者中(35.5%;1321/3725),基于aaIPI的患者中有29.5%符合frontmind, 5年PFS和OS分别为72.3%和82.8%。联合IPI和aaIPI并不能改善对标准治疗无反应的患者的识别,使用该策略进行试验选择并不优于单独使用IPI或NCCN-IPI。结论:预后模型可以帮助选择符合试验条件的HI和h -危险患者,从而增加识别那些对标准治疗无反应的患者的机会。然而,目前使用的预后指标不能准确识别一些高危患者,特别是年轻患者。因此,需要预后模型之外的其他风险因素来改善患者参与试验的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
International Prognostic Models as Tools for Selection of Higher-risk Trial-eligible Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell lymphoma.

Background: The International prognostic index (IPI) is a widely used model for identifying trial-eligible patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the applicability of prognostic models in identifying trial-eligible high-intermediate (HI) and high-risk (H), particularly younger patients, has not been extensively studied.

Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL were identified in the Danish Lymphoma Registry (LYFO). To evaluate the impact of IPI and age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) on identifying higher-risk (HI and H-risk) trial-eligible patients, we retrieved the eligibility criteria for the frontMIND trial (NCT04824092).

Results: Of 6252 patients with DLBCL registered in the LYFO, 3725 (59.6%) were trial-eligible. The dataset included all IPI/aaIPI groups. However, 46% of 3725 patients would meet trial eligibility if IPI and aaIPI higher-risk patients were selected. The 5-year progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 61.7% and 70.5%, respectively. Among patients aged ≤ 60 years (35.5%; 1321/3725), 29.5% were frontMIND-eligible based on aaIPI, with 5-year PFS and OS of 72.3% and 82.8%, respectively. Combining IPI and aaIPI did not improve the identification of patients who did not respond to standard treatment, and utilizing this strategy for trial selection was not superior to using IPI or NCCN-IPI alone.

Conclusions: Prognostic models can help in selecting trial-eligible HI and H-risk patients, thereby increasing the chances of identifying those who do not respond to standard treatment. However, the currently used prognostic indices fail to accurately recognize some high-risk patients, particularly young patients. Therefore, additional risk factors beyond prognostic models are needed to improve patient selection for trial participation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
3.70%
发文量
1606
审稿时长
26 days
期刊介绍: Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia is a peer-reviewed monthly journal that publishes original articles describing various aspects of clinical and translational research of lymphoma, myeloma and leukemia. Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma & Leukemia is devoted to articles on detection, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of lymphoma, myeloma, leukemia and related disorders including macroglobulinemia, amyloidosis, and plasma-cell dyscrasias. The main emphasis is on recent scientific developments in all areas related to lymphoma, myeloma and leukemia. Specific areas of interest include clinical research and mechanistic approaches; drug sensitivity and resistance; gene and antisense therapy; pathology, markers, and prognostic indicators; chemoprevention strategies; multimodality therapy; and integration of various approaches.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信