Browsing by Author "Brown, Peter (56437846200)"

Objectives: Recent front-line clinical trials used the International Prognostic Index (IPI) to identify trial-eligible patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, many IPI-like variants with improved accuracy have been developed over the years for rituximab-treated patients. Methods: We assessed the impact of International Prognostic Indices on patient enrolment in clinical trials, aiming to exclude low-risk IPI patients based on POLARIX/EPCORE DLBCL-2 trial criteria. Results: We identified 2877 patients in the Danish Lymphoma Registry who would have been eligible for the POLARIX trial if patients with IPI 0–1 scores were included. IPI and NCCN-IPI assigned 33.3% and 11.9% of patients to the low-risk group, respectively. Shorter 5-year overall survival (91.4% vs. 97.5%), higher relapse rate (9.9% vs. 4.4%), and more deaths (16.1% vs. 4.4%) occurred in the low-risk IPI group compared with low-risk NCCN-IPI group. Analyzed models failed to identify true high-risk patients with poor prognosis. Similar results were found in the confirmatory cohort developed based on EPCORE DLBCL-2 trial eligibility criteria. Conclusion: True low-risk patients are more optimal identified by NCCN-IPI and should be excluded from front-line clinical trials due to their excellent prognosis. However, additional high-risk factors besides clinical prognostic models need to be considered when selecting trial-eligible patients. © 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Currently, the International Prognostic Index (IPI) is the most used and reported model for prognostication in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). IPI-like variations have been proposed, but only a few have been validated in different populations (e.g., revised IPI (R-IPI), National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI)). We aimed to validate and compare different IPI-like variations to identify the model with the highest predictive accuracy for survival in newly diagnosed DLBCL patients. We included 5126 DLBCL patients treated with immunochemotherapy with available data required by 13 different prognostic models. All models could predict survival, but NCCN-IPI consistently provided high levels of accuracy. Moreover, we found similar 5-year overall survivals in the high-risk group (33.4%) compared to the original validation study of NCCN-IPI. Additionally, only one model incorporating albumin performed similarly well but did not outperform NCCN-IPI regarding discrimination (c-index 0.693). Poor fit, discrimination, and calibration were observed in models with only three risk groups and without age as a risk factor. In this extensive retrospective registry-based study comparing 13 prognostic models, we suggest that NCCN-IPI should be reported as the reference model along with IPI in newly diagnosed DLBCL patients until more accurate validated prognostic models for DLBCL become available. [Figure not available: see fulltext.] © 2023, Springer Nature Limited.

Background: Several clinical prognostic models for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have been proposed, including the most commonly used International Prognostic Index (IPI), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI), and models incorporating beta-2 microglobulin (β2M). However, the role of β2M in DLBCL patients is not fully understood. Methods: We identified 6075 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with immunochemotherapy registered in the Danish Lymphoma Registry. Results: A total of 3232 patients had data available to calculate risk scores from each of the nine considered risk models for DLBCL, including a model developed from our population. Three of four models with β2M and NCCN-IPI performed better than the International Prognostic Indexes (IPI, age-adjusted IPI, and revised IPI). Five-year overall survival for high- and low-risk patients were 43.6% and 86.4% for IPI and 34.9% and 96.2% for NCCN-IPI. In univariate analysis, higher levels of β2M were associated with inferior survival, higher tumor burden (advanced clinical stage and bulky disease), previous malignancy and increased age, and creatinine levels. Furthermore, we developed a model (β2M-NCCN-IPI) by adding β2M to NCCN-IPI (c-index 0.708) with improved discriminatory ability compared to NCCN-IPI (c-index 0.698, p < 0.05) and 5-year OS of 33.1%, 56.2%, 82.4%, and 96.4% in the high, high-intermediate, low-intermediate and low-risk group, respectively. Conclusion: International Prognostic Indices, except for NCCN-IPI, fail to accurately discriminate risk groups in the rituximab era. β2M, a readily available marker, could improve the discriminatory performance of NCCN-IPI and should be re-evaluated in the development setting of future models for DLBCL. © 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Background: Several clinical prognostic models for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have been proposed, including the most commonly used International Prognostic Index (IPI), the National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI), and models incorporating beta-2 microglobulin (β2M). However, the role of β2M in DLBCL patients is not fully understood. Methods: We identified 6075 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with immunochemotherapy registered in the Danish Lymphoma Registry. Results: A total of 3232 patients had data available to calculate risk scores from each of the nine considered risk models for DLBCL, including a model developed from our population. Three of four models with β2M and NCCN-IPI performed better than the International Prognostic Indexes (IPI, age-adjusted IPI, and revised IPI). Five-year overall survival for high- and low-risk patients were 43.6% and 86.4% for IPI and 34.9% and 96.2% for NCCN-IPI. In univariate analysis, higher levels of β2M were associated with inferior survival, higher tumor burden (advanced clinical stage and bulky disease), previous malignancy and increased age, and creatinine levels. Furthermore, we developed a model (β2M-NCCN-IPI) by adding β2M to NCCN-IPI (c-index 0.708) with improved discriminatory ability compared to NCCN-IPI (c-index 0.698, p < 0.05) and 5-year OS of 33.1%, 56.2%, 82.4%, and 96.4% in the high, high-intermediate, low-intermediate and low-risk group, respectively. Conclusion: International Prognostic Indices, except for NCCN-IPI, fail to accurately discriminate risk groups in the rituximab era. β2M, a readily available marker, could improve the discriminatory performance of NCCN-IPI and should be re-evaluated in the development setting of future models for DLBCL. © 2024 The Author(s). Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

The International Prognostic Index (IPI) is the most frequently used tool for prognostication in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) of all ages. This study validated and compared six models developed for patients above 60 with International Prognostic Indices (IPI, R-IPI, NCCN-IPI). Moreover, we created a clinical nomogram with an online tool for individualized predictions. A total of 2,835 patients aged over 60 with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with potentially curative immunochemotherapy were identified in the Danish Lymphoma Registry. A nomogram was developed by combining NCCN-IPI variables (excluding extranodal localization), albumin, and platelet levels in 1,970 patients and verified the results in the remaining 956 patients. Compared to other models, the elderly IPI (E-IPI) and age-adjusted IPI (aaIPI) showed better accuracy and discriminatory ability. However, the models failed to identify a high-risk group with a 3-year overall survival rate below 40%. Our nomogram-based model demonstrated superior discriminatory ability and provided more precise individual predictions than all other models based on a risk stratification system. Most clinical prognostic models fail to accurately predict patient outcomes in patients over 60 years old. Therefore, nomogram-based models should be considered in this population to prevent information loss due to variable dichotomization. © The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024.