SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türkiye'de Lösemi Lenfoma Miyelom Araştırmaları / 2021 / Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2

Comparison of Prognostic Scoring Systems in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Diffüz Büyük B Hücreli Lenfomada Prognostik Skorlama Sistemlerinin Karşılaştırılması

Eda ULUSOY
Nergiz ERKUT
ÖZLEN BEKTAŞ
Bircan SÖNMEZ
Mehmet SÖNMEZ
Pages
27–33
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: Overall survival decreased (p= 0.044, p= 0.008, p= 0.010, respectively) when IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI risk categories increased.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Clinical, laboratory, biological and genetic factors may affect prognosis in diffuse large B cell lymphomas (DLBCL).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients and Methods: 100 patients with DLBCL during 2008-2017 in Karadeniz Technical University Hematology department were evaluated retrospectively.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: Overall survival decreased (p= 0.044, p= 0.008, p= 0.010, respectively) when IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI risk categories increased.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2008-2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: Clinical, laboratory, biological and genetic factors may affect prognosis in diffuse large B cell lymphomas (DLBCL). New prognostic scoring systems have been developed over the years with the addition of new factors. Patients and Methods: 100 patients with DLBCL during 2008-2017 in Karadeniz Technical University Hematology department were evaluated retrospectively. Results: Overall survival decreased (p= 0.044, p= 0.008, p= 0.010, respectively) when IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI risk categories increased. When IPI, R-IPI, and NCCN-IPI were compared for overall survival (OS) and disease free survival (DFS) at 3-year, all were predicting OS (p= 0.005, p= 0.002, p= 0.010, respectively), and NCCN-IPI was the best predicting DFS (p= 0.039). IPI and R-IPI were better in predicting DFS at 5-year (p= 0.047, p= 0.004, respectively). Conclusion: NCCN-IPI was found to be the best predictor for DFS at 3 year and IPI and R-IPI were better in predicting DFS at 5 year.

Özet

Amaç: Diffüz büyük B hücreli lenfomada (DBBHL) klinik, laboratuvar, biyolojik ve genetik faktörler prognozu etkileyebilir. Yeni faktörlerin eklenmesi ile, yıllar içinde yeni prognostik skorlama sistemleri geliştirilmiştir. Hastalar ve Yöntem: 2008-2017 yılları arasında Karadeniz Teknik Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Hematoloji bölümünde takip edilen 100 DBBHL hastası retrospektif olarak değerlendirildi. Bulgular: IPI, R-IPI ve NCCN-IPI risk skorları arttıkça total sağkalım (TS) azalmaktaydı (sırasıyla, p= 0.044, p= 0.008, p= 0.010). IPI, R-IPI ve NCCN-IPI 3 yıllık TS ve hastalıksız sağkalım (HS) açısından karşılaştırıldığında, üç skorlama sistemi de TS’ı öngörüyordu (sırasıyla, p= 0.005, p= 0.002, p= 0.010), ancak HS’ı en iyi öngören NCCN-IPI idi (p= 0.039). 5 yıllık HS’ı en iyi öngören skorlama sistemleri IPI ve R-IPI idi (sırasıyla, p= 0.047, p= 0.004). Sonuç: 3 yıllık HS’ı en iyi NCCN-IPI, 5 yıllık HS’ı en iyi IPI ve R-IPI öngörüyordu.

🔖

Cite This Article

ULUSOY, E., ERKUT, N., BEKTAŞ, Ö., SÖNMEZ, B., SÖNMEZ, M. (2021). Comparison of Prognostic Scoring Systems in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma. Türkiye'de Lösemi Lenfoma Miyelom Araştırmaları, Cilt: 5 - Sayı: 2, 27–33. https://ajindex.com/articles/409027

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Armitage JO, Gascoyne RD, Lunning MA, Cavalli F. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The Lancet 2017;390(10091):298-310
  2. Morgan G, Vornanen M, Puitinen J, Naukkarinen A, Brincker H, Olsen J, et al. Changing trends in the incidence of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in Europe. Biomed Study Group. Ann Oncol 1997;8(Suppl 2):49–54
  3. The International Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project. A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med 1993;329:987–9
  4. Sehn LH, Berry B, Chhanabhai M, Fitgerald C, Gill K, Hoskins P, et al. The revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI) is a better predictor of outcome than the standard IPI for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with R-CHOP. Blood 2007;109(5):1857-61
  5. Zhou Z, Sehn LH, Rademaker AW, Gordon LI, Lacasce AS, Crosby- Thompson A, et al. An enhanced International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated in the rituximab era. Blood 2014;123(6):837-42
  6. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, Cavalli F, Schwartz LH, Zucca E, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol 2014;32:3059-68
  7. Yang Y, Wang L, Ma Y, Han T, Huang M. The enhanced international prognostic index for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Am J Med Sci 2017;353:459-65
  8. Ruppert AS, Dixon JG, Sall es GA, Wall A, Cunningham D, Poeschel V, et al. International prognostic indices in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): a comparison of IPI, R-IPI and NCCN-IPI. Blood 2020 Jun 4;135(23):2041-8
  9. Nakaya A, Fujita S, Satake A, Nakanishi T, Azuma Y, Tsubokura Y, et al. Enhanced international prognostic index in Japanese patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Leuk Res Rep 2016;6:24-6.