| Literature DB >> 31819527 |
Yi-Zhen Liu1, Pan Luo2, Cheng Liu3, Kai Xue1, Jia Jin1, Zu-Guang Xia1, Xiao-Jian Liu1, Qun-Ling Zhang1, Jun-Ning Cao1, Xiao-Nan Hong1, Fang-Fang Lv1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Primary testicular diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (PT-DLBCL) is relatively rare, and risk factors of this disease are still not well understood. This study aims to identify clinical features and prognostic factors of PT-DLBCL patients.Entities:
Keywords: clinical feature; primary testicular diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; prognosis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31819527 PMCID: PMC6897509 DOI: 10.2147/OTT.S228746
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Onco Targets Ther ISSN: 1178-6930 Impact factor: 4.147
Baseline Characteristics of 32 PT-DLBCL Patients
| Characteristic | PT-DLBCL | % |
|---|---|---|
| Age at diagnosis | ||
| >60 | 13 | 40.6 |
| ≤60 | 19 | 59.4 |
| Lugano stage | ||
| I | 12 | 37.5 |
| II | 8 | 25.0 |
| IV | 12 | 37.5 |
| Surgery | ||
| Yes | 30 | 93.7 |
| No | 2 | 6.3 |
| Subtypes (n=29) | ||
| GCB | 10 | 34.5 |
| Non-GCB | 19 | 65.5 |
| Ki67(n=30) | ||
| 50–70% | 3 | 10.0 |
| >70% | 27 | 90.0 |
| B symptoms | ||
| Yes | 2 | 6.3 |
| No | 30 | 93.7 |
| ALB | ||
| ≤40 | 2 | 6.3 |
| >40 | 30 | 93.7 |
| LDH | ||
| Normal(≤250) | 25 | 78.1 |
| Elevated | 7 | 21.9 |
| IPI | ||
| 0 | 14 | 43.8 |
| 1 | 9 | 28.1 |
| ≥2 | 9 | 28.1 |
| Location | ||
| Left | 12 | 37.5 |
| Right | 18 | 56.3 |
| Bilateral | 2 | 6.2 |
| SUVmax before treatment | ||
| Mean±SD | 13.03±9.25 |
Abbreviations: ALB, albumin; LDH, lactic dehydrogenase.
Figure 1Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of PT-DLBCL patients in our study. Kaplan–Meier curves showing the PFS (A) and OS (B) of PT-DLBCL patients in our study.
Figure 2Significant correlation of clinical and laboratory parameters with PT-DLBCL patients’ progression-free survival (PFS). Kaplan–Meier curves showing the association between IPI score (A), stage (B), B symptoms (C), serum LDH level (D) and PFS in PT-DLBCL patients in our study. All the P values are shown in the graph, by log-rank test.
Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Progression-Free Survival in PT-DLBCL Patients
| Variable | Univariate Analysis | Multivariate Analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | HR | 95% CI (95% CI) | |||
| Age | ||||||
| ≥60 vs <60 | 2.337 | 0.494–11.059 | 0.284 | |||
| Subtype | ||||||
| GCB vs non-GCB | 4.136 | 0.754–22.683 | 0.102 | |||
| Stage | ||||||
| Stage I/II vs Stage IV | 5.773 | 1.077–30.94 | 0.041 | 0.544 | 0.049–6.044 | 0.62 |
| IPI score | ||||||
| 0–1 vs ≥ 2 | 5.323 | 1.161–24.406 | 0.031 | 15.96 | 1.747–145.81 | 0.014 |
| ALB in CSF | ||||||
| Normal vs elevated | 0.037 | 0.000–254.577 | 0.464 | |||
| LDH in CSF | ||||||
| Normal vs elevated | 0.457 | 0.055–3.799 | 0.468 | |||
| B symptoms | ||||||
| Yes vs no | 8.32 | 1.509–45.869 | 0.015 | 36.669 | 3.067–438.441 | 0.004 |
| ALB in serum | ||||||
| Normal vs elevated | 0.726 | 0.081–6.467 | 0.774 | |||
| LDH in serum | ||||||
| Normal vs elevated | 4.701 | 1.02–21.669 | 0.047 | 1.303 | 0.161–10.56 | 0.804 |
| Location | ||||||
| Unilateral vs bilateral | 0.988 | 0.392–2.494 | 0.98 | |||
Abbreviation: HR, Hazard Ratio.
Figure 3ROC curve of serum LDH/CSF LDH and its impact on PFS. (A) ROC curve for the ratio of LDH level in serum to that in CSF. (B) Kaplan–Meier curve showing the correlation between the ratio of serum LDH/CSF LDH and PFS in PT-DLBCL patients in our study.