Hanno M Witte1,2, Niklas Gebauer3, Nadine Hertel1, Hartmut Merz4, Heinz-Wolfram Bernd4, Veronica Bernard4, Axel Künstner5,6, Hauke Busch5,6, Nikolas von Bubnoff1, Alfred C Feller4. 1. Department of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. 2. Department of Hematology and Oncology, Federal Armed Forces Hospital Ulm, Oberer Eselsberg 40, 89081, Ulm, Germany. 3. Department of Hematology and Oncology, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. Niklas.Gebauer@uksh.de. 4. Reference Centre for Lymph Node Pathology and Hematopathology, Hämatopathologie Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany. 5. Medical Systems Biology Group, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. 6. Institute for Cardiogenetics, University of Lübeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Plasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is a rare and aggressive B-cell malignancy with a heterogenous clinical and prognostic spectrum, determined by multiple factors, including age, HIV- and MYC-status. While there exist several validated scoring systems for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, which incorporate basic clinical features (age, lactate dehydrogenase, sites of (extranodal) involvement, stage and performance), none of these have been systematically assessed in PBL. METHODS: We determined the (age-adjusted; aa)-International Prognostic Index (IPI), revised IPI (R-IPI), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI) in a comprehensive multi-center cohort (n = 78) of PBL patients. Further, all indices were comparatively investigated for model quality and concordance. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed significant prognostic capabilities for all indices, all of which identified a subgroup with favorable outcome. Discriminatory power between patients with less benign prognosis and especially refractory disease exhibited significant variability. Subsequently, stratified models for each risk score were compared employing corrected Akaike's information criterion (cAIC) and Harrel's concordance index (c-index). Here, the NCCN-IPI outperformed both IPI and R-IPI regarding c-index with ambiguous cAIC results, underlining its clinical utility and suggesting it for preferential use in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Our current observations support the use of the IPI and its enhanced derivatives in PBL patients. There is, however, a distinct requirement for novel prognostic tools to better delineate subgroups at risk for early relapse or refractory disease as well as late relapse. A comprehensive molecular characterization of a clinically annotated cohort of PBL patients is therefore urgently warranted.
PURPOSE:Plasmablastic lymphoma (PBL) is a rare and aggressive B-cell malignancy with a heterogenous clinical and prognostic spectrum, determined by multiple factors, including age, HIV- and MYC-status. While there exist several validated scoring systems for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, which incorporate basic clinical features (age, lactate dehydrogenase, sites of (extranodal) involvement, stage and performance), none of these have been systematically assessed in PBL. METHODS: We determined the (age-adjusted; aa)-International Prognostic Index (IPI), revised IPI (R-IPI), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network IPI (NCCN-IPI) in a comprehensive multi-center cohort (n = 78) of PBL patients. Further, all indices were comparatively investigated for model quality and concordance. RESULTS: Univariate analysis revealed significant prognostic capabilities for all indices, all of which identified a subgroup with favorable outcome. Discriminatory power between patients with less benign prognosis and especially refractory disease exhibited significant variability. Subsequently, stratified models for each risk score were compared employing corrected Akaike's information criterion (cAIC) and Harrel's concordance index (c-index). Here, the NCCN-IPI outperformed both IPI and R-IPI regarding c-index with ambiguous cAIC results, underlining its clinical utility and suggesting it for preferential use in clinical practice. CONCLUSION: Our current observations support the use of the IPI and its enhanced derivatives in PBL patients. There is, however, a distinct requirement for novel prognostic tools to better delineate subgroups at risk for early relapse or refractory disease as well as late relapse. A comprehensive molecular characterization of a clinically annotated cohort of PBL patients is therefore urgently warranted.
Authors: Stefan K Barta; Xiaonan Xue; Dan Wang; Jeannette Y Lee; Lawrence D Kaplan; Josep-Maria Ribera; Albert Oriol; Michele Spina; Umberto Tirelli; Francois Boue; Wyndham H Wilson; Christoph Wyen; Kieron Dunleavy; Ariela Noy; Joseph A Sparano Journal: Haematologica Date: 2014-08-22 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Carlos Montalbán; Antonio Díaz-López; Ivan Dlouhy; Jordina Rovira; Armando Lopez-Guillermo; Sara Alonso; Alejandro Martín; Juan M Sancho; Olga García; Jose M Sánchez; Mario Rodríguez; Silvana Novelli; Antonio Salar; Antonio Gutiérrez; Maria J Rodríguez-Salazar; Mariana Bastos; Juan F Domínguez; Rubén Fernández; Sonia Gonzalez de Villambrosia; José A Queizan; Raul Córdoba; Raquel de Oña; Andrés López-Hernandez; Julian M Freue; Heidys Garrote; Lourdes López; Ana M Martin-Moreno; Jose Rodriguez; Víctor Abraira; Juan F García Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly; Diego Villa; Musa Alzahrani; Jakob Werner Hansen; Laurie H Sehn; Don Wilson; Peter de Nully Brown; Annika Loft; Victor Iyer; Hans Erik Johnsen; Kerry J Savage; Joseph M Connors; Martin Hutchings Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: Bjoern Chapuy; Chip Stewart; Andrew J Dunford; Jaegil Kim; Atanas Kamburov; Robert A Redd; Mike S Lawrence; Margaretha G M Roemer; Amy J Li; Marita Ziepert; Annette M Staiger; Jeremiah A Wala; Matthew D Ducar; Ignaty Leshchiner; Ester Rheinbay; Amaro Taylor-Weiner; Caroline A Coughlin; Julian M Hess; Chandra S Pedamallu; Dimitri Livitz; Daniel Rosebrock; Mara Rosenberg; Adam A Tracy; Heike Horn; Paul van Hummelen; Andrew L Feldman; Brian K Link; Anne J Novak; James R Cerhan; Thomas M Habermann; Reiner Siebert; Andreas Rosenwald; Aaron R Thorner; Matthew L Meyerson; Todd R Golub; Rameen Beroukhim; Gerald G Wulf; German Ott; Scott J Rodig; Stefano Monti; Donna S Neuberg; Markus Loeffler; Michael Pfreundschuh; Lorenz Trümper; Gad Getz; Margaret A Shipp Journal: Nat Med Date: 2018-04-30 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Roland Schmitz; George W Wright; Da Wei Huang; Calvin A Johnson; James D Phelan; James Q Wang; Sandrine Roulland; Monica Kasbekar; Ryan M Young; Arthur L Shaffer; Daniel J Hodson; Wenming Xiao; Xin Yu; Yandan Yang; Hong Zhao; Weihong Xu; Xuelu Liu; Bin Zhou; Wei Du; Wing C Chan; Elaine S Jaffe; Randy D Gascoyne; Joseph M Connors; Elias Campo; Armando Lopez-Guillermo; Andreas Rosenwald; German Ott; Jan Delabie; Lisa M Rimsza; Kevin Tay Kuang Wei; Andrew D Zelenetz; John P Leonard; Nancy L Bartlett; Bao Tran; Jyoti Shetty; Yongmei Zhao; Dan R Soppet; Stefania Pittaluga; Wyndham H Wilson; Louis M Staudt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-04-12 Impact factor: 91.245