| Literature DB >> 36185268 |
Li Wang1, Zhile Wang2, Lanqing Huo3, Ailin Zhao1.
Abstract
Objectives: To explore the clinical and prognostic characteristics of thymic lymphoma and the effects of current treatments on the prognosis.Entities:
Keywords: chemotherapy; prognosis; radiotherapy; surgery; thymic lymphoma
Year: 2022 PMID: 36185268 PMCID: PMC9516097 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.933672
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 5.738
Figure 1Age distribution of incidence in patients with thymic lymphoma from the SEER Research Data with 9 Registries (1975–2018).
Univariate Cox regression analyses for overall survival in 225 patients with thymic lymphoma.
| Characteristics | N = 225 (%) | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HR | 95% CI | P value | HR | 95% CI | P value | ||
| Age, years | 33 (26-44) | 1.04 | 1.02-1.05 | <0.001 | 1.03 | 1.03-1.04 | <0.001 |
| Sex | |||||||
| Male | 98 (43.6) | Referencee | – | – | Reference | – | – |
| Female | 127 (56.4) | 0.56 | 0.34-0.91 | 0.019 | 0.66 | 0.38-1.13 | 0.131 |
| Race | |||||||
| White | 173 (76.9) | Reference | – | – | |||
| Black | 30 (13.3) | 1.23 | 0.60-2.51 | 0.576 | |||
| Others | 18 (8.0) | 0.68 | 0.21-2.18 | 0.513 | |||
| Unknown | 4 (1.8) | – | – | – | |||
| Diagnosis year | |||||||
| 1975-1990 | 56 (24.9) | Reference | – | – | Reference | – | – |
| 1991-2000 | 45 (20.0) | 0.8 | 0.43-1.49 | 0.484 | 0.5 | 0.25-0.98 | 0.043 |
| 2001-2010 | 68 (30.2) | 0.48 | 0.23-0.96 | 0.039 | 0.38 | 0.15-0.89 | 0.026 |
| 2011-2018 | 56 (24.9) | 0.21 | 0.06-0.70 | 0.011 | 0.21 | 0.05-0.86 | 0.029 |
| Lymphoma type | |||||||
| HL | 63 (28.0) | Reference | – | – | Reference | – | – |
| NHL | 162 (72.0) | 1.75 | 1.01-3.03 | 0.047 | 1.96 | 0.63-6.15 | 0.247 |
| Pathologic type | |||||||
| PTLBL | 63 (28.0) | Reference | – | – | Reference | – | – |
| NSCHL | 58 (25.8) | 2.82 | 0.81-9.83 | 0.104 | 2.4 | 0.42-13.85 | 0.328 |
| DLBCL | 54 (24.0) | 4.63 | 1.34-16.02 | 0.016 | 2.78 | 0.71-10.90 | 0.143 |
| Others | 50 (22.2) | 10.9 | 3.32-36.23 | <0.001 | 4.71 | 1.16-19.22 | 0.031 |
| Ann Arbor stage | |||||||
| I | 72 (32.0) | Reference | – | – | |||
| II | 71 (31.6) | 1.25 | 0.67-2.35 | 0.486 | |||
| III+IV | 29 (12.9) | 1.04 | 0.41-2.61 | 0.938 | |||
| Unknown | 53 (23.6) | 1.67 | 0.88-3.18 | 0.115 | |||
| Surgery | |||||||
| Yes | 101 (44.9) | 1.84 | 0.99-3.42 | 0.054 | 0.96 | 0.42-2.17 | 0.917 |
| No | 124 (55.1) | Reference | – | – | Reference | – | – |
| Radiotherapy | |||||||
| Yes | 111 (49.3) | Reference | – | – | |||
| No | 114 (50.7) | 1.17 | 0.72-1.90 | 0.52 | |||
| Chemotherapy | |||||||
| Yes | 159 (70.7) | 0.71 | 0.43-1.20 | 0.201 | |||
| No | 66 (29.3) | Reference | – | – | |||
HL, Hodgkin lymphoma; NHL, non-Hodgkin lymphoma; PTLBL, primary thymic large B-cell lymphoma; NSCHL, nodular sclerosis classical Hodgkin lymphoma; DLBCL, diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma.
Figure 2Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log-rank tests for 225 patients with thymic lymphoma from the SEER Research Data with 9 Registries (1975–2018). (A) KM survival curves of all 225 patients. (B) KM survival curves grouped by Ann Arbor stages. (C) KM survival curves grouped by HL and NHL. (D) KM survival curves grouped by histological classification.
Figure 3Kaplan–Meier survival curves and log-rank tests for patients with thymic lymphoma (Ann Arbor stage I and II) in different subgroups. (A) KM survival curves of patients with thymic lymphoma comparing No surgery and Surgery. (B) KM survival curves of patients with thymic lymphoma comparing No radiation and Radiation. (C) KM survival curves of patients with thymic lymphoma comparing No chemotherapy and Chemotherapy. (D) KM survival curves of patients with thymic lymphoma comparing Only surgery, Only radiation and Radiation after surgery.