Immunohistochemical Subtype and Parameters of International Prognostic Index in the New Prognostic Model of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

LYMPHOID TUMORS , , , ,

SV Samarina1, AS Luchinin1, NV Minaeva1, IV Paramonov1, DA D’yakonov1, EV Vaneeva1, VA Rosin1, SV Gritsaev2

1 Kirov Research Institute of Hematology and Transfusiology, 72 Krasnoarmeiskaya str., Kirov, Russian Federation, 610027

2 Russian Research Institute of Hematology and Transfusiology, 16 2-ya Sovetskaya str., Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation, 191024

For correspondence: Svetlana Valer’evna Samarina, 72 Krasnoarmeiskaya str., Kirov, Russian Federation, 610027; Tel.: +7(912)732-47-56; e-mail: samarinasv2010@mail.ru

For citation: Samarina SV, Luchinin AS, Minaeva NV, et al. Immunohistochemical Subtype and Parameters of International Prognostic Index in the New Prognostic Model of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma. Clinical oncohematology. 2019;12(4):385–90 (In Russ).

DOI: 10.21320/2500-2139-2019-12-4-385-390

ABSTRACT

Aim. To develop an integrated prognostic model of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) on the basis of immunohistochemical tumor subtype and parameters of International Prognostic Index (IPI).

Materials & Methods. Out of 104 DLBCL patients in the data base 81 (77.9 %) met the eligibility criteria. Median age was 58 years (range 23–83). All patients were treated with R-СНОР. The creation of overall survival (OS) prognostic model for DLBCL patients was based on machine learning with classification and regression trees. OS was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier method. Survival curves were compared by means of log rank test and hazard ratio (HR). Any test was considered significant if two-sided level of p < 0.05 was reached.

Results. Following the developed model three groups of patients were identified: the 1st group of low risk (the combination of low, intermediate-low, and intermediate-high risks according to IPI and GCB subtype); the 2nd group of intermediate risk (the combination of low, intermediate-low, and intermediate-high risks according to IPI and non-GCB subtype); the 3d group of high risk (irrespective of subtype). In the group of low risk (n = 26) 2-year OS during the monitoring period was 100 %. In the group of intermediate risk (n = 34) median OS was not reached, 2-year OS was 74 %, and expected 5-year OS was 68 %. In the group of high risk (n = 21) median OS was 25 months, 2-year OS was 46 %, and expected 5-year OS was 37 % (log rank p < 0.0001). HR calculated for the high-risk group compared with the low- and intermediate-risk groups was 5.1 (95% CI 2.1–12.1; p = 0.0003).

Conclusion. A new integrated system of DLBCL prognosis is suggested which includes IPI risk parameters and immunohistochemical subtype based on Hans algorithm. This prognostic system can be used in clinical practice for DLBCL patient stratification and risk-adapted therapy.

Keywords: diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, overall survival, prognosis, International Prognostic Index, machine learning.

Received: March 18, 2019

Accepted: August 27, 2019

Read in PDF

REFERENCES

  1. Martellia M, Ferrerib AJM, Agostinellic C, et al. Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013;87(2):146–71. doi: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2012.12.009.

  2. Lynch RC, Gratzinger D, Advani RH. Clinical Impact of the 2016 Update to the WHO Lymphoma Classification. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2017;18(7):45. doi: 10.1007/s11864-017-0483-z.

  3. Li X, Huang H, Xu B, et al. Dose-Dense Rituximab-CHOP versus Standard Rituximab-CHOP in Newly Diagnosed Chinese Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Randomized, Multicenter, Open-Label Phase 3 Trial. Cancer Res Treat. 2019;51(3):919–32. doi: 10.4143/crt.2018.230.

  4. Coiffier B, Lepage E, Briere J, et al. CHOP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CHOP alone in elderly patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(4):235–42. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa011795.

  5. Castellino A, Chiappella A, LaPlant BR, et al. Lenalidomide plus R-CHOP21 in newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): long-term follow-up results from a combined analysis from two phase 2 trials. Blood Cancer J. 2018;8(11):108. doi: 10.1038/s41408-018-0145-9.

  6. Sharman JP, Forero-Torres A, Costa LJ, et al. Obinutuzumab plus CHOP is effective and has a tolerable safety profile in previously untreated, advanced diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: the phase II GATHER study. Leuk Lymphoma. 2018;60(4):894–903. doi: 10.1080/10428194.2018.1515940.

  7. Kameoka Y, Akagi T, Murai K, et al. Safety and efficacy of high-dose ranimustine (MCNU) containing regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplantation for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Int J Hematol. 2018;108(5):510–5. doi: 10.1007/s12185-018-2508-1.

  8. Sehn LH, Berry B, Chhanabhai M, 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. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-08-038257.

  9. Biccler J, Eloranta S, de Nully Brown P, et al. Simplicity at the cost of predictive accuracy in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a critical assessment of the R-IPI, IPI, and NCCN-IPI. Cancer Med. 2018;7(1):114–22. doi: 10.1002/cam4.1271.

  10. Shipp MA, Harrington DP, Anderson JR, et al. A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 1993;329(14):987–94. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199309303291402.

  11. Li JM, Wang L, Shen Y, et al. Rituximab in combination with CHOP chemotherapy for the treatment of diffuse large B cell lymphoma in Chinese patients. Annals Hematol. 2007;86(9):639–45. doi: 10.1007/s00277-007-0320-8.

  12. Alizadeh AA, Eisen MB, Davis RE, et al. Distinct types of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma identified by gene-expression profiling. Nature. 2000;403(6769):503–51. doi: 10.1038/35000501.

  13. Wang KL, Chen C, Shi PF, et al. Prognostic Value of Morphology and Hans Classification in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma. Zhongguo Shi Yan Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi. 2018;26(4):1079–85. doi: 10.7534/j.issn.1009-2137.2018.04.023.

  14. Rashidi A, Oak E, Carson KR, et al. Outcomes with R-CEOP for R-CHOP-ineligible patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma are highly dependent on cell of origin defined by Hans criteria. Leuk Lymphoma. 2016;57(5):1191–3. doi: 10.3109/10428194.2015.1096356.

  1. Ye ZY, Cao YB, Lin TY, Lin HL. Subgrouping and outcome prediction of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma by immunohistochemistry. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi. 2007;36(10):654–9.

  1. Montalban C, Diaz-Lopez A, Martin A, et al. Differential prognostic impact of GELTAMO-IPI in cell of origin subtypes of Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma as defined by the Hans algorithm. Br J Haematol. 2018;182(4):534–41. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15446.

  2. Tibiletti MG, Martin V, Bernasconi B, et al. BCL2, BCL6, MYC, MALT 1, and BCL10 rearrangements in nodal diffuse large B-cell lymphomas: a multicenter evaluation of a new set of fluorescent in situ hybridization probes and correlation with clinical outcome. Hum Pathol. 2009;40(5):645–52. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2008.06.032.

  3. Jaglal MV, Peker D, Tao J, Cultrera JL. Double and Triple Hit Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphomas and First Line Therapy. Blood. 2012;120:4885 [abstract].

  4. Kim M, Suh C, Kim J, Hong JY. Difference of Clinical Parameters between GCB and Non-GCB Subtype DLBCL. Blood. 2017;130:5231 [abstract].

  5. Da Costa CBT. Machine Learning Provides an Accurate Classification of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma from Immunohistochemical Data. J Pathol Inform. 2018;9(1):21. doi: 10.4103/jpi.jpi_14_18.

  6. Российские клинические рекомендации по диагностике и лечению лимфопролиферативных заболеваний. Под ред. И.В. Поддубной, В.Г. Савченко. М.: Буки Веди, 2016.

    [Poddubnaya IV, Savchenko VG, eds. Rossiiskie klinicheskie rekomendatsii po diagnostike i lecheniyu limfoproliferativnykh zabolevanii. (Russian clinical guidelines on diagnosis and treatment of lymphoproliferative disorders). Moscow: Buki Vedi Publ.; 2016. (In Russ)]

  7. Leval L, Harris NL. Variability in immunophenotype in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and it‘s clinical relevance. Histopathol. 2003;43(6):509–28. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2003.01758.x.

  8. Skarbnik AP, Donato ML. Safety and Efficacy Data for Combined Checkpoint Inhibition with Ipilimumab (Ipi) and Nivolumab (Nivo) As Consolidation Following Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) for High-Risk Hematological Malignancies. Blood. 2018;132:256.

  9. Matsuki E, Younes A. Checkpoint Inhibitors and Other Immune Therapies for Hodgkin and Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2016;17(6):31. doi: 10.1007/s11864-016-0401-9.

  10. Kaneko H, Tsutsumi Y, Fujino T, et al. Favorable event free-survival of high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for higher risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in first complete remission. Hematol Rep. 2015;7(2):5812 [abstract]. doi: 10.4081/hr.2015.5812.