Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Develops prognostic models for survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, suggesting improved risk stratification.
Although diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a heterogeneous disease, existing prognostic tools, including the revised International Prognostic Index (R-IPI) and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN-IPI), do not fully capture the heterogeneity and their performance in the competing-risks framework has not been validated. We developed and validated prognostic models for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) using both machine-learning (ML) and standard regression approaches in 2769 patients from the Lymphoma and Related Diseases Registry. Predictors included age, stage, performance status, chemo-immunotherapy, creatinine, lactate dehydrogenase, and anaemia, with extranodal involvement additionally used for OS and BCL6 expression for PFS. Both ML and regression-based models showed similar performance, with acceptable discrimination, particularly at 1- and 2-years. In validation, the Cox model achieved a 1-year OS AUC of 0.770, outperforming R-IPI (0.722) and comparable to NCCN-IPI (0.746). Both the nomogram and random survival forest models demonstrated greater 5-year OS risk separation, ranging from 26% in high-risk to 96% in low-risk patients and from 25 to 93%, respectively, compared with the R-IPI (50-91%) and NCCN-IPI (34-96%). Competing-risks analyses demonstrated that conventional methods underestimated survival, particularly in high-risk groups. While our models provided promising risk stratification, external validation is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alem et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: