Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Br J Haematol. 2010 Oct;151(2):143-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08331.x.
To assess if immunochemotherapy influenced the prognostic value of IPI in elderly diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients, we evaluated the performance of the standard International Prognostic Index (IPI) and following modifications: age adjusted (AA)-IPI, revised (R)-IPI, and an elderly IPI with age cut-off 70 years (E-IPI) in patients > 60 years treated with RCHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone). In 267 patients, by IPI/AA-IPI 60% were high-intermediate, 53% high and 12% low risk. With R-IPI, 60% were poor risk and none very good risk. Using E-IPI, 45% were high-intermediate/high risk and 27% low risk. No differences in outcome were seen in the low/low-intermediate groups with IPI/AA-IPI. For E-IPI, failure-free survival (FFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly different for low/low-intermediate groups. No differences were detected in the four indices with model fit/discrimination measures; however, E-IPI ranked highest. For elderly R-CHOP treated patients, distribution of IPI/AA-IPI skewed toward high/high-intermediate risk with no differences in FFS/OS between low/low-intermediate risk. In contrast, with E-IPI, more are classified as low risk with significant differences in FFS/OS for low-intermediate compared to low risk. The R-IPI does not identify a very good risk group, thus minimizing its utility in this population. The prognostic discrimination provided by the E-IPI for low and low-intermediate elderly DLBCL patients needs validation by other datasets.
为了评估免疫化疗是否影响老年弥漫性大 B 细胞淋巴瘤(DLBCL)患者国际预后指数(IPI)的预后价值,我们评估了标准国际预后指数(IPI)以及以下改良指标的性能:年龄调整(AA)-IPI、修订(R)-IPI 和年龄截止值为 70 岁的老年 IPI(E-IPI)在接受 RCHOP(利妥昔单抗、环磷酰胺、多柔比星、长春新碱和泼尼松)治疗的>60 岁患者中的表现。在 267 例患者中,根据 IPI/AA-IPI,60%为高中危,53%为高危,12%为低危。根据 R-IPI,60%为不良风险,无良好风险。使用 E-IPI,45%为高中危/高危,27%为低危。在低/低中危组中,IPI/AA-IPI 未见生存结果差异。对于 E-IPI,低/低中危组的无失败生存率(FFS)和总生存率(OS)有显著差异。四项指标的模型拟合/区分度测量未见差异,但 E-IPI 排名最高。对于接受 R-CHOP 治疗的老年患者,IPI/AA-IPI 的分布倾向于高/高中危,低/低中危组的 FFS/OS 无差异。相比之下,对于 E-IPI,更多的患者被归类为低危,低危与低中危相比,FFS/OS 差异显著。R-IPI 无法识别出良好风险组,因此在该人群中的应用价值有限。E-IPI 为低危和低中危老年 DLBCL 患者提供的预后区分度需要其他数据集的验证。