| Title |
The different roles of molecular classification according to upfront autologous stem cell transplantation in advanced-stage diffuse large B cell lymphoma patients with elevated serum lactate dehydrogenase
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Hematology, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00277-016-2729-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yu Ri Kim, Soo-Jeong Kim, June-Won Cheong, Deok-Hwan Yang, Hyewon Lee, Hyeon-Seok Eom, Yong Oh Sung, Hyo Jung Kim, Hye Jin Kang, Won-Sik Lee, Yong Park, Woo-Ick Yang, Yoo Hong Min, Jin Seok Kim |
| Abstract |
The non-germinal center B cell (non-GCB) subtype of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is more related to poor prognosis than the GCB subtype. To investigate the role of molecular classification according to upfront autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT), we retrospectively evaluated 219 newly diagnosed high-risk DLBCL patients. Eighty-one patients were in the ASCT group, and 138 patients were in the non-ASCT group. The ASCT group yielded significantly better overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) than the non-ASCT group (p = 0.038 and p = 0.007), and patients with the non-GCB subtype were more related to inferior PFS than those with the GCB subtype (p = 0.020). After performing age-matching by using propensity scores, upfront ASCT continued to show better OS and PFS than non-ASCT (p = 0.046 and p = 0.026). In the non-ASCT group, the non-GCB subtype showed worse OS and PFS than the GCB subtype (p = 0.039 and p = 0.007). Patients who achieved complete response showed differences in OS and PFS according to molecular subtype (p = 0.007 and p = 0.002). In the ASCT group, there were no significant differences in OS and PFS according to molecular classification (p = 0.277 and p = 0.892). In conclusion, non-GCB subtype DLBCL patients showed poor OS and PFS in the non-ASCT group while they did not show clinical significance in the ASCT group. This suggests the possibility that upfront ASCT may improve the poor prognosis of non-GCB subtype in high-risk DLBCL. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 11 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 11 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 27% |
| Researcher | 2 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 9% |
| Professor | 1 | 9% |
| Other | 2 | 18% |
| Unknown | 1 | 9% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 64% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 9% |
| Engineering | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 2 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,874,703
of 23,582,490 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Hematology
#1,212
of 2,251 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#225,985
of 354,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Hematology
#11
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,582,490 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,251 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 354,872 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its contemporaries.