Finding a Concordant or Discordant Bone Marrow Involvement by Histology or Flow Cytometry at DLBCL Nos Diagnosis Implies a Worse Prognosis Whereas Pet‐fdg Does Not

Abstract

HR 1.9 p = 0.06, OS HR 2 p = 0.04), and NLR >4 (1 point. EFS HR 1.7 p = 0.06, OS HR 3.3 p < 0.001). The albumin level was excluded because of its lack of significant impact on EFS. Cases were divided into three clusters with different outcome (Figure 1): 0 points (n = 22; 3-year EFS 88%, 3-year OS 93%), 1-3 points (n = 55; 3-year EFS 65%, 3-year OS 72%), and 4-7 points (n = 49; 3year EFS 34%, 3-year OS 39%). Conclusions:Here is presented a prognostic model based on five laboratory variables (LDH, β2M, Hb, platelets, and NLR) routinely evaluated at DLBCL diagnosis. The model is easily applicable and allows to separate patients in three clusters with well differentiated EFS and OS. Although the model would not have therapeutic implication, it may allow clinicians to have preliminary information on the prognosis of DLBCL patients by a single blood test. Our purpose is to prospectively validate the model in a larger cohort.