Abstract
Abstract 4856
The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics, prognostic factors and survival outcomes of patients with gastric diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
162 patients with gastric DLBCL were evaluated retrospectively. Comparisons were made between patients of gastric DLBCL with component of mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma (DLBCL/MALT) and patients of gastric DLBCL without detectable MALT component (de novo DLBCL).
Results according to the distribution of sex, age, stage, performance status, and other clinical characteristics were similar between de novo DLBCL group and DLBCL/MALT group (p>0.05). The ratio of patients with the germinal center B-cell-like (GCB) subtype to non-GCB subtype did not differ significantly between the two groups (1:1.1 versus 1:1.6, p=0.319). However, the proportion of patients with the stage-modified international prognostic index (m-IPI) ≥2 was higher in DLBCL/MALT groups (18%) than taht in de novo DLBCL groups (34%) (p=0.026). In addition, the H. pylori infection rate was 75% in DLBCL/MALT versus 38% in de novo DLBCL (p<0.001). Patients with de novo DLBCL have better 5-year PFS and OS estimates than those DLBCL/MALT patients (p=0.037 and 0.019 for the 5-year PFS and OS estimates, respectively). Surgical treatment did not offer survival benefit when compared with chemotherapy (p=0.405 and 0.065 for the 5-year PFS and OS estimates, respectively). Multivariate analysis revealed that non-GCB classification and m-IPI≥2 were independently associated with shorter OS and advanced stage was independently associated with shorter PFS.
Gastric DLBCL is a heterogeneous disease that included de novo DLBCL and DLBCL/MALT lymphoma. Compared with the former, the latter has a higher H. pylori infection rate. And what's more, the proportion of patients with m-IPI≥2 is higher in DLBCL/MALT groups. De novo DLBCL was associated with higher 5-year PFS and OS estimates. Non-surgical treatment should be a primary consideration for gastric DLBCL. Immunophenotype classification and m-IPI were the most reliable factors for OS, and advanced stage was for PFS.
No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
Author notes
Asterisk with author names denotes non-ASH members.