Characteristics of the 160 patients in the MCL2 study according to outcome
| Variable . | Score . | End point . | No. evaluable . | P . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ki-67 expression | 0-9 vs 10-29 vs ≥29 | EFS | 120 (10 vs 60 vs 50) | .008 |
| Age | ≤ 60 vs > 60 | EFS | 160 (119 vs 41) | .29 |
| Sex | Male vs female | EFS | 160 (113 vs 47) | .1 |
| International Prognostic Index | 0-2 vs 3-5 | EFS | 160 (104 vs 56) | .046 |
| BEAM vs BEAC | EFS | 145 (90 vs 55) | .305 | |
| Rituximab | 4 vs 6 infusions | EFS | 160 (116 vs 44) | .790 |
| Cytologic variant | Common vs blastoid/pleomorphic | EFS | 160 (129 vs 31) | .069 |
| Lymphoma growth pattern | Nondiffuse vs diffuse | EFS | 70 vs 81 | .012 |
| Response to induction | CR vs PR | PFS | 145 (81 vs 64) | .035 |
| Variable . | Score . | End point . | No. evaluable . | P . |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ki-67 expression | 0-9 vs 10-29 vs ≥29 | EFS | 120 (10 vs 60 vs 50) | .008 |
| Age | ≤ 60 vs > 60 | EFS | 160 (119 vs 41) | .29 |
| Sex | Male vs female | EFS | 160 (113 vs 47) | .1 |
| International Prognostic Index | 0-2 vs 3-5 | EFS | 160 (104 vs 56) | .046 |
| BEAM vs BEAC | EFS | 145 (90 vs 55) | .305 | |
| Rituximab | 4 vs 6 infusions | EFS | 160 (116 vs 44) | .790 |
| Cytologic variant | Common vs blastoid/pleomorphic | EFS | 160 (129 vs 31) | .069 |
| Lymphoma growth pattern | Nondiffuse vs diffuse | EFS | 70 vs 81 | .012 |
| Response to induction | CR vs PR | PFS | 145 (81 vs 64) | .035 |
CR indicates complete disappearance of all detectable disease manifestations; PR indicates at least 50% reduction of all evaluable disease manifestations.