Role of MYC and BCL2 expression in a cohort of 43 patients with DLBCL: a retrospective study

Table 1 Summary statistics (categorical variables) Characteristic Number (%) Age, years Median 70 Range 59–81 Sex Female 22 (51) Male 21 (49) COO subtype* Non-GCB 9 (21) GCB 24 (56) NK 10 (23) LDH (U/L) Median 534 IQR 354–867 Range 178–4855 Ann Arbor Staging I 4 (9) II 5 (12) III 17 (40) IV 17 (40) No of extranodal sites ≤1 32 (74) >1 5 (14) NK 6 (12) Performance status† ≤2 31 (72) >2 11 (26) NK 1 (2) IPI‡ 0 or 1 7 (16) 2 11 (26) 3 6 (14) 4 12 (28) 5 4 (9) NK 3 (7) MYC expression (%) 40% 3 (75) MYC expression 40% 12 (75) MYC expression 40 and BCL2 >70 (%) No 22 (51) Yes 19 (44) NK 2 (5) MYC expression >60 and BCL2 >50 (%) No 22 (72) Yes 10 (23) NK 2 (5) MYC expression >60 and BCL2 >70 (%) No 33 (77) Yes 8 (19) NK 2 (5) Ki67 (%) 90 13 (30) Double hit¶ No 19 (44) Yes 2 (5) NK 22 (51) Therapy No rituximab 7 (16) Rituximab containing 36 (84) Complete response** No 18 (42) Yes 25 (58) Relapsed-refractory after treatment No 29 (67) Yes 12 (28) NA 2 (5) Died No 24 (56) Yes 19 (44) *Cell of origin (COO) based on the Hans algorithm. †Performance status was calculated using Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) scoring and is based on the level of activity of the patient. ‡International Prognostic Index (IPI) is based on age, performance status, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), extent of extranodal involvement and Ann Arbor staging. Where the IPI score could not be calculated, the minimum IPI score was calculated and used. §Data are based on 20 patients with available cytogenetic data only. ¶Double hit denotes both translocation on MYC and BCL2 gene. **Includes CT-based and Positron Emission Tomography - Computed Tomography (PET-CT)-based assessment of response. There was no statistically significant association seen in prognosis when MYC and/or BCL2 translocation and protein expression data were correlated with OS and PFS.