The lym Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the lym Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The lym and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
The Lymphoma & CLL Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Beigene, Johnson & Johnson and Roche, and supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, Lilly, and Pfizer. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out more
Create an account and access these new features:
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View lym content recommended for you
Which is more accurate for predicting OS and TTFT, CLL-IPI or MDACC-PI?
Massimo Gentile from the Azienda Ospedaliera of Cosenza, Consenza, Italy, and colleagues from across Italy and the US recently published data in a letter to the editor on the topic of comparing two prognostic tools for CLL in a community based cohort in Blood, October, 2016. The authors set out to compare and assess the validity of the recently published CLL-IPI and the MD Anderson Cancer Center Prognostic Index (MDACC-PI) scores for predicting OS and TTFT in newly diagnosed CLL patients. The data was collected from 858 patients across 5 Italian centers and, in a separate data set, 506 patients at the Mayo Clinic in the US.
Highlights:
- 5-year OS of CLL-IPI groups in this study, similar to original publication
- OS C-statistic: CLL-IPI = 0.71 (P<0.0001) vs. MDACC-PI = 0.68 (P<0.001)
- TTFT C-statistic: CLL-IPI = 0.72 (P<0.001) vs. MDACC-PI = 0.63 (P<0.001)
- Mayo Clinic OS C-statistic: CLL-IPI 0.75 (P<0.001) vs. MDACC-PI = 0.66 (P<0.001)
- Mayo Clinic TTFT C-statistic: CLL-IPI 0.74 (P<0.001) vs. MDACC-PI = 0.66 (P<0.001)
The CLL-IPI is a more accurate prognostic predictor than MDACC-PI in terms of both OS and TTFT, in two separate populations, confirming the use of CLL-IPI. However, as MDACC-PI can be used without FISH (TP53) or IGHV, unlike CLL-IPI, it may still be useful in some settings. When taken together, this work validates the CLL-IPI for use in predicting both OS and TTFT in patients with newly diagnosed CLL.
References