Belada, David

LBA7000 Background: ~40% of DLBCL pts are not cured with first-line (1L) R-CHOP, underscoring a significant unmet need for more effective 1L regimens. Tafa (anti-CD19 mAb) + Len-R-CHOP in the phase 1b First-MIND study demonstrated safety and efficacy in pts with newly diagnosed disease. frontMIND, a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, compared Tafa-Len-R-CHOP vs R-CHOP in pts with high-risk aggressive BCLs. Methods: Pts aged 18–80 y with newly diagnosed, high-intermediate/high-risk DLBCL or HGBL (IPI 3–5, aaIPI 2–3 if ≤60 y) and ECOG PS 0–2 were randomized 1:1 to Tafa-Len-R-CHOP or R-CHOP. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS; secondary endpoints included: EFS, OS, CR, ORR, safety. Results: At primary analysis (data cutoff Oct 20, 2025), 899 pts were randomized to Tafa-Len-R-CHOP (n=448) or R-CHOP (n=451); baseline characteristics were similar between arms. With a median follow-up of 35.2 mo, Tafa-Len-R-CHOP achieved a statistically significant improvement in PFS vs R-CHOP (HR 0.75 [95% CI: 0.59, 0.96]; P =0.019) in the overall population; in pts with centrally confirmed lymphoma subtypes (n=773), PFS HR was 0.68 (95% CI: 0.52, 0.88) and 24-mo PFS was 72.7% vs 62.2%. PFS benefit was observed with Tafa-Len-R-CHOP in both molecular COO subtypes, ABC and GCB (data will be presented). Tafa-Len-R-CHOP significantly improved EFS vs R-CHOP; CR and ORR were similar between arms and HR for OS was 0.85 (final OS planned at 5y) (Table). Any-grade TEAEs were similar in treatment arms (98.6% vs 97.1%); more grade ≥3 TEAEs occurred with Tafa-Len-R-CHOP vs R-CHOP (86.7% vs 76.1%). Discontinuations due to TEAEs occurred in 25.7% vs 17.9% and deaths due to TEAEs in 5.9% vs 3.8% of pts for Tafa-Len-R-CHOP vs R-CHOP. Overall, there were fewer deaths with Tafa-Len-R-CHOP vs R-CHOP (18.5% vs 21.7%). Conclusions: The primary endpoint of frontMIND was met; Tafa-Len-R-CHOP resulted in a significant 25% reduction in risk of disease progression or death compared with R-CHOP, with an 8.2% difference in 24-month PFS rate in the overall population and 10.5% difference in pts with centrally confirmed lymphoma subtypes. TEAEs were manageable and consistent with the expected safety profile. Tafa-Len-R-CHOP represents a potential new 1L standard of care for pts with both COO subtypes of high-risk DLBCL or HGBL. Clinical trial information: NCT04824092 . Efficacy outcomes by treatment arm.* Variable Tafa-Len-R-CHOP(n=448) R-CHOP(n=451) HR or OR(95% CI) P value PFS, # events (%) † 121 (27.0) 155 (34.4) 0.75 (0.59, 0.96) 0.019 PFS rate at 24 mo, % 71.1 62.9 − − PFS rate at 36 mo, % 67.3 60.7 − − EFS, # events (%) 154 (34.4) 191 (42.4) 0.79 (0.64, 0.97) 0.026 OS, # events (%) 82 (18.3) 95 (21.1) 0.85 (0.63, 1.14) 0.270 CR at EOT, n (%) 292 (65.2) 294 (65.2) 0.998 (0.76, 1.31) 0.987 ‡ ORR at EOT, n (%) 360 (80.4) 343 (76.1) 1.290 (0.94, 1.78) 0.120 ‡ *Investigator-assessed. † Progressive disease or death from any cause. ‡ Nominal P value.

Abstract A short diagnosis-to-treatment interval independently predicts inferior outcomes in follicular lymphoma. Using international discovery and validation cohorts, we demonstrate its prognostic value beyond established prognostic indices, with implications for risk stratification, clinical trial design, and interpretation.

Abstract Introduction The International Prognostic Index (IPI) is widely used to stratify risk in large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) across all ages, with age-adjusted (aa)IPI applied to younger patients. While there have been efforts to develop prognostic indices (PIs) tailored to older patients, few are adopted in clinical practice due to their complexity and reliance on functional assessments, which are not routinely collected in real-world registry datasets. Recently proposed SENIOR-IPI (Dubois, ASH 2024) was developed for older patients with LBCL receiving anthracycline (A)-based therapy. We assessed the performance of standard and novel PIs in patients aged 80+ years and externally validated the SENIOR-IPI. Methods We harmonized and pooled data of patients aged 80+ years with newly diagnosed LBCL from a national registry and two prospective cohorts: NiHiL (Czech Republic, enrolled 2010–2023), LEO (USA; n=222, 2015–2020), and MER (USA; n=77, 2010–2015), forming a cohort of 819 individuals. We included 536 individuals with complete data on IPI components and albumin, including 485 treated with chemotherapy and 397 with A-based regimens (primary cohort). Following PIs were evaluated: IPI, NCCN-IPI, (aa)IPI, and SENIOR-IPI (age per year, aaIPI components, LDH >3x ULN as extra point, and albumin, all weighted six-fold; extranodal involvement excluded due to lack of prognostic significance). Multivariable hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models; discriminative ability was assessed using C-index and calibration plots. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); event-free survival results were consistent (230/357 events were deaths) and are not reported here. Results Among the 397 A-treated patients (median age 82 years, range 80–99), ECOG performance status (PS) 2–4 was observed in 35% of patients, clinical stage III–IV in 67%, elevated LDH in 65% (8% with >3x ULN), >1 extranodal (EN) site in 32%, and albumin levels < 3.5 g/dL in 27%. In multivariable modeling, only age per year (HR=1.07, P<0.01), and clinical stage (HR=1.36, P=0.048) were independent predictors of OS, whereas ECOG PS (HR=1.27, P=0.12), trichotomized LDH by ULN (HR=1.23, P=0.08) and albumin (HR=1.17, P=0.35) were not significant. SENIOR-IPI had the highest discrimination (C-index 0.631) in A-treated patients, outperforming IPI (0.617), NCCN-IPI (0.591), and aaIPI (0.620), with consistent results across cohorts: NiHiL (0.633), LEO (0.619), and MER (0.621). SENIOR-IPI stratified patients into low- (L-Risk, 0–9 points, 28%), low-intermediate (L-Int, 10–19 points, 42%), high-intermediate (H-Int, 20–29 points, 23%), and high-risk (H-Risk, 30–40 points, 7%) categories, with OS medians of 6.3, 3.8, 2.4, and 1.4 years, respectively (P<0.01), and significant separation between L-Int and H-Int (HR=1.47, P=0.02). By comparison, IPI categorized patients as L-Risk (12%), L-Int (24%), H-Int (27%), and H-Risk (37%), with median OS of 8.7, 4.6, 4.8, and 1.9 years, resp. (P<0.01). aaIPI yielded following distributions: 13%, 29%, 37%, and 21%; and median OS: 8.7, 5.3, 3.4, and 1.5 years; P<0.01. NCCN-IPI stratified patients into three groups: L-Int (13%), H-Int (49%), and H-Risk (39%), with respective OS medians of 8.7, 4.1, and 2.5 years (P<0.01). All PIs showed modest overestimation of mortality (calibration slopes: SENIOR-IPI 1.36; IPI 1.24; aaIPI 1.30; NCCN-IPI 1.26; intercept: -0.97, -0.87, -0.92, -0.87, resp.). In the entire cohort (n=536), SENIOR-IPI showed highest C-index (0.651 vs IPI 0.622, aaIPI 0.631, NCCN-IPI 0.606), and stratified patients into L-Risk (26%, 2-year OS: 6.4 years), L-Int (40%, 3.2 years), H-Int (24%, 1.5 years), and H-Risk (10%, 0.6 years). Calibration slope was 1.18 (intercept -0.33). Among patients not receiving chemotherapy, SENIOR-IPI also performed best (C-index 0.759 vs IPI 0.738, aaIPI 0.757, NCCN-IPI 0.728). Conclusion SENIOR-IPI enables effective risk stratification of patients aged 80+ years with LBCL into four prognostically distinct groups, outperforming traditional indices (IPI, NCCN-IPI, aaIPI) in patients receiving A-based therapy, as well as in the entire cohort and in patients not receiving chemotherapy. While its discrimination is superior, modest miscalibration suggests that future recalibration may improve precision. These findings support SENIOR-IPI as a clinically relevant prognostic tool for the elderly LBCL patient population. Funding: NU21-03-00411, P50 CA97274, U01 CA195568.

Abstract Introduction: THRLBCL is a rare disease accounting for less than 10% of all diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) subtypes. THRLBCL was associated with poor outcomes in the pre-rituximab era, with limited contemporaneous data. Optimal frontline treatment remains unclear with some studies advocating for intensive regimens. The goal of this international study is to analyze the survival and treatment-related outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed THRLBCL treated with rituximab-containing chemotherapy and to compare with a DLBCL, not otherwise specified (NOS) cohort. Methods: THRLBCL and DLBCL patients prospectively enrolled in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) (NCT02736357) (7/2015 to 5/2020), Molecular Epidemiology Resource (1/2010 to 6/2015), and Czech Lymphoma Study Group project (NiHiL) (NCT03199066) (2/2010 to 11/2023) were analyzed. Diagnosis was made in dedicated hematopathology centers in both registries. We excluded patients with prior nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma, central nervous system involvement, and not treated with rituximab-containing therapy. Event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated by Kaplan-Meier.Univariate associations were derived via Cox model and multivariate models were constructed by forward selection of significant variables with P≤0.05. Propensity score matching (1:5, caliper 0.2) between THRLBCL and DLBCL NOS patients was performed using IPI score components and treatment as covariates. Results: We identified 158 patients (LEO: 67 and NiHiL: 91) with THRLBCL. Among them, 140 patients received rituximab-containing regimens and were included in this analysis. Median age was 58 years (range, 19-89) with 57% aged ≤60 years. Most patients were male (n= 88; 63%) and had ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1 (n= 111; 79%), stage III-IV (n= 111; 79%), elevated LDH (n= 92; 66%), and B symptoms (n= 84; 60%). Fifty (36%) patients had ≥2 extranodal (EN) sites, mostly liver (n= 39; 28%) and lung (n= 16; 11%), bone marrow (BM) involvement was observed in 26% (n= 37). Bulky disease (≥7.5cm) was present in 50 (36%) and IPI score ≥3 in 68 (48%) patients. The median diagnosis-to-treatment interval was 23 days (IQ range, 13-38.5). Frequent regimens were R-CHOP (n= 106; 75.7%), followed by intensive regimens such as R-MegaCHOP/ESHAP, R-HyperCVAD/MA, and R-CODOX-M/IVAC (n= 15; 10.7%), and R-CHOEP/EPOCH-R (n= 10; 7.14%). With a median follow-up of 3.92 years, the 4-year EFS & OS were 71% and 80%, respectively. Lymphoma was the main cause of death (n= 15; 11%) among 30 events. No difference in 4-year EFS (70% vs. 76%; P= 0.55) & OS (80% vs 82%; P= 0.96) were observed between R-CHOP and intensive regimens. Factors associated with shorter EFS and OS in univariate analysis for THRLBCL were ECOG PS 2-4: (HR= 3.3; P<.001 & HR= 5.97, P<.001, respectively); ≥2 EN sites (HR= 1.85, P= 0.043 & HR= 2.54, P= 0.014, respectively); B symptoms (HR= 2.35, P= 0.014 & HR= 2.84, P= 0.023) and IPI score (HR= 1.5, P= 0.002 & HR= 2.16, P<.001). Stage III-IV and BM involvement were associated with shorter OS only (HR= 7.36, P= 0.05 & HR= 2.18, P= 0.036, respectively). Among them, only ECOG PS 2-4 (OS: HR= 3.6, P= 0.003) and B symptoms (EFS: HR= 2.3, P= 0.046) were independent predictors of survival in multivariate analysis. Finally, we compared baseline characteristics and survival between THRLBCL (n= 140) and DLBCL NOS (n= 6099; LEO/MER: 2069 & NiHiL: 4030) treated with rituximab-containing regimens. Patients with THRLBCL were younger (≤60 years: 57% vs. 38%; P<.001), more frequently had ECOG PS 0-1 (79% vs 76%; P= 0.012), stage III-IV (79% vs 63%; P<.001), B symptoms (60% vs 38%; P<.001), and liver involvement (28% vs 7%; P<.001), compared to DLBCL NOS. Subtype was not associated with survival (OS HR= 0.79, P= 0.262 & EFS HR= 0.93, P= 0.662) when adjusted for IPI score. With a median follow-up of 4.89 years in the DLBCL NOS cohort, we observed similar 4-year EFS (71% vs 67%; P= 0.197) & OS between histologies (80% vs 77%; P= 0.125). These results were confirmed in propensity matching for EFS (HR= 0.98, P= 0.897) and OS (HR= 1.07, P= 0.732). Conclusions: In this large international analysis of patients with newly diagnosed THRLBCL contemporaneously treated, we observed similar survival rates compared to DLBCL NOS treated with R-CHOP and intensive regimens. ECOG PS and the presence of B symptoms were independent factors associated with survival.

Abstract Introduction Short diagnosis-to-treatment interval (DTI) is associated with aggressive disease biology and inferior outcomes in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and is recognized as a potential source of selection bias in clinical trials if not properly addressed. However, its prognostic significance in follicular lymphoma (FL) remains poorly characterized. We aimed to evaluate the prognostic significance of DTI in newly diagnosed FL patients who received frontline (1L) immunochemotherapy (IC), using a large international dataset and an independent external validation cohort. Methods For the discovery dataset, we evaluated patients diagnosed between 2002 and 2018 from ten observational cohorts as part of the FLIPI24 Consortium. External validation was conducted using data from patients enrolled in the Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) Cohort between 2010 and 2015. All patients had FL grade 1–3A and received 1L IC within 100 days of diagnosis. Patients with a concurrent DLBCL were excluded. Missing baseline laboratory values were addressed via multiple imputation. The primary endpoint was event-free survival at 24 months (EFS24); secondary endpoint was 5-year overall survival (OS), both calculated from treatment initiation. DTI was analyzed as continuous (via splines) and dichotomized variable (≤14 vs >14 days; as defined in DLBCL). Results In the discovery cohort (n=3,907), median age was 61 years (IQR 53–69), and 50% were male; 49% of patients were high-risk according to FLIPI, 26% according to PRIMA-PI, and 38% according to FLIPI24. Included patients received R-CHOP (54%), R-CVP (26%), or B-R (20%) as 1L treatment, followed by anti-CD20 maintenance in 60%. The median DTI was 30 days (IQR 17–48). Using the 14-day cut-off, 851 patients (22%) had short DTI. These patients had more adverse baseline characteristics, including B symptoms (42% vs 32%, P<0.01), ECOG performance status ≥2 (15% vs 8%, P<0.01), elevated LDH (51% vs 40%, P<0.01), hemoglobin <12 g/dL (30% vs 17%, P<0.01), and elevated β2-microglobulin (56% vs 44%, P<0.01). Prognostic indices (PIs) were also more frequently high-risk in the short-DTI group: FLIPI (56% vs 47%), PRIMA-PI (36% vs 24%), and FLIPI24 (51% vs 34%, all P<0.01). Spline modeling showed a decreasing EFS24 rate with increasing DTI, reaching a plateau at 30–40 days. In logistic regression model, each additional week of DTI improved EFS24 (OR 0.92, P<0.01). DTI attenuated but remained prognostic after adjusting for PIs (OR 0.93 for FLIPI, 0.95 for PRIMA-PI, 0.96 for FLIPI24, all P<0.01). When analyzed as a dichotomized variable, short DTI was associated with inferior EFS24: OR 1.74 adjusted for FLIPI, 1.63 for PRIMA-PI, and 1.53 for FLIPI24 (all P<0.01). The 2-year EFS of short vs long DTI groups was 71% vs 82% (HR 1.50, 95% CI 1.34–1.67, P<0.01), 5-year OS was 80% vs 86% (HR 1.38, 95% CI 1.21–1.56, P<0.01), and the 5-year cumulative risk of histologic transformation was 7.7% vs. 5.4% (P<0.01). In the validation cohort (n=516), median age was 61 years (IQR 52–69 years), 55% were male; 36% of patients were high-risk according to FLIPI; 29% according to PRIMA-PI, and 33% according to FLIPI24. Patients received B-R (59%) or R-CHOP (41%) as 1L treatment. The median DTI was 31 days (IQR 19–48), 84 patients (16%) had DTI ≤14 days. Similar patterns were observed; patients with short DTI had adverse baseline characteristics, PIs, and shorter 2-year EFS (72% vs 84%, HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.13–2.55, P=0.01). DTI remained associated with EFS24 when analyzed as a continuous variable (per week: OR 0.88 unadjusted, 0.90 with FLIPI, 0.89 with PRIMA-PI, and 0.89 with FLIPI24), and dichotomized (≤14 vs >14 days: OR 1.83 adjusted for FLIPI, 1.88 for PRIMA-PI, and 1.73 for FLIPI24). Conclusion Short DTI, defined as ≤14 days (observed in 22% of FL patients vs 46% in DLBCL), is a strong and independent predictor of inferior outcomes in newly diagnosed FL patients treated with IC. While DTI correlates with adverse baseline features and established PIs, it retains independent prognostic value. Although a 14-day threshold is reasonable for risk modeling, DTI contains greater informational value when modeled as a continuous variable. Among PIs, FLIPI24 most strongly attenuated the DTI effect, underscoring its superior discriminative power over FLIPI and PRIMA-PI. Clinical trials designs should mitigate any potential barriers to enrollment of FL patients requiring urgent therapy.

Abstract Introduction Marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) is an indolent and heterogenous disease. Several prognostic models have been proposed to assess outcomes in MZL, including FLIPI, IPI (primarily designed for overall survival [OS]), and MZL-specific scores such as MALT-IPI (event-free survival [EFS]) and MZL-IPI (progression-free survival). FLIPI24 is a recently developed prognostic index for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) treated with first-line (1L) immunochemotherapy (IC), identifying a high-risk population with inferior survival and increased risk of lymphoma-related death. FLIPI24 has also demonstrated robust performance in the entire FL population, including patients under observation. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic utility of FLIPI24 in patients with MZL and to compare its performance with other established indices (FLIPI, MZL-IPI, IPI, MALT-IPI). Methods We pooled harmonized data from newly diagnosed MZL patients with complete available FLIPI24 variables (age, white blood cell count [WBC], hemoglobin [HGB], serum lactate dehydrogenase [LDH], and beta-2-microglobulin [B2M] levels) treated with 1L IC. Data were collected from three prospective international cohorts: NiHiL (Czech Republic; n=897; enrolled 2005–2023), LEO (USA; n=62; 2015–2020), and MER (USA; n=32; 2010–2015), forming a pooled cohort of 991 1L IC-treated patients. The analysis was then extended to include all newly diagnosed MZL patients (n=2,116), regardless of treatment. The primary endpoint in the 1L IC-treated cohort was EFS at 24 months (EFS24), and for all MZL patients, it was OS. Secondary endpoints included OS24 for 1L IC treated cohort, lymphoma-related mortality by FLIPI24 risk groups, and comparative prognostic performance of FLIPI, IPI, and MALT-IPI, by C-statistics; performance of MZL-IPI was assessed on a subgroup of NiHiL patients with available data (n=877 all MZL, n=485 1L IC-treated). Results Among the 991 1L IC-treated patients, the median age at diagnosis was 66 years (range 22–94); 47% were male; 11% had ECOG performance status ≥2, 68% clinical stage III–IV, 42% elevated LDH, 40% IPI 3–5, 42% FLIPI 3–5, and 62% MALT-IPI 2–3. The median B2M level was 2.8 mg/L, WBC 7.0 × 10⁹/L, and HGB 13.1 g/dL. MZL subtypes were: 64% extranodal (EMZL), 22% nodal (NMZL), and 14% splenic (SMZL). Most common 1L IC regimens were R-CVP (46%), R-CHOP-like (32%), R-chlorambucil (9%), and B-R (9%). FLIPI24 stratified patients into low- (18%), intermediate- (37%), and high-risk (45%) groups. High-risk patients were older (median 54 vs 65 vs 71 years for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively; P<0.01), had more frequent adverse baseline features, and were more likely to have the SMZL subtype (2% vs 7% vs 25% for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively; P<0.01). After a median follow-up of 7.2 years, EFS24 was 89%, 85%, and 65% (P<0.01) across low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups; OS at 2 years was 98%, 97%, and 79%; and OS at 5 years was 96%, 91%, and 62%, resp. (P<0.01). The 5-year cumulative incidence of lymphoma-related death was 13% in high-risk vs 6% in low-/intermediate-risk groups. FLIPI24 showed better prognostic accuracy for EFS compared with FLIPI, MZL-IPI, IPI and MALT-IPI (C-index: 0.640 vs 0.630, 0.622, 0.620 and 0.603, resp.), as well as for OS (C-index: 0.710 vs 0.672, 0.641, 0.663, 0.652, resp.). Prognostic performance was consistent across MZL subtypes. In the extended cohort of 2,116 newly diagnosed MZL patients (47% receiving IC, 17% rituximab monotherapy, 11% radiotherapy, 8% surgery, 2% antibiotics; 15% observed), FLIPI24 stratified patients into low- (24%), intermediate- (39%), and high-risk (37%) groups. OS at 2 year was 99%, 97%, and 83%, at 5 years it was 96%, 91%, and 62%, resp. (P<0.01). The 5-year cumulative incidence of lymphoma-related death was 12% in high-risk vs 4% in low-/intermediate-risk patients. FLIPI24 outperformed other indices (OS C-index: 0.754 vs MZL-IPI 0.654, FLIPI 0.700, MALT-IPI 0.694, IPI 0.699). Conclusion FLIPI24 demonstrates strong and consistent prognostic performance across all MZL subtypes, identifying ~40% of patients as high-risk with significantly worse survival and increased lymphoma-related mortality. The FLIPI24 outperforms FLIPI, MZL-IPI, IPI, and MALT-IPI in predicting outcomes and may serve as a practical tool to guide risk-adapted management and selection of patients for novel therapies in MZL. Funding: NU21-03-00411, P50 CA97274, U01 CA195568.

Abstract Introduction The International Prognostic Index (IPI, NEJM, 1993) has guided risk stratification in large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) for over three decades. Its simplicity and clinical utility have driven its widespread adoption, even in the era of precision medicine. However, the prognostic value of the IPI and its components may not be uniform across the age spectrum of LBCL patients. We evaluated the contemporary prognostic performance of the IPI in a large international cohort, focusing on age-stratified performance and the relative contributions of its individual components, grouped as patient- and disease-related factors. Methods We harmonized and pooled data from 6,941 patients with newly diagnosed systemic LBCL treated with R-CHOP-like regimens (R-CHOP, R-miniCHOP, DA-EPOCH-R, R-CHOEP, R-CHOP+X) with complete IPI data from three prospective cohorts: NiHiL (Czech Republic, n=4,590; 2010–2023), LEO (USA, n=1,789; 2015–2020), and MER (USA, n=562; 2010–2015). IPI components included age, ECOG performance status (PS) as patient-related, and Ann Arbor clinical stage, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and extranodal (EN) involvement as disease-related factors. Prognostic performance was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression models and C-statistics. Age-stratified analysis was performed for: ≤40 years (7%; n=492), 41–60 years (28%; n=1,909), 61–80 years (59%; n=4,080), and >80 years (7%; n=460). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results In the pooled cohort, the median age was 66 years (range 18–95). Compared to the original IPI cohort (n=3,273), our cohort was older (age >60 years: 66% vs 41%) but otherwise comparable: ECOG PS 2–4 (25% vs 24%), clinical stage III–IV (63% vs 66%), elevated LDH (60% vs 52%), and >1 EN involvement (32% vs 30%). In multivariable analysis, age (≤60 vs >60 years) was the strongest predictor of OS (HR=2.78; vs HR=1.96 in original IPI report), followed by ECOG PS (HR=2.07; vs 1.80), clinical stage (HR=1.50; vs 1.47), LDH (HR=1.41; vs 1.85, all P<0.01); EN involvement was not significant (P=0.50, HR=1.03 vs 1.48). Risk group distribution shifted from the original IPI: 28% were low-risk (0–1 factor; vs 35%), 23% low-intermediate (2; vs 27%), 24% high-intermediate (3; vs 22%), and 25% high-risk (4–5; vs 16%). Corresponding 2-year OS rates were 95%, 86%, 78%, and 63%, superior to those of the original IPI cohort (87%, 67%, 55%, 44%; pre-rituximab era). Age was associated with an increasing risk of mortality, with a more pronounced rise beyond 60 years. In a piecewise Cox model, the HR per year was 1.04 for ages ≤60 (linear), 1.05 for 61–69 (accelerated), and 1.06 for ≥70 years (exponential, all P<0.01). ECOG PS retained prognostic significance across age groups: HRs were 1.87 (P=0.06) for ≤40 years, 1.63 (P<0.01) for 41–60, 2.22 (P<0.01) for 61–80, and 1.43 (P<0.01) for >80 years. The strength of other IPI components declined with age. Clinical stage showed decreasing impact: HR 2.08 (P=0.09), 1.97 (P<0.01), 1.49 (P<0.01), and 1.31 (P=0.05). LDH was significant only up to age 80 years: HRs were 2.07 (P=0.04), 1.96 (P<0.01), 1.32 (P<0.01), and 1.21 (P=0.13). EN involvement was non-significant across all groups: HRs were 1.37 (P=0.34), 1.26 (P=0.05), 0.98 (P=0.74), and 1.06 (P=0.67). The IPI C-statistics was 0.676 overall and declined with age: ≤40 years (0.708), 41–60 years (0.683), 61–80 years (0.641), and >80 years (0.598). We next stratified the IPI factors into patient- (age, ECOG PS) and disease-related (clinical stage, LDH, EN involvement). In patients ≤40 years, disease-related factors outperformed patient-related (C-index 0.693 vs 0.602), as in the 41–60 group (C-index 0.677 vs 0.589). In patients aged 61–80, predictive values were comparable (0.613 vs 0.622). In >80-year-olds, both declined substantially (0.580 vs 0.568). Conclusion The IPI remains a valuable prognostic tool in LBCL, particularly among younger patients. However, its overall predictive accuracy declines with age. In patients ≤60 years old, prognosis is primarily driven by disease-related factors, suggesting a role for molecular classifiers to enhance risk stratification. In older patients, incorporation of additional patient-level factors, such as comorbidities and nutritional status could be considered. These findings underscore the need for more individualized prognostic tools for LBCL patients. Funding: NU21-03-00411, P50 CA97274, U01 CA195568, Charles University Haematology-Oncology Cooperatio Program.

PURPOSE Although most patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) can expect an indolent course, progressive lymphoma remains the primary cause of death during the first decade after diagnosis. Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) of starting first-line (1L) immunochemotherapy defines a high-risk population with poor survival, but better risk stratification at diagnosis is needed. METHODS The FLIPI24 model was developed and internally validated to predict 24-month event rates using individual data from 4,485 patients treated with 1L immunochemotherapy from 10 observational cohorts of FL. Overall and cause-specific survival was further evaluated in FLIPI24 risk groups. External validation in the 1L immunochemotherapy setting was performed using the prospective observational Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort (N = 565) and three randomized phase III trials (N = 3,192); extension to all patients with FL (any 1L therapy) was performed in the LEO cohort (N = 1,445) and its Molecular Epidemiology Resource subcohort (N = 1,074). RESULTS The FLIPI24 model uses age and four blood-based variables (hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, beta-2 microglobulin, and WBC count). FLIPI24 showed consistent performance across validation and extension data sets, which was superior to existing prognostic tools. Across the four external immunochemotherapy validation data sets, patients with high-risk FLIPI24 (23%-32% of patients) had significantly higher 24-month event rates (22%-35%) and inferior 5-year overall survival (77%-83%) compared with patients with low-risk FLIPI24 (29%-31% of patients, 24-month event rates: 10%-12%; 5-year OS: 96%-97%). Results were consistent when evaluating lymphoma-related death and when extended to all patients with FL. CONCLUSION The FLIPI24 model robustly stratifies, at diagnosis, patients with FL at increased risk of lymphoma-related death versus patients with very low lymphoma-related mortality during the first decade after diagnosis. FLIPI24 can be used to enrich future clinical trial designs in newly diagnosed FL.

ABSTRACT The characteristics at diagnosis and clinical course of primary extranodal follicular lymphoma (EFL) have not been extensively described. The International Extranodal Lymphoma Study Group (IELSG) conducted an international retrospective survey aimed to describe the clinical features at diagnosis and the outcomes of FL cases with a clinically dominant extranodal component. The dataset included 605 pathologically reviewed cases from 19 different countries, and their outcomes were compared to those of nodal follicular lymphomas. The two most common presentation sites for EFL were the skin ( n = 334) and the gastrointestinal tract ( n = 72), with 22 cases having primary duodenal localization. These subsets exhibited unique features at diagnosis and significantly different overall survival (OS) patterns. After a median follow‐up of 5.5 years, primary cutaneous lymphomas showed a superior outcome [10‐year OS: 89% (95% CI, 83%–93%)], while primary gastrointestinal lymphomas had an intermediate outcome [10‐year OS: 79% (95% CI, 59%–90%)]. Among the gastrointestinal lymphomas, primary duodenal lymphomas tended toward the best outcome [10‐year OS: 95% (95% CI, 69%–99%)]. Other primary extranodal sites had inferior outcomes [10‐year OS: 59% (95% CI, 48%–68%)], similar to primary nodal lymphomas [10‐year OS: 57% (95% CI, 49%–64%)]. These findings support the identification of specific primary FL localizations as distinct entities with particular clinical and biological characteristics.