MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials
Journal Article

A comparison of the prognostic performance of the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 response criteria in patients with NHL from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials

2023
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
The Lugano 2014 criteria are the standard for response assessment in lymphoma. We compared the prognostic performance of Lugano 2014 and the more recently developed response evaluation criteria in lymphoma (RECIL 2017), which relies primarily on computed tomography and uses unidimensional measurements, in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL) from the phase III GOYA and GALLIUM trials, respectively. Concordance between responses according to the Lugano 2014 and RECIL 2017 criteria was analyzed. Landmark analyses of progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) by end of treatment (EOT) and end of induction (EOI) response status according to RECIL 2017 and Lugano 2014 criteria, and prognostic value of response at EOT/EOI were also compared. Overall, 1333 patients were included from GOYA and 502 from GALLIUM. Complete response (CR) status according to RECIL 2017 criteria showed high concordance with complete metabolic response (CMR) status by Lugano 2014 criteria in both GOYA (92.5%) and GALLIUM (92.4%). EOT and EOI CR/CMR status by both criteria was highly prognostic for PFS in GOYA (RECIL 2017 [CR]: hazard ratio [HR], 0.35 [95% confidence interval [CI] 0.26–0.46]; Lugano 2014 [CMR]: HR, 0.35 [95% CI 0.26–0.48]; both p  < .0001) and GALLIUM (RECIL 2017 [CR]: HR, 0.35 [95% CI 0.23–0.53]; Lugano 2014 [CMR]: HR, 0.21 [95% CI 0.14–0.31]; both p  < .0001). In conclusion, response categorization by RECIL 2017 is similar to that by Lugano 2014 criteria, with high concordance observed. Both were prognostic for PFS and OS.