IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0360937.html

A public-data audit of transcriptomic prognostic transportability in R-CHOP-treated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Author

Listed:
  • Yongqing Li
  • Guowei Xiong
  • Wenhao Feng
  • Qi Chen
  • Yingying Qin
  • Haoyun Hong
  • Lin Lin

Abstract

Gene-expression biomarkers for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are often transported across retrospective cohorts that differ in treatment, assay platform, and clinical annotation. Using REMARK as the reporting framework, we audited prognostic associations with fixed scoring rules. Four Gene Expression Omnibus cohorts were harmonized for survival analysis. Treatment context was assessed after outcome-blind transcriptional state discovery. A directly mapped five-gene historical benchmark was evaluated with continuous Cox models in four R-CHOP cohorts. A 76-gene program selected in GSE31312 and GSE10846 served as a case study of two-cohort discovery, with GSE87371 as the only full-coverage independent evaluation and GSE32918 as a cross-platform sensitivity analysis. Coverage ablation, technical replicates, matched random programs, meta-analysis, and clinical-increment analyses assessed attenuation. The survival analyses included 470, 232, 87, and 140 patients. State composition was strongly associated with CHOP versus R-CHOP context in GSE10846 (Cramer’s V = 0.986). The historical score’s unadjusted random-effects hazard ratio (HR) was 1.35 (95% confidence interval 1.04–1.75); the prediction interval crossed the null (0.77–2.37). Common age/sex adjustment yielded HR 1.27 (1.05–1.54), with a prediction interval of 0.94–1.72. The 76-gene program was not independently validated in GSE87371 (unadjusted HR 1.23, 0.87–1.75; IPI/COO-adjusted HR 0.88, 0.56–1.40; age/sex-adjusted HR 1.09, 0.76–1.55). Its effect exceeded most matched random programs, but cross-cohort attenuation was pronounced and estimated clinical increment was negligible. With only 32 validation events, modest effects remain compatible with the data. Public DLBCL transcriptomic associations can be cohort-specific despite fixed scoring rules. Independent full-coverage evaluation and transparent treatment and platform audits should precede claims of general prognostic utility.

Suggested Citation

  • Yongqing Li & Guowei Xiong & Wenhao Feng & Qi Chen & Yingying Qin & Haoyun Hong & Lin Lin, 2026. "A public-data audit of transcriptomic prognostic transportability in R-CHOP-treated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(10), pages 1-15, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0360937
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0360937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0360937
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0360937&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0360937?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0360937. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.