Trial reportBlood advances2026
Validation of the newly introduced Deauville score 5a for patients treated for advanced-stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma.
Trial report in Blood advances, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
HD18 for Advanced Stages in Hodgkins Lymphoma
HD21 for Advanced Stages Treatment Optimization Trial in the First-line Treatment of Advanced Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma; Comparison of 6 Cycles of Escalated BEACOPP With 6 Cycles of BrECADD
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
abstractThe Lugano Imaging Committee recently refined the Deauville score (DS), subdividing DS5 into DS5a (>2× liver uptake without new lesions) and DS5b (new lesions). We investigated whether this improves prognostic discrimination at interim positron emission tomography (PET) after 2 cycles (PET-2) in patients with advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (AS-cHL) treated in recent German Hodgkin Study Group randomized phase 3 trials. The primary analysis cohort was HD18 postamendment standard arms (uniform treatment with 6 cycles of escalated doses of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone [eBEACOPP]); sensitivity cohorts were HD18 intention-to-treat and HD21 eBEACOPP and brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and dexamethasone arms. Progression-free survival (PFS) was analyzed by landmark Cox models starting at PET-2. DS5a was infrequent (4%-6% across cohorts; 39/639, 67/1745, 33/568, and 29/560). In the primary cohort, DS5 was associated with inferior PFS vs DS1 to DS3 (hazard ratio [HR], 3.00; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25-7.23) and vs DS1 to DS4 (HR, 2.35; 95% CI, 1.01-5.50). Across sensitivity cohorts, DS5a remained adverse compared with DS1 to DS4 (HR range, 2.57-5.47), whereas DS4 according to the new definition did not consistently separate from DS1 to DS3, which is likely a result of PET-adapted treatment. Overall survival trends were concordant, but interpretation is limited by few events. To our knowledge, this is the first prognostic validation of the refined DS in prospectively randomized trial populations. The newly introduced DS5a isolates a small high-risk AS-cHL, which further supports risk assessment and adaptation using quantitative biomarkers from PET. The HD18 and HD21 trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00515554 and NCT02661503, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.