
Launched: Early-Stage Hodgkin Lymphoma Prediction Tool
'Utilizing objective, continuous, and readily available variables in nearly 5400 early-stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma patients, we developed and validated a robust, dynamic, and modern prediction model,' co-author Andrew M. Evens, DO, of the Division of Blood Disorders, Rutgers Cancer Institute, New Brunswick, New Jersey, said in presenting the findings at the 18th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (ICML) 2025 in Lugano, Switzerland.
'Male sex, and continuous values of decreasing hemoglobin or albumin, and incrementally increasing maximum tumor diameter were associated with worse progression-free survival,' Evens said of the research, which was simultaneously published in NEJM Evidence .
While the vast majority of patients with early-stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma do have favorable outcomes, the cure rate isn't 100%, and the prognostic models currently used, such as those from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) or German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG), have been used for decades, with general assessments as being either favorable or unfavorable, Evens explained.
'These original models were based on data from the early 1970s, when the majority of patients had staging laparotomies and radiation alone as treatment,' he explained. An update from the GHSG in 2013 was performed, but 'overall, it had poor specificity,' he said.
'With more sophistication available in modeling and in contemporary datasets, there has been an unmet need [for a modernized prediction tool] identified,' Evens noted.
In response, the new model was developed by Evens and colleagues as part of the HoLISTIC (Hodgkin Lymphoma International Study for Individual Care) international consortium.
Called the Early-Stage cHL International Prognostication Index (E-HIPI), the new model was developed with the use of data on 3000 patients with untreated, early-stage classic Hodgkin lymphoma from four seminal, phase 3 clinical trials, including the CCTG-ECOG, EORTC H9, RAPID, and EORTC H10 trials.
Those patients, overall, had a median age of 31.2 years, and 77.4% had stage II disease.
Their estimated 2-year progression-free survival was 93.7%.
Four Key Risk Factors in Early-Stage Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma
Based on the analysis, four key parameters that emerged as being significantly associated with progression-free survival were female sex, conveying a lower risk (hazard ratio [HR], 0.59); maximum tumor diameter (HR, 1.06 per 1 cm, ranging from 1.5 to 15.0, hence 'about a 10% increased risk with each centimeter increase,' Evens said); hemoglobin level (HR, 1.09; continuous, ranging from 5.0 to 16.5 g/dL); and albumin level (HR, 0.83; continuous, ranging from 2.5 to 6.0 g/dL), where increases from low levels to high levels were predictive factors for each.
The data were validated externally using two separate cohorts of 2360 contemporaneously treated patients from five international cancer registries, including the BC Cancer, Princess Margaret, Iowa/Mayo SPORE, Stanford Registry, and Danish National Lymphoma Registry.
In those external validation cohorts, the 2-year progression-free survival was slightly lower, at 90.3% in cohort 1 and 91.6% in cohort 2.
After multivariate adjustment in a Cox regression model, the E-HIPI model was significantly associated with progression-free survival, whereas the EORTC measures of favorable or unfavorable status were not.
The number of nodal groups was also considered as a potential predictor but was ultimately not found to be significantly associated with progression-free survival in the model.
Continuous Variables Provide Greater Context
The online risk calculator, in addition to providing a 2-year progression-free survival estimate, also helps to estimate risk according to adjustments based on differing potential disease trajectories.
Notably, whereas many other models use basic cutoffs for factors, such as age being categorized as older or younger than 45 years, the model uses continuous variables to provide context for each input in relation to a full range, instead of just being under or over a specific level.
'We know that if you try to dichotomize a continuous factor, you lose a lot of statistical power, and you lose potential nonlinear effects,' Evens explained.
With dichotomized values such as age categorized as older or younger than 45 years, 'how can you know, for instance, that outcomes with a 44-year-old are going to be similar to the 18-year-old?' he said.
'Likewise, with tumor diameters, as opposed to saying simply above or below 10 cm, this approach gives us more richness and more power in individualized prediction to base the risk on the exact tumor dimension.'
The 2-year progression-free survival was seen as the most important primary outcome for the model because among the very small proportion of patients who do have a relapse, such events most commonly occur within 2 years, Evens noted.
However, with ever-advancing therapies continuously affecting outcomes, and the known small risk for postacute late effects occurring years later, potentially due not to the disease itself but to exposure to treatments such as chemotherapy and radiation, the work on E-HIPI will continue.
The current predictor was step 1, Evens told Medscape Medical News .
Step 2 will be to look at different treatments and help predict outcomes based on the differing treatments, and step 3 will involve the estimation of postacute late effects, he explained.
'Our model provides more precise and individualized prediction [than existing methods], and in the near future with the second and third iterations of the model, we'll be able to take this to the bedside and help predict not just general outcomes for patients, but more exact treatment options,' he said.
The E-HIPI is in fact the second prognostic tool developed by the international consortium. The team has also made available the Advanced-stage cHL International Prognostication Index.
Commenting on the study, Alex Herrera, MD, chief of the Division of Lymphoma, Department of Hematology & Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation, City of Hope Medical Center in Duarte, California, said the new model offers some important new insights.
'We rely heavily on early-stage prognostic indices, since patients with early-stage cHL are classified as 'favorable' or 'unfavorable' based on these risk factor indices, and that is what determines the treatment plan,' he told Medscape Medical News .
'Here we see that some of the traditional factors in the GHSG and EORTC risk stratification may not be as useful.'
Herrera agreed that a key attribute of the new prediction model is the use of the continuous values.
'An important change [from previous models] is the use of the full range of values (continuous) as opposed to just binary thresholds,' Herrera said.
He added that 'albumin and hemoglobin have always been a part of the advanced-stage IPI, but here they were key prognostic factors for early-stage disease.'
While the previous indices will continue to determine how to treat patients, 'the online tool will allow this to become a key part of prognostic discussions with patients in the clinic,' Herrera said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Gizmodo
14 minutes ago
- Gizmodo
Physicists Create First-Ever Antimatter Qubit, Making the Quantum World Even Weirder
Readers following our existential physics coverage may remember a recent breakthrough from CERN concerning matter's evil twin, antimatter. An outstanding mystery in physics is that our universe contains more matter than antimatter, contradicting most theoretical predictions. Scientists, therefore, understandably want to explain why and how this is the case. CERN announced yet another significant leap for studying antimatter—and this time, the achievement creeps into the realm of quantum computing. In a Nature paper published on July 23, CERN's Baryon Antibaryon Symmetry Experiment (BASE) collaboration announced the first-ever demonstration of an antimatter quantum bit, or qubit—the smallest unit of information for quantum computers. The qubit in question is an antiproton, a proton's antimatter counterpart, caught in a curious quantum swing—arcing back and forth between 'up' and 'down' spin states in perfect rhythm. The oscillation lasted for 50 seconds. The technical prowess that enabled this result represents a significant leap forward in our understanding of antimatter, the researchers claim. For the experiment, the team applied a technique called coherent quantum transition spectroscopy, which measures—with chilling precision—a particle's magnetic moment, or its behavior inside magnetic fields. First, the team brought in some antiprotons from CERN's antimatter factory, trapping the particles in an electromagnetic Penning trap—a superposition of magnetic fields. Next, they set up a second multi-trap inside the same magnet, extracting individual antiprotons to measure and tweak the particle's spin states in the process. Quantum states are fragile and easily disturbed by outside distractions. The wrong push can immediately send them spiraling down the drain toward decoherence—at which point the system loses the valuable information physicists hope to find. This fundamental limitation of quantum systems was a major concern for the BASE collaboration, who in 2017 used a similar setup to the new experiment to confirm that protons and antiprotons had practically identical magnetic moments. The team made substantial revisions to its technology, paying special attention to developing the mechanisms needed to suppress and eliminate decoherence. This hard work paid off; the antiproton performed a stable quantum swing for 50 seconds—a motion akin to how qubits exist in superpositions of states, which theoretically could allow them to store exponential loads of information. Additionally, it marked the first time physicists observed this phenomenon in a single free nuclear magnetic moment, whereas previous experiments had only seen it in large groups of particles. 'This represents the first antimatter qubit and opens up the prospect of applying the entire set of coherent spectroscopy methods to single matter and antimatter systems in precision experiments,' BASE spokesperson Stefan Ulmer said in a statement. That said, the team doesn't believe the new results will introduce antimatter qubits to quantum computing, at least not anytime soon. 'It does not make sense to use [the antimatter qubit] at the moment for quantum computers, because, simply speaking, engineering related to production and storage of antimatter is much more difficult than for normal matter,' Latacz explained, adding that since matter and antimatter are known to share fundamental properties, opting for the latter wouldn't make practical sense. 'However, if in the future [we find] that antimatter behaves differently than matter, then it may be interesting to consider this.' There are additional improvements the team hopes to make, which will happen sometime very soon, Latacz said. The upgrades to BASE—termed BASE-STEP—will greatly improve our capacity to study antiprotons with higher precision and allow us to 'improve the measurement of the magnetic moment of the antiproton by at least a factor of 10, and in a longer perspective even a factor of 100,' she said. The new breakthrough could contribute to engineering advances in quantum computing, atomic clocks, and other areas. But as the researchers emphasize, such technological applications aren't anything we should expect any time soon. Nevertheless, the result itself presents some fascinating lessons for fundamental physics—questions that may take years to answer, but to quote physicist Sean Carroll from the other recent CERN finding, 'Well, it's a small part of a much bigger puzzle—but you know, every part matters.'
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Bayer Provides Regulatory Update on Elinzanetant for the Treatment of Moderate to Severe Hot Flashes Due to Menopause
WHIPPANY, N.J., July 25, 2025--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Bayer today announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has extended the review period for the New Drug Application (NDA) for elinzanetant. Elinzanetant is the first neurokinin 1 and neurokinin 3 receptor antagonist in late-stage clinical development for the hormone-free treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms (VMS) due to menopause. The FDA has determined additional time is needed for a full review of the NDA submission, including information provided to support the application. The extension to the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (PDUFA) review period is up to 90 days. The FDA did not raise any concern regarding the general approvability of elinzanetant in its correspondence. "We are confident in the potential of elinzanetant to provide meaningful clinical benefit to women pending regulatory approval," said Yesmean Wahdan, M.D., Senior Vice President and Head of Medical Affairs, North America, Pharmaceuticals. "We continue to work with the FDA to make this treatment available for women in menopause with moderate to severe hot flashes. Despite the universal experience of menopause, social stigma and misinformation persist, leaving many women to suffer without treatment and support. It's critical we advance innovation and education in menopause so women can work with their healthcare provider to determine the best option for them." The NDA is based on the positive results from the OASIS 1, 2 and 3 Phase III studies evaluating the efficacy and safety of the investigational compound elinzanetant versus placebo. Results from OASIS 1 and 2 were published in August 2024 in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). Detailed results of the Phase III study OASIS 3 providing supporting efficacy and additional long-term safety data were presented at The Menopause Society (TMS) annual meeting in September 2024. In the last 30 days, elinzanetant was approved under the brand name Lynkuet™ in the United Kingdom and Canada. Submissions for marketing authorizations for elinzanetant are also ongoing in the EU and other markets around the world. About Women's Healthcare at BayerWomen's Health is in Bayer's DNA. As a global leader in women's healthcare, Bayer has a long-standing commitment to delivering science for a better life by advancing a portfolio of innovative treatments. Bayer offers a wide range of effective short- and long-acting birth control methods as well as therapies for menopause management and gynecological diseases. Bayer is also focusing on innovative options to address the unmet medical needs of women worldwide and to broadening treatment choices such as in menopause. Additionally, Bayer intends to provide 100 million women per year in low- and middle- income countries by 2030 with access to family planning by funding multi-stakeholder aid programs for capacity building and by ensuring the supply of affordable modern contraceptives. This is part of the comprehensive sustainability measures and commitments from 2020 onwards and in line with the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations. About BayerBayer is a global enterprise with core competencies in the life science fields of health care and nutrition. In line with its mission, "Health for all, Hunger for none," the company's products and services are designed to help people and the planet thrive by supporting efforts to master the major challenges presented by a growing and aging global population. Bayer is committed to driving sustainable development and generating a positive impact with its businesses. At the same time, the Group aims to increase its earning power and create value through innovation and growth. The Bayer brand stands for trust, reliability and quality throughout the world. In fiscal 2024, the Group employed around 93,000 people and had sales of 46.6 billion euros. R&D expenses before special items amounted to 6.2 billion euros. For more information, go to Find more information at Follow us on Facebook: Follow us on X: @BayerPharma Forward-Looking StatementsThis release may contain forward-looking statements based on current assumptions and forecasts made by Bayer management. Various known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors could lead to material differences between the actual future results, financial situation, development or performance of the company and the estimates given here. These factors include those discussed in Bayer's public reports which are available on the Bayer website at The company assumes no liability whatsoever to update these forward-looking statements or to conform them to future events or developments. View source version on Contacts Media Contact: Colleen Murphy+1 Sign in to access your portfolio


Forbes
7 hours ago
- Forbes
How Business Leaders Can Help Rebuild Trust In Innovation
Dr. Michael Johnson, President of the New Jersey Innovation Institute. For those of us who work in the innovation economy, you might feel like innovation is being deprioritized right now. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is facing cuts. National Science Foundation (NSF) grant programs are shrinking. Higher education is under increasing political and economic pressure. Venture capital investment in deep tech and biotech has plummeted. In some industries, startups that once might have raised funding in days now sit in purgatory for months. Some experts have warned that failing to prioritize and fund innovation, such as scientific research, could leave a lasting effect that Americans feel "for decades to come." As I see it, they are not entirely wrong, but there are reasons for these shifts. A Broken Social Contract Look at the past 40 years of innovation from the perspective of the average American, and it's easy for me to see why trust has eroded. Pharmaceutical innovations, for example, have produced miracle drugs, but many of these therapies cost six figures and remain inaccessible to many Americans. Automation and globalization have shifted demand away from mid-level skills and reduced the number of middle-skill jobs in favor of higher-level skill jobs. Increased globalization has also had a major impact on factory communities in the U.S. After the increase in imported goods from China in the early 2000s, "Many U.S. manufacturing towns couldn't compete ... Those communities experienced higher unemployment, lower wages, higher use of food stamps, higher disability payments, higher rates of single parenthood and child poverty, and elevated mortality," the Wall Street Journal reported. At the same time, economic gains have largely consolidated at the top. For many Americans, innovation has meant progress for others and pain for them. Now, with AI threatening white-collar positions, office workers are also facing uncertainty around job security. The unspoken agreement behind the innovation economy was simple: Scientists and entrepreneurs would invent the future, and everyone would share in the benefits. But I believe that promise has fallen apart. We built unicorns instead of ladders, and when support eroded, we were shocked to find some of the public no longer on our side. In my view, we don't need less innovation, but we do need better innovation—and it needs to be human-centered, broadly distributed and explicitly designed to lift everyone. Here's what that looks like and how businesses can help. 1. Focus on serving everyone. We, as leaders, can shift our focus toward solving problems that affect everyday people. That means supporting research and developing technologies that improve healthcare access, reduce energy costs, expand educational opportunities and address community-level needs. I believe much of the public is more interested in manufacturing innovations that drop the price of essentials, like blood pressure medication, than in developing new, expensive therapeutics they can't access. We can also advocate for federal agencies like the NIH and the NSF to reward translational science and public impact, not just academic publication. Universities can elevate researchers who produce solutions and not just citations. 2. Don't forget about blue-collar workers. We shouldn't equate success with becoming a white-collar professional. Not everyone will be a doctor, lawyer or software engineer, and that is perfectly fine. For too long, I believe the innovation economy has often celebrated a narrow definition of achievement, one that sidelines the millions of Americans who work with their hands, build physical things and keep essential systems running. Over the past 50 years, many of these jobs have been offshored or automated. But these are not disposable workers. They are the backbone of our economy and critical to our communities. I believe we need to develop innovations that create real, durable jobs for tradespeople, factory workers and front-line professionals—jobs that offer salaries capable of meeting basic needs without government assistance. This means building: • Human-centered automation and robotics that enhance physical labor rather than replace it • Intelligent tools and platforms that make trades work more efficient, safer and higher paid • Industries of the future, like clean manufacturing, modular construction and precision agriculture, that are built from the ground up to include and empower these workers If we want to recognize the dignity in all work, we must design innovations around the people who do it. That starts with recognizing their value and building a future that includes them on purpose. 3. Build real solutions that improve daily life. Innovation should not be measured by the number of patents filed or the amount of capital raised. I believe it should be judged by how directly it improves people's lives. For business leaders, this means building real solutions: technologies, systems and services that address the problems people actually face every day. This might include looking for ways to lower the cost of prescription drugs, reduce heating and cooling bills, cut the time it takes to get a doctor's appointment or improve public services. I believe what our institutions need is a new mandate: Focus on solving real problems that matter to everyday people, and do it with urgency, transparency and humility. When innovation is visible, useful and human-centered, it earns back public trust. That's how we restore belief in progress. Trust isn't built by asking people to imagine the future, but by delivering results that improve their lives today. Final Thoughts Innovation in America is not dead, but I do think it is misaligned. We have created incredible technologies, yet we have failed to ensure they serve the many. We have built a machine that doesn't work well for everyone. The path forward is not to retreat from innovation but to democratize it. We must restore trust, rebuild the social contract and make innovation a project that lifts all boats, not just the yachts. That is how we make innovation matter again. Forbes Business Council is the foremost growth and networking organization for business owners and leaders. Do I qualify?