A risk stratification model for nodal peripheral T-cell lymphomas based on the NCCN-IPI and posttreatment Deauville score

[1] Vose J(2008)International peripheral T-cell and natural killer/T-cell lymphoma study: pathology findings and clinical outcomes J Clin Oncol 26 4124-4130

[2] Armitage J(2011)WHO classification of malignant lymphomas in Korea: report of the third nationwide study Korean J Pathol 45 254-260

[3] Weisenburger D(2017)A prospective cohort study of patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma in the United States Cancer 123 1174-1183

[4] Kim JM(2014)Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification J Clin Oncol 32 3059-3068

[5] Ko YH(2014)Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group J Clin Oncol 32 3048-3058

[6] Lee SS(2015)Utility of interim and end-of-treatment PET/CT in peripheral T-cell lymphomas: a review of 124 patients Am J Hematol 90 975-980

[7] Huh J(2016)18F-FDG-PET is not a useful tool for end-of-treatment response evaluation in peripheral T-cell lymphomas Nucl Med Commun 37 217-842

[8] Kang CS(2014)An enhanced international prognostic index (NCCN-IPI) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated in the rituximab era Blood 123 837-2073

[9] Kim CW(2012)Interim 18-FDG-PET/CT failed to predict the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated at the diagnosis with rituximab-CHOP Blood 119 2066-4322

[10] Carson KR(2012)Impact of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography response evaluation in patients with high-tumor burden follicular lymphoma treated with immunochemotherapy: a prospective study from the Groupe d’Etudes des Lymphomes de l’Adulte and GOELAMS J Clin Oncol 30 4317-690

[1] Vose J(2008)International peripheral T-cell and natural killer/T-cell lymphoma study: pathology findings and clinical outcomes J Clin Oncol 26 4124-4130

[2] Armitage J(2011)WHO classification of malignant lymphomas in Korea: report of the third nationwide study Korean J Pathol 45 254-260

[3] Weisenburger D(2017)A prospective cohort study of patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma in the United States Cancer 123 1174-1183

[4] Kim JM(2014)Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification J Clin Oncol 32 3059-3068

[5] Ko YH(2014)Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group J Clin Oncol 32 3048-3058

[6] Lee SS(2015)Utility of interim and end-of-treatment PET/CT in peripheral T-cell lymphomas: a review of 124 patients Am J Hematol 90 975-980

[7] Huh J(2016)18F-FDG-PET is not a useful tool for end-of-treatment response evaluation in peripheral T-cell lymphomas Nucl Med Commun 37 217-842

[8] Kang CS(2014)An enhanced international prognostic index (NCCN-IPI) for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated in the rituximab era Blood 123 837-2073

[9] Kim CW(2012)Interim 18-FDG-PET/CT failed to predict the outcome in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients treated at the diagnosis with rituximab-CHOP Blood 119 2066-4322

[10] Carson KR(2012)Impact of [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography response evaluation in patients with high-tumor burden follicular lymphoma treated with immunochemotherapy: a prospective study from the Groupe d’Etudes des Lymphomes de l’Adulte and GOELAMS J Clin Oncol 30 4317-690