The International Atomic Energy Agency sponsored a large, multinational, prospective study to further define PET for risk stratification of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and to test the hypothesis that international biological diversity or diversity of healthcare systems may influence the kinetics of treatment response as assessed by interim PET (I-PET). Methods: Cancer centers in Brazil, Chile, Hungary, India, Italy, the Philippines, South Korea, and Thailand followed a common protocol based on treatment with R-CHOP (cyclophosphamide, hydroxyadriamycin, vincristine, prednisolone with rituximab), with I-PET after 2–3 cycles of chemotherapy and at the end of chemotherapy scored visually. Results: Two-year survivals for all 327 patients (median follow-up, 35 mo) were 79% (95% confidence interval [CI], 74%–83%) for event-free survival (EFS) and 86% (95% CI, 81%–89%) for overall survival (OS). Two hundred ten patients (64%) were I-PET–negative, and 117 (36%) were I-PET–positive. Two-year EFS was 90% (95% CI, 85%–93%) for I-PET–negative and 58% (95% CI, 48%–66%) for I-PET–positive, with a hazard ratio of 5.31 (95% CI, 3.29–8.56). Two-year OS was 93% (95% CI, 88%–96%) for I-PET–negative and 72% (95% CI, 63%–80%) for I-PET–positive, with a hazard ratio of 3.86 (95% CI, 2.12–7.03). On sequential monitoring, 192 of 312 (62%) patients had complete response at both I-PET and end-of-chemotherapy PET, with an EFS of 97% (95% CI, 92%–98%); 110 of these with favorable clinical indicators had an EFS of 98% (95% CI, 92%–100%). In contrast, the 107 I-PET–positive cases segregated into 2 groups: 58 (54%) achieved PET-negative complete remission at the end of chemotherapy (EFS, 86%; 95% CI, 73%–93%); 46% remained PET-positive (EFS, 35%; 95% CI, 22%–48%). Heterogeneity analysis found no significant difference between countries for outcomes stratified by I-PET. Conclusion: This large international cohort delivers 3 novel findings: treatment response assessed by I-PET is comparable across disparate healthcare systems, secondly a negative I-PET findings together with good clinical status identifies a group with an EFS of 98%, and thirdly a single I-PET scan does not differentiate chemoresistant lymphoma from complete response and cannot be used to guide risk-adapted therapy.

The past decade has seen the development of a network of specialist teenage and young adult cancer centres across the UK. These provide expertise in treatment across the spectrum of malignancies that occur in young adults, supported by multi-disciplinary teams that are able to provide the psycho-social support so necessary for this age group, and in a hospital environment that encourages social interaction while delivering expert medical care. The development of teenage and young adult (TYA) cancer as a specialty gained establishment backing in 2005, through NICE guidance which mandated that all 16- to 24-year-olds should be referred to specialist TYA cancer centres. The foundation of this achievement was set by a handful of committed individuals and the Teenage Cancer Trust, a charity that has acted as patient advocate and political pressure group, and that has brought to public attention the need for change while providing support for specialist staff and hospitals.

Addressing the global burden of cancer, understanding its diverse biology, and promoting appropriate prevention and treatment strategies around the world has become a priority for the United Nations and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the WHO, and International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The IAEA sponsored an international prospective cohort study to better understand biology, treatment response, and outcomes of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in low and middle-income countries across five UN-defined geographical regions. We report an analysis of biological variation in DLBCL across seven ethnic and environmentally diverse populations. In this cohort of 136 patients treated to a common protocol, we demonstrate significant biological differences between countries, characterized by a validated prognostic gene expression score (p < .0001), but International Prognostic Index (IPI)-adjusted survivals in all participating countries were similar. We conclude that DLBCL treatment outcomes in these populations can be benchmarked to international standards, despite biological heterogeneity.

Treating patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) remains a challenge, with a remission rate of 75% at 2 years from diagnosis. The International Prognostic Index (IPI) [1] and molecular characterization [2] are employed in the stratification and relapse prediction. Additionally, ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) and computed tomography (CT) have now become part of standard care in differentiating metabolic activity of the disease from fibrosis or necrosis [3]. Early optimism that the speed of response to treatment, as indicated by an interim-PET (iPET) scan after 2–3 cycles of chemotherapy, might reliably predict cure has not been fulfilled [4].