Figure 1
Figure 1. EFS and OS of patients with and without extralymphatic craniofacial involvement. For the entire population (A), EFS (P < .001; left) was significantly and OS was almost significantly (P = .052; right) better for 290 patients with than for 3865 patients without craniofacial involvement. A similar picture emerged from the analysis of patients treated without rituximab (B: 207 patients with and 2607 patients without craniofacial involvement), whereas in patients treated with rituximab (C: 83 patients with and 1258 patients without craniofacial involvement), the prognostic advantage of patients with extralymphatic craniofacial involvement was not observed anymore. Gray dashed curves represent patients with and black curves represent patients without extranodal craniofacial involvement.

EFS and OS of patients with and without extralymphatic craniofacial involvement. For the entire population (A), EFS (P < .001; left) was significantly and OS was almost significantly (P = .052; right) better for 290 patients with than for 3865 patients without craniofacial involvement. A similar picture emerged from the analysis of patients treated without rituximab (B: 207 patients with and 2607 patients without craniofacial involvement), whereas in patients treated with rituximab (C: 83 patients with and 1258 patients without craniofacial involvement), the prognostic advantage of patients with extralymphatic craniofacial involvement was not observed anymore. Gray dashed curves represent patients with and black curves represent patients without extranodal craniofacial involvement.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal