Higher interim PET response scores were associated with worse progression-free survival, with a pooled hazard ratio of 2.83 (95% confidence interval 1.85 to 4.33), and worse overall survival, with a pooled hazard ratio of 3.12 (95% confidence interval 1.83 to 5.34). Moderate heterogeneity was observed between studies for these estimates. The association was stronger at the end of treatment.

Higher end-of-treatment Deauville scores were associated with a pooled hazard ratio of 4.20 for progression-free survival (95% confidence interval 1.75 to 10.11) and 8.26 for overall survival (95% confidence interval 3.43 to 19.91). In other words, patients whose scans still showed substantial tracer uptake after finishing therapy faced a markedly elevated risk of progression and death in the pooled data. Subgroup analyses indicated where the signal was most consistent.

In studies that used univariate analysis, the pooled hazard ratio for progression-free survival was 2.67 (95% confidence interval 1.35 to 5.29) with low heterogeneity, with an I-squared of 16.4% and P = 0.274. In the subgroup of Asian patient cohorts, the pooled hazard ratio for overall survival reached 14.23 (95% confidence interval 5.80 to 34.93) with no significant between-study heterogeneity, with an I-squared of 0.0% and P = 0.508, although this estimate comes from a narrower set of populations and should be interpreted with that geographic and methodological scope in mind. The authors note that various treatment strategies are used for different PTCL types, yet interim and end-of-treatment PET/CT responses emerged as significant predictors of prognosis across the pooled studies.

Several limitations temper the conclusions. The evidence base rests on nine studies, and the heterogeneity observed in several pooled estimates, with I-squared values ranging from about 16% to 78%, indicates that the individual studies differed in design, patient mix and analytical methods. The results demonstrate associations between scan response and survival rather than proving that changing treatment based on scan findings improves outcomes.

The authors themselves state that large prospective studies are required to confirm the prognostic value of PET/CT parameters in patients with PTCL. It is also important to distinguish what the analysis does and does not show. The Deauville score at interim and end-of-treatment timepoints is a prognostic marker, meaning it stratifies patients by likely outcome; it is not evidence that modifying therapy on the basis of the score changes survival.

Prospective trials testing response-adapted treatment strategies in PTCL would be needed to establish any such clinical benefit. Until such trials are completed, the meta-analysis provides a synthesis of the available observational evidence rather than a treatment recommendation.

Subject of Research: Prognostic value of interim and end-of-treatment 18F-FDG PET/CT Deauville scores in peripheral T-cell lymphoma

Article Title: Prognostic value of interim and end-of-treatment 18F-FDG PET/CT responses based on the Deauville five-point score in peripheral T-cell lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Article References: Huang, S., & Wen, W. (2026). Prognostic value of interim and end-of-treatment 18F-FDG PET/CT responses based on the Deauville five-point score in peripheral T-cell lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-026-17233-2

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s12885-026-17233-2

Keywords: peripheral T-cell lymphoma, PET/CT, Deauville score, 18F-FDG, meta-analysis, systematic review, prognosis, progression-free survival, overall survival, hazard ratio, BMC Cancer, lymphoma imaging