I used to be a vocal skeptic of Hans and a key GEP fan, some say as an OG for GEP. I used to lament Hans IHC as the only tool available for my patients, when many trials used GEP instead. But I have been surprised by learning how IHC has dramatically improved over the last decade or so with availability of standardized antibody clones, use of auto strainers, and interpretation consistency. How was I convinced? We did a systematic meta-analysis of >2200 patients from 19 studies. We used the PRISMA diagnostic test accuracy framework for comparing Hans to GEP. library.ehaweb.org/eha/2026/… Remarkably, this analysis now clearly shows that Hans is consistently non-inferior to GEP across current modern studies at a 10% NI margin for Accuracy, Precision, and Specificity. This solid performance of Hans IHC is very much in line with current CAP benchmarks for diagnostic tests, and within the margins of NanoString GEP using FFPE vs original frozen GEP as the original elusive gold standard. Long live Hans as the best currently available SOC for COO across the globe.

Thrilled to share our new study describing distinct subtypes of #HodgkinLymphoma #cHL out today @Nature. #lymsm 1/15 nature.com/articles/s41586-0… PDF link at bottom of this thread