4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Role of hematotoxicity and sex in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma: An analysis from the German Hodgkin Study Group

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 31, Pages 8003-8011

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.205.60

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose Several scores have described sex as a prognostic factor in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). However, little is known how sex-specific factors influence treatment outcome. We systematically investigated sex differences with regard to pretreatment characteristics and therapy-related variables, and examined their influence on the outcome of HL patients. Patients and Methods This analysis comprises of 4,626 HL patients of all prognostic risk groups who were enrolled onto the multicenter studies HD4 to HD9 of the German Hodgkin Study Group. At 5.5 years, 2,050 female and 2,576 male patients were analyzed. Results Male and female patients had similar prognostic factors. There was more acute chemotherapy-related hematotoxicity in women, especially more severe leucopenia (WHO grade 3/4, 69.9% female and 55.2% male; P < .0001). Importantly, this did not translate into more infections. Female patients had similar response rates but fewer relapses and deaths, leading to a significantly better freedom from treatment failure (FFTF; at 66 months, 81% female [95% CI, 79% to 82%] and 74% male [95% CI, 72% to 76%]). Severe leucopenia during chemotherapy was strongly associated with better FFTF, both for males and females. In addition, when only those patients who developed severe leucopenia within the first two cycles of chemotherapy were included, the factor maintained its protective role. Conclusion The protective role of severe leucopenia suggests the testing of a more individualized therapy. In future trials, this therapy may be tailored in a response-adapted manner depending on the individual toxicity profile within the first cycles.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available