4.7 Article

Severe pulmonary toxicity in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's disease treated with a modified bleomycin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone, and gemcitabine (BEACOPP) regimen is probably related to the combination of gemcitabine and bleomycin:: A report of the German Hodgkin's lymphoma Study Group

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 22, Issue 12, Pages 2424-2429

Publisher

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2004.09.114

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose To investigate a new effective, nonleukemogenic polychemotherapy regimen, BAGCOPP (bleomycin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone, gemcitabine) in a phase I/II dose-escalation study in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's disease (HD). Patients and Methods Patients in clinical stages IIB with risk factors III and IV were enrolled in this nonrandomized, multicenter trial aimed at defining the maximum-tolerated dose of gemcitabine within a modified escalated BEACOPP regimen. Gemcitabine was given at a starting dose of 800 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 4 of each cycle. Results Twenty-seven patients (eight female, 19 male) were enrolled with a median age of 33 years (range, 19 to 65 years). Due to a higher than expected hematotoxicity, the day-4 application of gemcitabine was omitted after 14 patients were included and 59 cycles were given. A total of eight patients developed lung toxicity, mainly pneumonitis (six of eight), which led to the termination of the study. With a median follow-up of 27 months, 25 patients are in continuing complete remission. Conclusion The substitution of etoposide by gemcitabine in the escalated BEACOPP schema is not feasible and leads to severe pulmonary toxicity. This toxicity is probably related to the concomittant application of gemcitabine and bleomycin. (C) 2004 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

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