4.7 Article

Age-adjusted International Prognostic Index predicts autologous stem cell transplantation outcome for patients with relapsed or primary refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Journal

BLOOD
Volume 102, Issue 6, Pages 1989-1996

Publisher

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2002-12-3837

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P01 CA 05826, R01 CA137420] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Second-line chemotherapy followed by high-dose therapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) cures less than half of the patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Prognostic models capable of predicting outcome are essential. In 3 sequential clinical trials, conducted from January 1993 to August 2000, we treated 150 patients with relapsed or primary refractory DLBCL with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE) chemotherapy followed by HDT/ASCT for patients with chemosensitive disease. We evaluated the age-adjusted International Prognostic Index at the initiation of second-line therapy (sAAIPI) as a predictor of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). At a median follow-up of 4 years, the PFS and OS are 28% and 34% by intention to treat and 39% and 45% for only those patients with chemosensitive disease. Three risk groups with different PFS and OS were identified by the sAAIPI: low risk (0 factors), 70% and 74%; intermediate risk (1 factor), 39% and 49%; and high risk (2 or 3 factors), 16% and 18% (P < .001 for both PFS and OS). The sAAIPI also predicts the PFS and CS for patients with ICE-chemosensitive disease: low risk, 69% and 83%; intermediate risk, 46% and 55%; and high risk, 25% and 26% (P < .001 PIPS and OS). The sAAIPI predicts outcome for patients with relapsed or primary refractory DLBCL in both intent-to-treat and chemosensitive populations. This powerful prognostic instrument should be used to evaluate new treatment approaches and to compare results of different regimens.

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