4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Randomized Comparison of the Stanford V Regimen and ABVD in the Treatment of Advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma: United Kingdom National Cancer Research Institute Lymphoma Group Study ISRCTN 64141244

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 27, 期 32, 页码 5390-5396

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.3239

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0507-10154] Funding Source: researchfish
  2. Cancer Research UK [C2422/A2858] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose This multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy and toxicity of two chemotherapy regimens in advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL): the weekly alternating Stanford V and the standard, twice-weekly regimen of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). Patients and Methods Patients had stage IIB, III, or IV disease or had stages I to IIA disease with bulky disease or other adverse features. Radiotherapy was administered in both arms to sites of previous bulk (>5 cm) and to splenic deposits, although this was omitted in the latter part of the trial for patients achieving complete remission (CR) in the ABVD arm. A total of 520 patients were randomly assigned and were assessed for the primary outcome measure of progression-free survival (PFS). Five hundred patients received protocol treatment, and radiotherapy was administered to 73% in the Stanford V arm and to 53% in the ABVD arm. Results The overall response rates after completion of all treatment were 91% for Stanford V and 92% for ABVD. During a median follow-up of 4.3 years, there was no evidence of a difference in projected 5-year PFS and overall survival (OS) rates (76% and 90%, respectively, for ABVD; 74% and 92%, respectively, for Stanford V). More pulmonary toxicity was reported for ABVD, whereas other toxicities were more frequent with Stanford V. Conclusion In a large, randomized trial, the efficacies of Stanford V and ABVD were comparable when given in combination with appropriate radiotherapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据