4.7 Article

Clinical Features and Outcome in HIV-Associated Multicentric Castleman's Disease

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 29, 期 18, 页码 2481-2486

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.34.1909

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To describe clinical features, treatment outcomes and relapse rates in HIV-associated multicentric Castleman's disease (MCD) in a sizeable mature cohort. Methods From a prospective database, we identified 61 HIV-seropositive patients with histologically confirmed MCD (median follow-up, 4.2 years). Since 2003, 49 patients with newly diagnosed MCD have been treated with rituximab with (n = 14) or without (n = 35) etoposide. Results At MCD diagnosis, 55 (90%) of 61 patients met proposed clinical criteria defining an attack. Four patients (7%) had histologic evidence of coexisting lymphoma, and one developed lymphoma 2 years after treatment. The incidence of lymphoma is 28 per 1,000 patient years. With rituximab-based treatment, the overall survival was 94% (95% CI, 87% to 100%) at 2 years and was 90% (95% CI, 81% to 100%) at 5 years compared with 42% (95% CI, 14% to 70%) and 33% (95% CI, 6% to 60%) in 12 patients treated before introduction of rituximab (log-rank P < .001). Four of 49 rituximab-treated patients have died; three died as a result of MCD within 10 days of diagnosis, and one died as a result of lymphoma in remission of MCD. Eight of 46 patients who achieved clinical remission suffered symptomatic, histologically confirmed MCD relapse. The median time to relapse was 2 years, and all have been successfully re-treated and are alive in remission. The 2- and 5-year progression-free survival rates for all 49 patients treated with rituximab-based therapy were 85% (95% CI, 74% to 95%) and 61% (95% CI, 40% to 82%), respectively. Conclusion HIV-associated MCD is a remitting-relapsing disease. The outlook has improved dramatically in recent years with the introduction of rituximab-based therapy and yields high overall survival rates.

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