4.7 Review

Long-Term Complications of Lymphoma and Its Treatment

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 29, 期 14, 页码 1885-1892

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.8427

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a result of therapeutic advances, there is a growing population of survivors of both Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). A thorough understanding of the late effects of cancer and its treatment, including the risk of developing a second malignancy and non-neoplastic complications, most notably cardiac disease, is essential for the proper long-term follow-up care of these patients. For HL survivors cured in the past 5 decades, a large body of literature describes a range of long-term effects, many of which are related to extent of treatment. These studies form the basis for many of the follow-up recommendations developed for HL survivors. As HL therapy continues to evolve, however, with an emphasis toward treatment reduction, in particular for early-stage disease, it will be important to rigorously observe this new generation of patients long term to document and quantify late effects associated with modern treatments. Although data on late effects after NHL therapy have recently emerged, the formulation of structured follow-up plans for this heterogeneous group of survivors is challenging, given the highly variable natural history, treatments, and overall prognosis. However, the chemotherapy and radiation therapy approaches for some types of NHL are similar to that for HL; thus, some of the follow-up guidelines for patients with HL may also be transferrable to selected survivors of NHL. Additional work focused on treatment-related complications after NHL will facilitate the development of follow-up programs, as well as treatment refinements to minimize late effects in patients with various types of NHL. J Clin Oncol 29: 1885-1892. (C) 2011 by American Society of Clinical Oncology

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