4.6 Article

Long-term outcome of hyper-CVAD-R for Burkitt leukemia/lymphoma and high-grade B-cell lymphoma: focus on CNS relapse

期刊

BLOOD ADVANCES
卷 5, 期 20, 页码 3913-3918

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2021004427

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reports the long-term safety and efficacy of the hyper-CVAD-R regimen in adults with BL and HGBL, focusing on its effectiveness in preventing CNS relapse. The presence of CNS involvement and BM involvement were identified as independent predictors for relapse-free survival and overall survival. The data support the use of hyper-CVAD-R in preventing CNS relapse, especially among high-risk patients with BM or CNS involvement.
Burkitt leukemia/lymphoma (BL) and high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL) have a high incidence of central nervous system (CNS) involvement, which is associated with poor prognosis. The hyper-cyclophosphamide, vincristine, Adriamycin, and dexamethasone plus rituximab (CVAD-R) regimen includes systemic and intrathecal CNS-directed therapy to treat and prevent CNS disease. We report here the long-term safety and efficacy of the hyper-CVAD-R regimen in adults with BL and HGBL, focusing on its efficacy to prevent CNS relapse. Among 79 adults (54 BL, 25 HGBL), the median age was 44 years (25% >= 60 years old), 73% had bone marrow (BM) involvement, and 28% had CNS involvement. The complete response rate was 91%(BL 96%; HGBCL 79%; P = .16). The 5-year relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 58% and 52%, respectively. The cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) was 21% (BL 14%; HGBCL 37%, P = .06) and was associated with baseline BM (27% vs 0%; P = .02) and CNS (42% vs 12%; P < .01) involvement. In multivariate analyses, age and CNS involvement were independent predictors for OS and RFS. The 5-year CNS CIR was 6%(BL 4%; HGBL 11%; P = .31); 16% with baseline CNS involvement (P = .03). Our data support the use of hyper-CVAD-R in preventing CNS relapse, especially among high-risk patients with BM or CNS involvement.

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

4.6
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