4.7 Article

Early Positron Emission Tomography Response-Adapted Treatment in Stage I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma: Final Results of the Randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 35, 期 16, 页码 1786-+

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.6394

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (Belgium)
  2. LYmphoma Study Association (France)
  3. Fondazione Italiana Limfomi (Italy)
  4. Fondation Belge contre le Cancer (Belgium)
  5. Dutch Cancer Society (the Netherlands)
  6. Institut National du Cancer (France)
  7. Assistance Publique des Hopitaux de Paris (France)
  8. Societe Francaise de Medecine Nucleaire et Imagerie Moleculaire (France)
  9. Associazone Angela Serra (Italy)
  10. van Vlissingen Lymfoom Fonds (the Netherlands)
  11. Chugai Pharmaceutical (Japan)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposePatients who receive combined modality treatment for stage I and II Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) have an excellent outcome. Early response evaluation with positron emission tomography (PET) scan may improve selection of patients who need reduced or more intensive treatments.MethodsWe performed a randomized trial to evaluate treatment adaptation on the basis of early PET (ePET) after two cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in previously untreatedaccording to European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria favorable (F) and unfavorable (U)stage I and II HL. The standard arm consisted of ABVD followed by involved-node radiotherapy (INRT), regardless of ePET result. In the experimental arm, ePET-negative patients received ABVD only (noninferiority design), whereas ePET-positive patients switched to two cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPPesc) and INRT (superiority design). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsOf 1,950 randomly assigned patients, 1,925 received an ePET361 patients (18.8%) were positive. In ePET-positive patients, 5-year PFS improved from 77.4% for standard ABVD + INRT to 90.6% for intensification to BEACOPPesc + INRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.74; P = .002). In ePET-negative patients, 5-year PFS rates in the F group were 99.0% versus 87.1% (HR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.8 to 66.1) in favor of ABVD + INRT; the U group, 92.1% versus 89.6% (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.8 to 2.5) in favor of ABVD + INRT. For both F and U groups, noninferiority of ABVD only compared with combined modality treatment could not be demonstrated.ConclusionIn stage I and II HL, PET response after two cycles of ABVD allows for early treatment adaptation. When ePET is positive after two cycles of ABVD, switching to BEACOPPesc + INRT significantly improved 5-year PFS. In ePET-negative patients, noninferiority of ABVD only could not be demonstrated: risk of relapse is increased when INRT is omitted, especially in patients in the F group.

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