High-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (PBSCT) has become the standard treatment for patients with relapsed Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL). The intensity of treatment ...needed is unclear. This European intergroup study evaluated the impact of sequential high-dose chemotherapy (SHDCT) before myeloablative therapy.
Patients with histologically confirmed, relapsed HL were treated with two cycles of dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatin, and those without disease progression were randomly assigned. In the standard arm (A), patients received myeloablative therapy with carmustine, BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan) followed by PBSCT. Patients in the experimental arm (B) also received sequential cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and etoposide in high-doses before BEAM. Freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) was the primary end point. Remission rates, overall survival (OS), and toxicity of treatment were secondary end points.
From a total of 284 patients included, 241 responding patients were randomly assigned after two cycles of dexamethasone, cytarabine, and cisplatinum. Patients treated in arm B had longer treatment duration and experienced more toxicity and protocol violations (P < .05). Mortality was similar in both arms (20% and 18%). With a median observation time of 42 months, there was no significant difference in terms of FFTF (P = .56) and OS (P = .82) between arms. FFTF at 3 years was 62% (95% CI, 56% to 68%) and OS was 80% (95% CI, 75% to 85%). Patients with stage IV, early relapse, multiple relapse, anemia, or B symptoms had a higher risk of recurrence (P < .001).
Compared with conventional high-dose chemotherapy, additional SHDCT is associated with more adverse effects and does not improve the prognosis of patients with relapsed HL.
Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a disease predominantly affecting elderly patients with bad prognosis. Recently, a number of new agents have been shown to be active in this disease. This article ...reviews this data from the standpoint of everyday practice.
Front-line regimens combining rituximab with CHOP, cytarabine, bendamustine or lenalidomide, frequently followed by rituximab maintenance, remain the standard. Choice depends on the aggressiveness of the disease, patient characteristics and local availability. BTK inhibitors have emerged as most important agents for the treatment of relapsed/refractory disease, but many other options exist, including rituximab, chemotherapy, immunomodulators, bortezomib and venetoclax that can be used in combination and sequentially. In frail patients, combinations of rituximab with low-intensity chemotherapy, immunomodulators and BTK inhibitors can be useful but care must be taken to avoid additive drug toxicities and interaction.
Recent advances in treatment of MCL enable the delivery of multiple lines of therapy resulting in prolonged survival in most patients. Results of treatment of blastoid MCL with high Ki67 remain unsatisfactory and are an unmet medical need.
(1) Background: This study aimed to examine the difference in efficacy and toxicity of involved-field (IFRT) and involved-site radiotherapy (ISRT) fields in infradiaphragmal aggressive non-Hodgkin ...lymphoma patients. (2) Methods: In total, 140 patients with infradiaphragmal lymphoma treated between 2003 and 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. There were 69 patients (49%) treated with IFRT, and 71 (51%) patients treated with ISRT. The median dose in the IFRT group was 36 Gy, (range 4-50.4 Gy), and in the ISRT group, it was 30 Gy (range 4-48 Gy). (3) Results: The median follow-up in the IFRT group was 133 months (95% CI 109-158), and in the ISRT group, it was 48 months (95% CI 39-57). In the IFRT group, locoregional control was 67%, and in the ISRT group, 73%. The 2- and 5-year overall survival (OS) in the IFRT and ISRT groups were 79% and 69% vs. 80% and 70%, respectively (
= 0.711). The 2- and 5-year event-free survival (EFS) in the IFRT and ISRT groups were 73% and 68% vs. 77% and 70%, respectively (
= 0.575). Acute side effects occurred in 43 (31%) patients, which is more frequent in the IFRT group, 34 (39%) patients, than in the ISRT group, 9 (13%) patients,
> 0.01. Late toxicities occurred more often in the IFRT group of patients, (10/53) 19%, than in the ISRT group of patients, (2/37) 5%, (
= 0.026). (4) Conclusions: By reducing the radiotherapy volume and the doses in the treatment of infradiaphragmatic fields, treatment with significantly fewer acute and long-term side effects is possible. At the same time, efficiency and local disease control are not compromised.
Purpose
Data on efficacy and toxicity of infradiaphragmal radiotherapy fields in lymphoma patients are scarce. We therefore performed this retrospective study to analyse our experience with ...radiotherapy exclusively to infradiaphragmal fields.
Materials and methods
we retrospectively evaluated 101 patients treated between 2003 and 2014. Median dose was 36 Gy, range 4 to 54 Gy. Medium dose per fraction was 2 Gy, range 1.5 to 7 Gy.
Results
After a median follow-up of 66 months (range 1–211 months), we observed lymphoma recurrence in 38 patients (38%), five in the RT field and 33 out-of-field. Recurrences were significantly more frequent in the salvage group (17 out-of-field and 4 in-field in 31 patients) than in adjuvant group (16 out-of-field and 1 in-field in 70 patients;
p
< 0.001).
The 2-, 5- and 10-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 62%, 56% and 54%. The 2-, 5- and 10-year overall survival (OS) rates for the entire group of patients are 73%, 60% and 54%, respectively. Acute side effects occurred in 43 (43%) patients, most frequent gastrointestinal in 26 (26%) patients. Late side effects occurred in 12 (12%) of all patients, 6 of 23 (26%) followed up for more than 10 years. Six patients developed secondary cancers, four gastrointestinal disturbances, two diabetes mellitus and three renal failure.
Conclusion
Radiotherapy is an effective and safe treatment option for patients with infradiaphragmatic lymphoma providing excellent local disease control with minimal late toxicity. Infradiaphragmatic lymphoma localization should not be regarded as a contraindication for use of radiotherapy. However, patients should be monitored for a secondary malignancy.
Currently, there is no consensus regarding optimal front-line treatment for younger high-risk patients with large B cell lymphoma. American recommendations list only R-CHOP as standard, while ...European also include R-ACVBP and R-CHOEP14. We have been routinely using the latter regimen at our institution since 2011 and performed this retrospective real-life single-center study to analyze outcomes. Between September 2011 and April 2019, 66 newly diagnosed patients aged 18 to 60 years with B-large cell lymphoma and high-risk age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score were scheduled to receive 6 or 8 cycles of bi-weekly chemoimmunotherapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, etoposide, steroids, and rituximab (R-CHOEP14). After a median follow-up of 4.7 years, the estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 87% (95% CI 80–96%) and 3-year overall survival 90% (95% CI 83–98%). Grade ≥ 3 hematological side effects occurred in 83% and infectious in 41% of patients; one patient died of toxicity. Grade ≥ 2 cardiac toxicity occurred in 21% of patients, more frequently than previously reported. The cumulative 5-year risk of congestive heart failure with all-cause mortality as the competing risk was 17%. R-CHOEP14 is a very effective and manageable regimen for younger high-risk patients with B-large cell lymphoma, but the risk of cardiotoxicity warrants further investigations.
: eBEACOPP is the most effective chemotherapy regimen for younger patients with early unfavorable (EU) and advanced-stage (AS) Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), albeit with significant toxicities. The ...14-day/cycle prednisone course contributes to side effects, including osteoarticular events like avascular bone necrosis (AVN). Our center has been using eBEACOPP since 2009 for AS and 2014 for EU patients. In 2016, we reduced prednisone treatment to 7-10 days to lessen AVN risk. We analyzed the effects of this approach.
: We retrospectively collected data on patients who received at least two cycles of eBEACOPP for first-line HL treatment.
: A total of 162 patients (33 EU, 129 AS) were included. Their median age was 31 (range 19-59 years), and 88 were males. A total of 94 patients received full corticosteroid courses, and 68 received reduced corticosteroid courses. The overall response rate (ORR) was 98%. Different corticosteroid dosings had no significant effect on ORR, febrile neutropenia episodes, or hospital admissions. After a median follow-up (mFU) of 58 months, the 5yPFS for the entire cohort was 98% vs. 95% for the standard course vs. the short corticosteroids course, respectively (
= 0.37), while the 5yOS was 98% vs. 99% for the standard course vs. short corticosteroids course, respectively (
= 0.87). In AS patients intended to be treated with six eBEACOPP cycles, 5yPFS and 5yOS were 100% vs. 97% and 100% vs. 99% for standard vs. short corticosteroid courses, respectively (
= 0.56 and
= 0.17). In EU patients, 5yPFS was 97% (standard) vs. 95% (short) (
= 0.98) and 5yOS 100% vs. 93.3% (
= 0.87). Osteoarticular events were numerically lower in patients receiving the shorter prednisone course, both in the whole cohort and in the subgroup of patients treated with six cycles of eBEACOPP, but this difference failed to reach statistical significance.
: eBEACOPP provides excellent and durable first-line disease control. Shortening the corticosteroid course does not compromise efficacy, potentially reducing toxicity. However, longer follow-ups and larger studies are needed for confirmation.
PDF
