Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de Hodgkin , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Bleomicina/uso terapéutico , Ciclofosfamida/uso terapéutico , Doxorrubicina/uso terapéutico , Etopósido/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/diagnóstico por imagen , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Linfocitos , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Prednisona/uso terapéutico , Procarbazina , Vincristina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Background: Bone marrow (BM) involvement defines advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma and thus has impact on the assignment to treatment. Our aim was to evaluate whether the established BM biopsy may be omitted in patients if 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (PET) scanning is carried out during staging. Patients and methods: Our analysis set consisted of 832 Hodgkin lymphoma patients from the German Hodgkin Study Group trials HD16, HD17, and HD18 who underwent both PET scanning and BM biopsy before treatment. All PET studies were centrally reviewed and BM was categorized as showing focal involvement or not. Results: Taking BM biopsy as reference standard, baseline PET showed a negative predictive value of 99.9% [95% confidence interval (CI) 99.2% to 100%] with true-negative results in 702 of 703 cases. The sensitivity of PET for detecting BM involvement was 95.0% (95% CI 75.1% to 99.9%) as it could identify 19 out of 20 patients with positive BM biopsy. Moreover, PET found 110 additional subjects with focal BM lesions who would have been considered negative by biopsy. Conclusions: When compared with BM biopsy, PET was able to detect focal BM lesions in a large number of additional patients. This indicates that conventional BM biopsy may substantially underestimate the actual incidence of BM involvement. Given the high negative predictive value, baseline PET scanning can safely be used to exclude BM involvement in Hodgkin lymphoma. BM biopsy should be considered only in such patients in whom PET-detected lesions lead to a change of treatment protocol. Registered trials: The trials included in this analysis were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: HD16-NCT00736320, HD17-NCT01356680, and HD18-NCT00515554.
Asunto(s)
Médula Ósea/patología , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/diagnóstico , Tomografía Computarizada por Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Biopsia/normas , Médula Ósea/diagnóstico por imagen , Ensayos Clínicos Fase III como Asunto , Conjuntos de Datos como Asunto , Femenino , Fluorodesoxiglucosa F18/administración & dosificación , Alemania , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/patología , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Estudios Prospectivos , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estándares de Referencia , Adulto JovenAsunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales/uso terapéutico , Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia , Terapia Recuperativa , Tasa de Supervivencia , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In early-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), treatment according to the early favorable or unfavorable subgroup is guided by staging definitions, which differ between various study groups worldwide. We analyzed risk factors used in different international staging systems and their impact on the outcome of early-stage HL patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In 1173 early-stage HL patients treated homogenously within the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) trials HD10 and HD11, the impact of three staging systems developed and used by the GHSG, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) in discriminating risk groups for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed and the relevance of their single risk factors was investigated. RESULTS: All the three staging systems defined an unfavorable risk group out of early-stage patients of comparable size (56%, 55%, and 57%), having a significantly poorer PFS and OS as compared with the corresponding favorable group; 5-year differences between early favorable and early unfavorable in terms of PFS were 9.4% (HR 2.61, 95% CI 1.74-3.91), 6.7% (HR 2.10, 95% CI 1.41-3.13), and 8.6% (HR 2.14, 95% CI 1.45-3.16) with the GHSG, EORTC, and NCCN definition, respectively. Sensitivity was high for all systems (84%, 79%, and 83%); however, there was a low specificity with high rates of false-positive results (1-specificity 54%, 53%, and 55%, respectively). Models of high sensitivity included risk factors associated with large tumor burden and high tumor activity. Most risk factors for tumor-specific end points were also predictive of OS. CONCLUSIONS: Differentiating between a favorable and an unfavorable risk group has significant impact on PFS and OS in early-stage HL patients in the modern treatment era. Risk-adapted treatment strategies using new risk factors with higher specificity are needed.
Asunto(s)
Enfermedad de Hodgkin/patología , Adolescente , Adulto , Quimioradioterapia , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/mortalidad , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/terapia , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Treatment options for patients with nonbulky stage IA-IIA Hodgkin lymphoma include combined modality therapy (CMT) using doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) plus involved-field radiation therapy (IFRT), and chemotherapy with ABVD alone. There are no mature randomized data comparing ABVD with CMT using modern radiation techniques. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Using German Hodgkin Study Group HD10/HD11 and NCIC Clinical Trials Group HD.6 databases, we identified 588 patients who met mutually inclusive eligibility criteria from the preferred arms of HD10 or 11 (n = 406) and HD.6 (n = 182). We evaluated time to progression (TTP), progression-free (PFS) and overall survival, including in three predefined exploratory subset analyses. RESULTS: With median follow-up of 91 (HD10/11) and 134 (HD.6) months, respective 8-year outcomes were for TTP, 93% versus 87% [hazard ratio (HR) 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.24-0.78]; for PFS, 89% versus 86% (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.42-1.18) and for overall survival, 95% versus 95% (HR 1.09, 95% CI 0.49-2.40). In the exploratory subset analysis including HD10 eligible patients who achieved complete response (CR) or unconfirmed complete response (CRu) after two cycles of ABVD, 8-year PFS was 87% (HD10) versus 95% (HD.6) (HR 2.8; 95% CI 0.64-12.5) and overall survival 96% versus 100%. In contrast, among those without CR/CRu after two cycles of ABVD, 8-year PFS was 88% versus 74% (HR 0.35; 95% CI 0.16-0.79) and overall survival 95% versus 91%, respectively (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.12-1.44). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with nonbulky stage IA-IIA Hodgkin lymphoma, CMT provides better disease control than ABVD alone, especially among those not achieving complete response after two cycles of ABVD. Within the follow-up duration evaluated, overall survivals were similar. Longer follow-up is required to understand the implications of radiation and chemotherapy-related late effects. CLINICAL TRIALS: The trials included in this analysis were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov: HD10 - NCT00265018, HD11 - NCT00264953, HD.6 - NCT00002561.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Bleomicina/uso terapéutico , Quimioradioterapia , Dacarbazina/uso terapéutico , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Doxorrubicina/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Hodgkin/mortalidad , Humanos , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vinblastina/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In the HD14 trial, 2×BEACOPPescalated+2×ABVD (2+2) has improved the primary outcome. Compared with 4×ABVD, this benefit might be compromised by more infertility in women. Therefore, we analyzed gonadal function and fertility. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women≤45 years in ongoing remission at least 1 year after therapy were included. Hormone parameters, menopausal symptoms, measures to preserve fertility, menstrual cycle, pregnancies, and offspring were evaluated. RESULTS: Three hundred and thirty one of 579 women addressed participated (57.2%) and 263 per-protocol treated patients qualified (A=ABVD: 137, B=2+2: 126, mean time after therapy 42 and 43 months, respectively). Regular menstrual cycle after treatment (A: 87%, B: 83%) and time to recovery (≤12 months) were not different. Follicle-stimulating hormone and anti-Muellerian hormone were significantly better in arm A. However, pregnancies after therapy favored arm B (A: 15%, B: 26%, P=0.043) and motherhood rates were equivalent to the German normal population. Multivariate analysis revealed prophylactic use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues as highly significant prognostic factor for preservation of fertility (odds ratio=12.87, P=0.001). Severe menopausal symptoms were frequent in women≥30 years (A: 21%, B: 25%). CONCLUSIONS: Hormonal levels after 2+2 indicate a reduced ovarian reserve. However, 2+2 in combination with GnRH analogues does not compromise fertility within the evaluated observation time.