Early failure of frontline rituximab-containing chemo-immunotherapy in diffuse large B cell lymphoma does not predict futility of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation.
Early failure of frontline rituximab-containing chemo-immunotherapy in diffuse large B cell lymphoma does not predict futility of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.bbmt.2014.06.036
复制
发表时间：
2014-11
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Saber, Wael
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hamadani, Mehdi;Hari, Parameswaran N.;Zhang, Ying;Carreras, Jeanette;Akpek, Goerguen;Aljurf, Mahmoud D.;Ayala, Ernesto;Bachanova, Veronika;Chen, Andy I.;Chen, Yi-Bin;Costa, Luciano J.;Fenske, Timothy S.;Freytes, Cesar O.;Ganguly, Siddhartha;Hertzberg, Mark S.;Holmberg, Leona A.;Inwards, David J.;Kamble, Rammurti T.;Kanfer, Edward J.;Lazarus, Hillard M.;Marks, David I.;Nishihori, Taiga;Olsson, Richard;Reddy, Nishitha M.;Rizzieri, David A.;Savani, Bipin N.;Solh, Melhem;Vose, Julie M.;Wirk, Baldeep;Maloney, David G.;Smith, Sonali M.;Montoto, Silvia;Saber, Wael
关键词：
弥漫性大b细胞淋巴瘤（DLBCL）患者在接受一线利妥昔单抗免疫化疗后1年内复发的不良预后引发了关于自体移植（auto-HCT）在这种情况下的作用的争议。我们根据从诊断到复发的时间，比较了2000年至2011年两个队列中化疗敏感的DLBCL患者的auto-HCT结果。早期利妥昔单抗失败（ERF）队列包括原发性难治性疾病患者或初次诊断1年内首次复发的患者。将ERF队列与初次诊断后1年内复发的患者（晚期利妥昔单抗失效[LRF]队列）进行比较。ERF组和LRF组分别包括300例和216例患者。ERF组与LRF组的3年非复发死亡率（NRM）、进展/复发、无进展生存率（PFS）和总生存率（OS）分别为9% (95%CI 6-13) vs 9% （95%CI 5-13）、47% (95%CI 41-52) vs 39% （95%CI 33-46）、44% (95%CI 38-50) vs 52% （95%CI 45-59）和50% (95 CI 44-56) vs 67% （95%CI 60-74）。在多变量分析中，ERF与较高的NRM无关（相对风险（RR） 1.31, p=0.34）。在auto-HCT后的前9个月内，ERF队列治疗失败（进展/复发或死亡）（RR 2.08, p<0.001）和总死亡率（RR 3.75, p<0.001）的风险较高。在此期间之后，ERF组和LRF组的PFS和OS没有显著差异。尽管有ERF(3年PFS 44%)， Auto-HCT为相当大一部分DLBCL提供了持久的疾病控制，并且无论疾病复发的时间如何，Auto-HCT仍然是化疗敏感的DLBCL的标准治疗方法。
The poor prognosis of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients relapsing within 1-year of initial diagnosis after first-line rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy has created controversy about the role of autologous transplantation (auto-HCT) in this setting. We compared auto-HCT outcomes of chemosensitive DLBCL patients between 2000 and 2011 in two cohorts based on time to relapse from diagnosis. The early rituximab failure (ERF) cohort consisted of patients with primary refractory disease or those with first relapse within 1-year of initial diagnosis. The ERF cohort was compared with those relapsing >1-year after initial diagnosis (Late Rituximab Failure [LRF] cohort). ERF and LRF cohorts included 300 and 216 patients, respectively. Non-relapse mortality (NRM), progression/relapse, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of ERF vs. LRF cohorts at 3-years were 9% (95%CI 6–13) vs. 9% (95%CI 5–13), 47% (95%CI 41–52) vs. 39% (95%CI 33–46), 44% (95%CI 38–50) vs. 52% (95%CI 45–59) and 50% (95 CI 44–56) vs. 67% (95%CI 60–74), respectively. On multivariate analysis, ERF was not associated with higher NRM (relative risk (RR) 1.31, p=0.34). ERF cohort had a higher risk of treatment failure (progression/relapse or death) (RR 2.08, p<0.001) and overall mortality (RR 3.75, p<0.001) within the first 9 months post auto-HCT. Beyond this period, PFS and OS were not significantly different between ERF and LRF cohorts. Auto-HCT provides durable disease control to a sizeable subset of DLBCL despite ERF (3-year PFS 44%), and remains the standard-of-care in chemosensitive DLBCL regardless of the timing of disease relapse.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Lazarus, Hillard M.;Zhang, Mei-Jie;Carreras, Jeanette;Hayes-Lattin, Brandon M.;Ataergin, Asli Selmin;Bitran, Jacob D.;Bolwell, Brian J.;Freytes, Cesar O.;Gale, Robert Peter;Goldstein, Steven C.;Hale, Gregory A.;Inwards, David J.;Klumpp, Thomas R.;Marks, David I.;Maziarz, Richard T.;McCarthy, Philip L.;Pavlovsky, Santiago;Rizzo, J. Douglas;Shea, Thomas C.;Schouten, Harry C.;Slavin, Shimon;Winter, Jane N.;van Besien, Koen;Vose, Julie M.;Hari, Parameswaran N.
通讯作者：
Hari, Parameswaran N.
DOI：
10.1182/asheducation-2012.1.410
发表时间：
2012-12-01
期刊：
HEMATOLOGY-AMERICAN SOCIETY HEMATOLOGY EDUCATION PROGRAM
影响因子：
--
作者：
Gisselbrecht, Christian
通讯作者：
Gisselbrecht, Christian
影响因子：
4.3
作者：
Gascoyne, Randy D.;Moskowitz, Craig;Shea, Thomas C.
通讯作者：
Shea, Thomas C.
影响因子：
20.3
作者：
Matasar, Matthew J.;Czuczman, Myron S.;Moskowitz, Craig H.
通讯作者：
Moskowitz, Craig H.
影响因子：
64.8
作者：
Alizadeh, AA;Eisen, MB;Staudt, LM
通讯作者：
Staudt, LM