MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2534379449 · doi:10.1182/blood.v114.22.408.408

R-CHOP with Etoposide Substituted for Doxorubicin (R-CEOP): Excellent Outcome in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma for Patients with a Contraindication to Anthracyclines.

2009· article· en· W2534379449 sur OpenAlexaff
Alden A. Moccia, Kimberly Schaff, Paul Hoskins, Richard Klasa, Kerry J. Savage, Tamara Shenkier, Randy D. Gascoyne, Joseph M. Connors, Laurie H. Sehn

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensUniversity of British ColumbiaBC Cancer Agency
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineEtoposideInternal medicineAnthracyclineVincristineRituximabDoxorubicinContraindicationPopulationSurgeryGastroenterologyChemotherapyOncologyLymphomaCyclophosphamideCancerBreast cancerPathology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 408 Introduction: R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) is the current standard of care for the treatment of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Doxorubicin has an integral role but is associated with significant toxicity. The omission of doxorubicin in patients who are frail, have poor baseline cardiac function or who have previously received anthracycline therapy may compromise outcome. However, the recent introduction of rituximab may allow for improved outcomes without the use of doxorubicin. We assessed the efficacy of substituting etoposide for doxorubicin for patients with a contraindication to anthracyclines. Patients and Methods: Treatment guidelines in British Columbia (BC) recommend the substitution of etoposide for doxorubicin in standard dose R-CHOP for patients with DLBCL who have a contraindication to anthracyclines (R-CEOP). Etoposide is administered at a dose of 50 mg/m2 IV on day 1 and 100 mg/m2 PO on days 2 and 3 of each cycle. Patients with limited stage disease receive 3-4 cycles of chemotherapy with or without radiation therapy; patients with advanced stage disease receive 6 cycles of chemotherapy. We performed a retrospective population-based analysis using the BC Cancer Agency Lymphoid Cancer and pharmacy databases and included all patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL who were treated with curative intent with R-CEOP from December 2000 to March 2009. Patients who began treatment with R-CHOP but then switched to R-CEOP (due to intolerance or because a maximum threshold of anthracycline dosing was reached) were also included in the analysis if R-CEOP was administered for more than 50% of cycles delivered. Outcome of this population was compared with a 2:1 control group treated with R-CHOP in the same time period and matched for age, clinical stage and International Prognostic Index (IPI). End points were time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS). Results: We identified 81 patients treated with R-CEOP who met the stated inclusion criteria. Clinical characteristics were as follows: median age 73 y (range 34-93), 55 (68%) male, 15 (18%) limited stage and 66 (82%) advanced stage. Adverse prognostic factors according to the IPI were as follows: 85% age > 60 y, 58% stage III/IV, 31% PS > 1, 43% elevated LDH, and 12% > 1 extranodal site. IPI score: 19 (23%) low risk, 33 (41%) low-intermediate, 18 (22%) high-intermediate, and 11 (14%) high risk. Reasons for etoposide substitution were: 71 (88%) cardiac contraindication, 7 (9%) prior exposure to anthracyclines and 3 (4%) other co-morbidities. 72 (89%) patients received rituximab as part of the treatment, 25 (31%) received partial treatment with R-CHOP and then switched to R-CEOP and 56 (69%) received no anthracycline therapy. The control group included 162 randomly chosen patients matched for age, stage and IPI score and treated with R-CHOP. At a median follow-up of 28 months (range 3-86), 33/81 (41%) R-CEOP patients had died (23 with lymphoma, 3 treatment toxicity, 7 unrelated causes). The 5-year TTP was similar for patients treated with R-CEOP compared to patients in the R-CHOP control group, 57% versus 62%, respectively (p=0.21). (Fig. 1) The 5-y OS was lower for patients receiving R-CEOP compared with the R-CHOP control group (49% versus 64%, p=0.02), reflecting the underlying co-morbidities and frailty of this population. Interestingly, the 5-y TTP and 5-y OS rates were similar for patients in the R-CEOP cohort who had received partial treatment with an anthracycline and those who had received no anthracycline treatment (p=0.49 and p=0.77, respectively). Conclusions: A significant proportion of patients with DLBCL who are unable to receive anthracycline-based therapy can be cured with the etoposide-substituted regimen R-CEOP. R-CEOP is well tolerated even by patients with numerous co-morbidities. Moreover, the outcome of these patients does not appear to be significantly different compared to a similar population treated with standard R-CHOP. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,003
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,261
Écart entre enseignants0,252 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai non randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations47
Publié2009
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetLymphoma Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207