MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3212704623 · doi:10.1182/blood-2021-148982

Outcomes of Patients with Indolent Lymphoma Treated with Bendamustine Plus Rituximab Compared to Rituximab Plus CVP or CHOP Chemoimmunotherapy in Ontario

2021· article· en· W3212704623 on OpenAlexaffabout
Adam Suleman, Suriya Aktar, Ning Liu, Kelvin Chan, Matthew C. Cheung, Anca Prica

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreInstitute for Clinical Evaluative SciencesUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRituximabChemoimmunotherapyBendamustineCHOPInternal medicineVincristinePopulationDiffuse large B-cell lymphomaCyclophosphamideSurgeryOncologyLymphomaChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background For patients with symptomatic advanced stage indolent lymphoma, rituximab (R) was traditionally used alongside cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone (CVP), or cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP). Bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) has been found to increase progression-free survival compared to R-CVP/CHOP, albeit with possible increased toxicity. Since 2013, bendamustine has been approved for public reimbursement for treatment of indolent lymphomas in Ontario, Canada, and has become the preferred regimen. We aimed to assess survival and toxicity of patients with indolent lymphoma treated with BR compared with R-CVP/CHOP in Ontario. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort population-based study using administrative healthcare databases from Ontario, Canada. Patients were included if they had a diagnosis of indolent lymphoma and were treated with R-CVP/CHOP from 2005-2012, or with BR from 2013-2018. Patients with mantle cell lymphoma were excluded. Treatment groups were propensity score matched based on lymphoma subtype, age, sex, prior cancer diagnosis, time since diagnosis and rural or urban residence. The primary outcome of the study was overall survival (OS) from time of first treatment to death or end of study period. Secondary outcomes included toxicities during the first nine months of treatment, such as infections and secondary malignancies, associated resource utilization, and outcomes of patients treated with rituximab maintenance therapy. Cox regression models were used to assess factors associated with mortality. Results A propensity-matched cohort of 2032 patients treated with BR and 2032 treated with R-CVP/CHOP (1473 patients treated with R-CVP, 559 patients treated with R-CHOP) were included. The median age of patients was 65 years and 48% were female. A majority of patients had a diagnosis of follicular lymphoma (58.9% of patients treated with BR, 59.7% of patients treated with R-CVP/CHOP, p=0.59). Median follow-up time was 41 and 87 months for patients treated with BR and R-CVP/CHOP, respectively. BR was associated with significantly lower mortality compared to R-CVP/CHOP (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.67-0.89, p<0.01). Five-year OS was 80% and 75% for patients treated with BR and R-CVP/CHOP, respectively (Figure 1). A total of 969 patients died during a follow-up period of seven years - 331 (16.3%) treated with BR and 638 (31.4%) treated with R-CVP/CHOP. Causes of death were available in 861 patients (88.9%), shown in Table 1. Most patients in both groups died from lymphoma (66.9% treated with BR, 66.4% treated with R-CVP/CHOP, p=0.88). A Charlson comorbidity index greater than or equal to 2 was associated with increased mortality (HR 3.04, 95% CI 2.45-3.77). Treatment toxicities are listed in Table 2.Over a nine-month period after treatment initiation (induction), patients treated with BR had a mean of 0.85 emergency department visits compared to a mean of 1.01 for patients treated with R-CVP/CHOP (p<0.01). Admissions for febrile neutropenia were more common in patients treated with R-CVP/CHOP compared to BR (4.9% vs. 2.2%, p<0.01), whereas infections resulting in hospitalization were more common in patients treated with BR. (21.9% vs. 17.3%, p<0.01). A majority of patients in both cohorts received maintenance therapy (81% of patients treated with BR, 64.1% of patients treated with R-CVP/CHOP). The use of maintenance therapy with either regimen was associated with less mortality (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.14-0.19). Among patients who received maintenance therapy, patients previously treated with BR had more hospital admissions for fever (21.5% vs. 18.3%, p=0.03) and infections (37.9% vs. 31.5%, p<0.01) over a three-year period. Conclusion In these well-matched cohorts of patients with indolent lymphoma, improved OS was seen with BR compared to R-CVP/CHOP. Patients treated with BR had more infectious complications, although more episodes of febrile neutropenia were seen in patients treated with R-CVP/CHOP. The use of maintenance therapy was associated with less mortality, although patients who received maintenance therapy may have been a more fit and selected population. Higher infectious toxicities were seen for patients who received maintenance rituximab after BR. This study supports BR as the standard of care, and future prospective studies should evaluate the survival and toxicity impact of rituximab maintenance. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Prica: Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria; Kite Gilead: Honoraria.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicLymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→