Safety and Efficacy of Dose Attentuated R-CHOP Chemotherapy for Treatment of Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma in the Very Elderly: A Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is the most common subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and is frequently diagnosed in elderly patients. Elderly patients with DLBCL are known to have worse outcomes than younger patients with the same disease, in part due to comorbidities and poor performance status that may decrease their ability to tolerate treatment. A recent phase II study (Lancet Oncology 2011;12:460-8) demonstrated that patients with DLBCL who were older than 80 years of age had excellent tolerability while still maintaining efficacy when treated with an attenuated dose of R-CHOP called “R-mini-CHOP”. This paper prompted a change in treatment policy of very elderly patients with DLBCL at the London Regional Cancer Program. In November 2011, we began treating all DLBCL patients > 80 (and select patients aged 70-79 with significant comorbidities) with the R-mini-CHOP regimen rather than with standard R-CHOP or a ‘randomly dose-attenuated version’ of R-CHOP, which had been our practice prior to the policy change. Objective: This quality assurance study was undertaken in order to monitor and ensure the safety and efficacy of this practice change. Methods: Data was collected prospectively on all elderly patients with DLBCL who were initiated on R-mini-CHOP between November 2011 and January 2013. A retrospective chart review was also performed on patients > 80 treated at our centre in the preceding 10 years, after R-CHOP became standard treatment in elderly patients with DLBCL. We used 16 patients > 80 who received full dose R-CHOP between January 2010 and November 2011 as a historical control group for our prospective cohort. Results: Since November 2011, 17 patients (median age 81, range 71-90) have been treated with R-mini-CHOP and were enrolled in this quality assurance study. All 17 patients had stage III or IV disease. In contrast, only 6/16 patients in the retrospective group were advanced stage (p=0.00004). 12/17 R-mini-CHOP patients (70.6%) had an ECOG > 1, vs. 7/16 R-CHOP patients (43.8%, p=0.070). No dose modifications have been required in patients on R-mini-CHOP. 11/16 patients on R-CHOP underwent dose reductions due to side effects of chemotherapy. The majority of patients in both cohorts received primary prophylaxis with neupogen/neulasta. Five patients remain on R-mini-CHOP, all showing evidence of clinical response. Follow-up is too short to report on PFS or OS, but overall response rate thus far is 10/12 (83%) with 7 CRs (58.3%) and 3 PRs (25%). This compares favorably to the retrospective group who had an ORR of 13/16 (81%, p=0.30), 7 CRs (43.8%) and 6 PR’s (37.5%). One patient in each group had stable disease at the end of treatment. One mini-R-CHOP patient progressed on treatment and ultimately died of lymphoma. In the retrospective cohort, 4 deaths occurred secondary to infectious complications of chemotherapy during treatment period. C onclusions: Results with R-mini-CHOP have been encouraging so far. Despite the more aggressive disease (higher stage, inferior ECOG) in our R-mini-CHOP patients compared to the historical controls treated with R-CHOP, similar response rates are being achieved, with fewer adverse effects and better tolerability. Ongoing enrollment and longer follow-up will further help define the role of R-mini-CHOP in the very elderly patient population. Updated results with longer followup will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".