TY - JOUR
T1 - Early Positron Emission Tomography Response-Adapted Treatment in Stage I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma
T2 - Final Results of the Randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial
AU - André, Marc P E
AU - Federico, Massimo
AU - Girinsky, Theodore
AU - Reman, Oumédaly
AU - Fortpied, Catherine
AU - Gotti, Manuel
AU - Casasnovas, Olivier
AU - Brice, Pauline
AU - Van Der Maazen, Richard
AU - Re, Alessandro
AU - Edeline, Veronique
AU - Fermé, Christophe
AU - van Imhoff, Gustaaf W
AU - Merli, Francesco
AU - Bouabdallah, Reda
AU - Sebban, Catherine J
AU - Specht, Lena
AU - Stamatoullas, Aspasia
AU - Delarue, Richard
AU - Fiaccadori, Valeria
AU - Bellei, Monica
AU - Raveloarivahy, Tiana
AU - Versari, Annibale
AU - Hutchings, Martin
AU - Meignan, Michel
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - Purpose Patients who receive combined modality treatment for stage I and II Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) have an excellent outcome. Early response evaluation with positron emission tomography (PET) scan may improve selection of patients who need reduced or more intensive treatments. Methods We performed a randomized trial to evaluate treatment adaptation on the basis of early PET (ePET) after two cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in previously untreated-according to European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria favorable (F) and unfavorable (U)-stage I and II HL. The standard arm consisted of ABVD followed by involved-node radiotherapy (INRT), regardless of ePET result. In the experimental arm, ePET-negative patients received ABVD only (noninferiority design), whereas ePET-positive patients switched to two cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPPesc) and INRT (superiority design). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Of 1,950 randomly assigned patients, 1,925 received an ePET-361 patients (18.8%) were positive. In ePET-positive patients, 5-year PFS improved from 77.4% for standard ABVD + INRT to 90.6% for intensification to BEACOPPesc + INRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.74; P = .002). In ePET-negative patients, 5-year PFS rates in the F group were 99.0% versus 87.1% (HR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.8 to 66.1) in favor of ABVD + INRT; the U group, 92.1% versus 89.6% (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.8 to 2.5) in favor of ABVD + INRT. For both F and U groups, noninferiority of ABVD only compared with combined modality treatment could not be demonstrated. Conclusion In stage I and II HL, PET response after two cycles of ABVD allows for early treatment adaptation. When ePET is positive after two cycles of ABVD, switching to BEACOPPesc + INRT significantly improved 5-year PFS. In ePET-negative patients, noninferiority of ABVD only could not be demonstrated: risk of relapse is increased when INRT is omitted, especially in patients in the F group.
AB - Purpose Patients who receive combined modality treatment for stage I and II Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) have an excellent outcome. Early response evaluation with positron emission tomography (PET) scan may improve selection of patients who need reduced or more intensive treatments. Methods We performed a randomized trial to evaluate treatment adaptation on the basis of early PET (ePET) after two cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in previously untreated-according to European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria favorable (F) and unfavorable (U)-stage I and II HL. The standard arm consisted of ABVD followed by involved-node radiotherapy (INRT), regardless of ePET result. In the experimental arm, ePET-negative patients received ABVD only (noninferiority design), whereas ePET-positive patients switched to two cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPPesc) and INRT (superiority design). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results Of 1,950 randomly assigned patients, 1,925 received an ePET-361 patients (18.8%) were positive. In ePET-positive patients, 5-year PFS improved from 77.4% for standard ABVD + INRT to 90.6% for intensification to BEACOPPesc + INRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.74; P = .002). In ePET-negative patients, 5-year PFS rates in the F group were 99.0% versus 87.1% (HR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.8 to 66.1) in favor of ABVD + INRT; the U group, 92.1% versus 89.6% (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.8 to 2.5) in favor of ABVD + INRT. For both F and U groups, noninferiority of ABVD only compared with combined modality treatment could not be demonstrated. Conclusion In stage I and II HL, PET response after two cycles of ABVD allows for early treatment adaptation. When ePET is positive after two cycles of ABVD, switching to BEACOPPesc + INRT significantly improved 5-year PFS. In ePET-negative patients, noninferiority of ABVD only could not be demonstrated: risk of relapse is increased when INRT is omitted, especially in patients in the F group.
KW - Adolescent
KW - Adult
KW - Aged
KW - Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
KW - Bleomycin
KW - Chemoradiotherapy
KW - Cyclophosphamide
KW - Dacarbazine
KW - Disease-Free Survival
KW - Doxorubicin
KW - Etoposide
KW - Female
KW - Hodgkin Disease
KW - Humans
KW - Male
KW - Middle Aged
KW - Neoplasm Staging
KW - Positron-Emission Tomography
KW - Prednisone
KW - Procarbazine
KW - Survival Rate
KW - Vinblastine
KW - Vincristine
KW - Young Adult
KW - Clinical Trial, Phase III
KW - Journal Article
KW - Multicenter Study
KW - Randomized Controlled Trial
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.6394
DO - 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.6394
M3 - Journal article
C2 - 28291393
VL - 35
SP - 1786
EP - 1794
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
SN - 0732-183X
IS - 16
ER -