Suppr超能文献

ABVD方案对比改良斯坦福V方案对比MOPPEBVCAD方案并联合选择性和局限性放疗用于中晚期霍奇金淋巴瘤:意大利淋巴瘤协作组多中心随机试验的最终结果

ABVD versus modified stanford V versus MOPPEBVCAD with optional and limited radiotherapy in intermediate- and advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma: final results of a multicenter randomized trial by the Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi.

作者信息

Gobbi Paolo G, Levis Alessandro, Chisesi Teodoro, Broglia Chiara, Vitolo Umberto, Stelitano Caterina, Pavone Vincenzo, Cavanna Luigi, Santini Gino, Merli Francesco, Liberati Marina, Baldini Luca, Deliliers Giorgio Lambertenghi, Angelucci Emanuele, Bordonaro Roberto, Federico Massimo

机构信息

Medicina Interna e Oncologia Medica, Università di Pavia, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico Policlinico S. Matteo, Pavia, Italy.

出版信息

J Clin Oncol. 2005 Dec 20;23(36):9198-207. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.907. Epub 2005 Sep 19.

Abstract

PURPOSE

In this multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical trial on advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL), the efficacy and toxicity of two chemotherapy regimens, doxorubicin, vinblastine, mechlorethamine, vincristine, bleomycin, etoposide, and prednisone (Stanford V) and mechlorethamine, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone, epidoxirubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, lomustine, doxorubicin, and vindesine (MOPPEBVCAD), were compared with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) as standard therapy to select which regimen would best support a reduced radiotherapy program, which was limited to < or = two sites of either previous bulky or partially remitting disease (a modification of the original Stanford program).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Three hundred fifty-five patients with stage IIB, III, or IV HL were randomly assigned. Three hundred thirty-four patients were assessable for the study and received six cycles of ABVD (n = 122), three cycles of Stanford V (n = 107), or six cycles of MOPPEBVCAD (n = 106); radiotherapy was administered to 76, 71, and 50 patients in these three arms, respectively.

RESULTS

The complete response rates for ABVD, Stanford V, and MOPPEBVCAD were 89%, 76% and 94%, respectively; 5-year failure-free survival (FFS) and progression-free survival rates were 78%, 54%, 81% and 85%, 73%, and 94%, respectively (P < .01 for comparison of Stanford V with the other two regimens). Corresponding 5-year overall survival rates were 90%, 82%, and 89% for ABVD, Stanford V, and MOPPEBVCAD, respectively. Stanford V was more myelotoxic than ABVD but less myelotoxic than MOPPEBVCAD, which had larger reductions in the prescribed drug doses.

CONCLUSION

When associated with conditioned and limited (not adjuvant) radiotherapy, ABVD and MOPPEBVCAD were superior to Stanford V chemotherapy in terms of response rate and FFS and progression-free survival. Patients were irradiated less often after MOPPEBVCAD, but this regimen was more toxic. ABVD is still the best choice when it is combined with optional, limited irradiation.

摘要

目的

在这项针对晚期霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL)的多中心、前瞻性、随机临床试验中,将两种化疗方案(多柔比星、长春花碱、氮芥、长春新碱、博来霉素、依托泊苷和泼尼松(斯坦福V方案)以及氮芥、长春新碱、丙卡巴肼、泼尼松、表柔比星、博来霉素、长春花碱、洛莫司汀、多柔比星和长春地辛(MOPPEBVCAD方案))的疗效和毒性与作为标准治疗方案的多柔比星、博来霉素、长春花碱和达卡巴嗪(ABVD方案)进行比较,以选择哪种方案最有利于支持减少放疗计划,该放疗计划限于既往大块或部分缓解疾病的≤2个部位(对原斯坦福方案的一种改良)。

患者与方法

355例IIB期、III期或IV期HL患者被随机分组。334例患者可纳入本研究并接受6个周期的ABVD方案(n = 122)、3个周期的斯坦福V方案(n = 107)或6个周期的MOPPEBVCAD方案(n = 106);这三组分别有76例、71例和50例患者接受了放疗。

结果

ABVD方案、斯坦福V方案和MOPPEBVCAD方案的完全缓解率分别为89%、76%和94%;5年无失败生存率(FFS)和无进展生存率分别为78%、54%、81%以及85%、73%和94%(斯坦福V方案与其他两种方案比较,P <.01)。ABVD方案、斯坦福V方案和MOPPEBVCAD方案相应的5年总生存率分别为90%、82%和89%。斯坦福V方案的骨髓毒性比ABVD方案大,但比MOPPEBVCAD方案小,后者规定药物剂量的减少幅度更大。

结论

当联合有条件的有限(而非辅助性)放疗时,ABVD方案和MOPPEBVCAD方案在缓解率、FFS和无进展生存率方面优于斯坦福V方案化疗。接受MOPPEBVCAD方案治疗后患者接受放疗的次数较少,但该方案毒性更大。ABVD方案联合选择性有限放疗时仍是最佳选择。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验