R-CHOP versus R-CVP in the treatment of follicular lymphoma: a meta-analysis and critical appraisal of current literature.

PURPOSE

R-CHOP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) and R-CVP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone) have both been used successfully in the treatment of patients with symptomatic follicular lymphoma (FL). No study has compared the efficacy of the two treatment modalities and attempted to evaluate the role of anthracyclines in the management of patients with FL. We conducted a meta-analysis of relevant literature comparing the two treatment arms for FL with response being the final endpoint.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

TWO ANALYSES WERE CONDUCTED: The first analysis compared R-CHOP to R-CVP as frontline agents for the treatment of FL, and the second analysis included both untreated and relapsed patients.

RESULTS

For both studies, R-CVP was superior to R-CHOP when evaluating for complete response (CR). Odds ratios were 2.86 (95% CI, 1.81-4.51) in the first analysis and 1.48 (95% CI, 0.991-2.22) in the second analysis. However for overall response (CR+Partial response, PR), R-CHOP was superior, with odds ratios of 5.45 (95% CI: 2.51 - 11.83) and 5.54 (95% CI: 2.69 - 11.40), for the first and second analyses, respectively.

CONCLUSION

R-CHOP and R-CVP protocols achieve excellent overall response. In patients with known cardiac history, omission of anthracyclines is reasonable and R-CVP provides a competitive CR rate. In younger patients with FL where cumulative cardio-toxicity may be of importance in the long term and in whom future stem cell transplantation is an option, again R-CVP may be a more appealing option.