Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Department of Human Pathology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy.
Am J Hematol. 2020 Sep;95(9):1030-1037. doi: 10.1002/ajh.25871. Epub 2020 Jun 30.
The optimal first-line treatment for advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is still a matter of debate. While ABVD is less toxic and as effective as other, more intensive chemotherapy regimens, escalated BEACOPP (BEACOPPesc) is superior to ABVD for initial disease control and prolonged time-to-relapse. However, this advantage is associated with higher rate of early and late toxicities. As most of these data have been accumulated from clinical trials, a retrospective analysis was conducted in a large database of patients treated outside clinical trials to investigate the advantages and disadvantages of these regimes in a real-world setting. From October 2009 to October 2018, 397 advanced-stage HL patients treated with either ABVD or BEACOPPesc were retrospectively assessed in 7 European cancer centers (2 Austrian and 5 Italian centers). Complete metabolic remission (CMR) by PET was achieved in 76% and 85% of patients in the ABVD and BEACOPPesc groups, respectively (p = .01). Severe adverse events occurred more frequently with BEACOPPesc than ABVD. At a median follow-up of 8 years, 9% of the patients who achieved CMR after BEACOPPesc relapsed compared to 16.6% in the ABVD group (p = .043). No statistical difference in progression free survival (PFS) was observed between the two cohorts overall (p = .11), but there was a trend towards a superior PFS in high-risk patients treated with BEACOPPesc (p = .074). Nevertheless, overall survival was similar between the two groups (p = .94). In conclusion, we confirm that ABVD is an effective and less toxic therapeutic option for advanced-stage HL. Although BEACOPP results in better initial tumor control, the long-term outcome remains similar between the two regimens.
对于晚期霍奇金淋巴瘤(HL),最佳的一线治疗方案仍存在争议。虽然 ABVD 的毒性较低,与其他更强化疗方案一样有效,但对于初始疾病控制和延长复发时间, escalated BEACOPP(BEACOPPesc)优于 ABVD。然而,这种优势与更高的早期和晚期毒性发生率相关。由于这些数据大多来自临床试验,因此在大型临床试验之外的患者数据库中进行了回顾性分析,以在真实环境中研究这些方案的优缺点。从 2009 年 10 月至 2018 年 10 月,在 7 个欧洲癌症中心(2 个奥地利和 5 个意大利中心)对 397 例接受 ABVD 或 BEACOPPesc 治疗的晚期 HL 患者进行了回顾性评估。ABVD 和 BEACOPPesc 组分别有 76%和 85%的患者达到完全代谢缓解(CMR)(p=0.01)。BEACOPPesc 组发生严重不良事件的频率高于 ABVD 组。在中位随访 8 年后,BEACOPPesc 治疗后达到 CMR 的患者中有 9%复发,而 ABVD 组中有 16.6%(p=0.043)。两组患者的无进展生存期(PFS)总体无统计学差异(p=0.11),但 BEACOPPesc 治疗的高危患者有 PFS 改善的趋势(p=0.074)。然而,两组患者的总生存期相似(p=0.94)。总之,我们证实 ABVD 是晚期 HL 的一种有效且毒性较低的治疗选择。尽管 BEACOPP 可更好地控制初始肿瘤,但两种方案的长期结局相似。