Kim Seok Jin, Jo Jae-Cheol, Yoon Dok Hyun, Yang Deok-Hwan, Yoon Sang Eun, Lee Gyeong-Won, Kong Jee Hyun, Park Yong, Kang Ka-Won, Lee Ho-Sup, Oh Sung Yong, Shin Ho-Jin, Lee Won Sik, Choi Yoon Seok, Jeong Seong Hyun, Kim Min Kyoung, Kang Hye Jin, Yi Jun Ho, Lim Sung-Nam, Yhim Ho-Young, Do Young Rok, Yun Hwan Jung, Eom Hyeon-Seok, Lee Mark Hong, Suh Cheolwon, Kim Won Seog
Division of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Department of Health Sciences and Technology, Samsung Advanced Institute for Health Sciences and Technology, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Front Oncol. 2023 Aug 22;13:1230629. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1230629. eCollection 2023.
Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been recommended for patients who are newly diagnosed with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), and CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), an anthracycline-based chemotherapy has been the frontline chemotherapy for PTCL. However, it is not clear whether anthracycline-based chemotherapies such as CHOP could be standard induction therapy for PTCL.
We conducted a randomized phase II study to compare CHOP with fractionated ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide, and dexamethasone (ICED) for patients eligible for ASCT. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and safety profiles.
Patients were randomized into either CHOP (n = 69) or ICED (n = 66), and the characteristics of both arms were not different. PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS, n = 60) and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL, n = 53) were dominant. The objective response rate was not different between CHOP (59.4%) and ICED (56.1%), and the 3-year PFS was not different between CHOP (36.7%) and ICED (33.1%). In AITL patients, CHOP was favored over ICED whereas ICED was associated with more cytopenia and reduced dose intensity. Patients who received upfront ASCT after achieving complete response to CHOP or ICED showed 80% of 3-year OS.
In summary, our study showed no therapeutic difference between CHOP and ICED in terms of response and PFS. Thus, CHOP might remain the reference regimen especially for AITL based on its better outcome in AITL, and upfront ASCT could be recommended as a consolidation of complete response in patients with PTCL.
对于新诊断的外周T细胞淋巴瘤(PTCL)患者,推荐进行一线自体干细胞移植(ASCT),而基于蒽环类药物的化疗方案CHOP(环磷酰胺、阿霉素、长春新碱和泼尼松)一直是PTCL的一线化疗方案。然而,目前尚不清楚像CHOP这样基于蒽环类药物的化疗方案是否可作为PTCL的标准诱导治疗方案。
我们进行了一项随机II期研究,比较CHOP方案与分次使用异环磷酰胺、卡铂、依托泊苷和地塞米松(ICED)方案对适合进行ASCT的患者的疗效。主要终点是无进展生存期(PFS),次要终点包括客观缓解率、总生存期(OS)和安全性。
患者被随机分为CHOP组(n = 69)或ICED组(n = 66),两组患者的特征无差异。主要为未另行特指的PTCL(NOS,n = 60)和血管免疫母细胞性T细胞淋巴瘤(AITL,n = 53)。CHOP组(59.4%)和ICED组(56.1%)的客观缓解率无差异,CHOP组(36.7%)和ICED组(33.1%)的3年PFS也无差异。在AITL患者中,CHOP方案优于ICED方案,而ICED方案与更多的血细胞减少和更低的剂量强度相关。对CHOP或ICED方案达到完全缓解后接受一线ASCT的患者,3年OS率为80%。
总之,我们的研究表明,在缓解率和PFS方面,CHOP和ICED方案之间没有治疗差异。因此,基于CHOP方案在AITL患者中更好的疗效,CHOP可能仍是参考方案,对于PTCL患者,可推荐一线ASCT作为完全缓解后的巩固治疗。