High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous bone marrow transplantation versus dexamethasone, cisplatin, and cytarabine in aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with partial response to front-line chemotherapy: a prospective randomized italian multicenter study.

PURPOSE

To evaluate, in a prospective multicentric study, the efficacy of a conventional salvage chemotherapy (dexamethasone, cisplatin, and cytarabine [DHAP]) versus high-dose chemotherapy (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and cyclophosphamide [BEAC]) followed by autologous bone marrow transplantation (ABMT) in patients with aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) in clinical partial response (PR) after two thirds of a conventional front-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From August 1988 to August 1991, 286 patients with aggressive NHL were randomized in seven Italian institutions to receive fluorouracil, methotrexate, cytarabine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (F-MACHOP) or methotrexate with leucovorin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, and bleomycin (MACOP-B) as front-line therapy. Of the 286 patients enrolled onto the trial, 77 (27%) were considered in PR after two thirds of the front-line therapy, and 49 of 77 (64%) were randomized: 27 to receive DHAP chemotherapy and 22 to receive BEAC followed by ABMT.

RESULTS

The response after second-line treatment was as follows: in the DHAP group, four patients (15%) achieved a complete remission (CR), 12 (44%) remained in stable PR, and 11 (41%) showed progressive disease; in the ABMT group, three patients (14%) obtained a CR, 18 (82%) obtained a stable PR, and one (4%) progressed, with an overall response (CR + stable PR) of 59% and 96% (P < .001) in the DHAP and ABMT groups, respectively. The overall survival was 59% versus 73% and the progression-free survival (PFS) was 52% versus 73% in the DHAP and ABMT groups, respectively (P, not significant). The toxicity was mild, particularly in the ABMT group, and no treatment-related deaths occurred in either group.

CONCLUSION

Because of the small number of patients randomized, we were unable to determine whether ABMT or a standard salvage regimen (DHAP) is superior for PR patients. However, we confirmed that myeloablative treatment is a safe and well-tolerated procedure in this category of patients and this may enable us to evaluate its role as part of a front-line treatment in poor-risk NHL patients.