Long-Term Follow-Up of the Response-Adapted Intergroup EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial for Localized Hodgkin Lymphoma

JCO The primary analysis of the Early positron emission tomography (ePET) Response-Adapted Treatment in localized Hodgkin Lymphoma H10 Trial demonstrated that in ePET-negative patients, the risk of relapse increased when involved-node radiotherapy (INRT) was omitted and that in ePET-positive patient...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of clinical oncology 2024-01, Vol.42 (1), p.19-25
Hauptverfasser: Federico, Massimo, Fortpied, Catherine, Stepanishyna, Yana, Gotti, Manuel, van der Maazen, Richard, Cristinelli, Caterina, Re, Alessandro, Plattel, Wouter, Lazarovici, Julien, Merli, Francesco, Specht, Lena, Schiano de Colella, Jean-Marc, Hutchings, Martin, Versari, Annibale, Edeline, Véronique, Stamatoulas, Aspasia, Girinsky, Theodore, Ricardi, Umberto, Aleman, Berthe, Meulemans, Bart, Tonino, Sanne, Raemaekers, John, André, Marc
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:JCO The primary analysis of the Early positron emission tomography (ePET) Response-Adapted Treatment in localized Hodgkin Lymphoma H10 Trial demonstrated that in ePET-negative patients, the risk of relapse increased when involved-node radiotherapy (INRT) was omitted and that in ePET-positive patients, switching from doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) to bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPPesc) significantly improved 5-year progression-free survival (PFS). Here, we report the final results of a preplanned analysis at a 10-year follow-up. In the favorable (F) ePET-negative group, the 10-year PFS rates were 98.8% versus 85.4% (hazard ratio [HR], 13.2; 95% CI, 3.1 to 55.8; value for noninferiority = .9735; difference test < .0001) in favor of ABVD + INRT; in the unfavorable (U) ePET-negative group, the 10-year PFS rates were 91.4% and 86.5% (HR, 1.52; 95% CI, 0.84 to 2.75; value for noninferiority = .8577; difference test = .1628). In ePET-positive patients, the difference in terms of PFS between standard ABVD and intensified BEACOPPesc was no longer statistically significant (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.37 to 1.20; = .1777). In conclusion, the present long-term analysis confirms that in ePET-negative patients, the omission of INRT is associated with lower 10-year PFS. Instead, in ePET-positive patients, no significant difference between standard and experimental arms emerged although intensification with BEACOPPesc was safe, with no increase in late adverse events, namely, second malignancies.
ISSN:0732-183X
1527-7755
1527-7755
DOI:10.1200/JCO.23.01745