Radiotherapy volume size reduction from EF to IF after COPP + ABVD chemotherapy for two cycles produces similar results and less toxicity in patients with early-stage unfavorable HD.
Elderly patients have a poorer risk profile compared with younger HL patients and experience more severe treatment-associated toxicity. Higher mortality during treatment as well as lower dose-intensity are the major factors explaining the poorer overall outcome of elderly HL patients.
In contrast to younger patients, the prognosis of elderly patients with advanced Hodgkin's disease (HD) has not improved substantially over the last 20 years. We thus carried out a prospectively randomized study (HD9(elderly)) to compare the BEACOPP regimen in this setting against standard COPP-ABVD. Between February 1993 and 1998, 75 patients aged 66-75 years with newly diagnosed HD in advanced stages were recruited into the HD9 trial as a separate stratum (HD9(elderly)). Patients were assigned to eight alternating cycles of COPP and ABVD or eight cycles of BEACOPP in baseline doses. Radiotherapy was given to initial bulky or residual disease. In total, 68 of 75 registered patients were assessable: 26 were treated with COPP-ABVD and 42 with BEACOPP baseline. There were no significant differences between COPP-ABVD and BEACOPP in terms of complete remission (76%), overall survival (50%) and freedom from treatment failure (FFTF) (46%) at 5 years. At a median follow-up of 80 months, a total of 37 patients died: 14/26 patients (54%) treated with COPP-ABVD and 23/42 patients (55%) with BEACOPP. Two patients (8%) treated with COPP-ABVD and nine patients (21%) treated with BEACOPP died of acute toxicity. Hodgkin-specific FFTF at 5 years was 55% after COPP-ABVD and 74% after BEACOPP (P=0.13). Thus, there are no differences in survival between these regimens in elderly patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.