Although the results fall just short of the specified noninferiority margin, the omission of bleomycin from the ABVD regimen after negative findings on interim PET resulted in a lower incidence of pulmonary toxic effects than with continued ABVD but not significantly lower efficacy. (Funded by Cancer Research UK and Others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00678327.).
The negative prognostic impact of discordant involvement is adequately represented by the IPI score, while the risk with concordant involvement is greater than that encompassed by this predictor. The results emphasize the need for accurate staging assessment of bone marrow involvement in DLBCL.
Key Points• PET-CT is the modern standard for staging Hodgkin lymphoma and can replace contrast enhanced CT in the vast majority of cases.• Agreement between expert and local readers is sufficient for the Deauville criteria to assess response in clinical trials and the community.International guidelines recommend that positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) should replace CT in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). The aims of this study were to compare PET-CT with CT for staging and measure agreement between expert and local readers, using a 5-point scale (Deauville criteria), to adapt treatment in a clinical trial: Response-Adapted Therapy in Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma (RATHL). Patients were staged using clinical assessment, CT, and bone marrow biopsy (RATHL stage). PET-CT was performed at baseline (PET0) and after 2 chemotherapy cycles (PET2) in a response-adapted design. PET-CT was reported centrally by experts at 5 national core laboratories. Local readers optionally scored PET2 scans. The RATHL and PET-CT stages were compared. Agreement among experts and between expert and local readers was measured. RATHL and PET0 stage were concordant in 938 (80%) patients. PET-CT upstaged 159 (14%) and downstaged 74 (6%) patients. Upstaging by extranodal disease in bone marrow (92), lung (11), or multiple sites (12) on PET-CT accounted for most discrepancies. Follow-up of discrepant findings confirmed the PET characterization of lesions in the vast majority. Five patients were upstaged by marrow biopsy and 7 by contrast-enhanced CT in the bowel and/or liver or spleen. PET2 agreement among experts (140 scans) with a k (95% confidence interval) of 0.84 (0.76-0.91) was very good and between experts and local readers (300 scans) at 0.77 (0.68-0.86) was good. These results confirm PET-CT as the modern standard for staging HL and that response assessment using Deauville criteria is robust, enabling translation of RATHL results into clinical practice. (Blood. 2016;127(12):1531-1538
SummaryThere is no consensus regarding optimal follow-up mode for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients that achieve complete remission following chemotherapy or combined chemo-and radiation therapy. Several studies demonstrated high sensitivity of positron emission tomography/computerized tomography (PET/CT) in detecting disease progression; however, these techniques are currently not recommended for routine follow-up. This retrospective study conducted in two Israeli (N = 291) and one New Zealand academic centres (N = 77), compared a group of HL patients, followed-up with routine imaging every 6 months during the first 2 years after achieving remission, once in the third year, with additional dedicated studies performed due to symptoms or physical findings (Group I) to a group of patients without residual masses who underwent clinically-based surveillance with dedicated imaging upon relapse suspicion (Group II). Five-year overall survival (OS) was 94% and median time to relapse was 8Á6 months for both modes. Relapse rates in Groups I and II were 13% and 9%, respectively. During the first 3 years of follow-up, 47Á5 and 4Á7 studies were performed per detected relapse in Groups I and II, respectively. The current study demonstrated no benefit in either progression-free survival (PFS) or OS in HL patients followed by routine imaging versus clinical follow-up. The cost was 10 times higher for routine imaging.
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.