The prognostic score we developed may be useful in designing clinical trials for the treatment of advanced Hodgkin's disease and in making individual therapeutic decisions, but a distinct group of patients at very high risk could not be identified on the basis of routinely documented demographic and clinical characteristics.

Chemotherapy plus involved-field radiotherapy should be the standard treatment for Hodgkin's disease with favorable prognostic features. In patients with unfavorable features, four courses of chemotherapy plus involved-field radiotherapy should be the standard treatment. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00379041 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

Involved-field radiotherapy did not improve the outcome in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma who had a complete remission after MOPP-ABV chemotherapy. Radiotherapy may benefit patients with a partial response after chemotherapy.

A treatment strategy for early-stage HL based on prognostic factors leads to high OS rates in both favorable and unfavorable patients. In favorable patients, the combination of EBVP and IF-RT can replace STNI as standard treatment. In unfavorable patients, EBVP is significantly less efficient than MOPP/ABV.

Cardiovascular disease frequently occurs after lymphoma therapy, but it is common in the general population too. Therefore, risk estimation requires comparison to population-based rates. We calculated risk by standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and absolute excess risks Preexisting hypertension, NHL at young age, and salvage treatment increased risk of all cardiovascular events; the effect of radiotherapy was dose dependent. In conclusion, patients are at longterm high risk of chronic heart failure after NHL treatment and need therefore life-long monitoring. In contrast, risk of coronary artery disease appeared more age dependent than treatment related.

Motexafin gadolinium was well tolerated at doses up to 6.3 mg/kg, was selectively accumulated in tumors, and, when combined with WBRT of 30 Gy in 10 fractions, was associated with a high radiologic response rate.

ABVD8 and BEACOPP4+4 resulted in similar EFS and OS in patients with high-risk advanced-stage HL. Because BEACOPP4+4 did not demonstrate a favorable effectiveness or toxicity ratio compared with ABVD8, treatment burden, immediate and late toxicities, and associated costs must be considered before selecting one of these regimens on which to build future treatment strategies.

No abstract