Early Positron Emission Tomography Response-Adapted Treatment in Stage I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma: Final Results of the Randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial

Marc P. E. Andre, Theodore Girinsky, Massimo Federico, Oumedaly Reman, Catherine Fortpied, Manuel Gotti, Olivier Casasnovas, Pauline Brice, Richard van der Maazen, Alessandro Re, Veronique Edeline, Christophe Ferme, Gustaaf van Imhoff, Francesco Merli, Reda Bouabdallah, Catherine Sebban, Lena Specht, Aspasia Stamatoullas, Richard Delarue, Valeria FiaccadoriMonica Bellei, Tiana Raveloarivahy, Annibale Versari, Martin Hutchings, Michel Meignan, John Raemaekers*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

    434 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    PurposePatients who receive combined modality treatment for stage I and II Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) have an excellent outcome. Early response evaluation with positron emission tomography (PET) scan may improve selection of patients who need reduced or more intensive treatments.MethodsWe performed a randomized trial to evaluate treatment adaptation on the basis of early PET (ePET) after two cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in previously untreatedaccording to European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer criteria favorable (F) and unfavorable (U)stage I and II HL. The standard arm consisted of ABVD followed by involved-node radiotherapy (INRT), regardless of ePET result. In the experimental arm, ePET-negative patients received ABVD only (noninferiority design), whereas ePET-positive patients switched to two cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPPesc) and INRT (superiority design). Primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsOf 1,950 randomly assigned patients, 1,925 received an ePET361 patients (18.8%) were positive. In ePET-positive patients, 5-year PFS improved from 77.4% for standard ABVD + INRT to 90.6% for intensification to BEACOPPesc + INRT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.42; 95% CI, 0.23 to 0.74; P = .002). In ePET-negative patients, 5-year PFS rates in the F group were 99.0% versus 87.1% (HR, 15.8; 95% CI, 3.8 to 66.1) in favor of ABVD + INRT; the U group, 92.1% versus 89.6% (HR, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.8 to 2.5) in favor of ABVD + INRT. For both F and U groups, noninferiority of ABVD only compared with combined modality treatment could not be demonstrated.ConclusionIn stage I and II HL, PET response after two cycles of ABVD allows for early treatment adaptation. When ePET is positive after two cycles of ABVD, switching to BEACOPPesc + INRT significantly improved 5-year PFS. In ePET-negative patients, noninferiority of ABVD only could not be demonstrated: risk of relapse is increased when INRT is omitted, especially in patients in the F group.

    Original languageEnglish
    Number of pages13
    JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
    Volume35
    Issue number16
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1-Jun-2017

    Keywords

    • GROUP HD14 TRIAL
    • INCREASED RISK
    • INTERIM-PET
    • CHEMOTHERAPY
    • RADIOTHERAPY
    • RADIATION
    • THERAPY
    • DISEASE
    • GUIDELINES
    • SURVIVORS

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Early Positron Emission Tomography Response-Adapted Treatment in Stage I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma: Final Results of the Randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this