TY - JOUR
T1 - Early Positron Emission Tomography Response-Adapted Treatment in Stage I and II Hodgkin Lymphoma
T2 - Final Results of the Randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial
AU - Andre, Marc P. E.
AU - Girinsky, Theodore
AU - Federico, Massimo
AU - Reman, Oumedaly
AU - Fortpied, Catherine
AU - Gotti, Manuel
AU - Casasnovas, Olivier
AU - Brice, Pauline
AU - van der Maazen, Richard
AU - Re, Alessandro
AU - Edeline, Veronique
AU - Ferme, Christophe
AU - van Imhoff, Gustaaf
AU - Merli, Francesco
AU - Bouabdallah, Reda
AU - Sebban, Catherine
AU - Specht, Lena
AU - Stamatoullas, Aspasia
AU - Delarue, Richard
AU - Fiaccadori, Valeria
AU - Bellei, Monica
AU - Raveloarivahy, Tiana
AU - Versari, Annibale
AU - Hutchings, Martin
AU - Meignan, Michel
AU - Raemaekers, John
PY - 2017/6/1
Y1 - 2017/6/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - GROUP HD14 TRIAL
KW - INCREASED RISK
KW - INTERIM-PET
KW - CHEMOTHERAPY
KW - RADIOTHERAPY
KW - RADIATION
KW - THERAPY
KW - DISEASE
KW - GUIDELINES
KW - SURVIVORS
U2 - 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.6394
DO - 10.1200/JCO.2016.68.6394
M3 - Article
SN - 0732-183X
VL - 35
JO - Journal of Clinical Oncology
JF - Journal of Clinical Oncology
IS - 16
ER -