Search

PURPOSE: Patients diagnosed with advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (aHL) have historically been risk-stratified using the International Prognostic Score (IPS). This study investigated if a machine learning (ML) approach could outperform existing models when it comes to predicting overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study used patient data from the Danish National Lymphoma Register for model development (development cohort). The ML model was developed using stacking, which combines several predictive survival models (Cox proportional hazard, flexible parametric model, IPS, principal component, penalized regression) into a single model, and was compared with two versions of IPS (IPS-3 and IPS-7) and the newly developed aHL international prognostic index (A-HIPI). Internal model validation was performed using nested cross-validation, and external validation was performed using patient data from the Swedish Lymphoma Register and Cancer Registry of Norway (validation cohort). RESULTS: In total, 707 and 760 patients with aHL were included in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. Examining model performance for OS in the development cohort, the concordance index (C-index) for the ML model, IPS-7, IPS-3, and A-HIPI was found to be 0.789, 0.608, 0.650, and 0.768, respectively. The corresponding estimates in the validation cohort were 0.749, 0.700, 0.663, and 0.741. For PFS, the ML model achieved the highest C-index in both cohorts (0.665 in the development cohort and 0.691 in the validation cohort). The time-varying AUCs for both the ML model and the A-HIPI were consistently higher in both cohorts compared with the IPS models within the first 5 years after diagnosis. CONCLUSION: The new prognostic model for aHL on the basis of ML techniques demonstrated a substantial improvement compared with the IPS models, but yielded a limited improvement in predictive performance compared with the A-HIPI. Machine-Learning based advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma (aHL) prognosis surpasses International Prognostic Score, competes with aHL international prognostic index in overall survival and progression-free survival prediction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: We explored the potential overall survival (OS) benefit of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin (Adriamycin), cyclophosphamide, vincristine (Oncovin), procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP) over doxorubicin (Adriamycin), bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in a pooled analysis of four randomized trials. Patients and methods: Primary objective was to evaluate the OS impact of BEACOPP using individual patient data. Secondary objectives were progression‐free survival (PFS), secondary cancers, and use of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Results: About 1227 patients were included. The 7‐year OS was 84.3% (95% CI 80.8‐87.2) for ABVD vs 87.7% (95% CI 84.5‐90.2) for BEACOPP. Two follow‐up periods were identified based on survival curves and hazard ratio (HR) over time. For the first 18 months, there was no difference. For the second period of ≥18 months, ABVD patients had a higher death risk (HRABVD vs BEACOPP = 1.59; 95% CI 1.09‐2.33). A Cox model stratified by trial and evaluating the effect of treatment and International Prognostic Index (IPI) score as fixed effects showed that both were statistically significant (treatment, P =.0185; IPI score, P =.0107). The 7‐year PFS was 71.1% (95% CI 67.1‐74.6) for ABVD vs 81.1% (95% CI 77.5‐84.2) for BEACOPP (P <.001). After ABVD, 25 secondary cancers (4.0%) were reported with no myelodysplasia (MDS)/acute myeloid leukemia (AML) compared to 36 (6.5%) after BEACOPP, which included 13 patients with MDS/AML. Following ABVD, 86 patients (13.8%) received ASCT vs 39 (6.4%) for BEACOPP. Conclusions: This analysis showed a slight improvement in OS for BEACOPP and confirmed a PFS benefit. Frontline use of BEACOPP instead of ABVD increased secondary leukemia incidence but halved the requirement for ASCT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The use of routine imaging for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma ( HL) in complete remission ( CR) is controversial. In a population-based study, we examined the post-remission survival of Danish and Swedish HL patients for whom follow-up practices were different. Follow-up in Denmark included routine imaging, usually for a minimum of 2 years, whereas clinical follow-up without routine imaging was standard in Sweden. A total of 317 Danish and 454 Swedish comparable HL patients aged 18-65 years, diagnosed in the period 2007-2012 and having achieved CR following ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine)/ BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone) therapy, were included in the study. The cumulative progression rates in the first 2 years were 4% (95% confidence interval [ CI] 1-7) for patients with stage I-II disease vs. 12% (95% CI 6-18) for patients with stage III-IV disease. An imaging-based follow-up practice was not associated with a better post-remission survival in general ( P = 0·2) or in stage-specific subgroups ( P = 0·5 for I-II and P = 0·4 for III-IV). Age ≥45 years was the only independent adverse prognostic factor for survival. In conclusion, relapse of HL patients with CR is infrequent and systematic use of routine imaging in these patients does not improve post-remission survival. The present study supports clinical follow-up without routine imaging, as encouraged by the recent Lugano classification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Watch and wait ( WAW) is a common approach for asymptomatic, advanced stage follicular lymphoma ( FL), but single-agent rituximab is an alternative for these patients. In this nationwide study we describe the outcome of patients selected for WAW. A cohort of 286 out of 849 (34%) stage III- IVA FL patients seen between 2000 and 2011, were managed expectantly and included. The 5-year progression-free survival ( PFS) was 35% [95% confidence interval ( CI) 29-42]. The 10-year overall survival ( OS) was 65% (95% CI 54-78), and the cumulative risk of dying from lymphoma within 10 years of diagnosis was 13% (95% CI 7-20). Elevated lactate dehydrogenase and > four nodal regions involved were associated with a higher risk of lymphoma treatment and death from lymphoma. The WAW patients and a matched background population had similar OS during the first 50 months after diagnosis ( P = 0·7), but WAW patients had increased risk of death after 50 months ( P < 0·001). The estimated loss of residual life after 10 years was 6·8 months. The 10-year cumulative risk of histological transformation was 22% (95% CI 15-29) and the 3-year OS after transformation was 71% (95% CI 58-87%). In conclusion, advanced stage FL managed by WAW had a favourable outcome and abandoning this strategy could lead to overtreatment in some patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of clinician interpretation of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) reports at mid-therapy, interim PET (I-PET) and after the end of first-line therapy (E-PET) in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Four hundred and thirty patients were enrolled in this study comprising a total of 617 PET reports. Each report was evaluated by three expert hematologists randomly selected from a panel of nine. Reports were labeled positive or negative if all three interpreters agreed. All others were considered indeterminate. Indeterminate reports accounted for 59% of I-PET and 49% of E-PET reports. Two-year overall survival (OS) for patients with a positive, indeterminate and negative I-PET was 58%, 87% and 89% ( p < 0.001), respectively. Two-year OS for patients with E-PET was 41%, 89% and 97% ( p < 0.001) for positive, indeterminate and negative interpretation of PET/CT reports. Progression-free survival and OS did not differ significantly in patients with a negative and an indeterminate I-PET report. The use of well-defined reporting criteria, e.g. the Deauville five-point scale, is likely to reduce the number of scans perceived as indeterminate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Five-year follow-up in a trial involving patients with previously untreated stage III or IV classic Hodgkin's lymphoma showed long-term progression-free survival benefits with first-line therapy with brentuximab vedotin, a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate, plus doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD), as compared with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD). A planned interim analysis indicated a potential benefit with regard to overall survival; data from a median of 6 years of follow-up are now available.Methods: We randomly assigned patients in a 1:1 ratio to receive up to six cycles of A+AVD or ABVD. The primary end point, modified progression-free survival, has been reported previously. The key secondary end point was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed.Results: A total of 664 patients were assigned to receive A+AVD and 670 to receive ABVD. At a median follow-up of 73.0 months, 39 patients in the A+AVD group and 64 in the ABVD group had died (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40 to 0.88; P = 0.009). The 6-year overall survival estimates were 93.9% (95% CI, 91.6 to 95.5) in the A+AVD group and 89.4% (95% CI, 86.6 to 91.7) in the ABVD group. Progression-free survival was longer with A+AVD than with ABVD (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.86). Fewer patients in the A+AVD group than in the ABVD group received subsequent therapy, including transplantation, and fewer second cancers were reported with A+AVD (in 23 vs. 32 patients). Primary prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was recommended after an increased incidence of febrile neutropenia was observed with A+AVD. More patients had peripheral neuropathy with A+AVD than with ABVD, but most patients in the two groups had resolution or amelioration of the event by the last follow-up.Conclusions: Patients who received A+AVD for the treatment of stage III or IV Hodgkin's lymphoma had a survival advantage over those who received ABVD. (Funded by Takeda Development Center Americas and Seagen; ECHELON-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01712490; EudraCT number, 2011-005450-60.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]