1. Surveillance imaging during first remission in follicular lymphoma does not impact overall survival
- Author
-
Goldman, Max L, Mao, Jimmy J, Strouse, Christopher S, Chen, Wanqi, Rupji, Manali, Chen, Zhengjia, Maurer, Matthew J, Calzada, Oscar, Churnetski, Michael, Flowers, Christopher R, Cerhan, James R, Link, Brian K, Thompson, Carrie A, and Cohen, Jonathon B
- Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences ,Cardiovascular Medicine and Haematology ,Clinical Sciences ,Oncology and Carcinogenesis ,Lymphoma ,Hematology ,Genetics ,Clinical Research ,Rare Diseases ,Cancer ,4.2 Evaluation of markers and technologies ,Detection ,screening and diagnosis ,4.1 Discovery and preclinical testing of markers and technologies ,Good Health and Well Being ,Diagnostic Imaging ,Humans ,Lymphoma ,Follicular ,Neoplasm Recurrence ,Local ,Positron-Emission Tomography ,Remission Induction ,Retrospective Studies ,computed tomography ,follicular lymphoma ,positron emission tomography-computed tomography ,relapsed follicular lymphoma ,surveillance ,Public Health and Health Services ,Oncology & Carcinogenesis ,Oncology and carcinogenesis ,Public health - Abstract
BackgroundAlthough many patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) undergo routine radiographic surveillance during their first remission, no consensus exists on the modality, duration, frequency, or need for routine imaging studies. The authors retrospectively examined the effect of surveillance imaging on relapse detection and overall survival (OS) in patients with FL.MethodsPatients with newly diagnosed FL who had a response to induction therapy were identified from the Lymphoid Malignancies Enterprise Architecture Database (LEAD) at Emory University and from the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic. Patients were evaluated for both relapse and method of relapse detection (ie, clinical concerns vs radiologic detection through surveillance imaging in an asymptomatic patient).ResultsOf 148 patients in the LEAD cohort, 55 (37%) relapsed, and the majority (n = 35; 64%) of relapses were detected clinically. In the MER cohort, 63 of 177 relapses (54%) were detected clinically. There was no significant difference in OS from the date of diagnosis between the 2 methods of relapse detection in the LEAD (hazard ratio [HR], 0.61; 95% CI, 0.13-2.94; P = .54) and MER (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.47-2.21; P = .96) cohorts. Similarly, there was no significant difference in OS from the date of relapse between the 2 methods of relapse detection in the LEAD (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.10-2.27; P = .35) and MER (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.47-2.21; P = .96) cohorts.ConclusionsThese findings suggest a limited role for routine surveillance imaging in patients with FL who complete front-line therapy. Future studies should evaluate which patients may benefit from a more aggressive surveillance approach and should explore novel methods of relapse detection.
- Published
- 2021