TY - JOUR
T1 - Long-term overall survival and toxicities of ABVD vs BEACOPP in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma
T2 - A pooled analysis of four randomized trials
AU - André, Marc P E
AU - Carde, Patrice
AU - Viviani, Simonetta
AU - Bellei, Monica
AU - Fortpied, Catherine
AU - Hutchings, Martin
AU - Gianni, Alessandro M
AU - Brice, Pauline
AU - Casasnovas, Olivier
AU - Gobbi, Paolo G
AU - Zinzani, Pier Luigi
AU - Dupuis, Jehan
AU - Iannitto, Emilio
AU - Rambaldi, Alessandro
AU - Brière, Josette
AU - Clément-Filliatre, Laurianne
AU - Heczko, Marian
AU - Valagussa, Pinuccia
AU - Douxfils, Jonathan
AU - Depaus, Julien
AU - Federico, Massimo
AU - Mounier, Nicolas
N1 - © 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
U2 - 10.1002/cam4.3298
DO - 10.1002/cam4.3298
M3 - Article
C2 - 32710498
VL - 9
SP - 6565
EP - 6575
JO - Cancer Med.
JF - Cancer Med.
SN - 2045-7634
IS - 18
ER -