계명대학교 의학도서관 Repository

Comparison of first-line treatment with CHOP versus ICED in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma eligible for upfront autologous stem cell transplantation

Metadata Downloads
Author(s)
Seok Jin KimJae-Cheol JoDok Hyun YoonDeok-Hwan YangSang Eun YoonGyeong-Won LeeJee Hyun KongYong ParkKa-Won KangHo-Sup LeeSung Yong OhHo-Jin ShinWon Sik LeeYoon Seok ChoiSeong Hyun JeongMin Kyoung KimHye Jin KangJun Ho YiSung-Nam LimHo-Young YhimYoung Rok DoHwan Jung YunHyeon-Seok EomMark Hong LeeCheolwon SuhWon Seog Kim
Keimyung Author(s)
Do, Young Rok
Department
Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학)
Journal Title
Front Oncol
Issued Date
2023
Volume
13
Keyword
T-cellautologous stem cell transplantationchemotherapylymphomaprogression-free survival
Abstract
Introduction:
Upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has been recommended for patients who are newly diagnosed with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), and CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), an anthracycline-based chemotherapy has been the frontline chemotherapy for PTCL. However, it is not clear whether anthracycline-based chemotherapies such as CHOP could be standard induction therapy for PTCL.

Methods:
We conducted a randomized phase II study to compare CHOP with fractionated ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide, and dexamethasone (ICED) for patients eligible for ASCT. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) and secondary endpoints included objective response rate, overall survival (OS), and safety profiles.

Results:
Patients were randomized into either CHOP (n = 69) or ICED (n = 66), and the characteristics of both arms were not different. PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS, n = 60) and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL, n = 53) were dominant. The objective response rate was not different between CHOP (59.4%) and ICED (56.1%), and the 3-year PFS was not different between CHOP (36.7%) and ICED (33.1%). In AITL patients, CHOP was favored over ICED whereas ICED was associated with more cytopenia and reduced dose intensity. Patients who received upfront ASCT after achieving complete response to CHOP or ICED showed 80% of 3-year OS.

Discussion:
In summary, our study showed no therapeutic difference between CHOP and ICED in terms of response and PFS. Thus, CHOP might remain the reference regimen especially for AITL based on its better outcome in AITL, and upfront ASCT could be recommended as a consolidation of complete response in patients with PTCL.
Keimyung Author(s)(Kor)
도영록
Publisher
School of Medicine (의과대학)
Type
Article
ISSN
2234-943X
Source
https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/oncology/articles/10.3389/fonc.2023.1230629/full
DOI
10.3389/fonc.2023.1230629
URI
https://kumel.medlib.dsmc.or.kr/handle/2015.oak/45211
Appears in Collections:
1. School of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Internal Medicine (내과학)
공개 및 라이선스
  • 공개 구분공개
파일 목록

Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.