Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2026
Comparison of Outcomes With Novel Versus Traditional Chemotherapy Regimens for Relapsed and Refractory Classical Hodgkin Lymphoma.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ermann Daniel, Vardell Victoria, Zacholski Erin, Fegley Amanda, Modi Dipenkumar, Fedak Kalub, Sundaram Suchitra, Rajeeve Sridevi, Goyal Gaurav, Hatic Haris, Torka Pallawi, Ba Aqeel Sheeba, Borogovac Azra, MacDougall Kira, Kothari Shalin, Kress Anna, Travers Elizabeth, Chilakamarri Nitin, Brem Elizabeth, Ayyappan Sabarish, Sigmund Audrey, Bond David, Fitzgerald Lindsey, Wagner Charlotte, Hu Boyu, Stephens Deborah M, Shah Harsh
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Limited data exists comparing the efficacy of novel therapies containing brentuximab vedotin and/or checkpoint inhibitors to standard chemotherapy as treatment for relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin Lymphoma.
METHODS: In this study, we evaluated outcomes of 162 patients receiving second-line therapy, of which 64% (n = 104) were in the chemotherapy cohort and 36% (n = 58) in the novel therapy cohort.
RESULTS: Over all responses for novel therapy and chemotherapy cohort were 76% versus 70% (P = .44), and complete response (CR) rates were 57% versus 46% (P = .40). The 2-year EFS rates were 72% versus 60% in novel therapy and chemotherapy cohort, respectively (P = .10). For patients who proceeded to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT; n = 135), pretransplant CR predicted improved progression-free survival. In patients not proceeding to ASCT, prolonged 2-year EFS (86% vs. 33%, P < .01) was observed in those receiving novel therapy as second-line treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest improved outcomes in patients who receive novel agents compared to chemotherapy during second-line treatment.
METHODS: In this study, we evaluated outcomes of 162 patients receiving second-line therapy, of which 64% (n = 104) were in the chemotherapy cohort and 36% (n = 58) in the novel therapy cohort.
RESULTS: Over all responses for novel therapy and chemotherapy cohort were 76% versus 70% (P = .44), and complete response (CR) rates were 57% versus 46% (P = .40). The 2-year EFS rates were 72% versus 60% in novel therapy and chemotherapy cohort, respectively (P = .10). For patients who proceeded to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT; n = 135), pretransplant CR predicted improved progression-free survival. In patients not proceeding to ASCT, prolonged 2-year EFS (86% vs. 33%, P < .01) was observed in those receiving novel therapy as second-line treatment.
CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest improved outcomes in patients who receive novel agents compared to chemotherapy during second-line treatment.