The oncologist · 2015
Chemoimmunotherapy for Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue-Type Lymphoma: A Review of the Literature.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Kiesewetter Barbara, Ferreri Andrés J M, Raderer Markus
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Biological treatments, chemoimmunotherapy, and radiotherapy are associated with excellent disease control in both gastric and extragastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphomas. Systemic treatment approaches with both oral and i.v. agents are being increasingly studied, not only for patients with disseminated MALT lymphoma, but also for those with localized disease. To date, however, recommendations for the use of available systemic modalities have not been clearly defined.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present report reviews the current data on systemic treatment options for patients with MALT lymphoma and provides recommendations for their use in everyday practice.
RESULTS: Different chemotherapeutic agents, including anthracyclines, alkylators, and purine analogs, have been successfully tested in patients with MALT lymphoma. Reducing side effects while maintaining efficacy should be the main goal in treating these indolent lymphomas. From the data from the largest trial performed to date, the combination of chlorambucil plus rituximab (R) appears to be active as first-line treatment. Similarly, R-bendamustine also seems to be highly effective, but a longer follow-up period is needed. R-monotherapy results in lower remission rates, but seems a suitable option for less fit patients. New immunotherapeutic agents such as lenalidomide (with or without rituximab) or clarithromycin show solid activity but have not yet been validated in larger collectives.
CONCLUSION: Patients with MALT lymphoma should be treated within prospective trials to further define optimal therapeutic strategies. Systemic treatment is a reasonable option with potentially curative intent in everyday practice. Based on the efficacy and safety data from available studies, the present review provides recommendations for the use of systemic strategies.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present report reviews the current data on systemic treatment options for patients with MALT lymphoma and provides recommendations for their use in everyday practice.
RESULTS: Different chemotherapeutic agents, including anthracyclines, alkylators, and purine analogs, have been successfully tested in patients with MALT lymphoma. Reducing side effects while maintaining efficacy should be the main goal in treating these indolent lymphomas. From the data from the largest trial performed to date, the combination of chlorambucil plus rituximab (R) appears to be active as first-line treatment. Similarly, R-bendamustine also seems to be highly effective, but a longer follow-up period is needed. R-monotherapy results in lower remission rates, but seems a suitable option for less fit patients. New immunotherapeutic agents such as lenalidomide (with or without rituximab) or clarithromycin show solid activity but have not yet been validated in larger collectives.
CONCLUSION: Patients with MALT lymphoma should be treated within prospective trials to further define optimal therapeutic strategies. Systemic treatment is a reasonable option with potentially curative intent in everyday practice. Based on the efficacy and safety data from available studies, the present review provides recommendations for the use of systemic strategies.