Malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphoma of childhood and adolescence in Austria--therapy results between 1986 and 2000.

Between 1986 and 2000 183 Austrian children and adolescents with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) and mature B-cell acute leukemia (B-ALL) were enrolled in 3 consecutive studies of the Berlin-Frankfurt-Münster (BFM) Group. In trial NHL-BFM 86, patients were stratified according to the histologic subtype and clinical stage. In the succeeding studies NHL-BFM 90 and 95, treatment stratification was additionally based on the speed of tumor response to therapy and for children with B-cell NHL/B-ALL also on the pre-therapeutic serum lactic dehydrogenase level. Event-free survival rates were 84% +/- 6% in trial NHL-BFM 86 (n = 39) and 86% +/- 4% in both trials NHL-BFM 90 (n = 67) and NHL-BFM 95 (n = 77). Patients with lymphoblastic lymphoma (mainly with T-cell phenotypes) had an excellent prognosis with an ALL-type chemotherapy regimen (n = 49; relapse, n = 1), whereas an intensive, short-pulse therapy delivered within a 2- to 4-month period was found to be highly efficacious in children with B-cell NHL/B-ALL (n = 114; relapse, n = 6; progression, n = 5). Patients with anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) who were treated with similar alternating short courses of multi-agent chemotherapy had a less good outcome (n = 20; relapse, n = 6, progression, n = 3). Children with B-cell NHL and B-ALL who failed initial therapy also had a dismal prognosis (10/11 patients died). Local radiotherapy as a part of lymphoma therapy was completely abandoned in study NHL-BFM 90 and surgical interventions were confined to specific situations such as complete resection in localized B-cell NHL and ALCL, diagnostic biopsy and second-look operation. In conclusion, our results showed that the BFM treatment strategy for lymphoblastic lymphoma and B-cell NHL/B-ALL was highly successful in the majority of patients; however, optimal treatment for children with ALCL has not yet been defined. As a consequence, larger trials at an international level are necessary to find new prognostic markers that might define more precisely those patients who need further intensification of first-line treatment or novel therapy.