Annals of hematology · 2019
Clinical characteristics of interim-PET negative patients with a positive end PET from the prospective HD08-01 FIL study.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое 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.
Rigacci Luigi, Puccini Benedetta, Broccoli Alessandro, Dona Manjola, Gotti Manuel, Evangelista Andrea, Santoro Armando, Bonfichi Maurizio, Re Alessandro, Spina Michele, Botto Barbara, Pulsoni Alessandro, Pagani Chiara, Stelitano Caterina, Salvi Flavia, Nassi Luca, Mannelli Lara, Kovalchuk Sofia, Gioia Daniela, Zinzani Pier Luigi
Аннотация
FDG-positron emission tomography (PET) performed early during therapy in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma patients has been confirmed as being important for progression-free survival. A group of patients with a negative interim-PET (i-PET) showed a positive end induction PET (e-PET). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical characteristics of patients with a positive e-PET as a secondary end point of the HD0801 study. A total of 519 patients with advanced-stage de novo Hodgkin lymphoma received initial treatment and underwent an i-PET. Patients with negative results continued the standard treatment. i-PET negative patients were then evaluated for response with an e-PET and those patients found to have a positive one were also then given a salvage therapy. Among 409 i-PET negative, 16 interrupted the therapy, 393 patients were evaluated with an e-PET, and 39 were positive. Sixteen out of 39 underwent a diagnostic biopsy and 15 were confirmed as HD. Seventeen out of 39 e-PET were reviewed according to the Deauville Score and, in sixteen, it was confirmed positive (10 DS 5, 6 DS 4). With the exception of high LDH value at diagnosis (p = 0.01; HR 95% CI 1.18-4.89), no clinical characteristics were significantly different in comparison with e-PET negative patients. Positive e-PET after a negative i-PET has a worse outcome when compared with i-PET positive patients salvaged with therapy intensification. It was not possible to identify clinical characteristics associated with a positive e-PET.