OncoLink Cancer Treatment and Resources
Link to OncoLink

Effect of the addition of rituximab to front line therapy with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) on the remission rate and time to treatment failure (TTF) compared to CHOP alone in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL): results of a prospective randomized trial of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group (GLSG)

Reviewer: Maria Luisa Veronese, MD
Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania
Ultima Vez Modificado: 5 de junio del 2004

This study discusses an off-label use of rituximab for the treatment of MCL.

Presenter: W. Hiddemann
Presenter's Affiliation: Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munchen, Germany
Type of Session: Scientific

Background

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) accounts for up to 6% of all lymphomas.  Most patients present with advanced stage and progress rapidly.  There is currently no standardized approach for treatment of this disease.  Responses to different chemotherapy regimens range between 19% and 52% however, the overall survival remains poor.  New treatment modalities are therefore needed.  Based on the encouraging results of a previous trial combining rituximab with the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, mitoxantrone (FCM) regimen for salvage therapy of relapsed MCL, the GLSG started a prospective randomized trial comparing CHOP versus rituximab plus CHOP (R-CHOP) as first line therapy.

Materials and Methods

  • 122 patients with newly diagnosed MCL, stages III and IV were randomized between CHOP (n=60) and R-CHOP (n=62) (the studies included other histologies however, this analysis only include the patients with MCL)
  •  
  • Time to tumor failure (TTF) was defined as time from initial treatment to progression of the lymphoma, and Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from documented remission to relapse
  •  
  • Patients who achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) were subsequently randomized to other treatments (PSCT and IFN maintenance) with different schedules of administration according to age (> or < 60). 
  • Results

  • Overall, R-CHOP showed significantly better CR rates then CHOP of 34%  vs 7% (p=0.00024)
  •  
  • The overall response rate (CR + PR) was also superior for R-CHOP compared to CHOP with 94% vs 74% (p=0.005)  
  •  
  • The TTF was significantly longer (p=0.0131) in the R-CHOP group; PFS was not statistically different between the two groups
  •  
  • Toxicity was mild, predominantly comprising myelosuppression and granulocytopenia in particular.  Grade III and IV granulocytopenia was more frequent with R-CHOP regimen (63% versus 53%, p=0.01). 
  • Author's Conclusions

    • R-CHOP produced better CR and overall remissions
    • R-CHOP produced a longer TTF
    • There was no differences in PFS between the two regimens
    • There were no differences in the two post-induction regimens between the the CHOP and R-CHOP groups 
    • R-CHOP did not induce major toxicities

    Clinical/Scientific Implications
    MCL carries a poor prognosis and there are no standardized regimens.  Promising results have been shown with the inclusion of rituximab to the FCM regimen and rituximab has significant clinical activity in MCL as single agent.  Unfortunately, the progression free survival and the overall survival remain poor. This study compared CHOP and R-CHOP regimens as first line therapy in patients with MCL.  R-CHOP induced better CRs and longer TTF. PFS was not improved by the addition of rituximab.  The different regimens applied after CHOP/R-CHOP induction may partly account for the lack of differences in PFS.  These data are encouraging and further studies with a larger number of patients with stratification by prognostic risk factors and longer follow-up time to evaluate overall survival are needed.

    Oncolink's ASCO Coverage made possible by an unrestricted Educational Grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb Oncology.

    OncoLink I wish u knew...

    Dr. Giantonio discusses the importance of oncology clinical trials and clarifies some myths about studies. Read more.

    Cancer Types
    Bone Cancer
    Brain Tumors
    Breast Cancer
    Carcinoid Tumors
    Endocrine System Cancers
    Gastrointestinal Cancers
    Gynecologic Cancers
    Head and Neck Cancers
    Leukemia
    Lung Cancers
    Lymphomas
    Myelomas
    Pediatric Cancers
    Penile Cancer
    Prostate Cancer
    Sarcomas
    Skin Cancers
    Testicular Cancer
    Thyroid Cancer
    Urinary Tract Cancers
    OncoLink Vet

    Cancer Treatment
    Biologic Therapy
    Bone Marrow Transplants
    Chemotherapy

    Clinical Trials
    Complementary Medicine
    Gene Therapy
    General Treatment Concerns
    Hormone Therapy
    PDT Center
    Proton Therapy
    Radiation Oncology
    Surgical Oncology
    Targeted Therapies
    Vaccine Therapies

    Cancer Support
    Caregivers
    Hospice Care and Bereavement
    Nutrition and Cancer
    Sexuality & Fertility
    Side Effects
    Support
    Survivorship
    Exercise and Cancer

    Cancer Resources
    Cancer News
    OncoLink University
    Nurses' Notes
    Conferences
    Newly Diagnosed Patients
    Causes and Prevention
    Legal and Financial Information for Patients
    LGBT Resources
    NCI Resources
    Global Resources
    Cancer Resource List
    Resources for Young Adults

    OncoLink Media Library
    OncoLink TV
    Book, Music and Video Reviews


    Ask the Experts
    Brown Bag Chat
    Tracy's Corner

    About OncoLink
    About OncoLink
    Giving to OncoLink
    Contact Information
    Usage Policy
    Editorial Board
    How to Partner with OncoLink
    Link to OncoLink
    Mission Statement

    OncoLink Cancer Resources RSS What's New RSS