Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) is a diverse group of lymphomas (10-15% of all non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas) with aggressive behavior. Despite the standard of 1st line anthracycline-contain ingregimens, clinical outcomes are poor compared to B-cell lymphomas. In addition, there are still debates about specific prognostic factors (PF) in PTCLs. Aims: Primary endpoints -event-free survival (EFS) and over all survival (OS). To evaluate the prognostic significance of five PTCLs scores (International Prognostic Index -IPI, International Peripheral T-cell lymphoma Project Score -IPTCL, Prognostic Index for T-cell lymphoma -PIT, modified Prognostic Index for T-cell lymphoma -mPIT and T-cell score). Patients and methods: From 67 enrolled patients, only 50 were included: PTCL not otherwise specified (22, 44%), anaplastic large cell lymphoma ALK+ (anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive) (10, 20%) and ALK− (anaplastic lymphoma kinase-negative) (18, 36%). Patients received CHOP-like regimens (CHOP, CHOEP, EPOCH). Results: The over all rate response was observed in 66% of cases (complete response 78%). There were 48% of relapses after the 1st line therapy during follow-up (median 11 months; range 1-85 months). Median age 57 (range 22-80) with male predominance 62%. In total, 40% of patients were > 60 years old, 48% had stage III-IV. Majority of patients were assessed by five prognostic scores. IPI (45 patients): The 3-year EFS and OS were higher for IPI ≤ 1 vs. IPI > 2 (80 vs. 18% and 87 vs. 27%, respectively; p = 0.0002). Receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed poor clinical outcome to patients with PF > 1 (Se = 88 %; Sp = 68 %; AUC = 0.7; p = 0.0081). IPTCLP (41 patients): The presence of PF = 1-2 showed EFS and OS reduction. A 3-year EFS rate for 1-2 PF was 25 vs. 70% for PF = 0 (p = 0.003). Thus, 3-year OS in patients with PF = 0 vs. PF = 1-2 was 100 vs. 20% (p = 0.0001). PIT (42 patients): Better 3-year EFS and OS in patients with PF = 0 vs. PF = 1-3 (88 vs. 28% and 100 vs. 34%, respectively, p = 0.001). Patients with PF = 1-3 have a higher rate of relapses vs. PF = 0 (p = 0.0005 by Cox-test). mPIT (21 patients): No significant difference between PF and clinical outcomes. T-cell score (18 patients): Higher survival rates with PF ≤ 2. More than 2 PF have an impact on EFS (p = 0.005). The 3-years OS in patients with PF ≤ 2 was 77 vs. 25% in cases with PF ≥ 3 (p = 0.001). Conclusion: IPI, PIT, IPTCLP are still very useful in defining risk stratification. As to mPIT and T-cell score, more patients to evaluate their prognostication possibility are needed.
Ukraine data on prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in patients with peripheral t-cell lymphomas / Skrypets, T.; Novosad, O.; Pastushenko, Y.; Gorbach, O.; Kriachok, I.. - In: KLINICKÁ ONKOLOGIE. - ISSN 0862-495X. - 32:6(2019), pp. 436-444. [10.14735/amko2019436]
Ukraine data on prognostic factors and treatment outcomes in patients with peripheral t-cell lymphomas
Skrypets T.;
2019
Abstract
Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) is a diverse group of lymphomas (10-15% of all non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas) with aggressive behavior. Despite the standard of 1st line anthracycline-contain ingregimens, clinical outcomes are poor compared to B-cell lymphomas. In addition, there are still debates about specific prognostic factors (PF) in PTCLs. Aims: Primary endpoints -event-free survival (EFS) and over all survival (OS). To evaluate the prognostic significance of five PTCLs scores (International Prognostic Index -IPI, International Peripheral T-cell lymphoma Project Score -IPTCL, Prognostic Index for T-cell lymphoma -PIT, modified Prognostic Index for T-cell lymphoma -mPIT and T-cell score). Patients and methods: From 67 enrolled patients, only 50 were included: PTCL not otherwise specified (22, 44%), anaplastic large cell lymphoma ALK+ (anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive) (10, 20%) and ALK− (anaplastic lymphoma kinase-negative) (18, 36%). Patients received CHOP-like regimens (CHOP, CHOEP, EPOCH). Results: The over all rate response was observed in 66% of cases (complete response 78%). There were 48% of relapses after the 1st line therapy during follow-up (median 11 months; range 1-85 months). Median age 57 (range 22-80) with male predominance 62%. In total, 40% of patients were > 60 years old, 48% had stage III-IV. Majority of patients were assessed by five prognostic scores. IPI (45 patients): The 3-year EFS and OS were higher for IPI ≤ 1 vs. IPI > 2 (80 vs. 18% and 87 vs. 27%, respectively; p = 0.0002). Receiver operating characteristic analysis confirmed poor clinical outcome to patients with PF > 1 (Se = 88 %; Sp = 68 %; AUC = 0.7; p = 0.0081). IPTCLP (41 patients): The presence of PF = 1-2 showed EFS and OS reduction. A 3-year EFS rate for 1-2 PF was 25 vs. 70% for PF = 0 (p = 0.003). Thus, 3-year OS in patients with PF = 0 vs. PF = 1-2 was 100 vs. 20% (p = 0.0001). PIT (42 patients): Better 3-year EFS and OS in patients with PF = 0 vs. PF = 1-3 (88 vs. 28% and 100 vs. 34%, respectively, p = 0.001). Patients with PF = 1-3 have a higher rate of relapses vs. PF = 0 (p = 0.0005 by Cox-test). mPIT (21 patients): No significant difference between PF and clinical outcomes. T-cell score (18 patients): Higher survival rates with PF ≤ 2. More than 2 PF have an impact on EFS (p = 0.005). The 3-years OS in patients with PF ≤ 2 was 77 vs. 25% in cases with PF ≥ 3 (p = 0.001). Conclusion: IPI, PIT, IPTCLP are still very useful in defining risk stratification. As to mPIT and T-cell score, more patients to evaluate their prognostication possibility are needed.File | Dimensione | Formato | |
---|---|---|---|
KO_2019-6-5_ukrajinske-udaje-o-prognostickych-faktorech-a-vysledcich-lecby-u-pacientu-s-perifernimi-t-lymfomy-118543.pdf
Open access
Tipologia:
Versione pubblicata dall'editore
Dimensione
178.71 kB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
178.71 kB | Adobe PDF | Visualizza/Apri |
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I metadati presenti in IRIS UNIMORE sono rilasciati con licenza Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal, mentre i file delle pubblicazioni sono rilasciati con licenza Attribuzione 4.0 Internazionale (CC BY 4.0), salvo diversa indicazione.
In caso di violazione di copyright, contattare Supporto Iris