Eintrag weiter verarbeiten
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy: Involved‐fi...
Gespeichert in:
| Zeitschriftentitel: | Cancer |
|---|---|
| Personen und Körperschaften: | , , , , , |
| In: | Cancer, 118, 2012, 17, S. 4156-4165 |
| Format: | E-Article |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| veröffentlicht: |
Wiley
|
| Schlagwörter: |
| author_facet |
Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. |
|---|---|
| author |
Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. |
| spellingShingle |
Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. Cancer Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy Cancer Research Oncology |
| author_sort |
campbell, belinda a. |
| spelling |
Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. 0008-543X 1097-0142 Wiley Cancer Research Oncology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26687 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title><jats:p>For limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), treatment decisions are often influenced by toxicity profiles. One strategy that minimizes chemotherapy‐induced toxicities is abbreviated chemotherapy plus consolidation involved‐field radiotherapy (IFRT). Involved‐node radiotherapy (INRT) is a new concept to DLBCL, aimed to reduce radiotherapy‐induced toxicities. We retrospectively review the long‐term outcomes of limited‐stage DLBCL treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and radiotherapy focusing on field size: IFRT versus INRT.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title><jats:p>The British Columbia Cancer Agency Lymphoid Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with limited‐stage DLBCL (stage I/II, without B‐symptoms; bulk < 10 cm) from 1981 to 2007. Patients were prescribed 3 cycles of chemotherapy plus IFRT (1981‐1996) or INRT≤5 cm (1996‐2007), defined as INRT to the prechemotherapy involved nodes with margins ≤ 5 cm.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title><jats:p>A total of 288 patients were identified: 56% were aged >60 years, 34% had stage II disease, 55% had extranodal disease, 19% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, and 15% received rituximab. The two radiotherapy groups were IFRT (138 patients; 48%) and INRT≤5cm (150 patients; 52%); median follow‐up was 117 and 89 months, respectively. Distant relapse was the most common site of failure in both groups. After INRT≤5 cm, marginal recurrence was infrequent (2%). Time to progression (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .823), progression‐free survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .575), and overall survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .417) were not significantly different between the radiotherapy cohorts. Radiotherapy field size was not a significant prognostic factor on multivariate analyses.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title><jats:p>This research is the first known body of work to apply the concept of INRT to limited‐stage DLBCL. Reducing the field size from IFRT to INRT≤5 cm maintains a low marginal recurrence risk with no impact on overall outcome. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.</jats:p></jats:sec> Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy Cancer |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1002/cncr.26687 |
| facet_avail |
Online Free |
| finc_class_facet |
Medizin |
| format |
ElectronicArticle |
| fullrecord |
blob:ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9jbmNyLjI2Njg3 |
| id |
ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9jbmNyLjI2Njg3 |
| institution |
DE-D275 DE-Bn3 DE-Brt1 DE-Zwi2 DE-D161 DE-Gla1 DE-Zi4 DE-15 DE-Pl11 DE-Rs1 DE-105 DE-14 DE-Ch1 DE-L229 |
| imprint |
Wiley, 2012 |
| imprint_str_mv |
Wiley, 2012 |
| issn |
0008-543X 1097-0142 |
| issn_str_mv |
0008-543X 1097-0142 |
| language |
English |
| mega_collection |
Wiley (CrossRef) |
| match_str |
campbell2012limitedstagediffuselargebcelllymphomatreatedwithabbreviatedsystemictherapyandconsolidationradiotherapyinvolvedfieldversusinvolvednoderadiotherapyinvolvedfieldversusinvolvednoderadiotherapy |
| publishDateSort |
2012 |
| publisher |
Wiley |
| recordtype |
ai |
| record_format |
ai |
| series |
Cancer |
| source_id |
49 |
| title_sub |
Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_unstemmed |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_full |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_fullStr |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_short |
Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_sort |
limited‐stage diffuse large b‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| topic |
Cancer Research Oncology |
| url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26687 |
| publishDate |
2012 |
| physical |
4156-4165 |
| description |
<jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title><jats:p>For limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), treatment decisions are often influenced by toxicity profiles. One strategy that minimizes chemotherapy‐induced toxicities is abbreviated chemotherapy plus consolidation involved‐field radiotherapy (IFRT). Involved‐node radiotherapy (INRT) is a new concept to DLBCL, aimed to reduce radiotherapy‐induced toxicities. We retrospectively review the long‐term outcomes of limited‐stage DLBCL treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and radiotherapy focusing on field size: IFRT versus INRT.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title><jats:p>The British Columbia Cancer Agency Lymphoid Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with limited‐stage DLBCL (stage I/II, without B‐symptoms; bulk < 10 cm) from 1981 to 2007. Patients were prescribed 3 cycles of chemotherapy plus IFRT (1981‐1996) or INRT≤5 cm (1996‐2007), defined as INRT to the prechemotherapy involved nodes with margins ≤ 5 cm.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title><jats:p>A total of 288 patients were identified: 56% were aged >60 years, 34% had stage II disease, 55% had extranodal disease, 19% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, and 15% received rituximab. The two radiotherapy groups were IFRT (138 patients; 48%) and INRT≤5cm (150 patients; 52%); median follow‐up was 117 and 89 months, respectively. Distant relapse was the most common site of failure in both groups. After INRT≤5 cm, marginal recurrence was infrequent (2%). Time to progression (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .823), progression‐free survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .575), and overall survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .417) were not significantly different between the radiotherapy cohorts. Radiotherapy field size was not a significant prognostic factor on multivariate analyses.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title><jats:p>This research is the first known body of work to apply the concept of INRT to limited‐stage DLBCL. Reducing the field size from IFRT to INRT≤5 cm maintains a low marginal recurrence risk with no impact on overall outcome. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.</jats:p></jats:sec> |
| container_issue |
17 |
| container_start_page |
4156 |
| container_title |
Cancer |
| container_volume |
118 |
| format_de105 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 |
E-Article |
| format_del152 |
Buch |
| format_del189 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 |
Article |
| format_dezwi2 |
Article, E-Article |
| format_finc |
Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw |
Article, E-Article |
| _version_ |
1792337963079696392 |
| geogr_code |
not assigned |
| last_indexed |
2024-03-01T15:24:37.402Z |
| geogr_code_person |
not assigned |
| openURL |
url_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fvufind.svn.sourceforge.net%3Agenerator&rft.title=Limited%E2%80%90stage+diffuse+large+B%E2%80%90cell+lymphoma+treated+with+abbreviated+systemic+therapy+and+consolidation+radiotherapy+%3A+Involved%E2%80%90field+versus+involved%E2%80%90node+radiotherapy&rft.date=2012-09-01&genre=article&issn=1097-0142&volume=118&issue=17&spage=4156&epage=4165&pages=4156-4165&jtitle=Cancer&atitle=Limited%E2%80%90stage+diffuse+large+B%E2%80%90cell+lymphoma+treated+with+abbreviated+systemic+therapy+and+consolidation+radiotherapy+%3A+Involved%E2%80%90field+versus+involved%E2%80%90node+radiotherapy&aulast=Sehn&aufirst=Laurie+H.&rft_id=info%3Adoi%2F10.1002%2Fcncr.26687&rft.language%5B0%5D=eng |
| SOLR | |
| _version_ | 1792337963079696392 |
| author | Campbell, Belinda A., Connors, Joseph M., Gascoyne, Randy D., Morris, W. James, Pickles, Tom, Sehn, Laurie H. |
| author_facet | Campbell, Belinda A., Connors, Joseph M., Gascoyne, Randy D., Morris, W. James, Pickles, Tom, Sehn, Laurie H., Campbell, Belinda A., Connors, Joseph M., Gascoyne, Randy D., Morris, W. James, Pickles, Tom, Sehn, Laurie H. |
| author_sort | campbell, belinda a. |
| container_issue | 17 |
| container_start_page | 4156 |
| container_title | Cancer |
| container_volume | 118 |
| description | <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title><jats:p>For limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), treatment decisions are often influenced by toxicity profiles. One strategy that minimizes chemotherapy‐induced toxicities is abbreviated chemotherapy plus consolidation involved‐field radiotherapy (IFRT). Involved‐node radiotherapy (INRT) is a new concept to DLBCL, aimed to reduce radiotherapy‐induced toxicities. We retrospectively review the long‐term outcomes of limited‐stage DLBCL treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and radiotherapy focusing on field size: IFRT versus INRT.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title><jats:p>The British Columbia Cancer Agency Lymphoid Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with limited‐stage DLBCL (stage I/II, without B‐symptoms; bulk < 10 cm) from 1981 to 2007. Patients were prescribed 3 cycles of chemotherapy plus IFRT (1981‐1996) or INRT≤5 cm (1996‐2007), defined as INRT to the prechemotherapy involved nodes with margins ≤ 5 cm.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title><jats:p>A total of 288 patients were identified: 56% were aged >60 years, 34% had stage II disease, 55% had extranodal disease, 19% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, and 15% received rituximab. The two radiotherapy groups were IFRT (138 patients; 48%) and INRT≤5cm (150 patients; 52%); median follow‐up was 117 and 89 months, respectively. Distant relapse was the most common site of failure in both groups. After INRT≤5 cm, marginal recurrence was infrequent (2%). Time to progression (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .823), progression‐free survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .575), and overall survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .417) were not significantly different between the radiotherapy cohorts. Radiotherapy field size was not a significant prognostic factor on multivariate analyses.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title><jats:p>This research is the first known body of work to apply the concept of INRT to limited‐stage DLBCL. Reducing the field size from IFRT to INRT≤5 cm maintains a low marginal recurrence risk with no impact on overall outcome. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.</jats:p></jats:sec> |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1002/cncr.26687 |
| facet_avail | Online, Free |
| finc_class_facet | Medizin |
| format | ElectronicArticle |
| format_de105 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de14 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de15 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de520 | Article, E-Article |
| format_de540 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dech1 | Article, E-Article |
| format_ded117 | Article, E-Article |
| format_degla1 | E-Article |
| format_del152 | Buch |
| format_del189 | Article, E-Article |
| format_dezi4 | Article |
| format_dezwi2 | Article, E-Article |
| format_finc | Article, E-Article |
| format_nrw | Article, E-Article |
| geogr_code | not assigned |
| geogr_code_person | not assigned |
| id | ai-49-aHR0cDovL2R4LmRvaS5vcmcvMTAuMTAwMi9jbmNyLjI2Njg3 |
| imprint | Wiley, 2012 |
| imprint_str_mv | Wiley, 2012 |
| institution | DE-D275, DE-Bn3, DE-Brt1, DE-Zwi2, DE-D161, DE-Gla1, DE-Zi4, DE-15, DE-Pl11, DE-Rs1, DE-105, DE-14, DE-Ch1, DE-L229 |
| issn | 0008-543X, 1097-0142 |
| issn_str_mv | 0008-543X, 1097-0142 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-01T15:24:37.402Z |
| match_str | campbell2012limitedstagediffuselargebcelllymphomatreatedwithabbreviatedsystemictherapyandconsolidationradiotherapyinvolvedfieldversusinvolvednoderadiotherapyinvolvedfieldversusinvolvednoderadiotherapy |
| mega_collection | Wiley (CrossRef) |
| physical | 4156-4165 |
| publishDate | 2012 |
| publishDateSort | 2012 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | ai |
| recordtype | ai |
| series | Cancer |
| source_id | 49 |
| spelling | Campbell, Belinda A. Connors, Joseph M. Gascoyne, Randy D. Morris, W. James Pickles, Tom Sehn, Laurie H. 0008-543X 1097-0142 Wiley Cancer Research Oncology http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26687 <jats:title>Abstract</jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>BACKGROUND:</jats:title><jats:p>For limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL), treatment decisions are often influenced by toxicity profiles. One strategy that minimizes chemotherapy‐induced toxicities is abbreviated chemotherapy plus consolidation involved‐field radiotherapy (IFRT). Involved‐node radiotherapy (INRT) is a new concept to DLBCL, aimed to reduce radiotherapy‐induced toxicities. We retrospectively review the long‐term outcomes of limited‐stage DLBCL treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and radiotherapy focusing on field size: IFRT versus INRT.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>METHODS:</jats:title><jats:p>The British Columbia Cancer Agency Lymphoid Cancer Database was used to identify patients diagnosed with limited‐stage DLBCL (stage I/II, without B‐symptoms; bulk < 10 cm) from 1981 to 2007. Patients were prescribed 3 cycles of chemotherapy plus IFRT (1981‐1996) or INRT≤5 cm (1996‐2007), defined as INRT to the prechemotherapy involved nodes with margins ≤ 5 cm.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>RESULTS:</jats:title><jats:p>A total of 288 patients were identified: 56% were aged >60 years, 34% had stage II disease, 55% had extranodal disease, 19% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, and 15% received rituximab. The two radiotherapy groups were IFRT (138 patients; 48%) and INRT≤5cm (150 patients; 52%); median follow‐up was 117 and 89 months, respectively. Distant relapse was the most common site of failure in both groups. After INRT≤5 cm, marginal recurrence was infrequent (2%). Time to progression (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .823), progression‐free survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .575), and overall survival (<jats:italic>P</jats:italic> = .417) were not significantly different between the radiotherapy cohorts. Radiotherapy field size was not a significant prognostic factor on multivariate analyses.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>CONCLUSIONS:</jats:title><jats:p>This research is the first known body of work to apply the concept of INRT to limited‐stage DLBCL. Reducing the field size from IFRT to INRT≤5 cm maintains a low marginal recurrence risk with no impact on overall outcome. Cancer 2012. © 2012 American Cancer Society.</jats:p></jats:sec> Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy Cancer |
| spellingShingle | Campbell, Belinda A., Connors, Joseph M., Gascoyne, Randy D., Morris, W. James, Pickles, Tom, Sehn, Laurie H., Cancer, Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy, Cancer Research, Oncology |
| title | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_full | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_fullStr | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_full_unstemmed | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_short | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_sort | limited‐stage diffuse large b‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_sub | Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| title_unstemmed | Limited‐stage diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma treated with abbreviated systemic therapy and consolidation radiotherapy : Involved‐field versus involved‐node radiotherapy |
| topic | Cancer Research, Oncology |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26687 |