| Literature DB >> 22234681 |
Patrizia Pregno1, Annalisa Chiappella, Marilena Bellò, Barbara Botto, Simone Ferrero, Silvia Franceschetti, Francesca Giunta, Marco Ladetto, Giorgio Limerutti, Massimo Menga, Maura Nicolosi, Giorgio Priolo, Benedetta Puccini, Luigi Rigacci, Flavia Salvi, Luca Vaggelli, Roberto Passera, Gianni Bisi, Umberto Vitolo.
Abstract
Role of interim-PET (I-PET) in diffuse large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is controversial. To determine predictive value of I-PET on progression-free survival (PFS), we enrolled 88 first-line DLBCL patients treated with 6-8 R-CHOP courses regardless of I-PET. PET/CT were performed at diagnosis, after 2 to 4 courses and at the end of therapy with central reviewing according to visual dichotomous criteria. Results are as follows: I-PET, 72% negative, 28% positive; final-PET (F-PET), 88% negative, 12% positive; clinical complete response 90%. Concordance between clinical response and F-PET negativity was 97% because of 2 false positive. With a median follow-up of 26.2 months, 2-year overall survival and PFS were 91% and 77%, respectively. Two-year PFS for I-PET and F-PET negative versus positive were as follows: I-PET 85% versus 72% (P = .0475); F-PET 83% versus 64% (P < .001). Because of a small number of events, 2 independent bivariate Cox models were tested for PFS. In model 1, F-PET contradicted I-PET (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.03, P = .015 vs 1.27, P = 691); in model 2, F-PET (HR = 4.54) and International propnostic Index score (HR = 5.36, P = .001) remained independent prognostic factors. In conclusion, positive I-PET is not predictive of a worse outcome in DLBCL; larger prospective studies and harmonization of I-PET reading criteria are needed.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22234681 DOI: 10.1182/blood-2011-06-359943
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Blood ISSN: 0006-4971 Impact factor: 22.113