PURPOSE: The optimal management of stage I follicular lymphoma, according to consensus guidelines, is based on uncontrolled experiences of select institutions. Diverse treatment approaches are used despite guidelines that recommend radiation therapy (XRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed outcomes of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma enrolled onto the National LymphoCare database. RESULTS: Of 471 patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, 206 patients underwent rigorous staging as defined by both a bone marrow aspirate and biopsy and an imaging study (a computed tomography [CT] scan of the whole body, a positron emission tomography [PET]/CT scan, or both). Rigorously staged patients had superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with nonrigorously staged patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63). Treatments given to rigorously staged patients were rituximab/chemotherapy (R-chemo; 28%), XRT (27%), observation (17%), systemic therapy + XRT (13%), rituximab monotherapy (12%), and other (3%). With a median follow-up of 57 months for PFS, there were 44 progression events (in 21% of patients) for rigorously staged patients. For these patients, PFS was significantly improved with either R-chemo or systemic therapy + XRT compared with patients receiving XRT alone after adjustment for histology, LDH, and the presence of B symptoms. There were no differences in overall survival. CONCLUSION: In this largest, prospectively enrolled group of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, variable treatment approaches resulted in similar excellent outcomes, which challenges the paradigm that XRT should be standard for this presentation.
PURPOSE: The optimal management of stage I follicular lymphoma, according to consensus guidelines, is based on uncontrolled experiences of select institutions. Diverse treatment approaches are used despite guidelines that recommend radiation therapy (XRT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed outcomes of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma enrolled onto the National LymphoCare database. RESULTS: Of 471 patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, 206 patients underwent rigorous staging as defined by both a bone marrow aspirate and biopsy and an imaging study (a computed tomography [CT] scan of the whole body, a positron emission tomography [PET]/CT scan, or both). Rigorously staged patients had superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with nonrigorously staged patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63). Treatments given to rigorously staged patients were rituximab/chemotherapy (R-chemo; 28%), XRT (27%), observation (17%), systemic therapy + XRT (13%), rituximab monotherapy (12%), and other (3%). With a median follow-up of 57 months for PFS, there were 44 progression events (in 21% of patients) for rigorously staged patients. For these patients, PFS was significantly improved with either R-chemo or systemic therapy + XRT compared with patients receiving XRT alone after adjustment for histology, LDH, and the presence of B symptoms. There were no differences in overall survival. CONCLUSION: In this largest, prospectively enrolled group of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, variable treatment approaches resulted in similar excellent outcomes, which challenges the paradigm that XRT should be standard for this presentation.
Authors: R B Wilder; D Jones; S L Tucker; L M Fuller; C S Ha; P McLaughlin; M A Hess; F Cabanillas; J D Cox Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-12-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: John F Seymour; Barbara Pro; Lillian M Fuller; John T Manning; Fredrick B Hagemeister; Jorge Romaguera; Maria A Rodriguez; Chul S Ha; Terry L Smith; Ana Ayala; Mark Hess; James D Cox; Fernando Cabanillas; Peter McLaughlin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Philippe Solal-Céligny; Pascal Roy; Philippe Colombat; Josephine White; Jim O Armitage; Reyes Arranz-Saez; Wing Y Au; Monica Bellei; Pauline Brice; Dolores Caballero; Bertrand Coiffier; Eulogio Conde-Garcia; Chantal Doyen; Massimo Federico; Richard I Fisher; Javier F Garcia-Conde; Cesare Guglielmi; Anton Hagenbeek; Corinne Haïoun; Michael LeBlanc; Andrew T Lister; Armando Lopez-Guillermo; Peter McLaughlin; Noël Milpied; Pierre Morel; Nicolas Mounier; Stephen J Proctor; Ama Rohatiner; Paul Smith; Pierre Soubeyran; Hervé Tilly; Umberto Vitolo; Pier-Luigi Zinzani; Emanuele Zucca; Emili Montserrat Journal: Blood Date: 2004-05-04 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Christina A Clarke; Sally L Glaser; Ronald F Dorfman; Paige M Bracci; Erin Eberle; Elizabeth A Holly Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2004-01 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: R L M Haas; Ph Poortmans; D de Jong; B M P Aleman; L G H Dewit; M Verheij; A A M Hart; M H J van Oers; M van der Hulst; J W Baars; H Bartelink Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: I Chau; R Jones; D Cunningham; A Wotherspoon; N Maisey; A R Norman; P Jain; L Bishop; A Horwich; D Catovsky Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2003-07-07 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Stefan K Barta; Hailun Li; Howard S Hochster; Fangxin Hong; Edie Weller; Randy D Gascoyne; Thomas M Habermann; Leo I Gordon; Natalia Colocci; Elizabeth M Bengtson; Sandra J Horning; Brad S Kahl Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-06-28 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Sweet Ping Ng; Richard Khor; Mathias Bressel; Michael MacManus; John F Seymour; Rodney J Hicks; Andrew Wirth Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2018-08-07 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Ida Wong-Sefidan; Michelle Byrtek; Xiaolei Zhou; Jonathan W Friedberg; Christopher R Flowers; Andrew D Zelenetz; Keith L Dawson; Erin Reid Journal: Leuk Lymphoma Date: 2016-08-12