| Literature DB >> 33623433 |
Jiwei Li1,2,3, Jin Li4,5, Meizuo Zhong6, Hui Zhou4,5, Baohua Yu1,2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Advanced stage extranodal natural killer/T-cell lymphoma (ENKTL) is a distinct type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and the prognosis of ENKTL is poor with current treatment. This study aimed to investigate the clinical features, treatment strategy and survival outcome in patients with advanced stage ENKTL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 107 patients with newly diagnosed advanced stage ENKTL between January 2010 and December 2014 were reviewed from three cancer centers. Survival probability was calculated using Kaplan-Meier and the survival curves were compared by Log rank test. Cox regression analyses was performed to investigate the prognostic factors in ENKTL.Entities:
Keywords: chemotherapy; extranodal natural killer NK/T-cell lymphoma; toxicity
Year: 2021 PMID: 33623433 PMCID: PMC7896804 DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S292293
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Manag Res ISSN: 1179-1322 Impact factor: 3.989
Patient Characteristics
| Characteristics | Patient Number (%) | CHOP Group | L-asp Group (n = 66) | P value (L-asp vs CHOP Group) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total | GELOXD (n = 44) | SMILE (n = 22) | ||||
| Gender | 0.4237 | |||||
| Male | 75 (70.1) | 21 | 44 | 28 | 16 | |
| Female | 32 (29.9) | 7 | 22 | 16 | 6 | |
| Age (years) | 0.9702 | |||||
| > 60 | 20 (18.7) | 5 | 12 | 7 | 0 5 | |
| ≤ 60 | 87 (81.3) | 23 | 54 | 37 | 0 17 | |
| Median (years) | 42.0 | 37.5 | 41.5 | |||
| ECOG PS | 0.5275 | |||||
| 0–1 | 105 (98.1) | 27 | 65 | 43 | 0 22 | |
| 2–4 | 2 (1.9) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | |
| B symptom | 0.2049 | |||||
| Yes | 61 (57.0) | 13 | 40 | 25 | 0 15 | |
| No | 46 (43.0) | 15 | 26 | 19 | 0 7 | |
| IPI score | 91 | 23 | 60 | 41 | 0 19 | 0.1642 |
| > 1 | 31 (34.1) | 16 | 50 | 36 | 0 14 | |
| ≤ 1 | 60 (65.9) | 7 | 10 | 5 | 0 5 | |
| LDH level | 91 | 23 | 60 | 40 | 0 20 | 0.3745 |
| Elevated | 44 (48.4) | 9 | 30 | 17 | 0 13 | |
| Normal | 47 (51.6) | 14 | 30 | 23 | 0 7 | |
| Primary sites | 0.5596 | |||||
| UAT | 88 (82.2) | 23 | 52 | 36 | 0 17 | |
| NAT | 19 (17.8) | 4 | 13 | 8 | 0 5 | |
| Skin | 9 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 0 2 | |
| Intestinal tract | 6 (1.4) | 1 | 5 | 3 | 0 2 | |
| Breast | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 0 | |
| Distant lymph nodes | 3 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 0 1 | |
| PINK | 107 | 28 | 66 | 0.2282 | ||
| 1–2 | 38 (35.5) | 7 | 25 | 13 | 0 12 | |
| ≥3 | 69 (64.5) | 21 | 41 | 31 | 0 10 | |
| Immunophenotype | ||||||
| Ki- 67 ≥ 60% | 62 (57.9) | 18 | 32 | 22 | 0 10 | 0.1603 |
| EBER + | 101 (94.4) | 25 | 62 | 41 | 0 21 | 0.4319 |
Abbreviations: ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; IPI, International Prognostic Index; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; PINK, Prognostic Index of Natural Killer Lymphoma; EBER, EBV encoded RNA.
The Response Rates for Different Treatment Regimens
| CHOP (n=28) | L-asp Containing Regimen (n=66) | VIPD (n=7) | P value (L-asp vs CHOP) | P value (VIPD vs CHOP) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CR | 6 | 31 | 3 | 0.0204 | 0.2460 |
| PR | 6 | 14 | 2 | ||
| SD | 4 | 9 | 1 | ||
| PD | 12 | 12 | 1 | ||
| ORR | 42.9% | 68.2% | 71.4% | 0.0215 | 0.2285 |
Figure 1Kaplan-Meier survival curve of advanced stage ENKTL patients.
Figure 2Significant impact of primary involved site, IPI score and PINK score on the survival outcome.
Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Prognostic Factors for Survivals (by Cox Regression)
| Clinical Factor | Progression-Free Survival | Overall Survival | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Univariate | Multivariate | Univariate | Multivariate | |||||
| HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | HR (95% CI) | |||||
| Aged ≥ 60y | 0.011 | 0470 (0.255–0.865) | 0.019 | 0.491 (0.264–0.909) | ||||
| Gender | 0.817 | 0.921 (0.458–1.852) | 0.820 | 0.919 (0.444–1.903) | ||||
| B symptom | 0.928 | 1.029 (0.550–1.924) | 0.909 | 0.963 (0.502–1.847) | ||||
| LDH | 0.532 | 1.243 (0.628–2.462) | 0.649 | 1.173 (0.648–2.156) | ||||
| Ki67≥60% | 0.238 | 0.605(0.262–1.395) | 0.553 | 0.763(0.313–1.862) | ||||
| Primary tumor site (UAT vs NUAT) | 0.002 | 0.377(0.195–0.728) | 0.012 | 0.435(0.221–0.855) | ||||
| Stage (III vs IV) | 0.147 | 1.837 (0.807–4.180) | 0.238 | 1.648(0.719–3.778) | ||||
| IPI score ≥ 2 | 0.029 | 0.370 (0.144–0.951) | 0.039 | 0.389 (0.151–0.999) | ||||
| PINK score≥3 | 0.001 | 0.417 (0.239–0.726) | 0.014 | 0.335 (0.141–0.798) | 0.011 | 0.491 (0.279–0.866) | 0.048 | 0.415 (0.174–0.991) |
| β2 -microglobulin elevated > 2.5mg/L | 0.974 | 0.986 (0.416–2.333) | 0.770 | 0.874 (0.355–2.154) | ||||
| Hemoglobin < 110g/L | 0.568 | 0.828 (0.420–1.632) | 0.289 | 0.677 (0.329–1.391) | ||||
| Leukopenia < 4×109/L | 0.415 | 1.359(0.650–2.842) | 0.732 | 1.140 (0.538–2.419) | ||||
| Platelet < 150×109/L | 0.649 | 0.853 (0.431–1.690) | 0.367 | 0.723 (0.358–1.461) | ||||
| L-asp containing regimen | 0.106 | 1.548(0.899–2.667) | 0.042 | 1.776(1.022–3.089) | ||||
| CR after treatment | 0.000 | 5.409 (2.893–10.113) | 0.002 | 4.577 (1.72412.150) | 0.000 | 5.150 (2.717–9.759) | 0.045 | 2.507 (1.021–6.153) |
Grade 3/4 Toxicity That Occurred in the Two Groups
| Toxicity | GELOXD (n=44) | SMILE (n=22) | P value |
|---|---|---|---|
| 7 | 13 | 0.0003 | |
| Neutropenia | 6(13.6%) | 12(54.5%) | |
| Anemia | 4(9.1%) | 8(36.4%) | |
| Thrombocytopenia | 2(4.5%) | 9(40.9%) | |
| Febrile neutropenia | 1(2.3%) | 2(9.1%) | |
| 8 | 14 | 0.0002 | |
| Nausea | 5 (11.4%) | 8 (36.4%) | |
| Vomiting | 2 (4.5%) | 3 (13.6%) | |
| Diarrhea | 0 | 2 (9.1%) | |
| Transaminase elevation | 2 (4.5%) | 7 (31.8%) | |
| ALT elevation | 2 (4.5%) | 3 (13.6%) | |
| AST elevation | 1 (2.3%) | 5 (22.7%) | |
| Hyperbilirubinemia | 1 (2.3%) | 3 (13.6%) | |
| Peripheral neuropathy | 1 (2.3%) | 2 (9.1%) | |
| Fatigue | 1 (2.3%) | 3 (13.6%) |