| Literature DB >> 34858056 |
Limei Zhang1,2, He Huang1,3, Zhao Wang1,3, Yang Liang1,2, Tongyu Lin1,3,4, Xiaojie Fang1,3, Huangming Hong4, Yungchang Chen4, Fangfang Li1,3, Yuyi Yao1,3, Zegeng Chen1,3, Fei Pan1,3, Xiaoqian Li1,3, Meiting Chen1,3, Robert Peter Gale5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The management of primary intestinal diffuse large B cell lymphoma (PI-DLBCL) in elderly patients (aged >60 years) remains controversial. We conducted a retrospective study to assess the efficacy of different treatment strategies and prognostic factors for elderly Chinese patients with PI-DLBCL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-six untreated elderly patients with PI-DLBCL were included in this retrospective study. Twenty-four patients were treated with surgery (prior to chemotherapy) plus chemotherapy (SCT). The other 22 patients did not undergo surgery before chemotherapy (CT).Entities:
Keywords: PI-DLBCL; chemotherapy; prognostic factors; surgery; survival
Year: 2021 PMID: 34858056 PMCID: PMC8629765 DOI: 10.2147/CMAR.S330273
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancer Manag Res ISSN: 1179-1322 Impact factor: 3.989
Clinical Characteristics of Patients (n=46)
| Characteristic | Total(n=46) | SCT(n=24) | CT(n=22) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 67(61–81) | 65.5(61–80) | 67(61–81) | 0.432 | |
| Male | 31 | 15 | 16 | 0.460 |
| Female | 15 | 9 | 6 | |
| ECOG 0/1 | 44 | 24 | 20 | 0.432 |
| ECOG≥2 | 2 | 0 | 2 | |
| Normal | 30 | 16 | 14 | 0.673 |
| Increased | 15 | 7 | 8 | |
| Missing | 1 | 1 | ||
| Normal | 18 | 12 | 6 | 0.033 |
| Increased | 19 | 6 | 13 | |
| Missing | 9 | 6 | 3 | |
| Decreased | 32 | 17 | 15 | 0.845 |
| Normal | 14 | 7 | 7 | |
| Absent | 35 | 18 | 17 | 0.905 |
| Present | 10 | 6 | 4 | |
| Missing | 1 | 1 | ||
| 0–1 | 24 | 15 | 9 | 0.102 |
| ≥2 | 21 | 8 | 13 | |
| Missing | 1 | 1 | ||
| I/II-1 | 16 | 11 | 5 | 0.100 |
| II-2/II-E/IV | 30 | 13 | 17 | |
| Small intestinal | 13 | 7 | 6 | 0.698 |
| Ileocecus | 8 | 5 | 3 | |
| Large intestinal | 14 | 8 | 6 | |
| Multiregion | 11 | 4 | 7 | |
| Absent | 33 | 20 | 13 | 0.068 |
| Present | 13 | 4 | 9 | |
| GCB | 18 | 12 | 6 | 0.228 |
| N-GCB | 23 | 11 | 12 | |
| Missing | 5 | 1 | 4 | |
| Absent | 41 | 24 | 17 | 0.046 |
| Present | 5 | 0 | 5 | |
| <2 | 36 | 20 | 16 | 0.608 |
| ≥2 | 10 | 4 | 6 | |
| <6 | 20 | 11 | 9 | 0.736 |
| ≥6 | 26 | 13 | 13 | |
| Mass resection | 12 | |||
| Diagnostic | 11 | |||
| Perforation | 1 | |||
| Done | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1.000 |
| Not done | 46 | 24 | 22 | |
| Present | 1 | 1 | ||
| Absent | 45 | 23 | ||
| Absent | 21 | 11 | 10 | 0.979 |
| Present | 25 | 13 | 12 |
Abbreviations: ECOG, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; MG, microglobulin; IPI, international prognostic index; SCT, Surgery+Chemotherapy; CT, Chemotherapy; GCB, germinal center B-cell; R-CHOP, Rituximab in combination with cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, vincristine, and prednisolone.
The Detailed Comparison Between Two Groups in Main Comorbidity
| Comorbidity | SCT(n=24) | CT(n=22) |
|---|---|---|
| Hypertension disease | 5 | 3 |
| Diabetes | 3 | 4 |
| Chronic hepatitis B | 4 | 2 |
| Lumbar disc herniation | 1 | 2 |
| Chronic cholecystitis | 1 | 1 |
Characteristics of Patients Developed Intestinal Perforation During Chemotherapy
| No | Age | Sex | Stage | Surgery | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 81 | Male | IV | Partial ileectomy | Alive |
| 2 | 73 | Male | IV | Partial ileectomy | Dead |
| 3 | 70 | Female | IV | Right hemicolectomy | Dead |
| 4 | 65 | Male | IV | Partial ileectomy | Alive |
| 5 | 65 | Male | IV | Partial ileectomy | Alive |
Response of Patients Based on Treatment Strategy (n=46)
| Relapse and Response, n (%) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | Total | Relapse | CR | PR | SD/PD | ORR | |
| SCT | 24 | 4(16.7) | 19(79.2) | 3(12.5) | 2(8.3) | 22(91.7) | 0.581(ORR) |
| CT | 22 | 7(31.8) | 15(68.2) | 3(13.6) | 4(18.2) | 18(81.8) | |
Abbreviations: CR, complete response; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease; ORR, overall response rate.
Figure 1Survival of patients according to different treatment strategy. (A) OS; (B) EFS.
Figure 2Results of univariate and multivariate Cox regression.
Figure 3Univariate analysis of EFS in older patients with primary intestinal diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. (A) sex; (B) Lugano stage; (C) IPI score.