Dataset Information

Prognostic impact of sarcopenia in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Sarcopenia is known to be related to an increased risk of chemotherapy toxicity and to a poor prognosis in patients with malignancy. We assessed the prognostic role of sarcopenia in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

Methods

In total, 187 consecutive patients with DLBCL treated with induction rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (R-CHOP) immunochemotherapy were reviewed. Sarcopenia was defined as the lowest sex-specific quartile of the skeletal muscle index, calculated by dividing the pectoralis muscle area by the height. Clinical outcomes were compared between the sarcopenic and non-sarcopenic groups. A nomogram was constructed from the Cox regression model for overall survival (OS).

Results

Treatment-related mortality (21.7 vs. 5.0%, P = 0.002) and early discontinuation of treatment (32.6 vs. 14.9%, P = 0.008) were more common in the sarcopenic group than in the non-sarcopenic group. The 5 year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 35.3% in the sarcopenic group and 65.8% in the non-sarcopenic group (P < 0.001). The 5 year OS rates were 37.3% in the sarcopenic group and 68.1% in the non-sarcopenic group (P < 0.001). Sarcopenia and the five variables of the International Prognostic Index (IPI) were independent prognostic factors in a multivariate analysis for PFS and OS and were used to construct the nomogram. The calibration plot showed good agreement between the nomogram predictions and actual observations. The c index of the nomogram (0.80) was higher than those of other prognostic indices (IPI, 0.77, P = 0.009; revised-IPI, 0.74, P < 0.001; National Comprehensive Cancer Network-IPI, 0.77, P = 0.062).

Conclusions

Sarcopenia is associated with intolerance to standard R-CHOP chemotherapy as well as a poor prognosis. Moreover, sarcopenia itself can be included in prognostic models in DLBCL.

SUBMITTER: Go SI

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4833756 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeIbrutinib has shown activity in non-germinal center B-cell diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This double-blind phase III study evaluated ibrutinib and rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) in untreated non-germinal center B-cell DLBCL.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to ibrutinib (560 mg per day orally) plus R-CHOP or placebo plus R-CHOP. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and the activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL subgroup. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety.ResultsA total of 838 patients were randomly assigned to ibrutinib plus R-CHOP (n = 419) or placebo plus R-CHOP (n = 419). Median age was 62.0 years; 75.9% of evaluable patients had ABC subtype disease, and baseline characteristics were balanced. Ibrutinib plus R-CHOP did not improve EFS in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.934) or ABC (HR, 0.949) population. A preplanned analysis showed a significant interaction between treatment and age. In patients age younger than 60 years, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP improved EFS (HR, 0.579), PFS (HR, 0.556), and OS (HR, 0.330) and slightly increased serious adverse events (35.7% v 28.6%), but the proportion of patients receiving at least six cycles of R-CHOP was similar between treatment arms (92.9% v 93.0%). In patients age 60 years or older, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP worsened EFS, PFS, and OS, increased serious adverse events (63.4% v 38.2%), and decreased the proportion of patients receiving at least six cycles of R-CHOP (73.7% v 88.8%).ConclusionThe study did not meet its primary end point in the ITT or ABC population. However, in patients age younger than 60 years, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP improved EFS, PFS, and OS with manageable safety. In patients age 60 years or older, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP was associated with increased toxicity, leading to compromised R-CHOP administration and worse outcomes. Further investigation is warranted.

Project description:Intravenous rituximab plus chemotherapy is standard treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. A subcutaneous formulation of rituximab is expected to simplify and shorten drug preparation and administration, and to reduce treatment burden. MabEase (clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: 01649856) examined efficacy, safety and patient satisfaction with subcutaneous rituximab plus chemotherapy in treatment-naïve patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Patients were randomized 2:1 to subcutaneous rituximab (intravenous 375 mg/m2 cycle 1; subcutaneous 1,400 mg cycles 2-8) or intravenous rituximab (375 mg/m2 cycles 1-8) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 14 or 21 days. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed complete response/unconfirmed complete response. Secondary endpoints included safety, treatment satisfaction (Cancer Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire and Rituximab Administration Satisfaction Questionnaire), time savings, and survival. Of 576 randomized patients, 572 (378 subcutaneous; 194 intravenous) received treatment. End of induction complete response/unconfirmed complete response rates were 50.6% (subcutaneous) and 42.4% (intravenous). After a median 35 months, median overall, event-free and progression-free survivals were not reached. Grade ≥3 adverse events (subcutaneous 58.3%; intravenous 54.3%) and administration-related adverse events (both groups 21%) were similar between arms. Injection-site reactions were more common with subcutaneous injections (5.7% versus 0%, respectively). Rituximab Administration Satisfaction Questionnaire scores for 'impact on activities of daily living', 'convenience', and 'satisfaction' were improved with subcutaneous versus intravenous injections; Cancer Therapy Satisfaction Questionnaire scores were similar between arms. Median administration time (6 minutes vs 2.6 to 3.0 hours), chair/bed and overall hospital times were shorter with subcutaneous versus intravenous rituximab. Overall, subcutaneous and intravenous rituximab had similar efficacy and safety, with improved patient satisfaction and time savings.