Multicentre phase II study of the baseline BEACOPP regimen for patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin's lymphoma

Liver Involvement in Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Types of Injuries and Therapeutic Implications

The hepatocytolysis raises questions on following therapeutic conduct when it occurs during chemotherapy for Hodgkin's lymphoma, expression of its liver toxicity. But the onset of primary liver Hodgkin's lymphoma, including the form manifested by acute liver failure, poses even greater problems, as in the case of occurrence of vanishing bile duct syndrome - expression of a paraneoplastic syndrome, hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, peliosis hepatis or association of lymphoma with infection with hepatitis viruses or human immunodeficiency virus or different autoimmune diseases. This review summarizes the clinical experience acquired on the relationship between Hodgkin's lymphoma and liver, from the point of view of clinical manifestations, used treatments and clinical evolution. Suggestions on the course of treatment in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma and liver damage have been formulated starting from the metabolism and elimination of chemotherapy drugs and taking into account the clinical experience of published clinical trials and cases. This review is a synthesis of knowledge obtained in this field, during the time, of therapeutic possibilities and limits, and formulates potential future milestones for research.

Comparison of first-line chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP versus chemotherapy including ABVD for people with early unfavourable or advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma

BACKGROUND

There are two different international standards for the treatment of early unfavourable and advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL): chemotherapy with escalated BEACOPP (bleomycin/etoposide/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone) regimen and chemotherapy with ABVD (doxorubicin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine) regimen.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the advantages and disadvantages of chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP compared to chemotherapy including ABVD in the treatment of early unfavourable or advanced stage HL as first-line treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for randomised controlled trials in MEDLINE, CENTRAL and conference proceedings (January 1985 to July 2013 and for the update to March 2017) and Embase (1985 to November 2008). Moreover we searched trial registries (March 2017; www.controlled-trials.com, www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search, clinicaltrials.gov, www.eortc.be, www.ghsg.org, www.ctc.usyd.edu.au, www.trialscentral.org/index.html) SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials examining chemotherapy including at least two cycles of escalated BEACOPP regimens compared with chemotherapy including at least four cycles of ABVD regimens as first-line treatment for patients with early unfavourable stage or advanced stage HL.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The effect measures we used were hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and freedom from first progression.We used risk ratios (RRs) relative risks to analyse harms: treatment-related mortality, secondary malignancies (including myeloid dysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myeloid leukaemia (AML)), infertility and adverse events.Quality of life was not reported in any trial, therefore not analysed. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed quality of trials.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 1796 records and identified five eligible trials in total i.e. one trial could be added on the previous review. These trials included only adults (16 to 65 years of age). We included all five trials with 3427 people in the meta-analyses: the HD9 and HD14 trials were co-ordinated in Germany, the HD2000 and GSM-HD trials were performed in Italy and the EORTC 20012 was conducted in Belgium. The overall risk of performance and detection bias was low for overall survival (OS), but was high for other outcomes, as therapy blinding was not feasible. The remaining 'Risk of bias' domains were low and unclear.All trials reported results for OS and progression-free survival (PFS). In contrast to the our first published review (2011) the addition of results from the EORTC 20012 BEACOPP escalated increases OS (3142 participants; HR 0.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.57 to 0.97; high-quality evidence). This means that only 90 (70 to 117) patients will die after five years in the BEACOPP escalated arm compared to 120 in the ABVD arm. This survival advantage is also reflected in an increased PFS with BEACOPP escalated (3142 participants; HR 0.54 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.64); moderate-quality evidence), meaning that after five years only 144 (121 to 168) patients will experience a progress, relapse or death in the BEACOPP escalated arm compared to 250 in the ABVD arm.There is no evidence for a difference for treatment-related mortality (2700 participants, RR 2.15 (95% CI = 0.93 to 4.95), low-quality evidence).Although the occurrence of MDS or AML may increase with BEACOPP escalated (3332 participants, RR 3.90 (95% CI 1.36 to 11.21); low-quality evidence)), there is no evidence for a difference between both regimens for overall secondary malignancies (3332 participants, RR 1.00 (95% CI 0.68 to 1.48), low-quality evidence). However, the observation time of the studies included in the review is too short to be expected to demonstrate differences with respect to second solid tumours which would not be expected to show significance until around 15 years after treatment.We are very uncertain how many female patients will be infertile due to chemotherapy and which arm might be favoured (106 participants, RR 1.37 (95% CI 0.83 to 2.26), very low-quality evidence). This is a very small sample, and the age of the patients was not detailed. No analysis of male fertility was provided.Five trials reported adverse events and the analysis shows that the escalated BEACOPP regimens probably causes more haematological toxicities WHO grade III or IV ((anaemia: 2425 participants, RR 10.67 (95% CI 7.14 to 15.93); neutropenia: 519 participants, RR 1.80 (95% CI 1.52 to 2.13); thrombocytopenia: 2425 participants, RR 18.12 (95% CI 11.77 to 27.92); infections: 2425 participants, RR 3.73 (95% CI 2.58 to 5.38), all low-quality evidence).Only one trial (EORTC 20012) planned to assess quality of life, however, no results were reported.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis provides moderate- to high-quality evidence that adult patients between 16 and 60 years of age with early unfavourable and advanced stage HL benefit regarding OS and PFS from first-line chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP. The proven benefit in OS for patients with advanced HL is a new finding of this updated review due to the inclusion of the results from the EORTC 20012 trial. Furthermore, there is only low-quality evidence of a difference in the total number of secondary malignancies, as the follow-up period might be too short to detect meaningful differences. Low-quality evidence also suggests that people treated with escalated BEACOPP may have a higher risk to develop secondary AML or MDS. Due to the availability of only very low-quality evidence available, we are unable to come to a conclusion in terms of infertility. This review does for the first time suggest a survival benefit. However, it is clear from this review that BEACOPP escalated may be more toxic that ABVD, and very important long-term side effects of second malignancies and infertility have not been sufficiently analysed yet.

Two escalated followed by six standard BEACOPP in advanced-stage high-risk classical Hodgkin lymphoma: high cure rates but increased risk of aseptic osteonecrosis

BACKGROUND

From 1999, Norwegian guidelines recommend two escalated (esc) BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisolone) followed by six standard (s) BEACOPP for patients with advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) with an international prognostic score (IPS) ≥ 4. We evaluated retrospectively the experience with this recommendation at the Norwegian Radium Hospital, also including all IPS 3 patients treated with the same regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-seven patients were treated between June 1999 and December 2008. IPS was 3 in 10 patients and ≥ 4 in 37.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients received eight cycles of BEACOPP, 12 patients received one to six cycles only, mainly due to toxicity. Sixty percent of patients had dose reductions. With median follow-up of survivors of 89 months, 5-year progression-free and overall survival are 84% [95% confidence interval (CI) 73% to 95%] and 91% (95% CI 82% to 100%), respectively. Toxicity was considerable with grade 3 or more infections/febrile neutropenia in 66% of patients, including one death and three cases of Pneumocystis jiroveci pneumonia. Of note, 10 patients (21%) experienced symptomatic aseptic osteonecrosis, of whom 3 have had hip replacement surgery after treatment.

CONCLUSION

Two escBEACOPP plus six sBEACOPP is efficacious in advanced-stage high-risk HL. We document a high incidence of aseptic bone necrosis, possibly related to prednisolone.

Comparison of chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP versus chemotherapy including ABVD for patients with early unfavourable or advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma

BACKGROUND

There are two different international standards for the treatment of early unfavourable and advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL): chemotherapy with escalated BEACOPP (bleomycin/etoposide/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone) regimen and chemotherapy with ABVD (doxorubicin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine) regimen.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an evidence-based answer regarding the advantages and disadvantages of chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP compared to chemotherapy including ABVD.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched for randomised controlled trials in MEDLINE, CENTRAL and conference proceedings (January 1985 to November 2010) and EMBASE (1985 to November 2008).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials examining chemotherapy including at least two cycles of escalated BEACOPP regimens compared to chemotherapy including at least four cycles of ABVD regimens as first-line treatment for patients with early unfavourable stage or advanced stage HL.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Effect measures used were hazard ratios (HR) for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) and freedom from first progression. Relative risks were used to analyse complete response rate, treatment-related mortality and adverse events. Two independent review authors extracted data and assessed quality of trials.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 790 records were screened. Five eligible trials (four published, one ongoing), were identified. These trials included only adult patients (16 to 60 years of age). Four trials with 2868 patients were included in the meta-analyses: the HD9 and HD14 trials from Germany, the HD2000 and GSM-HD trials from Italy. All trials reported results for PFS and OS. PFS was statistically significantly longer for escalated BEACOPP: HR was 0.53 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44 to 0.64, I(2) = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference in OS between the comparators: HR was 0.80 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.09, I(2) = 0%). Three trials reported adverse events: the escalated BEACOPP regimens caused statistically significantly more haematological toxicities WHO grade III or IV (anaemia P < 0.00001, neutropenia P = 0.007, thrombocytopenia P < 0.00001), infections (P < 0.00001)) and occurrence of myeloid dysplastic syndrome (MDS) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (P = 0.05). There were no differences between both regimens for secondary malignancies, treatment-related mortality or infertility.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed that adult patients between 16 and 60 years of age with early unfavourable or advanced stage HL benefited from chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP regarding PFS, but there was no significant difference in OS. Longer follow-up and the inclusion of the EORTC 20012 trial will lead to a more definitive answer with respect to OS.

Comparing adult and pediatric Hodgkin lymphoma in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results Program, 1988-2005: an analysis of 21 734 cases

We analyzed data from 18 898 adults (age ≥20 years) and 2836 children/adolescents reported in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database as having Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), diagnosed from 1988 to 2005. The nodular sclerosis subtype was significantly more common in the pediatric age group (76% in children/adolescents vs. 61% in adults, p < 0.001). The mixed cellularity subtype was more prevalent in children <10 years old (22%), but less likely in older children/adolescents (8.5%). Systemic symptoms were reported in 39% of children/adolescents and in 48% of adults (p < 0.001). Children/adolescents had significantly better HL-specific survival than adults (5-year survival rate, 96% ± 0.4% vs.88% ± 0.3%, p < 0.001). Using a Cox proportional-hazards regression model in patients with classical HL, the prognostic factors significantly impacting survival were age, histology, stage, B symptoms, year of diagnosis, and race. The only adverse prognostic factors that were significant when this analysis was restricted to children/adolescents were stage IV disease and the presence of B symptoms. In conclusion, several differences in clinicopathologic features and outcomes were identified between children/adolescents and adults with HL, and this was particularly noted in young children (<10 years).

BEACOPP(escalated) Regimen for Hodgkin Lymphoma

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparing, dispensing, and administering antineoplastic therapy and to the agents, commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases.

BEACOPP(baseline) Regimen for Hodgkin Lymphoma

The complexity of cancer chemotherapy requires that pharmacists be familiar with the complicated regimens and highly toxic agents used. This column reviews various issues related to preparing, dispensing, and administering antineoplastic therapy and to the agents, commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases.

A clinicopathological study of nm23-H1 expression in classical Hodgkin's lymphoma

BACKGROUND

We carried out immunohistochemistry to examine the expression of nm23-H1 in Hodgkin and Reed-Sternberg cells in patients with classical Hodgkin's lymphoma (CHL).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated 128 patients with CHL [87 patients with nodular sclerosis (NS) and 41 patients with mixed cellularity (MC)] for CD15, CD20, Ki-67, EBER, TIA-1, and nm23-H1 by immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

CD15 was expressed in 79%, CD20 in 11%, Ki-67 in 93%, EBER in 34%, TIA-1 in 11%, and nm23-H1 in 60% of the CHL patients. NS patients showed a significantly higher rate of nm23-H1 expression than MC patients (P < 0.001). The serum nm23-H1 level was significantly higher in patients with positive nm23 expression. Univariate analysis showed that stage IV, poor performance status, low hemoglobin level, low serum albumin level, age of 45 years or older, TIA-1-positive status, and nm23-H1-positive status were associated with significantly shorter progression-free survival. Multivariate analysis with these factors showed TIA-1 and cytoplasmic nm23-H1 expression to be significant and independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that nm23-H1 expression is a prognostic factor for CHL and that it is as important as serum nm23-H1, both of which are useful for planning the treatment strategy.

Prophylactic use of filgrastim with ABVD and BEACOPP chemotherapy regimens for Hodgkin lymphoma

ABVD (doxorubicin/bleomycin/vinblastine/dacarbazine) and BEACOPP (bleomycin/etoposide/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide/vincristine/procarbazine/prednisone) are the most widely used regimens for the treatment of patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Both regimens are associated with significant neutropenia. Maintaining the planned dose intensity is considered an important goal to achieve when using curative therapy. Therefore, prophylactic use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is widely used to support these regimens and is mandatory to support BEACOPP-escalated and BEACOPP-14 to reduce toxicity and treatment delays. Recent retrospective studies are discussed which have reported using ABVD without G-CSF support. However, randomized studies are needed to clarify the role of primary prophylaxis with ABVD and BEACOPP-baseline regimens. Secondary prophylaxis should be considered in all patients, especially those who develop neutropenic fever.