Linked Life Data

10601560

Source:http://linkedlifedata.com/resource/pubmed/id/10601560

Statements in which the resource exists as a subject.
PredicateObject
rdf:type
lifeskim:mentions
pubmed:issue
1
pubmed:dateCreated
2000-1-11
pubmed:abstractText
From January 1992 to December 1995, 129 patients with previously untreated non-Hodgkin's lymphoma were randomised in a phase III multicenter trial to receive CEOP-B/VIMB or ProMACE-CytaBOM. Eligibility criteria included intermediate or high grade lymphoma (follicular large cell, diffuse small cleaved-cell, diffuse mixed, diffuse large-cell and immunoblastic) with an Ann Arbor stage II bulky, III or IV. All patients entered into the study were considered evaluable according to intent to treat analysis. At a median follow-up of 60 months there were no significant differences between the treatment response rates [82% (60%CR) for CEOP-B/VIMB vs. 81% (69% CR) for ProMACE-CytaBOM]. Conversely, with regard to disease-free survival, a significant difference was observed between the two treatment arms (42% for CEOP-B/VIMB vs. 24% for ProMACE-CytaBOM at 5 years; p=0.046). However, this difference did not translate in a significant difference in overall survival (45% vs. 39% at 5 years). Moreover, when response rates and outcome were analysed for different prognostic subgroups according to International Prognostic Index, no significant differences were observed between the treatment groups. It is important to note that neither regimen was able to improve outcome of poor risk patients who fared badly with both treatments (median survival 9 and 8 months respectively). Toxicity was also similar in both treatments with grade 3-4 leukopenia observed in 39% and 47% of cases and grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia in 24% and 27% of cases respectively. In conclusion, in this study CEOP-B/VIMB was not superior to ProMACE-CytaBOM in aggressive lymphomas and the alternating strategy failed to improve outcome of poor risk patients in which newer more aggressive treatments are needed.
pubmed:language
eng
pubmed:journal
pubmed:citationSubset
IM
pubmed:chemical
pubmed:status
MEDLINE
pubmed:month
Jan
pubmed:issn
1019-6439
pubmed:author
pubmed:issnType
Print
pubmed:volume
16
pubmed:owner
NLM
pubmed:authorsComplete
Y
pubmed:pagination
149-54
pubmed:dateRevised
2006-11-15
pubmed:meshHeading
pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Adolescent, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Adult, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Aged, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Bleomycin, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Cyclophosphamide, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Cytarabine, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Doxorubicin, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Epirubicin, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Etoposide, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Female, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Humans, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Male, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Methotrexate, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Middle Aged, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Neoplasm Staging, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Prednisone, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Survival Analysis, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Treatment Outcome, pubmed-meshheading:10601560-Vincristine
pubmed:year
2000
pubmed:articleTitle
CEOP-B/VIMB vs. promace-CytaBOM in the treatment of intermediate or high grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: A randomised multicenter study of Southern Italy Cooperative Group.
pubmed:affiliation
Oncology Institute, Bari, Italy.
pubmed:publicationType
Journal Article, Clinical Trial, Comparative Study, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, Multicenter Study