CEOP-21 versus CEOP-14 chemotherapy with or without rituximab for the first-line treatment of patients with aggressive lymphomas: Results of the HE22A99 trial of the hellenic cooperative oncology group

Background: In this study we investigated whether administering CEOP (cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, vincristine [Oncovin], and prednisone) every 2 weeks (CEOP-14) instead of every 3 weeks (the standard CEOP-21 regimen) improves outcomes in patients with previously untreated aggressive lymphomas. In a secondary analysis we evaluated the impact of adding rituximab to CEOP-14/CEOP-21 chemotherapy. Study Design: The trial opened in March 1999, and patients were randomly assigned to either CEOP-14 or CEOP-21. All patients enrolled from May 2002 onward received rituximab with each chemotherapy cycle, and those attaining a complete response received rituximab consolidation. Results: Complete and overall response rates in the CEOP-21 ± rituximab (N ≤ 114) and CEOP-14 ± rituximab (N ≤ 103) arms were similar, as were the overall survival (P ≤ 0.769) and time to progression distributions (P ≤ 0.969). Rituximab was shown to have a beneficial effect both on the overall survival and on the time to progression. Conclusions: Thus far, no significant improvement in outcome has been demonstrated with CEOP-14 ± rituximab versus CEOP-21 ± rituximab. However, with addition of rituximab to CEOP-21/CEOP-14, significant improvements in time to progression and overall survival were achieved. © 2007 by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Prognostic impact of tumor volumetry in patients with locally advanced head-and-neck carcinoma (non-nasopharyngeal) treated by radiotherapy alone or combined radiochemotherapy in a randomized trial

Purpose: Tumor volume (TV) is one of the main reported factors determining the outcome of treatment in head-and-neck carcinomas. In this study, the prognostic impact of TV was explored in the context of a randomized trial with the patients assigned to receive standard radiotherapy (RT) alone or RT plus platinum compounds (RT alone, RT plus cisplatin, or RT plus carboplatin). Methods and Materials: The tumor outlines were traced and digitized on each pretreatment CT slice for each of the 101 patients studied. Taking into account the magnification factor of the scan and CT slice thickness, a computer with specifically designed software calculated the TV in cubic centimeters. Results: The median overall survival for the whole group of patients was 21.6 months (95% confidence interval, 13.0- 30.2) and the 3-year survival rate was 40%. The addition of platinum compounds to RT (Groups 2 and 3) significantly improved the survival rate (RT alone vs. RT plus cisplatin, hazard ratio 0.36, p = 0.002; RT alone vs. RT plus carboplatin, hazard ratio 0.53, p = 0.029). In univariate analysis, the most significant parameters for survival were treatment group, total gross tumor volume (TGTV), complete response, nodal GTV, primary GTV, and performance status. In multivariate analysis, treatment group, TGTV, gender, and primary site were independent prognostic factors for survival. A prognostic threshold of 22.8 cm(3) was detected for TGTV. Patients with a TGTV of 22.8 cm(3) had a median survival of 12.3 months (log-rank test, p = 0.0102). Conclusion: The prognostic significance of the TGTV was confirmed and a cutoff value of 22.8 cm(3) derived. Our data indicated that locally advanced head-and-neck carcinomas should not be treated by standard (once-daily) RT alone. Tumor size and disease subsite should be taken into account in future randomized trials to increase their statistical power. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc