Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index.

The prognosis of follicular lymphomas (FL) is heterogeneous and numerous treatments may be proposed. A validated prognostic index (PI) would help in evaluating and choosing these treatments. Characteristics at diagnosis were collected from 4167 patients with FL diagnosed between 1985 and 1992. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to propose a PI. This index was then tested on 919 patients. Five adverse prognostic factors were selected: age (> 60 years vs or = 120 g/L), number of nodal areas (> 4 vs or = 3 adverse factors, 27% of patients, HR = 4.3). This Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) appeared more discriminant than the International Prognostic Index proposed for aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Results were very similar in the confirmation group. The FLIPI may be used for improving treatment choices, comparing clinical trials, and designing studies to evaluate new treatments

Rituximab in B-Cell Hematologic Malignancies: A Review of 20 Years of Clinical Experience

Rituximab is a human/murine, chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody with established efficacy, and a favorable and well-defined safety profile in patients with various CD20-expressing lymphoid malignancies, including indolent and aggressive forms of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Since its first approval 20 years ago, intravenously administered rituximab has revolutionized the treatment of B-cell malignancies and has become a standard component of care for follicular lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and mantle cell lymphoma. For all of these diseases, clinical trials have demonstrated that rituximab not only prolongs the time to disease progression but also extends overall survival. Efficacy benefits have also been shown in patients with marginal zone lymphoma and in more aggressive diseases such as Burkitt lymphoma. Although the proven clinical efficacy and success of rituximab has led to the development of other anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies in recent years (e.g., obinutuzumab, ofatumumab, veltuzumab, and ocrelizumab), rituximab is likely to maintain a position within the therapeutic armamentarium because it is well established with a long history of successful clinical use. Furthermore, a subcutaneous formulation of the drug has been approved both in the EU and in the USA for the treatment of B-cell malignancies. Using the wealth of data published on rituximab during the last two decades, we review the preclinical development of rituximab and the clinical experience gained in the treatment of hematologic B-cell malignancies, with a focus on the well-established intravenous route of administration. This article is a companion paper to A. Davies, et al., which is also published in this issue

Treatment of limited stage follicular lymphoma with Rituximab immunotherapy and involved field radiotherapy in a prospective multicenter Phase II trial-MIR trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The optimal treatment of early stage follicular Lymphoma is a matter of debate. Radiation therapy has frequently been applied with a curative approach beside watchful waiting. Involved field, extended field and total nodal radiation techniques are used in various protocols, but the optimal radiation field still has to be defined. Follicular lymphoma is characterized by stable expression of the CD20 antigen on the tumour cells surface. The anti CD20 antibody Rituximab (Mabthera^®) has shown to be effective in systemic therapy of FL in primary treatment, relapse and maintenance therapy.</p> <p>Methods/design</p> <p>The MIR (Mabthera^®and Involved field Radiation) study is a prospective multicenter trial combining systemic treatment with the anti CD20 antibody Rituximab (Mabthera^®) in combination with involved field radiotherapy (30 - 40 Gy). This trial aims at testing the combination's efficacy and safety with an accrual of 85 patients.</p> <p>Primary endpoint of the study is progression free survival. Secondary endpoints are response rate to Rituximab, complete remission rate at week 18, relapse rate, relapse pattern, relapse free survival, overall survival, toxicity and quality of life.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The trial evaluates the efficacy of Rituximab to prevent out-filed recurrences in early stage nodal follicular lymphoma and the safety of the combination of Rituximab and involved field radiotherapy. It also might show additional risk factors for a later recurrence (e.g. remission state after Rituximab only).</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials (NCT): <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00509184">NCT00509184</a></p

Radioimmunotherapy of B-cell lymphoma with radiolabelled anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies

CD20 has proven to be an excellent target for the treatment of B-cell lymphoma, first for the chimeric monoclonal antibody rituximab (Rituxan™), and more recently for the radiolabelled antibodies Y-90 ibritumomab tiuxetan (Zevalin™) and I-131 tositumomab (Bexxar™). Radiation therapy effects are due to beta emissions with path lengths of 1–5 mm; gamma radiation emitted by I-131 is the only radiation safety issue for either product. Dose-limiting toxicity for both radiolabelled antibodies is reversible bone marrow suppression. They produce response rates of 70%–90% in low-grade and follicular lymphoma and 40%–50% in transformed low-grade or intermediate-grade lymphomas. Both products produce higher response rates than related unlabelled antibodies, and both are highly active in patients who are relatively resistant to rituximab-based therapy. Median duration of response to a single course of treatment is about 1 year with complete remission rates that last 2 years or longer in about 25% of patients. Clinical trials suggest that anti- CD20 radioimmunotherapy is superior to total body irradiation in patients undergoing stem cell supported therapy for B-cell lymphoma, and that it is a safe and efficacious modality when used as consolidation therapy following chemotherapy. Among cytotoxic treatment options, current evidence suggests that one course of anti-CD20 radioimmunotherapy is as efficacious as six to eight cycles of combination chemotherapy. A major question that persists is how effective these agents are in the setting of rituximab- refractory lymphoma. These products have been underutilised because of the complexity of treatment coordination and concerns regarding reimbursement

«La relation de limitation et d’exception dans le français d’aujourd’hui : excepté, sauf et hormis comme pivots d’une relation algébrique »

L’analyse des emplois prépositionnels et des emplois conjonctifs d’ “excepté”, de “sauf” et d’ “hormis” permet d’envisager les trois prépositions/conjonctions comme le pivot d’un binôme, comme la plaque tournante d’une structure bipolaire. Placées au milieu du binôme, ces prépositions sont forcées par leur sémantisme originaire dûment métaphorisé de jouer le rôle de marqueurs d’inconséquence systématique entre l’élément se trouvant à leur gauche et celui qui se trouve à leur droite. L’opposition qui surgit entre les deux éléments n’est donc pas une incompatibilité naturelle, intrinsèque, mais extrinsèque, induite. Dans la plupart des cas (emplois limitatifs), cette opposition prend la forme d’un rapport entre une « classe » et le « membre (soustrait) de la classe », ou bien entre un « tout » et une « partie » ; dans d’autres (emplois exceptifs), cette opposition se manifeste au contraire comme une attaque de front portée par un « tout » à un autre « tout ». De plus, l’inconséquence induite mise en place par la préposition/conjonction paraît, en principe, tout à fait insurmontable. Dans l’assertion « les écureuils vivent partout, sauf en Australie » (que l’on peut expliciter par « Les écureuils vivent partout, sauf [qu’ils ne vivent pas] en Australie »), la préposition semble en effet capable d’impliquer le prédicat principal avec signe inverti, et de bâtir sur une telle implication une sorte de sous énoncé qui, à la rigueur, est totalement inconséquent avec celui qui le précède (si « les écureuils ne vivent pas en Australie », le fait qu’ils « vivent partout » est faux). Néanmoins, l’analyse montre qu’alors que certaines de ces oppositions peuvent enfin être dépassées, d’autres ne le peuvent pas. C’est, respectivement, le cas des relations limitatives et des relations exceptives. La relation limitative, impliquant le rapport « tout » - « partie », permet de résoudre le conflit dans les termes d’une somme algébrique entre deux sous énoncés pourvus de différent poids informatif et de signe contraire. Les valeurs numériques des termes de la somme étant déséquilibrées, le résultat est toujours autre que zéro. La relation exceptive, au contraire, qui n’implique pas le rapport « tout » - « partie », n’est pas capable de résoudre le conflit entre deux sous énoncés pourvus du même poids informatif et en même temps de signe contraire : les valeurs numériques des termes de la somme étant symétriques et égales, le résultat sera toujours équivalent à zéro