Intensified treatment of patients with early stage, unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma: long-term follow-up of a randomised, international phase 3 trial of the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG HD14).

To improve the long-term tumour control in early, unfavourable Hodgkin Lymphoma, the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) HD14 trial compared four cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) with an intensified chemotherapy regimen consisting of two cycles of escalated bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (escalated BEACOPP) plus two cycles of ABVD. The final analysis of the trial showed a significant advantage in terms of freedom from treatment failure (difference 7·2% [95% CI 3·8-10·5] at 5 years) for patients who received two cycles of escalated BEACOPP and two cycles of ABVD. However, there was no difference in overall survival between the two groups. To evaluate long-term efficacy and toxicity of this strategy, we did a follow-up analysis. Patients aged 18-60 years with performance status of 2 or less and primary diagnosis of early, unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma (all histologies) were included in an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Patients were randomly assigned to receive four cycles of ABVD (ABVD group) or two cycles of escalated BEACOPP and two cycles of ABVD (2 + 2 group), both groups also received 30 Gy involved field radiotherapy. The ABVD dosing regimen was doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15), bleomycin 10 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15), vinblastine 6 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15), and dacarbazine 375 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15), repeated on day 29. The escalated BEACOPP dosing regimen was cyclophosphamide 1250 mg/m2 (day 1), doxorubicin 35 mg/m2 (day 1), etoposide 200 mg/m2 (days 1-3), procarbazine 100 mg/m2 (days 1-7), prednisone 40 mg/m2 (days 1-14), vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 (day 8; maximum 2 mg), and bleomycin 10 mg/m2 (day 8), repeated on day 22. After closure of the ABVD group according to prespecified rules, patients were assigned to receive two cycles of escalated BEACOPP and two cycles of ABVD (non-randomised 2 + 2 group), which continued until the end of the predefined 5-year recruitment period. In this prespecified long-term follow-up analysis, we aimed to evaluate the secondary endpoints progression-free survival, overall survival, and long-term toxicity. To this end, we did a descriptive intention-to-treat analysis of all qualified HD14 patients and on the predefined subsets of randomised qualified HD14 patients and patients in the non-randomised 2 + 2 group. The trial was registered on the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial database, 04761296. Between Jan 28, 2003, and Dec 29, 2009, 1686 patients were randomly assigned to the ABVD group (847 [50·2%] patients) and the 2 + 2 group (839 [49·8%] patients). 370 additional patients were recruited to the non-randomised 2 + 2 group. 1550 (92%) randomly assigned patients (median observation time 112 months [IQR 80-132]) and 339 (92%) patients in the non-randomised 2 + 2 group (median observation time 74 months [58-100]) were included in the qualified analysis set. 10-year overall survival in the randomly assigned patients was 94·1% (95% CI 92·0-95·7) for the ABVD group and 94·1% (91·8-95·7) for the 2 + 2 group (HR 1·0 [95% CI 0·6-1·5]; p=0·88). 8-year overall survival in the non-randomised 2 + 2 group was 95·1% (95% CI 91·6-97·2). 10-year progression-free survival in the randomly assigned patients was 85·6% (95% CI 82·6-88·1) for the ABVD group and 91·2% (88·4-93·3) for the 2 + 2 group (HR 0·5% [95% CI 0·4-0·7]; p=0·0001), accounting for a significant difference of 5·6% (95% CI 1·9-9·2) favouring the 2 + 2 group (p=0·0001). In the non-randomised 2 + 2 group, 8-year progression-free survival was 94·5% (95% CI 91·1-96·6). Standardised incidence ratios of second primary malignancies were similar between the ABVD group (2·3 [95% CI 1·6-3·1]) and the 2 + 2 group (2·5 [1·8-3·4]; Gray's p=0·80). Standardised incidence ratio of second primary malignancies was 3·1 (95% CI 1·7-5·0) in the non-randomised 2 + 2 group. This long-term analysis confirms superior tumour control in the 2 + 2 group compared with the ABVD group without translating into an overall survival difference. At longer follow-up, there is no difference regarding second primary malignancies between groups. In conclusion, the 2 + 2 regimen spares a significant number of patients from the burden of relapse and additional treatment without increased long-term toxicity. Deutsche Krebshilfe eV and Swiss Federal Government.

Gillessen S ，Plütschow A ，Fuchs M ，Markova J ，Greil R ，Topp MS ，Meissner J ，Zijlstra JM ，Eichenauer DA ，Bröckelmann PJ ，Diehl V ，Borchmann P ，Engert A ，von Tresckow B ... -  《Lancet Haematology》

PET-guided omission of radiotherapy in early-stage unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma (GHSG HD17): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

Combined-modality treatment consisting of chemotherapy and consolidation radiotherapy is standard of care for patients with early-stage unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma. However, the use of radiotherapy can have long-term sequelae, which is of particular concern, as Hodgkin lymphoma is frequently diagnosed in young adults with a median age of approximately 30 years. In the German Hodgkin Study Group HD17 trial, we investigated whether radiotherapy can be omitted without loss of efficacy in patients who have a complete metabolic response after receiving two cycles of escalated doses of etoposide, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin, and regular doses of bleomycin, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (eBEACOPP) plus two cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) chemotherapy (2 + 2). In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, patients (aged 18-60 years) with newly diagnosed early-stage unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma (all histologies) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were enrolled at 224 hospitals and private practices in Germany, Switzerland, Austria, and the Netherlands. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either standard combined-modality treatment, consisting of the 2 + 2 regimen (eBEACOPP consisted of 1250 mg/m2 intravenous cyclophosphamide on day 1, 35 mg/m2 intravenous doxorubicin on day 1, 200 mg/m2 intravenous etoposide on days 1-3, 100 mg/m2 oral procarbazine on days 1-7, 40 mg/m2 oral prednisone on days 1-14, 1·4 mg/m2 intravenous vincristine on day 8 [maximum dose of 2 mg per cycle], and 10 mg/m2 intravenous bleomycin on day 8; ABVD consisted of 25 mg/m2 intravenous doxorubicin, 10 mg/m2 intravenous bleomycin, 6 mg/m2 intravenous vinblastine, and 375 mg/m2 intravenous dacarbazine, all given on days 1 and 15) followed by 30 Gy involved-field radiotherapy (standard combined-modality treatment group) or PET4-guided treatment, consisting of the 2 + 2 regimen followed by 30 Gy of involved-node radiotherapy only in patients with positive PET at the end of four cycles of chemotherapy (PET4; PET4-guided treatment group). Randomisation was done centrally and used the minimisation method and seven stratification factors (centre, age, sex, clinical symptoms, disease localisation, albumin concentration, and bulky disease), and patients and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until central review of the PET4 examination had been completed. With the final analysis presented here, the primary objective was to show non-inferiority of the PET4-guided strategy in a per-protocol analysis of the primary endpoint of progression-free survival. We defined non-inferiority as an absolute difference of 8% in the 5-year progression-free survival estimates between the two groups. Safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01356680. Between Jan 13, 2012, and March 21, 2017, we enrolled and randomly assigned 1100 patients to the standard combined-modality treatment group (n=548) or to the PET4-guided treatment group (n=552); two patients in each group were found ineligible after randomisation. At a median follow-up of 46·2 months (IQR 32·7-61·2), 5-year progression-free survival was 97·3% (95% CI 94·5-98·7) in the standard combined-modality treatment group and 95·1% (92·0-97·0) in the PET4-guided treatment group (hazard ratio 0·523 [95% CI 0·226-1·211]). The between-group difference was 2·2% (95% CI -0·9 to 5·3) and excluded the non-inferiority margin of 8%. The most common grade 3 or 4 acute haematological adverse events were leucopenia (436 [83%] of 528 patients in the standard combined-modality treatment group vs 443 [84%] of 529 patients in the PET4-guided treatment group) and thrombocytopenia (139 [26%] vs 176 [33%]), and the most frequent acute non-haematological toxic effects were infection (32 [6%] vs 40 [8%]) and nausea or vomiting (38 [7%] vs 29 [6%]). The most common acute radiotherapy-associated adverse events were dysphagia (26 [6%] in the standard combined-modality treatment group vs three [2%] in the PET4-guided treatment group) and mucositis (nine [2%] vs none). 229 serious adverse events were reported by 161 (29%) of 546 patients in the combined-modality treatment group, and 235 serious adverse events were reported by 164 (30%) of 550 patients in the PET4-guided treatment group. One suspected unexpected serious adverse reaction (infection) leading to death was reported in the PET4-guided treatment group. PET4-negativity after treatment with 2 + 2 chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed early-stage unfavourable Hodgkin lymphoma allows omission of consolidation radiotherapy without a clinically relevant loss of efficacy. PET4-guided therapy could thereby reduce the proportion of patients at risk of the late effects of radiotherapy. Deutsche Krebshilfe.

Borchmann P ，Plütschow A ，Kobe C ，Greil R ，Meissner J ，Topp MS ，Ostermann H ，Dierlamm J ，Mohm J ，Thiemer J ，Sökler M ，Kerkhoff A ，Ahlborn M ，Halbsguth TV ，Martin S ，Keller U ，Balabanov S ，Pabst T ，Vogelhuber M ，Hüttmann A ，Wilhelm M ，Zijlstra JM ，Moccia A ，Kuhnert G ，Bröckelmann PJ ，von Tresckow B ，Fuchs M ，Klimm B ，Rosenwald A ，Eich H ，Baues C ，Marnitz S ，Hallek M ，Diehl V ，Dietlein M ，Engert A ... -  《-》

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

Skoetz N ，Will A ，Monsef I ，Brillant C ，Engert A ，von Tresckow B ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

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

Bauer K ，Skoetz N ，Monsef I ，Engert A ，Brillant C ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》

Long-Term Results of the HD2000 Trial Comparing ABVD Versus BEACOPP Versus COPP-EBV-CAD in Untreated Patients With Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma: A Study by Fondazione Italiana Linfomi.

The randomized HD2000 trial compared six cycles of ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine), four escalated plus two standard cycles of BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone), and six cycles of COPP-EBV-CAD (cyclophosphamide, lomustine, vindesine, melphalan, prednisone, epidoxorubicin, vincristine, procarbazine, vinblastine, and bleomycin; CEC) in patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma. After a median follow-up of 42 months, patients who received BEACOPP were reported to have experienced better progression-free survival (PFS) but not better overall survival (OS) results than those receiving ABVD. We here report a post hoc analysis of this trial after a median follow-up of 10 years. Three hundred seven patients were enrolled, 295 of whom were evaluable. At the time of our analysis, the median follow-up for the entire group was 120 months (range, 4 to 169 months). The 10-year PFS results for the ABVD, BEACOPP, and CEC arms were 69%, 75%, and 76%, respectively; corresponding OS results were 85%, 84%, and 86%. Overall, 13 second malignancies were reported: one in the ABVD arm and six each in the BEACOPP and CEC arms. The cumulative risk of developing second malignancies at 10 years was 0.9%, 6.6%, and 6% with ABVD, BEACOPP, and CEC, respectively; the risk with either BEACOPP or CEC was significantly higher than that reported with ABVD (P = .027 and .02, respectively). With these mature results, we confirm that patients with advanced Hodgkin lymphoma have similar OS results when treated with ABVD, BEACOPP, or CEC. However, with longer follow-up, we were not able to confirm the superiority of BEACOPP over ABVD in terms of PFS, mainly because of higher mortality rates resulting from second malignancies observed after treatment with BEACOPP and CEC.

Merli F ，Luminari S ，Gobbi PG ，Cascavilla N ，Mammi C ，Ilariucci F ，Stelitano C ，Musso M ，Baldini L ，Galimberti S ，Angrilli F ，Polimeno G ，Scalzulli PR ，Ferrari A ，Marcheselli L ，Federico M ... -  《-》