Ganti et al present quite an extensive
overview of follicular
lymphoma, with most of their
emphasis on clinical practice. Many
of the issues they touch upon demonstrate
that we cannot draw firm conclusions
about the superiority of
various treatments over others, due to
a variety of study limitations. These
challenges to interpretation include the
indolent course of the disease in most
patients (and thus the long follow-up
needed to draw firm conclusions), the
often small number of patients in this
category, the retrospective nature of
most studies, differences in risk factors,
and the relative lack of randomized
studies. As is also the case with
efficacy, the most beneficial treatment
strategy in follicular lymphoma remains
to be established.
To clarify these problems for the
clinical practitioner, we feel that some
issues related to treatment goals deserve
to be elaborated upon.
Progression-Free vs
Overall Survival
These days, oncologists consider
progression-free survival to be the
most important parameter by which
to judge the benefit of therapy, as it
usually correlates more or less with
survival. It is clearly shown in the
review by Ganti et al that this is not
the case in follicular lymphoma. Nevertheless,
the majority of studies
published limit their end point to progression-
free survival.
First, we need to consider the issue
of immediate treatment at diagnosis
vs watchful waiting. Up until
the present time, there has been no
evidence supporting the hypothesis
that immediate treatment results in a
survival benefit. However, this question
has only been tackled by two
publications. Despite a better diseasefree
survival, no benefit in overall
survival was shown by either quite
intensive treatment (ProMACEMOPP-
ie, prednisone(Drug information on prednisone), methotrexate(Drug information on methotrexate), cyclophosphamide(Drug information on cyclophosphamide) [Cytoxan,
Neosar], etoposide, mechlorethamine
[Mustargen], vincristine [Oncovin],
procarbazine [Matulane], prednisone-
plus total nodal irradiation)
or with a low-intensity regimen of chlorambucil(Drug information on chlorambucil) (Leukeran) as initial
treatment, compared to watchful
waiting.
Second, the issue of treatment intensity
must be taken into account.
Although higher response rates may
be obtained by more intensive chemotherapy
regimens or combined
modalities, it remains to be seen
whether these better responses translate
into improved survival.
Clearly, from the studies referenced
in this overview, it can be concluded
that follicular lymphoma is a therapysensitive
disease. However, the main
argument for treatment should be benefit
rather than response.
To Cure or Not to Cure?
Most doctors try hard to cure their
patients of diseases, but at least until
now, this aim has been quite difficult
to achieve in patients with follicular
lymphoma. Most advanced-stage patients
will eventually relapse after
treatment, demonstrating that cure has
not been achieved. Furthermore, because
of the indolent behavior of follicular
lymphoma in most cases, cure
is difficult to define, as relapses may
occur decades later. Therefore, more
observation time is needed for proper
evaluation of recent, possibly more
efficacious treatments that produce
long progression-free survivals, such
as immunochemotherapy and highdose
chemotherapy with autologous
stem-cell rescue. However, this longer
observation time is not compatible
with the career goals of many clinical
researchers. Probably the same argument
holds true for the lack of randomized
studies.
At present, only radiotherapy in
early-stage disease or allogeneic stem
cell transplantation seems able to eradicate
all clonogenic follicular lymphoma
cells, resulting in cure. In addition,
a small randomized study of the value
of high-dose chemoradiotherapy followed
by autologous stem cell transplantation
(SCT) shows an improved
survival.[1] Thus, for the early-stage
patient, one may start with radiotherapy,
which in most patients has good
efficacy, relieves symptoms, and
avoids systemic toxicity.
Allogeneic stem cell transplantation,
on the other hand, should only
be employed when the toxicity of this
treatment outweighs the risk of disease
progression (ie, chemoresistance).
Although many clinicians
today will perform allogeneic stemcell
transplantation after reduced-intensity
conditioning (especially when
patients have undergone prior autografting,
which should be considered),
it still must be shown that this
transplantation strategy produces results
comparable to those obtained
with myeloablative conditioning in
terms of relapse-free survival.
Persistence of
Follicular Lymphoma
One intriguing question remains:
Why is it that this highly treatmentsensitive
disease cannot be cured by
known therapies? Clearly, we are able
to destroy many malignant cells; however,
because of the relapsing pattern
in virtually all patients, the malignant
clonogenic cell in follicular lymphoma
is able to "hide" from these effects.
Initially, a deregulated function of
the antiapoptotic bcl-2 gene by the
t(14;18) translocation contributes to
the development of the lymphoma,
although the t(14;18) alone may not
be sufficient for neoplastic transformation.[
2] In the first instance, the
antiapoptotic effect of upregulated
bcl-2 can be circumvented by chemotherapy-
induced upregulation of other
proapoptotic molecules. However,
the fact that in many cases only partial
responses are obtained (and that
relapses frequently occur even after
"complete responses") suggests the
persistence of refractory clonogenic
lymphoma cells. The nature of these
cells is not yet known.
One possibility is that, as seen in
acute myeloid leukemic blasts, a side
population exists with intrinsic drug
efflux capacity,[3] from which new
lymphoma cells will grow. Additional
chemotherapeutic resistance mechanisms
could develop, like p53 gene
mutations or repression of caspase
transcription,[4] and these clonogenic
cells will eventually give rise to
chemoresistant lymphoma. The existence
of such chemoresistant mechanisms
in mature B-cells is supported
by observations that after myeloablative
treatment and allogeneic stem
cell transplantation, host-type immunoglobulin
production may persist for
many years.[5]
Speculating that malignant cells
retain characteristics of their normal
counterpart, we may then ask why the
intrafollicular cell responding against
an antigen (before it develops to an
effector cell and memory cell) is so
important to the human immune system
that it harbors such an activated
antiapoptotic machinery, making it
refractory to every treatment except
radiotherapy.
Symptom Relief Still the
Predominant Goal
In our opinion, the treatment of
patients with follicular lymphoma
should only be initiated in cases of
symptomatic disease, irrespective of
age. If the patient suffers from the
disease, one should offer a treatment
that is highly effective in resolving
the symptoms, accompanied by the
least possible toxicity and not compromising
survival. For this purpose,
several suitable regimens are currently
at our disposal.
In the meantime, the clinical usefulness
of new strategies is eagerly
awaited.
