Fludarabine Versus Conventional CVP Chemotherapy in Newly C Diagnosed Patients With Stages III and IV Low-Grade Malignant Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Preliminary Results From a Prospective, Randomized Phase III Clinical Trial in 381 Patients

Publication
Article
OncologyONCOLOGY Vol 13 No 3
Volume 13
Issue 3

To establish the role of fludarabine (Fludara) in previously untreated patients with low-grade malignant non-Hodgkin’s

To establish the role of fludarabine (Fludara) in previously untreated patients with low-grade malignant non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), 381 patients were enrolled by 60 centers in nine countries between April 1993 and January 1997. Patients older than 18 years with NHL Working Formulation class A (chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL] excluded), B, and C were eligible. They were randomized, either immediately after diagnosis or after a wait-and-see period, to either eight courses of fludarabine (25 mg/m² intravenously [IV] daily for 5 days every 4 weeks) or eight courses of onventional CVP chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide, 750 mg/m² IV on day 1; vin-cristine, 1.4 mg/m² IV on day 1; and prednisone, 40 mg/m² PO on days 1-5 every 4 weeks). At entry and after the last course of treatment, complete (re)staging was performed, including computed tomographic (CT) scans and a bone marrow biopsy. From the 381 patients randomized, 72 (19%) were declared ineligible, mainly because of inadequate histology (CLL, mantle cell lymphoma) on central pathology review.

Response rates and survival times are presented according to intent-to-treat analysis. The overall response rate was 69% (39% complete response [CR], 30% partial response [PR]) in the fludarabine group and 53% (17% CR, 36% PR) in the CVP group (P = .001). In both treatment arms, these response rates were not significantly different between the subgroups of patients treated immediately after diagnosis or those treated after a wait-and-see period.

With a median follow-up of 570 days since randomization, the time to progression was 494 and 396 days for the fludarabine- and CVP-treated groups, respectively. With the limited number of deaths that have occurred so far, it is not possible to accurately assess any influence on overall survival at this time.

Toxicity > 2 (according to the World Health Organization [WHO] scale) was observed more frequently in the fludarabine arm for granulocytopenia and thrombocytopenia (P = .001). Significant hair loss occurred in the CVP group only. There were no significant differences in the frequency of severe infections between the two groups (2%). So far, 50 patients have died, 24 from NHL, 2 from a secondary malignancy, 3 from complications of treatment, 4 from intercurrent disease, and 17 from a variety of other causes (including missing data).

CONCLUSION: From the present study it can be concluded that fludarabine monotherapy is established as up-front treatment of patients with extensive low-grade malignant NHL, given the significant response rate (two times higher CR rate) and response duration without enhanced life-threatening toxicities. Apparently, it is too early to judge about possible differences in overall survival time. Fludarabine adds another important ingredient to the treatment strategy of patients with low-grade malignant NHL.

Click here for Dr. Bruce Cheson’s commentary on this abstract.

Articles in this issue

WHO Declares Lymphatic Mapping to Be the Standard of Care for Melanoma
Rituximab: Phase II Retreatment Study in Patients With Low-Grade or Follicular Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
Response Criteria for NHL: Importance of “Normal” Lymph Node Size and Correlations With Response
Chemotherapy Plus Radiation Improves Survival in Patients With Cervical Cancer
A Randomized Trial of Fludarabine, Mitoxantrone (FM) Versus Doxorubicin, Cyclophosphamide, Vindesine, Prednisone (CHEP) as First Line Treatment in Patients With Advanced Low-Grade Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Multicenter Study by GOELAMS Group
Navelbine Increased Elderly Lung Cancer Patients’ Survival
Fludarabine Versus Conventional CVP Chemotherapy in Newly C Diagnosed Patients With Stages III and IV Low-Grade Malignant Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma: Preliminary Results From a Prospective, Randomized Phase III Clinical Trial in 381 Patients
Multicenter, Phase III Study of Iodine-131 Tositumomab (Anti-B1 Antibody) for Chemotherapy-Refractory Low-Grade or Transformed Low-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
T-Cell–Depleted Allogeneic Bone Marrow Transplant From HLA-Matched Sibling Donors for Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
Consensus Statement on Prevention and Early Diagnosis of Lung Cancer
In Vivo Purging and Adjuvant Immunotherapy With Rituximab During PBSC Transplant For NHL
Fludarabine and Cyclophosphamide: A Highly Active and Well-Tolerated Regimen for Patients With Previously Untreated Indolent Lymphomas
Campath-1H Monoclonal Antibody in Therapy for Advanced Low-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphomas: A Phase II Study
AIDS Drugs Effective Against Most Common HIV Strain
Rituximab Therapy in Previously Treated Waldenström’s Macroglobulinemia: Preliminary Evidence of Activity
Related Videos
Carey Anders, MD, an expert on breast cancer
Carey Anders, MD, an expert on breast cancer
Carey Anders, MD, an expert on breast cancer
Carey K. Anders, MD, an expert on breast cancer
A panel of 4 experts on breast cancer seated at a long table
A panel of 4 experts on breast cancer seated at a long table
A panel of 4 experts on breast cancer seated at a long table
The use of a single-port robot may allow for surgically treating more patients with head and neck cancer in a more timely manner, according to Hilary McCrary, MD, MPH.
A panel of 5 experts on colorectal cancer
A panel of 5 experts on colorectal cancer
Related Content