Originally published as JCO Early Release 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.5376 on July 28 2008

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marcus, R. Articles by Stein, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Marcus, R. Articles by Stein, G. Related Articles Related Editorial Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Phase III Study of R-CVP Compared With Cyclophosphamide, Vincristine, and Prednisone Alone in Patients With Previously Untreated Advanced Follicular Lymphoma

Robert Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Philippe Solal-Celigny, John V. Catalano, Anna Dmoszynska, João C. Raposo, Fritz C. Offner, José Gomez-Codina, Andrew Belch, David Cunningham, Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch, George Stein

From the Department of Hematology, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge; Department of Medicine, Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton, Surrey, United Kingdom; Department of Medicine Toronto–Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre, Toronto, Ontario; Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Department of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Clinique Victor Hugo, Le Mans, France; Department of Hematology, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton, Victoria, Australia; Department of Hematology, Medical University of Lublin, Lublin, Poland; Servicio de Hematologia, Hospital Santa Maria, Lisbon, Portugal; Dienst Hematologie, Universitair Ziekenhuis, Gent, Belgium; Servicio de Oncologa Medica, Hospital La Fe de Valencia, Valencia, Spain; F. Hoffmann-La Roche; and Statistics for Research, Basel, Switzerland

Corresponding author: Robert Marcus, MB, Department of Haematology, Kings College Hospital, Denmark Hill, London SE5 9RS UK; e-mail: Robert.Marcus{at}kch.nhs.uk

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Purpose To compare the long-term outcome of patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) needing therapy, after treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone (CVP) versus CVP plus rituximab (R-CVP) and to evaluate the predictive value of known prognostic factors after treatment with R-CVP.

Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated CD20-positive stage III/IV FL were randomly assigned to eight cycles of R-CVP (n = 159) or CVP alone (n = 162). The median follow-up period was 53 months.

Results The primary end point—time to treatment failure (TTF), which included patients without a response after four cycles as an event—was significantly prolonged in patients receiving R-CVP versus CVP (P < .0001). Improvements in all other end points, including overall and complete response rates (P < .0001), time to progression (TTP; P < .0001), response duration (P < .0001), time to next antilymphoma treatment (P < .0001), and overall survival (OS; P = .029; 4-year OS: 83% v 77%;) were achieved with R-CVP versus CVP alone. Univariate analyses demonstrated an improvement in TTP with R-CVP versus CVP irrespective of the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) subgroup, the International Prognostic Index (IPI) subgroup, baseline histology, and the presence or absence of B symptoms or bulky disease. By multivariate analysis, FLIPI retains a strong predictive power for TTP in the presence of the trial treatment effect.

Conclusion Analysis of all outcome measures, including OS, confirm the benefit of adding R to CVP in the front-line treatment of FL.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Although prognostic factors for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) have been studied extensively, it has been unclear until recently which are the most useful in a clinical setting and whether these now apply after the widespread incorporation of rituximab (R) into first-line therapy.

The International Prognostic Index (IPI) for aggressive lymphomas¹ is predictive of outcome in FL, but its utility is limited because few patients (10% to 15%) fall into the high-risk group. A scoring system specifically designed for FL—the Follicular Lymphoma Prognostic Factor Index (FLIPI)—was developed through an international cooperative study.² This index divides patients into risk groups using five prognostic factors: age (> 60 v 60 years), Ann Arbor stage (III to IV v I to II), hemoglobin ( 12 v < 12 g/dL), number of affected nodal areas (> four v four), and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level (> normal v normal). Three risk groups were identified containing approximately equal numbers of patients: low risk (zero to one adverse factors), intermediate risk (two adverse factors, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.3), and poor risk (three to five adverse factors, HR = 4.3). This index allows for comparison of results across trials and may allow for studies of different therapies in the various groups.

Until recently, standard treatment for advanced symptomatic FL was chemotherapy. Alkylating agents, anthracyclines, and purine analog-based regimens have all been used, with no regimen conclusively demonstrating a superior outcome with the possible exception of anthracycline/interferon- combinations.³ More recently, improvements in long-term outcome in patients with FL, including prolongation of overall survival (OS), have been demonstrated in large randomized studies by the addition of R to standard chemotherapy combinations in the first-line treatment of FL.^4-7 Because R with chemotherapy is now widely used for first-line treatment of FL, it is important to establish whether these same prognostic factors still apply now as they did in the pre-R era.

We report 53-month median follow-up data from a phase III study comparing eight cycles of R plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone chemotherapy (R-CVP) with eight cycles of CVP alone in patients with previously untreated FL. This analysis includes survival data as well as univariate and multivariate analyses of the prognostic factors for time to progression (TTP) in both arms of the study.

	PATIENTS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Patients
As discussed in detail elsewhere,⁴ patients were eligible for the study if they had previously untreated CD20⁺ stage III or IV FL and required therapy in the opinion of the treating clinician.

This study complied with all the requirements of the Declaration of Helsinki and its current amendments and was conducted in accordance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines.

Treatment
Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to treatment with R-CVP or CVP alone for a maximum of eight cycles of therapy, as described previously.⁴ Random assignment was performed centrally for all participating centers, using stratification according to center and IPI scores (0 or 1 v 2 or 3).¹

Assessments
Disease response was determined in accordance with standard criteria.⁸ The primary end point was time to treatment failure (TTF), defined as the time between random assignment and any of the following events: progressive disease, relapse after response, institution of new antilymphoma treatment, stable disease after cycle 4 (SD4), or death resulting from any cause. Secondary parameters included TTP, response rates, OS, duration of response, time to next antilymphoma treatment or death, and disease-free survival. In the TTP analysis, patients who had SD4 were not censored at this time point but were followed, in the same way as responders, until progressive disease or death occurred, regardless of second-line therapy.

Statistical Analyses
A sample size of 318 patients was calculated as sufficient to detect a 50% increase in the median TTF in patients treated with R-CVP compared with those treated with CVP alone, with 85% power at a two-tailed significance level of 5%.

All analyses of efficacy and safety were performed on an intention-to-treat (ITT) basis. TTF and TTP were analyzed using the log-rank test, and the results were expressed as Kaplan-Meier plots.

TTP was subsequently analyzed using the Cox regression model to assess the effects of treatment according to various baseline prognostic factors. The following factors were considered: age, number of extranodal sites, bone marrow involvement, LDH levels, β₂-microglobulin levels, presence of B symptoms, bulky disease (defined as nodal or extranodal mass > 7 cm in its greater diameter), British National Lymphoma Investigation (BNLI) criteria for therapy, number of affected nodal areas, hemoglobin levels, composite IPI score, and composite FLIPI score.

Univariate analyses were performed first, including one factor in the model in addition to trial treatment group and center pool. Terms for the interaction of each prognostic factor with trial treatment were included in order to assess consistency of the treatment effect.

Multivariate analyses with both forward and backward selection of prognostic factors ( = .05) were conducted to assess the predictive value of various parameters on TTP in the presence of the trial treatment effect. Owing to the composite nature of the IPI and FLIPI scores and because they share a number of features, multivariate analysis was carried out in three different ways. First, the FLIPI score was included as a composite along with the other prognostic factors that are not incorporated in the FLIPI. Second, the IPI score was included as a composite along with the other prognostic factors that are not incorporated in the IPI. Third, the individual components of each of the composite FLIPI and IPI indexes were included, together with other prognostic factors.

All P values are two-tailed. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS software (SAS Institute, Cary, NC).

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Patient Characteristics
As previously reported,⁴ the final analysis population consisted of 159 patients in the CVP group and 162 patients in the R-CVP group. More than 80% of the patients had at least one symptom requiring therapy according to local treatment guidelines (BNLI, Groupe d'Etudes de Lymphoma Folliculaire, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/Southwest Oncology Group).

There were no clinically relevant differences between the two groups by any demographic, clinical, or pathologic criteria (Table 1). Although most patients had an IPI score of 0 to 2, 15% of patients receiving CVP and 13% receiving R-CVP had an IPI score of 3 to 4. According to the FLIPI, 45% of patients in the CVP group and 38% in the R-CVP group had scores of 3 to 5. All patients had an Ann Arbor disease stage of III or IV. Because patients had to have stage III/IV disease for enrollment, the FLIPI risk distribution in this cohort was skewed toward a higher proportion of high-risk patients when compared with an unselected population with FL.

View larger version (24K): [in this window] [in a new window] [PowerPoint Slide for Teaching]   Fig 1. CONSORT diagram showing the flow of patients through the trial. CVP, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone; R-CVP, rituximab plus CVP.

View larger version (16K): [in this window] [in a new window] [PowerPoint Slide for Teaching]   Fig 2. Overall survival in patients assigned to chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) or with CVP plus rituximab (R-CVP).

Of the 45 patients treated with a R-containing regimen, 34 (76%) of 45 were still alive at the time of the analysis as compared with 56 (64%) of 88 patients treated with a regimen without R. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were conducted to assess the efficacy of treatment in terms of TTP according to various baseline prognostic factors.

Univariate analyses. P values resulting from the analyses by patient subgroups are reported without stratification by center pools. Baseline FLIPI scores categorized patients as follows: low risk (zero to one risk factors), 17%; intermediate risk (two risk factors), 39%; and high risk (three to five risk factors), 44%. Baseline IPI categorized patients as follows: zero to one risk factors, 47%; two risk factors, 38%; and three to four risk factors, 15%.

Although FLIPI was conceived as a prognostic index for OS, there are too few deaths reported in this study at this time point to draw any conclusion using this parameter for subgroup analysis. Here, TTP is used as a possible surrogate for OS.

The addition of R to CVP was associated with significantly prolonged TTP compared with CVP alone in all FLIPI subgroups (Fig 3), all IPI subgroups, and irrespective of baseline histology, presence or absence of B symptoms, and presence or absence of bulky disease (Table 3; Fig 4).

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window] [PowerPoint Slide for Teaching]   Fig 3. Time to treatment progression in patients assigned to chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) or with CVP plus rituximab (R-CVP), according to baseline Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) score. (A) FLIPI 0 to 1, good prognosis; (B) FLIPI 2, intermediate prognosis; (C) FLIPI 3 to 5, poor prognosis.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window] [PowerPoint Slide for Teaching]   Fig 4. Cox regression model of time to treatment progression among patients assigned to chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) or with CVP plus rituximab, according to baseline prognostic factors. BNLI, British National Lymphoma Investigation; BM, bone marrow; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; B2M, β2-microglobulin; FLIP index, Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index; IPI, International Prognostic Index; CRF, case record form.

Multivariate analyses. Multivariate analysis was used to assess the prognostic value of various parameters (BNLI criteria, age, extranodal sites, LDH, FLIPI, IPI, bone marrow involvement, elevated β₂-microglobulin, B symptoms, bulky disease, nodal areas, hemoglobin level) on outcome in terms of TTP in the presence of the trial treatment effect. Only the FLIPI (categorized as 0 to 2 v 3 to 5 in the analysis) was found to be a significant prognostic parameter for TTP in addition to the trial treatment. Patients with a FLIPI score of 0 to 2 who received R-CVP had the longest TTP. No other prognostic factor improved the predictive power.

In two further multivariate analyses (one utilizing IPI instead of FLIPI, the other considering neither of the composite factors FLIPI and IPI), only hemoglobin level and number of nodal areas were found to be statistically significant predictors of TTP in addition to trial treatment.

Adverse Events
As previously reported,⁴ the incidence of adverse events was similar in the R-CVP and CVP groups. Although there was a higher incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia during treatment with R-CVP (24%) compared with CVP (14%), this did not translate into a higher rate of infections. There were no treatment-related deaths.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
These follow-up data (median, 53 months) confirm that the addition of R to CVP chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated FL significantly improves the CR rate, TTF, TTP, duration of response, disease-free survival, and time to next antilymphoma treatment compared with CVP chemotherapy alone. These data with long-term follow-up are consistent with the early results reported from this trial.⁴ An improvement in OS has also now been observed, although the delay between first relapse and death is long.

Thirty-four percent (45 of 133) of the patients receiving second-line therapy in the CVP group and 21% (18 of 84) of patients receiving second-line therapy in the R-CVP group were treated with R monotherapy or R-containing immunochemotherapy regimens, suggesting that, because there is an OS benefit in the R-CVP group, not all patients relapsing after chemotherapy alone can have successful salvage treatment with second-line R-containing therapy.

The study design allowed for collection of the second-line treatment only; therefore, the proportion of patients treated with R at subsequent relapses over the length of their disease is likely to be higher than the 34% reported here, especially as the indication for R treatment of patients with FL was extended to cover its use with chemotherapy after 2004.

This is one of four randomized trials to show a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) or TTP and OS associated with the addition of R to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of FL. Hiddemann et al⁵ demonstrated a significant improvement in PFS and OS with the addition of R to cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) chemotherapy in patients with untreated, advanced-stage FL: After 3 years, only six of 223 patients in the R-CHOP arm had died compared with 17 of 205 patients treated with CHOP alone (P = .016). Herold et al⁶ demonstrated significant prolongation of OS with R, mitoxantrone, chlorambucil, and prednisolone arm compared with mitoxantrone, chlorambucil, and prednisolone alone in patients with previously untreated advanced FL (4-year OS in FL patients, 87% v 74%; P = .0096).⁶ Foussard et al⁷ initially reported a significant improvement in OS in this setting by the addition of R to cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, etoposide, prednisone, and interferon compared with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, etoposide, prednisone, and interferon alone (OS at 42 months, 91% v 84%; P = .029), but recent 5-year follow-up suggests that this benefit is confined to those patients in the high FLIPI groups. In each of these four studies, the benefits achieved by the addition of R to chemotherapy were attained without substantially increasing toxicity. The OS rates for the other reported studies for chemotherapy alone and R-chemotherapy combinations (90% v 95% at 2 years;⁵ 74% v 87% at 4 years;⁶ and 84% v 91% at 42 months,⁷ respectively) may be superior to those reported here (77% v 83% at 48 months; Table 2), but it is important to note that patients in the other studies who received the more aggressive treatment regimens also received interferon-.

The effect is similar in all studies that compare chemotherapy versus R plus chemotherapy. In our study, the additional benefit of R-CVP over chemotherapy alone is estimated to be a 40% reduction in the risk of death (HR = 0.60; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.96). There is as yet no study directly comparing anthracycline- and non–anthracycline-based regimens and therefore no proof that such intensive regimens confer long-term benefit compared with R-CVP. It is also worth noting that patients achieving a CR with R-CVP have a prolonged disease-free survival, suggesting that such patients may not require more intensive treatment.

The Cochrane Group meta-analysis of seven randomized studies comparing R-chemotherapy with chemotherapy alone in a combined total of 1,943 patients with previously untreated and relapsed/refractory FL, mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL), or other indolent lymphoma, also recently confirmed a significant survival benefit associated with the addition of R to chemotherapy both for the overall cohort and for the subgroups of patients with FL and MCL.⁹

We have shown that the addition of R to CVP significantly improved TTP across all IPI and FLIPI subgroups. Similarly, the three other studies discussed herein^5-7 also demonstrate improvements in all FLIPI or IPI groups, with the index retaining its prognostic significance irrespective of the induction regimen used.

Utilizing a different approach to the use of R in previously untreated patients with indolent lymphoma, the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study group has reported results of a randomized study to evaluate the role of R maintenance therapy in patients with newly diagnosed indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after induction chemotherapy alone.¹⁰ After CVP treatment to maximum response (six to eight cycles), stable and responding patients were randomly assigned to R maintenance with four once-weekly doses of 375 mg/m² repeated at 6-month intervals for up to 2 years or to observation. In the subgroup of 237 patients with FL, R maintenance produced a significantly longer PFS compared with no further treatment (61 v 15 months, respectively; P = 3 x 10^–7). This benefit was observed across all FLIPI subgroups, particularly in patients with initial high tumor burden and those with only minimal residual disease after induction. An increase in OS (P = .03) was also observed in the R maintenance group. However, 20% of patients entering this study were not eligible for random assignment for a variety of reasons. The results of the Primary Rituximab Maintenance trial, now fully recruited but not yet reported, will confirm whether R maintenance is also useful after front-line R-containing chemotherapy induction.

In our study, the clinical benefit associated with the addition of R to CVP was confirmed across all subgroups of patients with FL, with the exception of patients with baseline hemoglobin less than 12 g/dL. Low hemoglobin has also been shown to be an unfavorable prognostic factor for response to a standard or prolonged course of R monotherapy in patients with FL or MCL.^11,12 This validation of the FLIPI raises the question of whether it might facilitate risk-adapted therapy now that we have confirmed its prognostic value: In our study, poor-prognosis (FLIPI 3 to 5) patients receiving R-CVP had a median TTP of only 26 months, suggesting that this subgroup of patients might benefit from more aggressive regimens.

This is supported by the results from the German Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group study of R-CHOP versus CHOP (± interferon or autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients achieving at least a PR after induction) published by Buske et al.¹³ After an albeit shorter follow-up of only 20 months, the 2-year TTF for R-CHOP followed by interferon- in the subgroup of FLIPI high-risk patients was 67%, significantly shorter than that reported in the low- or intermediate-risk patients (92% and 90%, respectively; P < .001).

The median disease-free survival of the 41% of patients who achieved a CR/CRu with R-CVP has still not been reached after a median follow-up of 53 months. This suggests that this regimen of modest intensity has long-lasting effects in responsive patients and raises the further possibility that future trials might stratify patients by initial response to treatment. For patients achieving less than CR, the potential role of peripheral-blood stem-cell transplantation or radioimmunotherapy should now be examined. Whether maintenance therapy in all patients with R might further prolong remission in all or a subset of patients receiving R-based induction is also currently being evaluated.

This report confirms that the benefits of the addition of R to first-line chemotherapy continue to be observed with long-term follow-up and reinforces the notion that R-containing chemotherapy should be the current standard of care for patients with FL requiring treatment. In addition, we can confirm the continued utility of FLIPI as a tool for predicting duration of response to treatment in the R era.

	AUTHORS’ DISCLOSURES OF POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Although all authors completed the disclosure declaration, the following author(s) indicated a financial or other interest that is relevant to the subject matter under consideration in this article. Certain relationships marked with a "U" are those for which no compensation was received; those relationships marked with a "C" were compensated. For a detailed description of the disclosure categories, or for more information about ASCO's conflict of interest policy, please refer to the Author Disclosure Declaration and the Disclosures of Potential Conflicts of Interest section in Information for Contributors.

Employment or Leadership Position: Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch, Hoffman La Roche (C) Consultant or Advisory Role: Robert Marcus, Roche (C), Genentech (C); Philippe Solal-Celigny, Roche (C); John V. Catalano, Roche (C); David Cunningham, Roche (C); George Stein, Roche (C) Stock Ownership: None Honoraria: Robert Marcus, Roche, Genentech; Kevin Imrie, Roche; Philippe Solal-Celigny, Roche; John V. Catalano, Roche; David Cunningham, Roche Research Funding: Philippe Solal-Celigny, Roche; John V. Catalano, Roche; Anna Dmoszynska, Roche; David Cunningham, Roche Expert Testimony: David Cunningham, Roche (C) Other Remuneration: None

	AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
Conception and design: Robert E. Marcus, Philippe Solal-Celigny

Financial support: Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch

Administrative support: Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch

Provision of study materials or patients: Robert E. Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Philippe Solal-Celigny, John Catalano, Anna Dmoszynska, Joao Raposo, Fritz Offner, Jose Gomez-Codina, Andrew Belch, David Cunningham

Collection and assembly of data: Robert E. Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch, George Stein

Data analysis and interpretation: Robert E. Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Philippe Solal-Celigny, Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch, George Stein

Manuscript writing: Robert E. Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Philippe Solal-Celigny, Andrew Belch, David Cunningham, Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch

Final approval of manuscript: Robert E. Marcus, Kevin Imrie, Philippe Solal-Celigny, John Catalano, Anna Dmoszynska, Joao Raposo, Fritz Offner, Jose Gomez-Codina, Andrew Belch, David Cunningham, Elisabeth Wassner-Fritsch, George Stein

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
The following people and institutions participated in this study. Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC): M. Dreyling (Germany), C. Gisselbrecht (France), Michael Herold (Germany), and Marc Buyse (DSMC Statistician, Belgium). Study centers: Australia, Monash Medical Centre, Clayton—J. Catalano; Box Hill Hospital, Box Hill—J. McKendrick; Royal Perth Hospital, Perth—R. Herrmann; Liverpool Hospital, Liverpool—D. Rosenfeld; Westmead Hospital, Westmead—K. Bradstock; The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville—J. Norman; Mater Adult Hospital, South Brisbane—K. Taylor. Belgium, Algemeen Ziekenhuis Middelheim, Antwerpen—R. De Bock; Institut Jules Bordet, Bruxelles—D. Bron; Universitair Ziekenhuis, Gent—F. Offner. Brazil, Santa Casa de Misericórdia de São Paulo, São Paulo—C. Chiattone. Canada, Cross Cancer Institute, Edmonton—A. Belch; Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa—I. Bence-Bruckler; QE II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax—S. Robinson; Toronto-Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre, Toronto—K. Imrie; Royal Victoria Hospital, Montreal—C. Shustik; Princess Margaret Hospital, Toronto—M. Crump. France, Clinique Victor Hugo, Le Mans—P. Solal-Celigny; Centre Hospitalier de Versailles, Le Chesnay—S. Castaigne. Israel: Rabin Medical Center, Petach-Tikva—O. Bairey. Poland, M. Sklodowska–Curie Memorial Institute, Warszawa—J. Walewski; Medical University of Lublin, Lublin—A. Dmoszynska; Medical University of Wroclaw, Wroclaw—K. Kuliczkowski. Portugal, Hospital de St António dos Capuchos, Lisboa—J. Veiga; Hospitais da Universidade de Coimbra, Coimbra—F. Plácido; Hospital Santa Maria, Lisboa—J. Raposo. Spain, Hospital La Fe de Valencia, Valencia—J. Gómez-Codina; Hospital Gregorio Marañón, Madrid—E. Flores; Hospital Clínico Universitario de Málaga, Málaga—A. Rueda; Complejo Hospitalario de Pontevedra, Pontevedra—M. Constenla; Hospital Sant Joan, Tarragona—J. Gumá. Switzerland: Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen—T. Cerny; Institut für med. Onkologie, Bern—R. Zenhäusern. Tenerife, Hospital Universitario de Canarias, La Laguna—N. Batista. United Kingdom, Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge—R. Marcus; Kings College Hospital, London—A. Pagliuca; University of Glasgow, Glasgow—T. Fitzsimons; Glasgow Infirmary, Glasgow—D. Dunlop; Leeds General Infirmary, Leeds—G. Morgan; Royal Victoria Infirmary, Newcastle on Tyne—S. Proctor; John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington—C. Hatton; Royal Free Hospital, London—M. Potter; Royal Marsden Hospital, Sutton—D. Cunningham; Weston Park Hospital NHS Trust, Sheffield—B. Hancock; Southampton General Hospital, Southampton—P. Johnson; University College Hospital, Cardiff—C. Poynton; St George's Hospital, London—R. Pettengell.

	NOTES

 
published online ahead of print at www.jco.org on July 28, 2008.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION PATIENTS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION AUTHORS' DISCLOSURES OF... AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS REFERENCES

 
1. The International Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project: A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. N Engl J Med 329:987-994, 1993[Abstract/Free Full Text]

2. Solal-Céligny P, Roy P, Colombat P, et al: Follicular lymphoma international prognostic index. Blood 104:1258-1265, 2004[Abstract/Free Full Text]

3. Rohatiner AZ, Gregory WM, Peterson B, et al: Meta-analysis to evaluate the role of interferon in follicular lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 23:2215-2223, 2005[Abstract/Free Full Text]

4. Marcus R, Imrie K, Belch A, et al: CVP chemotherapy plus rituximab compared with CVP as first-line treatment for advanced follicular lymphoma. Blood 105:1417-1423, 2005[Abstract/Free Full Text]

5. Hiddemann W, Kneba M, Dreyling M, et al: Frontline therapy with rituximab added to the combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (CHOP) significantly improves the outcome for patients with advanced stage follicular lymphoma compared with therapy with CHOP alone: Results of a prospective randomised study of the German Low-Grade Lymphoma Study Group. Blood 106:3725-3732, 2005[Abstract/Free Full Text]

6. Herold M, Antje H, Srock S, et al: Rituximab added to first-line mitoxantrone, chlorambucil, and prednisolone chemotherapy followed by interferon maintenance prolongs survival in patients with advanced follicular lymphoma: An East German Study Group Hematology and Oncology Study. J Clin Oncol 25:1986-1992, 2007[Abstract/Free Full Text]

7. Salles GA Mounier N, de Guibert S et al: Rituximab combined with chemotherapy and interferon in follicular lymphoma patients: Final analysis of the GELA–GOELAMS FL2000 study with a five year follow up. Blood 110:110a, 2007 (abstr 792)

8. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, et al: Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 17:1244-1253, 1999[Abstract/Free Full Text]

9. Schulz H, Bohlius JF, Trelle S, et al: Immunochemotherapy with rituximab and overall survival in patients with indolent or mantle cell lymphoma: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst 99:706-714, 2007[Abstract/Free Full Text]

10. Hochster HS, Weller E, Gascoyne RD, et al: Maintenance rituximab after CVP results in superior clinical outcome in advanced follicular lymphoma (FL): Results of the E1496 Phase III trial from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and the Cancer and Leukemia Group B. Blood 106:106a, 2005 (abstr)

11. Ghielmini M, Rufibach K, Salles G, et al: Single agent rituximab in patients with follicular or mantle cell lymphoma: Clinical and biological factors that are predictive of response and event-free survival as well as the effect of rituximab on the immune system—A study of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Res (SAKK). Ann Oncol 16:1675-1682, 2005[Abstract/Free Full Text]

12. Ghielmini M, Schmitz S, Cogliatti S, et al: Effect of single-agent rituximab given at the standard schedule or as prolonged treatment in patients with mantle cell lymphoma: A study of the Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Res (SAKK). J Clin Oncol 23:705-711, 2005[Abstract/Free Full Text]

13. Buske C, Hoster E, Dreyling M, et al: The Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) separates high-risk from intermediate- or low-risk patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma treated front-line with rituximab and the combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) with respect to treatment outcome. Blood 108:1504-1508, 2006[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Submitted July 16, 2007; accepted May 7, 2008.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

Related Editorial

• Follicular Lymphoma, Survival, and Rituximab: Is It Time to Declare Victory?
  Sandra J. Horning
  JCO 2008 26: 4537-4538 [Full Text]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. A. Gregory, K. Hohloch, C. Gisselbrecht, K. Tobinai, and M. Dreyling Harnessing the Energy: Development of Radioimmunotherapy for Patients with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Oncologist, October 1, 2009; 14(suppl_2): 4 - 16. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Morschhauser, M. Dreyling, A. Rohatiner, F. Hagemeister, and A. Bischof Delaloye Rationale for Consolidation to Improve Progression-Free Survival in Patients with Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A Review of the Evidence Oncologist, October 1, 2009; 14(suppl_2): 17 - 29. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Advani, A. Forero-Torres, R. R. Furman, J. D. Rosenblatt, A. Younes, H. Ren, K. Harrop, N. Whiting, and J. G. Drachman Phase I Study of the Humanized Anti-CD40 Monoclonal Antibody Dacetuzumab in Refractory or Recurrent Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma J. Clin. Oncol., September 10, 2009; 27(26): 4371 - 4377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Olafsen, D. Betting, V. E. Kenanova, F. B. Salazar, P. Clarke, J. Said, A. A. Raubitschek, J. M. Timmerman, and A. M. Wu Recombinant Anti-CD20 Antibody Fragments for Small-Animal PET Imaging of B-Cell Lymphomas J. Nucl. Med., September 1, 2009; 50(9): 1500 - 1508. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				W. Z. Ai, R. Tibshirani, B. Taidi, D. Czerwinski, and R. Levy Anti-idiotype antibody response after vaccination correlates with better overall survival in follicular lymphoma Blood, June 4, 2009; 113(23): 5743 - 5746. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. R. Carson, A. M. Evens, E. A. Richey, T. M. Habermann, D. Focosi, J. F. Seymour, J. Laubach, S. D. Bawn, L. I. Gordon, J. N. Winter, et al. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy after rituximab therapy in HIV-negative patients: a report of 57 cases from the Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports project Blood, May 14, 2009; 113(20): 4834 - 4840. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Liang How I treat and monitor viral hepatitis B infection in patients receiving intensive immunosuppressive therapies or undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation Blood, April 2, 2009; 113(14): 3147 - 3153. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Hagenbeek Maintenance or Eradication of Residual Disease in Indolent Lymphoma: Where Do We Stand? J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2009; 27(10): 1540 - 1542. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. J. Horning Follicular Lymphoma, Survival, and Rituximab: Is It Time to Declare Victory? J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2008; 26(28): 4537 - 4538. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Marcus, R. Articles by Stein, G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Marcus, R. Articles by Stein, G. Related Articles Related Editorial Social Bookmarking                            What's this?