TY - JOUR
T1 - R-CHOP versus R-CVP in the treatment of follicular lymphoma
T2 - A meta-analysis and critical appraisal of current literature
AU - Siddhartha, Ganguly
AU - Vijay, Patel
PY - 2009
Y1 - 2009
N2 - Purpose: R-CHOP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) and R-CVP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone) have both been used successfully in the treatment of patients with symptomatic follicular lymphoma (FL). No study has compared the efficacy of the two treatment modalities and attempted to evaluate the role of anthracyclines in the management of patients with FL. We conducted a meta-analysis of relevant literature comparing the two treatment arms for FL with response being the final endpoint. Patients and Methods: Two analyses were conducted: The first analysis compared R-CHOP to R-CVP as frontline agents for the treatment of FL, and the second analysis included both untreated and relapsed patients. Results: For both studies, R-CVP was superior to R-CHOP when evaluating for complete response (CR). Odds ratios were 2.86 (95% CI, 1.81-4.51) in the first analysis and 1.48 (95% CI, 0.991-2.22) in the second analysis. However for overall response (CR+Partial response, PR), R-CHOP was superior, with odds ratios of 5.45 (95% CI: 2.51-11.83) and 5.54 (95% CI: 2.69-11.40), for the first and second analyses, respectively. Conclusion: R-CHOP and R-CVP protocols achieve excellent overall response. In patients with known cardiac history, omission of anthracyclines is reasonable and R-CVP provides a competitive CR rate. In younger patients with FL where cumulative cardio-toxicity may be of importance in the long term and in whom future stem cell transplantation is an option, again R-CVP may be a more appealing option.
AB - Purpose: R-CHOP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) and R-CVP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone) have both been used successfully in the treatment of patients with symptomatic follicular lymphoma (FL). No study has compared the efficacy of the two treatment modalities and attempted to evaluate the role of anthracyclines in the management of patients with FL. We conducted a meta-analysis of relevant literature comparing the two treatment arms for FL with response being the final endpoint. Patients and Methods: Two analyses were conducted: The first analysis compared R-CHOP to R-CVP as frontline agents for the treatment of FL, and the second analysis included both untreated and relapsed patients. Results: For both studies, R-CVP was superior to R-CHOP when evaluating for complete response (CR). Odds ratios were 2.86 (95% CI, 1.81-4.51) in the first analysis and 1.48 (95% CI, 0.991-2.22) in the second analysis. However for overall response (CR+Partial response, PR), R-CHOP was superior, with odds ratios of 5.45 (95% CI: 2.51-11.83) and 5.54 (95% CI: 2.69-11.40), for the first and second analyses, respectively. Conclusion: R-CHOP and R-CVP protocols achieve excellent overall response. In patients with known cardiac history, omission of anthracyclines is reasonable and R-CVP provides a competitive CR rate. In younger patients with FL where cumulative cardio-toxicity may be of importance in the long term and in whom future stem cell transplantation is an option, again R-CVP may be a more appealing option.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=67651159290&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=67651159290&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/1756-8722-2-14
DO - 10.1186/1756-8722-2-14
M3 - Article
C2 - 19309523
AN - SCOPUS:67651159290
VL - 2
JO - Journal of Hematology and Oncology
JF - Journal of Hematology and Oncology
SN - 1756-8722
M1 - 14
ER -