Treatment outcomes for older patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma receiving salvage chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation are similar to younger patients: a subgroup analysis from the phase III CCTG LY.12 trial.

Background: High-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is often considered for older patients (age >60 years) with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphomas. Although registry data support the safety and potential efficacy of this approach, there are no prospective trials evaluating outcomes of ASCT in older patients. We evaluated the result of second-line chemotherapy and ASCT in older versus younger patients in the CCTG randomized LY.12 trial. Patients and methods: From August 2003 to November 2011, 619 patients with relapsed/refractory aggressive lymphoma were randomized to gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin (GDP) or dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin (DHAP); 177 patients (28.6%) enrolled were >60.0 years of age (range, 60-74) and 442 were ≤60.0 years of age. After two to three cycles, responding patients proceeded to ASCT. Intention-to-treat analysis was used to compare response rate, transplantation rate, event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) between patients aged ≤60.0 and >60.0 years. Results: Patient characteristics were comparable between the two cohorts, except a larger proportion of older patients had high International Prognostic Index risk scores. Response to salvage therapy was 48.6% for patients aged >60.0 versus 43.0% for those aged ≤60.0 (P = 0.21). Transplantation rates were also similar: 50.3% versus 49.8% (P = 0.87) for older versus younger patients. Rates of febrile neutropenia and adverse events requiring hospitalization were comparable for older and younger patients (30.5% versus 22.9% and 37.9% versus 32.1%, respectively). With a median follow-up of 53 months, there was no difference in 4-year OS (36% and 40% for patients aged >60.0 and ≤60.0 years, P = 0.42), or 4-year EFS (20% versus 28%, P = 0.43). Mortality from salvage therapy was 8/174 (4.60%) and 5/436 (1.15%), and 100-day mortality post-ASCT was 7/88 (8.06%) and 4/219 (1.85%). Conclusion: This subgroup analysis suggests that older patients derive similar benefit from salvage therapy and ASCT to younger patients, with acceptable toxicity. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00078949.

Patterns of disease progression and outcomes in a randomized trial testing ABVD alone for patients with limited-stage Hodgkin lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: In the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group/Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group HD.6 trial, progression-free survival was better in patients randomized to therapy that included radiation, compared to doxorubicin (Adriamycin), bleomycin, vinblastine and dacarbazine (ABVD) alone. We now evaluate patterns of progression and subsequent outcomes of patients with progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After a median of 4.2 years, 33 patients have progressed. Two radiation oncologists determined whether sites of progression were confined within radiation fields. Freedom from second progression (FF2P) and freedom from second progression or death (FF2P/D) were compared. RESULTS: Reviewers agreed for the extended (kappa = 0.87) and involved field (kappa = 1.0) analyses. Progression after ABVD alone was more frequently confined within both the extended (20/23 vs. 3/10; P = 0.002) and involved fields (16/23 vs. 2/10; P = 0.02). There was no difference in FF2P between groups [5-year estimate 99% (radiation) versus 96% (ABVD alone)] [hazard ratio (HR) = 3.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-15.6; P = 0.14]; the 5-year estimates of FF2P/D were 94% in each group (HR = 1.04, 95% CI 0.41-2.63; P = 0.93). CONCLUSION: Treatment that includes radiation reduces the risk of progressive Hodgkin lymphoma in sites that receive this therapy, but we are unable to detect differences in FF2P or FF2P/D.

Use of severity of illness to evaluate quality of care.

This study compared a severity of illness system (APACHE II) and a 10% random sample of charts in terms of their ability to identify cases with quality problems. Using condition-specific data bases of 337 pneumonia, 363 acute myocardial infarction and 266 hip fracture charts, severity of illness information was used to separate cases into those with a high and a low likelihood of a poor outcome. Cases with low admission severity of illness combined with subsequent death were flagged as potential quality problems. Physician evaluation was used as the gold standard to measure flag performance. Flags were tested against a 10% random sample drawn from within the three condition-specific data bases. Analyses focused on a combination of sensitivity and positive predictive value. The low severity plus death flag performed much better than a 10% random sample approach, suggesting that outcomes monitoring flags based on severity of illness could play an important role in screening cases for potential quality problems.