Does Interim PET Scan After 2 Cycles of ABVD Predict Outcome in Hodgkin Lymphoma? Real-World Evidence

• Main Authors: Arun Seshachalam, Shashidhar V. Karpurmath, Krishnakumar Rathnam, S. Ganapathi Raman, Murugesan Janarthinakani, Krishna Prasad, Channappa Patil, Parameswaran Anoop, Neelesh Reddy, Satish Kumar Anumula, Sirigeri Prabhakar Roopa, Krishna Reddy Golamari, Madhav Danthala, Prasad Gunari, Basawantrao Malipatil, Bharath Rangarajan, Karthik S. Udupa, Manjunath Nandennavar, Kesavan Niraimathi, Hemant Deepak Shewade
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: American Society of Clinical Oncology 2019-12-01
• Series: Journal of Global Oncology
• Online Access: http://ascopubs.org/doi/10.1200/JGO.19.00179

PURPOSE: Escalated BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone) improves overall survival (OS) in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) relative to ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) therapy. However, the associated higher cost and toxicity discourage clinicians from prescribing it. Identifying high-risk patients and administering escalated BEACOPP remains an effective strategy. We assessed the significance of interim positron emission tomography (iPET) scan after 2 cycles (iPET2) in identifying this high-risk subset. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This cohort study used secondary data from 12 tertiary care centers in South India gathered over 10 years (2008-2018). OS, event-free survival (EFS), determinants of EFS, and complete response (CR) in iPET2 were assessed. RESULTS: The study included 409 patients with HL (mean age, 34.5 years; male/female ratio, 1.4:1). The median duration of follow-up was 2.8 years. Of 409 patients, 63% underwent PET-based staging and 37% underwent computerized tomography (CT) staging. Stage IV (28.9%) and bone involvement (9.2%) were seen more often with PET than with CT staging (9.2% and 2%, respectively). Among 171 patients with iPET2 results, 24% did not achieve CR, and no factors were significantly associated. The 5-year EFS and OS rates of the entire cohort were 78% and 97%, respectively. The 5-year EFS and OS rates of patients with CR on iPET2 were 90% and 99%, respectively, whereas these were 65% and 100%, respectively, for patients not achieving CR. On univariable analysis, sex, stage, and iPET2 response significantly predicted inferior EFS. On multivariate analysis, only iPET2 response significantly predicted EFS (P < .000). CONCLUSION: Our study supports the use of PET for staging and iPET2 for response assessment. Nonachievement of CR on iPET2 indicates unfavorable outcome, and such patients may benefit from more intensive treatment.