Myeloablative Vs. Non-Myeloablative Consolidation for Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma: Results of Alliance 51101.
Journal
Blood advances
ISSN: 2473-9537
Titre abrégé: Blood Adv
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101698425
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Apr 2024
10 Apr 2024
Historique:
accepted:
05
03
2024
received:
11
09
2023
revised:
12
02
2024
medline:
10
4
2024
pubmed:
10
4
2024
entrez:
10
4
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
While it is evident that standard dose whole brain radiotherapy as consolidation is associated with significant neurotoxicity, the optimal consolidative strategy for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is not defined. We performed a randomized phase 2 clinical trial via the U.S. Alliance cancer cooperative group to compare myeloablative consolidation supported by autologous stem cell transplantation with non-myeloablative consolidation after induction therapy for PCNSL. This is the first randomized trial to be initiated that eliminates whole brain radiotherapy as a consolidative approach in newly-diagnosed PCNSL. Patients, age 18-75 years, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 manner to induction therapy (methotrexate, temozolomide, rituximab and cytarabine) followed by consolidation with either thiotepa plus carmustine and autologous stem cell rescue versus induction followed by non-myeloablative, infusional etoposide plus cytarabine (EA) The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 113 patients were randomized and 108 (54 in each arm) were evaluable. More patients in the non-myeloablative arm experienced progressive disease or death during induction (28% versus 11%, p = 0.05). Thirty-six patients received autologous stem cell transplant and 34 received non-myeloablative consolidation. The estimated 2-year PFS was higher in the myeloablative versus non-myeloablative arm (73% versus 51%; p= 0.02). However, a planned secondary analysis, landmarked at start of consolidation, revealed that the estimated 2-year PFS in those who completed consolidation therapy was not significantly different between the arms (86% versus 71%; p = 0.21). Both consolidative strategies yielded encouraging efficacy and similar toxicity profiles. Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01511562).
Identifiants
pubmed: 38598710
pii: 515687
doi: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2023011657
pii:
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT01511562']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.