English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

TO THE EDITOR:  Limited disease, defined as Ann Arbor stage I and non-bulky stage II, accounts for approximately 25% of diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs). Since the Southwest Oncology Group (SWOG) study 8736 demonstrated that 3 cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) followed by involved-field radiotherapy (IFRT) was superior to 8 cycles of CHOP [1], a short course of chemotherapy followed by IFRT has been the main treatment for limited, non-bulky DLBCL. This treatment strategy has not changed even after the efficacy of rituximab-CHOP (R-CHOP) was proved in the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte (GELA) study of advanced-stage DLBCL [2]. Hence, the current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines (Version I. 2011) recommend 2 treatment options for stage I/II, non-bulky DLBCL: 3 cycles of R-CHOP with subsequent IFRT and 6 cycles of R-CHOP with or without IFRT. However, the role of radiotherapy for controlling localized DLBCL has been debatable because radiotherapy-associated toxicity may deteriorate the quality of life as well as survival outcome, and in many patients, the disease may relapse outside the radiation field [1, 3]. There is also the risk of secondary malignancies caused by exposure to the radiation field [1, 3]. This controversial use of radiotherapy for consolidation has been augmented by the result of a GELA trial (LNH 93-4) that compared 4 cycles of CHOP with or without IFRT for patients older than 60 years with limited DLBCL and showed similar outcomes [3].  The need for radiotherapy has been challenged since R-CHOP was used as standard treatment for patients with DLBCL. No study has compared the effect of a short course of R-CHOP plus radiotherapy with extended cycles of R-CHOP alone for limited DLBCL; hence, physicians can choose to perform IFRT or 3 additional cycles of R-CHOP at their discretion. Because the selection of a treatment modality for consolidation after 3 cycles of R-CHOP is debatable, 3 additional cycles of R-CHOP or IFRT are suggested as a therapeutic option in the NCCN guidelines.  In the previous issue, Hong et al. reported the results of comparing 3-4 cycles of R-CHOP plus IFRT with 6-8 cycles of R-CHOP alone in limited, non-bulky DLBCL [4]. The 2 groups that were compared showed similar 3-year overall survival (OS). Their OS was comparable to that observed in a previous study (SWOG 0014) that tested the utility of adding 4 doses of rituximab to 3 cycles of CHOP with subsequent IFRT [5]. However, the study by Hong et al. involved a retrospective analysis with a small number of patients. Their results do not provide information helpful in selecting a treatment strategy. Furthermore, extended cycles of R-CHOP might increase the risk of febrile neutropenia, as evidenced by 1 treatment-related mortality that occurred in the group that underwent 6-8 cycles of R-CHOP [4]. Therefore, the selection of additional R-CHOP or IFRT as a consolidation for limited, non-bulky DLBCL will remain a therapeutic dilemma until a prospective study involving a large study population is conducted.

A therapeutic dilemma between the two "R"s: additional rituximab or radiotherapy for limited, non-bulky diffuse large B-cell lymphoma