z-logo
Premium
Impact of imaging modality on clinical outcome in Hodgkin lymphoma in a resource constraint setting
Author(s) -
Korula Anu,
Devasia Anup Joseph,
Kulkarni Uday,
Abubacker Fouzia N.,
Lakshmi Kavitha M.,
Abraham Aby,
Srivastava Alok,
George Biju,
Mathews Vikram
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
british journal of haematology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.907
H-Index - 186
eISSN - 1365-2141
pISSN - 0007-1048
DOI - 10.1111/bjh.16289
Subject(s) - medicine , stage (stratigraphy) , lymphoma , radiology , nuclear medicine , abvd , hodgkin lymphoma , positron emission tomography , chemotherapy , gastroenterology , cyclophosphamide , vincristine , biology , paleontology
Summary Treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) has evolved with risk‐stratified therapy based on PET‐CT scan at multiple timepoints. In a resource constraint setting even a single PET‐CT scan ($400) is inaccessible to many patients, who are re‐assessed with only clinical examination, abdominal ultrasonogram and/or x‐ray (C/U/X) ($10). To compare clinical outcomes in patients with HL who have had suboptimal imaging after completion of chemotherapy for HL, with those who had a CT or PET‐CT, 283 patients were treated for HL from 2011 to 2015, and 268 patients completed six cycles of ABVD therapy with response assessment modality by CT/PET in 185 patients and by C/U/X in 83. There was no difference in the number of patients with advanced (64·1% vs. 61·1%; P  = 0·650) or bulk disease (8·1% vs. 7·2%). A significantly higher number of patients in the CT/PET group received IFRT (25·4% vs. 7·7%; P  = 0·0005). The three‐year overall survival and progression‐free survival of all treated patients ( n  = 283) was 83·5 ± 2·3% and 76·7 ± 2·6% respectively [median follow‐up 36 months (range 2–93)]. At three years, the overall relapse‐free survival (RFS) was 80·1 ± 2·5%, with RFS of 77 ± 3·2% vs. 85 ± 4·0% in the CT/PET group and C/U/X groups respectively ( P  = 0·349). There was no difference in RFS between the two groups either in early‐stage disease (88·1 ± 4·6% vs. 91·8 ± 5·6%; P  = 0·671) or late‐stage disease (73·9 ± 4·8% vs. 81·3 ± 6·0%; P  = 0·747). The only significant factor adversely affecting RFS was advanced disease ( P  = 0·004). Factors not affecting RFS were age ( P  = 0·763), sex ( P  = 0·925), bulk disease ( P  = 0·889) and imaging modality ( P  = 0·352). There was no difference in relapse rates between patients who had suboptimal imaging compared to those who had a PET/CT. It is possible to use these basic imaging modalities when resources are a constraint, with acceptable outcomes.

This content is not available in your region!

Continue researching here.

Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom