Second-line rituximab–bendamustine versus rituximab–gemcitabine–oxaliplatin in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the real world
Author(s) -
Raluca IonescuIttu,
Aijing Shang,
Nancy Vander Velde,
Annie Guérin,
Yilu Lin,
Lizheng Shi,
Sherry Shi,
Naseer Qayum
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of comparative effectiveness research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.567
H-Index - 23
eISSN - 2042-6313
pISSN - 2042-6305
DOI - 10.2217/cer-2019-0062
Subject(s) - bendamustine , rituximab , medicine , gemcitabine , oxaliplatin , oncology , diffuse large b cell lymphoma , refractory (planetary science) , alemtuzumab , salvage therapy , lymphoma , transplantation , chemotherapy , cancer , colorectal cancer , physics , astrobiology
Aim: Despite long-term responses to first-line immunochemotherapy, many patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) have relapsed/refractory disease. Second-line treatment options are available. However, a large proportion of patients are ineligible for transplantation/intensive therapy. Patients & methods: This observational study of 702 patients in the USA, who used second-line therapies for relapsed/refractory DLBCL, evaluated treatment patterns and overall survival (OS). The study focused on the OS outcome of patients receiving second-line rituximab–bendamustine or rituximab–gemcitabine–oxaliplatin. Results & conclusion: Rituximab–bendamustine and rituximab–gemcitabine–oxaliplatin were received by 4.6 and 1.4% of patients, respectively (N = 42/702). Median and 1-year OS rates were similar between regimens. Many of the 200 different treatment regimens observed in second line were modified versions of National Comprehensive Cancer Network regimens.
Accelerating Research
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom
Address
John Eccles HouseRobert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom