A retrospective study of the CHOP, CHOPE, and CHOPE/G regimens as the first-line treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphomas
The standard treatment for peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs) is undetermined. We designed a CHOPE/G regimen (cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, vincristine, prednisolone, and etoposide alternating with a gemcitabine-based regimen) as the first-line treatment of PTCLs and compared with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, pirarubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) and CHOPE (CHOP plus etoposide) regimen to evaluate the optimal chemotherapy regimen.
116 previously untreated PTCL patients received CHOP (N = 46), CHOPE (N = 46), or CHOPE/G (N = 24) regimen at Peking University Cancer Hospital from 2009 to 2017 and were retrospectively analyzed.
The overall response rates (ORRs) of the CHOP, CHOPE, and CHOPE/G groups were 82.6%, 76.1%, and 75.0% (p = 0.673), with complete response (CR) rates of 32.6%, 56.5%, and 45.7% (p = 0.063), respectively. Within a median follow-up time of 35.5 months, the 3-year overall survival (OS) rates of the CHOP, CHOPE, and CHOPE/G groups were 37.0%, 47.0%, and 56.3% (p = 0.107), and the 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 19.9%, 29.9%, and 5.3% (p = 0.093), respectively. Compared with the CHOP regimen alone, CHOPE had a significantly higher CR rate (p = 0.021) with more favorable OS (p = 0.046). The CHOPE/G regimen did not improve the ORR, CR rate, or OS compared with either the CHOP or CHOPE, with a significantly poorer PFS compared with the CHOPE regimen (p = 0.029). Anemia and thrombocytopenia occurred most frequently in the CHOPE/G group (anemia 83.3%, p = 0.035; thrombocytopenia 50%, p = 0.015).
Compared with CHOP alone, CHOPE regimen improved the efficacy and survival; while the addition of gemcitabine in the front-line therapy resulted in more adverse events without benefit of survival.
KeywordsPeripheral T-cell lymphomas Chemotherapy CHOP Etoposide Gemcitabine
This study was funded by National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant number 81470368 and Grant number 81670187), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant number 7172047), Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (Grant number 2018-1-2151), Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals’ Ascent Plan (Grant number DFL20151001), and Beijing Medical and Health Foundation (Grant number 2221-16-157). We thank M.S. Lan Mi for statistical method supporting.
This study was funded by National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant number 81470368 and grant number 81670187), Beijing Natural Science Foundation (Grant number 7172047), Capital’s Funds for Health Improvement and Research (Grant number 2018-1-2151), Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals’ Ascent Plan (Grant number DFL20151001), and Beijing Medical and Health Foundation (Grant number 2221-16-157).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study formal consent is not required.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- 8.National Comprehensive Cancer Network (2018) Lymphomas T-Cell (Version 5) https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/t-cell.pdf. Accessed 13 Aug 2018
- 10.Schmitz N, Trümper L, Ziepert M et al (2010) Treatment and prognosis of mature T-cell and NK-cell lymphoma: an analysis of patients with T-cell lymphoma treated in studies of the German high-grade non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group. Blood 116(18):3418–3425. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-02-270785 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Nickelsen M, Ziepert M, Zeynalova S et al (2009) High-dose CHOP plus etoposide (MegaCHOEP) in T-cell lymphoma: a comparative analysis of patients treated within trials of the German high-grade non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group (DSHNHL). Ann Oncol 20(12):1977–1984. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdp211 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Harris NL et al (2008) WHO classification of tumours of haematopoietic and lymphoid tissues, Fourth edn. IARC WHO Classification of Tumours, No 2Google Scholar
- 23.Mahadevan D, Unger JM, Spier CM et al (2013) Phase 2 trial of combined cisplatin, etoposide, gemcitabine, and methylprednisolone (PEGS) in peripheral T cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: Southwest Oncology Group Study S0350. Cancer 119(2):371–379. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27733 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 24.Gleeson M, Peckitt C, To YM et al (2018) CHOP versus GEM-P in previously untreated patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (CHEMO-T): a phase 2, multicentre, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet Haematol 5(5):e190–e200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30039-5 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar