Prognostic impact of pre-transplantation computed tomography and 67gallium scanning in chemosensitive diffuse large B cell lymphoma patients undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation
- First Online:
- 54 Downloads
In the present study, we evaluated computed tomography (CT) and 67gallium scanning (67Ga scan) pre-transplant as prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma, undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and stem-cell transplantation.
Patients and methods
Forty-two patients were included. Of these, 9 (21%) had both positive CT and 67Ga scans, 17 (41%) negative results with both techniques, and 16 (38%) positive CT/negative 67Ga scan. Whole-body planar imaging and single-photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) were performed 72 h after an intravenous administration of 67Ga citrate measuring between 7 mCi and 10 mCi (259–370 MBq).
Patients with positive CT/positive 67Ga scan had a significantly worse EFS and OS at 5 years than those with negative 67Ga scan regardless of whether it was associated with a positive or a negative CT scan (29% and 16% vs. 81% and 93% vs. 88% and 100%, respectively, P < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 43 months (range 4–130 months), no differences were observed between patients with negative CT/negative 67Ga scan and those with positive CT/negative 67Ga scan, with an EFS and OS at 5 years of 88% versus 81% and 100% versus 93%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, the presence of a pre-transplant positive CT/67Ga scans adversely influenced both EFS and OS [HR 8, 95% confidence interval (CI) (1.4–38), P = 0.03 and HR 2; 95% CI (1.3–8), P = 0.02, respectively].
67Ga scan helps to identify, in the pre-transplant evaluation, two groups with a different outcome: one group of patients with positive CT and negative 67Ga scans pre-transplant, who showed a favorable outcome with a low rate of relapse, and the other group of patients with both positive CT and 67Ga scans pre-transplant, who showed a poor prognosis and did not benefit from autologous stem-cell transplantation. They should have been offered other therapeutic strategies.
KeywordsChemosensitive diffuse large B cell lymphoma Hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation Prognostic factors CT and 67Ga scan
- 1.De Vita VT Jr, Canellos GP, Chapner B, Schein P, Hubbard SP, Young RC. Advanced diffuse histiocytic lymphoma: a potentially curable disease. Lancet 1975;1:248–250.Google Scholar
- 8.Vose JM, Bierman PJ, Anderson JR, Harrison KA, Dalrymple GV, Byar K, et al. Single-photon emission computed tomography gallium imaging versus computed tomography: predictive value in patients undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:2473–2479.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Sureda A, Arranz R, Iriondo A, Carreras E, Lahuerta JJ, García-Conde J, et al. Autologous stem-cell transplantation for Hodgkin’s disease: results and prognostic factors in 494 patients from the Grupo Español de LInfomas/Trasplante Autólogo de Médula Ósea Spanish Cooperative Group. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:1395–1404.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Vose JM, Zhang MJ, Rowlings PA, Lazarus HM, Bolwell BJ, Freytes CO, et al. Autologous transplantation for diffuse aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma in patients never achieving remission: a report from the Autologus Blood and Marrow Transplant Registry. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:406–413.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Chen CI, Roitman D, Tsang R, Stewart AK, Keating A, Crump M. “Relative” chemotherapy sensitivity: the impact of number of salvage regimens prior to autologous stem cell transplant for relapsed and refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 2002;30:885–891.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Prince HM, Imrie K, Crump M, Stewart AK, Girouard C, Colwill R, et al. The role of intensive therapy and autologous blood and marrow transplantation for chemotherapy-sensitive relapsed and primary refractory non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: identification of major prognostic groups. Br J Haematol 1996;92:880–889.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Hamlin PA, Zelenetz AD, Kewalramani T, Quin J, Satagopan JM, Verbel D, et al. Age-adjusted International Prognostic Index predicts autologous stem cell transplantation outcome for patients with relapsed or primary refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Blood 2003;102:1989–1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Moskowitz CH, Nimer SD, Glassman JR, Portlock CS, Yahalom J, Straus DJ, et al. The International Prognostic Index predicts outcome following autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with relapsed and primary refractory intermediate-grade lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 1999;23:561–567.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Escobar IG, Caballero Barrigón MD, Alonso PT, Pérez-Simón JA, Mateos MV, García JR, et al. Prognostic impact of pre-transplant computed tomography and gallium scan in poor prognosis Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients undergoing hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma 2006;6:217–225.Google Scholar
- 41.Cremerius U, Fabry U, Wildberger JE, Zimny M, Reinartz P, Nowak B, et al. Pre-transplant positron emission tomography (PET) using fluorine-18-fluoro-deoxyglucose (FDG) predicts outcome in patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Bone Marrow Transplant 2002;30:103–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 42.Filmont JE, Czernin J, Yap C, Silverman DH, Quon A, Phelps ME, et al. Value of F-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for predicting the clinical outcome of patients with aggressive lymphoma prior to and after autologous stem-cell transplantation. Chest 2003;124:608–613.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 43.Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, Vandenberghe P, Maertens J, Bormans G, et al. Prognostic value of pretransplantation positron emission tomography using fluorine 18-fluorodeoxyglucose in patients with aggressive lymphoma treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. Blood 2003;102:53–59.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 47.Allen-Auerbach M, Quon A, Weber WA, Obrzut S, Crawford T, Silverman DH, et al. Comparison between 2-deoxy-2-[18F]fluoro-d-glucose positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography hardware fusion for staging of patients with lymphoma. Mol Imaging Biol 2004;6:411–416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 49.Juweid ME, Wiseman GA, Vose JM, Ritchie JM, Menda Y, Wooldridge JE, et al. Response assessment of aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma by integrated International Workshop Criteria and fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:4652–4661.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 50.Juweid ME, Stroobants S, Hoekstra OS, Mottaghy FM, Dietlein M, Guermazi A, et al. Use of positron emission tomography for response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the Imaging Subcommittiee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:571–578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar