Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

PET Response-Adapted Treatment in Hodgkin Lymphoma

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
PET Scan in Hodgkin Lymphoma

  • 825 Accesses

Abstract

The present review will focus on the issue of interim PET scan intended as surrogate test for chemosensitivity in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). When performed early during treatment, PET scan is able to predict the final treatment outcome with variable accuracy, depending on HL tumour burden. In early-stage disease, interim PET shows a very high sensitivity and negative predictive value, while specificity and positive predictive value are only moderate, due to a substantial number of false-positive studies. In advanced-stage disease, a better positive predictive value has been reported, at the partial expense of the negative predictive value, which proved suboptimal, due to a non negligible percentage (5–10 %) of cases experiencing treatment failure despite a negative interim PET scan. The latter transformed, in the last decade, from a simple imaging technique to a prognostic tool indissoluble from HL therapeutic strategy. As a consequence, several PET response-adapted strategies have been proposed in clinical trials; some of them already concluded, while others are still ongoing. In early-stage lymphoma, two phase II trials explored whether treatment de-escalation by omitting involved-field radiation could be safely offered in interim PET-negative patients, without compromising the treatment efficacy, with opposite conclusions. In advanced-stage disease, most trials have been addressed to explore the efficacy of escalating treatment in interim PET-positive patients after few courses of ABVD treatment, while two others are still ongoing aimed at assessing treatment de-escalation in patients with a negative interim PET scan after two courses of BEACOPP escalated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kyle SD, Law WP, Miles KA. Predicting tumour response. Cancer Imaging. 2013;13(3):381–90.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Keepers YP, Pizao PE, Peters GJ, Van Ark-Otte J, Winograd B, Pinedo HM. Comparison of the sulforhodamine B protein and tetrazolium (MTT) assays for in vitro chemosensitivity testing. Eur J Cancer. 1991;27:897–900.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Unger FT, Witte I, David KA. Prediction of individual response to anticancer therapy: historical and future perspectives. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2015;72:729–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Levis A, Vitolo U, Ciocca Vasino MA, Cametti G, Urgesi A, Bertini M, et al. Predictive value of the early response to chemotherapy in high-risk stages II and III Hodgkin’s disease. Cancer. 1987;60(8):1713–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Naumann R, Vaic A, Beuthien-Baumann B, Bredow J, Kropp J, Kittner T, et al. Prognostic value of positron emission tomography in the evaluation of post-treatment residual mass in patients with Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2001;115(4):793–800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Radford JA, Cowan RA, Flanagan M, Durn G, Crowther D, Johnson RJ, et al. The significance of residual mediastinal abnormality on the chest radiograph following treatment for Hodgkin’s disease. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6(6):940–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Weber WA. Assessing tumor response to therapy. J Nucl Med. 2009;50:1S–0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gallamini A, Hutchings M, Rigacci L, et al. Early interim 2-[18F]fluoro-2- deoxy-D glucose positron emission tomography is prognostically superior to international prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a report from a joint Italian-Danish study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3746–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lin C, Itti E, Haioun C, Petegnief Y, Luciani A, Dupuis J, et al. Early 18F-FDG PET for prediction of prognosis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: SUV-based assessment versus visual analysis. J Nucl Med. 2007;48:1626–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gavid M, Prevot-Bitot N, Timoschenko A, Gallet P, Martin C, Prades JM. [18F]-FDG PET-CT prediction of response to induction chemotherapy in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: preliminary findings. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2015;132(1):3–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Groheux D, Sanna A, Majdoub M, de Cremoux P, Giacchetti S, Teixeira L, et al. Baseline tumour 18FDG uptake and modifications after 2 cycles of neoadjuvant chemotherapy are prognostic of outcome in ER+/HER2- breast cancer. J Nucl Med. 2015;56(6):824–31. pli: jnumed 115.154138.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu FY, Yen TC, Wang JY, Tang TS. Early prediction by 18F-FDG PET/CT for progression free survival and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving third-line cetuximab-based therapy. Clin Nucl Med. 2015;40(3):200–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lamanna N, Jurcic JG, Noy A, Maslak P, Gencarelli AN, Panageas KS, et al. Sequential therapy with fludarabine, high-dose cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia produces high-quality responses: molecular remissions predict for durable complete responses. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(4):491–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Strati P, Keating MJ, O’Brien SM, Burger J, Ferrajoli A, Jain N, et al. Eradication of bone marrow minimal residual disease may prompt early treatment discontinuation in CLL. Blood. 2014;123(24):3727–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Mahon FX, Etienne G. Deep molecular response in chronic myeloid leukemia: the new goal of therapy? Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(2):310–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ladetto M, Lobetti-Bodoni C, Mantoan B, Ceccarelli M, Boccomini C, Genuardi E, et al. Persistence of minimal residual disease in bone marrow predicts outcome in follicular lymphomas treated with a rituximab-intensive program. Blood. 2013;122(23):3759–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gallamini A, Kostakoglu L. Interim FDG-PET in Hodgkin lymphoma: a compass for a safe navigation in clinical trials? Blood. 2012;120(25):4913–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Carbone PP, Kaplan HS, Musshoff K, et al. Report of the committee on Hodgkin’s disease staging classification. Cancer Res. 1971;31:1860–1.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lister TA, Crowther D, Sutcliffe SB, Glatstein E, Canellos GP, Young RC, et al. Report of a committee convened to discuss the evaluation and staging of patients with Hodgkin disease: Cotswolds meeting. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7(11):1630–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kaplan HS. Contiguity and progression in Hodgkin’s disease. Cancer Res. 1971;31:1811–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Castellino RA, Hoppe RT, Blank N, Young SW, Neumann C, Rosenberg SA, et al. Computed tomography, lymphography, and staging laparotomy: correlations in initial staging of Hodgkin disease. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1984;143(7):37–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gospadorowitz MK, O’Sullivan B, Koh ES. Prognostic factors: principles and applications. In: Prognostic factors in cancer. 3rd ed. Hoboken: Wiley-Liss; 2006. p. 23–8.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Specht L, Hasenclever D. Prognostic factors. In: Engert A, Younes A, editors. Hodgkin lymphoma. 2nd ed. Springer; 2015. p. 131–55.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Gobbi PG, Ghirardelli ML, Solcia M, Di Giulio G, Merli F, Tavecchia L, et al. Image-aided estimate of tumor burden in Hodgkin’s disease: evidence of its primary prognostic importance. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1388–94.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Horwich A, Easton D, Nogueira-Costa R, Liew KH, Colman M, Peckam MJ. An analysis of prognostic factors in early stage Hodgkin’s disease. Radiother Oncol. 1986;7:95–106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Mauch P, Tarbell N, Weinstein H, Silver B, Goffman T, Osteen R, et al. Stage IA and IIA supradiaphragmatic Hodgkin’s disease: prognostic factors in surgically staged patients treated with mantle and paraaortic irradiation. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6:1576–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gobbi PG, Broglia C, Di Giulio G, Mantelli M, Anselmo P, Merli F, et al. The clinical value of tumor burden at diagnosis in Hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer. 2004;101:1824–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bartlett NC: Limited-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: optimal chemotherapy and the role of radiotherapy Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2013; 374-80.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hasenclever D, Diehl V. A prognostic score for advanced Hodgkin’s disease. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:1506–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Gobbi PG, Zinzani PL, Broglia C, Comelli M, Magagnoli M, Federico M, et al. Comparison of prognostic models in patients with advanced Hodgkin disease. Promising results from integration of the best three systems. Cancer. 2001;91:1467–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Moccia AA, Donaldson J, Chhanabhai M, Hoskins PJ, Klasa RJ, Savage KJ, et al. International prognostic score in advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: altered utility in the modern era. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:3383–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, Pedersen LM, Berthelsen AK, Keiding S, et al. Position emission tomography with or without computed tomography in the primary staging of Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica. 2006;91:482–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Gallamini A. Positron emission tomography scanning: a new paradigm for the management of Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica. 2010;95(7):1046–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Steidl C, Connors JM, Gascoyne RD. Molecular pathogenesis of Hodgkin’s lymphoma: increasing evidence of the importance of the microenvironment. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(14):1812–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ma Y, Visser L, Roelofsen H, et al. Proteomics analysis of Hodgkin lymphoma: identification of new players lymphocytes involved in the crosstalk between HRS cells and infiltrating lymphocytes. Blood. 2008;111(4):2339–46.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Weiler-Sagie M, Bushelev O, Epelbaum R, et al. 18F-FDG avidity in lymphoma readdressed: a study of 766 patients. J Nucl Med. 2010;51(1):25–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hutchings M, Loft A, Hansen M, et al. FDG-PET after two cycles of chemotherapy predicts treatment failure and progression-free survival in Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2006;107(1):52–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Gallamini A, Rigacci L, Merli F, et al. The predictive value of positron emission tomography scanning performed after two courses of standard therapy on treatment outcome in advanced stage Hodgkin’s disease. Haematologica. 2006;91(4):475–81.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Weihrauch MR, Manzke O, Beyer M, et al. Elevated serum levels of CC thymus and activation-related chemokine (TARC) in primary Hodgkin’s disease: potential for a prognostic factor. Cancer Res. 2005;65(13):5516–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Plattel WJ, Van den Berg A, Visser L, et al. Plasma thymus and activation-regulated chemokine as an early response marker in classical Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Haematologica. 2012;97(3):410–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  41. Rohren EM, Turkington TG, Coleman RE. Clinical applications of PET in oncology. Radiology. 2004;231(2):305–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Evens AM, Kostakoglu L. The role of FDG-PET in defining prognosis of Hodgkin lymphoma for early-stage disease. Blood. 2014;124(23):3356–64.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Hutchings M, Mikhaeel NG, Fields PA, Nunan T, Timothy AR. Prognostic value of interim FDGPET after two or three cycles of chemotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(7):1160–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Straus DJ, Johnson JL, LaCasce AS, Bartlet NL, Kostakoglu L, Hsi LD, et al. Doxorubicin, vinblastine, and gemcitabine (CALGB 50203) for stage I/II nonbulky Hodgkin lymphoma: pretreatment prognostic factors and interim PET. Blood. 2011;117(20):5314–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Terasawa T, Lau J, Bardet S, et al. Fluorine-18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for interim response assessment of advanced stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1906–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Zinzani PL, Tani M, Fanti S, et al. Early positron emission tomography (PET) restaging: a predictive final response in Hodgkin’s disease patients. Ann Oncol. 2006;17(8):1296–300.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cerci JJ, Pracchia LF, Linardi CCG, Pitella FA, Delbeke D, Izaki M, et al. 18F-FDG PET after 2 cycles of ABVD predicts event-free survival in early and advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma. J Nucl Med. 2010;51:1337–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Gallamini A, Barrington SF, Biggi A, Chauvie S, Kostakoglu L, Gregianin M, et al. The predictive role of interim positron emission tomography for Hodgkin lymphoma treatment outcome is confirmed using the interpretation criteria of the Deauville five-point scale. Haematologica. 2014;99(6):1107–13.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  49. Kostakoglu L, Coleman M, Leonard JP, Kuji I, Zoe H, Goldsmith SJ. PET predicts prognosis after 1 cycle of chemotherapy in aggressive lymphoma and Hodgkin’s disease. J Nucl Med. 2002;43:1018–27.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Kostakoglu L, Goldsmith SJ, Leonard JP, Christos P, Furman RR, Atasever T, et al. FDG-PET after 1 cycle of therapy predicts outcome in diffuse large cell lymphoma and classic Hodgkin disease. Cancer. 2006;107:2678–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Hutchings M, Kostakoglu L, Zaucha JM, et al. In vivo treatment sensitivity testing with positron emission tomography/computed tomography after one cycle of chemotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2705–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Diehl V, Stein H, Hummel M, Zollinger R, Connors JM. Hodgkin’s lymphoma: biology and treatment strategies for primary, refractory, and relapsed disease. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program. 2003(1);225–47.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Bonadonna G, Viviani S, Bonfante V, Gianni AM, Valagussa P. Survival in Hodgkin’s disease patients – report of 25 years of experience at the Milan cancer Institute. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(7):998–1006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Armitage JO. Early-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2010;363:653–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Behringer K, Breuer K, Reineke T, May M, Nogova L, Klimm B, et al. Secondary amenorrhea after Hodgkin’s lymphoma is influenced by age at treatment, stage of disease, chemotherapy regimen, and the use of oral contraceptives during therapy: a report from the German Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7555–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Engert A, Diehl V, Franklin J, Lohri A, Dorken B, Ludwing WD, et al. Escalated-dose BEACOPP in the treatment of patients with advanced-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: 10 years of follow-up of the GHSG HD9 study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4548–54.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Freedman AS, Neuberg D, Mauch P, Soiffer RJ, Anderson KC, Fisher DC, et al. Longterm follow-up of autologous bone marrow transplantation in patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma. Blood. 1999;94:3325–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Rambaldi A, Carlotti E, Oldani E, Della Starza I, Baccarani M, Cortelazzo S, et al. Quantitative PCR of bone marrow BCL2/IgH+ cells at diagnosis predicts lymphoma treatment response and long-term outcome in follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2005;105:3428–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ziakas PD, Poulou LS. Improving outcome after positive interim PET in advanced Hodgkin’s disease: reality vs. expectation. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2008;35(8):1573–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Kasamon Y. Prognostication and risk-adapted therapy of Hodgkin’s lymphoma using positron emission tomography. Adv Hematol. 2011;271595:1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Laskar S, Gupta T, Vimal S, et al. Consolidation radiation after complete remission in Hodgkin’s disease following six cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine chemotherapy: is there a need? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(1):62–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Meyer RM, Gospodarowicz MK, Connors JM, et al. randomized comparison of ABVD chemotherapy with a strategy that includes radiation therapy in patients with limited-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(21):4634–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Nachman JB, Sposto R, Herzog P, et al. Randomized comparison of low-dose involved field radiotherapy and no radiotherapy for children with Hodgkin’s disease who achieve a complete response to chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(18):3765–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Straus DJ, Portlock CS, Qin J, et al. Results of a prospective randomized clinical trial of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) followed by radiation therapy (RT) versus ABVD alone for stages I, II, and IIIA nonbulky Hodgkin disease. Blood. 2004;104(12):3483–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Meyer RM, Gospodarowicz MK, Connors JM, et al. ABVD alone versus radiation-based therapy in limited-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(5):399–408.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Hay AE, Klimm B, Chen BE, et al. An individual patient-data comparison of combined modality therapy and ABVD alone for patients with limited stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(12):3065–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sher DJ, Mauch PM, Van Den Abbeele A, LaCasce AS, Czerminski J, Ng AK. Prognostic significance of mid- and post-ABVD PET imaging in Hodgkin’s lymphoma: the importance of involved-field radiotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1848–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Le Roux PY, Gastinne T, Le Gouill S, Nowak E, Bodet-Milin C, Querellou S, et al. Prognostic value of interim FDG PET/CT in Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients treated with interim response-adapted strategy: comparison of International Harmonization Project (IHP), Gallamini and London criteria. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2011;38(6):1064–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. Picardi M, De Renzo A, Pane F, Nicolai E, Pacelli R, Salvatore M, et al. Randomized comparison of consolidation radiation versus observation in bulky Hodgkin’s lymphoma with post-chemotherapy negative positron emission tomography scans. Leuk Lymphoma. 2007;48(9):1721–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Radford J, Illidge T, Counsell N, Hancock B, Pettengell R, Johnson P, et al. Results of a trial of PET-directed therapy for early-stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:1598–607.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C. Report on the first international workshop on interim-PET scan in lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009;50(8):1257–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Raemaekers JMM, André MPE, Federico M, Girinsky T, Oumedaly R, Brusamolino E, et al. Omitting radiotherapy in early Positron Emission Tomography-negative stage I/II Hodgkin Lymphoma is associated with an increased risk of early relapse: clinical results of the pre-planned interim analysis of the randomized EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(12):1188–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Raemaekers JMN, Andrè MPE, Federico M, et al. Early FDG-PET adapted treatment improves the outcome of early FDG-PET positive patients with stage I/II Hodgkin lymphoma (HL): final results of the randomized Intergroup EORTC/LYSA/FIL H10 trial. Hematol Oncol. 2015;33(Suppl 1 June 2015):abstract 117a.

    Google Scholar 

  74. HD16 for early stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00736320. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  75. HD17 for intermediate stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01356680. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  76. Response-based therapy assessed by PET scan in treating patients with bulky stage I and stage II classical Hodgkin lymphoma (CALGB 50801). Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01118026. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  77. Chemotherapy based on PET scan in treating patients with stage I or stage II Hodgkin lymphoma (ECOG). Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01390584. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  78. Federico M, Bellei M, Cheson BD. BEACOPP or no BEACOPP? Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(12):e487–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Viviani S, Zinzani PL, Rambaldi A, et al. ABVD versus BEACOPP for Hodgkin’s lymphoma when high-dose salvage is planned. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:203–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Federico M, Luminari S, Iannitto E, Polimeno G, Marcheselli L, Montanini A, et al. ABVD compared with BEACOPP, compared with CEC for the initial treatment of patients with advanced Hodgkin’s lymphoma: results from the HD2000 Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dei Linfomi Trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:805–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  81. Mounier N, Brice P, Bologna S, et al. ABVD (8 cycles) versus BEACOPP (4 escalated cycles ≥ 4 baseline): final results in stage III-IV low-risk Hodgkin lymphoma (IPS 0-2) of the LYSA H34 randomized trial. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(8):1622–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Borchmann P, Diehl V, Engert A. ABVD versus BEACOPP for Hodgkin’s lymphoma. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(16):1545–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Bauer K, Skoetz N, Monsef I, et al. Comparison of chemotherapy including escalated BEACOPP versus chemotherapy including ABVD for patients with early unfavourable or advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011;8:CD007941–CD007941.

    Google Scholar 

  84. Gallamini A, Patti C, Viviani S, Rossi A, Fiore F, Di Raimondo F, et al. Early chemotherapy intensification with BEACOPP in advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma patients with a interim-PET positive after two ABVD courses. Br J Haematol. 2011;152(5):551–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Ganesan P, Rajendranath R, Kannan K, Radhakrishnan V, Ganesan TS, Udupa K, et al. Phase II study of Interim PET-CT guided response adapted therapy in advanced Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Ann Oncol. 2015;26(6):1170–4. pii: mdv077.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Deau B, Franchi P, Briere J, Ohnona J, Tamburini J, Thieblemont C, Brice P. PET2-driven de-escalation therapy in 64 high-risk Hodgkin lymphoma patients treated with escalated BEACOPP. Br J Haematol. 2015. doi:10.1111/bjh.13287 [Epub ahead of print].

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Positron emission tomography (PET)-adapted chemotherapy in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) (HD0607). Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00795613. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  88. Fludeoxyglucose F 18-PET/CT imaging in assessing response to chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed stage II, stage III, or stage IV Hodgkin lymphoma (RATHL). Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00678327. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  89. Fludeoxyglucose F 18-PET/CT imaging and combination chemotherapy with or without additional chemotherapy and G-CSF in treating patients with stage III or stage IV Hodgkin lymphoma (SWOG-CALG-B). Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00822120. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  90. Press OW, LeBlanc M, Rimsza LM, Schoder H, Friedberg JW, Evens AM, et al. A phase II trial of response-adapted therapy of stages III-IV Hodgkin lymphoma using early interim FDG-PET imaging: US intergroup S0816. Hematol Oncol. 2013;31(Suppl 1):137. Abstract 124.

    Google Scholar 

  91. Johnson P, Federico M, Fossa A, O’Doherty M, Roberts T, Stevens L, et al. Response-adapted therapy based on interim FDG-PET scans in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma: first analysis of the safety of de-escalation and efficacy of escalation in the international RATHL study (CRUK/07/033). Hematol Oncol. 2015;33(Suppl 1 June 2015):102, Abstract 008.

    Google Scholar 

  92. Gallamini A, Rossi A, Patti C, Picardi M, Di Raimondo F, Cantonetti M, et al. Interim-PET adapted chemotherapy in advanced Hodgkin lymphoma: results of the second interim analysis of the Italian GITIL/FIL HD0607 trial. Hematol Oncol. 2015;33(Suppl 1 June 2015):163, Abstract 118.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Dodd LE, Korn EL, Freidlin B, Jaffe CC, Rubinstein LV, Dancey J, et al. Blinded independent central review of progression-free survival in phase III clinical trials: important design element or unnecessary expense? Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3791–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Amit O, Bushnell W, Dodd L, Roach N, Sargent D. Blinded independent central review of the progression-free survival endpoint. Oncologist. 2010;15:492–5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  95. Chauvie S, Biggi A, Stancu A, Cerello P, Cavallo A, Fallanca F, et al. WIDEN: a tool for medical image management in multicentre clinical trials. Clin Trials. 2014;11:355–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Tailored therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma using early interim therapy PET for therapy decision. Clinicaltrials.gov web site. http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00392314. Accessed 31 May 2013.

  97. Dann EJ, Bairey O, Bar-Shalom R, Izak M, Koremberg A, Akria L, et al. Tailored therapy in Hodgkin lymphoma, based on predefined risk factors and early interim PET/CT, Israeli H2 protocol: preliminary report on 317 patients. Haematologica. 2013;98(Suppl 2):37. Abstract T110.

    Google Scholar 

  98. Brucher BL, Weber W, Bauer M, Fink U, Avril N, Stein HJ, Werner M, Zimmerman F, Siewert JR, Schwaiger M. Neoadjuvant therapy of esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: response evaluation by positron emission tomography. Ann Surg. 2001;233:300–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  99. Vansteenkiste JF, Stroobants SG, de Leyn PR, Dupont PJ, Verbeken EK. Potentialuse of FDG-PET scan after induction chemotherapy in surgically staged IIIa-N2 non-small-cell lung cancer: a prospective pilot study. The Leuven Lung Cancer Group. Ann Oncol. 1998;9:1193–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Canellos GP. Residual mass in lymphoma may not be residual disease. J Clin Oncol. 1988;6(6):931–3.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Porceddu SV, Pryor DI, Burmeister E, Burmeister BH, Poulsen MG, Foote MC, Panizza B, Coman S, McFarlane D, Coman W, et al. Results of a prospective study of positron emission tomography-directed management of residual nodal abnormalities innode-positive head and neck cancer after definitive radiotherapy with or without systemic therapy. Head Neck. 2011;33:1675–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Van den Abbeele AD. The lessons of GIST—PET and PET/CT: a New paradigm for imaging. Oncologist. 2008;13:8–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Terasawa T, Nihashi T, Hotta T, Nagai H. 18F-FDG PET for post therapy assessment of Hodgkin’s disease and aggressive Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a systematic review. J Nucl Med. 2008;49(1):13–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Engert A, Haverkamp H, Kobe C, Markova J, Renner C, Ho A, et al. Reduced-intensity chemotherapy and PET-guided radiotherapy in patients with advanced stage Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HD15 trial): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 noninferiority trial. Lancet. 2012;379(9828):1791–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Magagnoli M, Marzo K, Balzarotti M, Rodari M, Mazza R, Giordano L, et al. Dimension of residual CT scan mass in Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) is a negative prognostic factor in patients with PET negative after chemo+/– radiotherapy. Blood. 2011;118:Abstract 93.

    Google Scholar 

  106. Kobe C, Kuhnert G, Kahraman D, Haverkamp H, Eich HT, Franke M, et al. Assessment of tumor size reduction improves outcome prediction of Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography after chemotherapy in advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1776–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Savage KJ, Connors JM, Klasa RJ, et al. The use of FDG-PET to guide consolidative radiotherapy in patients with advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma with residual abnormalities on CT scan following ABVD chemotherapy [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15 Suppl):8034.

    Google Scholar 

  108. Spaepen K, Stroobants S, Dupont P, et al. [(18)F]FDG PET monitoring of tumour response tochemotherapy: does [(18)F]FDG uptake correlate with the viable tumour cell fraction? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2003;30:682–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. Brice P, Bouabdallah R, Moreau P, et al. Prognostic factors for survival after high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with relapsing Hodgkin’s disease: analysis of 280 patients from the French registry. Société Française de Greffe de Moëlle. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1997;20:21–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Josting A, Muller H, Borchmann P, Baars JW, Metzner B, Dohner H, et al. Dose intensity of chemotherapy in patients with relapsed Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:5074–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Moskowitz AJ, Yahalom J, Kewalramani T, et al. Pre-transplantation functional imaging predicts outcome following autologous stem cell transplantation for relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2010;116:4934–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  112. Moskowitz CH, Matasar MJ, Zelenetz AD, et al. Normalization of pre-ASCT, FDG-PET imaging with second line, non-cross-resistant, chemotherapy programs improves event-free survival in patients with Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2012;119:1665–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  113. Poulou LS, Thanos L, Ziakas PD. Unifying the predictive value of pre-transplant FDG PET in patients with lymphoma: a review and meta-analysis of published trials. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37:156–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Gentzler RD, Evens AM, Rademaker AW, Weitner BB, Mittal BB, Dillehay GL, et al. F-18 FDG-PET predicts outcomes for patients receiving total lymphoid irradiation and autologous blood stem-cell transplantation for relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Br J Haematol. 2014;165:793–800.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Moskowitz AJ, Schöder H, Yahalom J, McCall SJ, Fox SY, Gerecitano J, et al. PET-adapted sequential salvage therapy with brentuximab vedotin followed by augmented Ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide for patients with relapsed and refractory Hodgkin’s lymphoma: a non-randomised, open-label, single-centre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(3):284–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Barrington SF, Mikhaeel NG, Kostakoglu L, Meignan M, Hutchings M, Müeller SP, et al. Role of imaging in the staging and response assessment of lymphoma: consensus of the International Conference on Malignant Lymphomas Imaging Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):3048–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  117. Castagna L, Bramanti S, Balzarotti M, Sarina B, Todisco E, Anastasia A, et al. Predictive value of early 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) during salvage chemotherapy in relapsing/refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL) treated with high-dose chemotherapy. Br J Haematol. 2009;145:369–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Younes A, et al. Brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) for relapsed CD30-positive lymphomas. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(19):1812–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Younes A, Gopal AK, Smith SE, Ansell SM, Rosenblatt JD, Savage KJ, et al. Results of a pivotal phase II study of Brentuximab Vedotin for patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin’s Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2183–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  120. Kahraman D, Theurich S, Rothe A, Kuhnert G, Sasse S, Scheid C, et al. 18-Fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography for assessment of response to brentuximab vedotin treatment in relapsed and refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma. 2014;55(4):811–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. 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 Subcommittee of International Harmonization Project in Lymphoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):571–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  122. Zinzani PL, Viviani S, Anastasia A, Vitolo U, Luminari S, Zaja F, et al. Brentuximab vedotin in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin’s lymphoma: the Italian experience and results of its use in daily clinical practice outside clinical trials. Haematologica. 2013;98(8):1232–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  123. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B, Shipp MA, Fisher RI, Connors JM, et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999;17(4):1244–1257.

    Google Scholar 

  124. Cheson BD, Pfistner B, Juweid ME, Gascoyne RD, Specht L, Horning SJ, et al. Revised response criteria for malignant lymphoma. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2007;25(5):579–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Itti E, Barrington S, Haioun C, Polliack A. Report on the third international workshop on interim positron emission tomography in lymphoma held in Menton, France, 26–27 September 2011 and Menton 2011 consensus. Leuk Lymphoma. 2012;53(10):1876–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Meignan M, Barrington S, Itti E, Gallamini A, Haioun C, Polliack A. Report on the 4th international workshop on positron emission tomography in lymphoma held in Menton, France, 3–5 October 2012. Leuk Lymphoma. 2014;55(1):31–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA. From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl. Med. 2009;50(5):122S–150S.

    Google Scholar 

  128. Gallamini A, Fiore F, Sorasio R, Meignan M. Interim positron emission tomography scan in Hodgkin lymphoma: definitions, interpretation rules, and clinical validation. Leuk Lymphoma. 2009;50(11):1761–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  129. Barrington SF, Qian W, Somer EJ, Franceschetto A, Bagni B, Brun E, et al. Concordance between four European centres of PET reporting criteria designed for use in multicentre trials in Hodgkin lymphoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2010;37(10):1824–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  130. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C, Polliack A. Report on the second international workshop on interim positron emission tomography in lymphoma held in Menton, France, 8-9 April 2010. Leuk Lymphoma. 2010;51(12):2171–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  131. Biggi A, Gallamini A, Chauvie S, Hutchings M, Kostakoglu L, Gregianin M, et al. International validation study for interim PET in ABVD-treated, advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma: interpretation criteria and concordance rate among reviewers. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2013;54(5):683–90.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Meignan M, Gallamini A, Haioun C, Barrington S, Itti E, Luminari S, et al. Report on the 5 international workshop on positron emission tomography in lymphoma held in Menton, France, 19–20 September 2014. Leuk Lymphoma 2015; 56(5):1229–32.

    Google Scholar 

  133. Cheson BD, Fisher RI, Barrington SF, Cavalli F, Schwartz LH, Zucca E, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):3059–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Rossi C, Kanoun S, Berriolo-Riedinger A, Dygai-Cochet I, Humbert O, Legouge C, et al. Interim 18F-FDG PET SUVmax reduction is superior to visual analysis in predicting outcome early in Hodgkin lymphoma patients. J Nucl Med Off Publ Soc Nucl Med. 2014;55(4):569–73.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  135. Kostakoglu L, Schoder H, Johnson JL, Hall NC, Schwartz LH, Straus DJ, et al. Interim [(18)F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography imaging in stage. Leuk Lymphoma. 2012;53(11):2143–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Research, Innovation and Statistics Department, A. Lacassagne Cancer Centre, 33, Rue de Valombrose, Nice, 06189, France

    Prof. Andrea Gallamini

  2. Hematology and Bone Marrow Transplant Department, Azienda Ospedaliera S. Croce e Carle, Cuneo, Italy

    Anna Borra

  3. Nuclear Medicine Department, A. Lacassagne Cancer Centre, Nice, France

    Colette Zwarthoed

Authors
  1. Prof. Andrea Gallamini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anna Borra
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Colette Zwarthoed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Gallamini .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Research, Innovation and Statistics, A. Lacassagne Cancer Center, Nice, France

    Andrea Gallamini

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gallamini, A., Borra, A., Zwarthoed, C. (2016). PET Response-Adapted Treatment in Hodgkin Lymphoma. In: Gallamini, A. (eds) PET Scan in Hodgkin Lymphoma. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31797-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31797-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31795-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31797-7

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation