Randomized trial of CVPP for three versus six cycles in favorable-prognosis and CVPP versus AOPE plus radiotherapy in intermediate-prognosis untreated Hodgkin's disease.

Abstract

PURPOSE To evaluate in a randomized trial the impact of three versus six cycles of cyclophosphamide, vinblastine, procarbazine, and prednisone (CVPP) chemotherapy in favorable-prognosis and CVPP versus doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, and etoposide (AOPE) plus involved-field radiotherapy (RT) in intermediate-prognosis previously untreated Hodgkin's disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS Of 256 patients evaluated, 80 with a favorable prognosis according to a prognostic index designed by the Grupo Argentina de Tratamiento de Leucemia Aguda (GATLA) were randomized to three versus six cycles of CVPP without RT and 176 with intermediate risk to CVPP versus AOPE, both for six cycles with RT between the third and fourth cycles of 30 Gy to the involved areas at diagnosis. CVPP consisted of intravenous (I.V.) cyclophosphamide and vinblastine on days 1 and 8, and oral procarbazine and prednisone on days 1 to 14, every 28 days. AOPE consisted of I.V. doxorubicin and vincristine on day 1, oral prednisone on days 1 to 5, and I.V. etoposide on days 1 and 3, every 28 days. RESULTS Complete remission was obtained in 39 of 41 (95%) patients treated with three cycles of CVPP and 36 of 39 (92%) treated with six cycles in the favorable-risk group (difference not significant [NS]). In the intermediate-risk group, 89 of 92 (97%) treated with CVPP plus RT versus 75 of 84 (89%) treated with AOPE plus RT achieved a complete remission (P = .05). At 60 months, the event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival rates in the favorable-risk group were 80% and 91% for CVPP x 3 and 84% and 97% for CVPP x 6, respectively (P = NS). In the intermediate-risk group, 60-month EFS rate for CVPP plus RT was 85%, compared with 66% for AOPE plus RT (P = .009). The overall survival rate was 95% versus 87% respectively (P = .157). CONCLUSION Three cycles of CVPP without RT are equally effective as six cycles in the favorable-risk group. However, in the intermediate-group, CVPP plus RT is superior to AOPE plus RT, with significantly fewer events before and after induction (P = .009), without a difference in overall survival.