RESUMO
Patients (pts) with asymptomatic low-burden follicular lymphoma (FL) are usually observed at diagnosis. Time to lymphoma treatment (TLT) initiation can however be very heterogeneous and risk factors of progression are poorly studied. Our study evaluated 201 pts with grade 1-3a low-tumor burden FL diagnosed in four French centers between 2010 and 2020 and managed by a watch and wait strategy in real-life settings. After a median follow-up of 4.8 years, the median TLT was 4.2 years (95% confidence interval, 3.1-5.5). On multivariate analysis, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.2; P = 0.02), more than 4 nodal areas involved (HR = 1.7; P = 0.02) and more than 1 extranodal involvement (HR = 2.7; P = 0.01) were identified as independent predictors of TLT. The median TLT was 5.8 years for pts with no risk factor, 2.4 years for 1 risk factor, and 1.3 years for >1 risk factors (P < 0.01). In a subanalysis of 75 pts staged with positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT), total metabolic tumor volume (TMTV) ≥14 cm3 and standardized Dmax (reflecting tumor dissemination) >0.32 m-1 were also associated with shorter TLT (HR = 3.4; P = 0.004 and HR = 2.4; P = 0.007, respectively). In multivariate models combining PET-CT parameters and clinical variables, TMTV remained independent predictor of shorter TLT. These simple parameters could help to identify FL patients initially observed at higher risk of early progression. The role of PET-CT (extranodal sites and PET metrics) in low-burden FL appears promising and warrants further assessment in large cohorts.
RESUMO
Objectives: The UMACOACH Lymphoma is a multidisciplinary monitoring program for patients initiating a first highly haematotoxic treatment for Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Patient follow-up is based on consultation with a pharmacist and planed phone calls by nurses supervised by a clinical haematologist. Our objective was to assess effectiveness and cost of the UMACOACH Lymphoma Program (ULP) and to investigate patient satisfaction and quality of life (QoL). Methods: This French monocentric case-control study included all patients enrolled in the ULP over a one-year period (cases) matched with retrospective patients receiving usual care (controls). Numbers of adverse events (AEs), re-hospitalisations, average relative dose intensity (ARDI), treatment response and survival were compared between the two groups. Among cases, patient satisfaction and QoL using the EORTC-QLQC30 questionnaire before and after treatment were evaluated. Results: Seventy-eight cases were matched to 78 controls. Twenty-six percent grade 3−4 AEs were observed in cases versus 38% in controls (p = 0.001). There were 76 and 88 re-hospitalisations in the case and control groups, respectively (p = 0.217). ARDI > 85% was observed in 92% and 82% of cases and controls, respectively (p = 0.138). No differences were observed in terms of treatment responses and survival. Estimated cost savings were of EUR 81,782 in favour of the case group. An improvement of 5.1 points was observed in the total QoL score before and after treatment in cases. Conclusions: A nurse−pharmacist−haematologist collaboration seems to be promising to reduce grade 3−4 AEs in HL and NHL patients receiving highly haematotoxic chemotherapy regimens. Cost savings from hospitalisation being avoided were also shown.
