Fludarabine-based versus CHOP-like regimens with or without rituximab in patients with previously untreated indolent lymphoma: a retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy

Abstract

Fludarabine-based regimens and CHOP (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone)-like regimens with or without rituximab are the most common treatment modalities for indolent lymphoma. However, there is no clear evidence to date about which chemotherapy regimen should be the proper initial treatment of indolent lymphoma. More recently, the use of fludarabine has raised concerns due to its high number of toxicities, especially hematological toxicity and infectious complications. The present study aimed to retrospectively evaluate both the efficacy and the potential toxicities of the two main regimens (fludarabine-based and CHOP-like regimens) in patients with previously untreated indolent lymphoma. Among a total of 107 patients assessed, 54 patients received fludarabine-based regimens (FLU arm) and 53 received CHOP or CHOPE (doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, or plus etoposide) regimens (CHOP arm). The results demonstrated that fludarabine-based regimens could induce significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with CHOP-like regimens. However, the FLU arm showed overall survival, complete response, and overall response rates similar to those of the CHOP arm. Grade 3–4 neutropenia occurred in 42.6% of the FLU arm and 7.5% of the CHOP arm (P < 0.000). Moreover, the FLU arm also had a higher occurrence of infection than the CHOP arm (27.8% vs 8.5%; P = 0.034). Multi-factor regression of infection revealed that only age (>60 years) and presentation of grade 3–4 myelosuppression were the independent factors to infection, and the FLU arm had significantly higher myelosuppression. In conclusion, the present study revealed that the use of fludarabine-based regimens could induce high rates of myelosuppression over CHOP-like regimens, in spite of significant increases in PFS.