Analysis of efficacy and adverse reactions of different chemotherapy regimens in treatment of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma
熊婕妤,汪君娣,罗明青,王季石,张燕,李艳菊,黄懿,李梦醒,赵鹏,李燕,卢英豪
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn511693-20200612-00130
2021-01-01
Abstract:Objective:To explore efficacy and adverse reactions of different chemotherapy regimens in treatment of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).Methods:From January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2018, a total of 130 DLBCL patients over 16 years old who were diagnosed and treated in Affiliated Hospital of Guizhou Medical University were selected as research subjects. The median age of them was 52 years (17-80 years). There were 73 male and 57 female patients. All 130 patients were classified into different groups according to chemotherapy regimens: rituximab group ( n=107) and non-rituximab group ( n=23), etoposide group ( n=39) and non-etoposide group ( n=91), as well as liposomal doxorubicin group ( n=29) and non-liposomal doxorubicin group ( n=101). Using retrospective cohort study method, patients′ gender, age, international prognostic index (IPI) score, clinical stage, adverse reactions and other clinical data were collected, and short-term efficacy, long-term prognosis and safety of different regimens groups were compared. This study was followed up until December 31, 2019. The comparison ratios of gender, age, IPI score, clinical stage and other clinical data of patients between two different groups were performed by chi-square test or correction for continuity. The Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis, and overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) rates between different groups were compared by log-rank test. This study was in line with World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki revised in 2013. Results:① In this study, the general clinical data of patients between rituximab group and non-rituximab group, etoposide group and non-etoposide group, liposomal doxorubicin group and non-liposomal doxorubicin group were compared, and the differences were not statistically significant ( P>0.05). ② The 3-year PFS and OS rates of patients in rituximab group were 78.2% and 82.6% respectively, which were higher than those of 46.1% and 63.2% in non-rituximab group, and the differences were statistically significant ( χ2=5.442, 3.895; P=0.020, 0.048). However, the complete remission (CR) rates [61.7% (66/107) vs 47.8% (11/23)], overall response rate (ORR) [83.2% (89/107) vs 87.0% (20/23)], and incidences of adverse reactions [74.8% (80/107) vs 78.3% (18/23)] between two groups were not statistically significant [ χ2=1.458, 0.457, 0.125; P=0.227, 0.499, 0.724]. ③ There were no significant differences in CR rates [51.3% (20/39) vs 62.6% (57/91)], ORR [87.2% (34/39) vs 82.4% (75/91)], 3-year PFS rates (63.6% vs 73.0%), 3-year OS rates (75.1% vs 80.8%) and incidences of adverse reaction [84.6% (33/39) vs 71.4% (65/91)] of patients between etoposide group and non-etoposide group ( χ2=1.458, 0.457, <0.001, 0.314, 2.558; P=0.227, 0.499, 0.994, 0.575, 0.110). However, the incidences of hematological adverse reactions [76.9% (30/39) vs 57.1% (52/91)], grade Ⅲ to Ⅳ hematological adverse reactions [59.0% (23/39) vs 38.5% (35/91)] and liver dysfunction [46.2% (18/39) vs 16.5% (15/91)] of patients in etoposide group, were all higher than those of non-etoposide group, and the differences were statistically significant ( χ2=4.586, 4.649, 12.668; P=0.032, 0.031, <0.001). ④ The CR rates [58.6% (17/29) vs 59.4% (60/101)], ORR [79.3% (23/29) vs 85.1% (86/101)], 3-year PFS rates (78.1% vs 76.0%) and 3-year OS rates (85.2% vs 78.7%) of patients between liposomal doxorubicin group and non-liposomal doxorubicin group were compared, and the differences were not statistically significant ( χ2=0.006, 1.382, 0.770, 0.868; P=0.940, 0.265, 0.380, 0.352). However, the incidences of adverse reactions [58.6%(17/29) vs 80.2%(81/101)], hematological adverse reactions [44.8%(13/29) vs 68.3%(69/101)], and grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ hematological adverse reactions [27.6%(8/29) vs 49.5%(50/101)] of patients in liposomal doxorubicin group were lower than those of non-liposomal doxorubicin group, and the differences were statistically significant ( χ2=5.653, 5.338, 4.381; P=0.017, 0.021, 0.036). Conclusions:In chemotherapy regimens for treatment of DLBCL patients in this study, the use of rituximab could improve PFS and OS rates of patients. Adding etoposide in chemotherapy regimens could not improve efficacy, but it increases incidences of adverse reactions. And the use of liposomal doxorubicin-based chemotherapy could significantly reduce incidences of adverse reactions, especially decrease incidences of grade Ⅲ-Ⅳ hematological adverse reactions.