30 likes | 118 Views
Study on Rituximab maintenance showing consistent benefits across subgroups, increasing conversion from PR to CR. Data by Salles GA et al (2010).
E N D
1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 – 84 17 0 505 472 445 423 404 307 207 70 16 0 – 367 334 247 161 513 469 415 Etude PRIMA NB: Data differ slightly from published abstract 74,9 % Rituximab maintenance 57,5 % Survie sans progression Observation HR = 0,55 IC95 : 0,44-0,68 p< 0,001 Mois Patients à risque Rituximab Observation Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.
PRIMA Update: Consistent benefitacross subgroups Category Subgroup Hazard ratio (HR) n HR * IC 95% All All 0,55 1018 0,44–0,68 Age < 60 0,49 624 0,37–0,65 ≥ 60 394 0,67 0,47–0,94 Sex Female 0,63 485 0,45–0,87 Male 533 0,48 0,36–0,64 FLIPl Index FLIPl < 1 0,39 216 0,21–0,72 370 0,30–0,64 FLIPl = 2 0,44 431 0,51–0,92 0,68 FLIPl > 3 R-CHOP 0,51 768 0,39–0,65 Induction Chemotherapy R-CVP 222 0,68 0,45–1,02 R-FCM 0,54 28 0,13–2,24 CR/CRu 720 0,57 0,44–0,74 Response to Induction 291 0,32–0,72 PR 0,48 0 1 2 3 Favours maintenance Favours observation Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004. * Non-stratified analysis.
18.0% 24.5% 5.8% n = 360 n = 139 51.8% 38.2% 27.0% n = 360 n = 152 5.3% 29.6% PRIMA: Conversion from PR to CR was higher with MabThera maintenance vs observation After maintenance:PR patients only After induction Randomised to MabTheramaintenance Randomised to observation PD CR/CRu PR Missing Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.