A systematic review of comparative schedule-related toxicities with maintenance rituximab in follicular and mantle cell lymphomas

8Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

We conducted a systematic review of grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) reported in prospective trials enrolling patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) receiving maintenance rituximab (MR). Random-effects models were used to calculate summary estimates and 95% confidence intervals for the proportion of AEs occurring during MR. Differences by induction program, histology, setting and MR schedule were examined by stratified analyses and univariate random-effects meta-regression. Eleven trials met the search criteria, with nine sufficiently reporting AEs during the MR phase. Of 1009 patients receiving MR, the proportion experiencing cumulative grade 3/4 toxicity was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14-36%). Patients receiving MR every 6 months as four weekly infusions for 2 years had significantly less toxicity compared with those receiving MR every 2 months (10% vs. 28%; p = 0.035). Patients treated with rituximab alone during induction had fewer toxicities compared to those treated with rituximab plus chemotherapy induction (12% vs. 35%; p = 0.031). Myelosuppression and infections were the most common toxicities. Our literature analysis suggests that MR given every 6 months and rituximab alone as induction may be associated with fewer grade 3/4 AEs for patients with FL and MCL; however, assessing the true independent impact of induction regimens and schedule on toxicity will require prospective trials. © 2014 Informa UK, Ltd.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Nabhan, C., Ollberding, N. J., Villines, D., Chiu, B. C. H., Caces, D. B. D., Valdez, T. V., … Smith, S. M. (2014). A systematic review of comparative schedule-related toxicities with maintenance rituximab in follicular and mantle cell lymphomas. Leukemia and Lymphoma, 55(6), 1288–1294. https://doi.org/10.3109/10428194.2013.839787

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free