High efficacy of BGD (bendamustine, gemcitabine, and dexamethasone) in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma

0Citations
Citations of this article
7Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The optimal salvage therapy in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (R/R HL) has not been defined so far. The goal of this multicenter retrospective study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of BGD (bendamustine, gemcitabine, dexamethasone) as a second or subsequent line of therapy in classical R/R HL. We have evaluated 92 consecutive R/R HL patients treated with BGD. Median age was 34.5 (19–82) years. Fifty-eight patients (63%) had received 2 or more lines of chemotherapy, 32 patients (34.8%) radiotherapy, and 21 patients (22.8%) an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (autoHCT). Forty-four patients (47.8%) were resistant to first line of chemotherapy. BGD therapy consisted of bendamustine 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2, gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 on days 1 and 4, dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1–4. Median number of BGD cycles was 4 (2–7). The following adverse events ≥ 3 grade were noted: neutropenia (22.8%), thrombocytopenia (20.7%), anemia (15.2%), infections (10.9%), AST/ALT increase (2.2%), and skin rush (1.1%). After BGD therapy, 51 (55.4%) patients achieved complete remission, 23 (25%)—partial response, 7 (7.6%)—stable disease, and 11 (12%) patients experienced progression disease. AutoHCT was conducted in 42 (45.7%) patients after BGD therapy, and allogeneic HCT (alloHCT) in 16 (17.4%) patients. Median progression-free survival was 21 months. BGD is a highly effective, well-tolerated salvage regimen for patients with R/R HL, providing an excellent bridge to auto- or alloHCT.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Swoboda, R., Giebel, S., Knopińska-Posłuszny, W., Chmielowska, E., Drozd-Sokołowska, J., Paszkiewicz-Kozik, E., … Zaucha, J. M. (2021). High efficacy of BGD (bendamustine, gemcitabine, and dexamethasone) in relapsed/refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma. Annals of Hematology, 100(7), 1755–1767. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00277-021-04448-5

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