© 2004 European Society for Medical Oncology
Predictive value of Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) in patients with follicular lymphoma at first progression
1 Department of Hematology and Hematopathology Unit, Hospital Clínic, IDIBAPS, Barcelona; 2 Department of Hematology, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant Pau, Barcelona, Spain
* Correspondence to: Dr A. López-Guillermo, Department of Hematology, Hospital Clínic, Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain. Tel: +34-93-227-5575; Fax: +34-93-227-5428; Email: alopezg{at}clinic.ub.es
 |
Abstract |
|---|
 Top Abstract IntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Background: Different prognostic scores have been proposed to predict the outcome of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients at diagnosis. A new prognostic index specifically addressing FL patients, the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI), has recently been developed, which might also be useful in patients with progression.
Patients and methods: One hundred and three patients (55 male, 48 female; median age 59 years) with FL in first relapse/progression after an initial response to therapy (50 complete responders/ 53 partial responders) were included in the study.
Results: Five-year survival from progression (SFP) was 55% (95% confidence interval 44%–66%). The distribution according to the FLIPI at relapse was 39% good prognosis, 24% intermediate prognosis and 37% poor prognosis. Five-year SFP for these groups were 85%, 79% and 28%, respectively (P < 0.0001). Other variables at relapse with prognostic significance for SFP were age, presence of B symptoms, performance status, bulky disease, number of involved nodal sites, lactate dehydrogenase level, hemoglobin level, histological transformation, the Italian Lymphoma Intergroup prognostic index for FL and the International Prognostic Index for aggressive lymphomas. In the multivariate analysis bulky disease (P=0.01), presence of B symptoms (P=0.03) and FLIPI at relapse (P=0.0003) were the most important variables for predicting SFP.
Conclusions: In patients with FL at first relapse/progression, the FLIPI, along with the presence of bulky disease and B symptoms, are features that predict SFP and thus could be useful to select candidates for experimental treatments.
Key words: FLIPI, follicular lymphoma, prognosis, progression
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
At present, there is no curative treatment for follicular lymphoma (FL). Although most patients with FL have a relatively indolent course with a median survival of about 10 years, the natural history of FL is characterized by a pattern of continuous relapses with a shorter response duration and a shorter survival after each relapse [1
–4]. Therefore, new experimental approaches such as stem cell transplantation (SCT) have been developed, especially to treat younger patients, in whom a median survival of 10 years is not acceptable. However, there is great concern regarding the toxicity of these therapies, including the risk of myelodysplastic syndromes [5–8]. Given the above facts, as well as the responsiveness of the disease at relapse, intensive treatments are usually reserved as salvage therapy for patients in progression. Therefore, the ability to identify patients with poor outcome after the first relapse who might deserve a potentially hazardous approach is important.
Several papers analyzing prognostic factors for FL patients have been published [2, 9–13]. In addition, various attempts to build a prognostic index for these patients have been made [3, 14]. Recently, an international multicenter study including data from more than 4000 patients resulted in a new prognostic index, the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI), specifically designed for FL patients [15]. The FLIPI distinguishes three groups of patients with around one-third of cases each, with overall survivals at 10 years of 70%, 50% and 35%.
In contrast with the many studies dealing with initial prognostic factors in FL after diagnosis, there are few studies addressing the outcome of patients with FL at relapse or progression [4, 16–19]. We hypothesized that the newly developed FLIPI might be useful to identify patients with different prognoses in such a situation. Towards this aim, the potential usefulness of FLIPI in a series of FL patients at first relapse/progression was analyzed.
|
Patients and methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Initial characteristics and treatment
Two hundred and eighty-four patients (median age 53 years; 143 male, 141 female) diagnosed with FL at two University Hospitals in Barcelona (Spain) between February 1980 and November 2000 were the basis of this study. The histological distribution according to the REAL/WHO classification [20
, 21] was as follows: grade I, 102 patients (36%); grade II, 149 patients (52%); grade III, 17 patients (6%); unclassified, 16 patients (6%). Thirty patients (11%) presented with stage I, 24 (8%) with stage II, 52 (18%) with stage III and 178 (63%) with stage IV. Initial treatment consisted of: monotherapy with alkylating agents, 32 patients (11%); COP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone) chemotherapy, 18 patients (6%); CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) chemotherapy, 202 patients (71%); and other treatments, 32 patients (11%). Among the 266 assessable patients, 124 (47%) achieved a complete response (CR), 112 (42%) a partial response (PR) and 30 patients (11%) were considered as non-responders. After a median follow-up of 4.2 years, 50 of 124 CR patients (40%) and 53 of 112 PR patients (47%) progressed. Overall, the median duration of response was 1.6 years (range 0.6–14.5). The 103 patients who responded to treatment and eventually progressed were the subject of the present study. The outcome after progression pattern of 75 of these patients has been reported previously [19]. The main characteristics of the patients at diagnosis and at relapse are listed in Table 1.
|
Staging, evaluation at response and follow-up procedures
Initial staging procedures included computed tomography (CT) of the thorax, abdomen and pelvis, as well as a bone marrow biopsy. Post-therapy restaging included the repetition of the previously abnormal tests and/or biopsies.
CR was defined as the disappearance of tumor masses and disease-related symptoms, as well as the normalization of the initially abnormal tests and/or biopsies lasting for at least 1 month. PR was considered to be achieved when measurable lesions decreased by at least 50%. Patients not included in these categories, as well as those who died before completing treatment, were considered as non-responders [22].
The follow-up surveillance policy after treatment consisted of physical examination, blood counts and biochemistry, and chest roentgenogram (if initially abnormal) every 3 months during the first year, every 4 months during the second year, every 6 months during the next 3 years and once a year thereafter. Abdominal CT scans were performed every 6 months during the first year and yearly for the following 5 years when abdomen was the principal involved site. The molecular follow-up assessment was only performed systematically from 1998 onwards.
Disease relapse or progression was defined as the appearance of new symptoms or signs of the disease as demonstrated by lymph node biopsy or other appropriate studies. At the time of relapse or progression, besides a new lymph node biopsy, CT scans of thorax, abdomen and pelvis, as well as a bone marrow biopsy, were performed whenever possible.
Parameters evaluated
In each patient the following data were recorded and evaluated for prognosis: (i) initial variables: age (<60 versus 
60 years), gender, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, B symptoms, histological subtype, hemoglobin (Hb), lymphocyte count, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and serum ß2-microglobulin (ß2M) levels, number of nodal and extranodal involved sites, Ann Arbor stage, bulky disease (defined as a tumor diameter 10 cm), bone marrow infiltration, the International Prognostic Index (IPI) for aggressive lymphomas and the FLIPI. (ii) Treatment: monotherapy with alkylating agents versus combination chemotherapies without doxorubicin versus doxorubicin-containing regimens. (iii) Response to initial therapy: CR versus PR versus no response. (iv) Response duration (RD): defined as the time from the response assessment to the relapse/progression. (v) Variables at relapse: clinical data (age, performance status, presence of B symptoms), histological subtype (FL versus transformed into high-grade lymphoma), tumor extension data (bulky disease, Ann Arbor stage, number of involved nodal sites, bone marrow involvement, Hb, lymphocyte count, LDH, ß2M), IPI [23], Italian Lymphoma Intergroup prognostic index (ILI) and FLIPI (as described below). (vi) Salvage treatment and response to salvage treatment.
Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index
Age 60 years, advanced stage (III–IV), increased serum LDH level, Hb level <120 g/l and more than five involved nodal sites were the variables used to classify patients according to the FLIPI as patients with good, intermediate or poor prognosis, depending on the number of adverse prognostic factors (0–1, 2 and 3, respectively) [15].
Statistical analysis
Overall survival was defined as the time between the date of diagnosis and the date of last follow-up or death. Survival from progression (SFP) for responding patients (CR or PR) was defined as the time from the relapse or progression assessment to the date of last follow-up or death.
The main end point of the study was SFP. In addition, overall survival was also analyzed. Actuarial survival analysis was performed according to the method described by Kaplan and Meier [24], and the curves were compared by the log-rank test [25]. The univariate analysis was carried out for each of the parameters indicated above. All significant prognostic factors in the univariate study, as well as some clinically relevant variables, were included in a multivariate analysis performed by Cox's stepwise proportional hazard regression method [26].
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Characteristics of the patients at progression, salvage therapy and response
From March 1983 to May 2002, 103 (male 55, female 48) of 236 responders (44%) presented with disease progression or relapse after having achieved CR (50 cases) or PR (53 cases). The median follow-up for surviving patients was 7.2 years (range 2–20.9). A new biopsy at relapse could be obtained in 69 patients (67%) and transformation into a high-grade lymphoma was demonstrated in 11 of them (16%) (diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in all cases). The median age at relapse/progression was 59 years (range 26–78). The main characteristics of the patients are listed in Table 1. Among 96 assessable patients, 67 (70%) were in advanced stage and 11% presented with bulky disease. B symptoms were present in 12% of the patients. A poor performance status (ECOG performance status
2) was observed in 11 cases (12%). All the parameters necessary to build up the FLIPI were available in 76 patients. The distribution of the patients according to the FLIPI was as follows: 30 patients, good prognosis (39%); 18 patients, intermediate prognosis (24%); and 28 patients, poor prognosis (37%).
Treatment at progression varied over the study period and consisted of: monotherapy with alkylating agents, 23 patients (22%); combination chemotherapy (including doxorubicin in 16 cases and ifosfamide/etoposide-containing regimens in 24 cases), 47 patients (46%); purine analogs alone or in combination, 18 patients (17%); and other treatments, 15 patients (15%). Among the latter, three patients were observed without treatment until further progression and four patients in localized stage received radiotherapy as salvage therapy. Treatment at progression for transformed patients consisted of combination chemotherapy, including doxorubicin in three cases and ifosfamide/etoposide-containing regimens in eight cases. Autologous SCT was performed in 22 patients at first relapse as part of the salvage treatment because of the following reasons: RD <2 years in 17 patients; disease transformation in six; and both causes in three. Seventeen of 58 (29%) patients with an RD <2 years were submitted to SCT at first relapse, whereas this proportion was 12% in those cases with a RD 2 years (P=0.03). SCT was performed at first relapse as part of the salvage therapy in 30%, 39% and 14% of patients with good, intermediate and poor prognosis according to the FLIPI, respectively (P not significant). One patient received an allogeneic SCT with reduced-intensity conditioning.
Forty-three of 93 assessable patients achieved CR (46%) after salvage therapy, 31 (33%) achieved PR and 19 patients (21%) were considered as non-responders.
Survival from progression
The median SFP was 5.4 years, with a 5-year SFP of 55% [95% confidence interval (CI) 44%–66%] (Figure 1). The most important variables predicting SFP are listed in Table 2. First-line treatment (monotherapy with alkylating agents versus combination chemotherapies without doxorubicin versus doxorubicin-containing regimens) did not significantly correlate with SFP. No statistical differences in SFP were found between patients achieving CR after initial therapy and patients in PR.
|
|
Prognostic factors at progression with a negative impact on SFP were: older age, poor performance status, presence of B symptoms, transformation into an aggressive lymphoma, anemia (Hb <120 g/l), high LDH level, number of involved nodal sites, bulky disease, poor prognosis according to the ILI as well as intermediate- or high-risk IPI. The FLIPI also showed an important predictive value for SFP: 5-year SFP for patients with good, intermediate and poor prognosis according to the FLIPI were 85% (95% CI 75%–95%), 79% (95% CI 60%–99%) and 28% (95% CI 8%–48%), respectively (P < 0.0001) (Figure 2).
|
SFP was not significantly influenced by the duration of the first response, with the median survival for patients with RD <2 and
2 years being 4.9 and 6 years, respectively. Finally, the achievement of CR or PR after salvage treatment was significantly associated with a longer SFP (median SFP 10.8 versus 0.7 years for non-responders; P < 0.00001).
To assess the importance of the FLIPI in predicting SFP, a multivariate analysis was performed. Besides the FLIPI (good versus intermediate versus poor prognosis) the variables selected for the analysis were as follows: (i) variables with prognostic significance in the univariate analysis (P < 0.05) and a high enough number of assessable cases: B symptoms at relapse (no versus yes), bulky disease at relapse (no versus yes), transformation into a high-risk lymphoma (no transformation versus transformation versus no biopsy); and (ii) RD (<2 versus 2 years). The variables used to calculate the FLIPI were not included in the model. Seventy-four of the 103 study patients were included in the final multivariate analysis for SFP. The variables that retained prognostic significance for SFP were the presence of bulky disease at progression [P=0.005; relative risk (RR) 3.8; 95% CI 2.9–4.8], the presence of B symptoms at relapse (P=0.03; RR 2.7; 95% CI 1.8–3.6) and the FLIPI at progression (P=0.002; RR 2.4; 95% CI 1.9–3). The multivariate analysis was repeated including only the patients in whom a new biopsy was performed at relapse to better analyse the role of histological transformation. In this subset of patients, the variables with prognostic significance for SFP were the presence of B symptoms, histological transformation and the FLIPI.
In Table 3, 5-year SFP according to the FLIPI, the ILI and the IPI is detailed. FLIPI, ILI (low versus intermediate versus high risk) and IPI (0, 1 versus 2 risk factors) were compared by a Cox regression method including these three scores as covariates. In the final model, with 61 cases, the FLIPI retained prognostic importance for SFP (P=0.0001; RR 2.9; 95% CI 2.4–3.4).
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
FL remains incurable with current therapies. For this reason, there is a great interest in investigating the role of new treatment approaches such as monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) or autologous SCT in patients with FL. Regarding intensive regimens, patients receiving high-dose chemotherapy with autologous SCT presented a longer time to treatment failure in comparison with historical controls in two studies [27
, 28], although only one of them showed modest advantage in survival [28]. Nevertheless, the early toxicity with autologous SCT is not negligible, with a mortality rate of 5% to 10% [28–30]. On the other hand, long-term toxicity is of concern, especially regarding myelodysplastic syndromes, reported in up to 12% of cases [5–8]. The long-term toxicity of other treatment modalities such as radiolabeled mAbs is not yet known. Because of this, newer and experimental therapies in FL are usually reserved for patients with unfavorable prognostic features either at diagnosis or at relapse.
The analysis of prognostic factors in patients with FL upon relapse or progression has been addressed in a few studies. Age at relapse [4, 16], response to first-line therapy [16], number of previous lines of therapy [4], response to salvage treatment [17] and RD [16, 19] are factors that have been associated with survival from first progression. However, the prognostic significance of clinical features at relapse has not been fully investigated. Spinolo et al. [18] reported that the number of prior failures, as well as B symptoms, Hb level and number of extranodal sites at relapse, were associated with outcome after progression, but in this study survival was analyzed after several relapses.
In the present series, poor prognosis according to the FLIPI, as well as the presence of bulky disease and B symptoms, were the factors at relapse that allowed the discrimination of patients with a shorter survival from progression. In line with some other studies [4, 16], in the current series the 5-year SFP was significantly shorter in older patients in the univariate analysis, but this variable was not included in the multivariate analysis since it is incorporated in the FLIPI. The prognostic value of the presence of bulky disease is consistent with the findings from a previous study by our group [19]. In the present series, the 5-year SFP of patients with good, intermediate or poor prognosis according to the FLIPI was 85%, 79% and 28%, respectively (P < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis the FLIPI emerged as one of the variables with prognostic value for SFP. Of note, the RD was also included in the multivariate analysis and did not achieve prognostic importance. Moreover, when we compared the FLIPI, the ILI and the IPI by a Cox regression, only the FLIPI retained prognostic significance. These results support the predictive value for SFP of FLIPI at relapse, and suggest that this index may be more accurate than other scores to select FL patients according to their risk.
In contrast to the report by Weisdorf et al. [16], response to first-line therapy did not predict SFP in the present series. RD, another variable with important prognostic value for SFP in the Weisdorf et al. [16] paper, did not correlate with survival in the current study. In fact, although in a previous report from our group [19] RD maintained its prognostic value for SFP, in the current series the median SFP was 4.9 and 6 years for patients with RD <2 and 2 years, respectively. Since, according to our previous results, patients with RD <2 years were submitted to autologous SCT, this may have overcome the negative impact of a shorter initial response on overall survival (data not shown).
In conclusion, this study shows that the clinical characteristics of the disease at relapse as assessed by the FLIPI are the crucial factor in the outcome of patients with FL after progression. Consequently, FLIPI may be employed to identify patients in progression who have an especially unfavorable outcome, and because of this, are reasonable candidates for experimental therapies.
|
Acknowledgements |
|---|
This work was supported in part by grants 02/0250 and 03/0473 from the Fondo de Investigación Sanitaria, Spanish Ministry of Health, Spain, and the Generalitat de Catalunya (2002XT 00030).
Received for publication March 22, 2004. Revision received May 27, 2004. Accepted for publication July 2, 2004.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionPatients and methodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
1. Horning SJ, Rosenberg SA. The natural history of initially untreated low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. N Engl J Med 1984; 311: 1471–1475.[Abstract]
2. Gallagher CJ, Gregory WM, Jones AE et al. Follicular lymphoma: prognostic factors for response and survival. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4: 1470–1480.
3. Romaguera JE, McLaughlin P, North L et al. Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in stage IV follicular low-grade lymphoma: a risk model. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9: 762–769.[Abstract]
4. Johnson PW, Rohatiner AZ, Whelan JS et al. Patterns of survival in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma: a 20-year study from a single center. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 140–147.
5. Friedberg JW, Neuberg D, Stone RM et al. Outcome in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome after autologous bone marrow transplantation for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 3128–3135.
6. Micallef IN, Lillington DM, Apostolidis J et al. Therapy-related myelodysplasia and secondary acute myelogenous leukemia after high-dose therapy with autologous hematopoietic progenitor-cell support for lymphoid malignancies. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 947–955.
7. Hosing C, Munsell M, Yazji S et al. Risk of therapy-related myelodysplastic syndrome/acute leukemia following high-dose therapy and autologous bone marrow transplantation for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 450–459.
8. Metayer C, Curtis RE, Vose J et al. Myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia after autotransplantation for lymphoma: a multicenter case-control study. Blood 2003; 101: 2015–2023.
9. Cabanillas F, Smith T, Bodey GP et al. Nodular malignant lymphomas: factors affecting complete response rate and survival. Cancer 1979; 44: 1983–1989.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
10. Cameron DA, Leonard RC, Mao JH, Prescott RJ. Identification of prognostic groups in follicular lymphoma The Scotland and Newcastle Lymphoma Group Therapy Working Party. Leuk Lymphoma 1993; 10: 89–99.[Web of Science][Medline]
11. Litam P, Swan F, Cabanillas F et al. Prognostic value of serum beta-2 microglobulin in low-grade lymphoma. Ann Intern Med 1991; 114: 855–860.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
12. Soubeyran P, Eghbali H, Bonichon F et al. Low-grade follicular lymphomas: analysis of prognosis in a series of 281 patients. Eur J Cancer 1991; 27: 1606–1613.[Web of Science][Medline]
13. Leonard RC, Hayward RL, Prescott RJ, Wang JX. The identification of discrete prognostic groups in low grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma The Scotland and Newcastle Lymphoma Group Therapy Working Party. Ann Oncol 1991; 2: 655–662.
14. Federico M, Vitolo U, Zinzani PL et al. Prognosis of follicular lymphoma: a predictive model based on a retrospective analysis of 987 cases Intergruppo Italiano Linfomi. Blood 2000; 95: 783–789.
15. Solal-Céligny PH, Roy P. Follicular lymphoma international prognostic project (FLIPP). Blood 2004; In press.
16. Weisdorf DJ, Andersen JW, Glick JH, Oken MM. Survival after relapse of low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: implications for marrow transplantation. J Clin Oncol 1992; 10: 942–947.[Abstract]
17. Davidge-Pitts M, Dansey R, Bezwoda WR. Salvage treatment after failure or relapse following initial chemotherapy for follicular non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Leuk Lymphoma 1997; 24: 341–347.[Web of Science][Medline]
18. Spinolo JA, Cabanillas F, Dixon DO et al. Therapy of relapsed or refractory low-grade follicular lymphomas: factors associated with complete remission, survival and time to treatment failure. Ann Oncol 1992; 3: 227–232.
19. Montoto S, López-Guillermo A, Ferrer A et al. Survival after progression in patients with follicular lymphoma: analysis of prognostic factors. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 523–530.
20. Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Stein H et al. A revised European-American classification of lymphoid neoplasms: a proposal from the International Lymphoma Study Group. Blood 1994; 84: 1361–1392.
21. Harris NL, Jaffe ES, Diebold J et al. The World Health Organization classification of neoplasms of the hematopoietic and lymphoid tissues: report of the Clinical Advisory Committee meeting—Airlie House Virginia, November, 1997. Hematol J 2000; 1: 53–66.[CrossRef][Medline]
22. Cheson BD, Horning SJ, Coiffier B et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize response criteria for non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. NCI Sponsored International Working Group. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1244–1253.
23. A predictive model for aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The International Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Prognostic Factors Project. N Engl J Med 1993; 329: 987–994.
24. Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations. J Am Stat Assoc 1958; 53: 457–481.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
25. Peto R, Pike MC. Conservatism of the approximation 
(O–E)2/E in the log-rank test for survival data on tumour incidence data. Biometrics 1973; 29: 759–784.
26. Cox DR. Regression models and life tables. J R Stat Assoc 1972; 34: 187–220.
27. Apostolidis J, Gupta RK, Grenzelias D et al. High-dose therapy with autologous bone marrow support as consolidation of remission in follicular lymphoma: long-term clinical and molecular follow-up. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 527–536.
28. Brice P, Simon D, Bouabdallah R et al. High-dose therapy with autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) after first progression prolonged survival of follicular lymphoma patients included in the prospective GELF 86 protocol. Ann Oncol 2000; 11: 1585–1590.
29. Stein RS, Greer JP, Goodman S et al. High-dose therapy with autologous or allogeneic transplantation as salvage therapy for small cleaved cell lymphoma of follicular center cell origin. Bone Marrow Transplant 1999; 23: 227–233.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline]
30. Bierman PJ, Vose JM, Anderson JR et al. High-dose therapy with autologous hematopoietic rescue for follicular low-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15: 445–450.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  S. A. M. van de Schans, E. W. Steyerberg, M. R. Nijziel, G.-J. Creemers, M. L. Janssen-Heijnen, and D. J. van Spronsen Validation, revision and extension of the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) in a population-based setting Ann. Onc., October 1, 2009; 20(10): 1697 - 1702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Carreras, A. Lopez-Guillermo, G. Roncador, N. Villamor, L. Colomo, A. Martinez, R. Hamoudi, W. J. Howat, E. Montserrat, and E. Campo High Numbers of Tumor-Infiltrating Programmed Cell Death 1-Positive Regulatory Lymphocytes Are Associated With Improved Overall Survival in Follicular Lymphoma J. Clin. Oncol., March 20, 2009; 27(9): 1470 - 1476. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Bendandi Aiming at a Curative Strategy for Follicular Lymphoma CA Cancer J Clin, September 1, 2008; 58(5): 305 - 317. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Cartron, L. Zhao-Yang, M. Baudard, T. Kanouni, V. Rouille, P. Quittet, B. Klein, and J.-F. Rossi Granulocyte-Macrophage Colony-Stimulating Factor Potentiates Rituximab in Patients With Relapsed Follicular Lymphoma: Results of a Phase II Study J. Clin. Oncol., June 1, 2008; 26(16): 2725 - 2731. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. Carreras, A. Lopez-Guillermo, B. C. Fox, L. Colomo, A. Martinez, G. Roncador, E. Montserrat, E. Campo, and A. H. Banham High numbers of tumor-infiltrating FOXP3-positive regulatory T cells are associated with improved overall survival in follicular lymphoma Blood, November 1, 2006; 108(9): 2957 - 2964. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E Gine, S Montoto, F Bosch, L Arenillas, S Mercadal, N Villamor, A Martinez, L Colomo, E Campo, E Montserrat, et al. The Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) and the histological subtype are the most important factors to predict histological transformation in follicular lymphoma Ann. Onc., October 1, 2006; 17(10): 1539 - 1545. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. Inoges, M. Rodriguez-Calvillo, N. Zabalegui, A. Lopez-Diaz de Cerio, H. Villanueva, E. Soria, L. Suarez, A. Rodriguez-Caballero, F. Pastor, R. Garcia-Munoz, et al. Clinical benefit associated with idiotypic vaccination in patients with follicular lymphoma. J Natl Cancer Inst, September 20, 2006; 98(18): 1292 - 1301. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||