
==== Front
Sao Paulo Med J
Sao Paulo Med J
Sao Paulo Med J
São Paulo Medical Journal
1516-3180
1806-9460
Associação Paulista de Medicina - APM

10685121
10.1590/S1516-31802000000100003
Original Article
Prognostic factors in non-Hodgkin lymphomas
Cecyn Karin Zattar *
Rodrigues de Oliveira José Salvador *
Alves Antônio Correia *
Silva Maria Regina Regis *
Kerbauy José *
Address for correspondence: Karin Zattar Cecyn Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, Disciplina de Hematologia e Hemoterapia. Rua Napoleão de Barros, 715 São Paulo/SP - Brasil - CEP 04023-902 e-mail: cecyn@uol.com.br
Conflict of interest: Not declared.

02 1 2000
2000
118 1 712
04 3 1999
14 7 1999
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons license.
abstract

CONTEXT:

In Hodgkin's disease, each clinical or pathologic stage can be related to the extent of the area involved and predicts the next anatomical region at risk for tumor dissemination.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine the best prognostic factors that could predict survival in non-Hodgkin lymphoma cases.

DESIGN:

A retrospective study.

LOCATION:

Department of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - Escola Paulista de Medicina.

PARTICIPANTS:

142 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma diagnosed between February 1988 and March 1993.

MAIN MEASUREMENTS:

Histological subset, Sex, Age, Race, B symptoms, Performance status, Stage, Extranodal disease, Bulk disease, Mediastinal disease, CNS involvement, BM infiltration, Level of DHL, Immunophenotype.

RESULTS:

In the first study (113 patients), the following variables had a worse influence on survival: yellow race (P<0.1); ECOG II, III e IV (P<0.1) and extranodal disease (P<0.1) for high grade lymphomas; constitutional symptoms (P<0.1), ECOG II, III e IV (P<0.1) and involvement of CNS (P<0.1) for intermediate grade and the subtype lymphoplasmocytoid (P=0.0186) for low grade lymphomas. In the second survey (93 patients), when treatment was included, the variables related to NHL survival were: CNS involvement (P<0.1) for high grade lymphomas, constitutional symptoms (P<0.1), ECOG II, III, IV (P=0.0185) and also CNS involvement (P<0.1) for the intermediate group. There were no variables related to the survival for low-grade lymphomas.

CONCLUSIONS:

The intermediate grade lymphomas were more compatible with data found in the literature, probably because of the larger number of patients. In this specific case, the treatment did not have an influence on the survival.

resumo

CONTEXTO:

Na doença de Hodgkin, cada estágio clínico ou patológico pode ser relacionado com a extensão da área envolvida e predizer a próxima região anatômica de risco para disseminação.

OBJETIVO:

Estabelecer os fatores prognósticos que melhor predizem sobrevida em LNH.

TIPO DE ESTUDO:

Estudo retrospectivo

LOCAL:

Disciplina de Hematologia e Hemoterapia, Universidade Federal de São Paulo - Escola Paulista de Medicina.

PARTICIPANTES:

142 pacientes com LNH diagnosticados entre fevereiro de 1988 e março de 1993.

VARIÁVEIS ESTUDADAS:

Tipo histológico, sexo, idade, raça, sintomas, sitação "performance", estágio, doença extranodal, desenvolvimento de Bulk, comprometimento mediastinal, envolvimento do SNC, infiltração da medúla óssea, nível de desidrogenose láctica, fenótipo imune.

RESULTADOS:

Ao primeiro estudo (113 pacientes), as seguintes variáveis tiveram uma pior influência na sobrevida: raça amarela (P<0.1); ECOG II, III e IV (P<0.1) e doença extranodal (P<0.1) para os linfomas de alto grau; sintomas constitucionais (P<0.1), ECOG II, III e IV (P<0.1) e envolvimento de SNC (P<0.1) para os linfomas de grau intermediário e o subtipo linfoplasmocitóide (P=0.0186) para os linfomas de baixo grau. Ao segundo estudo (93 pacientes), quando inclui-se o tratamento, as variáveis relacionadas a sobrevida foram : envolvimento de SNC (P<0.1) para o linfomas de alto grau; sintomas constitucionais (P<0.1), ECOG II, III, IV (P=0.0185) e envolvimento de SNC (P<0.1) para o grupo intermediário. Nenhuma variável relacionou-se com a sobrevida para os linfomas de baixo grau.

CONCLUSÕES:

Os linfomas de grau intermediário, provavelmente devido ao maior número de pacientes, foram mais compatíveis com os dados encontrados na literatura. Neste caso específico, o tratamento não influenciou a sobrevida.

KEY-WORDS:

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma
Prognostic Factors
Survival
PALAVRAS-CHAVE:

Linfoma não-Hodgkin
Fatores prognóstico
Sobrevida
==== Body
pmcINTRODUCTION

In Hodgkin's disease, each clinical or pathologic stage can be related to the extent of the area involved and predicts the next anatomical region at risk for tumor dissemination. Thus, the Ann Arbor staging criteria1,2 are useful in planning treatment and determining the evolution of the disease. However, the biological behavior of non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL) is much more complex in relation to their presentation and natural history. In this way, discrepancies between NHL found in the various subgroups make it impossible to analyze them all together, and in particular we cannot predict survival based only on the anatomical areas involved.

Age, general condition at the time of diagnosis, serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level, extranodal involvement and tumor burden assessment are the factors that have been shown to have prognostic value for survival in many studies.3-7 There are some variations between the different authors. We studied all these parameters in order to understand better which of these could predict survival among a set of patients of low socioeconomic level treated in a public hospital in the city of São Paulo.

METHODS

An initial analysis of 142 patients with NHL was made, whose biopsies were reviewed and classified in accordance with the Working Formulation (WF)8 between February 1988 and March 1993 in our institution. From this, 29 patients were excluded due ineligible data, leaving the 113 patients that constituted our first study. A second analysis was carried out on 93 patients who completed their follow-up and could be evaluated as regards their treatment.

The staging of the disease were done before and after treatment. The tests performed included: complete and differential blood cell count; biochemistry test, particularly the LDH level; chest x-ray; chest, abdomen and pelvis CT scans; and bilateral bone marrow biopsies. Some special procedures such as lumbar puncture, brain CT or percutaneous liver biopsy were performed only if there was clinical suspicion of local involvement. Each patient was characterized using the following remission criteria after treatment: complete remission (CR), defined as a complete absence of any clinical or laboratory (biochemical or radiological) signs of disease maintained for at least four sequential weeks; partial remission (PR), defined as a reduction in tumor burden of 50% or more, measurable in two dimensions at the same time; refractory disease (RD), defined as a reduction in tumor burden of less than 50% compared with the original size, or a complete failure of response to treatment, or evidence of growing tumor burden during two sequential therapy cycles. The disease free-survival (DFS) was taken as the length of time between CR and the last consultation or the relapse. The overall survival (OS) used the same criteria for all patient situations.

The following clinical variables were evaluated: age in years; sex; race; general condition (performance status) in accordance with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG);8 extranodal site involvement; presence of bulk disease defined as a tumor burden mass larger than 10 cm in one diameter or occupying more than one third of the mediastinum; and CNS involvement. The LDH level was scored at three levels: ≤ 225 U/dl; > 225 and < 450 U/dl; and ≥ 450 U/dl. Biopsies from different disease sites, mostly lymphoid nodes, were reviewed in the Pathology Department and reclassified according to the WF. When there were plenty of samples, immunohistological studies were done on the B (CD-20) and T (CD45RO) markers using the ABC method.9 The clinical stages were determined in accordance with the Ann Arbor classification. Seven different, non-randomized chemotherapy regimens were used. These were chosen based on the initial WF histological classification. The second and third generation schemes such as Macop-B,7 PromaceCYTAbom8 and the BFM-83 high-risk protocol9 were used for high grade groups. CHOP,10 BACOP10 and MVPP11 were used for intermediate groups. For low grade lymphoma, COP11 and MVPP11 were the most often used protocols.

Statistical Methods. Survival curves were plotted according to the method of Kaplan and Meier.12 Statistical significance among curves was determined by the Cox-Mantel method, measuring variables with two categories of results, and the generalized Wilcoxon test for those variables with more than two categories of results.

RESULTS

Patients’ parameters in relation to the grade of lymphoma are shown in Tables 1 to 3 and the distribution of the 93 treated patients among the different chemotherapy schemes is shown in Table 4.

Table 1 Characteristics of patients with high grade lymphoma

Variables	1st analysis	2nd analysis	
n°patients	P-value	n°patients	P-value	
Histological subset	
Immunoblastic	12	0.42	09	0.54	
SNCC	02		01		
Lymphoblastic	03		03		
Lymphoblastic	04		03		
Sex	
Female	05	0.06	11	0.15	
Male	16		05		
Age (years)	
< 60	19	0.92	14	0.42	
> 60	02		02		
Race	
White	15	0.04	11	0.07	
Black	04		04		
Yellow	02		01		
B symptoms	
Present	13	0.15	09	0.62	
Absent	08		07		
Performance status	
0	03	<0.01	02	0.52	
1	12		10		
2	04		03		
3	04		01		
4	01		00		
Stage	
I	02	0.09	02	0.13	
II	07		04		
III	06		05		
IV	06		05		
Extranodal disease	
Present	03	<0.01	03	0.06	
Absent	18		13		
Bulk disease	
Present	10	0.63	08	0.48	
Absent	11		08		
Mediastinal disease	
Present	06	0.63	04	0.87	
Absent	15		12		
CNS involvement	
Present	01	0.14	01	<0.01	
Absent	16		15		
BM infiltration	
Present	05	0.30	04	0.17	
Absent	16		12		
Level of DHL	
≤ 225 U/dl	04	0.88	04	0.14	
>225 and <450 U/dl	06		05		
≥ 450 U/dl	04		02		
Immunophenotype	
B	09	0.50	06	0.65	
T	01		01		
SNCC = malignant lymphoma small non-cleaved cell; DSCC = malignant lymphoma diffuse small cleaved cell; DMSLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse mixed small and large cell; DLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse large cell; FMSCLC = malignant lymphoma follicular mixed small cleaved and large cell; BM = bone marrow.

Table 2 Characteristics of patients with intermediate grade lymphomas

Variables	1st analysis	2nd analysis	
n°patients	P-value	n°patients	P-value	
Histological subset	
DSCC	26	0.22	20	0.54	
DMSLC	21		17		
DLC	18		15		
Sex	
Female	34	0.29	28	0.25	
Male	31		24		
Age (years)	
< 60	47	0.96	41	0.13	
> 60	18		11		
Race	
White	43	0.09	34	0.68	
Black	22		18		
B Symptoms	
Present	43	>0.01	34	>0.01	
Absent	22		18		
Performance status	
0	09	>0.01	06	0.02	
1	38		33		
2	14		11		
3	02		02		
4	02				
Stage	
I	02	0.42	01	0.29	
II	19		17		
III	16		12		
IV	28		22		
Extranodal disease	
Present	34	0.48	30	0.36	
Absent	31		22		
Bulk disease	
Present	39	0.11	30	0.07	
Absent	26		20		
Mediastinal Disease	
Present	20	0.87	18	0.65	
Absent	45		34		
CNS involvement	
Present	04	<0.01	04	<0.01	
Absent	39		39		
BM Infiltration	
Present	24	0.17	36	0.09	
Absent	40		16		
Level of DHL	
≤l 250 U/dl	14	0.06	10	0.14	
>250 and <450 U/dl	27		24		
≥ 450 U/dl	12		09		
Immunophenotype	
B	31	0.50	23	0.24	
T	07		05		
NCC = malignant lymphoma small non-cleaved cell; SCC = malignant lymphoma diffuse small cleaved cell; DMSLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse mixed small and large cell; DLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse large cell; FMSCLC = malignant lymphoma follicular mixed small cleaved and large cell; BM = bone marrow

Table 3 Characteristics of patients with low grade lymphomas

Variables	1st analysis	2nd analysis	
n°patients	P-value	n°patients	P-value	
Histological subtype	
FMSCLC	12	0.02	11	0.29	
Lymphoplasmocytoid	03		02		
Small Lymphocytes	12		12		
Sex	
Female	11	0.14	10	0.19	
Male	16		15		
Age (years)	
< 60	24	0.98	23	0.45	
> 60	03		02		
Race	
White	18	0.21	17	0.15	
Black	09		08		
B Symptoms	
Present	20	0.10	19	0.06	
Absent	07		06		
Performance Status	
0	04	0.21	04	0.21	
1	14		14		
2	07		05		
3	02		02		
4	00		00		
Stage	
I	03	0.26	03	0.26	
II	03		03		
III	07		07		
IV	14		14		
Extranodal disease	
Present	07	0.62	05	0.48	
Absent	20		20		
Bulk disease	
Present	04	0.65	04	0.7702	
Absent	23		21		
Mediastinal disease	
Present	10	0.29	10	0.52	
Absent	17		15		
CNS involvement	
Present	02	0.56	02	0.56	
Absent	13		13		
BM infiltration	
Present	11	0.94	08	0.79	
Absent	16	0.94	17		
Level of DHL	
≤l 250 U/dl	06	0.69	06	0.69	
<250 and <450 U/dl	08		08		
≥ 450 U/dl	05		05		
Immunophenotype	
B	18	0.42	16	0.60	
T	03		03		
NCC = malignant lymphoma small non-cleaved cell; DSCC = malignant lymphoma diffuse small cleaved cell; DMSLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse mixed small and large cell; DLC = malignant lymphoma diffuse large cell; FMSCLC = malignant lymphoma follicular mixed small cleaved and large cell; BM = bone marrow

Table 4 Distribution of 93 patients with non-hodgkin lymphomas according to the treatment received

	Lymphoma grade	
High	Intermediate	Low	
Macop-B	6	14	4	
Promace-CytaBOM	1	7	3	
BFM-83	1	3	3	
MVPP	1	12	2	
BACOP	2	13	8	
CHOP	5	2	2	
Total	16	52	25	
Comparisons between types of treatment in each lymphoma grade. High P=0.7;Intermediate P=0.16; Low P=0.27

The remission rates for high-grade lymphomas were: 62% CR, 25% PR and 12% RD; for the intermediate group: 50% CR, 27% PR and 23% RD; and for the low grade group: 44% CR, 32% PR and 24% RD. MACOPB and CHOP were the treatments analyzed for high grade lymphoma and their CR were 66% and 40% respectively (P = 0.777). For the intermediate grade, the rate of CR to the protocols analyzed were: CHOP 61%, BACOP 41% and MACOP-B 50% (P = 0.1642). The median 5-year survival rates were: OS 62% and DFS 52% for high grade lymphoma, 57% and 49% for intermediate grade and 63% and 52% for low grade lymphoma respectively.

DISCUSSION

We analyzed patients with NHL divided into three subgroups in accordance with the WF classification and evaluated the variables that could demonstrate prognostic value. A second statistical study was done to check the influence of treatment on the survival for each variable studied at the first step.

The intermediate grade lymphomas presented results comparable to those described in the literature, probably because this was the largest group of patients. In this group the variables associated with worse prognosis were: B symptoms (P< 0.01); performance status III and IV (P< 0.01) and CNS involvement (P = 0.006). There are reports that patients with a diagnosis of performance status of III and IV is related to high cell proliferation and this fact could have implications of an unfavorable prognosis.14 It is well known that better therapeutic results are associated with longer survival in patients that have a good performance status at the diagnosis.5-7,13

Involvement of the CNS generally implies frequently relapsing disease.15 Some studies have suggested that patients with bone marrow involvement have a higher risk of presenting CNS infiltration.15 This aspect was observed in our study.

The small number of patients with high and low grade lymphomas made it impossible to demonstrate statistically some important variables reported elsewhere such as: bone marrow and CNS involvement, bulk disease, mediastinal disease, high levels of LDH and age above 60 years.15

For high grade lymphomas the following variables were related to worse disease: yellow race (P = 0.003), ECOG III and IV (P < 0.01) and extranodal disease (P < 0.01). After including the treatment, the only variable associated with an unfavorable prognosis for survival was CNS infiltration (P < 0.01). Many reports have demonstrated that extranodal disease, especially if there are two or more involved sites, is associated with worse evolution.3,16 This is valid for all kinds of lymphomas. This fact, even if negated by others, makes us think that it may be necessary to have other factors associated with the extranodal disease in order to cause a worse prognosis.5,6 For low grade lymphomas, only the lymphoplasmocytoid subset (P = 0.018) had prognostic value, and in the second study no variable was associated with treatment and survival.

The overall survival and DFS for all grades of the WF classification are quite similar to those of other studies, although our patients were treated with different non-randomized protocols. Costa et al.7 had an OS of 54% and a 5-year DFS of 52% in a series of 54 high and intermediate grade lymphomas, most of which with diffuse histological patterns and advanced stage disease. Klimo & Connors17 found a median 8-year survival of 62% and a DFS of 52% in 126 patients with diffuse large cell lymphoma. For the low-grade lymphoma, the OS and DFS were comparable to the many other studies that included patients with advanced stage disease.3

A relationship between a high level of LDH and a worse survival for NHL has very often been reported.5,14,18 Schneider et al.21 pointed out the importance of this marker even when not considering the extent of the tumor nor the bulk mass burden. In our intermediate group, an LDH higher than 450U/dl had some relation with survival, with a p-value close to significance (P = 0.055).

Bone marrow involvement was not related to unfavorable survival in the three studied groups. We analyzed the presence or absence of focal or diffuse infiltration. For the intermediate grade lymphomas, there was a tendency towards diffuse marrow involvement and worse survival (P = 0.086). Data from the National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, USA, has postulated that marrow involvement means a poor prognostic factor for survival. A similar analysis performed at the M.D. Anderson Hospital was not able to predict this variable as an unfavorable factor. However, the association of bone marrow involvement, high LDH level and a high rate of cellular proliferation seems to have some prognostic meaning.14 In both of our statistical analyses immunological phenotyping did not influence the survival of the three different groups.

Our treatment was based on the first histological WF classification, but 43 of the 113 evaluated patients from the first study had their histological sub-type changed after review. Thus, the philosophy of basing treatment on the initial diagnosis generated a miscellany of analyses. Despite having a small sample size, especially when analyzing each chemotherapy scheme in isolation, our data are similar to those in other reports.8,20 Although MACOP-B seems to be better than CHOP for CR rates, we can conclude that they are similar when considering OS and DFS. This conclusion has been confirmed by other reports in the last five years.21

For the largest group, the intermediate lymphomas, there were no differences between CHOP, BACOP and MACOP-B relating to survival (P = 0.1642). When considered separately, CHOP showed a better rate of CR, 8/13 (61.50%), but this was not significant. At present, there is a world trend to use CHOP as the treatment schedule for aggressive lymphoma due to results that are similar and comparable to more toxic third-generation protocols.7,8,13

For low-grade lymphomas our results are slightly inferior to those of other reports, but are comparable to studies that included advanced stage disease.22 Even though 28% of those patients were treated with third-generation schemes and the others with CHOP, BACOP, MVPP or COP, no chemotherapy scheme was seen to be superior in relation to the prognosis (P = 0.2717). New treatment forms are being used for low-grade lymphomas, especially purine analogs, inter-feron and allogeneic and autologous bone marrow transplantation. However their efficacy is still limited when compared with classic treatments such as usage of alkylating agents or aggressive chemo-therapy.23,24 We believe that new studies and protocols are necessary in order to have a more precise conclusion about the best treatment for low grade lymphomas.25

A new attempt at classifying NHL has recently been made. In this new classification, lymphoproliferative disorders are divided into B, T or NK diseases.26 The cytogenetic characteristics and oncogenesis with their respective molecular rearrangements are considered in trying to describe each known pathology as an isolated entity. It is designated the REAL classification, signifying a consensus between American, European and Asian hemato-pathologists. This classification appears to have achieved the ideal, but more time and experience will be required before reaching a definitive conclusion on such a complex subject.

It is clear that we need to bring together clinical hematologists, pathologists and cytogeneticists in Brazil, in order attain a better understanding of the complex setting of this disease. Cooperation between institutions in different areas of the country could achieve clinical and therapeutic results. Only in this way will there be a commonality of spirit leading to a better understanding of NHL in Brazil.

Karin Zattar Cecyn, MD. Assistant Physician, Discipline of Hematology and Hemotherapy, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil.

José Salvador Rodrigues de Oliveira, MD, PhD. Adjunct Professor, Discipline of Hematology and Hemotherapy, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil.

Antônio Correia Alves, MD, PhD. Adjunct Professor, Discipline of Anatomy Pathologic, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil.

Maria Regina Regis Silva, MD, PhD. Adjunct Professor, Discipline of Anatomy Pathologic, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil.

José Kerbauy, MD, PhD. Titular Professor, Discipline of Hematology and Hemotherapy, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil.

Sources of funding: Not declared.

Department of Hematology and Transfusion Medicine, Universidade Federal de São Paulo/Escola Paulista de Medicina, São Paulo, Brazil
==== Refs
REFERENCES

1 Carbone PP Kaplan HS Musshoff K Report of the committee on Hodgkin's disease staging Cancer Res 1971 31 1860 1861 5121694
2 Rosenberg SA Validity of Ann Arbor staging of the non-Hodgkin's lymphomas Cancer Treat Rep 1977 61 1023 1027 902260
3 Romaguera JE McLaughlin P North L Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in stage IV follicular low-grade lymphoma: a risk model J Clin Oncol 1991 9 762 769 1707956
4 Velasquez WS Jagannath S Tucker SL Risk classification of the basis for clinical staging of diffuse large cell lymphoma derived from 10-year survival data Blood 1989 74 551 557 2752132
5 Vitolo U Bertini M Brusamolino E Macop-B treatment in diffuse large-cell lymphoma: identification of prognostic groups in an Italian multivariate study J Clin Oncol 1992 10 219 227 1370690
6 Shipp MA Harrington DP Klatt MM Identification of major prognostic subgroups of patients with large-cell lymphoma treated with m-Bacod or M-Bacod Ann Intern Med 1986 104 757 765 2422995
7 Costa AM Froimtchuk MJ Robinowits M Olivetto LO Allanse Gil RA Long-term results with Macop-B in the treatment of aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas Am J Clin Oncol 1994 17 323 327 7519390
8 Summary and Description of a Working Formulation for Clinical Usage: National Cancer Institute sponsored study of classification of nonHodgkin's lymphomas Cancer 1992 49 2112 2135
9 Pilleri AS Sabatini E Falini B Immunohistochemical detection of the multidrug transport protein P-170 in human normal tissues and malignant lymphomas Histopathol 1991 19 131 140
10 Longo D DeVita VT Duffey P Randomized trial of Promace-Mopp (PM) (day 1 and 8) vs. Promace-CytaBOM (PC) in stage II to IV aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1987 6 206 206 (abstract)
11 Hoelzer ET Löffer H Bodenstein H Intensified therapy in acute lymphoblastic and acute undifferentiated leukemia in adults Blood 1984 54 38 47
12 Yi PI Coleman S Saltz L Chemotherapy for large-cell lymphoma: a status update Semin Oncol 1990 17 60 73 2406919
13 Young RC Longo DL Gladstein E The treatment of indolent lymphomas: watchful waiting for aggressive combined modality treatment Semin Hematol 1988 25 suppl 2 11 16 2456618
14 Kaplan EL Meyer P Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observation J Am Stat Assoc 1958 53 457 481
15 Silvestrini R Costa A Boracchi P Giardini R Rilke F Cell proliferation as a long term prognostic factor in diffuse large-cell lymphomas Int J Cancer 1993 54 231 236 8486424
16 Jagannath S Velasquez SW Tucker SL Tumor burden assessment and its implication for a prognostic model in advanced diffuse large-cell lymphoma J Clin Oncol 1986 4 859 865 2423653
17 Shipp AM Yeap YB Harrington DP Klatt MM The m-Bacod combination chemotherapy regimen in large-cell lymphoma: analysis of the complete trial and comparison with the M-Bacod regimen J Clin Oncol 1990 8 84 93 1688615
18 Kirn D Mauch P Shaffer K Pinkus G Large-cell and immunoblastic lymphoma of the mediastinum: prognostic features and treatment outcome in 57 patients J Clin Oncol 1993 11 1336 1343 8315431
19 Klimo P Connors J MACOP-B chemotherapy for the treatment of diffuse large-cell lymphoma Ann Intern Med 1985 102 596 602 2580468
20 Danieu L Wang G Koziner B Predictive model for prognosis in advanced diffuse histiocytic lymphoma Cancer Res 1986 46 5372 5379 3530438
21 Schneider RF Seibert K Passe S Prognostic significance of serum lactate dehydrogenase in malignant lymphoma Cancer 1980 46 139 143 6992974
22 Miller TP Lippman SM Spier CM HLA-DR (Ia) immune phenotype predicts outcome for patients with diffuse large-cell lymphoma J Clin Immunol 1988 82 370 372
23 Gordon LE Harrington D Andersen R Comparison of a second generation combination chemotherapy regimen (m-Bacod) with a standard regimen (Chop) for advanced diffuse non-Hodgkin's lymphoma N Engl J Med 1992 327 12 18
24 Lyang R Chiu E Lake SL Management of low-grade lymphomas in Hong Kong Chinese Oncology 1991 48 121 124 1997934
25 McKelvey EM Gottlieb JA Wilson HE Hydroxydaunomycin (adriamycin) combination chemotherapy in malignant lymphoma Cancer 1976 38 1484 1493 791473
26 Portlock CS Rosenberg SA No initial therapy for stage III and IV non-Hodgkin lymphomas of favorable histologic types Ann Intern Med 1979 90 10 13 369420
27 Cheson B New chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of low grade non-Hodgkin's lymphomas Semin Oncol 1993 20 suppl 5 96 110
28 Chan JKC, MBBS Banks PM Cleary ML A revised European-American classification of lymphoid neoplasms proposed by the international lymphoma study group: a summary version Am J Clin Pathol 1993 103 543 560
