Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):805-11.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.0910. Epub 2009 Jan 5.

ABVD compared with BEACOPP compared with CEC for the initial treatment of patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma: results from the HD2000 Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dei Linfomi Trial

Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

ABVD compared with BEACOPP compared with CEC for the initial treatment of patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma: results from the HD2000 Gruppo Italiano per lo Studio dei Linfomi Trial

Massimo Federico et al. J Clin Oncol. .

Abstract

Purpose: To compare doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (ABVD) versus bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP) versus cyclophosphamide, lomustine, vindesine, melphalan, prednisone, epidoxirubicin, vincristine, procarbazine, vinblastine, and bleomycin (COPPEBVCAD; CEC) for advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL).

Patients and methods: Three hundred seven patients with advanced HL (stage IIB, III, and IV) were randomly assigned to receive six courses of ABVD, four escalated plus two standard courses of BEACOPP, or six courses of CEC, plus a limited radiation therapy program.

Results: After a median follow-up of 41 months, BEACOPP resulted in a superior progression-free survival (PFS), with a significant reduction in risk of progression (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.50) compared with ABVD. No differences between BEACOPP and CEC, or CEC and ABVD were observed. The 5-year PFS was 68% (95% CI, 56% to 78%), 81% (95% CI, 70% to 89%), and 78% (95% CI, 68% to 86%), for ABVD, BEACOPP, and CEC, respectively (BEACOPP v ABVD, P = .038; CEC v ABVD and BEACOPP v CEC, P = not significant [NS]). The 5-year overall survival was 84% (95% CI, 69% to 92%), 92% (95% CI, 84% to 96%), and 91% (95% CI, 81% to 96%) for ABVD, BEACOPP, and CEC, respectively (P = NS). BEACOPP and CEC resulted in higher rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia than ABVD (P = .016); BEACOPP was associated with higher rates of severe infections than ABVD and CEC (P = .003).

Conclusion: As adopted in this study BEACOPP is associated with a significantly improved PFS compared with ABVD, with a predictable higher acute toxicity.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types