These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Rituximab and chlorambucil versus rituximab alone in gastric mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue lymphoma according to t(11;18) status: a monocentric non-randomized observational study.
    Author: Lévy M, Copie-Bergman C, Amiot A, Dupuis J, Le Baleur Y, Belhadj K, Hémery F, Sobhani I, Delfau-Larue MH, Leroy K, Haioun C, Delchier JC.
    Journal: Leuk Lymphoma; 2013 May; 54(5):940-4. PubMed ID: 22978684.
    Abstract:
    Forty-nine patients, t(11;18)-positive (n = 31) and t(11;18)-negative (n = 18), were treated without randomization with rituximab-chlorambucil or rituximab alone. Evaluation was performed at week (W) 6, week (W) 25 and every 6 months (Wx). Comparing the rituximab-chlorambucil group to the rituximab-alone group, remission was obtained in 93% vs. 66% at W6 (p = 0.01), in 93% vs. 81% at W25 (p = 0.14) and in 93% vs. 76% at Wx (p = 0.07). Comparing the rituximab-chlorambucil group to the rituximab-alone group in t(11;18)-positive patients, remission was obtained in 100% vs. 45% at W6 (p = 0.0005), in 100% vs. 66% at W25 (p = 0.01) and in 96% vs. 55% at Wx (p = 0.01). Comparing the rituximab-chlorambucil group to the rituximab-alone group in t(11;18)-negative patients, remission was obtained in 66% vs. 83% at W6 (p = 0.32), in 66% vs. 92% at W25 (p = 0.22) and in 83% vs. 92% at Wx (p = 0.47). In conclusion, rituximab-chlorambucil is significantly more rapidly efficient than rituximab alone. In t(11;18)-positive patients, the combination is more efficient than rituximab alone. In t(11;18)-negative patients, rituximab alone is as efficient as rituximab-chlorambucil and may be an alternative treatment.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]