R-ESHAP as salvage therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: the influence of prior exposure to rituximab on outcome. A GEL/TAMO study.

BACKGROUND The role of re-treatment with rituximab in aggressive B-cell lymphomas still needs to be defined. This study evaluated the influence of prior exposure to rituximab on response rates and survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab plus etoposide, cytarabine, cisplatinum and methylprednisolone (R-ESHAP). DESIGN AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 163 patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who received R-ESHAP as salvage therapy with a curative purpose. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether rituximab had been administered (n=94, "R+" group) or not (n=69, "R-" group) prior to R-ESHAP. RESULTS Response rates were significantly higher in the R- group in the univariate but not in the multivariate analysis. In the analysis restricted to the R+ group, we observed very low complete remission and overall response rates in patients with primary refractory disease (8% and 33%, respectively), as compared to those in patients who were in first partial remission (41% and 86%) or who had relapsed disease (50% and 75%) (p<0.01 in both cases). Overall, 60% and 65% of patients in the R+ and R- groups, respectively, underwent stem-cell transplantation after the salvage therapy. With a median follow-up of 29 months (range, 6-84), patients in the R+ group had significantly worse progression-free survival (17% vs. 57% at 3 years, p<0.0001) and overall survival (38% v 67% at 3 years, p=0.0005) than patients in the R- group. Prior exposure to rituximab was also an independent adverse prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (RR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2-3.3, p=0.008) and overall survival (RR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.3-3.9, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS R-ESHAP was associated with a high response rate in patients who were not refractory to upfront rituximab-based chemotherapy. However, the survival outcome was poor for patients previously exposed to rituximab, as compared to in those who had not previously been treated with rituximab.

Management of hepatitis B virus infection after liver transplantation.

Chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection is responsible for up to 30% of cases of liver cirrhosis and up to 53% of cases of hepatocellular carcinoma. Liver transplantation (LT) is the best therapeutic option for patients with end-stage liver failure caused by HBV. The success of transplantation, though, depends on receiving prophylactic treatment against post-transplant viral reactivation. In the absence of prophylaxis, liver transplantation due to chronic hepatitis B (CHB) is associated with high rates of viral recurrence and poor survival. The introduction of treatment with hepatitis B immunoglobulins (HBIG) during the 1990s and later the incorporation of oral antiviral drugs have improved the prognosis of these patients. Thus, LT for CHB is now a universally accepted option, with an estimated 5 years survival of around 85% vs the 45% survival seen prior to the introduction of HBIG. The combination of lamivudine plus HBIG has for many years been the most widely used prophylactic regimen. However, with the appearance of new more potent oral antiviral agents associated with less resistance (e.g., entecavir and tenofovir) for the treatment of CHB, new prophylactic strategies are being designed, either in combination with HBIG or alone as a monotherapy. These advances have allowed for more personalized prophylaxis based on the individual risk profile of a given patient. In addition, the small pool of donors has required the use of anti-HBc-positive donors (with the resulting possibility of transmitting HBV from these organs), which has been made possible by suitable prophylactic regimens.