1 / 3

Patients à risque

1,0. 0,8. 0,6. 0,4. 0,2. 0. 0. 6. 12. 18. 24. 30. 36. 42. 48. 54. 60. –. 84. 17. 0. 505. 472. 445. 423. 404. 307. 207. 70. 16. 0. –. 367. 334. 247. 161. 513. 469. 415. Etude PRIMA. NB: Data differ slightly from published abstract. 74,9 %.

tegan
Télécharger la présentation

Patients à risque

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 1,0 0,8 0,6 0,4 0,2 0 0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60 – 84 17 0 505 472 445 423 404 307 207 70 16 0 – 367 334 247 161 513 469 415 Etude PRIMA NB: Data differ slightly from published abstract 74,9 % Rituximab maintenance 57,5 % Survie sans progression Observation HR = 0,55 IC95 : 0,44-0,68 p< 0,001 Mois Patients à risque Rituximab Observation Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.

  2. PRIMA Update: Consistent benefitacross subgroups Category Subgroup Hazard ratio (HR) n HR * IC 95% All All 0,55 1018 0,44–0,68 Age < 60 0,49 624 0,37–0,65 ≥ 60 394 0,67 0,47–0,94 Sex Female 0,63 485 0,45–0,87 Male 533 0,48 0,36–0,64 FLIPl Index FLIPl < 1 0,39 216 0,21–0,72 370 0,30–0,64 FLIPl = 2 0,44 431 0,51–0,92 0,68 FLIPl > 3 R-CHOP 0,51 768 0,39–0,65 Induction Chemotherapy R-CVP 222 0,68 0,45–1,02 R-FCM 0,54 28 0,13–2,24 CR/CRu 720 0,57 0,44–0,74 Response to Induction 291 0,32–0,72 PR 0,48 0 1 2 3 Favours maintenance Favours observation Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004. * Non-stratified analysis.

  3. 18.0% 24.5% 5.8% n = 360 n = 139 51.8% 38.2% 27.0% n = 360 n = 152 5.3% 29.6% PRIMA: Conversion from PR to CR was higher with MabThera maintenance vs observation After maintenance:PR patients only After induction Randomised to MabTheramaintenance Randomised to observation PD CR/CRu PR Missing Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.

More Related