4.5 Article

Low absolute lymphocyte count and addition of rituximab confer high risk for interstitial pneumonia in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

Journal

ANNALS OF HEMATOLOGY
Volume 90, Issue 10, Pages 1145-1151

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00277-011-1268-2

Keywords

Absolute lymphocyte count; Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; Interstitial pneumonia; Rituximab

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Health, Center of Excellence for Cancer Research at Taipei Veterans General Hospital [DOH99-TD-C-111-007]
  2. Taiwan Clinical Oncology Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Several small-scale studies have reported pulmonary toxicity among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy, though whether the use of rituximab predisposes to interstitial pneumonia (IP) remains unclear. This retrospective study was intended to identify the characteristics and risk factors of IP in patients with DLBCL. Between 2000 and 2009, 529 consecutive patients with DLBCL receiving first-line tri-weekly COP- or CHOP-based chemotherapy with or without rituximab were enrolled as subjects. IP was defined as diffuse pulmonary interstitial infiltrates found on computed tomography scans in conjunction with respiratory symptoms. IP was observed in 26 patients (4.9%), six of whom were confirmed with Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia. The median number of chemotherapy courses before IP was four cycles. Using multivariate analysis, absolute lymphocyte count less than 1 x 10(9)/l at diagnosis [odds ratio (OR) 2.75, p = 0.014] and the addition of rituximab to chemotherapy (OR 4.56, p = 0.003) were identified as independent risk factors for IP. In conclusion, the incidence of IP is increased in patients with DLBCL receiving rituximab-containing chemotherapy. Specific subgroups with lymphopenia at diagnosis may justify close scrutiny to detect pulmonary complications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available