title: MACOP-B versus ProMACE-MOPP in the treatment of advanced diffuse non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: results of a prospective randomized trial by the non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Cooperative Study Group.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  The aim of our study was to compare in a multicentric randomized trial two regimens widely used in the treatment of advanced-stage intermediate- to high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and to assess whether a third-generation regimen (methotrexate with leucovorin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, and bleomycin [MACOP-B]) was superior to a second-generation regimen (procarbazine, methotrexate with leucovorin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and etoposide [ProMACE-MOPP]).
  
  
  METHODS
  Between January 1987 and August 1991, 221 patients with diffuse intermediate- to high-grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (Working Formulation groups F, G, H, and K), stage II bulky (> 10 cm), III, or IV, were randomized by the Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Cooperative Study Group (NHLCSG) to receive ProMACE-MOPP for six cycles or MACOP-B for 12 weeks. Survival, progression-free survival, and disease-free survival were determined, and multivariate analysis of prognostic factors was performed.
  
  
  RESULTS
  In the two groups of patients, there was no significant difference in terms of complete remission (CR) rate (49.1% with ProMACE-MOPP and 52.3% with MACOP-B), 3-year overall survival rate (45.2% with PROMACE-MOPP and 52.3% with MACOP-B), and 3-year progression-free survival rate (36.4% with ProMACE-MOPP and 36.1% with MACOP-B). In terms of toxicity, no significantly greater toxicity occurred in either arm. Overall toxicity was acceptable. The most frequent side effects were grade II through IV leukopenia, infection, mucositis, and anemia. Treatment-related deaths were equally distributed.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  No significant differences in terms of efficacy and/or toxicity between ProMACE-MOPP and MACOP-B are evident. These results are consistent with recent randomized trials showing that the new-generation aggressive regimens are no better than previous ones.
authors.affiliation: Institute of Oncology, Genova University, Italy.
authors.forename: M R
authors.initials: MR
authors.lastname: Sertoli
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Santini
authors.forename: T
authors.initials: T
authors.lastname: Chisesi
authors.forename: A M
authors.initials: AM
authors.lastname: Congiu
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Rubagotti
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Contu
authors.forename: L
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Salvagno
authors.forename: P
authors.initials: P
authors.lastname: Coser
authors.forename: A
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Porcellini
authors.forename: M
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Vespignani
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000971:Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D001761:Bleomycin / Q000008:administration & dosage; D003520:Cyclophosphamide / Q000008:administration & dosage; D004317:Doxorubicin / Q000008:administration & dosage; D005047:Etoposide / Q000008:administration & dosage; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D002955:Leucovorin / Q000008:administration & dosage; D008228:Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin / Q000188:drug therapy*; D008297:Male; D008466:Mechlorethamine / Q000008:administration & dosage; D008727:Methotrexate / Q000008:administration & dosage; D008875:Middle Aged; D015999:Multivariate Analysis; D011241:Prednisone / Q000008:administration & dosage; D011344:Procarbazine / Q000008:administration & dosage; D011379:Prognosis; D011446:Prospective Studies; D012307:Risk Factors; D016019:Survival Analysis; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014750:Vincristine / Q000008:administration & dosage
chemical_list: D001761:Bleomycin; D011344:Procarbazine; D008466:Mechlorethamine; D014750:Vincristine; D005047:Etoposide; D004317:Doxorubicin; D003520:Cyclophosphamide; D002955:Leucovorin; D011241:Prednisone; D008727:Methotrexate