Patients à risque505513

472 445 423 307 207 17469 415 367 247 161 16

00

404334

8470

––

RituximabObservation

HR = 0,55IC95 : 0,44-0,68p < 0,001

Mois

Su

rvie

san

s p

rog

ress

ion

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0

1,0

60 12 24 30 42 48 6018 36 54

Observation

Rituximab maintenance

NB: Data differ slightly from published abstract

74,9 %

57,5 %

Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.

Etude PRIMA

PRIMA Update: Consistent benefitacross subgroups

Favours maintenance Favours observation

Hazard ratio (HR)Subgroup

All

R-CHOPR-CVPR-FCM

CR/CRuPR

< 60≥ 60

FLIPl = 2FLIPl < 1

FLIPl > 3

FemaleMale

Category

All

Induction Chemotherapy

Response to Induction

Age

FLIPl Index

Sex

0 1 2 3

IC 95%

0,44–0,68

0,39–0,650,45–1,020,13–2,24

0,44–0,740,32–0,72

0,37–0,650,47–0,94

0,21–0,720,30–0,640,51–0,92

0,45–0,870,36–0,64

n

1018

768

28222

720291

624394

216

431370

485533

HR *

0,55

0,51

0,540,68

0,570,48

0,490,67

0,39

0,680,44

0,630,48

* Non-stratified analysis.Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.

PRIMA: Conversion from PR to CR was higher with MabThera maintenance vs observation

After inductionAfter maintenance:PR patients only

CR/CRu PR PD Missing

Randomised toMabTheramaintenance

Randomised toobservation

n = 360 n = 139

n = 360 n = 152

51.8%

24.5%

18.0%

5.8%

29.6%

27.0%

38.2%

5.3%

Salles GA et al. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:abstr. 8004.