Table 2.
Best clinical response and Deauville 5-point scale
| All treated patients (n = 61) | Efficacy-evaluable patients (n = 60) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | 95% CI‡ | n (%) | 95% CI‡ | |
| Objective response rate* (CR + PR) | 50 (82) | 70–90.6 | 50 (83) | 71.5–91.7 |
| Complete metabolic response (CMR/CR) | 37 (61) | 47.3–72.9 | 37 (62) | 48.2–73.9 |
| Deauville score = 1 | 14 (23) | 14 (23) | ||
| Deauville score = 2 | 15 (25) | 15 (25) | ||
| Deauville score = 3 | 7 (11) | 6 (10) | ||
| Deauville score = 5† | 1 (2) | 21 (2) | ||
| Partial metabolic response (PMR/PR) | 13 (21) | 11.9–33.7 | 13 (22) | 12.1–34.2 |
| Deauville score = 4 | 7 (11) | 7 (12) | ||
| Deauville score = 5 | 6 (10) | 6 (10) | ||
| No metabolic response (NMR/SD) | 5 (8) | 2.7–18.1 | 5 (8) | 2.8–18.4 |
| Deauville score = 5 | 5 (8) | 5 (8) | ||
| Progressive disease (PMD/PD) | 4 (7) | 1.8–15.9 | 4 (7) | 1.8–16.2 |
| Deauville score = 5 | 4 (7) | 4 (7) | ||
| Clinical progression | 1 (2) | 1 (2) | ||
| NE | 1 (2) | 0 | ||
NE, not evaluable; NMR, no metabolic response; PMD, progressive metabolic disease; PMR, partial metabolic response.
*
CMR/CR, PMR/PR, NMR/SD, and PMD/PD per Lugano classification (Cheson et al, 2014)35, with PET scan assessment required to determine response.
†
Residual area of FDG-avidity on PET scan was biopsied and was not consistent with residual HL.
‡
Two-sided 95% exact CI, computed with use of the Clopper-Pearson method (1934).38