Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).

© Todd Buchanan 2017

An additional presentation has been added to the late-breaking abstract session of the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

The session was expanded from six abstracts to seven this year because of a record number of “exciting” submissions, according to ASH Secretary Robert A. Brodsky, MD, of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.

“We received 98 late-breaking abstracts, which is a record,” Dr. Brodsky said.

“They were so exciting this year that we added a seventh, and, quite frankly, we could have added several more, but we just didn’t have time in the meeting.”

Dr. Brodsky discussed this year’s late-breaking abstracts during a recent press briefing.

Abstract LBA-1 reports results of rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Compared to placebo, rivaroxaban significantly reduced VTE and VTE-related death during treatment but not over the entire study period.

Abstract LBA-2 describes a phase 3, randomized trial comparing daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplant. The addition of daratumumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 45%.

Abstract LBA-3 details results with HemoTypeSC, a test used to detect sickle cell trait and sickle cell disease. The test correctly identified all phenotypes in the 1,000 children studied.

Abstract LBA-4 describes a randomized, phase 3 study comparing ibrutinib plus rituximab to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in younger patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Investigators found that ibrutinib plus rituximab provided significantly better progression-free and overall survival than the three-drug combination.

Abstract LBA-5 details a strategy for direct oral anticoagulant use in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing surgery. Investigators say the strategy is likely to be “practice-changing” and incorporated into guidelines.

Abstract LBA-6 ­covers a trial of emapalumab in patients with primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Emapalumab, which was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, produced responses in most of the 34 patients studied and had a favorable safety profile, according to investigators.

Abstract LBA-7 reports the discovery of a recurrent mutation in BCL2 that confers resistance to venetoclax in patients with progressive CLL. Investigators say this mutation could be a biomarker of CLL relapse.

© Todd Buchanan 2017

An additional presentation has been added to the late-breaking abstract session of the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

The session was expanded from six abstracts to seven this year because of a record number of “exciting” submissions, according to ASH Secretary Robert A. Brodsky, MD, of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.

“We received 98 late-breaking abstracts, which is a record,” Dr. Brodsky said.

“They were so exciting this year that we added a seventh, and, quite frankly, we could have added several more, but we just didn’t have time in the meeting.”

Dr. Brodsky discussed this year’s late-breaking abstracts during a recent press briefing.

Abstract LBA-1 reports results of rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Compared to placebo, rivaroxaban significantly reduced VTE and VTE-related death during treatment but not over the entire study period.

Abstract LBA-2 describes a phase 3, randomized trial comparing daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplant. The addition of daratumumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 45%.

Abstract LBA-3 details results with HemoTypeSC, a test used to detect sickle cell trait and sickle cell disease. The test correctly identified all phenotypes in the 1,000 children studied.

Abstract LBA-4 describes a randomized, phase 3 study comparing ibrutinib plus rituximab to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in younger patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Investigators found that ibrutinib plus rituximab provided significantly better progression-free and overall survival than the three-drug combination.

Abstract LBA-5 details a strategy for direct oral anticoagulant use in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing surgery. Investigators say the strategy is likely to be “practice-changing” and incorporated into guidelines.

Abstract LBA-6 ­covers a trial of emapalumab in patients with primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Emapalumab, which was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, produced responses in most of the 34 patients studied and had a favorable safety profile, according to investigators.

Abstract LBA-7 reports the discovery of a recurrent mutation in BCL2 that confers resistance to venetoclax in patients with progressive CLL. Investigators say this mutation could be a biomarker of CLL relapse.

© Todd Buchanan 2017

An additional presentation has been added to the late-breaking abstract session of the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

The session was expanded from six abstracts to seven this year because of a record number of “exciting” submissions, according to ASH Secretary Robert A. Brodsky, MD, of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland.

“We received 98 late-breaking abstracts, which is a record,” Dr. Brodsky said.

“They were so exciting this year that we added a seventh, and, quite frankly, we could have added several more, but we just didn’t have time in the meeting.”

Dr. Brodsky discussed this year’s late-breaking abstracts during a recent press briefing.

Abstract LBA-1 reports results of rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE). Compared to placebo, rivaroxaban significantly reduced VTE and VTE-related death during treatment but not over the entire study period.

Abstract LBA-2 describes a phase 3, randomized trial comparing daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone to lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for transplant. The addition of daratumumab reduced the risk of disease progression or death by 45%.

Abstract LBA-3 details results with HemoTypeSC, a test used to detect sickle cell trait and sickle cell disease. The test correctly identified all phenotypes in the 1,000 children studied.

Abstract LBA-4 describes a randomized, phase 3 study comparing ibrutinib plus rituximab to fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in younger patients with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Investigators found that ibrutinib plus rituximab provided significantly better progression-free and overall survival than the three-drug combination.

Abstract LBA-5 details a strategy for direct oral anticoagulant use in patients with atrial fibrillation undergoing surgery. Investigators say the strategy is likely to be “practice-changing” and incorporated into guidelines.

Abstract LBA-6 ­covers a trial of emapalumab in patients with primary hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis. Emapalumab, which was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, produced responses in most of the 34 patients studied and had a favorable safety profile, according to investigators.

Abstract LBA-7 reports the discovery of a recurrent mutation in BCL2 that confers resistance to venetoclax in patients with progressive CLL. Investigators say this mutation could be a biomarker of CLL relapse.

follicular lymphoma

Phase 3 results suggest the biosimilar product CT-P10 is equivalent to rituximab in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma (FL).

Overall response rates were similar—both exceeding 80%—in patients who received CT-P10 and those who received rituximab.

In addition, adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable between the treatment arms.

Larry W. Kwak, MD, PhD, of City of Hope in Duarte, California, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.

CT-P10 was approved by the European Commission in 2017 and was recommended for approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee last month.

The phase 3 trial of CT-P10 included 258 patients with stage II-IV low-tumor-burden FL. They were randomized to receive CT-P10 (n=130) or rituximab (n=128).

Patients received intravenous CT-P10 or rituximab weekly for 4 weeks as induction therapy. Patients experiencing disease control went on to a maintenance phase with their assigned treatment, given every 8 weeks for six cycles, followed by another year of maintenance therapy with CT-P10 for those still on study.

Efficacy

The overall response rate at 7 months was 83% in patients randomized to CT-P10 and 81% in those randomized to rituximab.

The complete response rates were 28% and 34%, respectively. The unconfirmed complete response rates were 5% and 2%, respectively. And the partial response rates were 51% and 46%, respectively.

The two treatments were deemed therapeutically equivalent, as the two-sided 90% confidence intervals for the difference in proportion of responders between CT-P10 and rituximab were within the prespecified equivalence margin of 17%.

Safety

Treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 71% of patients in the CT-P10 arm and 67% of those in the rituximab arm.

The most common treatment-emergent AEs (in the CT-P10 and rituximab arms, respectively) were:

• Infusion-related reactions (31% and 29%)
• Infections (27% and 21%)
• Worsening neutropenia (22% for both)
• Upper respiratory tract infection (12% and 11%)
• Worsening anemia (10% and 14%)
• Worsening thrombocytopenia (8% and 7%)
• Fatigue (7% and 9%)
• Diarrhea (5% for both)
• Nausea (5% for both)
• Urinary tract infection (4% and 5%)
• Headache (3% and 5%).

Serious AEs were reported in six patients in the CT-P10 arm and three patients in the rituximab arm.

Two serious AEs—myocardial infarction and constipation—in the CT-P10 arm were considered related to treatment. None of the serious AEs in the rituximab arm were considered treatment-related.

Two patients in the CT-P10 arm discontinued treatment due to AEs—one due to myocardial infarction and one due to dermatitis. There were no AE-related discontinuations in the rituximab arm.

There were two deaths in the CT-P10 arm as of the cutoff date (January 4, 2018). One was due to myocardial infarction, and one was due to respiratory failure. The myocardial infarction was considered possibly related to treatment.

This trial was sponsored by Celltrion, the company developing CT-P10. Three study authors are employees of the company.

Dr. Kwak and several other authors not employed by Celltrion reported disclosures related to the company. Authors also reported relationships with Novartis, Roche, AbbVie, Celgene, and Takeda, among other entities.

follicular lymphoma

Phase 3 results suggest the biosimilar product CT-P10 is equivalent to rituximab in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma (FL).

Overall response rates were similar—both exceeding 80%—in patients who received CT-P10 and those who received rituximab.

In addition, adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable between the treatment arms.

Larry W. Kwak, MD, PhD, of City of Hope in Duarte, California, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.

CT-P10 was approved by the European Commission in 2017 and was recommended for approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee last month.

The phase 3 trial of CT-P10 included 258 patients with stage II-IV low-tumor-burden FL. They were randomized to receive CT-P10 (n=130) or rituximab (n=128).

Patients received intravenous CT-P10 or rituximab weekly for 4 weeks as induction therapy. Patients experiencing disease control went on to a maintenance phase with their assigned treatment, given every 8 weeks for six cycles, followed by another year of maintenance therapy with CT-P10 for those still on study.

Efficacy

The overall response rate at 7 months was 83% in patients randomized to CT-P10 and 81% in those randomized to rituximab.

The complete response rates were 28% and 34%, respectively. The unconfirmed complete response rates were 5% and 2%, respectively. And the partial response rates were 51% and 46%, respectively.

The two treatments were deemed therapeutically equivalent, as the two-sided 90% confidence intervals for the difference in proportion of responders between CT-P10 and rituximab were within the prespecified equivalence margin of 17%.

Safety

Treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 71% of patients in the CT-P10 arm and 67% of those in the rituximab arm.

The most common treatment-emergent AEs (in the CT-P10 and rituximab arms, respectively) were:

• Infusion-related reactions (31% and 29%)
• Infections (27% and 21%)
• Worsening neutropenia (22% for both)
• Upper respiratory tract infection (12% and 11%)
• Worsening anemia (10% and 14%)
• Worsening thrombocytopenia (8% and 7%)
• Fatigue (7% and 9%)
• Diarrhea (5% for both)
• Nausea (5% for both)
• Urinary tract infection (4% and 5%)
• Headache (3% and 5%).

Serious AEs were reported in six patients in the CT-P10 arm and three patients in the rituximab arm.

Two serious AEs—myocardial infarction and constipation—in the CT-P10 arm were considered related to treatment. None of the serious AEs in the rituximab arm were considered treatment-related.

Two patients in the CT-P10 arm discontinued treatment due to AEs—one due to myocardial infarction and one due to dermatitis. There were no AE-related discontinuations in the rituximab arm.

There were two deaths in the CT-P10 arm as of the cutoff date (January 4, 2018). One was due to myocardial infarction, and one was due to respiratory failure. The myocardial infarction was considered possibly related to treatment.

This trial was sponsored by Celltrion, the company developing CT-P10. Three study authors are employees of the company.

Dr. Kwak and several other authors not employed by Celltrion reported disclosures related to the company. Authors also reported relationships with Novartis, Roche, AbbVie, Celgene, and Takeda, among other entities.

follicular lymphoma

Phase 3 results suggest the biosimilar product CT-P10 is equivalent to rituximab in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma (FL).

Overall response rates were similar—both exceeding 80%—in patients who received CT-P10 and those who received rituximab.

In addition, adverse event (AE) profiles were comparable between the treatment arms.

Larry W. Kwak, MD, PhD, of City of Hope in Duarte, California, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.

CT-P10 was approved by the European Commission in 2017 and was recommended for approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee last month.

The phase 3 trial of CT-P10 included 258 patients with stage II-IV low-tumor-burden FL. They were randomized to receive CT-P10 (n=130) or rituximab (n=128).

Patients received intravenous CT-P10 or rituximab weekly for 4 weeks as induction therapy. Patients experiencing disease control went on to a maintenance phase with their assigned treatment, given every 8 weeks for six cycles, followed by another year of maintenance therapy with CT-P10 for those still on study.

Efficacy

The overall response rate at 7 months was 83% in patients randomized to CT-P10 and 81% in those randomized to rituximab.

The complete response rates were 28% and 34%, respectively. The unconfirmed complete response rates were 5% and 2%, respectively. And the partial response rates were 51% and 46%, respectively.

The two treatments were deemed therapeutically equivalent, as the two-sided 90% confidence intervals for the difference in proportion of responders between CT-P10 and rituximab were within the prespecified equivalence margin of 17%.

Safety

Treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 71% of patients in the CT-P10 arm and 67% of those in the rituximab arm.

The most common treatment-emergent AEs (in the CT-P10 and rituximab arms, respectively) were:

• Infusion-related reactions (31% and 29%)
• Infections (27% and 21%)
• Worsening neutropenia (22% for both)
• Upper respiratory tract infection (12% and 11%)
• Worsening anemia (10% and 14%)
• Worsening thrombocytopenia (8% and 7%)
• Fatigue (7% and 9%)
• Diarrhea (5% for both)
• Nausea (5% for both)
• Urinary tract infection (4% and 5%)
• Headache (3% and 5%).

Serious AEs were reported in six patients in the CT-P10 arm and three patients in the rituximab arm.

Two serious AEs—myocardial infarction and constipation—in the CT-P10 arm were considered related to treatment. None of the serious AEs in the rituximab arm were considered treatment-related.

Two patients in the CT-P10 arm discontinued treatment due to AEs—one due to myocardial infarction and one due to dermatitis. There were no AE-related discontinuations in the rituximab arm.

There were two deaths in the CT-P10 arm as of the cutoff date (January 4, 2018). One was due to myocardial infarction, and one was due to respiratory failure. The myocardial infarction was considered possibly related to treatment.

This trial was sponsored by Celltrion, the company developing CT-P10. Three study authors are employees of the company.

Dr. Kwak and several other authors not employed by Celltrion reported disclosures related to the company. Authors also reported relationships with Novartis, Roche, AbbVie, Celgene, and Takeda, among other entities.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

A retrospective study suggests elderly patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are more likely to die, but not relapse, within a year of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT).

The rate of non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1 year was significantly higher for elderly patients than for middle-aged or young patients.

However, the 3-year rate of relapse was similar across the age groups.

Charalampia Kyriakou, MD, PhD, of University College London in the U.K., and her colleagues reported these findings in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The investigators analyzed 3,919 patients with NHL who underwent allo-HSCT between 2003 and 2013.

The patients had follicular lymphoma (n=1,461), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=1,192), mantle cell lymphoma (n=823), and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (n=443).

At the time of transplant, about 85% of patients were chemo-sensitive, with the remainder being chemo-refractory.

Results

The investigators compared outcomes in patients assigned to three age groups—young (18-50), middle-aged (51-65), and elderly (66-77).

NRM at 1 year was 13% for young patients, 20% for middle-aged patients, and 33% for elderly patients (P<0.001).

Overall survival at 3 years was 60% in young patients, 54% in middle-aged patients, and 38% in the elderly (P<0.001).

In contrast to these significant associations between age and survival, the rate of relapse at 3 years remained relatively consistent—30% in young patients, 31% in middle-aged patients, and 28% in elderly patients (P=0.355).

The increased risk of NRM in elderly patients could not be fully explained by comorbidities, although these were more common in the elderly.

After analyzing information from a subset of patients, the investigators concluded that “the presence of comorbidities is a significant risk factor for NRM and survival, but this does not fully explain the outcome disadvantages in our [elderly] group.”

Therefore, age remains an independent risk factor.

The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

A retrospective study suggests elderly patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are more likely to die, but not relapse, within a year of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT).

The rate of non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1 year was significantly higher for elderly patients than for middle-aged or young patients.

However, the 3-year rate of relapse was similar across the age groups.

Charalampia Kyriakou, MD, PhD, of University College London in the U.K., and her colleagues reported these findings in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The investigators analyzed 3,919 patients with NHL who underwent allo-HSCT between 2003 and 2013.

The patients had follicular lymphoma (n=1,461), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=1,192), mantle cell lymphoma (n=823), and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (n=443).

At the time of transplant, about 85% of patients were chemo-sensitive, with the remainder being chemo-refractory.

Results

The investigators compared outcomes in patients assigned to three age groups—young (18-50), middle-aged (51-65), and elderly (66-77).

NRM at 1 year was 13% for young patients, 20% for middle-aged patients, and 33% for elderly patients (P<0.001).

Overall survival at 3 years was 60% in young patients, 54% in middle-aged patients, and 38% in the elderly (P<0.001).

In contrast to these significant associations between age and survival, the rate of relapse at 3 years remained relatively consistent—30% in young patients, 31% in middle-aged patients, and 28% in elderly patients (P=0.355).

The increased risk of NRM in elderly patients could not be fully explained by comorbidities, although these were more common in the elderly.

After analyzing information from a subset of patients, the investigators concluded that “the presence of comorbidities is a significant risk factor for NRM and survival, but this does not fully explain the outcome disadvantages in our [elderly] group.”

Therefore, age remains an independent risk factor.

The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

A retrospective study suggests elderly patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) are more likely to die, but not relapse, within a year of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT).

The rate of non-relapse mortality (NRM) at 1 year was significantly higher for elderly patients than for middle-aged or young patients.

However, the 3-year rate of relapse was similar across the age groups.

Charalampia Kyriakou, MD, PhD, of University College London in the U.K., and her colleagues reported these findings in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The investigators analyzed 3,919 patients with NHL who underwent allo-HSCT between 2003 and 2013.

The patients had follicular lymphoma (n=1,461), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=1,192), mantle cell lymphoma (n=823), and peripheral T-cell lymphoma (n=443).

At the time of transplant, about 85% of patients were chemo-sensitive, with the remainder being chemo-refractory.

Results

The investigators compared outcomes in patients assigned to three age groups—young (18-50), middle-aged (51-65), and elderly (66-77).

NRM at 1 year was 13% for young patients, 20% for middle-aged patients, and 33% for elderly patients (P<0.001).

Overall survival at 3 years was 60% in young patients, 54% in middle-aged patients, and 38% in the elderly (P<0.001).

In contrast to these significant associations between age and survival, the rate of relapse at 3 years remained relatively consistent—30% in young patients, 31% in middle-aged patients, and 28% in elderly patients (P=0.355).

The increased risk of NRM in elderly patients could not be fully explained by comorbidities, although these were more common in the elderly.

After analyzing information from a subset of patients, the investigators concluded that “the presence of comorbidities is a significant risk factor for NRM and survival, but this does not fully explain the outcome disadvantages in our [elderly] group.”

Therefore, age remains an independent risk factor.

The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.

and David Joseph Russell

Bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM) and CXCR4 mutations, according to a new study.

Researchers assessed the impact of treatment with bortezomib and rituximab in patients with WM, based on their CXCR4 mutation status.

The team found no significant difference in progression-free survival or overall survival between patients with CXCR4 mutations and those with wild-type CXCR4.

Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported this discovery in Blood.

The researchers’ main analysis included 43 patients with WM, 17 (39.5%) of whom had a CXCR4 mutation.

All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations.

The patients were treated with bortezomib and rituximab, either upfront (n=14) or in the relapsed/refractory (n=29) setting, as part of a phase 2 trial.

Bortezomib was given at 1.6 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for six cycles, and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.

The median follow-up was 90.7 months.

The researchers found no significant difference between CXCR4-mutated and wild-type patients when it came to progression-free survival (P=0.994) or overall survival (P=0.407).

The researchers repeated their analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.

“We report, for the first time, that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote.

“Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”

The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work here may be different than what is seen with bortezomib in other cancers.

“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma,” the researchers wrote.

“However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM, there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data.”

The researchers recommended that this theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations.

Another thing to be determined, they said, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.

and David Joseph Russell

Bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM) and CXCR4 mutations, according to a new study.

Researchers assessed the impact of treatment with bortezomib and rituximab in patients with WM, based on their CXCR4 mutation status.

The team found no significant difference in progression-free survival or overall survival between patients with CXCR4 mutations and those with wild-type CXCR4.

Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported this discovery in Blood.

The researchers’ main analysis included 43 patients with WM, 17 (39.5%) of whom had a CXCR4 mutation.

All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations.

The patients were treated with bortezomib and rituximab, either upfront (n=14) or in the relapsed/refractory (n=29) setting, as part of a phase 2 trial.

Bortezomib was given at 1.6 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for six cycles, and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.

The median follow-up was 90.7 months.

The researchers found no significant difference between CXCR4-mutated and wild-type patients when it came to progression-free survival (P=0.994) or overall survival (P=0.407).

The researchers repeated their analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.

“We report, for the first time, that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote.

“Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”

The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work here may be different than what is seen with bortezomib in other cancers.

“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma,” the researchers wrote.

“However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM, there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data.”

The researchers recommended that this theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations.

Another thing to be determined, they said, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.

and David Joseph Russell

Bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM) and CXCR4 mutations, according to a new study.

Researchers assessed the impact of treatment with bortezomib and rituximab in patients with WM, based on their CXCR4 mutation status.

The team found no significant difference in progression-free survival or overall survival between patients with CXCR4 mutations and those with wild-type CXCR4.

Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and his colleagues reported this discovery in Blood.

The researchers’ main analysis included 43 patients with WM, 17 (39.5%) of whom had a CXCR4 mutation.

All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations.

The patients were treated with bortezomib and rituximab, either upfront (n=14) or in the relapsed/refractory (n=29) setting, as part of a phase 2 trial.

Bortezomib was given at 1.6 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days for six cycles, and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m² on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.

The median follow-up was 90.7 months.

The researchers found no significant difference between CXCR4-mutated and wild-type patients when it came to progression-free survival (P=0.994) or overall survival (P=0.407).

The researchers repeated their analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.

“We report, for the first time, that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote.

“Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”

The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work here may be different than what is seen with bortezomib in other cancers.

“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma,” the researchers wrote.

“However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM, there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data.”

The researchers recommended that this theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations.

Another thing to be determined, they said, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.

This study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.