Advanced Hodgkin lymphoma in the East of England: a 10-year comparative analysis of outcomes for real-world patients treated with ABVD or escalated-BEACOPP, aged less than 60 years, compared with 5-year extended follow-up from the RATHL trial.

Treatment with ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or escalated(e)-BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisolone) remains the international standard of care for advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). We performed a retrospective, multicentre analysis of 221 non-trial ("real-world") patients, aged 16-59 years, diagnosed with advanced-stage HL in the Anglia Cancer Network between 2004 and 2014, treated with ABVD or eBEACOPP, and compared outcomes with 1088 patients in the Response-Adjusted Therapy for Advanced Hodgkin Lymphoma (RATHL) trial, aged 18-59 years, with median follow-up of 87.0 and 69.5 months, respectively. Real-world ABVD patients (n=177) had highly similar 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared with RATHL (PFS 79.2% vs 81.4%; OS 92.9% vs 95.2%), despite interim positron-emission tomography-computed tomography (PET/CT)-guided dose-escalation being predominantly restricted to trial patients. Real-world eBEACOPP patients (n=44) had superior PFS (95.5%) compared with real-world ABVD (HR 0.20, p=0.027) and RATHL (HR 0.21, p=0.015), and superior OS for higher-risk (international prognostic score ≥3 [IPS 3+]) patients compared with real-world IPS 3+ ABVD (100% vs 84.5%, p=0.045), but not IPS 3+ RATHL patients. Our data support a PFS, but not OS, advantage for patients with advanced-stage HL treated with eBEACOPP compared with ABVD and suggest higher-risk patients may benefit disproportionately from more intensive therapy. However, increased access to effective salvage therapies might minimise any OS benefit from reduced relapse rates after frontline therapy

SARS-CoV-2-specific immune responses and clinical outcomes after COVID-19 vaccination in patients with immune-suppressive disease

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) immune responses and infection outcomes were evaluated in 2,686 patients with varying immune-suppressive disease states after administration of two Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines. Overall, 255 of 2,204 (12%) patients failed to develop anti-spike antibodies, with an additional 600 of 2,204 (27%) patients generating low levels (<380 AU ml−1). Vaccine failure rates were highest in ANCA-associated vasculitis on rituximab (21/29, 72%), hemodialysis on immunosuppressive therapy (6/30, 20%) and solid organ transplant recipients (20/81, 25% and 141/458, 31%). SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell responses were detected in 513 of 580 (88%) patients, with lower T cell magnitude or proportion in hemodialysis, allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation and liver transplant recipients (versus healthy controls). Humoral responses against Omicron (BA.1) were reduced, although cross-reactive T cell responses were sustained in all participants for whom these data were available. BNT162b2 was associated with higher antibody but lower cellular responses compared to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccination. We report 474 SARS-CoV-2 infection episodes, including 48 individuals with hospitalization or death from COVID-19. Decreased magnitude of both the serological and the T cell response was associated with severe COVID-19. Overall, we identified clinical phenotypes that may benefit from targeted COVID-19 therapeutic strategies

Incidence and outcomes of post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease after 5365 solid-organ transplants over a 20-year period at two UK transplant centres.

Post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (PTLD) is a life-threatening complication of solid-organ transplantation (SOT). We present the incidence and outcomes of PTLD in a cohort of 5365 SOT recipients over a 20-year period at two UK transplant centres. With a median follow-up of 7.7 years, 142 of 5365 patients have developed PTLD. Cumulative incidence was 18% at five years after multivisceral transplant and 1%-3% at five years following the other SOT types. Twenty-year cumulative incidence was 2%-3% following liver and heart transplantation and 10% following kidney transplantation. Median overall survival (OS) following SOT was 16 years, which is significantly reduced compared with the age-adjusted UK population. There is relatively high early mortality following diagnosis of PTLD and only patients surviving two years regained a longer-term survival approaching the non-PTLD SOT cohort. Of 90 patients with monomorphic PTLD, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 66 were treated with first-line rituximab monotherapy and 24 received first-line rituximab plus chemotherapy. Up-front rituximab monotherapy does not appear to compromise OS, but the number of patients dying from non-lymphoma causes before and after treatment remains high with both treatment approaches. Multivariate analysis of all 90 monomorphic PTLD patients identified an International Prognostic Index (IPI) of 3+ as the strongest pretreatment variable associating with inferior one-year OS

Managing relapsed refractory lymphoma with palliative oral chemotherapy: A multicentre retrospective study.

PEP-C (prednisolone, etoposide, procarbazine and cyclophosphamide) is an orally administered daily chemotherapy regimen used with palliative intent in relapsed refractory lymphoma. To our knowledge, no data on PEP-C have been reported since the original group described the regimen. Here we present a multicentre retrospective cohort reporting our use of PEP-C in 92 patients over an 8-year period. We find that even heavily pretreated lymphoma can respond to PEP-C, particularly low-grade lymphoma (including mantle cell) and lymphoma that was sensitive to the previous line of systemic therapy (chemosensitive). These characteristics may help in the selection of patients likely to derive benefit. The median overall survival of patients with chemosensitive lymphoma treated with PEP-C is 217 days. Within the limitations of a retrospective cohort, we find that PEP-C is well tolerated: the most common toxicity leading to discontinuation is marrow suppression. We suggest that PEP-C should be considered for patients with relapsed refractory lymphoma in two settings: first, where there is no licensed alternative; and second, where the licensed alternative is an intravenous drug and the patient would prefer to choose an oral chemotherapy option