Nelarabine in the Treatment of Refractory T-Cell Malignancies

Nelarabine is a nucleoside analog indicated for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) or T-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma (T-LBL) that is refractory or has relapsed after treatment with at least two chemotherapy regimens. After being first synthesized in the late 1970s and receiving FDA approval in 2005, the appropriate use of nelarabine for refractory hematologic malignancies is still being elucidated. Nelarabine is the prodrug of 9-β-D-arabinofuranosylguanine (ara-G) which when phosphorylated intracellularly to ara-G triphosphate (ara-GTP), preferentially accumulates in cancerous T-cells. Dose-dependent toxicities, including neurotoxicity and myelosuppression, have been documented and may, in turn, limit the ability to appropriately treat the diagnosed malignancy. This article will summarize the pharmacologic properties of nelarabine and will address the current place in therapy nelarabine holds based upon the results of the available clinical trials to date

Gene expression profiling reveals a close relationship between follicular lymphoma grade 3A and 3B, but distinct profiles of follicular lymphoma grade 1 and 2

A linear progression model of follicular lymphomas (FL) FL1, FL2 and FL3A has been favored, since FL3A often co-exist with an FL1/2 component. FL3B, in contrast, is thought to be more closely related to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and both are often simultaneously present in one tumor (DLBCL/FL3B). To obtain more detailed insights into follicular lymphoma progression, a comprehensive analysis of a well-defined set of FL1/2 (n=22), FL3A (n=16), FL3B (n=6), DLBCL/FL3B (n=9), and germinal center B-cell-type diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (n=45) was undertaken using gene expression profiling, immunohistochemical stainings and genetic analyses by fluorescence in situ hybridization. While immunohistochemical (CD10, IRF4/MUM1, Ki67, BCL2, BCL6) and genetic profiles (translocations of BCL2, BCL6 and MYC) delineate FL1-3A from FL3B and DLBCL/FL3B, significant differences were observed between FL1/2 and FL3A upon gene expression profiling. Interestingly, FL3B turned out to be closely related to FL3A, not categorizing within a separate gene expression cluster, and both FL3A and FL3B showed overlapping profiles in between FL1/2 and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Finally, based upon their gene expression pattern, DLBCL/FL3B represent a composite form of FL3B and DLBCL, with the majority of samples more closely resembling the latter. The fact that gene expression profiling clearly separated FL1/2 from both FL3A and FL3B suggests a closer biological relationship between the latter. This notion, however, is in contrast to immunohistochemical and genetic profiles of the different histological FL subtypes that point to a closer relationship between FL1/2 and FL3A, and separates them from FL3B

Primary breast lymphoma: Patient profile, outcome and prognostic factors. A multicentre Rare Cancer Network study

BACKGROUND: To asses the clinical profile, treatment outcome and prognostic factors in primary breast lymphoma (PBL). METHODS: Between 1970 and 2000, 84 consecutive patients with PBL were treated in 20 institutions of the Rare Cancer Network. Forty-six patients had Ann Arbor stage IE, 33 stage IIE, 1 stage IIIE, 2 stage IVE and 2 an unknown stage. Twenty-one underwent a mastectomy, 39 conservative surgery and 23 biopsy; 51 received radiotherapy (RT) with (n = 37) or without (n = 14) chemotherapy. Median RT dose was 40 Gy (range 12-55 Gy). RESULTS: Ten (12%) patients progressed locally and 43 (55%) had a systemic relapse. Central nervous system (CNS) was the site of relapse in 12 (14%) cases. The 5-yr overall survival, lymphoma-specific survival, disease-free survival and local control rates were 53%, 59%, 41% and 87% respectively. In the univariate analyses, favorable prognostic factors were early stage, conservative surgery, RT administration and combined modality treatment. Multivariate analysis showed that early stage and the use of RT were favorable prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: The outcome of PBL is fair. Local control is excellent with RT or combined modality treatment but systemic relapses, including that in the CNS, occurs frequently