Outcomes Associated With Thiotepa-Based Conditioning in Patients With Primary Central Nervous System Lymphoma After Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplant

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) requires induction and consolidation to achieve potential cure. High-dose therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT) is an accepted and effective consolidation strategy for PCNSL, but no consensus exists on the optimal conditioning regimens. To assess the outcomes in patients with PCNSL undergoing AHCT with the 3 most commonly used conditioning regimens: thiotepa/busulfan/cyclophosphamide (TBC), thiotepa/carmustine (TT-BCNU), and carmustine/etoposide/cytarabine/melphalan (BEAM). This observational cohort study used registry data from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry. The Center is a working group of more than 380 transplantation centers worldwide that contributed detailed data on HCT to a statistical center at the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. The participant data were from 603 adult patients with PCNSL who underwent AHCT as initial, or subsequent, consolidation between January 2010 and December 2018. Patients were excluded if they had a non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtype other than diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, systemic non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or HIV; received an uncommon conditioning regimen; or were not in partial remission or complete remission prior to AHCT. Statistical analysis was performed from July 5, 2020, to March 1, 2021. Patients received 1 of 3 conditioning regimens: TBC (n = 263), TT-BCNU (n = 275), and BEAM (n = 65). The primary outcome was progression-free survival. Secondary outcomes included hematopoietic recovery, incidence of relapse, nonrelapse mortality, and overall survival. Of 603 patients, the mean age was 57 (range, 19-77) years and 318 (53%) were male. The 3-year adjusted progression-free survival rates were higher in the TBC cohort (75%) and TT-BCNU cohort (76%) compared with the BEAM cohort (58%) (P = .03) owing to a higher relapse risk in the BEAM cohort (hazard ratio [HR], 4.34; 95% CI, 2.45-7.70; P < .001). In a multivariable regression analysis, compared with the TBC cohort, patients who received TT-BCNU had a higher relapse risk (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.07-2.98; P = .03), lower risk of nonrelapse mortality (NRM) (HR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.29-0.87; P = .01), and similar risk of all-cause mortality more than 6 months after HCT (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.93-2.55; P = .10). Age of 60 years or older, Karnofsky performance status less than 90, and an HCT-comorbidity index greater than or equal to 3 were associated with lower rates of survival across all 3 cohorts. Subgroup analyses demonstrated that patients aged 60 years and older had considerably higher NRM with TBC. In this cohort study, thiotepa-based conditioning regimen was associated with higher rates of survival compared with BEAM, despite higher rates of early toxic effects and NRM; these findings may assist clinicians in choosing between TBC or TT-BCNU based on patient and disease characteristics

Autologous transplantation versus allogeneic transplantation in patients with follicular lymphoma experiencing early treatment failure.

BACKGROUND Early treatment failure (ETF) in follicular lymphoma (FL), defined as relapse or progression within 2 years of frontline chemoimmunotherapy, is a newly recognized marker of poor survival and identifies a high-risk group of patients with an expected 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of approximately 50%. Transplantation is an established option for relapsed FL, but its efficacy in this specific ETF FL population has not been previously evaluated. METHODS This study compared autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) with either matched sibling donor (MSD) or matched unrelated donor (MUD) allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) as the first transplantation approach for patients with ETF FL (age ≥ 18 years) undergoing auto-HCT or allo-HCT between 2002 and 2014. The primary endpoint was OS. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, relapse, and nonrelapse mortality (NRM). RESULTS Four hundred forty FL patients had ETF (auto-HCT, 240; MSD hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [HCT], 105; and MUD HCT, 95). With a median follow-up of 69 to 73 months, the adjusted probability of 5-year OS was significantly higher after auto-HCT (70%) or MSD HCT (73%) versus MUD HCT (49%; P = .0008). The 5-year adjusted probability of NRM was significantly lower for auto-HCT (5%) versus MSD (17%) or MUD HCT (33%; P < .0001). The 5-year adjusted probability of disease relapse was lower with MSD (31%) or MUD HCT (23%) versus auto-HCT (58%; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS Patients with high-risk FL, as defined by ETF, undergoing auto-HCT for FL have low NRM and a promising 5-year OS rate (70%). MSD HCT has lower relapse rates than auto-HCT but similar OS. Cancer 2018;124:2541-51. © 2018 American Cancer Society

Outcomes of rituximab‐BEAM versus BEAM conditioning regimen in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma undergoing autologous transplantation

BACKGROUND Although rituximab-based high-dose therapy is frequently used in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT), data supporting the benefits are not available. Herein, we report the impact of rituximab-based conditioning on auto-HCT outcomes in patients who have DLBCL. METHODS Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry, 862 adult DLBCL patients undergoing auto-HCT between 2003 and 2017 using BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) conditioning regimen were included. All patients received frontline rituximab-containing chemoimmunotherapy and had chemosensitive disease pre-HCT. Early chemoimmunotherapy failure was defined as not achieving complete remission (CR) after frontline chemoimmunotherapy or relapse within 1 year of initial diagnosis. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS The study cohort was divided into 2 groups: BEAM (n = 667) and R-BEAM (n = 195). On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was seen in OS (P = .83) or progression-free survival (PFS) (P = .61) across the 2 cohorts. No significant association between the use of rituximab and risk of relapse (P = .15) or nonrelapse mortality (P = .12) was observed. Variables independently associated with lower OS included older age at auto-HCT (P < .001), absence of CR at auto-HCT (P < .001) and early chemoimmunotherapy failure (P < .001). Older age (P < .0002) and non-CR pre-HCT (P < .0001) were also associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in early infectious complications between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSION In this large registry analysis of DLBCL patients undergoing auto-HCT, the addition of rituximab to the BEAM conditioning regimen had no impact on transplantation outcomes. Older age, absence of CR pre auto-HCT, and early chemoimmunotherapy failure were associated with inferior survival

Outcomes of rituximab-BEAM versus BEAM conditioning regimen in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma undergoing autologous transplantation.

BACKGROUND Although rituximab-based high-dose therapy is frequently used in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients undergoing autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT), data supporting the benefits are not available. Herein, we report the impact of rituximab-based conditioning on auto-HCT outcomes in patients who have DLBCL. METHODS Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry, 862 adult DLBCL patients undergoing auto-HCT between 2003 and 2017 using BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) conditioning regimen were included. All patients received frontline rituximab-containing chemoimmunotherapy and had chemosensitive disease pre-HCT. Early chemoimmunotherapy failure was defined as not achieving complete remission (CR) after frontline chemoimmunotherapy or relapse within 1 year of initial diagnosis. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). RESULTS The study cohort was divided into 2 groups: BEAM (n = 667) and R-BEAM (n = 195). On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was seen in OS (P = .83) or progression-free survival (PFS) (P = .61) across the 2 cohorts. No significant association between the use of rituximab and risk of relapse (P = .15) or nonrelapse mortality (P = .12) was observed. Variables independently associated with lower OS included older age at auto-HCT (P < .001), absence of CR at auto-HCT (P < .001) and early chemoimmunotherapy failure (P < .001). Older age (P < .0002) and non-CR pre-HCT (P < .0001) were also associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in early infectious complications between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSION In this large registry analysis of DLBCL patients undergoing auto-HCT, the addition of rituximab to the BEAM conditioning regimen had no impact on transplantation outcomes. Older age, absence of CR pre auto-HCT, and early chemoimmunotherapy failure were associated with inferior survival

Predictors of Cytokine Release Syndrome and Neurotoxicity in Patients with Large B-Cell Lymphoma and Their Impact on Survival

Background: Autologous CAR-T therapy targeting CD19 is an effective treatment for relapsed or refractory large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). However, morbidity and mortality related to CAR-T toxicity remain significant concerns. This study aims to evaluate the patterns, risk factors, and implications of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) following CD19-CAR-T therapy in LBCL. Methods: This retrospective analysis includes 1916 LBCL patients treated with CD19-CAR-T cell therapy (axicabtagene-ciloleucel [axi-cel] 75% and tisagenlecleucel 25%) between 2018 and 2020 and reported to the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR). Patient demographics, baseline characteristics, treatment-related variables, and clinical outcomes were collected. The incidence, severity and timing of onset of CRS and ICANS (according to median time to onset) were analyzed, factors associated with these outcomes and their impact on overall survival as time dependent covariates were done using Cox Regression multivariate analyses. Results: The median age of the patients was 64 years, with a majority having a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) below 90% (61%) and not receiving bridging therapy (67%). CRS was observed in 75.1% of patients, with 9% experiencing severe CRS (grades ≥ 3). Similarly, 43% of patients experienced ICANS, with 20% having severe ICANS (grade ≥ 3). The median time to toxicity was shorter for CRS (4 days) compared to ICANS (7 days). Nearly all the patients who developed ICANS also experienced CRS (98%; ), and the correlation between these two events and respective severities are shown in the Figure 1a. In the multivariate analyses, factors associated with development of CRS were gender (women, Odds ratio [OR] 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10- 1.76, p=0.006), high LDH at time of infusion (OR 1.56; 95% CI 1.22 - 2.00, p=0.002) and product (axi-cel OR 4.60, 95% CI 3.56 -5.81, p 65 years, OR 1.83; 1.50-2.24, p3 CRS (HR 1.79; 1.41-2.28, p3 ICANS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.34; 95% CI 1.13-1.59, p=0.002) and early onset ICANS (<7 days, HR 1.23; 1.05-1.44, p=0.01) were associated with higher mortality. The impact of severe CRS on survival are shown in the landmark analysis at 30 days from infusion in the figure 1B. Conclusion: In the largest analysis of CD19-CAR-T cell therapy toxicities to date, we observed a high burden of CRS and ICANS among LBCL patients. The CAR T cell product type was consistently associated with higher incidence, shorter onset and higher severity of both toxicities. High LDH, older age and low performance score also influence the severity and onset of these outcomes. Additionally, patients who developed higher grades of CRS/ICANS and earlier onset ICANS had a higher mortality, stressing the need to develop novel strategies to mitigate the incidence and optimize management of these patients to improve their outcomes

Predictive factors and outcomes for ibrutinib in relapsed/refractory marginal zone lymphoma: a multicenter cohort study

Abstract Ibrutinib is effective in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. However, factors associated with response (or lack thereof) to ibrutinib in R/R MZL in clinical practice are largely unknown. To answer this question, we performed a multicenter (25 US centers) cohort study and divided the study population into three groups: “ibrutinib responders”—patients who achieved complete or partial response (CR/PR) to ibrutinib; “stable disease (SD)”; and “primary progressors (PP)”—patients with progression of disease as their best response to ibrutinib. One hundred and nineteen patients met the eligibility criteria with 58%/17% ORR/CR, 29% with SD, and 13% with PP. The median PFS and OS were 29 and 71.4 months, respectively, with no difference in PFS or OS based on the ibrutinib line of therapy or type of therapy before ibrutinib. Patients with complex cytogenetics had an inferior PFS (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.23–7.67, p = 0.02), while those with both complex cytogenetics (HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.03–8.68, p = 0.04) and PP (HR = 13.94, 95% CI 5.17–37.62, p < 0.001) had inferior OS. Only primary refractory disease to first-line therapy predicted a higher probability of PP to ibrutinib (RR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.15–12.33, p = 0.03). In this largest study to date evaluating outcomes of R/R MZL treated with ibrutinib, we show that patients with primary refractory disease and those with PP on ibrutinib are very high-risk subsets and need to be prioritized for experimental therapies

Predictive Factors and Outcomes for Ibrutinib in Relapsed/refractory Marginal Zone Lymphoma: A multicenter Cohort Study

Ibrutinib is effective in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. However, factors associated with response (or lack thereof) to ibrutinib in R/R MZL in clinical practice are largely unknown. To answer this question, we performed a multicenter (25 US centers) cohort study and divided the study population into three groups: ibrutinib responders -patients who achieved complete or partial response (CR/PR) to ibrutinib; stable disease (SD) ; and primary progressors (PP) -patients with progression of disease as their best response to ibrutinib. One hundred and nineteen patients met the eligibility criteria with 58%/17% ORR/CR, 29% with SD, and 13% with PP. The median PFS and OS were 29 and 71.4 months, respectively, with no difference in PFS or OS based on the ibrutinib line of therapy or type of therapy before ibrutinib. Patients with complex cytogenetics had an inferior PFS (HR = 3.08, 95% CI 1.23-7.67, p = 0.02), while those with both complex cytogenetics (HR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.03-8.68, p = 0.04) and PP (HR = 13.94, 95% CI 5.17-37.62, p \u3c 0.001) had inferior OS. Only primary refractory disease to first-line therapy predicted a higher probability of PP to ibrutinib (RR = 3.77, 95% CI 1.15-12.33, p = 0.03). In this largest study to date evaluating outcomes of R/R MZL treated with ibrutinib, we show that patients with primary refractory disease and those with PP on ibrutinib are very high-risk subsets and need to be prioritized for experimental therapies