RB but not R‐HCVAD is a feasible induction regimen prior to auto‐HCT in frontline MCL: results of SWOG Study S1106

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136294/1/bjh14480_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136294/2/bjh14480.pd

RB but not R-HCVAD is a feasible induction regimen prior to auto-HCT in frontline MCL: results of SWOG Study S1106

Aggressive induction chemotherapy followed by autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HCT) is effective for younger patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). However, the optimal induction regimen is widely debated. The Southwesterm Oncology Group S1106 trial was designed to assess rituximab plushyperCVAD/MTX/ARAC (hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin and dexamethasone, alternating with high dose cytarabine and methotrexate) (RH) versus rituximab plus bendamustine (RB) in a randomized phase II trial to select a pre-transplant induction regimen for future development. Patients had previously untreated stage III, IV, or bulky stage II MCL and received either 4 cycles of RH or 6 cycles of RB, followed by auto-HCT. Fifty-three of a planned 160 patients were accrued; an unacceptably high mobilization failure rate (29%) on the RH arm prompted premature study closure. The estimated 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 81% vs. 82% and overall survival (OS) was 87% vs. 88% for RB and RH, respectively. RH is not an ideal platform for future multi-centre transplant trials in MCL. RB achieved a 2-year PFS of 81% and a 78% MRD negative rate. Premature closure of the study limited the sample size and the precision of PFS estimates and MRD rates. However, RB can achieve a deep remission and could be a platform for future trials in MCL

Follicular Lymphoma: Recent and Emerging Therapies, Treatment Strategies, and Remaining Unmet Needs

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is a heterogeneous disease with varying prognosis owing to differences in clinical, laboratory, and disease parameters. Although generally considered incurable, prognosis for early- and advanced-stage disease has improved because of therapeutic advances, several of which have resulted from elucidation of the biologic and molecular basis of the disease. The choice of treatment for FL is highly dependent on patient and disease characteristics. Several tools are available for risk stratification, although limitations in their routine clinical use exist. For limited disease, treatment options include radiotherapy, rituximab monotherapy or combination regimens, and surveillance. Treatment of advanced disease is often determined by tumor burden, with surveillance or rituximab considered for low tumor burden and chemoimmunotherapy for high tumor burden disease. Treatment for relapsed or refractory disease is influenced by initial first-line therapy and the duration and quality of the response. Presently, there is no consensus for treatment of patients with early or multiply relapsed disease; however, numerous agents, combination regimens, and transplant options have demonstrated efficacy. Although the number of therapies available to treat FL has increased together with an improved understanding of the underlying biologic basis of disease, the best approach to select the most appropriate treatment strategy for an individual patient at a particular time continues to be elucidated. This review considers prognostication and the evolving treatment landscape of FL, including recent and emergent therapies as well as remaining unmet needs. Implications for Practice: In follicular lymphoma, a personalized approach to management based on disease biology, patient characteristics, and other factors continues to emerge. However, application of current management requires an understanding of the available therapeutic options for first-line treatment and knowledge of current development in therapies for previously untreated and for relapsed or refractory disease. Thus, this work reviews for clinicians the contemporary data in follicular lymphoma, from advances in characterizing disease biology to current treatments and emerging novel therapies

Observational study of lenalidomide in patients with mantle cell lymphoma who relapsed/progressed after or were refractory/intolerant to ibrutinib (MCL-004).

BACKGROUND: The observational MCL-004 study evaluated outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma who received lenalidomide-based therapy after ibrutinib failure or intolerance. METHODS: The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response rate based on the 2007 International Working Group criteria. RESULTS: Of 58 enrolled patients (median age, 71 years; range, 50-89), 13 received lenalidomide monotherapy, 11 lenalidomide plus rituximab, and 34 lenalidomide plus other treatment. Most patients (88%) had received ≥ 3 prior therapies (median 4; range, 1-13). Median time from last dose of ibrutinib to the start of lenalidomide was 1.3 weeks (range, 0.1-21.7); 45% of patients had partial responses or better to prior ibrutinib. Primary reasons for ibrutinib discontinuation were lack of efficacy (88%) and ibrutinib toxicity (9%). After a median of two cycles (range, 0-11) of lenalidomide-based treatment, 17 patients responded (8 complete responses, 9 partial responses), for a 29% overall response rate (95% confidence interval, 18-43%) and a median duration of response of 20 weeks (95% confidence interval, 2.9 to not available). Overall response rate to lenalidomide-based therapy was similar for patients with relapsed/progressive disease after previous response to ibrutinib (i.e., ≥PR) versus ibrutinib-refractory (i.e., ≤SD) patients (30 versus 32%, respectively). The most common all-grade treatment-emergent adverse events after lenalidomide-containing therapy (n = 58) were fatigue (38%) and cough, dizziness, dyspnea, nausea, and peripheral edema (19% each). At data cutoff, 28 patients have died, primarily due to mantle cell lymphoma. CONCLUSION: Lenalidomide-based treatment showed clinical activity, with no unexpected toxicities, in patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma who previously failed ibrutinib therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02341781 . Date of registration: January 14, 2015

American Society of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Center of International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, and European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Clinical Practice Recommendations for Transplantation and Cellular Therapies in Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Autologous (auto-) and allogeneic (allo-) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) are accepted treatment modalities in contemporary treatment algorithms for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy recently received approval for MCL; however, its exact place and sequence in relation to HCT remain unclear. The American Society of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Center of International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation jointly convened an expert panel to formulate consensus recommendations for role, timing, and sequencing of auto-HCT, allo-HCT, and CAR T cell therapy for patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL. The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements. Seventeen consensus statements were generated, with a few key statements as follows: in the first line setting, auto-HCT consolidation represents standard of care in eligible patients, whereas there is no clear role of allo-HCT or CAR T cell therapy outside of clinical trials. In the R/R setting, the preferential option is CAR T cell therapy, especially in patients with MCL failing or intolerant to at least one Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, while allo-HCT is recommended if CAR T cell therapy fails or is infeasible. Several recommendations were based on expert opinion, where the panel developed consensus statements for important real-world clinical scenarios to guide clinical practice. In the absence of contemporary evidence-based data, the panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a formal framework for developing consensus recommendations for the timing and sequence of cellular therapies for MCL

Integrative Analysis of Clinicopathological Features Defines Novel Prognostic Models for Mantle Cell Lymphoma in the Immunochemotherapy Era: A Report from The North American Mantle Cell Lymphoma Consortium

BACKGROUND: Patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) exhibit a wide variation in clinical presentation and outcome. However, the commonly used prognostic models are outdated and inadequate to address the needs of the current multidisciplinary management of this disease. This study aims to investigate the clinical and pathological features of MCL in the immunochemotherapy era and improve the prognostic models for a more accurate prediction of patient outcomes. METHODS: The North American Mantle Cell Lymphoma Project is a multi-institutional collaboration of 23 institutions across North America to evaluate and refine prognosticators for front-line therapy. A total of 586 MCL cases diagnosed between 2000 and 2012 are included in this study. A comprehensive retrospective analysis was performed on the clinicopathological features, treatment approaches, and outcomes of these cases. The establishment of novel prognostic models was based on in-depth examination of baseline parameters, and subsequent validation in an independent cohort of MCL cases. RESULTS: In front-line strategies, the use of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation was the most significant parameter affecting outcomes, for both overall survival (OS, p \u3c 0.0001) and progression-free survival (PFS, p \u3c 0.0001). P53 positive expression was the most significant pathological parameter correlating with inferior outcomes (p \u3c 0.0001 for OS and p = 0.0021 for PFS). Based on the baseline risk factor profile, we developed a set of prognostic models incorporating clinical, laboratory, and pathological parameters that are specifically tailored for various applications. These models, when tested in the validation cohort, exhibited strong predictive power for survival and showed a stratification resembling the training cohort. CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of patients with MCL has markedly improved over the past two decades, and further enhancement is anticipated with the evolution of clinical management. The innovative prognostic models developed in this study would serve as a valuable tool to guide the selection of more suitable treatment strategies for patients with MCL

ABCL-439 Subcutaneous Epcoritamab With Gemcitabine + Oxaliplatin (GemOx) Induced High Response Rates in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Ineligible for Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT)

Context : Patients with R/R DLBCL who fail or are ineligible for ASCT have poor outcomes with standard palliative chemotherapy. Epcoritamab is a subcutaneously administered CD3xCD20 bispecific antibody that demonstrated substantial antitumor activity in R/R DLBCL. Objective : Evaluate the safety and efficacy of epcoritamab + GemOx in patients with R/R DLBCL who are ineligible for ASCT in arm 5 of a phase 1/2, open-label trial (EPCORE NHL-2; NCT04663347). Patients : Adults with R/R CD20+ DLBCL who failed or were ineligible for ASCT were included. As of December 1, 2021, 27 patients (median age, 71 y) were treated. Interventions : Patients received subcutaneous epcoritamab (QW, cycle [C] 1–3; Q2W, C4–9; Q4W, C≥10) and GemOx (Q2W, C1–4) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity (28 d/C). Step-up dosing and prophylactic corticosteroids were required. Results : Of the 27 patients (epcoritamab 24 mg, n=3; 48 mg, n=24), most were stage IV (56%), primary refractory (56%), and/or refractory to last therapy (70%). Median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1–13), and median follow-up was 6.0 mo (range, 1.0–11.1), with treatment ongoing in 16 patients (59%). The most common treatment-emergent AEs were CRS (70%), thrombocytopenia (70%), neutropenia (56%), anemia (52%), and infections (52%). CRS events were all grade (G) 1–2, with most cases in C1; all cases resolved. One patient had ICANS (G3). Six patients (22%) had G5 AEs: unrelated to epcoritamab by the investigator in 4 patients; epcoritamab contribution could not be ruled out in 2 patients. The overall response rate for the 25 efficacy-evaluable patients was 92% by PET-CT; 60% had a complete metabolic response (CMR), and 32% had a partial metabolic response (PMR). At data cutoff, the longest duration of response was 6.9 mo. All 3 patients with prior CAR T remained on treatment and in response (2 had CMR and 1 had PMR). Conclusions : In this R/R population with high unmet need, no unexpected safety findings were observed for epcoritamab + GemOx. These initial data are encouraging and warrant further clinical evaluation. Funding: This study was funded by Genmab A/S and AbbVie

Survival following salvage therapy for primary refractory peripheral T‐cell lymphomas (PTCL)

Optimal salvage therapy for primary refractory peripheral T‐cell lymphomas (PTCL) and the role of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (SCT) remain poorly defined. We conducted a retrospective review of clinical outcomes and prognostic factors in a single‐center cohort of 93 patients with primary refractory PTCL, defined as progression during first‐line therapy or relapse within 6 months of its completion. Clinical outcomes were poor in this population, with median event‐free survival (EFS) of 3.5 months, median overall survival (OS) of 9.1 months, and 34% 3‐year survival. Outcomes were comparable in patients who progressed through first‐line therapy and patients who achieved CR/PR and subsequently relapsed within 6 months. A majority exhibited high‐risk features and had intermediate to high risk IPI, which correlated with inferior outcomes. There was no difference in outcomes between patients who received single‐agent salvage regimens and patients who underwent traditional, multi‐agent salvage regimens. Thus, participation in well‐designed clinical trials should be encouraged in this population. Additionally, there may be a trend toward improved EFS and OS in patients who underwent autologous or allogeneic SCT compared to patients who achieved CR or PR but were not transplanted.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142498/1/ajh24992.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/142498/2/ajh24992_am.pd

Clinical application of next generation sequencing in lymphoma.

Successful treatment of relapsed/refractory and rare subtypes of lymphomas remains a therapeutic challenge. Though the use of tumor profiling is increasing, little is described about how providers ultimately utilize this information in clinical decision-making. We reviewed 92 adult lymphoma patients who underwent an IRB-approved tumor sequencing protocol at the University of Michigan, MI-ONCOSEQ. Of this cohort, 60 had a targeted treatment suggested by their test results, and 11 patients ultimately underwent the MI-ONCOSEQ recommended therapy. One obtained complete response based on precision treatment recommendations. The two main barriers for targeted treatment utilization included inopportune timing (the patient either was sequenced too early or too late in their disease course) and clinical trial availability. While this study demonstrates the success of sequencing lymphomas for the identification of novel therapies, it also underlines the clinical challenges, namely the optimal timing and availability of trials, inherent in the successful application of this technology