Savage, Kerry J.

Abstract With the introduction of large-scale molecular profiling methods and high-throughput sequencing technologies, the genomic features of most lymphoid neoplasms have been characterized at an unprecedented scale. Although the principles for the classification and diagnosis of these disorders, founded on a multidimensional definition of disease entities, have been consolidated over the past 25 years, novel genomic data have markedly enhanced our understanding of lymphomagenesis and enriched the description of disease entities at the molecular level. Yet, the current diagnosis of lymphoid tumors is largely based on morphological assessment and immunophenotyping, with only few entities being defined by genomic criteria. This paper, which accompanies the International Consensus Classification of mature lymphoid neoplasms, will address how established assays and newly developed technologies for molecular testing already complement clinical diagnoses and provide a novel lens on disease classification. More specifically, their contributions to diagnosis refinement, risk stratification, and therapy prediction will be considered for the main categories of lymphoid neoplasms. The potential of whole-genome sequencing, circulating tumor DNA analyses, single-cell analyses, and epigenetic profiling will be discussed because these will likely become important future tools for implementing precision medicine approaches in clinical decision making for patients with lymphoid malignancies.

PURPOSE Peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) includes heterogeneous clinicopathologic entities with numerous diagnostic and treatment challenges. We previously defined robust transcriptomic signatures that distinguish common PTCL entities and identified two novel biologic and prognostic PTCL-not otherwise specified subtypes (PTCL-TBX21 and PTCL-GATA3). We aimed to consolidate a gene expression–based subclassification using formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissues to improve the accuracy and precision in PTCL diagnosis. MATERIALS AND METHODS We assembled a well-characterized PTCL training cohort (n = 105) with gene expression profiling data to derive a diagnostic signature using fresh-frozen tissue on the HG-U133plus2.0 platform (Affymetrix, Inc, Santa Clara, CA) subsequently validated using matched FFPE tissues in a digital gene expression profiling platform (nCounter, NanoString Technologies, Inc, Seattle, WA). Statistical filtering approaches were applied to refine the transcriptomic signatures and then validated in another PTCL cohort (n = 140) with rigorous pathology review and ancillary assays. RESULTS In the training cohort, the refined transcriptomic classifier in FFPE tissues showed high sensitivity (> 80%), specificity (> 95%), and accuracy (> 94%) for PTCL subclassification compared with the fresh-frozen–derived diagnostic model and showed high reproducibility between three independent laboratories. In the validation cohort, the transcriptional classifier matched the pathology diagnosis rendered by three expert hematopathologists in 85% (n = 119) of the cases, showed borderline association with the molecular signatures in 6% (n = 8), and disagreed in 8% (n = 11). The classifier improved the pathology diagnosis in two cases, validated by clinical findings. Of the 11 cases with disagreements, four had a molecular classification that may provide an improvement over pathology diagnosis on the basis of overall transcriptomic and morphological features. The molecular subclassification provided a comprehensive molecular characterization of PTCL subtypes, including viral etiologic factors and translocation partners. CONCLUSION We developed a novel transcriptomic approach for PTCL subclassification that facilitates translation into clinical practice with higher precision and uniformity than conventional pathology diagnosis.

7503 Background: To date, an overall survival (OS) benefit from upfront treatment for new treatment combinations over existing approaches has rarely been shown in first-line classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). With the introduction of newer active therapies for relapsed/refractory disease, demonstration of improved OS with first-line therapy has been challenging. In ECHELON-1 (NCT01712490), 5-year follow-up analyses supported the long-term progression-free survival (PFS) benefit with first-line brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) vs doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) in patients (pts) with stage III/IV cHL, independent of interim positron emission tomography status. A+AVD had a manageable long-term safety profile, with numerically fewer second malignancies and a greater number of pregnancies reported vs ABVD (Connors et al, NEJM 2018; Straus et al, Lancet Haematol 2021). We report a prespecified OS analysis after approximately 6 years’ follow-up (cut-off, June 1, 2021). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive up to 6 cycles of A+AVD (n = 664) or ABVD (n = 670) on day 1 and 15 every 28 days. OS was the key secondary endpoint and was an event-driven, pre-specified, alpha-controlled analysis in the intention to treat population. Results: At a median follow-up of 73 months, 39 and 64 OS events occurred in A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively: OS significantly favored A+AVD vs ABVD (HR 0.590; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.396–0.879; p = 0.009). Estimated 6-year OS rates (95% CI) were 93.9% (91.6–95.5) vs 89.4% (86.6–91.7) with A+AVD vs ABVD, respectively. There was a consistent OS benefit for A+AVD vs ABVD across prespecified subgroups. The 6-year PFS estimate was 82.3% (79.1–85.0) vs 74.5% (70.8–77.7) with A+AVD vs ABVD, respectively (HR 0.678 [95% CI 0.532–0.863]). Overall, A+AVD had a comparable long-term safety profile to ABVD. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy continued to resolve or improve in both arms, with 86% (379/443) and 87% (249/286) of cases in the A+AVD and ABVD arms either completely resolving (72% vs 79%) or improving (14% vs 8%) by last follow-up. Fewer second malignancies were reported in the A+AVD vs ABVD arm (23 vs 32). More female patients reported pregnancy (49 vs 28) or live births (42 vs 19 in females) in the A+AVD vs the ABVD arm; no stillbirths were reported. No new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: A+AVD treatment resulted in a statistically significant 41% reduction in the risk of death vs ABVD, with a manageable safety profile consistent with prior reports. These outcomes confirm A+AVD as a preferred option for pts with previously untreated stage III/IV cHL. Clinical trial information: NCT01712490.

Abstract The objective of this study was to explore differences in outcomes between first-line rituximab plus bendamustine (R-B) and R-CHOP/R-DHAP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone, dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin) in transplant-eligible patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). A population-based cohort of 97 patients aged 18 to 65 years with stage II-IV MCL, consecutively treated with R-B was retrospectively identified at BC Cancer. Baseline characteristics, response rates, and outcomes were compared with the cohort of 232 patients with MCL randomized to the R-CHOP/R-DHAP arm of the MCL Younger trial. The primary endpoint was the hazard ratio (HR) of the progression-free survival (PFS) comparison between both groups, adjusted for MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI), Ki67 index, and blastoid/ pleomorphic morphology. Ann Arbor stage, lactate dehydrogenase, MIPI, blastoid morphology, and MCL35 assignments were similar between both groups. The overall response rate (ORR) to R-B was 90% (54% complete response [CR]); 77% of patients proceeded to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and 78% received maintenance rituximab (MR). The ORR to R-CHOP/R-DHAP was 94% (54% CR); 78% proceeded to ASCT and 2% received MR. There were no differences in PFS in unadjusted (HR, 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-1.41; P = .56) or adjusted (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.45-1.37; P = .40) comparisons. There were no clear differences in secondary endpoints in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. This retrospective adjusted comparison of 2 independent cohorts of younger patients with MCL suggests that R-B with ASCT and maintenance rituximab is a feasible and effective first-line treatment, with outcomes comparable to R-CHOP/R-DHAP with ASCT.