Ketterer, Nicolas

Abstract We have recently reported that event-free survival at 24 months from diagnosis (EFS24) is a robust endpoint for assessment of disease related outcome for newly diagnosed patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated with anthracycline-based immunochemotherapy (IC). Patients who achieve EFS24 following IC have a subsequent overall survival that is equivalent to the age and sex matched general population. The IPI was developed in the pre-rituximab era using OS/EFS endpoints. While the IPI is associated with outcome in the IC era, the original survival estimates for the IPI risk groups are outdated. The IPI is also a discrete risk classifier, with only 6 possible groups. Here we remodel the IPI using EFS24 as the endpoint in a large international cohort of patients treated with IC. This model provides an individual level 0-100% risk of failing to achieve EFS24 for each patient and can be used for patient prognosis, treatment stratification, and risk assessment. Methods Newly diagnosed DLBCL patients treated with immunochemotherapy from the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource, NCCTG N0489 clinical trial, GELA LNH2003B program, and a Lyon, France based hospital registry were included in the original EFS24 study. Patients with a relapse, progression, unplanned re-treatment, or death due to any cause within 730 days of diagnosis were considered a failure for the EFS24 endpoint. Patients alive and progression/relapse free at 730 days from diagnosis with no subsequent treatment following initial IC were considered a success for the EFS24 endpoint. Variables selected for potential model inclusion were the IPI components (age, stage, ECOG PS, number of extranodal sites, and LDH), as well as standard clinical variables typically reported in studies of DLBCL: presence of B-symptoms, bone marrow involvement, bulky disease (>10 cm), and sex. The IPI24, a prognostic model for EFS24, was developed using logistic regression models. Model building began by fitting the classic IPI score (0-5), then allowing individual IPI variables to carry different model weights and number of categories, followed by dropping insignificant variables, finally adding any additional significant variables. Model performance was assessed using bias corrected c-statistics, AIC, and R2 values. Model selection was done using the complete case set with multiple imputation on the full dataset used to refine parameter estimates for the final model. Results 1596 total patients were available for modeling. The median age was 62 (range 18-93) and 53% were male; 33% were IPI 0-1, 25% were IPI 2, 25% were IPI 3, and 17% were IPI of 4-5. The failure rate for achieving EFS24 was 29%. All variables but sex (p=0.33) were univariately associated with EFS24 (p<6.4x10-5). The original IPI had good prognostic ability for EFS24 (c=0.696, p=2.2x10-32). Allowing multiple categories for ECOG PS, stage, and age (continuous) improved model fit and prognostic ability (c=0.727). The number of extranodal sites was not significant when IPI variables were modeled separately and was removed from the model. Sex and bulky disease were additional significant variables when added to the model. Thus, the final IPI24 model contained the following risk predictors: male sex, ECOG PS (0 vs. 1 vs 2 vs 3-4), stage (I vs. II, vs. III vs. IV), LDH (elevated vs. normal range), bulky disease > 10cm, and age (continuous). This model resulted in improved fit and prognostic ability (c=0.749) over the standard IPI (c=0.696, bootstrap p<0.001). Model validation was performed on an additional 158 patients from the SPORE MER and showed good concordance (c=0.697). Additional validation is planned in a larger set of independent patients. Conclusion The IPI24, generated using standard clinical variables, yields an individual risk prediction for failing to achieve EFS24 following IC for treatment of DLBCL. The IPI24 has superior prognostic ability to the standard IPI and can be implemented in the clinic using a nomogram or as a simple electronic application. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Purpose Selection bias in clinical trials has consequences for scientific validity and applicability of study results to the general population. There is concern that patients with clinically aggressive disease may not have enrolled in recent diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) trials due to the consent process and the inability to delay therapy for eligibility evaluation. We have examined the diagnosis-to-treatment interval (DTI) and its association with clinical factors and outcome in a clinic-based observational cohort of patients with DLBCL from the United States. Validation of results was performed in an independent, clinical trial-based cohort from Europe. Patients and Methods Patients were prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa and Mayo Clinic Specialized Programs of Research Excellence Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER; N = 986) or the Lymphoma Study Association (LYSA) LNH-2003 clinical trials program (N = 1,444). All patients received anthracycline-based immunochemotherapy at initial diagnosis. Associations of DTI with clinical factors and outcome were examined. Outcome was assessed using event-free survival at 24 months from diagnosis (EFS24). Results Median (range) DTI was 15 days (0 to 155 days in the MER and 23 days (0 to 215 days) in LYSA. Shorter DTI was strongly associated with adverse clinical factors, including elevated lactate dehydrogenase levels, poor performance status, B symptoms, and higher International Prognostic Index in both cohorts (all P < .001). Longer DTI was associated with improved EFS24 in both the MER (per-week odds ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.74 to .0.87) and LYSA (per-week odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.94); association with EFS24 remained significant after adjustment for International Prognostic Index. Conclusion DTI is strongly associated with prognostic clinical factors and outcome in newly diagnosed DLBCL. DTI should be reported in all clinical trials of newly diagnosed DLBCL and future trials should take steps to avoid selection bias due to treatment delay.

AbstractSingle nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in FCγ‐receptor genes FCGR3A (rs396991) and FCGR2A (rs1801274) influence the affinity of the Fc portion of anti‐CD20 immunoglobulin G1 monoclonal antibody. Their roles in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated with rituximab in combination with anthracycline‐based chemotherapy remain controversial. To address this question, we genotyped FCGR2A and FCGR3A SNPs in two prospective DLBCL cohorts from Lymphoma Study Association trials (N = 554) and Iowa/Mayo Specialized Program Of Research Excellence (N = 580). Correlations with treatment response and hematological toxicity were assessed in Lymphoma Study Association. Correlation with event‐free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) was performed in both cohorts, followed by a meta‐analysis to increase power. Our study shows the absence of correlation between these SNPs and treatment response. Grades 3 and 4 febrile neutropenia during treatment was more frequently observed in FCGR3A VV (39%) than VF (29%) and FF (32%) carriers (p = 0.04). Our analysis for EFS and OS shows that FCGR3A was not associated with outcome. In a meta‐analysis using an ordinal model, FCGR2A (per R allele) was associated with a better EFS (hazard ratio = 0.87; 95%CI, 0.76–0.99; p = 0.04) and OS (hazard ratio = 0.86; 95%CI, 0.73–1.00; p = 0.05) which was not altered after adjustment for the International Prognostic Index. Overall, our data demonstrate that patients with DLBCL with the low‐affinity FCγRIIA RR had an unexpectedly better outcome than FCγRIIA H carriers. Whether rituximab efficacy is improved in FCγRIIA RR patients due a clearance reduction or other functions of FCγRIIA in DLBCL should be investigated (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT00135499, NTC00135499 NCT00140595, NCT00144807, NCT00144755, NCT01087424, and NCT00301821). Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Purpose Studies of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are typically evaluated by using a time-to-event approach with relapse, re-treatment, and death commonly used as the events. We evaluated the timing and type of events in newly diagnosed DLBCL and compared patient outcome with reference population data. Patients and Methods Patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with immunochemotherapy were prospectively enrolled onto the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Specialized Program of Research Excellence Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and the North Central Cancer Treatment Group NCCTG-N0489 clinical trial from 2002 to 2009. Patient outcomes were evaluated at diagnosis and in the subsets of patients achieving event-free status at 12 months (EFS12) and 24 months (EFS24) from diagnosis. Overall survival was compared with age- and sex-matched population data. Results were replicated in an external validation cohort from the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte (GELA) Lymphome Non Hodgkinien 2003 (LNH2003) program and a registry based in Lyon, France. Results In all, 767 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL who had a median age of 63 years were enrolled onto the MER and NCCTG studies. At a median follow-up of 60 months (range, 8 to 116 months), 299 patients had an event and 210 patients had died. Patients achieving EFS24 had an overall survival equivalent to that of the age- and sex-matched general population (standardized mortality ratio [SMR], 1.18; P = .25). This result was confirmed in 820 patients from the GELA study and registry in Lyon (SMR, 1.09; P = .71). Simulation studies showed that EFS24 has comparable power to continuous EFS when evaluating clinical trials in DLBCL. Conclusion Patients with DLBCL who achieve EFS24 have a subsequent overall survival equivalent to that of the age- and sex-matched general population. EFS24 will be useful in patient counseling and should be considered as an end point for future studies of newly diagnosed DLBCL.