Casasnovas, Olivier

Abstract Background: Despite recent therapeutic advances in AS cHL, PET-adaptive chemotherapy-based regimens remain a first-line treatment option, especially for patients (pts) without access to novel agents. Most PET-adaptive regiments start with either 2 cycles of escBEACOPP (escBEACOPP2) or ABVD (ABVD2) prior to interim PET assessment (iPET), followed by treatment de-escalation or intensification by iPET result. There have been no direct comparisons of escBEACOPP2 vs ABVD2 PET-adaptive regimens. Additionally, the AS-Hodgkin Lymphoma International Prognostication Index (A-HIPI) score (Rodday JCO 2023) has not been fully explored in escBEACOPP2 regimens. Therefore, we utilized multiple analytic approaches to compare outcomes of PET-adaptive escBEACOPP2 and ABVD2 regimens, while adjusting for and assessing the effect of the baseline A-HIPI score. Methods: Through the global HoLISTIC Consortium (www.hodgkinconsortium.com), we obtained individual patient data from 4 AS clinical trials of newly diagnosed cHL pts treated with PET-adaptive escBEACOPP2 (AHL2011) or ABVD2 (SWOG0816, RATHL, HD0607) regimens. Pts were restricted to age 18 to 65 years (y), stage IIB-IV, and PET-adapted treatment arms. Positive iPET was based on Deauville score >3. Treatment effects of escBEACOPP2 vs ABVD2 (reference) on 5y progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were first evaluated using Cox models. Importantly, baseline disease risk was adjusted for using the 5y PFS or OS A-HIPI score (including stage, sex, age, bulk, lymphocyte count, albumin, white blood cell count), where higher scores indicate higher predicted risk (scale 1-100). The A-HIPI was modeled per 1 standard deviation (SD) increase. Our multistate model (MSM) comprised 4 health states: diagnosis, sustained remission at 1yr, treatment failure, and death from any cause. Pts all started in the diagnosis state and transitioned to other states without return to prior states. We assessed the impact of treatment on transitions (except binary sustained remission at 1y) that involved ≥5 pts per treatment group, adjusting for A-HIPI for all transitions. All effects are reported as adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: 2,381 AS cHL pts were included (n=372 for escBEACOPP2, n=2009 for ABVD2). For escBEACOPP2 and ABVD2 groups (median follow-up 60 and 56 months), respectively, the mean baseline A-HIPI scores (i.e., predicted 5y PFS event rate) were 25.1 (SD=6.3) and 22.9 (SD=6.5), the rates of positive iPET were 11.3% and 17.0%, 5y PFS was 87.0% and 79.5%, and 5y OS was 96.3% and 94.6%. In Cox models, escBEACOPP2 was associated with significantly improved PFS compared to ABVD2 (aHR=0.54, 95% CI=0.39-0.73); the aHR for OS was 0.67 (95% CI=0.37-1.19). Notably, higher risk A-HIPI score was associated with significantly worse PFS (aHR=1.42, 95% CI=1.31-1.54) and OS (aHR=1.60, 95% CI=1.47-1.76), independent of treatment. In the MSM, the effect of escBEACOPP2 compared to ABVD2 regimens was modeled in 3 transitions with adjustment for A-HIPI score: those treated with escBEACOPP2 had lower likelihood of treatment failure with (aHR=0.38, 95% CI=0.22-0.66) or without (aHR=0.61, 95% CI=0.40-0.92) sustained remission at 1y; the aHR for treatment failure to death was 0.55 (95% CI=0.25-1.22). Higher risk baseline A-HIPI score was associated with higher likelihood of treatment failure and death without sustained remission at 1y (aHR=1.43, 95% CI=1.28-1.61 and aHR=2.50, 95% CI=1.80-3.49, respectively). Furthermore, higher risk baseline A-HIPI score was associated with higher likelihood of treatment failure after achieving sustained remission at 1y (aHR=1.29, 95% CI=1.12-1.48) as well as death after treatment failure (aHR=1.54, 95% CI=1.27-1.86). Conclusions: Comparing newly diagnosed adult AS cHL PET-adaptive regimens with adjustment for baseline A-HIPI score, we found pts treated with escBEACOPP2 on AHL2011 had improved PFS versus pooled pt data from 3 ABVD2 trials. Using MSM, we further demonstrated that escBEACOPP2 was associated with a lower likelihood of treatment failure with or without achieving sustained remission at 1yr. In addition, baseline A-HIPI score was associated with PFS and OS, which was independent of treatment. Finally, higher baseline A-HIPI scores maintained prognostic impact throughout the disease course, including increased risk of treatment failure for pts in remission at 1yr and death after treatment failure.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) poses a challenge in hematology given its varied symptoms, and the complex interplay between disease and treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The phase 3 POLARIX study demonstrated superior progression-free survival and a similar safety profile with polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) vs R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) in patients with previously untreated DLBCL. Here, we evaluate HRQoL through patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to fully characterize the patient experience in the POLARIX study. Changes from baseline in HRQoL, lymphoma symptoms, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were assessed, as well as incidence and severity of common symptoms by PROs vs clinician-reported adverse events (AEs). Baseline characteristics of PRO-evaluable patients (N = 874) were consistent. Comparison between PROs and clinician-reported AEs revealed a notable discordance; patients generally reported a higher incidence of symptoms than clinicians, emphasizing the need for patient-centric tools to accurately capture the patient experience. Both treatments exhibited rapid and sustained improvements in HRQoL and lymphoma symptoms, with the most substantial improvements seen in global health status/QoL, lymphoma symptoms, fatigue, role, emotional, and social functioning. GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, and vomiting) were generally similar between treatment arms and returned to baseline levels after treatment completion. These HRQoL data underscore the complementarity of PROs, as an adjunct to clinician-reported AEs, in evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of new treatments, including Pola-R-CHP, which may represent a new benchmark for patient-reported HRQoL in previously untreated DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03274492.

Abstract Outcomes in classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) have steadily improved; however, additional therapies are needed for patients who relapse or do not respond to novel agents. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of camidanlumab tesirine (Cami), an anti-CD25 antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with relapsed/refractory cHL after brentuximab vedotin/programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitor therapies from the phase 2 ADCT-301-201 study. Eligible patients were adults with cHL who had received ≥3 previous lines of systemic therapy (or ≥2 if ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant). Patients received 45 μg/kg Cami (IV, once every 3 weeks) in cycles 1 to 2, followed by 30 μg/kg IV once every 3 weeks for ≤1 year. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) per 2014 Lugano classification. Secondary end points included complete response rate (CRR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). In total, 117 patients were enrolled with a median age of 37.0 years (range, 19-87). The ORR was 70.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 60.9-78.2), with a CRR of 33.3% (95% CI, 24.9-42.6). The median PFS was 9.13 months (95% CI, 5.3-15.0); median OS was not reached. Thirty-three (28.2%) patients discontinued treatment because of treatment-emergent adverse events; the most common reasons were skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (n = 10 [8.5%] patients), infections and infestations (n = 5 [4.3%]), and nervous systems disorders (n = 5 [4.3%]). Guillain-Barré–type or polyradiculopathy-type events occurred in 8 (6.8%) patients. Cami was efficacious in this heavily pretreated population; however, the efficacy was overshadowed by substantial issues with the safety profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04052997.

12100 Background: The safety profiles of novel agents are mainly based on clinician-reported adverse events (AEs) from clinical trials. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) may better represent the treatment burden experienced by patients (pts) compared with clinician-reported AEs. Using data from POLARIX, a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase 3 international study (NCT03274492), we previously presented PRO and clinician-reported data showing similar rates of neuropathy (Trněný et al. 2022). Here, we evaluate the reporting of other common symptoms using PRO and clinician-reported data in POLARIX. Methods: POLARIX methods were previously described (Tilly et al. 2022); this analysis included all pts with PRO data. PRO and clinician-reported data described the incidence and severity of fatigue, constipation, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Clinician-reported severity grading was based on the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) v4.0. PROs were collected using the European Organisation Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), which was administered to pts at clinic visits on Day 1 of Cycles 1 (baseline), 2, 3, and 5, and end of treatment (EOT). PRO severity scores included ‘A little’, ‘Quite a bit’, and ‘Very much’. Results: Overall, 825 pts were evaluable. From baseline to EOT, PROs showed a higher incidence of symptoms compared with clinicians for fatigue (98% vs 27%), constipation (68% vs 29%), diarrhea (56% vs 26%), nausea (58% vs 40%), and vomiting (24% vs 15%). PRO severity scores of ‘Quite a bit’ or ‘Very much’ were reported in 33% of pts for fatigue, 29% for constipation, 17% for diarrhea, 19% for nausea, and 7% for vomiting. Clinicians reported Grade ≥2 symptoms in 11% of pts for fatigue, 11% for constipation, 11% for diarrhea, 14% for nausea, and 6% for vomiting. Conclusions: In POLARIX, pts reported a higher incidence and severity of symptoms compared with clinicians. Although distinct scales were used, the differences in symptom rates reported by pts and clinicians were clinically meaningful. These data may have implications for symptom management, including physician evaluation and communication of symptom expectations for pts. Reporting of symptoms by PROs should be incorporated into clinical trials as an adjunct to standard AE reporting to better characterize the patient experience. Clinical trial information: NCT03274492 . [Table: see text]

Abstract Abstract 3637 Background: A recent large genome-wide association study confirmed the important role of the major histocompatibility complex in classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL) susceptibility (rs6903608), but also identified significant associations with genetic variants outside of the HLA region at chromosomal regions 2p16.1 (REL, rs1432295), 8q24.21 (PVT1, rs2608053, rs2019960), and 10p14 (GATA3, rs501764, rs485411). These single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) are localized in or near important genes involved in lymphoma pathogenesis: REL, which encodes for c-rel, is a member of NFkB pathway; PVT1, which is downstream of the MYC locus, encodes for non-coding microRNAs, some of which have oncogenic properties; and GATA3, which is a critical transcriptional factor for priming lymphoid T-cells for Th2 phenotype, is aberrantly expressed in HL. We investigated whether these six SNPs described in cHL etiology also influence the outcome of newly diagnosed cHL patients in two independent cohorts. Patients and Methods: The first cohort consisted of 342 cHL patients from the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte (GELA) who were prospectively enrolled between 1998 and 2002. The second cohort consisted of 259 patients prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). DNA for genotyping was extracted from a blood samples collected at diagnosis, and genotyping was conducted using Taqman technology (ABI Prism 7000, Applied Biosystems) for HLA-DRA, PVT1, GATA3 and PCR-based restriction fragment length polymorphism for REL in GELA cohort and Illumina iSelect for the 6 SNPs in MER cohort. Both cohorts were followed for disease progression, re-treatment and death. In the GELA series, the median age was 32 years (range, 15–93), 57% were male, and 72% had an Ann Arbor stage I–II. Histology was nodular sclerosis in 84%, and 29% of available cases (n=40/140) were EBV positive. In the MER series, the median age was 38 years (range, 18–89), 53% were male, and 53% had an Ann Arbor stage I-II. Nodular sclerosis was the most common subtype (62%) and 23 of 115 available cases were EBV positive (20%). The International Prognostic Score (IPS) was 0–1 in 46% and 52% of GELA and MER patients, respectively. ABVD regimen was used for 60% and 88% of the GELA and MER patients, respectively. The 5-year progression free survival (PFS) was 83% and 75% in GELA and MER cohorts, respectively. We estimated the prognostic value of each individual SNP for PFS for allelic and genotypic (dominant and recessive) modes of transmission in each series. In order to increase power, we then performed a meta-analysis of the two studies. Results: Consistent with prior reports, the minor allele frequencies for REL (rs1432295), HLA-DRA (rs6903608), PVT1 (rs2608053), PVT1 (rs2019960), GATA3 (rs501764) and GATA3 (rs485411) were 0.44, 0.50, 0.43, 0.29, 0.22, 0.28 in the GELA and 0.46, 0.41, 0.46, 0.27, 0.25, 0.31 in the MER series, respectively. In GELA, GATA3 (rs501767) was associated with PFS in the ordinal model (HR=1.66, 95%CI 1.11–2.49, P=.01), while there were suggestive associations for PVT1 (rs2608053) (HR=1.76, 95%CI 0.95–3.26, P=.07) and REL (rs1432295) (HR=0.63, 95%CI 0.37–1.06, P=.08) in the dominant model. In the MER, PVT1 (rs2608053) was associated with PFS in the ordinal model (HR=1.42, 95%CI 0.99–2.03, P=.06), while there was a suggestive association with HLA-DRA (rs6903608) in the dominant model (HR=0.64, 95%CI 0.39–1.05, P=.08) for whole cohort but also for EBV negative cHL (HR=0.41, 95%CI 0.17–0.99, P=.05). In a meta-analysis of the two studies, PVT1 (rs2608053) was significantly associated with PFS in the ordinal (HR=1.34, 95%CI 1.04–1.73, P=.02) and the dominant (HR=1.88, 95%CI 1.20–2.95, P=.006) models. Further adjustment for IPS had minimal impact on these associations (ordinal HR=1.30, 95%CI 1.00–1.70; dominant HR=1.78, 95%CI 1.13–2.83). Patients with PVT1(rs2608053) GG, GA, AA genotypes had a 5-year PFS rate of 83%, 74% and 73% in GELA and 86%, 70%, and 73% in the MER, respectively. Conclusions: The non-HLA cHL susceptibility locus PVT1 (rs2608053) was associated with PFS in two independent cohorts of cHL cases, and after adjustment for the IPS. While associations with GATA3 and REL were only observed in one of the studies, their evaluation in other studies is warranted. Functional studies of PVT1 in cHL pathogenesis should be pursued. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

We recently defined event‐free survival at 24 months (EFS24) as a clinically relevant outcome for patients with DLBCL. Patients who fail EFS24 have very poor overall survival, while those who achieve EFS24 have a subsequent overall survival equivalent to that of the age‐ and sex‐matched general population. Here, we develop and validate a clinical risk calculator (IPI24) for EFS24. Model building was performed on a discovery dataset of 1,348 patients with DLBCL and treated with anthracycline‐based immunochemotherapy. A multivariable model containing age, Ann Arbor stage, normalized serum LDH, ALC, ECOG performance status, bulky disease, and sex was identified. The model was then applied to an independent validation dataset of 1,177 DLBCL patients. The IPI24 score estimates the probability of failing to achieve the EFS24 endpoint for an individual patient. The IPI24 model showed superior discriminatory ability (c‐statistic = 0.671) in the validation dataset compared to the IPI (c‐statistic = 0.649) or the NCCN‐IPI (c‐statistic = 0.657). After recalibration of the model on the combined dataset, the median predicted probability of failing to achieve EFS24 was 36% (range, 12–88%), and the IPI24 showed an EFS24 gradient in all IPI groups. The IPI24 also identified a significant percentage of patients with high risk disease, with over 20% of patients having a 50% or higher risk of failing to achieve EFS24. The IPI24 provides an individual patient level probability of achieving the clinically relevant EFS24 endpoint. It can be used via electronic apps. Am. J. Hematol. 91:179–184, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.