Czuczman, M. S.

8569 Introduction: Relapsed or refractory MCL patients demonstrated a promising overall response rate (ORR) of 53% with a median duration of response (DR) of 13.7 months to single-agent lenalidomide when analyzed as a subset in a recent a phase II study (NHL-002). A supporting international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive NHL. In this report, we analyze the current results from the MCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory MCL and measurable disease 2 cm after at least 1 prior treatment regimen were eligible. Patients received 25 mg of lenalidomide orally once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle. Patients continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: Fifty-four MCL patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response assessment. Median age was 69 years (33–82) and 40 patients (74%) were male. Median time from diagnosis was 3.2 years (0.4–10.4), patients had received a median of 3 prior treatments (1–8), 17 of the patients (32%) had received prior bortezomib therapy (MCL-bortezomib), and 14 (26%) had received a prior stem cell transplant (MCL-stem cell). Response rates are shown in the Table. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (43%), thrombocytopenia (22%) and anemia (11%). Conclusions: This is the second study to demonstrate that lenalidomide oral monotherapy is effective in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory MCL, with manageable side effects. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

e19504 Background: Patients with diffuse large-B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not cured with R-CHOP or high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell rescue have a dismal prognosis. A recent phase II trial (NHL-002) of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) demonstrated a 19% overall response rate (ORR) with a 7-month median duration of response (DR) in the subset of patients with DLBCL. A supporting international phase II trial (NHL-003) of single-agent lenalidomide was initiated for patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive NHL that had received at least one prior treatment and had measurable disease. Herein, we report the data from the DLBCL patients enrolled in this trial. Methods: Patients received 25 mg oral lenalidomide once daily on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle and continued therapy until disease progression or toxicity. The 1999 IWLRC methodology was used to assess response and progression. Results: One hundred-three DLBCL patients were enrolled and were evaluable for response assessment. The median age was 66 years (21–87) and 70 patients (68%) were male. Median time from diagnosis was 2 years (0.4–18.6), patients had received a median of 3 prior treatment regimens (1–10) and 46 of the patients (45%) had received a prior stem cell transplant (DLBCL-stem cell). Response rates are shown in the Table . Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurring in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (34%), thrombocytopenia (18%), asthenia (9%), anemia (8%), leucopenia (7%), back pain (6%) and dyspnea (6%). Conclusions: This international study demonstrates that lenalidomide is active in heavily pre-treated patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL and has manageable side effects. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Background:Lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2) has established efficacy and a tolerable safety profile in patients with previously untreated and relapsed/refractory (R/R) indolent NHL. This includes patients with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) who are generally treated in a similar manner to follicular lymphoma (FL).Aims:Primary results for the AUGMENT study in R/R FL grade 1–3a and MZL showed significantly improved progression‐free survival (PFS) for R2 over R/placebo in the overall population and in the subgroup analyses, with the exception of the MZL subgroup. Given the small sample size for MZL patients, post hoc analyses of baseline characteristics and univariate/multivariate analyses of PFS were conducted to examine possible explanations for these results.Methods:The phase III AUGMENT study randomized patients 1:1 to R2 (lenalidomide PO 20 mg/day (d), d1–21/28 X12 cycles plus rituximab IV 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and d1 of cycles 2–5) or rituximab‐placebo (R/placebo; same dosing schedule). PFS by 2007 IWG (without PET) was the primary endpoint. Post hoc Cox regression models were used for univariate analysis of one risk factor and multivariate analyses including treatment arm and significant risk factors (P < 0.05) from the univariate analyses.Results:A total of 63/358 (18%) MZL patients were part of the overall study population, including n = 14/16 MALT, n = 9/6 splenic, and n = 8/10 nodal MZL subtypes for respective R2 and R/placebo arms. Numerical differences between treatment arms for baseline demographics and disease characteristics for MZL patients favoring the R/placebo arm were: fewer R2 patients had an ECOG score of 0 (55% R2 vs 72% R/placebo), and more R2 (vs R/placebo) patients were older (≥65 y: 68% vs 59%; ≥70 y: 42% vs 38%), were refractory to the last prior regimen (13% vs 3%), had Ann Arbor stage IV disease at enrollment (65% vs 41%), high‐risk MALT‐IPI score (50% vs 19%), elevated LDH (29% vs 19%), B symptoms (13% vs 3%), and high tumor burden per GELF criteria (65% vs 56%). The most common grade 3/4 AEs for MZL patients receiving R2 vs R/placebo, respectively, were neutropenia (47% vs 16%), pneumonia (3% vs 13%), and leukopenia (10% vs 0). A total of 5 deaths occurred in the R2 arm (most associated with progression of disease; 2 deaths occurred early at 3 and 13 days after randomization [one prior to receiving R2 and one 2 days after treatment initiation]) and 2 in the R/placebo arm. Despite worse prognostic features, best response was improved with R2 (vs R/placebo) with ORR = 65% vs 44% (P = 0.13) and CR = 29% vs 13% (P = 0.13), although neither were statistically significant. Improved response rates did not translate into a survival advantage for R2. Median PFS for MZL patients was 20.2 mo R2 vs 25.2 mo R/placebo (HR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.47–2.13; P = 1.0). Univariate analyses showed that several baseline factors were prognostic for MZL patients (P < 0.05): Ann Arbor stage IV, elevated LDH, and unfit for chemotherapy (Table). Multivariate analyses adjusting for the imbalance in these 3 significant prognostic factors showed an adjusted PFS HR of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.20–1.28) favoring the R2 arm, similar to the PFS HR in the overall population (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34–0.63). The univariate and multivariate analyses suggested that the imbalance in baseline prognostic factors impacted PFS results for MZL patients.Summary/Conclusion:Overall, these findings suggest that the PFS results in MZL patients were negatively impacted by the imbalance in baseline prognostic factors and more aggressive disease in the R2 over the R/placebo arm.image