Citations

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) accounts for approximately 24% of new cases of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the US each year. Up to 50% of patients relapse or are refractory (R/R) to the standard first-line treatment option, R-CHOP. The anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody tafasitamab, in combination with lenalidomide (LEN), is an NCCN preferred regimen for transplant-ineligible patients with R/R DLBCL and received accelerated approval in the US (July 2020) and conditional marketing authorization in Europe (August 2021) and other countries, based on data from the L-MIND study. The recommended dose of tafasitamab is 12 mg/kg by intravenous infusion, administered in combination with LEN 25 mg for 12 cycles, followed by tafasitamab monotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tafasitamab + LEN is associated with durable responses in patients with R/R DLBCL. The majority of clinically significant treatment-associated adverse events are attributable to LEN and can be managed with dose modification and supportive therapy. We provide guidelines for the management of patients with R/R DLBCL treated with tafasitamab and LEN in routine clinical practice, including elderly patients and those with renal and hepatic impairment, and advice regarding patient education as part of a comprehensive patient engagement plan. Our recommendations include LEN administration at a reduced dose if required in patients unable to tolerate the recommended dose. No dose modification is required for tafasitamab in special patient populations.

Abstract BACKGROUND Emavusertib, an oral interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase 4 (IRAK4) inhibitor, targets toll-like receptor (TLR) and interleukin-1 receptor (IL-1R) signaling pathway in B-cell proliferation. IRAK4 forms a Myddosome complex with MYD88 adaptor protein and drives overactivation of NF-κB, causing inflammation and tumor growth. Emavusertib has been reported to be well tolerated and active as monotherapy in heavily pretreated relapsed/refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). In a murine PDX model of primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL), emavusertib crossed the blood-brain barrier, resulting in tumor response and prolonged survival. In combination with Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors, emavusertib showed in vivo anti-cancer synergy in B-cell NHL. METHODS This is an ongoing open-label trial (NCT03328078) in patients with R/R NHL. Currently, we are in the dose escalation portion of combination therapy to evaluate safety and efficacy following treatment of emavusertib at dose levels of 200 or 300mg BID with ibrutinib at full prescribed dose. As of May 6th, 2022, 13 patients have been treated with emavusertib+ibrutinib combination therapy. RESULTS Among the 13 patients, two were diagnosed with R/R PCNSL and had several prior lines of anti-cancer therapy. Emavusertib in combination with ibrutinib (560 mg daily) appeared to be well tolerated in these two subjects. One patient experienced Gr3 treatment-related adverse events (thrombocytopenia, muscle weakness, pain). The preliminary efficacy data demonstrated one CR and one SD. The patient who achieved CR after the combination therapy was originally intolerant to high-dose methotrexate based chemoimmunotherapy and did not achieve complete remission after switching to ibrutinib, providing early clinical evidence of CNS penetration and anti-tumor activity of emavusertib. CONCLUSION In R/R PCNSL, these preliminary data suggest that combination therapy has a tolerable safety profile with promising anti-cancer activity and may overcome ibrutinib resistance.

Abstract Activated B cell (ABC) type diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), double hit lymphoma (DHL) and double expressor lymphoma (DEL) have poor outcomes to frontline R‐CHOP but impact of these molecular features on outcomes of relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease is not well‐characterized. We evaluated the association of diagnostic cell of origin (COO), double hit and double expressor status with overall survival after first relapse in DLBCL patients who were enrolled into the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) cohort. COO was available from immunohistochemistry (IHC) using Hans criteria or gene expression profiling (GEP) (Nanostring) on the diagnostic FFPE biopsy. Of 373 pts with R/R DLBCL, 278 had COO by IHC: 152 were GCB, 107 were non‐GCB. One hundred and fourty had COO by GEP: 44 were ABC, 65 were GCB and 13 were unclassifiable. Nineteen out of 163 (12%) were DHL; 30 out of 135 (22%) had DEL. COO, either by IHC (2 years OS GCB: 45% [CI 95 : 38–54] vs. non‐GCB: 44% [CI 95 :36–55], p > 0.05) or GEP (2 years OS ABC: 42% [CI 95 : 29–59] vs. GCB: 40% [CI 95 : 30–54], p > 0.05), was not associated with difference in OS. DHL (2 years OS 16 [CI 95 :6–45] vs. 45% [CI 95 : 34–59], p < 0.01) and DEL (2 years OS 33% [CI 95 : 20–56], vs. 50% [CI 95 : 41–60], p < 0.05) had lower OS than non‐DHL and non‐DEL/non‐DHL counterparts, respectively. COO by IHC or GEP was not associated with OS in R/R DLBCL while DHL and DEL were adverse prognostic markers in DLBCL at first relapse.

AbstractDirect comparisons of the effectiveness of the numerous novel therapies in the diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment landscape in a range of head‐to‐head randomized phase 3 trials would be time‐consuming and costly. Comparative effectiveness studies using real‐world data (RWD) represent a complementary approach. Recently, several studies of relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL have used RWD to create observational cohorts to compare patient outcomes with cohorts derived from single‐arm phase 2 trials. Using propensity score methods to balance clinically and prognostically relevant baseline covariates, closely matched patient‐level cohorts can be generated. By incorporating appropriate measures to assess covariate balance and address potential bias in comparative effectiveness study designs, robust comparative analyses can be performed. Results from such studies have been used to supplement regulatory approval of therapies assessed in single‐arm trials. While RWD studies have a greater susceptibility to bias compared to randomized controlled trials, well‐designed and appropriately analyzed studies can provide complementary real‐world evidence on treatment effectiveness.

PURPOSE:High-dose methotrexate (HDMTX; > 500 mg/m2) is an important component of lymphoma therapy. Serum MTX monitoring at 48 hours is the standard approach to identify those at increased risk of developing MTX toxicity. Our aim was to characterize the incidence of complications and their association with MTX levels.METHODS:A retrospective review of our institutional electronic medical record was conducted to identify patients with lymphoma who received HDMTX between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2018. We characterized the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, length of hospital stay (LOS), and 30-day mortality across 48-hour MTX levels. To establish an association between 48-hour MTX levels and the complications listed, we performed chi-square analysis for dichotomous variables and Kruskal-Wallis for nonparametric data. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis was performed to identify the MTX level where AKI grade ≥ 2 was more likely. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify risk factors for this MTX level.RESULTS:We identified 642 patients with 2,804 cycles of HDMTX. The incidence of AKI was 19.1% with AKI grade ≥ 2 making up 21% of cases. Rates of AKI, ICU admission, and 30-day mortality are associated with elevated 48-hour MTX levels. There was a significant increase in median LOS with elevated MTX levels ( P < .001). Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for AKI grade ≥ 2 demonstrated a 48-hour MTX level threshold of 1.28 μmol/L. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed age, male sex, elevated body surface area, higher MTX dose, monotherapy, and first cycle as independent factors.CONCLUSION:Elevated MTX levels are associated with a significant increased rate of AKI, ICU admission, prolonged LOS, and 30-day mortality. Elevated 48-hour MTX levels, particularly > 1.28 μmol/L, should alert clinicians for complications and to initiate measures to reduce MTX levels.

Abstract An enhanced understanding of the molecular heterogeneity of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has opened the door to clinical trials evaluating novel agents with subtype-specific activity. It is an emerging question whether core needle biopsies (CNB) can adequately meet the increasing tissue requirements of these clinical trials. This can potentially lead to selective enrollment of patients who can undergo excisional biopsy (EB). It is also important to know whether patients who can undergo extensive diagnostic work up differ in their disease characteristics and outcomes from those who cannot. In this observational study, we describe the characteristics, outcomes, and adequacy of diagnostic tissue in patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL and primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma who underwent EB vs CNB. Of the 1061 patients, 532 (49.8%) underwent EB and 529 (50.1%) underwent CNB. A significantly higher proportion of patients with CNB had advanced stage disease, an international prognostic index of ≥3, and inadequate tissue for molecular analyses. Patients with CNB had significantly worse 5-year event-free survival (67.6% vs 56.9%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.76; confidence interval [CI]95, 0.6-0.9, P &lt; .001) and 5-year overall survival (76.4% vs 69.2%; HR, 0.8; CI95, 0.6-0.9, P &lt; .001). Thus, patients who underwent CNB have poor-risk features and inferior outcomes on frontline chemoimmunotherapy, are more likely to have inadequate tissue for molecular analyses, and might not meet the tissue requirements of biomarker-driven clinical trials. Thus, the increasing tissue requirements of biomarker-driven clinical trials may result in the exclusion of patients with high-risk DLBCL who need novel agents.

Abstract Low-grade B-cell lymphomas other than follicular and small lymphocytic lymphoma (LGBCL) account for 10% of all B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas. Despite improvements in survival outcomes for these patients, little is known about cause of death (COD) in the rituximab era. For a better understanding, we studied 822 newly diagnosed patients with marginal zone, lymphoplasmacytic, and unclassifiable low-grade B-cell lymphoma prospectively enrolled in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic Specialized Program of Research Excellence Molecular Epidemiology Resource from 2002 to 2015. COD was assigned based on medical record review using a standard protocol. At a median follow-up of 107 months, 219 (27%) patients had died. The incidence of lymphoma-related deaths when pooling across subtypes was lower than non–lymphoma-related deaths (10-year incidence, 8.0%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-10.4 vs 13.6%; 95% CI: 11.2-16.6). The incidence of lymphoma-related deaths varied by subtype, ranging from 3.7% at 10 years in extranodal marginal zone lymphoma to 19.3% in lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma/Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Patients with early progression or retreatment events, defined using event-free survival at 24 months from diagnosis, had significantly higher likelihood of lymphoma-related death compared with patients without early events (10-year estimate: 19.1% vs 5.1%, respectively; P &lt; .001), whereas the rates for non–lymphoma-related death were comparable in patients with or without early events (10-year estimates: 11.0% vs 15.3%, respectively). In conclusion, the most common COD in LGBCLs in the first decade after diagnosis was for causes other than lymphoma. Progression or retreatment within the first 2 years of diagnosis was a strong predictor for risk of lymphoma-related death.