Citations

We present a subset analysis on the adolescent cohort of the S1826 randomized phase three trial, comparing nivolumab, doxorubicin, vinblastine, dacarbazine (N-AVD) to brentuximab vedotin-AVD (BV-AVD) in newly diagnosed advanced-stage (AS, stages III and IV) classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). Among 994 patients enrolled, 24% (n = 240) were age 12-17 years. The 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly higher in the N-AVD group (93% [95% CI, 87 to 96]) compared with the BV-AVD group (82% [95% CI, 73 to 88]; hazard ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.17 to 0.80]). One N-AVD and two BV-AVD patients received protocol-specified residual site radiotherapy (RT). Rates of febrile neutropenia and sepsis were low in both groups. Severe immune-related adverse events were infrequent, although thyroid dysfunction was seen in 7% with N-AVD. Sensory neuropathy (grade ≥2) was more frequent with BV-AVD (14% v 7%) by clinician report. Although premature discontinuation of therapy was reported in 12 N-AVD patients and four BV-AVD patients, no PFS events were noted in the N-AVD group. Patient-reported outcomes indicated less toxicity with N-AVD. N-AVD demonstrated high 3-year PFS in adolescents with AS cHL, with minimal RT use. S1826 exemplifies the benefits of harmonized clinical trial protocols, resulting in timely access to novel agents for adolescents.

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 Background: Although progression-free survival (PFS) in early-stage (ES) classic Hodgkin Lymphoma (cHL) is high, there remains a subset of patients (pts) at higher risk of worse outcomes, particularly in those with unfavorable risk disease. Leveraging pt-level data from within the HoLISTIC (Hodgkin Lymphoma International STudy for Individual Care) Consortium, the E-HIPI was developed in clinical trial pts and validated in real-world registry pts to predict 2-year (y) PFS (Rodday. NEJM Evidence 2025). Continuous, objective, and readily measurable pre-treatment variables were considered, with sex, maximum tumor diameter, albumin, and hemoglobin included as significant predictors. Using the E-HIPI, interactive calculators for pt risk, comparison, and stratification were created (https://rtools.mayo.edu/holistic_ehipi/). Although the E-HIPI was developed and validated in both unfavorable and favorable ES cHL pts, the clinical predictors are primarily markers of unfavorable disease. In the development and initial validation cohorts, 2y PFS was 93.7% and 90.3%, respectively, the C-statistic was 0.63 in both cohorts, calibration was strong with slight underprediction of events in the validation cohort, and the E-HIPI outperformed the historic binary classification of patients as favorable or unfavorable using EORTC criteria. However, since pts in the original E-HIPI development and validation were primarily treated with ABVD chemotherapy protocols, additional validation is needed, particularly among pts with unfavorable ES cHL who were treated initially with more intensive chemotherapeutic platforms (e.g., BEACOPP-based). Thus, we conducted an external validation of the E-HIPI in pts treated on recent unfavorable ES cHL GHSG trials. Methods: The validation cohort included 2367 adults (ages 18 to 60y) with newly-diagnosed unfavorable cHL from randomized phase 3 trials conducted by the GHSG (HD14 von Tresckow. JCO 2012; and HD17 Borchmann. Lancet 2021). We calculated the predicted probability of 2y PFS events based on the E-HIPI model equation (scale 1-100%). Model performance was assessed using discrimination and calibration. Discrimination, which is the model's ability to separate high and low risk pts, was assessed using Harrell's C-statistic. Calibration, which is the model's ability to accurately predict absolute risk, was assessed by comparing observed and predicted probabilities of 2y PFS events within quintiles of predicted probabilities and estimating calibration-in-the-large (predicted minus observed event rate) and the calibration slope. Results: For pts treated on unfavorable GHSG trials, mean age was 33y, 95% had stage II disease, mean baseline E-HIPI score (i.e., predicted 2y PFS event rate) was 6.0% (SD=2.3%), and the observed 2y PFS rate was 96.2% (95%CI: 95.4-97.0%). The C-statistic was 0.65 (95% CI: 0.59-0.70), calibration-in-the-large was 0.02, and the calibration slope was 1.08 (95% CI: 0.52, 1.64). Within the lowest risk E-HIPI quintile, the observed 2y PFS event rate was 1.6%, compared with 6.1% in the highest risk quintile. Conclusions: In external validation of the recently published E-HIPI in pts with cHL treated on unfavorable GHSG trials using more intensive BEACOPP-based protocols, discrimination was similar to the original development and validation cohorts. Collectively, the E-HIPI is a treatment-agnostic prediction tool across varied treatment regimens for unfavorable ES cHL pts. Better 2y PFS in the GHSG trials than in the E-HIPI development and initial validation cohorts may have contributed to mild misclassification, likely reflecting differences in treatment regimens. This may be resolved with recalibration or incorporating granular treatment variables into future models. Additional research is needed to understand E-HIPI performance in pts with favorable disease who have even lower event rates as well as to more fully predict individualized pt outcomes across varied chemotherapy platforms and radiation received for all ES cHL pts.

10019 Background: The reported incidence of second malignant neoplasms (SMN) in long-term survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is derived from patients treated with outdated radiation therapy (RT) techniques. We modeled the risk of SMN in pediatric patients with high-risk classic HL treated with modern mediastinal RT. Methods: In patients who received mediastinal RT on the Children’s Oncology Group study AHOD1331, we modeled the lifetime attributable risk (LAR) at 70 years of age of thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. This value indicates the absolute increased risk of SMN at 70 years of age due to RT, above the baseline population risk (mean baseline rates at 70 years of age are 0.7%, 3.3%, and 8.9% for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma, respectively, https://seer.cancer.gov/data/ ). Results: In 296 patients who received protocol-directed mediastinal RT, median age at diagnosis was 15.1 years, 55% were female, and 98% had large mediastinal adenopathy. Following 5 cycles of chemotherapy, patients received RT targeting the mediastinum based on criteria of this study; in addition, some patients received RT to other supradiaphragmatic sites that contained slowly responding lesions, including the axilla (n = 3, 1%), lung (n = 7, 2.4%), upper neck (n = 4, 1.3%), and lower neck (n = 8, 2.7%). The RT modality was proton therapy in 25.3%, photon intensity modulated RT (IMRT) in 45.6%, and photon 3-dimensional conformal RT (3D-CRT) in 27.7%. The RT prescription dose was 21 Gy in 83% and 30 Gy in 16% who had a partial metabolic response at the completion of chemotherapy. The mean (range) doses to the thyroid, lungs, and breasts were 12.8 Gy (0-30.3), 8.0 Gy (0.1-15.2), and 4.2 Gy (0.2-14.5), respectively. For the complete cohort, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of thyroid carcinoma was 0.063% and of lung carcinoma was 5.34%. For females, the mean LAR at 70 years of age of breast carcinoma was 2.92%. The Table summarizes the LAR for each SMN, stratified by RT modality. Conclusions: In patients treated with mediastinal RT on a recent multi-institutional study of pediatric HL, the predicted long-term risk of SMN is substantially lower than in historical cohorts. Clinicians should consider the toxicity associated with a current RT approach when selecting therapies and counseling patients. Clinical trial information: NCT02166463 , this is a post hoc modeling study that includes patients enrolled on this study. Mean [range] lifetime attributable risk (%) at an attained age of 70 years for thyroid, lung, and breast carcinoma. Thyroid Lung Breast (females) 3D-CRT 0.046 [0.002-0.332]N=81 5.07 [0.12-10.82]N=82 1.82 [0.67-5.98]N=46 IMRT 0.064 [0.001-0.386]N=135 6.24 [2.22-11.79]N=135 4.36 [0.66-8.43]N=76 Proton 0.086 [0-1.160]N=74 4.15 [0.94-7.77]N=75 1.45 [0.17-7.23]N=40