Chohan, Karan

Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare, non-Hodgkin lymphoma that remains incurable. Rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody has been the cornerstone of treatment against WM, and its combination with an alkylator, bendamustine, achieves durable remission in treatment-naive patients with symptomatic WM. However, novel “druggable” targets that have been identified within the clonal lymphoplasmacytic cells in WM have resulted in a rapid development of targeted therapies in both the frontline and relapsed and refractory (R/R) settings. Several agents directed against the known targets have shown promising efficacy, with mostly manageable toxicities. The class of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitors has transformed the therapeutic landscape for patients with WM, given their convenient oral dosing and strong efficacy, with high rates of attainment of very good partial response (VGPR). The tolerability of the next-generation BTK inhibitors appears to be superior to that of the first-in-class agent, ibrutinib. Targeted therapies from other classes have also demonstrated efficacy in both single-agent and combination regimens. Inhibitors of proteasome BCL-2, mTOR and PI-3 kinase have demonstrated efficacy in WM. Emerging therapies under investigation will continue to further shape the management paradigm, especially in the R/R setting. These include bispecific antibodies, radiotherapeutic agents and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART) cell therapies. This review outlines the current literature and future direction of targeted therapies in WM.

AbstractWaldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare, indolent lymphoma, that predominately affects the elderly. We report the outcomes of young WM patients, evaluated over five decades, compared to their older counterparts, matched for the time of diagnosis. Between January 1, 1960 and October 31, 2013, 140 (11.8%) WM patients were ≤50 years of age at diagnosis in our database, and their estimated 10‐year overall survival (OS) was 74%, with death attributable to WM in a higher proportion of patients compared to their older (≥65 years) counterparts (91% vs. 58%, p = .0001). Young patients were grouped into three cohorts based on the timing of the initiation of therapy: Group 1 (1960–1977, n = 12), Group 2 (1978–1995, n = 48), and Group 3 (1996–2013, n = 74). Among young patients, there was no disease‐specific survival (DSS) difference across the three periods, [median DSS at 13 years (95% CI 5–23), 16 years (95% CI 14–22), and 15 years (95% CI 10‐NR; p = .41), respectively]. However, DSS for the older cohort incrementally improved (Group 1, median 5.2 years, Group 2: 9.6 years, Group 3: 12 years; p = .05) over these periods. The estimated average years‐of‐life lost for the young cohort was 11.2 years from diagnosis, based on the expected survival for a normal age‐ and sex‐matched population. Despite a protracted disease course, nearly all young patients succumb to their disease. In contrast to the improved survival of the elderly patient population, the evolving treatment strategies in WM have not impacted the outcome of young patients; however, the impact of Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors on this unique patient population remains to be determined.

e19562 Background: Considerable healthcare resource utilization and financial burden have been associated with the treatment of Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM); however, the impact of health insurance status on patient outcomes has not been explored. We aimed to assess the insurance-based outcome relationship in WM using the National Cancer Database (NCDB). Methods: We analyzed patient-level data obtained from the NCDB, a database representing more than 70% of newly diagnosed cancer cases nationwide. All newly diagnosed WM cases (n = 8540) between 2004 to 2017 were identified. Only patients who underwent treatment were included. Insurance status was recorded by assessing the primary payer at the time of diagnosis. Due to Medicare eligibility criteria, age-based (< 65 and ≥65 years) stratified analysis was conducted. Cox proportional hazards model was utilized to analyze survival. Time-to-event analysis was conducted based on date-of-diagnosis using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Results: Analysis was conducted on 3878 patients after meeting inclusion criteria, with a median follow-up time of 54.6 months. Among patients < 65 years (n = 1249; median age: 58 years; male: 62.4%), those with non-private insurance had inferior survival on multivariate analysis (Table) after adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, income, education, treatment center characteristics, and treatment start time. Significant overall survival (OS) differences were seen in those < 65 years (log-rank p < 0.001), with 5-year OS highest among patients with private insurance 91.2%, compared to Medicaid 79.8%, uninsured 77.4%, and Medicare 70.2%. In patients < 65 years, compared to private insurance, uninsured patients were more likely to be of Black race, reside in lower income areas, and be treated at non-academic centers (all p < 0.05). Both Medicaid and Medicare patients < 65 years were more likely to have a higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity index (> 1) and live in areas of lower educational attainment and household income compared to private insurance (all p < 0.05). In patients ≥65 years (n = 2629; median age: 75 years; 60.6% males), no insurance-based OS (log-rank p = 0.096) differences were seen. Conclusions: Based on our study, significant insurance-based disparities exist in WM, where patients < 65 years old who are uninsured, or non-privately insured are at a higher risk of mortality. While the root cause of these differences is not fully elucidated, efforts should focus on ensuring that all patients have equal access to care regardless of primary payer status.[Table: see text]

e19532 Background: The traditional approach to the treatment of early-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) has been combined modality therapy (CMT) with both chemotherapy and radiotherapy (RT). CMT has shown improved disease control, but RT can lead to long-term adverse effects, including secondary malignancies and cardiac toxicity. Multiple clinical trials have assessed treatment de-escalation strategies to chemotherapy-alone regimens, but results are conflicting. We aimed to assess the real-world implications of these trials by comparing patient outcomes based upon treatment with CMT or chemotherapy-alone. Furthermore, we proposed to assess differences in treatment outcomes stratified by disease bulk, favorable/unfavorable disease, and PET2 response. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multi-center cohort study of consecutive adult patients with early-stage (stage IA-IIB) cHL treated between January 2010-December 2020. Baseline characteristics, treatment modality, and outcomes were abstracted by chart review. Available PET2 scans (n=110) were independently reviewed by a blinded nuclear radiologist. Deauville score (DS) ≥4 was characterized as positive (+), and DS≤3 negative (-). All analysis was conducted using intention-to-treat principles based upon the initial treatment plan (CMT or chemotherapy-alone). Results: In 125 patients [58% male, median age 34 (range, 18-78)] with early-stage cHL, CMT was intended in 63 (50%) patients, with chemotherapy-alone in 62 (50%). Bulky disease was observed in 43 (34%), unfavorable disease in 81 (65%), and 15 (14%) were found to be PET2+. With median follow-up of 59.8 months (95%CI, 48.6 to 71.0), 5 (4%) deaths occurred, and 17 (14%) patients had relapsed/refractory disease. No significant differences in overall survival (OS) were seen based upon treatment intention. However, there was substantially reduced progression-free survival (PFS) (Table) with chemotherapy-alone in the whole cohort, and also in those with bulky, unfavorable, and PET2+ disease. No significant PFS differences were seen based upon treatment intention for patients with non-bulky, favorable, or PET2- disease. Conclusions: Based on our real-world experience, CMT appears particularly beneficial for patients with bulky disease, unfavorable prognostic factors, and PET2+ disease. However, while recent trials showed a benefit of CMT in non-bulky, favorable and PET2- patients, chemotherapy-alone may be comparable for these patients in actual clinical practice.[Table: see text]

Abstract Multiple clinical trials have assessed de-escalation strategies from combined modality therapy (CMT) to chemotherapy-alone for the treatment of early-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), confirming similar outcomes. The application of these data to the real-world is limited, however. We conducted a retrospective, multicenter cohort study comparing CMT vs chemotherapy-alone in patients with early-stage cHL (stage IA-IIB) treated between January 2010 and December 2020. Positron emission tomography (PET) scans after chemotherapy cycle 2 (PET2) were independently reviewed by a nuclear radiologist (Deauville score ≥4, positive; ≤3, negative). Patient outcomes were compared by using an intention-to-treat analysis. Among 125 patients (CMT, n = 63; chemotherapy-alone, n = 62) with a median follow-up of 59.8 months (95% CI, 48.6-71.0), no differences in overall survival were observed (5-year overall survival, CMT 98.0% vs chemotherapy-alone 95.1%; log-rank test, P = .38). However, there was reduced progression-free survival (PFS) with chemotherapy-alone among all patients (2-year PFS, CMT 95.1% vs chemotherapy-alone 75.3%; log-rank test, P = .005) and in those with bulky (n = 43; log-rank test, P &lt; .001), unfavorable (n = 81; log-rank test, P = .002), or PET2-positive (n = 15; log-rank test, P = .02) disease. No significant differences in PFS were seen for patients with non-bulky (log-rank test, P = .35), favorable (log-rank test, P = .62), or PET2-negative (log-rank test, P = .19) disease. Based on our real-world experience, CMT seems beneficial for patients with early-stage cHL, especially those with PET2-positive and unfavorable disease. Chemotherapy-alone regimens can lead to comparable outcomes for patients with favorable, non-bulky, or PET2-negative disease. We conclude that although results seen in clinical trials are replicated in certain patient subgroups, other subgroups not fitting trial criteria do poorly when radiotherapy is excluded.