Witzig, T.E.

AbstractHigh‐dose methotrexate (HDMTX) pharmacokinetics (PKs), including the best estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation that reflects methotrexate (MTX) clearance, requires investigation. This prospective, observational, single‐center study evaluated adult patients with lymphoma treated with HDMTX. Samples were collected at predefined time points up to 96 h postinfusion. MTX and 7‐hydroxy‐MTX PKs were estimated by standard noncompartmental analysis. Linear regression determined which serum creatinine‐ or cystatin C‐based eGFR equation best predicted MTX clearance. The 80 included patients had a median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of 68.6 years (IQR 59.2–75.6), 54 (67.5%) were men, and 74 (92.5%) were White. The median (IQR) dose of MTX was 7.6 (IQR 4.8–11.3) grams. Median clearance was similar across three dosing levels at 4.5–5.6 L/h and was consistent with linear PKs. Liver function, weight, age, sex, concomitant chemotherapy, and number of previous MTX doses did not impact clearance. MTX area under the curve (AUC) values varied over a fourfold range and appeared to increase in proportion to the dose. The eGFRcys (ml/min) equation most closely correlated with MTX clearance in both the entire cohort and after excluding outlier MTX clearance values (r = 0.31 and 0.51, respectively). HDMTX as a 4‐h infusion displays high interpatient pharmacokinetic variability. Population PK modeling to optimize MTX AUC attainment requires further evaluation. The cystatin C‐based eGFR equation most closely estimated MTX clearance and should be investigated for dosing and monitoring in adults requiring MTX as part of lymphoma management.

PURPOSE: The benefit of routine pre-emptive screening for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections in patients with cancer before cancer-directed therapies is unclear. Herein, we characterize the outcomes of a cohort of patients with cancer who were diagnosed with COVID-19 by routine screening (RS) in comparison with those diagnosed on the basis of clinical suspicion or exposure history (nonroutine screening [NRS]). METHODS: A multisite prospective observational study was conducted at three major and five satellite campuses of the Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between March 18 and July 31, 2020. The primary outcome was COVID-19–related hospital admission. Secondary outcomes included intensive care unit admissions and all-cause mortality. RESULTS: Five thousand four hundred fifty-two patients underwent RS in the outpatient setting only, and 44 (0.81%) were diagnosed with COVID-19. RS detected 19 additional patients from the scheduled inpatient admissions for surgical or interventional procedures or inpatient chemotherapy. One hundred sixty-one patients were diagnosed with COVID-19 on the basis of NRS. COVID-19–related hospitalization rate (17.5% v 26.7%; P = .14), intensive care unit admission (1.6% v 5.6%; P = .19), and mortality (4.8% v 3.7%; P = .72) were not significantly different between the RS and NRS groups. In the multivariable analysis, age ≥ 60 years (odds ratio, 4.4; P = .023) and an absolute lymphocyte count ≤ 1.4 × 109/L (odds ratio, 9.2; P = .002) were independent predictors of COVID-19–related hospital admission. CONCLUSION: The COVID-19 positivity rate was low on the basis of RS. Comparing the hospital admission and mortality outcomes with the NRS cohort, there were no significant differences. The value of routine pre-emptive screening of asymptomatic patients with cancer for COVID-19 remains low.

AbstractThe development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in long‐term survivors of lymphoma is of increasing importance. Here, we characterize the cumulative incidence and risk factors for CVD in lymphoma patients diagnosed in the current treatment era. From 2002–2015, newly diagnosed lymphoma patients (>18 years) were enrollment into a prospective cohort study that captured incident CVD, consisting of congestive heart failure (CHF), acute coronary syndrome (ACS), valvular heart disease (VHD), and arrhythmia. The cumulative incidence of CVD was calculated with death modeled as a competing risk. We estimated the association of treatment with anthracyclines or radiotherapy and traditional CVD risk factors with incidence of CVD using hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) estimated from Cox regression. After excluding prevalent CVD at lymphoma diagnosis, the study consisted of 3063 patients with a median age of 59 years (range 18–95). The cumulative incidence of CVD at 10‐years was 10.7% (95% CI, 9.5%–12.1%). In multivariable analysis, increasing age (HR = 1.05 per year, p < 0.001), male sex (HR = 1.36, p = 0.02), current smoker (HR = 2.10, p < 0.001), BMI > 30 kg/m2 (HR = 1.45, p = 0.01), and any anthracycline treatment (HR = 1.57, p < 0.001) were all significantly associated with risk of CVD. Anthracyclines were associated with increased risk of CHF (HR = 2.71, p < 0.001) and arrhythmia (HR = 1.61, p < 0.01), but not VHD (HR = 0.84, p = 0.58) or ACS (HR = 1.32, p = 0.24) after adjustment for CVD risk factors. Even in the modern treatment era, CVD remains common in lymphoma survivors and preventive efforts are required that address both treatment and CVD risk factors.

Abstract Comparative data guiding initial therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), an infrequently encountered non‐Hodgkin lymphoma, are sparse. We evaluated three commonly used rituximab‐based frontline regimens: rituximab‐bendamustine (R‐Benda); dexamethasone, rituximab, cyclophosphamide (DRC); and bortezomib, dexamethasone, rituximab (BDR) in 220 treatment‐naïve patients with WM, seen at Mayo Clinic between November 1, 2000 and October 31, 2019. The median follow‐up was 4.5 (95%CI: 4–5) years. The R‐Benda cohort (n = 83) demonstrated superior overall response rate (ORR: 98%), in comparison to DRC (n = 92, ORR: 78%) or BDR (n = 45, ORR: 84%) cohorts, p = 0.003. Similarly, longer progression‐free survival (PFS) was evident with R‐Benda use [median 5.2 vs. 4.3 (DRC) and 1.8 years (BDR), p < 0.001]. The time‐to‐next therapy (TTNT) favored R‐Benda [median, not‐reached, 4.4 (DRC) and 2.6 years (BDR), p < 0.001). These endpoints were comparable between the DRC and BDR cohorts. Overall survival (OS) was similar across the three cohorts, p = 0.77. In a subset analysis of 142 patients genotyped for MYD88 L265P mutation, the ORR, PFS and TTNT were unaffected by the patients' MYD88 signature within each cohort. In conclusion, ORR, PFS and TTNT with R‐Benda are superior compared to DRC or BDR in treatment‐naïve patients with active WM. The patient outcomes with any one of these three regimens are unaffected by the MYD88 L265P mutation status.

Abstract B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma cell survival depends on poorly understood immune evasion mechanisms. In melanoma, the composition of the gut microbiota (GMB) is associated with immune system regulation and response to immunotherapy. We investigated the association of GMB composition and diversity with lymphoma biology and treatment outcome. Patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), marginal zone (MZL), and follicular lymphoma (FL) were recruited at Mayo Clinic, Minnesota, and Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Health. The pretreatment GMB was analyzed using 16S ribosomal RNA gene sequencing. We examined GMB compositions in 3 contexts: lymphoma patients (51) compared with healthy controls (58), aggressive (DLBCL) (8) compared with indolent (FL, MZL) (18), and the association of GMB with immunochemotherapy treatment outcomes (8 responders, 6 nonresponders). Respectively, we found that the pretreatment GMB in lymphoma patients had a distinct composition compared with healthy controls (P &lt; .001); GMB compositions in DLBCL patients were significantly different than indolent patients (P = .01) with a trend toward reduced microbial diversity in DLBCL patients (P = .08); and pretreatment GMB diversity and composition were significant predictors of treatment responses (P = .01). The impact of these pilot results is limited by our small sample size, and should be considered a proof of principle. If validated, our results could lead toward improved treatment outcomes by improving medication stewardship and informing which GMB-targeted therapies should be tested to improve patient outcomes.

PURPOSE Patients with the activated B-cell-like (ABC) subtype of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) historically showed inferior survival with standard rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Phase II studies demonstrated that adding the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide to R-CHOP improved outcomes in ABC-type DLBCL. The goal of the global, phase III ROBUST study was to compare lenalidomide plus R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) with placebo/R-CHOP in previously untreated, ABC-type DLBCL. METHODS Histology and cell-of-origin type were prospectively analyzed by central pathology prior to random assignment and study treatment. Patients with ABC-DLBCL received lenalidomide oral 15 mg/d, days 1-14/21 plus standard R-CHOP21 versus placebo/R-CHOP21 for six cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) per independent central radiology review. RESULTS A total of 570 patients with ABC-DLBCL (n = 285 per arm) were stratified by International Prognostic Index score, age, and bulky disease, and randomly assigned to R2-CHOP or placebo/R-CHOP. Baseline demographics were similar between arms. Most patients completed six cycles of treatment: 74% R2-CHOP and 84% placebo/R-CHOP. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for R2-CHOP versus placebo/R-CHOP were neutropenia (60% v 48%), anemia (22% v 14%), thrombocytopenia (17% v 11%), and leukopenia (14% v 15%). The primary end point of PFS was not met, with a hazard ratio of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.63 to 1.14) and P = .29; median PFS has not been reached for either arm. PFS trends favoring R2-CHOP over placebo/R-CHOP were seen in patients with higher-risk disease. CONCLUSION ROBUST is the first DLBCL phase III study to integrate biomarker-driven identification of eligible ABC patients. Although the ROBUST trial did not meet the primary end point of PFS in all patients, the safety profile of R2-CHOP was consistent with individual treatments with no new safety signals.

PURPOSE Lenalidomide combined with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) (R2CHOP) in untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has shown promising activity, particularly in the activated B-cell–like (ABC) subtype. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG)-ACRIN trial E1412 was a randomized phase II study comparing R2CHOP versus R-CHOP in untreated DLBCL. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL, stage II bulky-IV disease, International Prognostic Index (IPI) ≥ 2, and ECOG performance status ≤ 2 were eligible and randomly assigned 1:1 to R2CHOP versus R-CHOP for six cycles. Tumors were analyzed using the NanoString Lymph2Cx for cell of origin. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in all patients with the co-primary end point of PFS in ABC-DLBCL. Secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR) rate, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Three hundred forty-nine patients were enrolled; 280 patients (145 R2CHOP and 135 R-CHOP) were evaluable: 94 were ABC-DLBCL, 122 germinal center B-cell–like-DLBCL, 18 unclassifiable, and 46 unknowns. Baseline characteristics were well-balanced between arms, and the median age was 66 (range, 24-92); 70% of patients had stage IV disease; 34%, 43%, and 24% had IPI 2, 3, and 4 or 5, respectively. Myelosuppression was more common in the R2CHOP arm. The ORR and CR rate were 92% and 68% in R-CHOP and 97% ( P = .06) and 73% ( P = .43) in the R2CHOP arm, respectively. The median follow-up was 3.0 years; R2CHOP was associated with a 34% reduction in risk of progression or death versus R-CHOP (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66 95% CI, 0.43 to 1.01) and 3-year PFS of 73% versus 61%, one-sided P = .03, and an improvement in OS (83% and 75% at 3 years; HR, 0.67; one-sided P = .05). The PFS HR for R2CHOP was 0.67 for ABC-DLBCL, one-sided P = .1. CONCLUSION In this signal-seeking study, the addition of lenalidomide to R-CHOP (R2CHOP) improved outcomes in newly diagnosed DLBCL including patients with ABC-DLBCL.

PURPOSE Exclusion of patients needing urgent treatment or requiring novel biomarkers before enrollment has impacted the ability to enroll real-world patients in frontline trials of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The impact of baseline organ function–based eligibility criteria on this effect and clinical trial exclusion is less well-understood. METHODS Consecutive patients with newly diagnosed lymphoma were enrolled from 2002 to 2015 into the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) of the University of Iowa and Mayo Clinic Lymphoma Specialized Program of Research Excellence. The current analysis includes 1,265 patients with DLBCL receiving standard immunochemotherapy. Organ function parameters were identified from criteria for hemoglobin, absolute neutrophil count, platelet count, creatinine clearance, and bilirubin, as reported in frontline DLBCL trials. Abstracted laboratory values from MER were used to determine the percent (%) of patients excluded. Outcomes and cause-of-death analyses comparing ineligible and eligible groups in MER were conducted. An interactive online tool was developed to estimate exclusions based on organ function for future trial design. RESULTS Between 9% and 24% of MER patients with DLBCL receiving standard immunochemotherapy were excluded on the basis of baseline organ function alone. Ineligible patients based on organ function had significantly inferior event-free survival (hazard ratios, 1.67-2.16), overall survival (hazard ratios, 1.87-2.56), and event-free survival at 24 months (odds ratio, 1.71-2.16). Ineligible patients were more likely to die from lymphoma progression than increased therapy-related complications. CONCLUSION Current national and international trials exclude up to 24% of patients from participation on the basis of organ function alone. A significant difference in the outcomes, notably lymphoma-related death, suggests issues with generalization and potential exclusion of high-risk patients. These data will help future clinical trial development and meet US Food and Drug Administration and ASCO recommendations to increase trial accrual.