Trnĕný, Marek

PURPOSE In large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), use of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) to prevent CNS relapse (so-called CNS prophylaxis) remains controversial. International guidelines continue to recommend HD-MTX in patients deemed ultra high risk (UHR) because of a lack of robust data specific to these subgroups. This study was designed to examine the impact of HD-MTX specifically in UHR patients. METHODS Data from two previous retrospective analyses were combined to produce a cohort of UHR patients (≥1 of the following criteria: CNS international prognostic index score 5-6; testicular, renal/adrenal, or breast involvement; ≥3 extranodal sites), treated with or without HD-MTX. The primary outcome was CNS relapse rate (isolated or concurrent with systemic relapse) measured from diagnosis with additional landmark analysis of all responding patients with no progression event at 6 months. RESULTS Analyses were performed on 1,923 patients meeting UHR criteria. No significant difference in 3-year CNS relapse rate was observed between no HD-MTX (n = 1,051) versus HD-MTX patients (n = 872), including in multivariable analyses adjusting for baseline characteristics (3-year rate, 9.3% v 8.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.57]). Analyses restricted to isolated CNS relapse also confirmed no difference (5.9% v 5.7%; adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.53]). In the landmark analysis (no HD-MTX n = 782, HD-MTX n = 773), no difference in 3-year CNS relapse was observed (6.7% v 6.6%, adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.44]). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest international comparative data set of patients with LBCL with UHR features showing no significant reduction in CNS relapse with HD-MTX in all UHR or in any individual subgroup. Despite inherent limitations of retrospective analyses, the data strongly support previous studies in suggesting HD-MTX prophylaxis has no meaningful benefit for most patients.

The phase III AUGMENT trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01938001 ) demonstrated improved efficacy for lenalidomide plus rituximab (R 2 ) versus rituximab with placebo (R-placebo) in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL). Here, we present the long-term follow-up results and prespecified subgroup analyses of patients with follicular lymphoma (FL), including those 70 years and older. Patients with R/R grade 1 to 3a iNHL were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive R 2 or R-placebo. In this long-term follow-up report, progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed per the investigator. Secondary end points included overall survival (OS) and safety. Of the 358 randomly assigned patients (intent-to-treat [ITT] population), 295 had FL (≥70 years, n = 66). At long-term follow-up (median, 65.9 months), in the ITT iNHL population, PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.50 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.66]) and OS (HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.95]) were improved with R 2 versus R-placebo. Safety findings were consistent with the primary analysis. Improved long-term efficacy with R 2 versus R-placebo and manageable safety with R 2 were observed in patients with FL, including those 70 years and older. With a follow-up of >5 years, data from the AUGMENT trial continue to support the use of R 2 as a standard of care for patients with R/R iNHL.

Abstract A short diagnosis-to-treatment interval independently predicts inferior outcomes in follicular lymphoma. Using international discovery and validation cohorts, we demonstrate its prognostic value beyond established prognostic indices, with implications for risk stratification, clinical trial design, and interpretation.

PURPOSE Although most patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) can expect an indolent course, progressive lymphoma remains the primary cause of death during the first decade after diagnosis. Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) of starting first-line (1L) immunochemotherapy defines a high-risk population with poor survival, but better risk stratification at diagnosis is needed. METHODS The FLIPI24 model was developed and internally validated to predict 24-month event rates using individual data from 4,485 patients treated with 1L immunochemotherapy from 10 observational cohorts of FL. Overall and cause-specific survival was further evaluated in FLIPI24 risk groups. External validation in the 1L immunochemotherapy setting was performed using the prospective observational Lymphoma Epidemiology of Outcomes (LEO) cohort (N = 565) and three randomized phase III trials (N = 3,192); extension to all patients with FL (any 1L therapy) was performed in the LEO cohort (N = 1,445) and its Molecular Epidemiology Resource subcohort (N = 1,074). RESULTS The FLIPI24 model uses age and four blood-based variables (hemoglobin, lactate dehydrogenase, beta-2 microglobulin, and WBC count). FLIPI24 showed consistent performance across validation and extension data sets, which was superior to existing prognostic tools. Across the four external immunochemotherapy validation data sets, patients with high-risk FLIPI24 (23%-32% of patients) had significantly higher 24-month event rates (22%-35%) and inferior 5-year overall survival (77%-83%) compared with patients with low-risk FLIPI24 (29%-31% of patients, 24-month event rates: 10%-12%; 5-year OS: 96%-97%). Results were consistent when evaluating lymphoma-related death and when extended to all patients with FL. CONCLUSION The FLIPI24 model robustly stratifies, at diagnosis, patients with FL at increased risk of lymphoma-related death versus patients with very low lymphoma-related mortality during the first decade after diagnosis. FLIPI24 can be used to enrich future clinical trial designs in newly diagnosed FL.

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) poses a challenge in hematology given its varied symptoms, and the complex interplay between disease and treatment effects on health-related quality of life (HRQoL). The phase 3 POLARIX study demonstrated superior progression-free survival and a similar safety profile with polatuzumab vedotin plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (Pola-R-CHP) vs R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) in patients with previously untreated DLBCL. Here, we evaluate HRQoL through patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments to fully characterize the patient experience in the POLARIX study. Changes from baseline in HRQoL, lymphoma symptoms, and gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms were assessed, as well as incidence and severity of common symptoms by PROs vs clinician-reported adverse events (AEs). Baseline characteristics of PRO-evaluable patients (N = 874) were consistent. Comparison between PROs and clinician-reported AEs revealed a notable discordance; patients generally reported a higher incidence of symptoms than clinicians, emphasizing the need for patient-centric tools to accurately capture the patient experience. Both treatments exhibited rapid and sustained improvements in HRQoL and lymphoma symptoms, with the most substantial improvements seen in global health status/QoL, lymphoma symptoms, fatigue, role, emotional, and social functioning. GI symptoms (diarrhea, constipation, nausea, and vomiting) were generally similar between treatment arms and returned to baseline levels after treatment completion. These HRQoL data underscore the complementarity of PROs, as an adjunct to clinician-reported AEs, in evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of new treatments, including Pola-R-CHP, which may represent a new benchmark for patient-reported HRQoL in previously untreated DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03274492.

Abstract Anti-CD19 immunotherapy tafasitamab is used in combination with lenalidomide in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant. Open-label, phase 1b, First-MIND study assessed safety and preliminary efficacy of tafasitamab + R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) ± lenalidomide as first-line therapy in patients with DLBCL. From December 2019 to August 2020, 83 adults with untreated DLBCL (International Prognostic Index 2-5) were screened and 66 were randomly assigned (33 per arm) to R-CHOP-tafasitamab (arm T) or R-CHOP-tafasitamab-lenalidomide (arm T/L) for 6 cycles. Primary end point was safety; secondary end points included end-of-treatment (EoT) overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate. All patients had ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event, mostly grade 1 or 2. Grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred, respectively, in 57.6% and 12.1% (arm T) and 84.8% and 36.4% (arm T/L) of patients. Nonhematologic toxicities occurred at similar rates among arms. R-CHOP mean relative dose intensity was ≥89% in both arms. EoT ORR was 75.8% (CR 72.7%) in arm T and 81.8% (CR 66.7%) in arm T/L; best ORR across visits was 90.0% and 93.9%. Eighteen-month duration of response and of CR rates were 72.7% and 74.5% (arm T) and 78.7% and 86.5% (arm T/L); 24-month progression-free and overall survival rates were 72.7% and 90.3% (arm T) and 76.8% and 93.8% (arm T/L). Manageable safety and promising signals of efficacy were observed in both arms. Potential benefit of adding tafasitamab + lenalidomide to R-CHOP is being investigated in phase 3 frontMIND (NCT04824092). This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT04134936.

Abstract Purpose: Randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 2/3 trial investigating lenalidomide versus investigator's choice (IC) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Experimental Design: Patients with DLBCL who received ≥2 prior therapies were stratified by DLBCL subtype [germinal center B-cell (GCB) vs. non-GCB; determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC)] and then randomized 1:1 to lenalidomide (25 mg/day, 21 days of 28-day cycle) or IC (gemcitabine, rituximab, etoposide, or oxaliplatin). Crossover to lenalidomide was permitted for IC-treated patients with radiologically confirmed progressive disease. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and subtype analysis [GCB vs. activated B-cell (ABC)] using gene expression profiling (GEP) were exploratory endpoints. Results: Stage 1: 102 DLBCL patients (by IHC: non-GCB, n = 54; GCB, n = 48) received ≥1 dose of lenalidomide or IC. Hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events with lenalidomide versus IC included neutropenia (42.6%; 36.4%), anemia (33.3%; 47.3%), thrombocytopenia (24.1%; 43.6%), and leukopenia (5.6%; 12.7%), respectively. Overall, lenalidomide-treated patients had an ORR of 27.5% versus 11.8% in IC (ORRs were similar regardless of IHC-defined DLBCL subtype). Median PFS was increased in patients receiving lenalidomide (13.6 weeks) versus IC (7.9 weeks; P = 0.041), with greater improvements in non-GCB patients (15.1 vs. 7.1 weeks, respectively; P = 0.021) compared with GCB (10.1 vs. 9.0 weeks, respectively; P = 0.550). Conclusions: The clinical benefit of lenalidomide monotherapy in DLBCL patients was more evident in the non-GCB subtype. Exploratory analyses suggest that this preferential benefit was more pronounced in the GEP-defined ABC population, demonstrating a need for additional studies of lenalidomide in DLBCL using GEP subtyping. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 4127–37. ©2017 AACR.