Citations

BACKGROUNDIn an ECOG‐ACRIN Cancer Research Group study (E1496), maintenance rituximab (MR) was reported to prolong progression‐free survival (PFS) in comparison with observation (OBS) alone in patients with indolent lymphoma after induction chemotherapy. Here the long‐term follow‐up of the same patient cohort is presented.METHODSPatients with indolent lymphoma received induction chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP). Patients with stable disease or a better response were then randomized to weekly rituximab (375 mg/m2 × 4 doses) every 6 months for 2 years (MR) or to OBS. The primary endpoint was PFS; the secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), response rate, and toxicities.RESULTSOf the 387 patients who initially received CVP induction, 158 were randomized to MR, and 153 were randomized to OBS. After a median follow‐up of 11.5 years, patients on MR had longer median PFS (4.8 years) than patients on OBS (1.3 years; hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; P < .0001). However, there was no difference in OS between MR and OBS (10‐year OS, 67% vs 59%; median OS, 13.5 years vs not reached; HR, 0.91; P = .69). Other than MR, only minimal residual disease after induction therapy was significantly associated with PFS on multivariate analysis (HR, 0.71; P = .02). A low initial tumor burden, minimal residual disease, follicular histology, a low Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score, and female sex were associated with longer OS. There was no increase in the rate of second primary malignancies with MR vs OBS.CONCLUSIONSWith long‐term follow‐up, MR did not influence OS. The PFS benefit was maintained. MR should be considered optional for patients with indolent B‐cell lymphoma. Cancer 2016;122:2996‐3004. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Purpose To determine if maintenance rituximab (MR) after standard chemotherapy improves progression-free survival (PFS) in advanced-stage indolent lymphoma. Patients and Methods Patients with stage III-IV indolent lymphoma with responding or stable disease after cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (CVP) chemotherapy were stratified by initial tumor burden, residual disease after CVP (minimal or gross), and histology, and randomly assigned to observation (OBS) or MR 375 mg/m2 once per week for 4 weeks every 6 months for 2 years. PFS was the primary end point. Results Three hundred eleven (282 with follicular lymphoma) evaluable patients who received CVP were randomly assigned to OBS (n = 158) or MR (n = 153). Best response improved in 22% MR versus 7% OBS patients (P = .00006). Toxicity was minimal in both study arms. Three-year PFS after random assignment was 68% MR versus 33% OBS (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.4; P = 4.4 × 10−10 [all patients]) and 64% MR v 33% OBS (HR = 0.4; P = 9.2 × 10−8 [patients with follicular lymphoma]). There was an advantage for MR regardless of Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index score, tumor burden, residual disease, or histology. In multivariate analysis of MR patients, minimal disease after CVP was a favorable prognostic factor. OS at 3 years was 92% MR versus 86% OBS (HR = 0.6; log-rank one-sided P = .05) and, among patients with follicular lymphoma, OS was 91% MR versus 86% (HR = 0.6; log-rank one-sided P = .08). A trend favoring MR was observed among patients with high tumor burden (log-rank one-sided P = .03). Conclusion The E1496 study provides the first phase III data in untreated indolent lymphoma that MR after chemotherapy significantly prolongs PFS.

Abstract This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 study evaluated 2 dose regimens of lenalidomide for relapsed, refractory myeloma. Seventy patients were randomized to receive either 30 mg once-daily or 15 mg twice-daily oral lenalidomide for 21 days of every 28-day cycle. Patients with progressive or stable disease after 2 cycles received dexamethasone. Analysis of the first 70 patients showed increased grade 3/4 myelo-suppression in patients receiving 15 mg twice daily (41% versus 13%, P = .03). An additional 32 patients received 30 mg once daily. Responses were evaluated according to European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) criteria. Overall response rate (complete, partial, or minor) to lenalidomide alone was 25% (24% for once-daily and 29% for twice-daily lenalidomide). Median overall survival in 30-mg once-daily and twice-daily groups was 28 and 27 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 7.7 months on once-daily versus 3.9 months on twice-daily lenalidomide (P = .2). Dexamethasone was added in 68 patients and 29% responded. Time to first occurrence of clinically significant grade 3/4 myelosuppression was shorter in the twice-daily group (1.8 vs 5.5 months, P = .05). Significant peripheral neuropathy and deep vein thrombosis each occurred in only 3%. Lenalidomide is active and well tolerated in relapsed, refractory myeloma, with the 30-mg once-daily regimen providing the basis for future studies as monotherapy and with dexamethasone.

Purpose To address early and late treatment failures in older patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), we designed a two-stage randomized trial of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) versus rituximab plus CHOP (R-CHOP), with a second random assignment to maintenance rituximab (MR) or observation in responding patients. Patients and Methods Untreated DLBCL patients who were 60 years or older were randomly assigned to R-CHOP (n = 318) or CHOP (n = 314); 415 responders were randomly assigned to MR (n = 207) or observation (n = 208). The primary end point was failure-free survival (FFS). All P values were two sided. Results Three-year FFS rate was 53% for R-CHOP patients and 46% for CHOP patients (P = .04) at a median follow-up time of 3.5 years. Two-year FFS rate from second random assignment was 76% for MR compared with 61% for observation (P = .009). No significant differences in survival were seen according to induction or maintenance therapy. FFS was prolonged with MR after CHOP (P = .0004) but not after R-CHOP (P = .81) with 2-year FFS rates from second random assignment of 77%, 79%, 74%, and 45% for R-CHOP, R-CHOP + MR, CHOP + MR, and CHOP, respectively. In a secondary analysis excluding MR patients, R-CHOP alone reduced the risks of treatment failure (P = .003) and death (P = .05) compared with CHOP alone. Conclusion Rituximab administered as induction or maintenance with CHOP chemotherapy significantly prolonged FFS in older DLBCL patients. After R-CHOP, no benefit was provided by MR. These results, which are consistent with an additive effect of rituximab, suggest that future studies could focus on maintenance strategies with novel agents as well as new induction therapies.

Purpose To compare low-dose (30 Gy) radiotherapy (RT) with observation (OBS) in limited-stage aggressive lymphoma patients achieving complete remission (CR) after chemotherapy, and to measure conversion from partial response (PR) to CR with high-dose (40 Gy) RT. Patients and Methods From 1984 to 1992, stage I (with risk factors) and II adults with diffuse aggressive lymphoma in CR after eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) were randomly assigned to 30 Gy involved-field RT or OBS. PR patients received 40 Gy RT. Results Among 172 CR patients, the 6-year disease-free survival (DFS) was 73% for low-dose RT versus 56% for OBS (two-sided P = .05). Failure-free survival (two-sided P = .06), and time to progression (two-sided P = .06) also favored RT. Intent-to-treat analyses yielded similar results. No survival differences were observed. Three RT versus 15 OBS patients relapsed in initial disease sites. At 6 years, failure-free survival was 63% in PR patients; conversion to CR did not significantly influence clinical outcome. Conclusion For patients in CR after CHOP, low-dose RT prolonged DFS and provided local control, but no survival benefit was observed. The majority of PR patients were event-free at 6 years despite residual radiographic abnormalities. Future efforts should be directed toward improved imaging and more effective systemic therapies.