Citations

Background:Predicting early clinical failure in patients with untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) is important but difficult. Lymphoma involvement of extranodal (EN) sites is better detected by FDG‐PET/CT than CT alone, but PET parameters are not part of the usual predictive indices.Aims:We aimed to determine the incidence and patterns of EN and spleen disease, and learn if they were useful in predicting early clinical failure.Methods:PET/CT images from 613 cases of newly diagnosed FL between 2003 – 2016 were retrospectively reviewed for EN and spleen involvement. The location, number, and pattern of EN sites, as well as splenic involvement, were recorded. Associations with outcomes were assessed using event‐free survival (EFS), overall survival (OS), and early clinical failure at 24 months (EFS24).Results:49% (301/613) of patients had PET/CT‐detected EN involvement, and 28% (171/613) had spleen involvement. Presence of ≥2 EN sites, spleen, bone or soft tissue involvement all predicted failure to achieve EFS24. These factors, as well as pattern of bone involvement by imaging, were predictors of EFS on univariate analysis; presence of ≥2 EN sites and bone involvement pattern were also predictive of OS. In a multivariate analysis with FLIPI‐2 factors, spleen involvement, pattern of bone involvement, and soft tissue involvement independently predicted a lower EFS (Table 1). When the multivariate analysis was performed using PRIMA‐PI factors (marrow and B2 M), the presence of ≥2 EN sites was an adverse independent prognostic factor for OS (HR 2.28; 95% CI 1.01–5.18; p = 0.05).Table 1: Extranodal and spleen involvement by PET/CT as predictors of event‐free survival Summary/Conclusion:Baseline PET/CT identifies EN and spleen sites of disease that can predict early clinical failure in FL. These results, when combined with other factors, may better identify high‐risk patients and guide appropriate therapy.imageimage

Background:There are limited treatment options for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependent (TD) LR (IPSS Low/Int‐1) MDS patients who are relapsed/refractory to ESAs. Imetelstat is a first‐in‐class telomerase inhibitor that targets cells with short telomeres and active telomerase, characteristics observed in some MDS patients across all disease stages. Preliminary results show that imetelstat is effective treatment in LR‐MDS patients inducing durable TI (Steensma et al ASH 2018 Abstr463).Aims:We report updated efficacy data with a median follow‐up of 12.1 months in 38 LR non‐del(5q) MDS patients, R/R to ESA and LEN/HMA naive from the open‐label, single‐arm Part 1 of IMerge, an ongoing phase 2/3 study (NCT02598661).Methods:Part 1 of the IMerge study included patients with LR MDS, who were heavily transfused (≥4U/8wks), were R/R to ESA or had sEPO >500 mU/mL. Imetelstat 7.5 mg/kg was administered IV every 4 weeks. The primary endpoint was 8‐week TI rate; key secondary endpoints included 24‐week TI rate, safety, duration of TI, and hematologic improvement (HI) rate. Among the initially enrolled patients, higher 8‐week TI rate was observed in the non‐del5q, LEN/HMA naive patients. Therefore, the study was amended to subsequently enroll only these patients. From a total of 57 patients enrolled in Part 1, 38 were non‐del(5q), LEN/HMA naïve patients (13 in the initial and 25 in the expansion cohort). Here we report long‐term efficacy, safety and biomarker data from these 38 patients.Results:Median baseline RBC transfusion burden was 8U/8weeks (range 4–14), 37% of the patients had IPSS Int‐1; 71% had WHO 2001 RARS or RCMD‐RS subtype and 32% with evaluable sEPO levels had baseline level >500 mU/mL.As of 23 January 2019, median follow‐up was 12.1 months for the 38 patients, representing 30.4 and 11.6 months for the initial 13 and additional 25 patients, respectively. The 8‐week TI rate was 45% (17/38) and median TI duration was 8.5 months (range 1.8–32.4). Of the 17 responding patients, 10 (59%) remained transfusion free for over 24 weeks. The 8‐week TI rate did not differ based on the presence of ring sideroblasts or baseline sEPO levels. The 24‐week TI rate was 26% (10/38). Erythroid HI, defined as transfusion reduction by at least 4 units /8 weeks (IWG2006), was achieved in 68% (26/38) of the patients. The most frequently reported adverse events were manageable and reversible grade ≥3 cytopenias. 6/38 patients had IPSS‐R intermediate/poor cytogenetic risk. All 6 patents achieved 8‐week TI; 2/6 patients achieved partial cytogenetic response. Post treatment decrease in telomerase hTERT RNA level was observed in 25/34 (73.5%) patients with available sample. Among 7 patients with pre‐ and post‐treatment mutation analyses, six had SF3B1 mutations at baseline, and a decrease in the mutation VAF was observed in 2 patients that had longest TI duration on study.Summary/Conclusion:In high RBC transfusion burden patients with non‐del(5q) LR‐MDS R/R to ESA and naive to LEN/HMA, single‐agent imetelstat yielded 8‐week TI rate of 45%, with a median duration of 8.5 months (range 1.8–32.4). The 24‐week TI rate was 26%. HI‐E rate was 68%. All patients with IPSS‐R intermediate and poor cytogenetic risk responded. Biomarker analyses of telomerase activity and mutation allele burden indicate an effect on the malignant mutant clone. These data support Part 2 of IMerge, Phase 3 placebo‐controlled, randomized portion of the study, expected to open mid‐2019.

Background:Lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2) has established efficacy and a tolerable safety profile in patients with previously untreated and relapsed/refractory (R/R) indolent NHL. This includes patients with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) who are generally treated in a similar manner to follicular lymphoma (FL).Aims:Primary results for the AUGMENT study in R/R FL grade 1–3a and MZL showed significantly improved progression‐free survival (PFS) for R2 over R/placebo in the overall population and in the subgroup analyses, with the exception of the MZL subgroup. Given the small sample size for MZL patients, post hoc analyses of baseline characteristics and univariate/multivariate analyses of PFS were conducted to examine possible explanations for these results.Methods:The phase III AUGMENT study randomized patients 1:1 to R2 (lenalidomide PO 20 mg/day (d), d1–21/28 X12 cycles plus rituximab IV 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and d1 of cycles 2–5) or rituximab‐placebo (R/placebo; same dosing schedule). PFS by 2007 IWG (without PET) was the primary endpoint. Post hoc Cox regression models were used for univariate analysis of one risk factor and multivariate analyses including treatment arm and significant risk factors (P < 0.05) from the univariate analyses.Results:A total of 63/358 (18%) MZL patients were part of the overall study population, including n = 14/16 MALT, n = 9/6 splenic, and n = 8/10 nodal MZL subtypes for respective R2 and R/placebo arms. Numerical differences between treatment arms for baseline demographics and disease characteristics for MZL patients favoring the R/placebo arm were: fewer R2 patients had an ECOG score of 0 (55% R2 vs 72% R/placebo), and more R2 (vs R/placebo) patients were older (≥65 y: 68% vs 59%; ≥70 y: 42% vs 38%), were refractory to the last prior regimen (13% vs 3%), had Ann Arbor stage IV disease at enrollment (65% vs 41%), high‐risk MALT‐IPI score (50% vs 19%), elevated LDH (29% vs 19%), B symptoms (13% vs 3%), and high tumor burden per GELF criteria (65% vs 56%). The most common grade 3/4 AEs for MZL patients receiving R2 vs R/placebo, respectively, were neutropenia (47% vs 16%), pneumonia (3% vs 13%), and leukopenia (10% vs 0). A total of 5 deaths occurred in the R2 arm (most associated with progression of disease; 2 deaths occurred early at 3 and 13 days after randomization [one prior to receiving R2 and one 2 days after treatment initiation]) and 2 in the R/placebo arm. Despite worse prognostic features, best response was improved with R2 (vs R/placebo) with ORR = 65% vs 44% (P = 0.13) and CR = 29% vs 13% (P = 0.13), although neither were statistically significant. Improved response rates did not translate into a survival advantage for R2. Median PFS for MZL patients was 20.2 mo R2 vs 25.2 mo R/placebo (HR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.47–2.13; P = 1.0). Univariate analyses showed that several baseline factors were prognostic for MZL patients (P < 0.05): Ann Arbor stage IV, elevated LDH, and unfit for chemotherapy (Table). Multivariate analyses adjusting for the imbalance in these 3 significant prognostic factors showed an adjusted PFS HR of 0.51 (95% CI, 0.20–1.28) favoring the R2 arm, similar to the PFS HR in the overall population (HR = 0.46; 95% CI, 0.34–0.63). The univariate and multivariate analyses suggested that the imbalance in baseline prognostic factors impacted PFS results for MZL patients.Summary/Conclusion:Overall, these findings suggest that the PFS results in MZL patients were negatively impacted by the imbalance in baseline prognostic factors and more aggressive disease in the R2 over the R/placebo arm.image