scholarly journals Systematic Review of Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) Clinical Trials: Implications for Decision Modeling

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. A615-A616
Author(s):  
S. Sorensen ◽  
E. Dorman ◽  
Y. Xu ◽  
R. Sallum ◽  
F. Pan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Decision Modeling ◽  
Mantle Cell

scholarly journals Efficacy of Chemotherapeutic Regimens for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review of Phase III Trials

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 6-7
Author(s):  
Ali Jaan ◽  
Muhammad Tayyeb ◽  
Farhan Khalid ◽  
Muhammad Khawar Sana ◽  
Zahoor Ahmed ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Interferon Alfa ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Combination Regimens

Background: The mainstay treatment for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is chemotherapy ± immunotherapy. The standard chemotherapeutic regimens have limited efficacy in MCL when used alone. In this systematic review, we have assessed the efficacy and safety of various combination regimens for the treatment of MCL evaluated in phase III clinical trials. Methods: We performed a comprehensive systematic literature search on PubMed, Embase, clinicaltrials.gov, and Web of Science databases with the date of inception to May 2020. We used MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms for "mantle cell lymphoma", "treatment outcome" along with their keywords, and combined their results. Our search generated a total of 3572 articles. After excluding case reports, case series, observational studies, review articles, meta-analysis, phase I/II clinical trials, and pre-clinical studies, we included five phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reporting the efficacy of combination regimens for MCL treatment. Results Data from five phase III RCTs was pooled with total N=1683 (newly diagnosed (ND), n=1242, relapsed/refractory (RR), n=441). 1610 patients were evaluable. Kluin-Nelemans et al. 2020 (n=560) studied induction with R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) vs R-FC (rituximab, fludarabine, and cyclophosphamide) for ND-MCL with follow-up on maintenance with rituximab (R) -vs interferon alfa. At a median follow up of 7.6 years (y), median overall survival (mOS) was 6.4 vs 3.9 y (p=0.0054) in R-CHOP vs R-FC group, respectively. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) and mOS in the R-CHOP cohort on R maintenance were significantly better when compared to those on interferon alfa maintenance (mPFS, 5.4 y vs 1.9 y, p<0.001) (mOS, 9.8 y vs 7.1 y, p=0.0026). Robak et al. (2015) (n=487) assessed bortezomib in ND-MCL by substituting it for vincristine in the standard R-CHOP therapy. A cohort of MCL ineligible for stem cell transplant (SCT) was randomly assigned to either R-CHOP or VR-CAP (bortezomib replacing vincristine). At a median follow-up of 40 months (mo), mPFS was 24.7 mo vs 14.4 mo in VR-CAP vs R-CHOP (HR 0.63, p<0.001), respectively. Similar, relative improvements were reported in complete response (CR) (53% vs 42%, p=0.007) and 4-year OS was (64% [95% CI 56-71] vs 54% [95% CI 45-62]). Jin et al. (2018) (n=121) assessed R-CHOP vs VR-CAP in ND-MCL patients ineligible for SCT. After a median follow-up of 42.4 mo, mPFS for VR-CAP was better than R-CHOP (28.6 mo vs 13.9 mo, HR=0.7, p=0.157). The overall response rate (ORR) was almost similar in VR-CAP (97%) and R-CHOP (98%). The 4-year OS was 62% vs 61% in VR-CAP vs R-CHOP, respectively. Flinn et al. (2014) (n=74) studied the efficacy of bendamustine in combination with rituximab (BR) vs R-CHOP or R-CVP (R-CHOP minus doxorubicin) as induction regimens in ND-MCL. 36 patients received BR and 38 patients received R-CHOP/R-CVP. ORR was 94% vs 85% with BR vs R-CHOP/R-CVP, respectively. Hess et al. (2009) (n=162) evaluated temsirolimus in RR-MCL. The study population was randomized to either 175/75mg temsirolimus (arm A), 175/25mg temsirolimus (arm B), and the investigator's choice of chemotherapy (arm C). The mPFS was significantly better in arm A compared to arm C (4.8 mo vs 1.9 mo, HR 0.44 [97.5% CI 0.25-0.7], p=0.0009). Arm B had slight improvement but insignificant. Similarly, mOS was 12.8 mo in arm A (HR 0.8 [95% CI 0.5-1.28], p=0.35), and 8.8 in arm B (HR 0.96 [95% CI 0.60-1.54], p=0.87), when compared to 9.5 mo in arm C. Drelying et al. (2016) (n=280), studied temsirolimus in comparison with ibrutinib, RR-MCL with mPFS of 14.6 mo (95% CI 10.4-not estimable) vs 6.2 mo (95% CI 4.2-7.9), respectively. Toxicities were typically manageable. VR-CAP was associated with a higher incidence of toxicity (100%) vs R-CHOP (94%) majority of which was hematological. Thrombocytopenia was particularly more prominent with temsirolimus. Granulocytopenia was persistent in 30-40% in the R-FC cohort after 5 y. Conclusion: The chemo-immunotherapy combination is favorable compared to chemotherapy alone for the treatment of MCL. R-CHOP induction followed by rituximab maintenance in MCL shows favorable long-term safety and efficacy profile. Bortezomib substituting for vincristine in R-CHOP improves the efficacy outcomes. Ibrutinib-based regimens are superior to temsirolimus-based regimens. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.:Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Economic Evaluation of Ibrutinib Versus Acalabrutinib Versus Zanubrutinib for Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
Neda Alrawashdh ◽  
Ali McBride ◽  
Marion Slack ◽  
Ivo Abraham
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Health States ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Cost

Background . Refractory or relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (R/R MCL) is generally associated with poor outcomes; median overall survival (OS) is 4-5 years. First generation Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) (Ibrutinib) and second generation BTKi (acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib) have led to significant improvements in efficacy and safety over conventional chemoimmunotherapy in treating R/R MCL. In the absence of direct head to head clinical trials compare between BTKi, indirect comparisons between the first and second BTKi generations show possible differences in safety and efficacy. We used existing evidence from phase I/II clinical trials for second BTKi generation to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ibrutinib vs acalabrutinib vs zanubrutinib in treating patients with R/R MCL from the US payer perspective. Methods. A Markov model with two health states (progression-free [PF] and progression or death) was specified. Kaplan-Meier (KM) curves of PF survival (PFS) from the phase III trial by Dreyling et al. (Lancet 2016) for ibrutinib, the phase II trial by Wang et al. (Lancet 2018) for acalabrutinib, and the phase I/II trial by Tam et al. (Blood 2019) for zanubrutinib were fitted to exponential distributions to extract transition probabilities between the two health states for each drug. Wholesale acquisition costs (WAC) were obtained from RedBook and costs of adverse events management were derived from the literature. The analysis was conducted over a lifetime horizon with health utility outcomes and costs discounted at 3.5% per year after the first year. The cost and PFS life years (LYs) and PFS quality-adjusted LYs (QALYs) for each treatment, the incremental PFS LYs and PFS QALYs gained with acalabrutinib or zanubrutinib over ibrutinib, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and cost-utility ratio (ICUR) were estimated in both base and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA: 100,000 simulations). Results. As detailed in the table, acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib were associated with better clinical outcomes than ibrutinib, with incremental PFS LYs gained of 1.61 and 0.98, and incremental PFS QALYs of 1.27 and 0.77, respectively. The incremental costs when comparing acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib with ibrutinib were $110,931and $64,624, respectively. In probabilistic analyses, the ICERs ($61,689/LYg for acalabrutinib; $53,438/LYg for zanubrutinib) and ICURs ($86,750/QALYg for acalabrutinib; $82,897/QALYg for zanubrutinib) were lower than the US willingness to pay (WTP) threshold of $100,000 to $150,000 per QALY for cancer treatment. At WTP of $100,000, the cost-effectiveness acceptability curves showed the probabilities of acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib, and ibrutinib being cost-effective to be 50%, 34%, and 16%, respectively. Conclusions. Acalabrutinib is more cost-effective compared with ibrutinib and zanubrutinib and improves health outcomes more in R/R MCL patients. This analysis using phase I/II trials should be validated as additional trial and real-world evidence about efficacy, safety, and associated health-related quality of life outcomes. Based on the current data, acalabrutinib offers the most cost-effective treatment option in R/R MCL. Disclosures McBride: Coherus BioSciences: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Abraham:Janssen: Consultancy; Coherus BioSciences: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Mylan: Consultancy; Rockwell Medical: Consultancy; Terumo: Consultancy.

Bendamustine for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Retrospective Analysis of the Spanish Experience

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 4942-4942
Author(s):  
Ana García-Noblejas ◽  
Belén Navarro Matilla ◽  
Carolina Da Silva Rodriguez ◽  
Raquel De Oña Navarrete ◽  
María José Ramirez Sánchez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Retrospective Analysis ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Mantle Cell

Abstract Abstract 4942 INTRODUCTION. Patients with Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) have an adverse outcome after relapse due to chemorefractory disease with conventional treatments. Bendamustine, a nitrogen mustard compound chemically related to the alkylating agents, has demonstrated high efficacy with a low toxicity profile in reported clinical trials. AIM. To analyze the Spanish experience in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL treated with Bendamustine. METHODS. Retrospective analysis of spanish experience in relapsed/refractory MCL treated with Bendamustine alone or in combination. This study has been approved by local ethical committees. RESULTS. Currently, there are 36 patients registered and 28 are available for this analysis. Patients'characteristics: 69% male, median age 65 years old (range 41–81), 87% ECOG≤ 1, 83% Ann Arbor stage IV, 37% high risk MIPI and 9% blastic variant. Previous regimens were CHOP or CHOP like ± R in 42.5%, HyperCVAD/MtxAraC ± R in 42.5%, R-CVP in 9% and other regimens in 6%. Median number of previous treatments were 2.6 (range 1–6), all patients had received prior Rituximab and 73% had chemosensitive disease to the last treatment. Bendamustine regimen was R-B (R-375mg/m2 D1, B-90 mg/m2 D1-2) in 78% patients, R-B with B-70 mg/m2 in 8%, B alone in 3%, R-B-Bortezomib in 3% and R-B plus consolidation (SCT, Y90Ibritumomab-tiuxetan) in 8%. Median number of cycles was 4.61 (range 1–7). G- CSF support was administered in 43% of cycles. Response: Overall response rate was 73%, with 43% CR & uCR and 30% PR. Survival: Median overall survival from diagnosis is 8,26 years (range: 1.6–11,6 years) without plateau. Median progression free survival (PFS) after Bendamustine treatment was 16 months (95% CI: 11.7–20.4), data that compares favourably with patients' PFS to previous therapy (12 months, 95% CI: 6.5–17.5). Median PFS for patients who achieved CR/uCR is 32.6 months (95% CI: 19.9–45.4) versus 11 months in patients with PR (95% CI: 3.9–18.8). With a median follow-up for surviving patients of 12 months since Bendamustine treatment, the estimated OS at 3 years is 47% (+ SD 14%). Toxicity: No treatment related mortality has been described so far. Over 152 cycles, only 10 hospitalizations due to febrile neutropenia were reported. No one case of lysis tumoral syndrome has been reported. CONCLUSION. Bendamustine plus Rituximab is a good rescue treatment in non selected pretreated patients with mantle cell lymphoma. CR rate and duration of response seem to reproduce in current clinical practice the good data reported in previous clinical trials and compares favourably with other available treatments. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

scholarly journals Mantle cell lymphoma treatment options for elderly/unfit patients: A systematic review

eJHaem ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahera Alnassfan ◽  
Megan J. Cox‐Pridmore ◽  
Azzam Taktak ◽  
Kathleen J Till
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Lymphoma Treatment ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Unfit Patients

scholarly journals The potential for chemotherapy-free strategies in mantle cell lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (17) ◽  
pp. 1881-1888 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Martin ◽  
Jia Ruan ◽  
John P. Leonard
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
Chemotherapy Drugs ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Practical Development ◽  
Cytotoxic Therapies ◽  
Line Setting ◽  
New Strategies

Abstract Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) may be 1 of the few cancers for which multiple chemotherapy and nonchemotherapy regimens are considered as standard. Despite the significant activity of chemotherapy in the first-line setting and beyond, its limitations are reflected in the relatively poor ultimate outcomes of patients with MCL treated in the real world. Patients with highly proliferative MCL and those with TP53 mutations tend to respond poorly despite intensive cytotoxic therapies. Patients with comorbidities and those who are geographically isolated may not have access to the regimens that may appear most promising in clinical trials. Thoughtfully directed, nonchemotherapy agents might overcome some of the factors associated with a poor prognosis, such at TP53 mutation, and might resolve some of the challenges related to the toxicity and deliverability of standard chemotherapy regimens. Several clinical trials have already demonstrated that combinations of nonchemotherapy plus chemotherapy drugs can impact outcomes, whereas data with nonchemotherapy agents alone or in combination have suggested that some patients might be well suited to treatment without chemotherapy at all. However, challenges including chronic or unexpected toxicities, the rational vs practical development of combinations, and the financial acceptability of new strategies abound. The nonchemotherapy era is here: how it unfolds will depend on how we meet these challenges.

scholarly journals A phase II study of bortezomib in mantle cell lymphoma: the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group trial IND.150

2007 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 116-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Belch ◽  
C.T. Kouroukis ◽  
M. Crump ◽  
L. Sehn ◽  
R.D. Gascoyne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
National Cancer Institute ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Group Trial
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document