scholarly journals Update on the role of brentuximab vedotin in classical Hodgkin lymphoma

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (9) ◽  
pp. 261-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Tomassetti ◽  
Alex F. Herrera

Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an effective and well-tolerated treatment for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). It was initially approved by the US FDA for the treatment of HL after failure of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (autoHSCT) or after failure of at least two prior lines of multiagent chemotherapy in patients who are not transplant candidates, and then subsequently, as consolidation therapy after autoHSCT in patients who are at high risk for relapse. However, the role of BV in the treatment of HL is evolving. BV has shown promising efficacy as a salvage treatment in the second-line setting prior to autoHSCT. Most recently, the ECHELON-1 trial demonstrated that BV combined with AVD for the treatment of newly diagnosed advanced stage HL improved modified progression-free survival (mPFS) compared with standard ABVD. Based on these results, the US FDA has approved BV as part of the initial treatment of advanced stage HL. With the approval of BV as front-line therapy, depending on how widely the use of BV plus AVD is adopted, the role of BV in the treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory (rel/ref) HL may need to be redefined. BV retreatment can be effective, and studies of rational BV-based combination regimens may help to improve response rates and overcome BV resistance. Furthermore, BV has been demonstrated to be effective in the initial treatment of elderly or unfit patients, and ongoing studies are evaluating the addition of BV to initial chemotherapy in patients with early stage HL.

Hematology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (1) ◽  
pp. 207-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison J. Moskowitz

AbstractThe US Food and Drug Administration approval of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in 2011 marked an important milestone in the management of classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Although initially approved for use in the relapsed or refractory setting, its high efficacy and favorable toxicity profile led to numerous studies evaluating BV in the front-line, second-line, and posttransplant settings. BV is now approved for use (in combination with chemotherapy) as frontline treatment of advanced-stage patients and as maintenance therapy following autologous stem cell transplant. Additional studies demonstrate its promise as second-line therapy and for elderly patients, as well. Although studies have demonstrated its promise in multiple settings, the ideal timing for use of BV is evolving. Studies evaluating individualized treatment strategies will ultimately define the optimal place for BV in HL treatment.


2019 ◽  
Vol Volume 9 ◽  
pp. 63-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
Catherine Lai ◽  
Adrese Michael Kandahari ◽  
Chaitra Ujjani

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 4828-4828
Author(s):  
Lauren S. Maeda ◽  
Richard T. Hoppe ◽  
Saul A. Rosenberg ◽  
Sandra J. Horning ◽  
Ranjana H. Advani

Abstract Abstract 4828 Purpose: Stanford V is an abbreviated combined modality approach for the treatment of advanced stage Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). This regimen was developed with the aim of shortening the duration of chemotherapy, limiting the radiotherapy (RT) to a modified involved field and thereby potentially reducing short and long term toxicity while maintaining or improving cure rates. Specifically the chemotherapy regimen has significantly lower cumulative doses of adriamycin, bleomycin and alkylating agents compared to other standard regimens such as ABVD or escalated BEACOPP. We have previously reported excellent outcomes with this regimen with a freedom from progression (FFP) of 89% and overall survival (OS) of 96% (Horning, S.J., et al., J Clin Oncol 2002, 20:630-7). The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of patients (pts) treated with secondary therapy after failing Stanford V. Methods: Pts with advanced stage HL who had either refractory disease or had relapsed after primary therapy with Stanford V, were retrospectively identified from the HL database. We analyzed this group of patients for risk factors, salvage therapy, and treatment outcome. Results: Between May 1989 and March 2003, 167 pts were treated on protocol. At a median follow-up of 12.8 years the outcomes are excellent with a 10-year FFP and OS of 87% and 93%, respectively. Therapy failed in 19 pts (11%) of which 16 relapsed and 3 did not complete the intended treatment (disease progression n=2, and muscle pain and hyponatremia n=1). The median age of pts who failed therapy was 31 years (range 21 – 58) with a median time to progression of 5.1 months (range 0.2 – 41.4). 11 pts relapsed at 0 to 12 months from completion of therapy and 8 pts relapsed at > 12 months. At initial diagnosis 5 had stage I/II disease with bulky mediastinum, 5 stage III and 9 stage IV disease. The International Prognostic Score (IPS) at initial diagnosis was 0–1 (n=4), 2–3 (n=10) and 4–7 (n=5). 13/19 (68%) pts relapsed outside the RT field, 2 infield, 3 both infield and outside and 1 unknown. 7/19 pts in whom therapy failed had bulky disease and of these 5 failed outside the RT field. Relapse was detected clinically in 12 pts, and on surveillance positron emission tomography scan performed every 3 to 6 months in 5 pts who were asymptomatic (2 pts unknown). 14/19 (74%) pts received secondary therapy with a platinum-containing regimen (ICE or DHAP) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 91% (complete response [CR] n=1, partial response [PR] n=9, progressive disease [PD] n=1, unknown response n=3), followed by an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant. 5 pts were treated with non-transplant regimens consisting of chemotherapy with MOPP/ABV + RT (n=2), ChlVPP (n=1), oral cyclophosphamide (n=1) and procarbazine/alkeran/adriamycin/etoposide (n=1), with an ORR of 80% (CR n=4). Reasons for non-transplant therapy were neuropathy (n=1), pt preference (n=1), liver disease (n=1), and unknown (n=2). 11 of the 19 pts in whom Stanford V failed died (disease progression n=3, second malignancy n=2, graft failure n=1, infection n=1, liver failure n=1, cardiac arrest n=1, suicide n=1 and unknown n=1). At a median follow-up of 8 years, the disease-specific survival (DSS), FFP and OS for pts with refractory or relapsed disease after Stanford V was 84%, 63% and 42%, respectively. Outcome of pts who relapsed within a year was worse than pts who relapsed > 1 year with an OS of 36% versus 50%, respectively. There was no difference in FFP for these groups, 64% versus 63%, respectively. Conclusions: The outcome of pts with advanced HL is excellent with the Stanford V regimen. For the 11% of pts in whom front line therapy fails, secondary therapy is effective with a DSS of > 80%. The majority of pts (84%) failed at distant sites suggesting that more aggressive upfront chemotherapy may have been beneficial in these pts. Future efforts will aim at identifying this subset upfront. Pts who relapse within a year have a worse outcome despite salvage and for this subgroup, newer therapies are warranted. Disclosures: Horning: Genentech: Employment.


Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (11) ◽  
pp. 1375-1377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph M. Connors ◽  
Stephen M. Ansell ◽  
Michelle Fanale ◽  
Steven I. Park ◽  
Anas Younes

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 125 (8) ◽  
pp. 1226-1235 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas S. Uldrick ◽  
Richard F. Little

Abstract HIV-associated classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HIV-cHL) is an important complication of HIV disease in the era of effective combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). Generally, newly diagnosed HIV-cHL should be managed with curative intent. With modern HIV therapeutics, HIV-cHL treatment outcomes are largely comparable to those of the background population with cHL (non–HIV-cHL). To achieve these outcomes, particular attention must be given to managing HIV. This management includes understanding HIV as a comorbid condition with a spectrum of impact that is unique to each patient. Meticulous attention to drug-drug interactions is required to avoid toxicity and pharmacokinetic effects that can undermine cure. Relapsed and refractory HIV-cHL poses additional therapeutic challenges. The standard management in this setting should also be based on that for non–HIV-cHL, and includes the use of salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant in chemosensitive disease. The role of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant is less clear but may be useful in select cases. Newer agents with activity in cHL are being tested as part of primary and salvage therapy and are also highly relevant for HIV-cHL.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document