Single Institution Experience of Gastrointestinal Involvement of Diffuse Large B- Cell Lymphoma: Presentation, Outcomes and Patterns of Treatment Failure

Abstract Introduction Extranodal (EN) involvement of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) presents heterogeneously across different anatomic sites and often occurs at initial diagnosis. Rituximab, anthracycline-based combination chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery have all been studied separately and in various combinations. However, given the variability in how patients may present in these contexts, there remains no consistent standard of care or pattern of treatment failure. We hypothesized these patients have different outcomes than those lacking this EN site of involvement. Methods We conducted a single-institution, retrospective analysis of consecutive cases who presented at initial diagnosis with DLBCL involving the GI tract including the esophagus, stomach, small intestine, or portion of large intestine. We performed a search in the University of Virginia Pathology database to identify all patients age >/= 18 years with DLBCL involving the GI tract and excluded those without additional clinical information available for review. A total of 51 patients were identified and we retrospectively collected data on demographics, date of diagnosis, involvement of extranodal sites, stage, International Prognostic Index (IPI) score, treatment, response to treatment, relapse, and survival at last follow-up. Results Of the 51 DLBCL patients, 65% of patients were male and 82% were Caucasian. Median age was 65 years (range 22-92). Three patients had HIV infection and no patients had active hepatitis B or C. Sites included gastric (51%), colon (27%), small bowel (12%), esophagus (4%), and rectum (2%); 4% had multiple GI sites involved. Forty-nine percent of patients presented with abdominal pain. Other common presentations included gastric/bowel perforation (12%), GI bleed (12%), gastric/small bowel obstruction (12%). Three cases (6%) were discovered on a screening colonoscopy. Forty-three percent of patients presented as stages I-IIIE versus 57% presented as stage IVE. Fifty-five percent were IPI 0-2 while 45% were IPI 3-5. Six patients (12%) had CNS involvement at presentation. Median follow-up was 20 months (range 26 days to 17 years). Six patients were lost to follow-up prior to assessment of response, and 4 had treatment discontinued early (3 due to grade 5 infection, 1 for GI perforation leading to death). One patient was still undergoing treatment. Forty patients were available to assess for response to treatment. The majority were treated with R-CHOP (57%) or DA-R-EPOCH (29%). Sixty-eight percent (n=27) had a complete response (CR), 22.5% (n=9) a partial response (PR), and 10% (n=4) were primary refractory. Of the 27 CRs, 13 (48%) had presented as stage 1-3 and 14 (52%) had presented as stage 4; 16 (59%) had an IPI score of 0-2 and 11 (41%) had an IPI score of 3-5. Of the four patients who had primary refractory disease, 3 had multiple EN sites involved at diagnosis, including 2 with CNS involvement. Of those who had a response (including CR or PR), median duration of response was 1 year (range 4 months to 13 years). Eleven patients (28%) had a relapse: 3 in the CNS, 5 in the GI tract (3 at the same site of initial involvement, 1 with a different GI site involved, and 1 with a different GI site in addition to systemic disease), and 3 in lymph nodes alone. Time to relapse ranged 1 month to 13 years with a median of 8.4 months. Fifty-seven percent of patients were alive at time of last follow-up. Median Overall survival (OS) was 5.7 years and Median Progression Free Survival (PFS) was 5.6 years (Figure 1). Conclusion There is limited data on how patients with DLBCL involving the GI tract initially present and respond to therapy. This study encompassing almost twenty years of experience at a single institution, suggests that though patients present at all stages and as low risk vs high risk IPI, outcomes are poor compared to prior studies, especially when additional extranodal sites are involved. Duration of response can be substantial, however relapses are common and may present years later indicating ongoing follow-up is imperative. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Portell: AbbVie: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Kite: Research Funding; TG therapeutics: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding. Williams:Sandoz: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Phase II Study Of Anti-CD19 Antibody Drug Conjugate (SAR3419) In Combination With Rituximab: Clinical Activity and Safety In Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (NCT01470456)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.4395.4395 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 4395-4395 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Bertrand Coiffier ◽

Catherine Thieblemont ◽

Sophie de Guibert ◽

Jehan Dupuis ◽

Vincent Ribrag ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Clinical Activity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Duration Of Response ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background SAR3419 is a humanized anti-CD19 antibody conjugated to maytansin DM4, a potent cytotoxic agent. SAR3419 targets CD19, an antigen expressed in the majority of B cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL). The recommended dose for single agent SAR3419 was previously determined to be 55 mg/m2 administered IV every week for 4 weeks, then bi-weekly. In phase I, clinical activity was shown mainly in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). (Trial funded by Sanofi). Methods Patients (pts) with a CD20+ and CD19+ DLBCL relapsing or refractory (R/R) after at least 1 standard treatment including rituximab and not candidate for or who already underwent transplantation, were eligible. Refractory disease was defined as unresponsive to or progressing within 6 months of regimen completion. Fresh (or recent formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded) biopsy was required before SAR3419 start. Pts received 375 mg/m2 of rituximab (R) IV and 55 mg/m² of SAR3419 on day 1, 8, 15, 22 (35-day cycle 1), followed by bi-weekly R and SAR3419 at the same doses for 2 additional 28-day cycles, provided there was no disease progression or other study discontinuation criteria met. The primary objective was the overall response rate (ORR) following Cheson 2007 criteria, with the first tumor assessment being done 42 days after the last study treatment administration. Secondary objectives were: safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), duration of response (DOR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and correlation of the antitumor and biological activity of the combination with tumor biomarker status. Results Fifty-three pts were enrolled, 52 treated. Median age was 66.5 years (range 38-85), 50% were male; 23%, 33% and 40% of patients had received 1, 2 or ≥3 prior chemo/immunotherapy regimens for DLBCL, respectively. Of the enrolled patients, 3.8% had received no prior regimen for DLBCL and therefore were excluded from primary analysis for efficacy. Seventy-three percent had stage III/IV disease, 59% had elevated lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), and 63% had bulky disease. Sixty percent were refractory to first regimen (primary refractory), 16% were refractory to last regimen and 24% were relapsed pts. The ORR in the per-protocol population (n=45) was 31.1% (80% confidence interval (CI): 22.0% to 41.6%). Among the 14 responders, 5 had progressed at the time of analysis, with duration of response beyond 6 months for 3 of them. The ORR was 58.3% (80% CI: 36.2% to 78.1%) for patients with relapsed DLBCL (n=12), 42.9% (80% CI: 17.0% to 72.1%) for pts refractory to last regimen (n=7) and 15.4% (80% CI: 6.9% to 28.4%) for primary refractory pts (n=26). Overall survival and PFS data are not yet mature. Biomarkers and PK data will be presented at the meeting. The most common (≥10%) all grades non-hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were asthenia (25.0%), nausea (21.2%), cough (19.2%), diarrhea (17.3%), weight decrease (17.3%), vomiting (15.4%), dyspnea (15.4%), abdominal pain (13.5%), back pain (13.5%), pyrexia (13.5%) and constipation (11.5%). Related grade 3-4 TEAEs were: 1 syncope, 1 bronchospasm, 2 neutropenia and 1 anemia. No TEAEs led to treatment discontinuation, no grade 3-4 peripheral neuropathy or grade 3-4 ocular events were observed. Two pts experienced grade 2 keratitis, both rapidly recovered with local treatment. Hematological toxicity was moderate, with grade 3-4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in 15.7% and 9.8% pts, respectively. No complications related to neutropenia were reported. Grade 3 transaminase increase was observed in 1 patient. Conclusions The combination of SAR3419 plus R showed moderate ORR in R/R DLBCL; however the study population was of poor prognosis (60% refractory to first line therapy). In the relapsed DLBCL patients a higher ORR was observed. SAR3419 plus R presented with a favorable safety profile. Further investigations on biomarker expression are ongoing to identify a sub-group of pts who could have better benefited from this combination. Disclosures: Coiffier: Sanofi: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Phase II of SAR3419. Ribrag:Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cartron:LFB: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Casasnovas:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hatteville:Sanofi: Employment. Zilocchi:Sanofi: Employment. Oprea:Sanofi: Employment. Tilly:Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Central Nervous System Relapse in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Analysis of Incidence and Prognostic Factors

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.1666.1666 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 1666-1666

Author(s):

Masahiro Uni ◽

Yuki Kagoya ◽

Yasuhito Nannya ◽

Fumihiko Nakamura ◽

Mineo Kurokawa

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Initial Diagnosis ◽

High Dose ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Cns Relapse ◽

Large B Cell

Abstract The addition of rituximab to CHOP (R-CHOP; CHOP, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) has significantly improved the outcome of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, its secondary involvement in the central nervous system (CNS) is still a fatal event, and optimal therapeutic strategies have remained to be established. Combined immunochemotherapy with rituximab, methotrexate, procarbazine, and vincristine (R-MPV) followed by consolidation reduced-dose whole-brain radiotherapy and high-dose cytarabine is currently in use for patients with CNS relapse, though treatment outcome has not been evaluated enough. In the present study, we aimed to analyze the incidence and prognosis of CNS relapse of aggressive B-cell lymphoma in comparison with those of systemic relapse in the era of rituximab-containing regimens. We also estimated the risk factors and prognostic factors for CNS relapse. We retrospectively analyzed 278 consecutive adult patients (≥16 years old) who were diagnosed as DLBCL or primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMLBL) at The University of Tokyo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, from August 2003 through August 2013. We excluded patients who had CNS or intraocular involvement at diagnosis since those patients had received high-dose methotrexate-based therapy instead of R-CHOP. Four to six courses of intrathecal administration of methotrexate were performed in patients with adrenal gland, testis or breast involvement as prophylaxis for CNS relapse. The median follow-up period was 42 months, and the median age was 66 years (range, 23-91). Overall, 67 patients (24.1%) had relapse at any site, of which 24 patients (35.8%) had CNS involvement. The median interval between initial diagnosis and the occurrence of secondary CNS involvement was 212 days, and 15 of the 24 patients (62.5%) had CNS relapse within 1 year from the initial diagnosis. Multivariate analysis revealed that multiple or diffuse extranodal involvement at initial diagnosis (hazard ratio [HR] 3.74, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.28-10.91; P<0.01) was associated with the development of CNS relapse against non-CNS relapse. Chromosomal abnormality was investigated in 112 patients, of which 38 had abnormal karyotypes as identified by G-banding analysis for lymph nodes. Patients with CNS relapse more frequently harbored chromosomal abnormalities compared with those without relapse in univariate analysis (P=0.01). We also analyzed the survival of patients with primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) as a control. Only two (7%) of 27 patients with PCNSL died during the follow-up period. Five-year OS from initial diagnosis was 92.3% (95% CI: 82.5-100.0%), and was significantly better than that for patients with CNS relapse (33.9%, 95% CI: 17.3-66.3%, P<0.01). Among 24 patients with CNS relapse, eight (33%) had systemic lesions other than CNS when diagnosed as CNS relapse, and four (17%) patients newly developed systemic lesions while treated for CNS relapse. Patients without concurrent systemic lesions attained a rather good prognosis by chemo-radiotherapy, while those harboring concurrent systemic lesions had dismal outcome (one-year OS after the diagnosis of relapse: 74.0% versus 12.4%, P<0.01, Figure 1, systemic relapse was treated as a time-dependent covariate). These results indicate that controlling systemic lesions as well as CNS ones is essential for treating patients with secondary CNS involvement of DLBCL. CNS lesions would be well controlled with R-MPV implementation as salvage therapy, nevertheless we should be careful for concurrent systemic lesions which might require different therapeutic strategies. Disclosures Nannya: Chugai Pharmaceutical　CO., LTD: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding. Kurokawa:Chugai Pharmaceutical　CO., LTD: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer Japan Inc.: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

An International Collaborative Study of Outcome and Prognostic Factors in Patients with Secondary CNS Involvement By Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1874.1874 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1874-1874 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Tarec Christoffer El-Galaly ◽

Chan Yoon Cheah ◽

Mette Dahl Bendtsen ◽

Gita Thanarasjasingam ◽

Roopesh Kansara ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Systemic Disease ◽

Performance Status ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma

Abstract Background: Secondary CNS involvement (SCNS) is a detrimental complication seen in ~5% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated with modern immunochemotherapy. Data from older series report short survival following SCNS, typically <6 months. However, data in patients that develop SCNS following primary therapy that contains a rituximab-based-regimen as well as the impact of more intensified treatment for SCNS are limited. Aims: The aims of this study were to i) describe the natural history of SCNS in a large cohort of patients treated with immunochemotherapy, and ii) determine prognostic factors after SCNS. Patients and methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients diagnosed with SCNS during or after frontline immunochemotherapy (R-CHOP or equivalently effective regimens). SCNS was defined as new involvement of the CNS (parenchymal, leptomeningeal, and/or eye) in patients without known CNS involvement at the time of first pathologic diagnosis of DLBCL. Patients were identified from local databases and/or regional/national registries in Denmark, Canada (British Columbia), Australia, Israel, US (University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE), and England (Guy's and St. Thomas' Hospital, London). Clinico-pathologic and treatment characteristics at the time of SCNS were collected from medical records. Results: In total, 281 patients with SCNS diagnosed between 2001 and 2016 were included. Median age at SCNS was 64 (range 20-93) years and male:female ratio was 1.3. SCNS occurred as part of first relapse in 244 (87%) patients and 112 (40%) had documented concurrent systemic disease at the time of SCNS. The median time from initial DLBCL diagnosis to SCNS was 9 months, which was similar for patients treated with (N=76, 27%) or without upfront CNS prophylaxis (N=205, 73%) (10 vs 9 Mo; P=0.3). The median post-SCNS OS was 4 months (interquartile range 2-13) and the 2yr survival rate was 20% (95% CI 15-25) for the entire cohort. Associations between clinicopathologic features, management strategy, and post-SCNS survival are shown in Table 1, which excludes patients who did not receive any treatment against SCNS, patients treated with steroids alone, and a patient with unavailable treatment information (n=43, 15%). In multivariable analysis, performance status >1, concurrent leptomeningeal and parenchymal involvement, SCNS developing before completion of 1st line treatment, and combined systemic and CNS involvement by DLBCL were associated with inferior outcomes. Upfront CNS prophylaxis did not influence post-SCNS OS. High-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) and/or platinum based treatment regimens (i.e. ICE, DHAP, or GDP [+/- IT treatment and/or radiotherapy], N=163) for SCNS were associated with reduced risk of death (HR 0.45 [0.32-0.62, P<0.01]). The 2yr post-SCNS survival for patients treated with HDMTX and/or platinum-based regimens (N=163) was 29% (95% CI 22-37). For patients with isolated parenchymal SCNS, single modality treatment with radiotherapy resulted in 2-yr OS of 19% (95% CI 8-35). For the subgroup of 49 patients treated with HDMTX- and/or platinum-based regimens for isolated SCNS after 1st line DLBCL treatment and with performance status 0 or 1, the 2yr post-SCNS survival was 46% (95% CI 31-59). Overall, 9% of the patients received HDT with ASCT as part of salvage therapy at the time of SCNS. Amongst 36 SCNS patients without systemic involvement and in CR following intensive treatment (HDMTX and/or platinum-based treatments), 11 patients consolidated with HDT had similar outcomes to 25 patients treated without consolidating HDT (P=0.9, Fig 1) Conclusions: Outcomes for patients with SCNS remain poor in this large international cohort of patients from the immunochemotherapy era. Combined parenchymal and leptomeningeal disease, presence of systemic disease concurrent with SCNS, performance status >1, and SCNS developing during first line treatment were independently associated with inferior OS. However, a significant fraction of patients with isolated SCNS after first line DLBCL treatment and with good performance status may achieve long-term remissions after intensive regimens for SCNS. Disclosures El-Galaly: Roche: Consultancy, Other: travel funding. Cheah:Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker's Bureau. Kansara:Celgene: Honoraria. Connors:Bristol Myers Squib: Research Funding; NanoString Technologies: Research Funding; F Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Sehn:roche/genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; seattle genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Opat:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Provision of subsidised drugs, Research Funding. Seymour:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Villa:Celgene: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Survival and Risk of Central Nervous System Recurrence in Burkitt or High-Grade B-Cell Lymphoma in the DA-EPOCH-R Era

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-115676 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2983-2983

Author(s):

Dominic Decker ◽

Pamela C Egan ◽

Diana O Treaba ◽

Adam J Olszewski

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

High Intensity ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

High Grade ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

Cns Prophylaxis ◽

Cns Relapse

Abstract Background: The 2017 World Health Organization (WHO) classification distinguished new categories of high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBCL). Treatment of these lymphomas is in flux, as some were historically classified as DLBCL and treated with the RCHOP regimen, while others, akin to Burkitt lymphoma (BL), were treated using high-intensity regimens (e.g. CODOX-M/IVAC or hyper-CVAD) that include systemic high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) as central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis . Recently, the less intensive DA-EPOCH-R regimen has been increasingly applied for BL or HGBCL with concurrent MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements based on phase 2 data (Dunleavy et al., NEJM 2013). We examined progression-free survival (PFS) and risk of CNS relapse among HGBCL/BL patients treated in our institution. Methods: In this retrospective series from an academic center, we integrated cancer registry and electronic medical records for all patients treated for BL or HGBCL at Lifespan Cancer Institute in 2005-2017. We designated as "HGBCL" all cases with concurrent MYC and BCL2/BCL6 rearrangements, or those previously diagnosed as "B-cell lymphoma, unclassifiable, with features intermediate between DLBCL and BL" (per WHO 2008). We compared characteristics of patients treated with intensive regimens or with DA-EPOCH-R, as well as their PFS (using log-rank test) and cumulative incidence function (CIF) of CNS relapse (using Gray's test). Results: Among 64 patients with BL (n=38) and HGBCL (n=26), those with BL were somewhat younger (median age 52 versus [vs.] 61 years), more often male (84% vs. 58%), HIV-positive (29% vs. 8%), or with CNS involvement at baseline (21% vs. 4%). Among HGBCLs, 58% had a MYC rearrangement, whereas 31% had concurrent MYC and BCL2/BCL6 rearrangements. Eight patients who did not receive chemotherapy (median age, 78 years) were excluded from outcome analysis. Compared with patients with BL, those with HGBCL more often received DA-EPOCH-R (41% vs. 15%) or R-CHOP (27% vs. 12%), and less often high-intensity regimens (32% vs. 73%, P=.027). Compared with patients treated using high-intensity regimens, those treated with DA-EPOCH-R were significantly older (61 vs. 49 years, P=.023), with high/high-intermediate International Prognostic Index (IPI, 86% vs. 50%, P=.027), or diagnosis after 2010 (86% vs. 53%, P=.049). There was no difference in baseline CNS involvement (P=.68) or receipt of intrathecal prophylaxis (P=.16) between DA-EPOCH-R and high-intensity regimens. After median follow-up of 5.7 years, we observed 12 recurrences, including 5 (42%) in the CNS. Median PFS was not reached, whereas 3-year PFS was 56% (95% confidence interval [CI], 42-68%), numerically better in BL than in HGBCL (63% vs. 45%, P=.33, Fig. A). Overall survival at 3 years was also 56% (95%CI, 41-68%). Factors associated with shorter PFS included age >60 years (log-rank P=.017), poor performance status (P<.001), high/high-intermediate IPI (P=.0003), and lack of CNS prophylaxis (P=.021). Treatment with DA-EPOCH-R rather than a high-intensity regimen was also associated with worse PFS (P=.001), but not when stratified by histology and age (P=.14). HIV status (P=.53) or CNS involvement at baseline (P=.15) were not prognostic. Survival after recurrence was dismal (median, 1 month, 95%CI, 0.2-3.4), despite 58% of patients receiving salvage therapy. The 3-year CIF of CNS recurrence was 9% (95%CI, 3-18%), and higher in patients with CNS involvement at baseline (P=.002). All CNS recurrences occurred during the first year of follow-up and were among patients receiving DA-EPOCH-R (35.7% vs. 0% for other regimens, P=.0004). Administration of HDMTX for CNS prophylaxis was associated with a numerically lower risk of CNS recurrence (3% vs. 16% without, P=.09, Fig. B). Conversely, we observed no difference in CNS relapse with or without intrathecal prophylaxis (9% vs. 8%, P=.84, Fig. C). Conclusions: The high proportion of CNS recurrences despite prophylaxis, and very poor outcomes at relapse, indicate persistent major areas of need in BL/HGBCL. Outcomes of DA-EPOCH-R were heavily influenced by selection bias (as evidenced by unfavorable characteristics of patients selected for this regimen), so evaluation of this regimen in comparison with high-intensity approaches is warranted in a larger sample. However, our data suggest that in BL/HGBCL systemic HDMTX may be essential for effective CNS prophylaxis. Disclosures Olszewski: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Rituximab-CHOP and Central Nervous System Prophylaxis Using Intrathecal Methotrexate in Primary Breast Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: A Prospective, Multicenter, Single-Arm Phase II Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122631 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4076-4076

Author(s):

Ho-Young Yhim ◽

Cheolwon Suh ◽

Seok Jin Kim ◽

Deok-Hwan Yang ◽

Hyeon-Seok Eom ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Phase Ii ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase Ii Study ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Intrathecal Methotrexate ◽

Cns Prophylaxis ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma

Background: Primary breast diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has poor outcomes with frequent extranodal failures, particularly in the central nervous system (CNS). To prevent CNS recurrence, we designed this phase II trial that addressed feasibility and activity of conventional immunochemotherapy and CNS prophylaxis. Methods: This prospective, multicenter, single-arm phase II study was conducted to evaluate efficacy and safety of 6 cycles of conventional rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 21 days (R-CHOP) with the addition of 4 doses of intrathecal methotrexate (IT MTX; 12mg) during the first 4 cycles of R-CHOP in patients with primary breast DLBCL. Primary breast lymphoma was defined as lymphoma involving one or both breasts as a sole extranodal site regardless of specific nodal involvement status. The primary end-point was 2-year progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end-points included cumulative incidence of CNS recurrence, overall survival (OS), and safety. All patients provided written informed consents and the study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01448096. Results: Thirty-three patients with primary breast DLBCL were enrolled between Jan 2012 and Jul 2017 in the Consortium for Improving Survival of Lymphoma (CISL) member institutions. The median age was 50 years at diagnosis (range, 29-75) and all were female. Right breast involvement was more common than left (18 [55%] vs 14 [42%]) and bilateral breast involvement was found in one patient (3%). Nodal involvement was present in 16 patients (49%), primarily in regional nodes (14 patients). Thus, the Ann Arbor stage was IE in 17 (52%), IIE in 13 (39%), IIIE in 2 (6.1%), and IV in 1 (3.0%). ECOG performance status was ≥2 in 1 patient (3%) and serum LDH level was elevated in 9 (27%). Therefore, the IPI and the CNS-IPI risk were mainly low (28 patients, 85%; respectively). No patients had CNS involvement at diagnosis. 32 (97%) of the 33 patients completed R-CHOP as planned, and the remaining patient withdraw a consent after four cycles of R-CHOP because of poor tolerance. CNS prophylaxis using IT MTX was completed as planned in 31 patients (94%), but it was discontinued in 2 patients because of patient's refusal. These 2 patients received two and three IT MTX doses, respectively. 32 patients (97%) were evaluable for treatment response and all these patients achieved a complete response. At the cutoff date of this analysis (10 Jul 2019), all patients who entered a follow-up phase had at least 24.0 months of follow-up. With a median follow-up duration of 46.1 months (IQR 31.1-66.8), 6 patients had experienced treatment failure and 3 of these died. The 2-year PFS and OS were 81.3% (95% CI, 67.7-94.8) and 93.5% (95% CI, 84.9-100.0), respectively (fig 1A and B). Of the 6 patients with treatment failure, diseases involved CNS with or without lymph nodes in 4 patients and breasts in 2 patients (1 ipsilateral and 1 contralateral breast recurrence). 3 of the four patients with CNS recurrence had isolated CNS recurrences (2 brain parenchymal and 1 meningeal disease) and one had a concurrent meningeal and lymph nodal recurrence. All 4 patients with CNS recurrence had received prophylactic IT MTX as planned by protocol. The 2-year cumulative incidence of CNS recurrence, taking into account the competing risk of death, was 12.5% (95% CI, 0.3-23.2, fig 1C). Although the number of patients with intermediate CNS-IPI risk was small (5 patients, 15%), the cumulative incidence of CNS recurrence did not differ significantly according to the CNS-IPI risk group. All CNS recurrences occurred within the first 2 years after enrolment. Toxicities were generally manageable during the R-CHOP and IT MTX treatment. No deaths as a result of toxicity occurred during treatment. Conclusion: Our study shows that conventional R-CHOP with prophylactic IT MTX is feasible in patients with primary breast DLBCL. However, given a substantially high rate of CNS recurrence, further studies to properly define the best strategy for CNS prophylaxis should be needed in patients with primary breast DLBCL. Figure 1 Disclosures Yoon: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding. Kim:Celltrion: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Donga: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; J + J: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Molecular Correlates of Central Nervous System Relapse in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-124235 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 2763-2763

Author(s):

Robert Kridel ◽

Keren Isaev ◽

Daisuke Ennishi ◽

Brian Skinnider ◽

Karen Mungall ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gene Expression ◽

B Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

Gene Set Enrichment ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Cns Relapse ◽

Systemic Relapse

Introduction: Central nervous system (CNS) relapse is a rare phenomenon in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), occurring in less than 5% of all patients, but is associated with disproportionate morbidity and mortality. Indeed, the median survival of patients diagnosed with CNS relapse is as low as 2-4 months. Individual risk factors for CNS relapse are well established, and include clinical parameters such as stage, number/type of extranodal sites and elevated lactate dehydrogenase. These and other clinical risk factors have been integrated into a risk score that is reproducible and easy to calculate (CNS International Prognostic Index). Moreover, molecular attributes such as double-hit translocation status, MYC/BCL2 dual protein expression and the activated B-cell-like subtype have been associated with a higher risk of CNS relapse. However, while experts recommend prophylactic interventions for high-risk patients, the major shortcoming of available risk tools is their limited sensitivity. Herein, we evaluated whether gene expression and/or mutational profiles can identify those patients that will ultimately experience CNS relapse, and whether intratumoral heterogeneity impedes accurate prognostication. Methods: We accrued diagnostic FFPET samples from 230 newly diagnosed DLBCL patients, selected to fall into 3 clinical groups: 1) cases with CNS relapse/CNS involvement at diagnosis (n=58); 2) cases with systemic relapse but without CNS relapse (n=64) and 3) cases without any relapse (n=108). These 230 samples were subjected to microarray-based gene expression profiling and differential gene expression analysis. Pathway analysis was performed using Gene Set Enrichment Analysis on ranked gene lists. We assembled a partially overlapping dataset with mutation data of 45 genes in 213 diagnostic samples (n=65 with CNS relapse, 62 with systemic relapse and 86 without relapse). Lastly, we performed exome sequencing in 5 pairs (peripheral and CNS parenchymal tumors) of patients with CNS relapse or CNS involvement at diagnosis, and reconstructed clonal phylogenies using PyClone. Results: Focusing on gene expression data at first, we did not observe significant differential expression between CNS relapse and non-relapse cases at the individual gene level. This was in contrast to the comparison between systemic relapse vs. non-relapse cases where 368 genes were differentially expressed (adjusted P<0.05). In terms of pathway analysis, minimal gene set enrichment was seen in CNS relapse cases, whereas functional annotations such as translation, ribosome biogenesis and MYC targets were significantly enriched in cases with systemic relapse. In keeping with these observations, the percentage of cases that were positive for the recently published double hit signature was highest in cases with systemic relapse (64% vs. 39% in CNS relapse cases and 27% in cases without relapse, P=0.012). However, CNS relapsing cases were defined by down-regulation of numerous immune signatures (e.g. interferon and multiple T cell signatures), suggesting that an intact immune response may have a protective effect on CNS relapse. Considering mutation data, we found that TP53 and SGK were most commonly mutated in systemic relapse cases, while TNFRSF14 and KTM2D were most commonly mutated in non-relapse cases (all adjusted P<0.05). The only gene mutation with a borderline significant trend for enrichment in CNS relapse cases was MYD88 (adjusted P=0.05). We then performed exome sequencing of 5 tumor pairs. A subset of high-confidence somatic variants and tumor purity were used as input for PyClone to infer clonal population structures. In all pairs, we documented the existence of common ancestral mutations, as well as significant clonal divergence, with CNS-exclusive mutations not identified in diagnostic specimens. Conclusion: In summary, we have documented that CNS and systemic relapse result from distinct biological processes that, in part, may be associated with the underlying taxonomy of DLBCL. Our findings further show that CNS relapse results from the dissemination of sub-clones that may not be readily sampled at the time of diagnosis, and that intratumoral heterogeneity may limit our ability to predict CNS relapse. Large-scale, integrative analyses and in-depth characterization of clonal trajectories hold the promise to increase our ability to predict dissemination of DLBCL into the CNS. Disclosures Kridel: Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Villa:Roche, Abbvie, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Lundbeck, AstraZeneca, Nanostring, Janssen, Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Steidl:Nanostring: Patents & Royalties: Filed patent on behalf of BC Cancer; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Tioma: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Savage:BMS, Merck, Novartis, Verastem, Abbvie, Servier, and Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Scott:Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution], Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Lymphocyte-to-Monocyte Ratio at Diagnosis and Survival in De Novo Double/Triple Hit Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.3885.3885 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 3885-3885

Author(s):

Luis Porrata ◽

Kay Ristow ◽

Ellen D. McPhail ◽

William Macon ◽

Matthew J Maurer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prognostic Factor ◽

B Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

De Novo ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Lymphocyte To Monocyte Ratio ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Large B Cell

Abstract The lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio at diagnosis (LMR-D) has been reported to be a prognostic factor for clinical outcomes in both T-cell and B-cell lymphomas. However, there are no reports testing the prognostic ability of LMR-D in patients diagnosed with de novo double/triple hit diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Thus, we set out to investigate if the LMR-D is a prognostic factor for survival in de novo double/triple hit lymphomas. From 10/5/1998 until 1/16/2015, thirty-four patients with de novo double/triple hit DLBCL were identified for this study. Double and triple hit were defined by interphase FISH evaluating three fusion signals to identify the BCL2 translocation and IGK/MYC D-FISH probe to identify whether the partner is IG or non-IG. Interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was performed on paraffin sections using probes that included 8q24 (5'MYC, 3'MYC); t (2;8), IGK/MYC; t(8,14), MYC/IGH; t(8;22), MYC/IGL; 3q27 (3'BCL6, 5'BCL'6); and 18q21 (3'BCL2, 5'BCL2). The cohort included 14 females and 20 males. The median follow-up for the cohort was 9.0 months (range: 0.4-72.6 months). Using the median for the LMR-D as the cut-off value, patients with a LMR-D ≥ 1.2 experienced superior overall survival (OS) [Hazard ratio (HR) of 0.127, 95% confidence interval (CI) of 0.019-0.530, p < 0.004] and progression-free survival (PFS) [HR of 0.107, 95 CI of 0.024-0.335, p < 0.0001]. The median follow up for OS for patients with a LMR-D ≥ 1.2 was not reached with a 5-year OS rate of 82% (95% CI of 49%-95%) compared with a median follow-up of 10 months for patients with a LMR-D < 1.2 with a 0% 5 year OS rate, p < 0.003 (Figure 1A). The median PFS for patients with a LMR-D ≥ 2 was not reached with a 5 years PFS of 74% (95%CI, of 43%-91%) compared with a median follow-up of 4.7 months for patients with a LMR-D < 1.2 and 0% 5 year PFS rate, p < 0.0001 (Figure 1B). After adjusting for the International Prognostic Index, multivariate analysis showed that the LMR-D remained an independent prognostic factor for OS [HR = 0.180, 95% CI of 0.254-0.784, p < 0.02] and for PFS [HR of 0.127, 95%CI of 0.029-0.409, p < 0.0003]. In spite of the small cohort of de novo double/triple hit DLBCL, the LMR-D was identified as a prognostic factor for clinical outcomes for this specific set of aggressive lymphomas. Further studies are warranted to confirm our findings. Table.LMR-D ≥ 1.2, N = 18Events = 2LMR-D < 1.2, N = 16Events = 8P < 0.003LMR-D ≥ 1.2, N = 18Events = 3LMR-D < 1.2, N = 16Events = 14P < 0.0001Figure 1AB Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Maurer: Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Off Label Use: New agent in a combination regimen..

Download Full-text

Randomized Phase III Trial of 131iodine-Tositumomab (Bexxar)/Carmustine, Etoposide, Cytarabine, Melphalan (BEAM) Vs. Rituximab/BEAM and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation for Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): No Difference in Progression-Free (PFS) or Overall Survival (OS)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.661.661 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 661-661 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Julie M Vose ◽

Shelly L Carter ◽

Linda J Burns ◽

Ernesto Ayala ◽

Oliver W. Press ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Stem Cell Transplantation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Off Label Use ◽

Off Label ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Large B Cell

Abstract Abstract 661 Objective: To compare 131Iodine-Tositumomab/BEAM to Rituximab/BEAM as the conditioning regimen followed by autologous stem cell transplantation for patients with relapsed chemotherapy sensitive DLBCL. Patients and Methods: The Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network (BMT CTN 0401) study sponsored by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the National Cancer Institute enrolled 224 patients between 1/06 and 7/09. Eligible patients were age 18–80 years, had a Karnofsky performance score > 70%, persistent or recurrent DLBCL, chemotherapy sensitive disease, and had received 1–3 prior chemotherapy regimens. Patients with transformed DLBCL were excluded. Patients were randomized to receive 131Iodine Tositumomab (dosimetric dose of 5 mCi on day −19 and therapeutic dose of 75 cGy on day −12), carmustine 300 mg/m2 (day −6), etoposide 100 mg/m2 twice daily × 4 (days −5 to −2), cytarabine 100 mg/m2 twice daily × 4 (days −5 to −2), and melphalan 140 mg/m2 (day −1) (Bexxar/BEAM, n=111) vs. rituximab 375 mg/m2 on days −19 and −12 with the BEAM regimen (R/BEAM, n=113). All drugs were given intravenously. The median age at the time of transplant was 56.8 years in the Bexxar/BEAM and 58.8 years in the R/BEAM arm. All 224 patients were included in the intent to treat analysis for the primary endpoint of 2-year PFS. Twelve patients were not transplanted and two patients were ineligible based upon incorrect pathologic subtype and therefore were not included in further analyses Results: The median follow-up of the patients was 25.5 months (mo) (range 13.8– 47.0) in the Bexxar/ BEAM and 24.7 mos (range 4.7 – 58.6) in the R/BEAM arms, respectively. The primary end point of 2-year PFS was 47.9% (95% CI: 38.2%, 57.0%) for Bexxar/BEAM and 48.6% (95% CI: 38.6%, 57.8%) for R/BEAM (p= 0.94). The 2-year OS of all randomized patients was 61.0% (95% CI: 50.9%, 69.6%) for Bexxar/BEAM and 65.6% (95% CI: 55.3%, 74.1%) for R/BEAM (p= 0.38). Patients in complete remission after salvage chemotherapy (CR2) had an improved 2-yr OS compared to patients with primary induction failure (PIF) or chemosensitive relapse (p= 0.005). However, there were no differences in any group by treatment arm. 2-yr OS for CR2 patients with Bexxar/BEAM was 76.9% (95% CI: 62.9%, 86.1%) compared to 79.9% (95% CI: 64.7%, 89.1%) with R/BEAM (p= 0.61). The most common cause of failure was progression/relapse of the lymphoma with a cumulative incidence of relapse/progression at 2 yrs post transplant of 45.0% (95% CI: 35.2%, 54.8%) in the Bexxar/BEAM arm and 48.1% (95% CI: 38.1%, 58.1%) in the R/BEAM arm (p= 0.69). The treatment related mortality was 4.9% (95% CI: 0.8%, 9.0%) in the Bexxar/BEAM and 4.1% (95% CI: 0.2%, 8.0%) in the R/BEAM arms at 2 years post transplant (p= 0.97). Engraftment was similar with neutrophils to > 500/ul in 96.1% (95% CI: 92.2%, 100%) of Bexxar/BEAM and 93.5% (95% CI: 88.6%, 98.4%) of R/BEAM patients by day +28 (p= 0.40). Platelet recovery to > 20,000/ul with no transfusion by day +100 was present in 84.5% (95% CI: 77.4%, 91.6%) of the Bexxar/BEAM and 81.3% (95% CI: 73.9%, 88.7%) of the R/BEAM patients (p= 0.58). The median maximum mucositis score (by OMAS scale) was higher in the Bexxar/BEAM patients at 0.72 compared to 0.31 in the R/BEAM patients (p < 0.0001). One case of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) was reported in each arm of the trial and one additional case of acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) was reported in the R/BEAM arm. By exploratory analyses, immune reconstitution as measured by levels of quantitative immunoglobulins and B and T-lymphocyte subsets was not different between the two randomized arms at baseline, day +100, day +365, or day +730. Conclusions: The Bexxar/BEAM and the R/BEAM regimens produced similar 2-yr PFS and OS for patients with chemotherapy sensitive relapsed DLBCL. No differences in engraftment or other toxicities were apparent other than an increase in mucositis with the Bexxar/BEAM regimen. No significant difference in the risk of MDS or AML could be detected with the current follow up. Disclosures: Vose: Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Exelixis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Off Label Use: 131 Iodine Tositumomab combined with BEAM chemotherapy as a transplant preparative regimen for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is an off label use. Burns:Novartis: Research Funding. Press:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria. Fenske:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium (Takeda) Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Natural History of Central Nervous System Relapse in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma in the Immunochemotherapy Era

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.1456.1456 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 1456-1456

Author(s):

Gita Thanarajasingam ◽

Matthew J Maurer ◽

Umar Farooq ◽

Patrick B. Johnston ◽

Carrie Thompson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Cell Of Origin ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

Cns Disease ◽

Cns Relapse ◽

History Of

Abstract Introduction Relapse in the central nervous system is an uncommon complication of diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) associated with a poor prognosis. The addition of rituximab to chemotherapy has improved outcomes in patients with DLBCL but its effect on the outcome of patients with CNS relapse is not well characterized. Here we present the natural history of patients with CNS relapse in a large cohort of patients with DLBCL who were treated in the immunochemotherapy (IC) era. Methods Newly diagnosed patients with DLBCL or primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) and treated with primary anthracycline based IC were prospectively enrolled on the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) within 9 months of diagnosis and followed for relapse, retreatment, and death. Clinical management at diagnosis and subsequent therapies were per treating physician. Patients with documented CNS involvement at diagnosis, primary CNS lymphoma, or post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorder at diagnosis were excluded. All CNS relapse and retreatment details were verified by medical record review. Results 1017 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL or PMBCL, no documented CNS disease at diagnosis, and treated with IC were enrolled in the MER between 2002 and 2012. At a median follow-up of 59 months (range 1-148), 36 patients had CNS relapse. The cumulative incidence of CNS relapse was 3.1% (95% CI: 2.2%-4.4%) at 2 years and 3.7% (95% CI: 2.7%-5.0%) at 5 years after diagnosis. CNS involvement was identified after first line IC in 25 patients, and after salvage therapy in 11 patients. 22 patients had an isolated CNS relapse, while 14 had both systemic and CNS disease at relapse. The incidence of isolated CNS relapse at two years from diagnosis was 1.9% (95% CI: 1.2%-3.0%, figure 1). CNS involvement was parenchymal in 22 patients, leptomeningeal in 11, and parenchymal and leptomeningeal in 3 patients. At diagnosis, this subset of 36 patients had a median age of 61 years (range 20-86); 25 (69%) were male. IPI was 0-1 in 6 patients, 2 in 13 patients, 3 in 11 patients and 4-5 in 6 patients. Cell of origin per Hans algorithm was available in 17 patients, 8 were GCB and 9 were non-GCB. Extranodal sites of disease at diagnosis included testicular (2), renal (5), bone (10) and bone marrow (6). 7 patients had no sites of extranodal disease. LDH was elevated in 71%. The German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Study Group CNS risk score was low risk in 6 patients, intermediate risk in 22 patients, and high risk in 8 patients. 6 patients received CNS prophylaxis with their initial immunochemotherapy, including 3 of the 21 patients who subsequently developed isolated CNS disease. First line therapy after CNS relapse included high dose methotrexate based chemotherapy in 22 patients and other systemic regimens in 6, with intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy in 5. Overall survival in patients after CNS relapse was poor with a median survival of 6.3 months (95% CI: 2.9-15.5) and 12-month survival rate of 29% (95% CI: 17%-49%). Patients who had CNS relapse following initial IC had better subsequent survival (median OS = 7.6 months) compared to patients with first presentation of CNS relapse following salvage therapy (OS = 2.1 months, p=0.005, see figure 2). 10 patients (28%) proceeded to SCT after CNS relapse, of which 6 remain alive at a median follow-up of 39 months. There were no differences in post-CNS relapse survival by age, sex, CNS risk score, cell of origin, extranodal site involvement at diagnosis, or site of CNS relapse (all p>0.10), though power was limited due to small numbers. Conclusions The incidence of CNS relapse in DLBCL is approximately 4% in the immunochemotherapy era. The vast majority of CNS relapses occur within 2 years of diagnosis. Isolated relapse in patients without CNS involvement at diagnosis is a relatively rare event with an incidence of approximately 2% at 2 years of diagnosis. Outcomes remain poor, and standard clinical variables do not predict survival after CNS relapse. Novel therapeutic approaches are needed in this population, with consideration to autologous SCT, which produces durable remission in a subset of patients. Disclosures Maurer: Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Farooq:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Thompson:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Cerhan:Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Link:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Development of Novel CAR Therapies for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Using Genome-Wide Overexpression Screens

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-148485 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1726-1726

Author(s):

Mat Legut ◽

Zoran Gajic ◽

Maria Guarino ◽

Eleni Mimitou ◽

Stephanie Hao ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cells ◽

T Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Car T Cell ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Car T ◽

Large B Cell

Abstract Despite recent therapeutic advances in the management of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), up to 50% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) relapse after first line therapy, and for DLBCL patients who relapse within 12 months after subsequent stem cell transplant (SCT), the median overall survival (OS) is 6.3 months. Recently, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has shown remarkable activity in relapsed DLBCL with complete response (CR) rate of 40% and 54% for the two of the FDA-approved CAR T-cell products, tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel, respectively. However, at a median follow-up of 18 months, only 36% of patients treated with tisagenlecleucel remained in CR; with longer follow-up for axicabtagene ciloleucel the median progression free survival (PFS) was 5.9 months. Immune escape and immune evasion are primary mechanisms of CAR-T resistance; clearly improvements are needed to increase response rate and cure. While CRISPR-based loss-of-function screens have shown promise for high-throughput identification of genes that modulate T-cell response, these methods have been limited thus far to negative regulators of T-cell functions, and raise safety concerns due to the permanent nature of genome modification. Here we identify positive T-cell regulators via overexpression of ~12,000 barcoded human open reading frames (ORFs). Using this genome-scale ORF screen, we found modulator genes which increased primary human CD4+ and CD8+ T-cell proliferation, including activation markers like CD25 and CD40L, and secretion of key cytokines like interleukin-2 and interferon-gamma. In addition, we developed a single-cell genomics method (OverCITE-seq) for high-throughput quantification of the transcriptome and surface proteome in ORF-engineered T-cells. The top-ranked ORF, lymphotoxin beta receptor (LTBR), is typically expressed in a subset of myeloid cells but absent in lymphocytes. When expressed in T-cells, LTBR induces a profound transcriptional remodelling, resulting in increased resistance to exhaustion and activation-induced apoptosis, as well as upregulation of a plethora of proinflammatory cytokines, co-stimulatory molecules and antigen presentation machinery. In order to investigate the mechanism of action of LTBR, we developed an epistasis assay which allows for simultaneous gene knockout and LTBR overexpression in primary T cells. Thus, LTBR appears to induce both canonical and non-canonical NFkB pathways - but the phenotype observed in T cells is dependent only on the former. Finally, we co-expressed several top-ranked genes, including LTBR, with FDA approved CD19-targeting CARs utilizing either 4-1BB or CD28 co-stimulatory domains. In line with previous results, co-expression of top-ranked ORFs increased proinflammatory cytokine secretion and cytotoxicity against CD19+ positive cancer cell lines. This functional improvement was also observed when top-ranked ORFs and CARs were delivered to T cells isolated from DLBCL patients as shown in Figure 1. Our results provide several strategies for improving next generation CAR T-cell therapies via induction of new synthetic cell programs which may optimize immune activation and enhance the efficacy of these important therapies, a high priority for patients with relapsed and refractory DLBCL and other lymphomas. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Mimitou: Immunai: Current Employment. Smibert: Immunai: Current Employment. Diefenbach: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; IMab: Research Funding; Gilead: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Celgene: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; IGM Biosciences: Research Funding; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; MEI: Consultancy, Research Funding; Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone Health: Current Employment; Incyte: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc./ F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Sanjana: Qiagen: Consultancy; Vertex: Consultancy.

Download Full-text