scholarly journals Follicular Lymphoma Microenvironment Signatures Define Patients Subsets Obtaining Long Term Clinical Benefit after Single-Agent First-Line Anti-CD20 Immunotherapy

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3500-3500
Author(s):  
Enrico Derenzini ◽  
Marcello Del Corvo ◽  
Maria Chiara Quattrocchi ◽  
Marta Castelli ◽  
Maria Rosaria Sapienza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
First Line ◽  
Immune Signature ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Term Benefit

Abstract The role of first-line single agent Rituximab immunotherapy in follicular lymphoma (FL) is still a matter of debate. Although a subset of patients (pts) may obtain long term benefit with upfront immunotherapy, first-line therapy with standard chemoimmunotherapy offers better results in terms of progression free survival (PFS) compared to single agent Rituximab. On the other hand, there is no clear demonstration of sizeable long term benefit with first-line Rituximab compared to an initial wait and see approach, as most FL pts will ultimately be exposed to chemotherapy at some point in their disease course. Here we show that the efficacy of front line anti CD20 immunotherapy in FL could be dependent on microenvironmental factors, and that specific immune signatures could define FL pts subsets obtaining maximal benefit from upfront anti CD20 immunotherapy. First, we retrospectively analyzed the outcome of our single center cohort of 81 FL pts treated with first-line single agent Rituximab therapy with (n=53) or without (n=28) maintenance. The vast majority of pts considered in this analysis were treated in the context of several clinical trials exploring the efficacy of upfront single agent originator (SAKK 35/98, 35/03, 35/10: n= 68) or biosimilar (JASMINE and REFLECTIONS B328/06 n= 9) Rituximab, which were ran at our center from 2000 to 2018. Four patients received off-label single agent Rituximab. Median age was 55 years (y), 52% (42) of patients were female, 72% (58) stage III-IV, 76% (62) were Follicular international prognostic index (FLIPI) score 0-2, 26% (21) were bulky, 52% (42) were high tumor burden according to the GELF criteria. After a median follow-up of 9.5 y, the overall survival (OS) and PFS rates were 82% and 35% respectively. With a long follow-up, these data are in line with previous findings indicating that a sizeable fraction of FL pts derive long term benefit from upfront single agent Rituximab maintaining a continuous complete remission. Paraffin embedded tissue from initial diagnosis was available in 39 pts. In order to dissect determinants of Rituximab immunotherapy efficacy in this homogeneous chemo-naive population, we analyzed FL diagnostic biopsies (n=39 FL + 5 healthy controls) with targeted gene expression profiling (T-GEP) on the NanoString platform, using the PanCancer Immune Profiling panel, which includes 730 genes belonging to the most relevant immunologic checkpoints and pathways. A 20-gene signature including genes involved in chemokine-cytokine signaling, T-regulatory cells, natural-killer cell activity and interleukin-17 signaling was significantly associated with the achievement of a complete response after induction +/- maintenance treatment. A simple 6-gene immune signature (hereafter ImSig) was found to be significantly associated with PFS, with IL22RA2, CCL22, TNFRSF4, IL17RB, CCL19 overexpression and CD209 downregulation being associated with worse outcome. By applying the maxstat package 10-y PFS was 65% for ImSig low pts vs 6% for ImSig high pts (p<0.0001). In multivariate analysis only the 6-gene ImSig and Rituximab maintenance retained independent prognostic value (p<0.001 and 0.002 respectively). As opposite, GELF criteria (present/absent = 27/12) and FLIPI score (0-2/3-5 = 23/16) were not associated with PFS. The 6-gene immune signature was validated in silico in 2 independent publicly available cohorts of FL pts treated with upfront chemoimmunotherapy: a cohort of 137 pts (Silva et al 2019, Affimetryx platform) and a cohort of 50 pts (Bararia et al. 2020), the latter analyzed on the NanoString Platform with the same T-GEP panel (PanCancer Immune Profiling) used in our discovery cohort. The 6-gene signature was confirmed to be a powerful outcome predictor in these 2 chemoimmunotherapy-treated cohorts, and notably the 10-y PFS rates of ImSig low vs high patients mirrored the results observed with single agent immunotherapy in the discovery cohort. The results here reported indicate that pts with a favorable immune signature could derive maximal benefit from a first-line chemo-free treatment approach with single agent Rituximab, achieving and maintaining complete remission in the long term, irrespective of the tumor burden and other clinical variables. Thus, profiling of FL microenvironment with T-GEP could provide a useful tool for selecting patients who may be suitable for a chemo-free upfront treatment with anti CD20 immunotherapy. Disclosures Derenzini: TG-THERAPEUTICS: Research Funding; ASTRA-ZENECA: Consultancy, Other: ADVISORY-BOARD; ADC-THERAPEUTICS: Research Funding; TAKEDA: Research Funding; BEIGENE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD. Pileri: CELGENE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; NANOSTRING: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; ROCHE: Other: ADVISORY-BOARD. Tarella: ADC-THERAPEUTICS: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; Abbvie: Other: ADVISORY BOARD. OffLabel Disclosure: First line single agent Rituximab in Follicular Lymphoma

scholarly journals Results of a Phase II Study of Obinutuzumab in Combination with Lenalidomide in Previously Untreated, High Tumor Burden Follicular Lymphoma (FL)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 125-125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Loretta J. Nastoupil ◽  
Jason R. Westin ◽  
Fredrick B. Hagemeister ◽  
Hun Ju Lee ◽  
Luis Fayad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Nk Cell ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
High Tumor Burden ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Grade 3

Introduction: FL, the most common indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, is characterized by a defective immune microenvironment that suppresses normal T-cell and natural-killer (NK)-cell activity. The clinical course is often depicted by high initial response rates coupled with a prolonged natural history and repeated relapses with most patients (pts) succumbing to their disease. Effective, well tolerated therapies are desirable. Obinutuzumab (O) is a humanized, type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody glycoengineered for enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC). Lenalidomide (len) is an immunomodulatory agent that binds the cereblon E3 ubiquitin ligase complex resulting in recruitment, ubiquitination, and degradation of transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros resulting in T-cell and NK-cell activation. Therefore, combining O with len is anticipated to be synergistic in augmenting the innate and adaptive immune response in FL. The combination has been shown to be well tolerated and effective in relapsed FL (Fowler ICML 2017). Therefore, we sought to explore the efficacy and safety of O-len in previously untreated, high tumor burden FL. Methods: We conducted as single-center, phase 2 study in previously untreated, stage II, III, or IV, high tumor burden (defined by GELF) FL (grade 1, 2 or 3A). Pts received 1000mg of O on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2-6, and day 1 of even numbered cycles, cycle 8-30. Cycle length was 28 days. Len was administered as 20mg on days 1-21 of cycles 1-6. Pts in a complete response (CR) after 6 cycles received reduced dose len (10mg on days 1-21) for cycles 7-18. Among pts in a partial response (PR) after 6 cycles, len was continued at 20mg for the next 3-6 cycles or until CR, whichever occurred first, len was then dose reduced to 10mg on days 1-21 for the remainder of 18 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years (according to Lugano 2014 criteria). Secondary endpoints included: safety, CR, PR, overall response (ORR), and overall survival (OS). Results: 90 pts with high tumor burden FL were enrolled. Median age was 58 years (range 33-84), 52% (N=47) were male, 67 (74%) had an ECOG performance status of 0, 9 (10%) had stage II, 23 (26%) stage III, and 58 (64%) had stage IV disease. The majority had grade 1/2 FL (80%). Twenty-one percent had low risk FLIPI scores, 37% intermediate risk, and 42% were high risk. With a median follow-up of 22 months (range 1-30 months), the 2-year PFS estimate is 96% (95% CI 92-100%) with only 2 pts experiencing progression to date. The ORR is 98% (85 CR, 1 PR), 92% achieved a CR at the first response assessment (cycle 4, day 1). Correlative studies are underway including serial circulating tumor DNA measurements. No deaths have been observed to date. Eleven pts (12%) discontinued therapy as a result of an adverse event (AE), upper respiratory infection was the most common reason (N=5). Other reasons included bradycardia with sick sinus syndrome, urinary tract infection, constipation, abdominal pain, fatigue, foot neuroma (N=1 for each instance). The most common grade 3 or higher AEs include neutropenia (16%, grade 3 N=5, grade 4 N= 9), rash (10%), lung infection (4%), neutropenic fever (1%). Conclusions: O-Len was associated with very high CR rates and 2-year PFS estimates in untreated, high tumor burden FL. The toxicity profile was manageable. Further study of this effective, immune therapy approach in untreated FL is warranted. Figure Disclosures Nastoupil: Bayer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Honoraria. Westin:Genentech: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Unum: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Juno: Other: Advisory Board; 47 Inc: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Other: Advisory Board; Kite: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Curis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding. Parmar:Cellenkos Inc.: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Wang:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MoreHealth: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; BioInvent: Consultancy, Research Funding; VelosBio: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aviara: Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Honoraria. Neelapu:Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Consultancy; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Poseida: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fowler:ABBVIE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Lenalidomide in untreated follicular lymphoma

Long-Term Follow-Up of Patients With Newly Diagnosed Follicular Lymphoma in the Prerituximab Era: Effect of Response Quality on Survival—A Study From the Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomes de l'Adulte

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 822-829 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Bachy ◽  
Pauline Brice ◽  
Richard Delarue ◽  
Nicole Brousse ◽  
Corinne Haioun ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
Response Quality ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
First Line Treatment

Purpose First-line treatment for patients with newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma (FL) still remains debated, even in the rituximab-based combination therapy era. Few studies have addressed the question whether complete remission (CR) translates into better survival. The aim of this study was to assess the long-term follow-up of prospectively treated patients with FL and the potential correlation between response quality to first-line treatment and overall survival (OS). Patients and Methods Data from 536 patients with FL with low (n = 193) or high (n = 343) tumor burden enrolled from October 1986 to May 1995 in the French and Belgian GELF86 studies were analyzed. Data from these trials have been previously reported for low–tumor burden and high–tumor burden patients. Results Median follow-up was 14.9 years, and median OS was 9.8 years. Treated patients who achieved a complete response (CR; n = 194; 45%) had a significant longer OS than those only reaching a partial response (PR; n = 168; 39%) throughout treatment (hazard ratio [HR], 0.55; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.72; P < .001) in an univariate time-dependent Cox model. Similar findings were found when response to treatment (CR v PR) was adjusted for potentially confounding factors in a multivariate model (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.73; P < .001). Conclusion These data provide a long follow-up of these patients' cohorts and indicate that a better response to first-line treatment translates into an improved survival for patients with FL. Therefore, response-adapted therapy aiming to achieve a CR should be considered as first-line treatment.

scholarly journals Long-Term Efficacy of First-Line Ibrutinib Treatment for Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) With 4 Years of Follow-Up in Patients With TP53 Aberrations (del(17p) or TP53 Mutation): A Pooled Analysis From 4 Clinical Trials

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 23-24
Author(s):  
John N. Allan ◽  
Tait Shanafelt ◽  
Adrian Wiestner ◽  
Carol Moreno ◽  
Susan M. O'Brien ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Tp53 Mutation ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

Background : The presence of TP53 aberrations (defined as del(17p) or TP53 gene mutation) is a strong negative predictor of survival in patients (pts) with CLL. First-line chemoimmunotherapy is suboptimal in pts with CLL bearing TP53 aberrations, with 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates of only 18% and 38%, respectively, with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (Hallek, Lancet 2010). Ibrutinib is the only once-daily Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor with significant PFS and OS benefit demonstrated in multiple randomized phase 3 studies (eg, RESONATE-2, ECOG1912) in the first-line treatment of CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Previous reports of single-agent ibrutinib or ibrutinib-based combination treatments have further demonstrated favorable PFS benefit in pts with TP53 aberrations in both the first-line and relapsed/refractory settings. Despite these study-specific subgroup analyses, there are limited data on long-term outcomes in pts with TP53 aberrations treated with first-line BTK inhibitors. We performed a pooled analysis of data across 4 studies to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of first-line ibrutinib-based therapy in pts with CLL bearing TP53 aberrations. Methods : Data for first-line ibrutinib treatment in pts with TP53 aberrations were pooled across 4 clinical trials in CLL/SLL: PCYC-1122e (NCT01500733; single-agent ibrutinib; n=34), PCYC-1130 (NCT02264574; ibrutinib + obinutuzumab; n=18), ECOG1912 (NCT02048813; ibrutinib + rituximab; n=26), and RESONATE-2 (NCT01722487; single-agent ibrutinib; n=11). ECOG1912 and RESONATE-2 excluded pts with del(17p) but did not exclude pts with TP53 mutations. Long-term PFS (assessed by investigator), OS, and safety are reported. Results : Eighty-nine pts with TP53 aberrations receiving first-line ibrutinib treatment were included in this pooled analysis. Median age was 65 years (range 33-87), and 69% of pts were male. At baseline, 53% had Rai stage III/IV, 38% had bulky disease (lymph nodes ≥5 cm), and 69% (of 87 evaluable) had unmutated IGHV. All patients had either del(17p) or TP53 mutation; 53% (of 89 evaluable) had del(17p) and 91% (of 58 evaluable) had TP53 mutation. Among 16 pts with del(17p) who had TP53 sequencing results available, 11 (69%) had both del(17p) and TP53 mutation. Forty-five pts received ibrutinib as a single agent and 44 received ibrutinib in combination with an anti-CD20 agent. With a median follow-up of 50 months (range 0.1 to 95.9 months), median PFS was not reached (95% CI: 67 months to not estimable; Figure 1A). At 48 months, the PFS rate was 79% and the OS rate was 88% (Figure 1B). Median duration of ibrutinib treatment was 46 months (range 0.1 to 95.5 months). Reasons for treatment discontinuation were progressive disease (20%), study closure (12%), adverse event (10%), withdrawal by pt (7%), death (3%), and other (physician decision due to scheduled pt surgery; 1%). Grade ≥3 adverse events of clinical interest with up to 8 years of treatment with ibrutinib were infection (22%; most commonly pneumonia in 7%), hypertension (13%), atrial fibrillation (12%), and major hemorrhage (7%). With the current follow-up, 46% of pts with TP53 aberrations remained on ibrutinib treatment. Conclusions : With a median follow-up of 4 years, first-line ibrutinib-based treatment resulted in sustained efficacy with high PFS and OS rates in CLL pts with TP53 aberrations, a population with historically poor outcomes. Although pts with TP53 aberrations remain at risk for progression, first-line treatment with ibrutinib has partially overcome the poor prognosis in this high-risk population with 4-year PFS and OS rates of 79% and 88%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in this analysis. These results from a large, pooled, multi-study dataset demonstrated the long-term benefit of first-line ibrutinib-based treatment in pts with TP53 aberrations. Disclosures Allan: Janssen, AbbVie, and AstraZeneca: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses; Celgene, Genentech, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, and Janssen: Research Funding; AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, Genentech, AbbVie, Ascentage, and Cellectar: Consultancy; Janssen, AstraZeneca, and AbbVie: Honoraria. Shanafelt:Genentech, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, AbbVie, GlaxoSmithKline, and Merck: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic: Patents & Royalties: and other intellectual property. Wiestner:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company; Acerta, Merck, Nurix, Verastem, and Genmab: Research Funding; National Institutes of Health: Patents & Royalties: and other intellectual property. Moreno:Janssen, AbbVie, Sunesis, and AstraZeneca: Consultancy; AbbVie and Janssen: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. O'Brien:Eisai: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Sunesis: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Vida Ventures: Consultancy; KITE: Research Funding; Vaniam Group LL: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy. Braggio:DASA: Consultancy; Bayer: Other: Stock Owner; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding. Liu:AbbVie: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Current Employment. Dean:AbbVie: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Current Employment. Lai:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Current Employment; AbbVie and Bristol-Myers Squibb: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; AbbVie: Other: Travel/accommodations/expenses.

scholarly journals Where to start? Upfront therapy for follicular lymphoma in 2018

Hematology ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 2018 (1) ◽  
pp. 185-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
John P. Leonard ◽  
Loretta J. Nastoupil ◽  
Christopher R. Flowers
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Chronic Health Condition ◽  
Health Condition ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Laboratory Findings ◽  
Routine Surveillance ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Anti Cd20

Abstract The initial approach to the management of follicular lymphoma (FL) is challenging for patients and physicians. Most FL patients present with minimal symptoms; given the lack of a survival benefit to early treatment in this population, a period of observation without therapy is often appropriate. Once there is disease progression beyond low-tumor-burden criteria or symptoms prompting intervention, patients may be considered for an array of potential treatment options. These range from single-agent rituximab (anti-CD20) to various forms of chemoimmunotherapy, including rituximab or the newer anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab. Unfortunately, prognostic and other clinical factors are of limited value in guiding optimal selection of therapy. Once patients complete initial treatment and achieve a complete or a partial remission, the next decision relates to the pros and cons of maintenance anti-CD20 therapy. Maintenance antibody administration can improve progression-free, but not overall, survival; hence, patient preferences typically drive this decision. Monitoring after remission is achieved should generally be guided by symptoms, physical examination, and laboratory findings, with routine surveillance imaging discouraged in the absence of new clinical issues. Given the wide range of options available and the importance of optimizing quality of life in this chronic health condition, education and shared decision making are pillars in the upfront management of FL to help patients achieve the best possible outcomes.

scholarly journals Phase II Study of Venetoclax in Combination with Obinutuzumab and Bendamustine in Patients with High Tumor Burden Follicular Lymphoma As Front Line Therapy (PrECOG 0403)

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 814-814
Author(s):  
Craig A. Portell ◽  
Opeyemi Jegede ◽  
Nina D. Wagner-Johnston ◽  
Grzegorz S. Nowakowski ◽  
Christopher D. Fletcher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Type I ◽  
High Tumor Burden ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Chemoimmunotherapy is considered standard initial therapy for follicular lymphoma (FL) with high tumor burden (HTB). Obinutuzumab and Bendamustine (OB) with maintenance Obinutuzumab (mO) is considered a standard therapy for the frontline treatment of HTB FL (GALLIUM, Marcus et al, NEJM 2017). Venetoclax (VEN), an oral BCL2 inhibitor, is an attractive target in FL given the high BCL2 expression; though single agent activity has been disappointing (Davids et al. JCO 2017). BCL2 inhibition is thought to be synergistic with chemotherapy. Thus, the PrE0403 study evaluated the OB-VEN combination in frontline HTB FL. Here we present end of induction (EOI) outcomes. Methods: The primary objective of this Phase II study was to estimate the complete remission (CR) rate at EOI. Potential participants must have had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of FL grade 1, 2, or 3a with HTB defined by GELF or high risk defined by FLIPI-1 criteria. They must have had adequate performance status and organ function. Notably, creatinine clearance must have been ≥50 mL/min. Participants must have not had prior treatment for FL. Eligible participants were treated with Bendamustine IV 90 mg/m2 Day (D) 1 & 2, Obinutuzumab IV 100 mg D1, 900 mg D2, 1000 mg D8 and D15 of Cycle (C) 1 then D1 of each cycle, and VEN 800 mg orally daily D1-10 every 28 days for 6 total cycles. Due to a high rate of laboratory tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) during C1 in the first 21 patients, VEN was removed from C1 and given in C2-6 only. Participants with a CR at EOI were treated with mO IV 1000 mg D1 every 8 weeks for 2 years. Those with a partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) were treated with mO as well as VEN 800 mg orally daily for 2 years. Pneumocystis jiroveci Pneumonia (PJP) and antiviral prophylaxis was required as was G-CSF support. Response was assessed via Lugano Criteria at EOI including PET/CT and bone marrow assessment. Adverse Events (AEs) were evaluated using CTCAE v5.0. To be considered promising, OB-VEN should improve the null hypothesis CR rate of 50% (OB) to 65%. With an 85% power and a one sided 15% type I error, 56 participants would be needed with an estimated 51 eligible. Support for the study was from Genentech, Member of the Roche Group. Results A total of 56 participants were enrolled and treated between 12/2017 and 11/2020; baseline characteristics are listed in Table 1. TLS was closely monitored in C1 and 8/21 participants developed TLS when VEN was administered in C1; 0/35 when it was not. However, monitoring for TLS in C1 became less stringent when VEN was not administered. Treatment related Grade ≥3 toxicities occurred in 47/56 participants (83.9%) with serious adverse events in 31 of 56 (55.5%). Atypical infections were seen; there was one treatment related death on study due to cytomegalovirus (CMV) encephalitis as well as PJP pneumonia which occurred after induction C6. Enrollment was temporarily suspended and CMV monitoring was implemented with no further occurrences. Another participant receiving mO later developed BK virus nephropathy following mO C6 and now requires ongoing hemodialysis. Another was diagnosed with Respiratory Syncytial Virus pneumonia 30 days after C6 and later PJP pneumonia after C2 of mO. Common (incidence &gt;10%) AEs during induction are listed in Table 2. 45 of 56 (80.4%) participants were able to receive all 6 cycles of OB-VEN. CR was seen in 41 of 56 participants (73.2%, 2 sided 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 59.7-84.2%) at the EOI. 30 participants (53.5%) went onto maintenance. With a median follow up of 20.9 months, estimated 2 year Overall Survival (OS) and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) (90% CI) is 94.4% (82.4-98.3%) and 85.8% (68.8-93.9%) respectively. Conclusions This Phase II study of OB-VEN in untreated HTB FL showed high CR rate and met its primary endpoint with early signs of prolonged PFS. Laboratory TLS was identified but it was unclear if attributed solely to VEN, as baseline laboratory TLS rate for OB is unknown. The rate of Grade ≥3 AE of 83.9% (compared to 69% for OB in GALLIUM, Hiddeman JCO 2018) and the observation of opportunistic infections including CMV encephalitis, PJP pneumonia and BK nephropathy, suggests the combination is highly immunosuppressive. Therefore, while the study met its primary outcome, the combination of OB-VEN at 800 mg for 10 days, plus mO, does not have an acceptable risk/benefit profile. Participants will continue to be followed for efficacy and safety during the maintenance phase. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Portell: Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; SeaGen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; BeiGene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Morphosys: Honoraria; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; Genentech: Research Funding; VelosBio: Research Funding. Nowakowski: MorphoSys: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kymera Therapeutics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy; Nanostrings: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Zai Labolatory: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Bantham Pharmaceutical: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Selvita: Consultancy; Ryvu Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kyte Pharma: Consultancy. Cohen: Janssen, Adicet, Astra Zeneca, Genentech, Aptitude Health, Cellectar, Kite/Gilead, Loxo, BeiGene, Adaptive: Consultancy; Genentech, BMS/Celgene, LAM, BioINvent, LOXO, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, M2Gen, Takeda: Research Funding. Kahl: AbbVie, Acerta, ADCT, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie, Adaptive, ADCT, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech, Incyte, Janssen, Karyopharm, Kite, MEI, Pharmacyclics, Roche, TG Therapeutics, and Teva: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is not approved for follicular lymphoma or in combination with bendamustine and obinutuzumab

What Is the Best First-Line Treatment Strategy for Patients with Indolent Lymphomas?

2012 ◽  
pp. 488-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilles Salles ◽  
Hervé Ghesquières ◽  
Emmanuel Bachy
Keyword(s):  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Short Treatment ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
First Line Treatment

Overview: Although advanced follicular lymphoma is considered incurable, patient outcomes have improved over the last decade with the use of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Multiple treatment options are available and their use depends on clinical presentation (i.e., Ann Arbor stage, tumor burden, symptoms) and patient condition and age. Radiation therapy for patients with limited stage disease remains useful, although its use in the era of anti-CD20 antibodies should be re-evaluated. Single-agent rituximab has been tested in multiple studies with patients with low tumor burden. Short treatment duration provides a response lasting 2 to 3 years, although the benefit of maintenance therapy with rituximab after induction therapy with rituximab remains unproven. When watchful waiting is not an option, a combination of rituximab with chemotherapy is the standard of care: alkylating agents with anthracycline or bendamustine appear to be the most widely used regimens, but alkylating agents alone may still be used in selected patients subgroups. The toxicity of regimens containing fludarabine appears to limit their indication as first-line treatment. In patients responding to one of these combinations, consolidation therapy with rituximab maintenance has been shown to prolong progression-free survival with acceptable toxicity. The benefit of radioimmunotherapy in first-line treatment is still uncertain. With patients surviving for many years, the therapeutic strategy of first-line management should weigh the quality and duration of response against the risk of long-term toxicities.

Evaluation of Ofatumumab, a Novel Human CD20 Monoclonal Antibody, as Single Agent Therapy in Rituximab-Refractory Follicular Lymphoma.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 935-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Hagenbeek ◽  
Luis Fayad ◽  
Vincent Delwail ◽  
Jean Francois Rossi ◽  
Eric Jacobsen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 935 Introduction: Patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) who are refractory to rituximab-based therapy have a need for new non-cytotoxic treatment options. Ofatumumab targets a unique small-loop epitope on CD20 and elicits rapid and efficient in vitro cell lysis via complement-dependent cytotoxicity, even in rituximab-resistant B cells that express high levels of complement inhibitory proteins. Ofatumumab as single agent showed activity in relapsed/refractory FL, including in some patients previously exposed to rituximab (Hagenbeek et al, Blood 2008). Here we report preliminary results from an international, single-arm trial assessing ofatumumab monotherapy in patients with rituximab-refractory FL. Methods: Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years), with Grade 1 or 2 CD20+ FL considered refractory to rituximab alone or in combination with chemotherapy, were enrolled between Sept 2006 and Sept 2008 (N=116). Refractoriness to rituximab (at least 4 doses) was defined as failure to achieve at least a partial response, disease progression during rituximab treatment, or disease progression following a response within 6 months of last treatment with rituximab-containing regimens. Patients received 8 weekly infusions of ofatumumab (Dose 1, 300 mg; Doses 2–8, 500 or 1000 mg); glucocorticoid premedication was required before infusions 1 and 2, and acetaminophen and antihistamine were administered before every infusion. The primary endpoint was objective response (International Working Group criteria) in the 1000 mg dose group over 6 months from the start of treatment, as assessed by an Independent Endpoint Review Committee. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs). Results: Table 1 summarizes the baseline characteristics; 90% of patients received all 8 ofatumumab doses. The median follow-up time on the study was 4.7 months overall and 5.5 months for the 1000 mg group. The overall response rate (ORR) in the 1000 mg group was 10% (95% CI: 4, 17%), including 1 complete response. Stable disease was observed in 50% of patients. In the 1000 mg group, the median duration of response was 6.0 months (95% CI: 2.8, upper limit not estimable) and median PFS was 6.0 months (95% CI: 4.9, 9.1). The ORR in the total population was 11% (95% CI: 5, 17%). Among patients who were refractory to prior rituximab monotherapy (n=27), the ORR was 22% (95% CI: 7, 38%). The ORR among patients who were refractory to rituximab maintenance therapy (n=44) and rituximab combined with chemotherapy (n=45) was 9% (95% CI: 1, 18%) and 7% (95% CI: 0, 14%), respectively. During treatment and up to 30 days following the last dose, the most common AEs (>10% of patients) included rash (15%), urticaria (14%), fatigue (14%), pruritis (13%), nausea (12%), pyrexia (11%) and cough (11%); grade 3–4 infusion-related reactions occurred in only 3 patients (all grade 3 events), none of which were considered serious events; grade 3–4 hematologic AEs included neutropenia in 5% of patients, anemia in 3% and thrombocytopenia in 1%; grade 3 infections (sepsis, febrile neutropenia) occurred in 2 patients. Conclusions: The majority of patients with rituximab-refractory FL in this study were heavily pretreated, were also refractory to chemotherapy and had high-risk FLIPI scores. Although response rates were low with single-agent ofatumumab in patients refractory to rituximab-chemotherapy, a higher response rate was observed in patients who were refractory to rituximab monotherapy, indicating activity despite being refractory to single-agent rituximab. Ofatumumab was well tolerated in this heavily-pretreated population. Infusion reactions were manageable and no unexpected toxicities were observed. Further investigations with ofatumumab are warranted, including in combination with other therapies in patients with FL. Disclosures: Hagenbeek: Roche, Bayer Schering Pharma, Genmab: Advisory roles. Off Label Use: Ofatumumab is an investigational anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, currently under development for the treatment of B-cell malignancies (chronic lymphocytic leukemia, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, Waldenstroms macroglobulinemia and follicular lymphoma) as well as autoimmune diseases (rheumatoid arthritis and multiple sclerosis).. Fayad:GlaxoSmithKline, Genmab: Research Funding. Rossi:GlaxoSmithKline: Investigator on trial funded by GSK. Kuliczkowski:GlaxoSmithKline: Investigator on trial funded by GSK. Link:Genentech: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Genmab, GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding. Radford:GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership. Hellmann:Novartis, BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gupta:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment. Arning:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Begtrup:Genmab: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schultz:Genmab: Employment. Bang:Genmab: Employment. Russell:Genmab: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:GlaxoSmithKline: Advisory Board, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genmab: Advisory Board, Research Funding.

Phase II Trial of Ofatumumab (OFA) in Previously Untreated Follicular Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL): CALGB 50901 (Alliance)

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2741-2741 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cara A. Rosenbaum ◽  
Brandelyn Pitcher ◽  
Nancy L Bartlett ◽  
Sonali M. Smith ◽  
Jane Jijun Liu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Coronary Syndrome ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Anti Cd20

Abstract Background: Rituximab has proven safety and efficacy in untreated patients with advanced stage follicular lymphoma (FL) with response rates upward of 67% (Ghielmini et al., Blood 2004). OFA is a fully humanized anti-CD20 mAb with higher CD20 antigen affinity and increased complement dependent cytotoxicity compared to rituximab. OFA has demonstrated activity in relapsed/refractory FL and high risk untreated FL in combination with chemotherapy. We therefore investigated OFA monotherapy as initial treatment for low/intermediate (int) risk, advanced stage FL in order to determine single agent efficacy as a platform for future studies. Methods: We conducted a randomized, multicenter phase II study in which previously untreated CD20+, grade (gr) 1- 3a FL patients (pts) and low/int FLIPI scores in stages III, IV or bulky stage II were randomized to either 500 mg (n=15) or 1000 mg (n=36) OFA dose. Induction consisted of 4 weekly doses followed by an extended induction schedule every 8 weeks for 4 additional doses. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) with an ORR of 60% or lower considered inadequate, and 80% or higher of strong interest. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Premedication included acetaminophen and antihistamine (all infusions) and glucocorticoid (infusions 1 and 2 and extended induction infusions 5-8). Pts with gr 3/4 infusion reactions during weeks 1 and 2 also received glucocorticoid during weeks 3 and 4. Due to slower than anticipated accrual, the 500 mg arm was stopped in Oct 2013 in order to meet the primary endpoint in at least one dosing arm; pts enrolled on 500 mg prior to that date continued treatment at that dose. Results: Fifty-one pts were accrued. The median age was 60 years (range 40-85). 86.3% were Caucasian; 54.9% were male. The majority had FL gr 1 (45.1%) or gr 2 (41.2%) and Stage III-IVA (84.3%). Five pts had B-symptoms. The majority of pts were int risk (72.5% FLIPI 2; 70.6% FLIPI2 1-2) or low risk (21.6% FLIPI 0-1; 19.6% FLIPI2 0). Of 36 pts allocated to the 1000 mg arm, 32 were evaluable for response. Four pts are excluded from response analysis: ineligible (n=3) and insufficient data (n=1). Two additional pts had no response assessment as therapy was stopped after the first dose; one withdrew consent and the other received alternative therapy per treating physician. The best response was CR (13.3%), PR (73.3%) and SD (10%). One pt progressed on treatment. The ORR of evaluable pts with evaluable defined as having at least one response assessed was 86.7% [95% CI (69.3%-96.2%)]. The ITT response rate was 81.3% [95% CI (63.6%- 92.8%)]. With a median (med) follow-up of 15.6 months (mo) (< 1 mo - 39.6 mo), the 1 year PFS in the 1000 mg arm is 96.6% [95% CI (77.9%, 99.5%)]; 12/33 (36.6%) pts progressed. Of 15 pts allocated to the 500 mg arm, the ORR was 60% [95% CI (32.2%-83.7%)]. The best response was CR (13.3%), PR (46.7%) and SD (40%). One pt progressed on treatment. The 1 year PFS is 85.1% [95% CI (52.3%, 96.1%)]; 9/15 (60%) pts progressed. All pts remain alive. Hematologic adverse events (AEs) in the 1000 mg arm included 1 pt with gr 3 neutropenia; no gr 4 hematologic AEs were reported. There were no gr 3/4 infections. Gr 3 infusion-related events occurred in 9/36 (25%) evaluable pts and all occurred with 1st infusion; there were no gr 4 infusion-related events. Steroid-induced AEs included gr 3 hypertension in 3 pts and gr 3 hyperglycemia in 4 pts. Nine additional gr 3 events occurred (2 fatigue, 2, dyspnea, 1, syncope, 1 GI obstruction, 1 hyponatremia, 1 hypokalemia, 1 hyperkalemia). A single gr 4 AE was reported; ARDS with acute coronary syndrome occurring after the 2nd infusion. The pt withdrew and made a full recovery. Conclusions: OFA when given as a single agent in an extended induction dosing schedule is well tolerated and active as front line therapy in patients with low/int risk FLIPI, advanced stage FL in this multicenter study. Activity appears to be in a range comparable to that reported with other anti-CD20 antibodies in this setting, suggesting that significant improvements in efficacy will require novel combinations. NCT01190449. Support: U10CA180821, U10CA180882 Disclosures Rosenbaum: Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Ofatumumab is an anti CD20 monoclonal antibody not approved for use in follicular lymphoma.. Bartlett:Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Colgene: Research Funding; Medimmune: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Insight: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; MERC: Research Funding; Dynavax: Research Funding; Idera: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Bristol Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; LAM Theapeutics: Research Funding. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Hsi:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Cellerant Therapeutics: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Leonard:Weill Cornell Medical College: Employment; Genentech: Consultancy; Medimmune: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Vertex: Consultancy; ProNAI: Consultancy; Biotest: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Mirati Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Cheson:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; Ascenta: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document