Long-Term Follow up of a Comparison of Non-Myeloablative Allografting with Autografting for Newly Diagnosed Myeloma

Abstract Abstract 525 Background: Role and timing of allografting in myeloma are hotly debated. Before the introduction of new drugs, we carried out a trial where the treatment assignment was based only on the presence/absence of an HLA-identical sibling (Bruno et al, N Engl J Med 2007). Methods: Overall, 162/199 (81%) of patients with at least one sibling were HLA-typed. First-line treatments included induction with VAD-based regimens and a cytoreductive autograft, followed by a nonmyeloablative allograft (Tandem auto-allo) or a second melphalan-based autograft (Double-auto). We now report an update at a median follow up of 7.1 years. Results: Response rates [complete (CR) and partial remissions (PR)] at the time and after the non-myeloablative allograft and at the time and after the second autograft did not differ between the two cohorts: 76% and 86%, and 76% and 91% respectively (p=1 and p=0,54). However, CR rate was significantly higher after the non-myeloablative allograft than after the second autograft: 55% versus 26% (p=0,0026). At a median follow up of 7.1 years (range 2.5 – 10.7+), by intention-to-treat analysis, median overall survival (OS) and event free survival (EFS) were significantly longer in patients with HLA-identical siblings (No.80) as compared with those without (No.82): not reached vs. 4.25 years (HR 0.51, CI 95% 0.34–0.76, p=0.001) and 2.8 vs. 2.4 years (HR 0.62, CI 95% 0.44–0.87, p=0.005). By multivariate analysis, independent of age, gender, myeloma protein isotype, Durie&Salmon stage, and disease status at the first autograft; the presence of an HLA-identical sibling was significantly associated with longer OS (HR 0.5, CI 95% 0.3–0.8, p=0.001) and EFS (HR 0.63, CI 95% 0.4–0.9, p=0.01). At a median follow up of 7.3 (range 5.4 – 10.7+ years), median OS was not reached in the 58 patients who received a non-myeloablative allograft and 5.3 years in the 46 who received a second high-dose melphalan autograft (HR 0.55, CI 95% 0.32–0.94, p=0.02), whereas EFS was 39 months and 33 months (HR 0.62, CI 95% 0.40–0.96, p=0.02) respectively. Cumulative incidence of transplant related mortality was 11% and 2% at 2 years respectively. At median follow-ups of 7.3 years from diagnosis (range 5.4 – 10.4+) and 6.5 years from the allograft (range 4.2 – 9.4+), and 7.4 years from diagnosis (range 5.6 – 10.7+) and 6.2 years from the second autograft (range 4.7 – 9.1+), 30/58 (52%) and 37/46 (80%) patients, respectively, were treated for disease relapse/progression. Salvage therapies included bortezomib- or thalidomide-containing regimens in most patients of both cohorts. After 1–3 lines of therapy, 22/30 (73%) had a response, including 5 CR and 17 PR, in the tandem auto-allo group, whereas 21/37 (54%) had a response, including 4 CR and 16 PR after the second autograft. Of note, at a median follow up of 3.9 years from the start of the first salvage therapy, OS was not reached and was 1.7 years in patients who had relapsed/progressed after the allograft and the second high-dose melphalan (HR 0.44, CI 95% 0.24–0.82, p=0.01) respectively. Conclusions: In this study, allografting conferred a long term survival advantage over standard autografting. Salvage therapy was associated with longer OS perhaps due to a synergistic effect between new drugs and residual graft-vs.-myeloma effects. In prospective clinical trials, the combination of graft-vs.-myeloma effects with “new drugs” should be explored and may increase the cure rate of myeloma patients. Disclosures: Bringhen: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Palumbo:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Conventional Immunochemotherapy (R-CHOEP) Vs High-Dose Immunochemotherapy (R-MegaCHOEP) in Younger Patients with High-Risk Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma: 10-Year Long-Term Follow-up of a German Lymphoma Alliance (GLA) Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123637 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1589-1589

Author(s):

Fabian Frontzek ◽

Marita Ziepert ◽

Maike Nickelsen ◽

Bettina Altmann ◽

Bertram Glass ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

Introduction: The R-MegaCHOEP trial showed that dose-escalation of conventional chemotherapy necessitating autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) does not confer a survival benefit for younger patients (pts) with high-risk aggressive B-cell lymphoma in the Rituximab era (Schmitz et al., Lancet Oncology 2012; 13, 1250-1259). To describe efficacy and toxicity over time and document the long-term risks of relapse and secondary malignancy we present the 10-year follow-up of this study. Methods: In the randomized, prospective phase 3 trial R-MegaCHOEP younger pts aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk (aaIPI 2-3) aggressive B-cell lymphoma were assigned to 8 cycles of CHOEP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubcine, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone) or 4 cycles of dose-escalated high-dose therapy (HDT) necessitating repetitive ASCT both combined with Rituximab. Both arms were stratified according to aaIPI, bulky disease, and center. Primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). All analyses were calculated for the intention-to-treat population. This follow-up report includes molecular data based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for MYC (IHC: 31/92 positive [40-100%], FISH: 14/103 positive), BCL2 (IHC: 65/89 positive [50-100%], FISH: 23/111 positive) and BCL6 (IHC: 52/86 positive [30-100%], FISH: 34/110 positive) and data on cell of origin (COO) classification according to the Lymph2CX assay (GCB: 53/88; ABC: 24/88; unclassified: 11/88). Results: 130 pts had been assigned to R-CHOEP and 132 to R-MegaCHOEP. DLBCL was the most common lymphoma subtype (~80%). 73% of pts scored an aaIPI of 2 and 27% an aaIPI of 3. 60% of pts had an initial lymphoma bulk and in 40% more than 1 extranodal site was involved. After a median observation time of 111 months, EFS at 10 years was 57% (95% CI 47-67%) in the R-CHOEP vs. 51% in the R-MegaCHOEP arm (42-61%) (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8, p=0.228), overall survival (OS) after 10 years was 72% (63-81%) vs. 66% (57-76%) respectively (p=0.249). With regard to molecular characterization, we were unable to detect a significant benefit for HDT/ASCT in any subgroup analyzed. In total, 16% of pts (30 pts) relapsed after having achieved a complete remission (CR). 23% of all relapses (7 pts) showed an indolent histology (follicular lymphoma grade 1-3a) and 6 of these pts survived long-term. In contrast, of 23 pts (77%) relapsing with aggressive DLBCL or unknown histology 18 pts died due to lymphoma or related therapy. The majority of relapses occurred during the first 3 years after randomization (median time: 22 months) while after 5 years we detected relapses only in 5 pts (3% of all 190 pts prior CR). 11% of pts were initially progressive (28 pts) among whom 71% (20 pts) died rapidly due to lymphoma. Interestingly, the remaining 29% (8 pts) showed a long-term survival after salvage therapy (+/- ASCT); only 1 pt received allogeneic transplantation. The frequency of secondary malignancies was very similar in both treatment arms (9% vs. 8%) despite the very high dose of etoposide (total 4g/m2)in the R-MegaCHOEP arm. We observed 2 cases of AML and 1 case of MDS per arm. In total 70 pts (28%) have died: 30 pts due to lymphoma (12%), 22 pts therapy-related (11 pts due to salvage therapy) (9%), 8 pts of secondary neoplasia (3%), 5 pts due to concomitant disease (2%) and 5 pts for unknown reasons. Conclusions: This 10-year long-term follow-up of the R-MegaCHOEP trial confirms the very encouraging outcome of young high-risk pts following conventional chemotherapy with R-CHOEP. High-dose therapy did not improve outcome in any subgroup analysis including molecular high-risk groups. Relapse rate was generally low. Pts with aggressive relapse showed a very poor long-term outcome while pts with indolent histology at relapse survived long-term. Secondary malignancies occurred; however, they were rare with no excess leukemias/MDS following treatment with very high doses of etoposide and other cytotoxic agents. Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Figure Disclosures Nickelsen: Roche Pharma AG: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grants; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: advisory board; Roche: Honoraria. Truemper:Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: scientific advisory board; Sandoz: Other: scientific advisory board; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Other: scientific advisory board. Viardot:Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenwald:MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lenz:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Employment, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy. Schmitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Bortezomib With High-Dose Melphalan, Arsenic Trioxide, and Ascorbic Acid In a Preparative Regimen For Multiple Myeloma: 5-Year Follow Up

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.5547.5547 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 5547-5547

Author(s):

A. Megan Cornelison ◽

Yvonne Dinh ◽

Manish Sharma ◽

Nina Shah ◽

Qaiser Bashir ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

High Dose ◽

Refractory Disease ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Preparative Regimen ◽

First Remission ◽

High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Background Bortezomib and high-dose melphalan was associated with a higher complete remission (CR) rate in a phase II trial by the IFM group. Four doses of bortezomib 1 mg/m2 IV were given on days -6, -3, +1 and +4. (Roussel M et al. Blood 2010. 115:32-37).In a randomized phase II trial we reported that the addition of bortezomib to a preparative regimen of arsenic trioxide (ATO), ascorbic acid (AA), and melphalan followed by autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) failed to demonstrate a statistically significant improvement in CR rate or survival in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed or relapsed multiple myeloma (Sharma M et al. Cancer. 118:2507-15).This study was limited by a short follow up (median 36 months) and inclusion of pts with relapsed and refractory disease. In this retrospective analysis, we evaluated the long-term (5-years) impact of the addition of bortezomib to this preparative regimen in pts who underwent auto-HCT in first remission or with primary refractory disease. Methods Forty-three pts underwent auto-HCT in first remission or with primary refractory disease. All patients received ATO 0.25 mg/kg intravenously on days -9 to -3, AA 1000 mg intravenously on days -9 to -3, and melphalan 100 mg/m2 intravenously on days -4 and -3. Pts received either no bortezomib (n=13), or bortezomib at a dose of either 1 mg/m2 of 1.5 mg/m2 on days -9, -6, and -3. The primary endpoint was CR rate and secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results Pt characteristics are shown in the attached Table. The median follow-up for all surviving pts was 61.4 months (range, 15-80 months). Pts in the bortezomib and non-bortezomib arms were matched for age, gender, high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, time to auto-HSCT, use of bortezomib in induction, and disease burden at auto-HSCT (Table). Only 5 (17%) pts in the bortezomib and 4 (30%) in the non-bortezomib group received maintenance therapy. There was no significant difference in the time to neutrophil engraftment or treatment-related mortality TRM between the bortezomib and non-bortezomib groups. The CR rate in the bortezomib group and the non-bortezomib group was 20% and 53%, respectively (p=0.03). There was no significant difference in rates of CR + very good partial remission (VGPR), or CR + VGPR + partial remission (PR) between the bortezomib and non-bortezomib groups (p=0.72 and 1.00, respectively). The median PFS in the bortezomib group and the non-bortezomib group was 25.4, and 40.0 months, respectively (p=0.13, Figure 1). The median OS was 61.6 months in the bortezomib group and not reached in the non-bortezomib group (p=0.22, Figure 2). There was no significant impact of high-risk cytogenetics, lactic dehydrogenase (LDH) or b2 microglobulin levels, or maintenance therapy on PFS or OS. Conclusions After long-term follow up of 5 years, the addition of bortezomib to a preparative regimen of ATO, AA, and high-dose melphalan did not result in a significant improvement in CR rate, PFS, or OS. The lack of benefit with bortezomib may be due to the inclusion of ATO and AA in the regimen, or the schedule of bortezomib, which was only given before melphalan. Disclosures: Shah: Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Qazilbash:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees Other; Millenium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees Other.

Download Full-text

Long-term follow-up of a comparison of nonmyeloablative allografting with autografting for newly diagnosed myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2011-03-339945 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 117 (24) ◽

pp. 6721-6727 ◽

Cited By ~ 83

Author(s):

Luisa Giaccone ◽

Barry Storer ◽

Francesca Patriarca ◽

Marcello Rotta ◽

Roberto Sorasio ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Complete Remission ◽

New Drugs ◽

High Dose ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Term Survival ◽

Free Survival ◽

Long Term Follow Up ◽

High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Before the introduction of new drugs, we designed a trial where treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma patients was based on the presence or absence of HLA-identical siblings. First-line treatments included a cytoreductive autograft followed by a nonmyeloablative allograft or a second melphalan-based autograft. Here, we report long-term clinical outcomes and discuss them in the light of the recent remarkable advancements in the treatment of myeloma. After a median follow-up of 7 years, median overall survival (OS) was not reached (P = .001) and event-free survival (EFS) was 2.8 years (P = .005) for 80 patients with HLA-identical siblings and 4.25 and 2.4 years for 82 without, respectively. Median OS was not reached (P = .02) and EFS was 39 months (P = .02) in the 58 patients who received a nonmyeloablative allograft whereas OS was 5.3 years and EFS 33 months in the 46 who received 2 high-dose melphalan autografts. Among patients who reached complete remission in these 2 cohorts, 53% and 19% are in continuous complete remission. Among relapsed patients rescued with “new drugs,” median OS from the start of salvage therapy was not reached and was 1.7 (P = .01) years, respectively. Allografting conferred a long-term survival and disease-free advantage over standard autografting in this comparative study.

Download Full-text

Long-Term AL Amyloidosis Survivors Among Non-Selected Referral Population

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-117802 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3226-3226

Author(s):

Eli Muchtar ◽

Morie A. Gertz ◽

Martha Q. Lacy ◽

David Dingli ◽

Francis K. Buadi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Survival Rates ◽

Al Amyloidosis ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survivors

Abstract Introduction: Prognosis of AL amyloidosis has improved in recent years; however for many patients prognosis remains poor. We aimed to define patient-, disease- and treatment characteristics which are associated with long-term survival. Method: A retrospective chart review of all patients with biopsy-proven systemic AL amyloidosis, who were seen within 90 days of the confirmed diagnosis. Long-term survival was defined as 5-year and 10-year survival from the time of diagnosis. For 5-year survival we selected patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2012 (allowing a minimum of 5-year follow-up, n=1331) and for 10-year survival we screened patients seen between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2007 (allowing a minimum of 10-year follow-up; n=779). Treatment allocation was defined as the first regimen given, irrespective of subsequent treatment modifications. Results: Of the screening population, 498 patients survived ≥5 years from diagnosis (37% of the 5-year screening cohort) and 168 patients survived 10 years or more (22% of the 10-year screening cohort). Five-year survivors and 10-year survivors as compared to their counterparts were (Table): younger, higher proportion of women, more likely to have single organ involvement, less heart/liver/nerve involvement and more kidney involvement. Long-term survivors also had lower bone marrow plasma cell percentage at the time of diagnosis and lower tumor burden measured by the difference between involved to uninvolved light chain (dFLC). Similarly, long-term survivors had lower Mayo stages and higher systolic blood pressure. No difference in light chain isotype was observed between long-term survivors to long term non-survivors. Long-term survivors were less likely to be seen within 30 days of diagnosis compared to their counterparts (52% among 5-year survivors vs 67% among 5-year non-survivor; P<0.001). FISH abnormalities (data available for 555/1331 patients, 42%) were comparable between groups with regard to t(11;14) (50% among 5-year survival compared to 50% among 5-year non-survivors; P=0.93) and 13q abnormalities (34% vs 36%, respectively; P=0.53). However, trisomies were less frequently encountered in the 5-year survivor group (20% vs 29%, respectively; P=0.01), and far less common among 10-year survivors (11% vs 26%, respectively; P=0.04). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was more likely to be associated with long-term survival. Of all patients who underwent ASCT, 74% survived more than 5 years and 49% survived more than 10 years. In comparison, among the standard-intensity therapies, 5-year survival rates for melphalan-dexamethasone, bortezomib-based regimens, immunomodulatory drug-based regimens and single agent dexamethasone/ melphalan-prednisone were 29%, 28%, 30% and 10%, respectively. The corresponding 10-year survival rates were 15%, 20%, 20% and 5%, respectively. Conclusions: Long-term AL survivors have distinct favorable baseline characteristics (including those introduced by referral bias) and ASCT as their initial therapy. Identification of these patients, especially the Mayo 2004 stage III and the Mayo 2012 stage III-IV patients who unexpectedly survived 10 years, will allow for further study and insights. Disclosures Gertz: Teva: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; annexon: Consultancy. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kumar:KITE: 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; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: 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; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: 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; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Survival in Adult Patients with Relapsed/Refractory B-Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) Who Achieved Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) Response Following Anti-CD19 BiTE® Blinatumomab

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.2287.2287 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 2287-2287 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Gerhard Zugmaier ◽

Nicola Goekbuget ◽

Andreas Viardot ◽

Matthias Stelljes ◽

Svenja Neumann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Term Survival ◽

Long Term Survival ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction: Relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-precursor ALL in adults has an unfavorable prognosis with a median overall survival of 4–8 months and a 5-year survival of <10%. Long-term follow-up data are presented from an exploratory phase 2 study with blinatumomab, an investigational bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE®) antibody construct that directs cytotoxic T-cells to CD19-expressing target cells (Topp MS et al. Blood 2012;120(21):670). Methods: The primary endpoint was hematologic complete remission (CR) or CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh*) within 2 cycles of blinatumomab. Secondary endpoints included rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) response (defined as < 10-4), overall survival (OS), and relapse-free survival (RFS). Blinatumomab was administered by continuous intravenous infusion for 28 days followed by a 14-day treatment-free interval. Responding patients had the option to receive 3 additional cycles of treatment or to proceed to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT). Results: 36 patients were treated; 25 (69%) responded, with 15 (42%) achieving CR and 10 (28%) CRh*. MRD response was achieved in 22 (88%) of these 25 patients with CR or CRh*. Thirteen patients with CR or CRh* proceeded to aHSCT after blinatumomab treatment. In addition, one patient with hypocellular bone marrow and MRD response after the first cycle underwent aHSCT. Follow-up for RFS is 22.4 months; median RFS is 8.8 months. Median follow-up for OS is 30.2 months; median OS is 12.9 months. Ten patients (28%) are alive at 29.7 months (Figure). We analyzed the characteristics of the 10 living long-term survivors, defined as OS of 2 years or longer, seven of whom were relapse-free. The age of these 10 patients at the time of first infusion ranged from 21 to 72 years; the blast count at screening ranged from 8% to 97% (median, 56%). Four of the 10 patients alive had received aHSCT prior to blinatumomab treatment. Of the six patients without a prior aHSCT, two were primary refractory; two had the first relapse within 12 months and two after 12 months post first diagnosis. In the 10 surviving patients blinatumomab treatment induced CR in seven patients, CRh* in two patients, and blast-free hypo-cellular bone marrow in one patient. All 10 surviving patients had an MRD response following blinatumomab treatment. The patient with hypocellular bone marrow received a transplant after the first cycle before potential recovery of blood counts qualifying for CR/CRh* could occur. Seven of the surviving patients underwent aHSCT after blinatumomab, including four patients who received a second aHSCT after they had already received an aHSCT prior to blinatumomab. One of the three patients who did not undergo aHSCT after CRh* had grade 4 cytokine release syndrome requiring resuscitation after 1 day of blinatumomab treatment and has remained in ongoing remission for 22 months without any further treatment aside from 5 cycles of blinatumomab. Another one of these three patients, who had a grade 3 neurologic event on day 2 of cycle 2, has remained in ongoing remission for 34 months without any further treatment aside from 5 cycles of blinatumomab. The third of these three patients had two CD19-positive relapses after CR following blinatumomab treatment. The patient was retreated with 3 cycles of blinatumomab, resulting twice in CR and MRD response. Two of the 10 surviving patients relapsed after blinatumomab and aHSCT; one patient with a CD 19-negative relapse achieved another hematologic remission by chemotherapy. Summary: These data show that patients with r/r ALL, who achieved MRD response and received subsequent aHSCT following blinatumomab immunotherapy may achieve long-term survival longer than 2 years. Studies with a larger sample size are warranted to confirm these data. Two patients with grade 3 or 4 toxicities showed long-term survival without aHSCT after blinatumomab. Figure Figure. Disclosures Zugmaier: Amgen Inc.: Equity Ownership; Amgen Research (Munich) GmbH: Employment. Off Label Use: This presentation will discuss the off-label use of blinatumomab, as this agent is not approved for use by the FDA, EMA or any other regulatory authorities.. Goekbuget:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Viardot:Amgen Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Travel support Other; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Travel support, Travel support Other; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Travel support Other. Horst:Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Brueggemann:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Holland:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schmidt:Amgen Inc.: Equity Ownership; Amgen Research (Munich) GmbH: Employment. Mergen:Amgen Inc.: Equity Ownership; Amgen Research (Munich) GmbH: Employment. Bargou:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Topp:Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Consolidation Followed By Maintenance Therapy Versus Maintenance Alone in Newly Diagnosed, Transplant Eligible Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM): A Randomized Phase 3 Study of the European Myeloma Network (EMN02/HO95 MM Trial)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.242.242 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 242-242 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Pieter Sonneveld ◽

Meral Beksac ◽

Bronno van der Holt ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Angelo Michele Carella ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Primary Study ◽

High Dose ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Background The role of up-front consolidation for newly diagnosed, transplant eligible MM (NDMM) patients (pts) has not yet been prospectively addressed in the novel agents era. Methods The EMN02/HO95 trial was designed to randomly (R) compare (R1) 4 cycles of bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP) vs high-dose melphalan (HDM) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), either single or double, as intensification therapy after induction with bortezomib-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (VCD) (M Cavo et al, ASCO 2016, abstract #8000). A second randomization to consolidation therapy with 2 cycles of VRD vs no consolidation (R2) was performed after intensification, to be followed by lenalidomide maintenance (lenalidomide 10 mg continuously) until progression or toxicity in both arms. (VRD: bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 intravenously days 1, 4, 8, 11; lenalidomide 25 mg orally days 1 - 21; dexamethasone 20 mg orally days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 of a 28 days cycle). Primary study end points were progression-free survival (PFS) from R1 and PFS from R2. A first planned interim analysis for R2 was performed in July 2016 when at least 33% (= 172) of the required events for PFS had been observed. Results From February 2011 to April 2014, 1510 pts aged ≤ 65 years with symptomatic MM were enrolled, of whom 1499 were eligible. Of these, 1211 were randomized (stratification by ISS stage) to VMP (505 pts) or HDM (1 or 2 ASCT) (706 pts). For R2 903 eligible patients were randomized to consolidation (459 pts) or no consolidation (444 pts). Median follow up from R2 was 25 months (maximum 53). Response status at time of R2 was ≥ CR (23%), ≥ VGPR (67%), ≥ PR (93%), and will be updated for status at start of maintenance. At the time of analysis, 258 events for PFS after R2 had been reported. 3-year. PFS from R2 was 62% in all patients, i.e., 60% without consolidation and 65% in patients with consolidation, and median PFS had not yet been reached. PFS from R2 with adjustment for R1 was prolonged in pts randomized to VRD (HR=0.78; 95% CI=0.61-1.00; P=0.045), a benefit retained across predefined subgroups with revised ISS stage III (HR=0.67; P=0.26) and in patients randomized in R1 to VMP (HR=0.76; P=0.19) and to HDM (HR=0.79; P=0.13). The benefit of consolidation was observed in patients with low-risk cytogenetics (HR=0.68; P=0.03), but not in patients with high-risk cytogenetics (del(17p) and/or t(4;14) and/or t(14;16); HR=1.03; P=0.91). At 3 years OS from R2 was 86% and 87%, respectively. Toxicity from VRD was limited with 5% CTCAE grade 4, mainly hematological. Conclusions Consolidation treatment with VRD followed by Lenalidomide maintenance until progression or toxicity shows promising results as compared to maintenance alone for younger NDMM pts, but further study follow-up is needed. This trial was registered at www.trialregister.nl as NTR 2528, EudraCT 2009-017903-28 This trial was supported by unrestricted grants from Celgene and Janssen. Disclosures Sonneveld: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Carella:Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau. Ludwig:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Driessen:janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Mundipharma-EDO: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Mellqvist:Mundipharma: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zweegman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schjesvold:Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Palumbo:Takeda: Employment, Honoraria; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria. Cavo:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

High-Dose Melphalan Significantly Increases Mutational Burden in Multiple Myeloma Cells at Relapse: Results from a Randomized Study in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-139014 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4-5

Author(s):

Mehmet K. Samur ◽

Marco Roncador ◽

Anil Aktas-Samur ◽

Mariateresa Fulciniti ◽

Abdul Hamid Bazarbachi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

High Dose ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Private Company ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

High Dose Melphalan ◽

New Mutations

We recently shown that high-dose melphalan (HDM) followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) as first line therapy in young (<66 yrs) multiple myeloma (MM) patients significantly improves progression-free survival (IFM/DFCI 2009 study). However, the impact of alkylating agent melphalan inducing N-alkylpurine-monoadducts forming interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) in surviving myeloma cells remains an important biological question. We here profiled samples from the IFM/DFCI 2009 study, where patients were randomized to RVD+HDM vs RVD alone, to identify genomic changes induced by HDM and observed at relapse. We analyzed paired purified MM cells collected at diagnosis and at relapse from 68 patients using deep (75X) whole genome sequencing. Forty-five patients were treated with RVD only, while 23 patients received RVD followed by HDM. There was no significant difference between the 2 groups in regard to disease characteristics including sex, age, cytogenetic risk, and best response. Median follow-up was similar (29 vs 31 months, respectively), removing longer follow up as a confounding variable. The number of mutations at diagnosis was similar on both arms (7137 [IQR=3742] vs. 7230 [IQR=3702], p value = 0.67). Although mutational load increased in both arms; there was a significantly higher increase in number of mutations and indels in the HDM arm compared to RVD alone (mutations 5686 vs 1745, p=1.4e-5; and indels 467 vs 360, p= 0.02, respectively). Using a model incorporating number of new mutations, depth, and purity, we found that HDM causes a 4.1 fold higher mutation accumulation rate per month than RVD only (158.3 vs 38.3 mutations/ month; p=0.003). Importantly, newly acquired mutations were localized to regions which overlap with transcribed regions, and accumulated at significantly higher rate in the HDM group (p=0.009). In contrast, we did not observe any significant changes in copy number alterations (CNAs) and structural variants, including translocations, between both arms. A significant change in frequency of driver mutations including RAS/RAF, FAM46C, TP53, and DIS3 was not observed at the time of relapse. Clonality level was increased only for KRAS (p=0.054), while all other specific driver genes had similar clonality level at diagnosis and relapse. Interestingly, a significant increase in mutations involving MYO16 and SLC7A8 genes was observed at relapse in both arms, implicating components of the induction regimen (RVD). Investigating the mutational signature utilization in only newly acquired mutations identified 4 signatures: APOBEC, HR Double Strand Repair, clock-like signature, and unknown. k-means clustering analysis of samples based on signature utilization showed four distinct clusters. All patients clustering with high DNA repair signature utilization were in the HDM arm (65% HDM patients), the majority of whom achieved CR or sCR (74%); these patients acquired 8308 (range 3302-19107) new mutations between diagnosis and relapse. None of the RVD only treated patients were in this cluster. The remaining 35% HDM group patients were clustered with RVD samples and showed unknown signature utilization. Furthermore, motif enrichment analysis identified CYWR and ATGAGATV (p < 1e-130) as enriched motifs around the new mutations in HDM compared to RVD cohort. Importantly and as expected, DNA damage repair pathway genes were frequently targeted in the HDM group: 72% HDM samples accumulated DDR gene mutations vs. only 17% in the RVD alone arm (p < 0.001). At the time of relapse, 100% HDM arm patients had at least one DDR gene mutation and 80% had two or more, while only 37% RVD only group had one or more such mutation. Finally, we have reconstructed phylogenetic and evolutionary trajectories based on mutation and copy-number data from samples at diagnosis and relapse. The clonal composition in both arms was similar at diagnosis; however, HDM caused a significant shift to more subclonal mutations at relapse. chromothripsis and chromoplexy events were detected in 30% patients at diagnosis, which remained constant at relapse regardless of treatment. In summary, we describe significant accumulation of mutations following high dose melphalan. This fundamental molecular change in the disease at relapse, suggests the need for reappraisal of the optimal use and sequencing of high dose melphalan in the era of novel agents. Disclosures Fulciniti: NIH: Research Funding. Richardson:Celgene/BMS, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Karyopharm: Research Funding. Thakurta:Oxford University: Other: visiting professor; Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Perrot:Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Moreau:Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Anderson:Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopep and C4 Therapeutics.: Other: Scientific Founder of Oncopep and C4 Therapeutics.; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium-Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Parmigiani:Phaeno Biotehnologies: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; CRA Health: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Foundation Medicine Institute: Consultancy; Delphi Diagnostics: Consultancy; BayesMendel Laboratory: Other: Co-lead. Munshi:Amgen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; C4: Current equity holder in private company; OncoPep: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties; BMS: Consultancy; Legend: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Patient Outcomes with Two Different Formulations of Melphalan As Conditioning Chemotherapy for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-141105 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1-1

Author(s):

Filiz Yucebay ◽

Ashleigh Keiter ◽

Qiuhong Zhao ◽

Alison Neal ◽

Nita Williams ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Propylene Glycol ◽

Research Funding ◽

Transfusion Requirement ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

High Dose Melphalan

Introduction: High-dose melphalan is the standard conditioning chemotherapy for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in multiple myeloma (MM). However, patients experience several side effects and toxicities from high-dose melphalan. In 2016, United States Food and Drug Administration approved Evomela, a propylene glycol-free formulation of melphalan, as conditioning chemotherapy for ASCT in MM. This was based on its bioequivalence to the standard propylene-glycol solubilized melphalan formulation (Alkeran) in a phase 2 study. Evomela has the advantages of improved solubility, stability, bioavailability and being free of propylene glycol that is associated with organ dysfunction. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study of patients who received ASCT with high dose chemotherapy using alkeran (n=255) or evomela (n=259) at our institution to compare their outcomes such as side effects, duration of cytopenias, transfusion requirements, length of hospital stay, readmission within 30 days and progression-free survival (PFS) post-SCT. Clinical and demographic characteristics were compared between two treatment regimens using the Chi-square test for categorical variables and the Wilcoxon rank sum test for the continuous variables. Overall survival (OS) was calculated from the date of transplant to death, censoring the alive patients at their last follow up date. Progression-free survival (PFS) was calculated from the date of transplant to date of relapse or death, whichever occurred first, censoring at the last follow-up if no relapse or death. OS and PFS estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log-rank test. Results: The baseline patient characteristics such as age, ISS stage, comorbidity index and number of prior lines of therapy prior to ASCT were similar between the two groups. (See table 1). Mucositis was seen in 77.2% of the patients who received Alkeran compared to 69.5% who received Evomela (p=<0.001). Incidence of febrile neutropenia was 65.9% in the Alkeran group and 49.4% in the Evomela group (p=0.0002). Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting were reported in 98.8% and 93.4% of the patients in the Alkeran and Evomela groups respectively (p=0.001). Rates of diarrhea and clostridium difficile infection were similar with the two drugs. Time to neutrophil engraftment was the same in both the groups while duration of thrombocytopenia (platelets <20k) was slightly longer in the Evomela group (6 days in alkeran and 8 days in evomela group, p=<0.001). Red cell transfusion requirement was higher with the use of Alkeran compared to Evomela (42.3% vs 21.8%, p=0.001) while platelet transfusion was the same. There was no difference in the duration of hospital stay between the two groups. However, rate of readmission within 30 days of discharge was higher in patients who got Evomela compared to Alkeran (9.4% versus 17.4%, p=0.008). Day +100 serological response (very good partial response or better), PFS post-SCT and OS were similar in both groups. (Figure 1). Conclusion: We conclude that use of Evomela is associated with a better side-effect profile and transfusion requirement while having similar outcomes as Alkeran. Disclosures Yucebay: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioXCell: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; G1 Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chaudhry:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Efebera:Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Ohio State University: Current Employment. Bumma:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Speakers Bureau. Khan:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Devarakonda:Janssen: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Prognostic Parameters in Adults with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia at Second Complete Response

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1603.1603 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1603-1603

Author(s):

Caner Saygin ◽

Nikolaos Papadantonakis ◽

Ryan D Cassaday ◽

Michaela Liedtke ◽

Katrina Fischer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Salvage Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Independent Predictor ◽

Complete Response ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Term Survival ◽

First Relapse ◽

Count Recovery

Abstract Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) represents 20% of adult leukemias. With the optimization of doses and schedules of chemotherapy regimens, and incorporation of targeted agents into adult therapy, over 80% of adults with ALL attain a complete remission. However, the majority will ultimately relapse and the utility of prognostic criteria in predicting long-term survival at the time of 1st relapse has not been fully elucidated. We investigated the prognostic significance of neutrophil and platelet count recovery after salvage therapy in predicting long-term survival after second complete response [complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete platelet count recovery (CRp), or CR with incomplete neutrophil count recovery (CRi)] in adult patients (pts) with ALL. Methods: ALL pts at Cleveland Clinic, University of Washington, and Stanford treated during the yrs 1997-2015 were included. A total of 87 adult pts with ALL who achieved CR1 after induction treatment but subsequently relapsed and achieved second complete response with salvage therapy were analyzed. Pts refractory to salvage treatment and cases with isolated extramedullary relapse were excluded. Response to salvage treatment was assessed. CR was defined as <5% blasts with an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) of ≥1000/uL and platelets ≥100,000/uL; CRi: same as CR but ANC <1000/uL; CRp: same as CR but platelets <100,000/uL. Cases with both incomplete ANC and platelet recovery were categorized as CRi. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by ten-color flow cytometry and any abnormal blast population was considered MRD positive. Cytogenetic (CG) risk was ascribed by CALGB criteria. Results: Of 87 pts included, the median age was 37 yrs (range, 18-76) at diagnosis and 38 yrs (range, 20-73) at relapse. Fifty-five percent were males, 69% were Caucasian, 84% had B-ALL, and 23% had extramedullary involvement in addition to bone marrow involvement. Age, sex, race, immunophenotype and extramedullary involvement had no impact on overall survival (OS) or relapse-free survival (RFS) after first relapse. Sixty-eight percent of pts had available CG data at relapse, and of these, 39% had normal CG, while 37% were poor risk and 24% were grouped in "others". Of the poor risk pts, 68% were Ph+. CG risk at relapse had no impact on OS or RFS after first relapse. Relapse therapies included hyper-CVAD: 26%, high dose cytarabine: 17%; BFM-based regimens: 17%; inotuzumab: 13%; nelarabine: 8%; blinatumomab: 5%; and 14% of pts received other regimens. In addition, 70% of Ph+ pts received tyrosine kinase inhibitors in combination with salvage chemotherapy. Best response achieved was CR in 72%, CRp in 19%, and CRi in 9% of pts. Among 55 pts with MRD assessment following response to relapse therapy, 27% were MRD positive. The frequency of MRD positivity was significantly higher in pts with CRi (100%) as compared to CR (26%) and CRp (11%) (p=0.009). Pts with CRp or CRi after salvage treatment had worse OS compared to those with CR (p=0.006) (Figure 1A). Moreover, pts with CRi had worse RFS than those who attained CR or CRp (p=0.008) (Figure 1B). MRD positivity at the time of relapse response did not impact OS (p=0.48), but MRD negative pts had significantly better RFS than pts with MRD positivity (p<0.001) (Figure 1C). Sixty percent of pts received hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HCT) after salvage therapy in CR2, and 14% had HCT before relapse in CR1. Pts receiving HCT after salvage therapy had significantly longer OS (p<0.001) (Figure 1D) and RFS (p<0.001) (Figure 1E) than pts without HCT. Multivariable cox proportional hazard analysis included relapse treatment response (CR vs CRi vs CRp), MRD status at the time of relapse response, and HCT status, and demonstrated that MRD status at relapse response (p=0.002) and HCT (p<0.001) were independent predictors of RFS after first relapse. Type of salvage therapy response (CR vs CRi vs CRp) did not impact OS (p=0.17) or RFS (p=0.16) in multivariable analysis. Only HCT status was an independent predictor of better OS in multivariable analysis (p=0.006). Conclusion: In adult ALL pts who achieved CR2, CG risk at the time of relapse does not affect long-term survival. MRD positivity at the time of relapse response is an independent predictor of worse RFS, and it is associated with CRi. Ability to get to a successful HCT is the only independent predictor of longer RFS and OS at the time of CR2. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Sekeres: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mukherjee:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Carraway:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Advani:Pfizer Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blinatumomab: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Follow up of Pediatric Patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma Treated with High Dose Therapy and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.2000.2000 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 2000-2000

Author(s):

Lisa Giulino Roth ◽

Tara O'Donohue MD ◽

Tanya Trippett ◽

Elizabeth Klein ◽

Nancy A. Kernan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Pediatric Patients ◽

Disease Free Survival ◽

Cancer Center ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Relapsed Disease

Abstract Introduction: Despite improved outcomes for children with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), relapsed and refractory disease remain a challenge for a subset of patients. High dose therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard of care for relapsed disease, largely based on data from studies in adults. As new therapies emerge for HL, risk stratification of pediatric patients with relapsed disease will be essential to determine which patients are likely to benefit from ASCT and which patients should be selected for alternative therapy. In this study we report the long-term outcome of 34 pediatric patients with HL who underwent ASCT at a single institution. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of 34 consecutive pediatric patients with HL who underwent ASCT at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 1989-2013. Data collected included age, histology, treatment prior to ASCT, disease status at the time of transplant, conditioning regimen, and outcome after ASCT. Given recent data supporting a Childhood Hodgkin International Prognostic Score (CHIPS) for risk stratification in first-line therapy(Schwartz et al, ASH Abstract #3649, 2011), this score was calculated at the time of relapse to evaluate its prognostic relevance in the relapse setting. One point was awarded for each of the following: stage IV disease, bulky mediastinal adenopathy, albumin <3.5, and fever. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to estimate the probability of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Patient Characteristics: Pathologic classification included nodular sclerosis (n=30), mixed cellularity (n=1), lymphocyte predominant (n=2), or subtype unspecified (n=1). The median age was 17.9 yrs (range 9.7-21) and 47% of patients were male. Thirty-three patients had relapsed disease; one patient had primary refractory disease. The median time from diagnosis to first relapse was 13 months (range 5-60). Twenty-five patients (73.5%) had chemotherapy responsive disease at the time of transplant (CR or PR). Others had stable disease (n=6), mixed response (n=2) or progressive disease (n=1). Thirty-one of 34 patients received radiation therapy either during initial treatment or as part of a salvage regimen. Four patients received brentuximab vedotin at the time of relapse. ASCT preparative regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide-etoposide + total lymphoid irradiation (n=14) or + carmustine (n=16), while 4 patients received the BEAM regimen. All but two patients treated after 1997 received chemotherapy-only preparative regimens. Results: The median follow up for the cohort was 70.5 months (range 2.5-144). The 12-year OS and DFS were 65.1% and 63.6% respectively. The cause of death included HL (n=7), sepsis (n=1) and end stage renal disease (n=1). Patient age, stage at diagnosis, and time from diagnosis to relapse were not associated with differences in DFS. Patients who received an ASCT after 1997 had a better outcome than those who received an ASCT before 1997 (DFS 44.9% vs. 81.8%, p=0.012). Patients with chemotherapy sensitive disease at the time of transplant had a superior DFS (74.5% vs. 33.3%, p=0.005). Although not statistically significant, there was a trend toward improved outcome among patients with early stage disease at relapse (stage I/II) compared to advanced stage (III/IV) (DFS 81.3% vs. 54.2%, p=0.098). Among 21 patients with data available to calculate CHIPS at time of relapse, there was a superior OS among those with a lower CHIPS with OS of 100%, 70%, 50%, and 0% for patients with a CHIPS of 0, 1, 2, and 3 respectively (p=0.021). There were no patients with a CHIPS of 4. There was a trend toward improved DFS among patients with a low CHIPS, however this was not statistically significant (DFS of 100%, 70%, 66.7%, and 0% in patients with a CHIPS of 0, 1, 2, and 3 respectively, p=0.176). Conclusions: ASCT offers the prospect of durable, disease free survival for a significant proportion of pediatric patients with relapsed HL. The outcome among patients who received an ASCT in recent years (1997-2013) was high (DFS 81.8%). Chemotherapy sensitive disease at the time of transplant was associated with superior DFS. To our knowledge this is the first report evaluating the potential utility of CHIPS in the relapse setting. Despite the small sample size (n=21) CHIPS was predictive of OS, suggesting that this measure should be studied further as a potential prognostic marker in relapsed HL. Disclosures Trippett: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; OSI Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Kernan:Gentium S.p.A.: Research Funding. Prockop:Atara Biotherapeutics: Other: I have no financial disclosures, but Atara Biotherapeutics has exercised a licensing agreement with Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and MSKCC and some investigators at MSKCC have a financial interest in Atara.. Scaradavou:National Cord Blood Program- New York Blood Center: Employment. Moskowitz:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.

Download Full-text