Diagnostic Tumor Mirna Profiling Predicts Molecular Relapse in Mantle Cell Lymphoma Patients Prospectively Followed for Minimal Residual Disease. Results from the Nordic MCL2-3 Trials

Abstract Background Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a subtype of non-Hodgkin`s lymphoma (NHL) with a variable but often aggressive clinical course. The majority of MCL patients ≤65 years will experience clinical relapse during a 10-year period (Geisler et al. Br J Haematol 2012). Risk-stratification is therefore of great importance in order to identify patients who are eligible for novel or alternative treatment regimens. Minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring can predict clinical progression in MCL and guide pre-emptive treatment with rituximab as single agent. It has thus far not been possible to predict post-treatment molecular relapse (MRD-positivity). Although some recent studies have shown that aberrant miRNA expression delineate pathogenic molecular pathways and predict survival in MCL patients, miRNA profiling has not been performed in the context of MRD and molecular relapse. Aims We assessed MCL miRNA expression, in a large, prospective, uniformly treated patient cohort followed with molecular markers for MRD to determine if miRNAs could predict molecular relapse. Methods Diagnostic MCL tumor samples from 114 patients in the Nordic MCL2 and MCL3 clinical trials were retrieved. All patients had confirmed CyclinD1 overexpression and 96 patients had Ki-67 expression measurement for use in the MIPI-B predictive score. All patients received almost identical induction treatment with six alternating cycles of maxi-CHOP and high-dose Ara-C in combination with rituximab. Patients in remission were consolidated with high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. All patients had a molecular marker (PCR detectable t(11;14) or clonal IgH rearrangement) for MRD. The median follow-up was 6.4 years for the MCL2 cohort and 3.7 years for the MCL3 cohort. 19 miRNAs, previously found to have prognostic significance in MCL (Husby et al EHA 2014), were measured by qRT-PCR and analyzed in concordance with MRD-data. The main endpoint was first event of molecular relapse (MRD-positive sample). Results Of the 114 patients in the study, 71 (62%) patients became MRD-positive in the follow-up period. Of the 19 examined miRNAs, 10 miRNAs showed unique qPCR melting curves and were analyzed with respect to MRD. Four miRNAs (miR-92a, miR-3687, miR-486-5p and miR-185-5p) were significantly up-regulated in patients who had molecular relapse (t-test; respectively p = 0.010, p = 0.019, p = 0.048, p = 0.043). However miR-18b, previously identified as prognostic marker regarding survival, was not significantly overexpressed. We hereafter investigated if a newly derived prognostic score, the MIPI-B-miR, which incorporates miR-18b with the MIPI-B, could predict molecular relapse. The MIPI-B-miR high-risk patients had significantly shorter time to first molecular relapse than MIPI-B high-risk patients (Figure 1). Functional studies of these aberrantly expressed miRs are ongoing. Conclusion Patients with molecular relapse had significantly increased levels of miR-92a, miR-3687, miR-486-5p and miR-185-5p, and MIPI-B-miR improved MRD prediction compared to MIPI-B. Aberrant miRNA profiles may be able to predict molecular relapse, and may already at diagnosis identify patients eligible to anti-CD20 antibody maintenance or alternative regimens. However validation in other cohorts is needed. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kolstad: Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Räty:GlaxoSmithKline Ltd: Honoraria; Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Heavy and Light Chain Monitoring in High Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma Patients Included in the GEM-CESAR Trial: Comparison with Conventional and Minimal Residual Disease IMWG Response Assessment

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-128655 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1852-1852

Author(s):

Noemi Puig ◽

Teresa Contreras ◽

Bruno Paiva ◽

María Teresa Cedena ◽

José J Pérez ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Bone Marrow ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Response Assessment ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Minimal Residual

Introduction: The GEM-CESAR trial is a potentially curative strategy for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (HRsMM) patients (pts) in which the primary endpoint is the achievement of bone marrow minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. However, other methods of disease evaluation in serum such as heavy+light chain (HLC) assessment, with a potential complementary value to the IMWG response criteria, have also been tested. Aim: To evaluate the performance of HLC assay in HRsMM pts at diagnosis and after consolidation, comparing the results with standard serological methods and Next Generation Flow (NGF) for the assessment of bone marrow MRD. Patients and Methods: Ninety HRsMM pts included in the GEM-CESAR trial received six 4-weeks cycles of carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by high dose melphalan and 2 further cycles of consolidation with the same regimen. All pts received maintenance treatment with lenalidomide for up to 2 years. SPEP and IFE were performed using standard procedures. Serum IgGk, IgGl, IgAk and IgAl HLC concentrations were measured using Hevylite (The Binding Site Group Ltd, Birmingham, UK) on a SPA PLUS turbidimeter. HLC concentrations and ratios were considered abnormal if they were outside the 95% reference ranges provided by the manufacturer. MRD was analyzed by flow cytometry following EuroFlow recommendations (sensitivity, 2x10-6). Standard response assignment was carried out as per the IMWG guidelines. Hevylite responses were assigned and HLC-pair suppression was defined as in Michalet et al (Leukemia 2018). Results: Out of 90 HRsMM pts, 75 had monoclonal intact immunoglobulin and samples available at diagnosis (50 IgG and 25 IgA). HLC ratio was abnormal in 98% of IgG pts and in 100% of IgA pts. Response assessment by Hevylite and standard IMWG criteria were available in 62 pts post-consolidation (Table 1). A good agreement was found between the two methods (kappa quadratic weighting = 0,6327 (0,4016 - 0,8638)). Among 46 pts with assigned CR as per the IMWG response criteria, there were 3 and 8 pts in PR and VGPR according to the Hevylite method, respectively. In 62 cases, paired Hevylite and MRD assessment data were available. Concordant results were found in 72.5% of cases (45/62; HLC+/NGF+ in 15 and HLC-/NGF- in 30 cases) while in the remaining 27.4% of cases results were discordant (17/62; HLC-/NGF+ in 6 and HLC+/NGF- in 11 cases). Post-consolidation, 24, 25.8 and 42.3% of the 62 samples were positive by SPEP, NGF and Hevylite, respectively. HLC-pair suppression was identified in 13/62 pts; 10 had severe HLC-pair suppression at the end of consolidation. After a median follow-up of 32 months (8-128), 93% of pts remain alive and progression-free. Three patients that have already progressed had their responses assessed post-consolidation. The first pt was assigned VGPR by the standard IMWG criteria and PR by Hevylite and was MRD positive by NGF; the second pt was assigned CR by IMWG criteria and Hevylite but had severe HLC-pair immunosuppression and was MRD positive by NGF; the third pt was in CR by IMWG and HLC criteria and was MRD positive by MFC. Conclusions: Moderate agreement was found between response assessment by Hevylite and the standard IMWG methods as well as between Hevylite and MRD assessment by NGF. Most discordances were a result of Hevylite detecting disease in samples negative by the standard methods, but longer follow-up is needed to ascertain its clinical value. HLC assessment could have anticipated the progression noted in 2 (out of 3) patients. Disclosures Puig: Takeda, Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; The Binding Site: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Paiva:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi and Takeda: Consultancy. Rodriguez Otero:Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Oriol:Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, Jansse: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rios:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. De Arriba:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Ocio:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bladé:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Irctures: Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Alternating Courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP Plus Rituximab Followed by a High Dose ARA-C Containing Myeloablative Regimen and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) Increases Overall Survival When Compared to 6 Courses of CHOP Plus Rituximab Followed by Myeloablative Radiochemotherapy and ASCT in Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Final Analysis of the MCL Younger Trial of the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network (MCL net)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.151.151 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 151-151 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Olivier Hermine ◽

Eva Hoster ◽

Jan Walewski ◽

Vincent Ribrag ◽

Nicole Brousse ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Final Analysis ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 151 Background MCL outcome has improved during the last decades. In its first randomized trial, the MCL net demonstrated that myeloablative consolidation followed by ASCT resulted in a significant prolongation of PFS in advanced stage MCL (Dreyling et al Blood 2005). Recent phase II studies suggest that the addition of rituximab and/or high dose ARA-C may significantly improve outcome. A phase II trial using sequential R-CHOP/R-DHAP followed by ASCT showed an ORR of 95% with a CR rate of 61%, a median EFS of 83m and a 75% survival rate at 5 years (Delarue et al Blood 20012). Two years ago we presented preliminary results of the the MCL randomized trial comparing 6 courses of CHOP plus Rituximab followed by myeloablative radiochemotherapy (12 Gray TBI, 2×60mg/kg Cyclophosphamide) and ASCT (control arm A) versus alternating courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP plus Rituximab followed by a high dose ARA-C containing myeloablative regimen (10 Gray TBI, 4×1,5 g/m2 Ara-C, 140mg/m2 melphalan) and ASCT (experimental arm B) and have shown that after a follow up (FU) median of 27m patients of Arm B experienced a significantly better time to treatment failure (TTF) (49m vs NR; p=0.0384, HR 0.68), but no overall survival difference. Here, we present final results after a longer FU. Methods Patient eligibility criteria included previously untreated MCL stage II-IV up to the age of 65 years. Histological diagnosis was confirmed by a central pathology review board. The primary end point TTF was monitored continuously by a sequential procedure based on a one sided triangular test. Stable diseases after induction, progression or death from any causes were considered as treatment failure. Sample size was calculated to detect a relative risk of 52% for arm B with a power of 95%. Randomization was stopped as soon as a significant difference was observed between the two arms. Results From July 2004 to May 2010, 497 patients were randomized in 4 countries (Germany, France, Poland, Belgium). The 455 patients evaluable for the primary analysis (19 no MCL, 13 not yet documented, 7 lost of follow up, 2 stage 1, and 1 R bendamustine chemotherapy) displayed the following characteristics (A vs B): median age 54 vs 56 year, male 79% vs 79%, stage IV 82% vs 81%, B symptoms 43% vs 31%, ECOG >2 4% vs 4%, elevated LDH 39% vs 35%, and MIPI low/int/high risk 60%/25%/15% vs 64%/23%/13%, respectively. After induction overall response (OR) was similar in both arms (90% vs 95%; p=0.19) but CR and CR/CRu rates were significantly higher in arm B (25% vs 36%; p=0.012 and 40% vs 54%; p=0.0003). The number of patients transplanted was similar in both arms (72% vs 73%). After transplantation OR and CR rates were comparable in both arms (98% vs 97% and 63% vs 61%). After a median FU of 51 months, TTF was longer in Arm B (46m vs 88m; p=0.0382, HR 0.68) mainly due to a lower number of relapses after CR/CRu/PR (n= 81 vs 40). The rate of ASCT-related death in remission was similar in both arms (4% vs 4%). Although CR rate after ASCT was similar in both arms, remission duration (RD) after ASCT was superior in Arm B (49m vs 84m; p=0.0001). At the time of final analysis, OS was superior in Arm B (NR vs 82m, p=0.045). Safety after induction was comparable in both arms except for an increased grade 3/4 hematological toxicity (Hb 9% vs 30%, WBC 50% vs 75%, platelets 10% vs 74%), renal toxicity (creatinine grade 1/2: 10% vs 44%, grade 3/4: none vs 1%), and grade 1/2 nausea and vomiting in arm B. Toxicities of both conditioning regimen were similar. Conclusions With a longer FU, we confirmed that high dose ARA-C in addition to R-CHOP increases significantly complete response rates, TTF and in addition overall survival without clinically relevant increase of toxicity. Therefore, induction regimen containing high dose ARA-C followed by ASCT should become the new standard of care of MCL patients <65 y. Disclosures: Ribrag: Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; bayer: Research Funding; sanofi: Research Funding. Gisselbrecht:roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; baxter: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) By Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) Is Highly Predictive of Progression Free Survival in the IFM/DFCI 2009 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.191.191 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 191-191 ◽

Cited By ~ 38

Author(s):

Herve Avet-Loiseau ◽

Jill Corre ◽

Valerie Lauwers-Cances ◽

Marie-Lorraine Chretien ◽

Nelly Robillard ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Young Patients ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients

Abstract Evaluation of MRD in multiple myeloma (MM) is becoming an important trial endpoint, especially in young patients. With current intensive approaches, the complete remission (CR) rates are up to 70%, making conventional evaluations of response quite useless. More sensitive tools are mandatory. Two techniques may help investigators to reach this goal, flow cytometry (FCM) and NGS. We applied both techniques to the IFM part of the IFM/DFCI 2009 trial. Briefly, this trial enrolled 700 patients under 66 years of age who were randomized to receive either 8 cycles of VRD (Velcade®-Revlimid®-Dexamethasone) (arm A), or 3 VRD cycles, high-dose melphalan, followed by two consolidation VRD cycles (arm B). All patients received a lenalidomide maintenance for 12 months. A bone marrow MRD evaluation was planned before and after maintenance for all patients achieving at least very good partial response (VGPR). A one-mL bone marrow aspirate was sent overnight to one of the central labs. The primary purpose was to assess MRD by FCM. When extra cells were available, they were frozen as a dry pellet for NGS analyses, using the LymphoSight® platform (Sequenta/Adaptive Inc.). A total of 246 patients have been evaluated by NGS before maintenance and 178 after maintenance. Patients were classified in 3 categories: negative (< 10-6), low-positive (between 10-4 and 10-6), and positive (> 10-4). At pre-maintenance, 87 patients were negative, 80 were low-positive, and 79 were positive. At post-maintenance, these numbers were respectively 86, 52, and 40. Using a cutoff at 10-6, patients below 10-6 at pre-maintenance presented a 3-year PFS at 83%, vs 53% for patients > 10-6. At post-maintenance, these % were 90% and 59% respectively. When restricted to patients in CR, the 3-year PFS was 87% and 63% at pre-maintenance, and 92% and 64% at post-maintenance (Figure). Finally, we compared the two MRD techniques. Using a 7-color FCM strategy, the sensitivity level was 10-4. Amongst the 163 patients negative with the FCM approach, 84 (51 %) patients were positive using NGS and among 72 patients positive with FCM, 67 (93%) were also positive using NGS. In the subgroup of patients with negative MRD using FCM, the 3 year PFS was 86% for NGS negative patients vs 66 % for NGS positive at pre-maintenance and 91% vs 65% at post maintenance. Looking at high-risk patients, 26 patients with t(4;14), and 16 with del(17p) were evaluated. Half of the t(4;14) patients achieved MRD negativity, versus only 1/16 patients with del(17p). Interestingly, 9/13 patients with t(4;14) who achieved MRD negativity, and 0/1 patients with del(17p) did not relapse, showing the importance of achieving deep response in these high-risk patients. In conclusion, this study clearly demonstrates that a sensitive technique like NGS is able to predict PFS in patients treated with modern approaches. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Avet-Loiseau: Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Hulin:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Arnulf:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Garderet:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Karlin:Sandoz: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. MACRO:millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Faham:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Employment, Equity Ownership. Facon:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Takeda: Other: Adboard; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Novartis: Other: Adboard. Attal:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; jansen: Honoraria.

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

Radioimmunotherapy for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: 5-Year Follow-up of 90 Patients from the International RIT-Registry

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-124192 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 5263-5263

Author(s):

Karin Hohloch ◽

Christine Windemuth-Kieselbach ◽

Pier Luigi Zinzani ◽

Roberto E. Cacchione ◽

Wojciech Jurczak ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Follicular Lymphoma ◽

Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Primary Therapy ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Mantle Cell

To assess the efficacy of radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with 90yttrium-ibrutinib-tiuxetan (90Y-IT) in mantle cell lymphoma, data from 90 patients registered in the RIT Network with a median follow-up (FU) of 5.5 years after RIT were evaluated. 90Y-IT was given as first-line therapy in 45 (50%) (consolidation 44 pts., primary therapy 1 pt.) and at relapse in 45 (50%) patients (consolidation 24 pts., recurrence 12 pts., therapy refractory 3 pts., conditioning 2 pts., other 4 pts.). As a first-line treatment, 30 patients (pts.) (67%) achieved CR, 10 pts. (22%) PR%., 1 pt. (2%) PD, and for 4 pts. (9%) no response data was available. At relapse, CR was achieved in 17 pts. (38%), PR in 6 pts. (13%), SD in 2 pts. (4%), and 6 pts. (13%) had PD, while the response was not documented for 14 pts. (31%). After a median FU of 5.5 years, median PFS for all patients was 2.11 (95%CI: 1.03-2.32) years, and median OS was 4.05 (95%CI 2.79-7.21) years. Eleven pts. (12.2%) developed second malignancy. In conclusion, this is the largest report of MCL pts. treated with 90Y-IT to date. 90Y-IT was most often used as consolidation after first- and second-line chemotherapy and may improve the results achieved using chemoimmunotherapy alone. However, the results are less encouraging compared to treatment with small molecules such as ibrutinib. Disclosures Zinzani: TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy. Jurczak:Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Truemper:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy. Scholz:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Hexal: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy; GILEAD: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankio: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Yttrium 90 (90Y) Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin) is approved for treatment of patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma and as consolidation therapy after chemo(immuno)therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma.

Download Full-text

Improving the Definition of Response Assessment: Prognostic Value of Minimal Residual Disease Combined with PET/CT at Day 100 Post Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-142845 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 33-34

Author(s):

Miguel Gonzalez-Velez ◽

Mariano Arribas ◽

Heidi E. Kosiorek ◽

Richard Butterfield ◽

Carlo Guerrero ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Prognostic Value ◽

Residual Disease ◽

High Sensitivity ◽

Response Assessment ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Pet Ct ◽

Definition Of ◽

Minimal Residual

Introduction: Response assessment at day 100 post Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) is associated with long-term relapsed free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in multiple myeloma (MM). The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) are the preferred criteria to define best response to treatment and define relapse. In the last years, response assessment has incorporated minimal residual disease (MRD) status -associated with improved RFS and OS (Munshi et al); and PET/CT combined with clinical characteristics -also associated with favorable outcomes (Zamagni et al. NCT01910987; MMY3033). The 2016 IMWG MRD criteria, combined imaging (PET/CT) plus next-generation sequencing (NGS) MRD-negative to define complete response (CR). To our knowledge, there is limited data examining the correlation and prognostic value of MRD and FDG-PET/CT at day 100 post ASCT in MM. IN this study, we aimed to determine the prognostic valued of MRD by NGS combined with PET/CT in RFS and OS status after high dose chemotherapy and ASCT in MM. Methods: Patients who underwent ASCT for MM at Mayo Clinic Arizona and had MRD and PET/CT data were included in the study. Clinical data was obtained via retrospective chart review. Cytogenetic risk (CyR) was classified using the mSMART criteria . Disease and ASCT related characteristics were compared by MRD status. MRD was measured by NGS on bone marrow aspirates using the previosly validated clonoSEQ ® Assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation, Seattle, USA) tracking the IgH, IgK and IgL rearrangements at a minimum sensitivity level of 10-5. MRD was defined by residual clonal cells per million nucleated cells as: negative= 0, borderline= 1-5, positive >5. PET/CT scans were performed locally at baseline and at day 100. Comparisons were performed using the chi-square test for categorical variables, Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuos variables, McNemar's test and Cohens's Kappa for agreement measures. Results: A total of 103 patients had matched MRD and PET/CT assessment around day 100 (+/-9 days) and were included in the analysis. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range, 54-66 years), 71 patients (68.9%) were men. CyR was standard risk in 49 (47.6%), high-risk in 39 (37.9%) and unknown in 15 (14.6%) patients. Most 75 (72.8%) patients were MRD positive, 16 (15.5%) were MRD negative, and 12 (11.7%) borderline. The median main MRD clone detected was 64 (range 0-91,874). 70 patients (68%) and 33 (32%) had a negative and positive PET/CT respectively. The median follow-up time was 18 months (range, 13-31 months). At the time of data analysis, 10 patients (9.7%) had relapsed and only 4 (3.9%) had died. There was a high-correlation between MRD status and PET/CT, 31 patients (93.9%) with positive PET/CT were also MRD positive (p=0.0027). There were no statistical differences between PET/CT and CyR (p=0.95). We analyzed the correlation using the FREQ procedure (McNemars's test); there was a strong association between positive PET/CT and positive MRD in 31/33 patients (93.9%, high sensitivity), and low association for negative PET/CT the negative/borderline MRD in 26/70 (37.1%, low specificity; p<0.001). The agreement measure between the PET/CT and MRD using negative/borderline combined had a kappa of 0.23 (95% CI 0.11, 0.35) indicating a fair agreement beyond chance (Figure 1). PET/CT-CT was a statistically significant predictor of worse RFS (HR 3.53, 95%CI: 1.02-12.24, p<0.0337) and OS (HR 11.38, 95%CI: 1.18-109.56, p<0.0078) (Figure 2-3, respectively). MRD was not predictive of neither RFS (HR 1.72, 95%CI: 0.36-8.14, p<0.49) or OS (p<0.16). Conclusions: In conclusion, we demonstrate that the combination of MRD by NGS (clonoSEQ ®) and PET/CT at day 100 are complementary and have a high sensitivity (true positive rate) and fair correlation of agreement but low specificity (true negative rate). PET/CT was the best most sensitive technique to prognosticate RFS and OS. We did not find prognostic correlation of MRD with RFS and OS. However, our findings might be confounded by the low risk of relapse and death, a longer follow-up may demonstrate clinically important differences. Our results add evidence that MRD plus PET/CT improve the definition of CR in MM patients post ASCT. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate the optimal timing and role of combined MRD, PET/CT with other prognostic markers of clinical outcomes. Disclosures Larsen: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fonseca:Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; OncoTracker: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Minimal residual disease detection in mantle cell lymphoma: methods and significance of four-color flow cytometry compared to consensus IGH-polymerase chain reaction at initial staging and for follow-up examinations

Haematologica ◽

10.3324/haematol.11267 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 93 (4) ◽

pp. 551-559 ◽

Cited By ~ 52

Author(s):

S. Bottcher ◽

M. Ritgen ◽

S. Buske ◽

S. Gesk ◽

W. Klapper ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Flow Cytometry ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Chain Reaction ◽

Color Flow ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Polymerase Chain ◽

Initial Staging ◽

Minimal Residual

Download Full-text

ABVD Versus Escalated Beacopp in Advanced Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Results from a Retrospective, Multicenter European Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-128198 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1565-1565 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Patrizia Mondello ◽

Irene Dogliotti ◽

Jan-Paul Bohn ◽

Federica Cavallo ◽

Simone Ferrero ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advanced Stage ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients

Purpose: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is a highly curable disease even in advanced-stage, with >90% of long-term survivors. Currently, the standard of care is ABVD (doxorubicin, etoposide, vinblastine and dacarbazine), as it is less toxic and as effective as other more intensive chemotherapy regimens. Alternatively, BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone) has been proposed as front-line intensified regimen with a better initial disease control and prolonged time to relapse when compared to ABVD. However, this advantage is associated with higher rates of severe hematologic toxicity, treatment-related deaths, secondary neoplasms and infertility. To date, the debate regarding which regimen should be preferred as first line for advanced-stage HL is still ongoing. To shed some light on this open question we compared efficacy and safety of both regimens in clinical practice. Patients and Methods: From October 2009 to October 2018, patients with HL stage III-IV treated with either ABVD or BEACOPP escalated (BEACOPPesc) were retrospectively assessed in 7 European cancer centers. Results: A total of 372 consecutive patients were included in the study. One-hundred and ten patients were treated with BEACOPPesc and 262 with ABVD. The baseline characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, except for a higher rate of high-risk patients in the BEACOPPesc group in contrast to the ABVD one (47% vs 18%; p= 0.003). Complete response rate (CR) assessed by PET imaging at the end of the second cycle was 67% and 78% for the ABVD and BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.003), respectively. Thirteen patients of the ABVD group achieved stable disease (SD) and 6 had a progression disease (PD). On the other hand, 4 of the patients in the BEACOPPesc group progressed, another 2 interrupted therapy because life-threatening toxicity. At the end of the therapy, CR was 76% in the ABVD group and 85% in the BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.01). A total of 20% patients in the ABVD group and 14% patients in the BEACOPPesc group received consolidation radiotherapy on the mediastinal mass at the dose of 30Gy. After radiotherapy, the number of patients with CR increased to 79% and 87% in the two groups (p= 0.041), respectively. Thirty-nine patients (35%) in the BEACOPPesc group required dose reduction of chemotherapy due to toxicity compared to 12 patients (5%; p= <0.001) in the ABVD group. Overall, the rate of severe toxicities was higher in the BEACOPPesc group in comparison with the ABVD cohort. In particular, there was a significant increased frequency of acute grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (neutropenia 61% vs 24%; anemia 29% vs 4%; thrombocytopenia 29% vs 3%), febrile neutropenia (29% vs 3%), severe infections (18% vs 3%). Myeloid growth factors were administered to 85% and 59% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD group. Blood transfusions were required in 51% and 6% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD cohort. Progression during or shortly after treatment occurred in 5 patients in the BEACOPPesc group (4%) and in 16 patients in the ABVD group (6%; p= 0.62). Among the 96 patients who achieved a CR after BEACOPPesc and radiotherapy, 8 relapsed (8%), compared to 29 of 208 patients in the ABVD group (14%; p= 0.04). At a median follow-up period of 5 years, no statistical difference in progression free survival (PFS; p=0.11) and event-free survival (EFS; p=0.22) was observed between the BEACOPPesc and ABVD cohorts. Similarly, overall survival (OS) did not differ between the two groups (p=0.14). The baseline international prognostic score (IPS <3 vs ≥ 3) significantly influenced the EFS with an advantage for the high-risk group treated with BEACOPPesc (Figure 1A; p=0.03), but not the PFS (Figure 1B; p=0.06) and OS (Figure 1C; p=0.14). During the follow-up period, in the BEACOPPesc group one patient developed myelodysplasia and one acute leukemia. Second solid tumors developed in one patient in the ABVD group (lung cancer) and one in BEACOPPesc group (breast cancer). Conclusion: We confirm that the ABVD regimen is an effective and less toxic therapeutic option for advanced-stage HL. Although BEACOPP results in better initial tumor control especially in high-risk patients, the long-term outcome remains similar between the two regimens. Disclosures Ferrero: EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Martinelli:BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Willenbacher:European Commission: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myelom- und Lymphomselbsthilfe Österreich: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Science: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; IQVIA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; oncotyrol: Employment, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujimoto: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tirol Program: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

A Pilot Study of Acalabrutinib with Bendamustine/Rituximab Followed By Cytarabine/Rituximab (R-ABC) for Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-143095 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 8-9

Author(s):

Daniel Guy ◽

Marcus Watkins ◽

Fei Wan ◽

Nancy L. Bartlett ◽

Amanda F Cashen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Complete Response ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Stem Cell Collection

Introduction The management of younger fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) varies widely with no consensus on an optimal induction therapy. To date, the treatments with the longest progression-free survival incorporate a chemotherapy backbone that includes high dose cytarabine, followed by consolidation with an autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) (Hermine et al. Lancet 2016, Eskelund et al. Br J Haematol 2016). Recent data showed that a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab achieved high complete response rates with high minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (Merryman RW et al. Blood Adv 2020). We hypothesized that adding the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib to the same chemotherapeutic backbone would be safe and increase complete response rates as well as minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity pre-transplant, and potentially improve clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a single arm, single institution pilot study registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03623373). Patients with untreated MCL, who were between ages 18-70 and were candidates for ASCT, were eligible. Patients received six 28-day cycles of treatment. Cycles 1-3 consisted of bendamustine 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2, rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 28. Cycles 4-6 consisted of rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, cytarabine 2 g/m2 (1.5 g/m2 if age>60) q12 hours on days 1 and 2, and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 7 and 22 through 28. Restaging PET/CT and response assessment based on the Lugano classification were obtained following cycles 3 and 6. After cycle 6 patients underwent leukapheresis and stem-cell collection as preparation for ASCT. Blood for MRD status was collected after cycles 2, 4 and 6 and will be evaluated using the ClonoSeq assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). The primary objective was to determine the stem cell mobilization success rate. Secondary objectives included safety and tolerability, overall response rate (ORR), pre-transplant complete response rate (CR), and the MRD negativity rate during and after completion of therapy. Results The trial enrolled 14 patients from December 2018 to February 2020. One patient withdrew consent prior to start of treatment and another was found to have an undiagnosed adenocarcinoma shortly after starting MCL treatment. Both are excluded from the analysis. The median age was 57 years (range 52-66). 11 patients were males (92%), all patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1. 11 patients (92%) presented with stage IV disease. The mean MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score was 6.3 (25% high-risk, 42% intermediate-risk and 33% low-risk). Of the 12 patients who began treatment, 9 completed all 6 cycles. Three patients did not complete therapy due to: insurance issues (n = 1), and thrombocytopenia (n = 2) following cycle 5 and 4. The side effect profile showed expected hematologic toxicities with grade 3-4 cytopenias in all patients, mostly during cytarabine cycles. In total, 100% of patients developed grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and 83% of patients developed grade 3-4 neutropenia. Three episodes of febrile neutropenia were observed. One patient had a grade 3 transaminase increase, and one patient had grade 3 diarrhea. No bleeding events or treatment related deaths occurred. The remainder of the side effects were low grade and the treatment was generally well tolerated. Of the 12 evaluable patients, 10 responded (ORR 83%) with 9 achieving CR (75%). One patient achieved PR prior to being removed from the study due to thrombocytopenia and then achieved CR off study. Two patients experienced PD during induction. With a median follow up of 9 months, no responding patients have relapsed. The median CD34+ stem cell collection was 3.84x106 cells/kg (range 2.77 - 5.9). MRD results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions This is the first study attempting to combine BTK inhibition with a high dose cytarabine containing regimen. The addition of acalabrutinib to a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab appears to be safe. The R-ABC combination will be further tested in the recently activated intergroup trial EA4181. Disclosures Bartlett: Autolus: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Fehniger:ImmunityBio: Research Funding; HCW Biologics: Research Funding; Kiadis: Consultancy; Nkarta: Consultancy; Indapta: Consultancy; Wugen: Consultancy; Orca Biosystems: Consultancy; Compass Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ghobadi:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; WuGen: Consultancy. Mehta-Shah:Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Genetech/Roche: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Verastem: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Corvus: Research Funding. Kahl:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Alternating Courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP Plus Rituximab Followed by a High Dose ARA-C Containing Myeloablative Regimen and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) Is Superior to 6 Courses CHOP Plus Rituximab Followed by Myeloablative Radiochemotherapy and ASCT In Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Results of the MCL Younger Trial of the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network (MCL net)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.110.110 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 110-110 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Olivier Hermine ◽

Eva Hoster ◽

Jan Walewski ◽

Vincent Ribrag ◽

Nicole Brousse ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Treatment Failure ◽

Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 110 Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) has been characterized by poor long term prognosis with a median survival of only 3 to 4 years. However, outcome has improved during the last decades. In its first randomized trial, the MCL net demonstrated that myeloablative consolidation followed by ASCT resulted in a significant prolongation of PFS in advanced stage MCL (Dreyling et al Blood 2005). Recent phase II studies suggested that the addition of rituximab to CHOP like chemotherapy and/or high dose ARA-C may significantly improve remission rates and PFS. A French phase II trial using sequential R-CHOP/R-DHAP followed by ASCT showed an overall response rate of 95% with a CR rate of 61% translating into a median EFS of 83 months and a 75% survival rate at 5 years (Delarue et al ASH 2008). Methods: To evaluate the potential superiority of a high dose ARA-C containing regimen, the MCL net initiated a randomized trial comparing 6 courses of CHOP plus Rituximab followed by myeloablative radiochemotherapy (12 Gray TBI, 2×60mg/kg Cyclophosphamide) and ASCT (control arm A) versus alternating courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP plus Rituximab followed by a high dose ARA-C containing myeloablative regimen (10 Gray TBI, 4×1,5 g/m2 Ara-C, 140mg/m2 melphalan) and ASCT (experimental arm B). Patient eligibility criteria included previously untreated MCL stage II-IV up to the age of 65 years. Histological diagnosis was confirmed by a central pathology review board. The primary end point time to treatment failure (TTF) was monitored continuously by a sequential procedure based on a one sided triangular test. Stable disease after induction, progression or death from any causes, were considered as treatment failure. Sample size was calculated to detect a hazard ratio of 52% for arm B with a power of 95%. Randomization was stopped as soon as a significant difference was observed between the two arms. Results: From July 2004 to May 2010, 497 patients were randomized in 4 countries (Germany, France, Poland, Belgium). The 391 patients evaluable for the primary analysis (19 no MCL, 87 not yet documented) displayed similar characteristics in both treatment arms: median age 55 vs 56 years, male 78% vs 79%, stage IV 85% vs 79%, B symptoms 43% vs 33%, ECOG >2 5% vs 5%, elevated LDH 37% vs 38%, and MIPI low/int/high risk 61%/25%/14% vs 62%/23%/15%, respectively. After induction overall response was similarly high in both arms (A: 90% vs B: 94%; p=0.19) and CR rate and combined CR/CRu rate were significantly higher in arm B (26% vs 39%; p=0.012 and 41% vs 60%; p=0.0003). The number of patients transplanted was similar in both arms (72% vs 73%) and after transplantation overall response and CR rates were comparable in both arms (97% vs 97% and 63% vs 65%, respectively). After a median follow up of 27 months, patients in arm B experienced a significantly longer TTF (49 months vs NR; p=0.0384, hazard ratio 0.68) mainly due to a lower number of relapses after CR/CRu/PR (20% vs 10%), whereas the rate of ASCT-related deaths in remission was similar in both arms (3% vs 4%). Although CR rate after ASCT was comparable in both arms, remission duration (RD) after ASCT was superior in Arm B (48m vs NR; p=0.047). Interestingly, for patients in CR after ASCT, RD after ASCT was also presumably superior in arm B (51 months vs NR; p=0.077). At the time of analysis overall survival was similar in both arms with medians not reached and 79% vs. 80% survival rates at 3 years (p=0.74). Safety after induction was comparable in both arms except for an increased grade 3/4 hematological toxicity (Hb 8% vs 28%, WBC 48% vs 75%, platelets 9% vs 74%, respectively), an excess of renal toxicity (creatinine grade 1/2: 8% vs 38%, grade 3/4: none vs 2%), and more frequent grade 1/2 nausea and vomiting in arm B. Toxicities of both conditioning regimen were similar, except for higher grade 3/4 mucositis (43% vs. 61%) in Arm B, and higher grade 1/2 liver toxicity and constipation in Arm A. Conclusions: High dose ARA-C in addition to R-CHOP+ASCT increases significantly complete response rates and TTF without clinically relevant increase of toxicity. Therefore, induction regimen containing high dose ARA-C followed by ASCT should become the new standard of care of MCL patients up to 65 years. Disclosures: Walewski: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stilgenbauer:Amgen: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding. Feugier:roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bosly:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gisselbrecht:Roche: Research Funding.

Download Full-text