Risk Stratification Combining MYC Immunohistochemistry with Standard IPI Has Utility in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2656-2656
Author(s):  
David Simon Kliman ◽  
Louise Imlay-Gillespie ◽  
Kirsten McIlroy ◽  
Anthony Gill ◽  
Christopher Arthur ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Background Though the majority of patients (pts) with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are curable with R-CHOP chemotherapy, a significant proportion will relapse or have refractory disease. The most commonly used clinical tool is the international prognostic index (IPI), though this cannot fully capture the heterogeneity of cases seen in practice. In recent years biomarkers such as MYC are entering clinical use. Pts with lymphomas demonstrating dual abnormalities of MYC in association with BCL2 and/or BCL6-known as 'double-hit' lymphomas are consistently shown to have poorer disease free and overall survival. While Fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) for MYC translocation is the gold-standard, immunohistochemistry (IHC) is faster and significantly cheaper. Studies in recent years have confirmed the prognostic significance of increased MYC expression by IHC. Due to significant inter-laboratory variability however, internal validation is required. Methods Tissue samples of pts treated at Royal North Shore Hospital in Sydney, Australia between 2003-2012 were retrospectively assessed. Pts were included if they were transplant eligible (age <70 years), and had been treated for de novo DLBCL with a rituximab containing regimen. Samples were scored for MYC IHC as well as BCL2 and BCL6. Clinical data including IPI score, treatment and outcomes were also collected. Treatments were stratified into standard R-CHOP-like versus more intensive regimens including R-Hyper-CVAD and dose-adjusted R-EPOCH. A significant cut-off for MYC staining was determined using X-Tile (Rimmlab, New Haven, CT) and confirmed with the log-rank test. Estimation of OS and EFS was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Pt characteristics were compared using Chi-squared test. Statistical analysis was performed using MedCalc 15.4 (MedCalc software, Ostend, Belgium). Ethics approval was received for a retrospective study. Results 105 patients met study criteria. The 5 year OS and EFS was 86% and 77% respectively (Figure 1 and 2). The optimal cut-off for positive MYC IHC was >70%. This was seen in 23% of samples. From the 13 cases with MYC FISH results, the positive and negative predictive values of positive MYC IHC were 50% and 92% respectively. There was no significant difference between the MYC positive and negative groups with respect to demographics or IPI score (Table 1). Significantly more patients with MYC positivity received intensive treatment (37% versus 16%, p=0.047). Despite this, 5 year OS was significantly poorer at 51% versus 87% at median follow-up of 40 months (P=0.0025, Figure 3). There was a trend towards worse EFS at 61% versus 75% though this did not reach statistical significance (P=0.242). On multivariate analysis, MYC IHC and IPI score were the only independent prognostic factors. Based on the relative odds ratio, a combined scoring system was designed, attributing 1 point for positive MYC IHC and/ or IPI intermediate-high risk, and 2 points for IPI high risk. This resulted in 4 risk groups with significantly different 5 year OS of 94%, 78%, 45% and 0% (P<0.0001). Discussion MYC IHC is of independent prognostic significance. Due to significant variability between laboratories, local validation is required. A composite score combining IPI and MYC IHC is simple to calculate and may provide better prognostic utility than either factor alone. Ongoing prospective studies investigating the role of clinical risk stratification and newer biomarkers are required to identify patients likely to need more intensive or novel therapies. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Imlay-Gillespie: Novartis: Honoraria. Arthur:Amgen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Mackinlay:Roche: Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding. Mulligan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Young High Risk Patients with MYC/BCL2 Double Hit Lymphoma, BCL2+ and/or Germinal Centre B-Cell like Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Benefit from Dose-Dense Chemoimmunotherapy Including Early CNS Prophylaxis: Analysis of Data from the Nordic Lymphoma Group CRY-04 and Chic Trials

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2955-2955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirpa Leppa ◽  
Judit Jørgensen ◽  
Leo Meriranta ◽  
Klaus Beiske ◽  
Jan M.A. Delabie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cns Prophylaxis ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Dose Dense ◽  
In The Beginning ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Background. Survival of patients with high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is suboptimal, and the risk of central nervous system (CNS) progression is relatively high. We investigated the efficacy of dose-dense chemoimmunotherapy and systemic CNS prophylaxis in two Nordic trials including patients less than 65 years with high-risk DLBCL. We combined individual patient data from these trials to compare clinical outcome and biological prognostic factors in patients treated with CNS prophylaxis given in the beginning (CHIC) versus at the end (CRY-04) of therapy. Patients and methods. In CRY-04 study, patients were treated with six courses of R-CHOEP14 followed by HD-Mtx and HD-Ara-C. In CHIC trial, treatment started with two courses of HD-Mtx in combination with R-CHOP14, followed by four courses of R-CHOEP-14 and one course of R-HD-AraC. In addition, liposomal AraC was administered intrathecally at courses 1, 3 and 5. For the correlative studies, formalin fixed paraffin embedded pretreatment tumor samples were analyzed by fluorescent in situ hybridization for BCL2 and c-MYC breakpoints and by immunochemistry for CD10, BCL6, MUM1, MYC and BCL2 expression. Germinal center B-cell-like (GCB)/non-GCB) subclassification was performed according to Hans algorithm. Results. Among 303 patients enrolled in the trials (CRY-04, n=160 and CHIC, n=143), 295 (CRY-04, n=154 and CHIC, n=139) were evaluable for baseline characteristics and outcome. Median age (54 and 56 years, p=0.222), male/female ratio, stage, and aaIPI scores were comparable in the two cohorts. CHIC regimen improved outcome over CRY-04; the findings included 4-year estimates of PFS (81% vs 66%, p=0.003), OS (83% and 79%, p=ns) and cumulative incidence rates of CNS progression (2.4% and 5.0%, p=ns). Treatment with the CHIC regimen reduced the risk of systemic progression (aaIPI adjusted RR=0.489, 95%CI 0.308-0.777, p=0.002). PFS benefit with CHIC over CRY-04 was observed across pre-specified subgroups, and particularly in patients less than 60 years old (p=0.008). In the entire study population, dual protein expression (DPE) of BCL2 and MYC was the only parameter to be significantly correlated with a worse PFS (4-y PFS 77% vs 50%, p=0.024; RR=2.300, 95% CI 1.088-4.860, p=0.029). Neither any single immunohistochemical marker nor the GCB/non-GCB subtype or MYC/BCL2-translocations significantly affected outcome. However, when treatment interaction was tested, MYC/BCL2 double hit status (DHL; 13%) predicted poor outcome among patients treated with CRY-04 regimen compared with patients who received CHIC regimen (4-y PFS; 38% vs 78%, p=0.086). GCB subtype and BCL2 positivity were also associated with better outcome in the CHIC cohort (4 y PFS; 63% vs 84%, p=0.011 and 61% vs 80%, p=0.007, respectively), whereas there were no significant survival differences between these regimens among the patients with non-GCB subtype, BCL2 negative DLBCL or DPE lymphomas. Conclusions. Our results derived from trial data with homogenous treatment support the use of HD-Mtx in the beginning rather than at the end of therapy. The survival benefit related to CHIC regimen over CRY-04 is due to better systemic control of the disease, and at least partly linked to improved survival among patients with GCB subtype, BCL2 positivity and DHL. Disclosures Leppa: Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Holte:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Norway: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes and Cost Analysis of Dose-Adjusted R-EPOCH Vs R-CHOP in Treatment of Diffuse Large B- Cell Lymphoma with High Risk Features

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4790-4790
Author(s):  
Bhagirathbhai Dholaria ◽  
Prakash Vishnu ◽  
Yenni Alejandro Moreno-Vanegas ◽  
Aaron C. Spaulding ◽  
Nancy N. Diehl ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Cost Analysis ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Red Cell ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Cost ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Background Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with high-risk features carries a poor prognosis despite treatment with immunochemotherapy regimen incorporating rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP). Hence, dose adjusted rituximab, etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide and doxorubicin (DA.R-EPOCH), a higher intensity regimen, is suggested as an upfront treatment of high-risk DLBCL. In our study, we analyzed the outcomes in a prospectively followed cohort of patients with de novo high-risk DLBCL who received DA.R-EPOCH, and compared them to the patients who received R-CHOP. Furthermore, we conducted a cost analysis to determine which of the two treatments produces a larger financial burden. Method Patients diagnosed with DLBCL who received chemo-immunotherapy at our center between January 2011 to December 2016 were included in the analysis. High-risk DLBCL was defined by the presence of any of the following features at diagnosis: NCCN- IPI score ≥4, tumor measuring ≥5 cm, MYC ± BCL2 or BCL6 rearrangement by FISH or MYC overexpression (>40% by immunohistochemistry [IHC]), Ki-67 index ≥80% and non-GCB immunophenotype by Hans algorithm. Responses were evaluated at middle and end of chemotherapy. Overall (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were calculated. For the cost analysis, standardized costs were obtained from Mayo Clinic Florida cost data warehouse based upon patient encounters and treatments. Report cost-to-charge ratios were multiplied by the charges for all hospital billed services, and all resulting costs were adjusted to 2016 dollars with the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Implicit Price Deflator. Patients who did not receive their complete planned treatment at our facility were excluded from the cost analysis. Results Of 80 patients with high-risk DLBCL, 52 (65%) patients were treated with R-CHOP and 28 (35%) with DA.R-EPOCH. The median follow-up was 11.2 months (range: 0.7- 151.3 months). The planned treatment completion rate and complete remission rate at the end of treatment were similar in both groups. There was no significant difference in OS and PFS among the patients treated with DA.R-EPOCH compared to R-CHOP. The hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.79 (95% CI- 0.28-2.29, P=0.67) and OS was 0.86 (95% CI- 0.26-2.78, P=0.80) (Figure 1). In Cox-regression analysis, low baseline albumin, ECOG performance status ≥2, above-normal LDH, high NCCN- IPI and low cumulative chemotherapy doses were associated with poor OS and PFS. Overall incidence of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, neuropathy, and unplanned hospitalizations were similar between the two treatment groups. Patients treated with DA.R-EPOCH required more red cell transfusions during the treatment (P=0.004). The total mean cost associated with DA.R-EPOCH and R-CHOP regimens was $106,940 ± $39,351 and $58,509 ± 24,588, respectively (P<0.001). The cost associated with hospital services, laboratory testing and evaluation and management were higher in DA.R-EPCOH group compared to R-CHOP group (P<0.001) (Table 2). Conclusion Our study showed that there was no significant difference in PFS and OS of patients with DLBCL with high-risk features when treated with R-CHOP compared to DA.R-EPOCH. DA.R-EPOCH was associated with higher red cell transfusion requirement and treatment related expenses. A prospective randomized comparison is warranted between these two regimens specifically for patients with high-risk DLBCL. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

A Phase II Randomized Study of Lenalidomide or Lenalidomide and Rituximab As Maintenance Therapy Following R-CHOP Chemotherapy for Patients with High Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3668-3668
Author(s):  
Nishitha M. Reddy ◽  
Rhea M Simons ◽  
Meghan E Caldwell ◽  
Heidi Chen ◽  
Madan Jagasia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
One Year ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Abstract 3668 Background: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients with an intermediate/high to high risk international prognostic index (IPI) score are at an increased risk of disease relapse in the first year after completion of standard therapy with R-CHOP. Lenalidomide (LEN), an immunomodulatory drug, enhances the natural-killer cell mediated antibody-dependant cellular cytotoxicity of rituximab in lymphoma cell lines, inhibits angiogenesis, alters cytokine production, and has been shown to have clinical activity against B-cell lymphoma including relapsed DLBCL. Methods: DLBCL patients with high risk features (IPI scores of 3 or greater) who achieved CR after R-CHOP were randomized to LEN (arm A) alone or LEN and rituximab maintenance therapy (arm B) within 12 weeks of last dose of R-CHOP. The primary endpoint of the study was to assess the one year relapse-free survival. We expected that a 25% difference of relapse compared with current standard therapy will have clinical significance. Patients in arm A received LEN at a dose of 25 mg daily for 21 days of 28 days. Patients in arm B received LEN at a dose of 20mg daily for 21 days of 28 days along with rituximab (375mg/m2) on day 8 of even cycles. Treatment on both arms was continued for one year. Treatment was discontinued for disease progression. LEN dose adjustments were incorporated in the protocol. Results: Thirty five patients, 19 arm A/16 arm B, 20 female/15 male, with a median age of 59 yrs were enrolled. The median IPI was 3 for all patients. For patients over the age of 60 the median IPI score was 4 and the median aa-IPI was 3. Two patients received XRT to areas of bulky disease at the completion of R-CHOP prior to start of maintenance. At a median follow up of 22 months, the 2 yr PFS and DFS was 86% and 96% respectively. For patients in arm A and arm B the 2 yr PFS was 92% vs.77% and the 2 yr DFS was 100% vs. 92% respectively (p=0.52). Two patients discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Grade 3–4 toxicities include neutropenia (25%), fatigue (17%), diarrhea (8%), DVT (3%), rash (3%), febrile neutropenia (3%). Related grade 1–2 toxicities include hypothyroidism (11%) and rash (47%). There were no treatment related deaths. Conclusions: Lenalidomide as maintenance therapy demonstrates encouraging clinical activity following standard chemotherapy and results in superior survival outcomes in DLBCL patients with high risk prognostic features. The 2-yr OS was 90% in our study as compared with historical controls of 70%. Our study suggests that maintenance strategy with lenalidomide based therapy may increase cure rate and needs to be prospectively evaluated in a phase III study. Disclosures: Reddy: Celgene: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide in Lymphoma. Park:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding.

The Oncoprotein LMO2 Is Expressed in a Germinal Center B-Cell-Associated Pattern and Predicts Survival in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 810-810
Author(s):  
Yasodha Natkunam ◽  
Eric D. Hsi ◽  
Christine Hans ◽  
Shuchun Zhao ◽  
Behnaz Taidi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Protein Expression ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Germinal Center ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Rna Expression ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is clinically and molecularly heterogeneous and portends a poor prognosis in more than half the affected patients. We developed a multivariate model based on the RNA expression of six genes – LMO2, BCL6, FN1, CCND2, SCYA3 and BCL2 – that independently predicts survival in DLBCL patients treated with anthracycline-containing regimens (Lossos et al, NEJM 2004). Since the transcription factor LMO2 emerged as the strongest predictor of superior outcome, we generated a monoclonal anti-LMO2 antibody in order to document the tissue expression pattern of LMO2 protein and to establish its prognostic significance. Immunohistological analysis of 1200 normal tissues and hematolymphoid neoplasms showed that LMO2 protein is expressed as a nuclear marker in normal germinal center (GC) B-cells and in a subset of B-cell lymphomas. It is rarely expressed in mature T, NK and plasma cell neoplasms. Immature precursors of all bone marrow hematopoietic lineages and a significant proportion of acute lymphomphoblastic and myeloid leukemias express LMO2 protein. Apart from endothelial cells, no other non-hematolymphoid tissues we tested showed LMO2 protein expression. Hierarchical cluster analysis of immunohistologic data in DLBCL demonstrated that the expression profile of LMO2 protein is similar to that of other GC-associated proteins (HGAL, BCL6 and CD10) but different from that of non-GC proteins (MUM1/IRF4 and BCL2). LMO2 protein expression paralleled its RNA expression in B-cell lymphoma cell lines and was found in GC B, but not in non-GC, B-cell lines. To test the prognostic significance of LMO2 protein we analyzed an independent cohort of 203 DLBCL patients (mean age 63, range 18–93), uniformly treated with anthracycline-containing chemotherapy not containing rituximab, from four medical centers. No significant difference in response to therapy (CR and CRu) was observed between patients with LMO2-positive and LMO2-negative lymphomas (77% and 59%, respectively, p 0.05). However, Kaplan- Meier curves demonstrated a statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) between LMO2-positive and LMO2-negative cases (p 0.035; median OS of 74 and 20 months, respectively). Similarly, event-free survival (EFS) was also significantly longer in patients with LMO2-positive compared to LMO2-negative lymphomas (p 0.01, median EFS of 48 and 12 months, respectively). The predictive power of LMO2 expression was IPI-independent. Multivariate analyses with protein expression profiles of HGAL, BCL6, CD10, JAW1, MUM1/IRF4 and BCL2 on this cohort of patients are underway to construct a clinically applicable immunohistologic algorithm for predicting survival. The capacity of LMO2 protein to identify DLBCL patients with improved outcome in an IPI-independent manner indicates its important role in risk stratification in this disease.

LMO2 and Bcl-6 Expression in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Predict Overall Survival in R-CHOP Treated Patients

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 5304-5304
Author(s):  
Heather D. Brooks ◽  
Robert M. Graham ◽  
Randall L. Woodford ◽  
Audrey K. Bennett ◽  
Xin Qun Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Germinal Center ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Previous History ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract LMO2, a germinal center marker and transcription factor with an important role in angiogenesis and erythropoiesis, was found to confer improved prognosis in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) when expressed in tissue microarray (TMA) samples (Natkunam et al J Clin Oncol2008,26:447). Bcl-6, a transcriptional repressor controlling germinal center formation, has been associated with favorable outcomes in DLBCL patients treated with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) but was found to have no prognostic significance in DLBCL patients older than 60 treated with rituximab (R) + CHOP (Winter et al Blood2006,107:4207). Hans previously described an algorithm to subclassify DLBCL into germinal center B-cell like (GCB) and activated B-cell like (ABC) using immunohistochemical staining for CD10, bcl-6 and MUM1 with GCB exhibiting improved survival (Hans et al Blood2004,103:275). The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of LMO2, CD10, bcl-6, bcl-2 and MUM1 expression in DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP. We also applied the Hans classification to our cohort and incorporated LMO2 into the algorithm. Adults (&gt;18 years) with DLBCL who were diagnosed and treated at the University of Virginia between 2000 and 2007 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were selected based on adequate tissue, treatment with at least 3 cycles of R-CHOP and if a minimum of 6 months of follow-up data was available at the time of data analysis. Forty-one cases were included of which 26 were de novo DLBCL, 12 were DLBCL with concurrent follicular lymphoma (FL) and 3 cases were new diagnoses of DLBCL with a previous history of FL. H&E-stained sections from paraffin-embedded, formalin-fixed blocks were used to define diagnostic areas, and 3 representative 1.0-mm cores were obtained from each case. TMA sections were then stained with antibodies to CD10, bcl-6, bcl-2, MUM1 and LMO2. Cases were assigned to GCB-like and ABC-like subgroups based on the Hans algorithm. The LMO2 stain was incorporated into the Hans algorithm to create modified-Hans (m-Hans) subgroups; the sample received an m-GCB designation if LMO2 positive but the normal Hans classification was applied if the sample was LMO2 negative. For 41 complete patient samples, a nonparametric Kaplan-Meier estimator was used to estimate overall survival (OS) probability for each group (m-GCB, m-ABC). A log-rank test demonstrated that there was a significant difference in OS probability between m-ABC and m-GCB groups (p = 0.047). Six month and 3 year survival for m-ABC and m-GCB were 71% and 88%, and 44% and 68% respectively. A semi-parametric Cox proportional hazard model was used to assess association between OS and each individual stain (CD10, bcl-2, bcl-6, MUM1 and LMO2), and a hazards ratio was used to quantify the effect of each stain. Bcl-6 and LMO2 expression were highly correlated, with bcl-6 expression significantly associated with OS (p=0.011). Patients without bcl-6 expression had more than four-fold risk than those expressing bcl-6 in OS (Hazard Ratio = 4.29, 95% CI: 1.4–13.1). Also, LMO2 expression showed a marginal association with OS (p=0.065). In conclusion, LMO2 incorporated into the Hans classification and bcl-6 expression are both significant predictors of OS in DLBCL patients treated with R-CHOP. Figure Figure

Phase II Randomized Study Of Lenalidomide Or Lenalidomide and Rituximab As Maintenance Therapy Following Standard Chemotherapy For Patients With Intermediate-High/High Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 3061-3061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nishitha M. Reddy ◽  
David S. Morgan ◽  
Steven I. Park ◽  
John P Greer ◽  
Kristy L. Richards
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Standard Chemotherapy ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
One Year ◽  
Large B Cell

Background DLBCL patients (pts) with an intermediate/high to high risk international prognostic index (IPI) are at an increased risk of disease relapse rate in the first year after completion of standard therapy with R-CHOP. Lenalidomide (len), an immunomodulatory drug, has activity in relapsed diffuse large B cell Lymphoma. Len enhances the natural-killer cell mediated antibody-dependant cellular cytotoxicity of rituximab in lymphoma cell lines and inhibits angiogenesis as well as alters cytokine production. Lenalidomide received FDA approval based on its clinical activity in relapsed mantle cell lymphoma. Methods Intermediate-high/high risk IPI pts with DLBCL were randomized to len (arm A) alone or len and rituximab (arm B). The primary endpoint of the study was to assess the one year disease-free survival. We expected that a 25% difference of relapse will have clinical significance when compared with current standard therapy. Pts in arm A received len at a dose of 25 mg daily for 21 days of 28 days. Patients on arm B received len at a dose of 20mg daily for 21 days of 28 days along with rituximab on day 8 of even cycles. Treatment on both arms was continued for one year. Treatment was discontinued for disease progression. Len dose adjustments are incorporated in the protocol. Results Forty three pts, 21 arm A/ 22 arm B, 21 female/22 male, with a median age of 59 yrs were enrolled. The median IPI was 4 for pts over the age of 60 and the median aa-IPI was 3. Three pts received XRT to areas of bulky disease. At a median follow up of 27 months, the 2 yr DFS and OS was 88%. For patients in arm A and arm B the 2 yr DFS was 90% vs. 86% (figure 1) and the 2 yr OS was 95.2% vs. 81% (figure 2), respectively (P=NS). Two pts discontinued treatment due to adverse events. Grade 3-4 toxicities include neutropenia (28%), fatigue (16%), diarrhea (6%), DVT (3%), rash (3%), febrile neutropenia (3%). Related grade 1-2 toxicities include hypothyroidism (15%) and rash (54%). Conclusions Len as maintenance therapy demonstrates clinical activity following standard chemotherapy and improves DFS and OS in DLBCL patients with high risk prognostic features as compared with historical controls. This trial is registered with NCI- #NCT00765245 Disclosures: Reddy: Celgene: Research Funding. Off Label Use: lenalidomide in diffuse large B cell lymphoma. Park:TEVA: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding.

A Phase III Study Of Enzastaurin In Patients With High-Risk Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma Following Response To Primary Treatment: The Prelude Trial

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 371-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Crump ◽  
Sirpa Leppä ◽  
Luis E Fayad ◽  
Je-Jung Lee ◽  
Alice Di Rocco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Large B Cell

Abstract Background Despite improvements in outcome following the addition of rituximab (R) to CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) (R-CHOP), patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and International Prognostic Index (IPI) scores of 3-5 at diagnosis have a poor outcome. Enzastaurin is a potent inhibitor of PKCβ, a component of the B-cell receptor signaling complex, with preclinical activity and clinical activity in a phase II trial in patients with relapsed DLBCL, providing the rationale for this study in the primary therapy setting. Methods PRELUDE was a multi-national, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. Patients were required to have a histologic diagnosis of DLBCL, pre-treatment IPI score ≥3, and a complete response (CR) or CRu by International Working Group Criteria, or a negative FDG-PET scan after 6–8 cycles of R-CHOP. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive either enzastaurin 500 mg daily or an identical placebo as maintenance therapy, for a planned treatment duration of 3 years. The primary endpoint was DFS, defined as lack of disease progression or death. Assuming a 2-year DFS rate in the control group of 70%, the primary analysis had 80% power to detect a HR of 0.67, eg, a 2-year DFS rate of 79% in the enzastaurin group. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS). Data were analyzed 3 years after the last enrolled patient initiated treatment. Results From May 2006–April 2010, 758 patients were enrolled (enzastaurin, n=504; placebo, n=254). Median age at enrollment was 64 years (range 21-89); at diagnosis, 65% of patients had stage IV disease, 48% had B symptoms, and 25% had a mass >10 cm; baseline disease and patient characteristics were well balanced between treatment arms. Fifty-seven percent had a negative PET scan following completion of R-CHOP. Median follow-up time for all patients was 48 months (range 0.03–80). At the time of analysis, 209 events had occurred. The DFS HR for enzastaurin vs. placebo was 0.92 (95% CI: 0.69, 1.22; 2-sided log-rank p=0.54). DFS at 24 and 48 months were 79% and 70% for the enzastaurin arm, and 75% and 71% for placebo, respectively. OS at 24 and 48 months was 87% and 81% for enzastaurin, and 89% and 82% for placebo; HR for enzastaurin vs. placebo was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.74, 1.47; 2-sided log-rank p=0.81). Percent of ITT population patients on therapy at 12, 24, and 36 months was 70.6%, 60.6%, and 20.1% for enzastaurin; 72.3%, 60.6%, and 22.1% for placebo. Biomarker subgroup analysis was performed and will be available at time of presentation. Treatment emergent AEs (all grades) that were possibly study drug-related and significantly different between enzastaurin and placebo included chromaturia (18.5% vs. 0.4%), QTc prolongation (10.8% vs. 3.6%), and diarrhea (10.3% vs. 2.8%). There were no significant differences in number of patients with at least 1 grade 3 or higher AE between treatment arms. No significant differences were observed in the frequency of deaths while on therapy. Conclusion Enzastaurin did not improve DFS, EFS, or OS in patients with high-risk DLBCL and CR following R-CHOP treatment. Disclosures: Crump: Roche: Honoraria; Jansen-Ortho: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria. Off Label Use: rituximab for maintenance therapy post autolgous transplant for lymphoma. Leppä:Eli Lilly: Research Funding. Ogura:Eli Lilly: Research Funding. Rifkin:Millenium, Celgene, ONYX: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mackensen:Eli Lilly: Consultancy. Offner:Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Smith:Genentech, Celgene, Spectrum, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, Amgen/Micronet: Consultancy. Tobinai:Eli Lilly: Research Funding. Hahka-Kemppinen:Eli Lilly: Employment. Thornton:Eli Lilly: Employment. Shi:Eli Lilly: Employment. Lin:Eli Lilly: Employment. Kahl:Genentech: Consultancy. Savage:Eli Lilly: Consultancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document