User login
Rituximab plus lenalidomide had efficacy similar to that of rituximab plus chemotherapy in the treatment of follicular lymphoma (FL) in a phase 3 trial.
Patients with previously untreated FL had similar complete response (CR) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) rates whether they received rituximab-based chemotherapy or rituximab plus lenalidomide.
These results were published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The trial, RELEVANCE, included 1,030 patients with previously untreated FL. They were randomized to receive rituximab plus chemotherapy (n=517) or rituximab plus lenalidomide (n=513) for 18 cycles.
Patients in the chemotherapy arm received one of three regimens—R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), rituximab and bendamustine, or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone).
Patients in both treatment arms went on to receive rituximab maintenance every 8 weeks for 12 cycles. The total duration of treatment was 120 weeks. The median age of the combined groups was 59 years.
The coprimary endpoints were CR (confirmed or unconfirmed) and PFS. After a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the rates of coprimary endpoints were similar between the treatment arms.
CR was observed in 48% of the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 53% of the rituximab-chemotherapy arm (P=0.13).
The interim 3-year PFS rate was 77% in the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 78% in the rituximab-chemotherapy arm. The hazard ratio for progression or death from any cause was 1.10 (P=0.48).
The efficacy of rituximab plus chemotherapy was greater in low-risk patients (based on Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores) and in patients whose disease was Ann Arbor stage I or II, whereas the efficacy of rituximab-lenalidomide was independent of prognostic factors.
Safety was the biggest area of difference, with some adverse events (AEs) being more common in one arm than the other.
AEs that were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide include cutaneous reactions (43% vs 24%), diarrhea (37% vs 19%), rash (29% vs 8%), abdominal pain (15% vs 9%), peripheral edema (14% vs 9%), muscle spasms (13% vs 4%), myalgia (14% vs 6%), and tumor flare reaction (6% vs <1%).
AEs that were more common with rituximab-chemotherapy were anemia (89% vs 66%), fatigue (29% vs 23%), nausea (42% vs 20%), vomiting (19% vs 7%), febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%), leukopenia (10% vs 4%), and peripheral neuropathy (16% vs 7%).
Grade 3/4 cutaneous reactions were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide (7% vs 1%), and grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common with rituximab-chemotherapy (50% vs 32%).
The RELEVANCE trial was sponsored by Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. The study authors reported various disclosures, including financial ties to Celgene.
Rituximab plus lenalidomide had efficacy similar to that of rituximab plus chemotherapy in the treatment of follicular lymphoma (FL) in a phase 3 trial.
Patients with previously untreated FL had similar complete response (CR) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) rates whether they received rituximab-based chemotherapy or rituximab plus lenalidomide.
These results were published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The trial, RELEVANCE, included 1,030 patients with previously untreated FL. They were randomized to receive rituximab plus chemotherapy (n=517) or rituximab plus lenalidomide (n=513) for 18 cycles.
Patients in the chemotherapy arm received one of three regimens—R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), rituximab and bendamustine, or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone).
Patients in both treatment arms went on to receive rituximab maintenance every 8 weeks for 12 cycles. The total duration of treatment was 120 weeks. The median age of the combined groups was 59 years.
The coprimary endpoints were CR (confirmed or unconfirmed) and PFS. After a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the rates of coprimary endpoints were similar between the treatment arms.
CR was observed in 48% of the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 53% of the rituximab-chemotherapy arm (P=0.13).
The interim 3-year PFS rate was 77% in the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 78% in the rituximab-chemotherapy arm. The hazard ratio for progression or death from any cause was 1.10 (P=0.48).
The efficacy of rituximab plus chemotherapy was greater in low-risk patients (based on Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores) and in patients whose disease was Ann Arbor stage I or II, whereas the efficacy of rituximab-lenalidomide was independent of prognostic factors.
Safety was the biggest area of difference, with some adverse events (AEs) being more common in one arm than the other.
AEs that were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide include cutaneous reactions (43% vs 24%), diarrhea (37% vs 19%), rash (29% vs 8%), abdominal pain (15% vs 9%), peripheral edema (14% vs 9%), muscle spasms (13% vs 4%), myalgia (14% vs 6%), and tumor flare reaction (6% vs <1%).
AEs that were more common with rituximab-chemotherapy were anemia (89% vs 66%), fatigue (29% vs 23%), nausea (42% vs 20%), vomiting (19% vs 7%), febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%), leukopenia (10% vs 4%), and peripheral neuropathy (16% vs 7%).
Grade 3/4 cutaneous reactions were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide (7% vs 1%), and grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common with rituximab-chemotherapy (50% vs 32%).
The RELEVANCE trial was sponsored by Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. The study authors reported various disclosures, including financial ties to Celgene.
Rituximab plus lenalidomide had efficacy similar to that of rituximab plus chemotherapy in the treatment of follicular lymphoma (FL) in a phase 3 trial.
Patients with previously untreated FL had similar complete response (CR) rates and progression-free survival (PFS) rates whether they received rituximab-based chemotherapy or rituximab plus lenalidomide.
These results were published in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The trial, RELEVANCE, included 1,030 patients with previously untreated FL. They were randomized to receive rituximab plus chemotherapy (n=517) or rituximab plus lenalidomide (n=513) for 18 cycles.
Patients in the chemotherapy arm received one of three regimens—R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), rituximab and bendamustine, or R-CVP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone).
Patients in both treatment arms went on to receive rituximab maintenance every 8 weeks for 12 cycles. The total duration of treatment was 120 weeks. The median age of the combined groups was 59 years.
The coprimary endpoints were CR (confirmed or unconfirmed) and PFS. After a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the rates of coprimary endpoints were similar between the treatment arms.
CR was observed in 48% of the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 53% of the rituximab-chemotherapy arm (P=0.13).
The interim 3-year PFS rate was 77% in the rituximab-lenalidomide arm and 78% in the rituximab-chemotherapy arm. The hazard ratio for progression or death from any cause was 1.10 (P=0.48).
The efficacy of rituximab plus chemotherapy was greater in low-risk patients (based on Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores) and in patients whose disease was Ann Arbor stage I or II, whereas the efficacy of rituximab-lenalidomide was independent of prognostic factors.
Safety was the biggest area of difference, with some adverse events (AEs) being more common in one arm than the other.
AEs that were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide include cutaneous reactions (43% vs 24%), diarrhea (37% vs 19%), rash (29% vs 8%), abdominal pain (15% vs 9%), peripheral edema (14% vs 9%), muscle spasms (13% vs 4%), myalgia (14% vs 6%), and tumor flare reaction (6% vs <1%).
AEs that were more common with rituximab-chemotherapy were anemia (89% vs 66%), fatigue (29% vs 23%), nausea (42% vs 20%), vomiting (19% vs 7%), febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%), leukopenia (10% vs 4%), and peripheral neuropathy (16% vs 7%).
Grade 3/4 cutaneous reactions were more common with rituximab-lenalidomide (7% vs 1%), and grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common with rituximab-chemotherapy (50% vs 32%).
The RELEVANCE trial was sponsored by Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. The study authors reported various disclosures, including financial ties to Celgene.