Aggressive Lymphomas

Two variations of the BCL2 gene are linked with the survival prospects of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are treated with the R-CHOP regimen, based on a study published in Haematologica.

In the population-based, case-control study of patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma across the British Columbia province, Morteza Bashash, PhD, of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, and researchers at the British Columbia Cancer Agency analyzed 217 germline DLBCL samples, excluding those with primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, specifically looking at nine single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 ecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Two variations of the BCL2 gene are linked with the survival prospects of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are treated with the R-CHOP regimen, based on a study published in Haematologica.

In the population-based, case-control study of patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma across the British Columbia province, Morteza Bashash, PhD, of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, and researchers at the British Columbia Cancer Agency analyzed 217 germline DLBCL samples, excluding those with primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, specifically looking at nine single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 ecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Two variations of the BCL2 gene are linked with the survival prospects of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are treated with the R-CHOP regimen, based on a study published in Haematologica.

In the population-based, case-control study of patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma across the British Columbia province, Morteza Bashash, PhD, of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, Toronto, and researchers at the British Columbia Cancer Agency analyzed 217 germline DLBCL samples, excluding those with primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, specifically looking at nine single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs).

Nephron/Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 3.0 ecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], via Wikimedia Commons

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

Ibrutinib, the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has transformed the treatment landscape for patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Yet for patients with high-risk molecular features, such as 11q deletion, 17p deletion, or TP53 mutation, relapse remains problematic.

Investigators evaluated whether the addition of ublituximab to ibrutinib would improve the outcome of patients with genetically high-risk CLL in the GENUINE (UTX-IB-301) phase 3 study.

Jeff P. Sharman, MD, of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center in Springfield, Oregon, reported the results at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7504).*

Ublituximab is a glycoengineered, anti-CD20 type 1 monoclonal antibody that maintains complement-dependent cytotoxicity and enhances antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. In a phase 2 study in combination with ibrutinib, it achieved an ORR of approximately 88%.

Protocol design

Originally, the study had co-primary endpoints of overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). To adequately power for both endpoints, the target enrollment was 330 patients.

Dr Sharman explained that after 22 months of open enrollment, the trial sponsor determined that the original enrollment goal could not be met in a timely manner and elected to redesign the protocol.

In the modified protocol, ORR became the primary response rate and PFS a secondary endpoint. This allowed for a reduced target enrollment of 120. However, the study was no longer powered to detect a change in PFS.

Investigators stratified the patients by lines of prior therapy and then randomized them to receive ibrutinib or ublituximab plus ibrutinib.

The ibrutinib dose was 420 mg daily in both arms. Ublituximab dose was 900 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6 and every third cycle thereafter.

The primary endpoint was ORR as assessed by Independent Central Review (IRC) using the iwCLL 2008 criteria.

Secondary endpoints included PFS, the complete response (CR) rate and depth of response (minimal residual disease [MRD] negativity), and safety.

The investigators assessed patients for response on weeks 8, 16, 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter.

The primary endpoint was evaluated when all enrolled patients had at least 2 efficacy evaluations.

The median follow-up was 11.4 months.

 Patient characteristics

 Patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk CLL had their disease centrally confirmed for the presence of deletion 17p, deletion 11q, and/or TP53 mutation.

They had measurable disease, ECOG performance status of 2 or less, no history of transformation of CLL, and no prior BTK inhibitor therapy.

 The investigators randomized 126 patients, and 117 received any dose of therapy.

“The dropout was because in part ibrutinib was via commercial supply and not every patient could get access,” Dr Sharman noted.

Fifty-nine patients were treated in the combination arm and 58 in the monotherapy arm.

All patients had at least one of the specified mutations, which were relatively balanced between the 2 arms.

Patients were a mean age of 67 (range, 43 – 87), had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1 – 8), and more than 70% were male.

Patient characteristics were similar in each arm except for bulky disease, with 45% in the combination arm having bulky disease of 5 cm or more at baseline, compared with 26% in the monotherapy arm.

Twenty percent of the patients were considered refractory to rituximab.

Safety

Infusion reactions occurred in 54% of patients in the combination arm and 5% had grade 3/4 reactions. None occurred in the ibrutinib arm, since the latter is an orally bioavailable drug.

Other adverse events of all grades occurring in 10% of patients or more for the combination and monotherapy arms, respectively, were: diarrhea (42% and 40%), fatigue (27% and 33%), insomnia (24% and 10%), nausea (22% and 21%), headache (20% and 28%), arthralgia (19% and 17%), cough (19% and 24%), abdominal pain (15% and 9%), stomatitis (15% and 9%), upper respiratory infection (15% and 12%), dizziness (15% and 22%), contusion (15% and 29%), anemia (14% and 17%), and peripheral edema (10% and 21%).

Neutropenia was higher in the experimental arm, 22% any grade, compared with 12% in the ibrutinib arm, although grade 3 or higher neutropenia was similar in the 2 arms. Other laboratory abnormalities were similar between the arms.

Efficacy

 The best ORR in the combination arm was 78%, with 7% achieving CR compared with 45% in the monotherapy arm with no CRs (P<0.001).

Nineteen percent of the combination arm achieved MRD negativity in peripheral blood compared with 2% of the monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

The reduction in lymph node size was similar between the arms.

In contrast, lymphocytosis was very different between the arms.

“As has been reported multiple times with targeted B-cell receptor signaling inhibitors,” Dr Sharman said, “patients treated with ibrutinib experienced rapid increase in their lymphocytes, returning approximately to baseline by 3 months and decreasing thereafter.”

“By contrast,” he continued, “those patients treated with the additional antibody had much more rapid resolution of their lymphocytosis. This was true whether patients were considered rituximab refractory or not.”

The investigators performed an additional analysis of ORR, this time including patients who achieved partial response with lymphocytosis (PR-L). These patients were not included in the primary endpoint because the iwCLL 2008 criteria had not yet been updated to include PR-L.

The best overall response including active PR-L patients was 83% in the experimental arm and 59% in the ibrutinib monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

PFS showed a trend toward improvement in the patients treated with the combination, with a hazard ratio of 0.559, which was not of statistical significance at the time of analysis.

The investigators concluded that the study met its primary endpoint, with a greater response rate and a greater depth of response than ibrutinib alone.

And the addition of ublituximab did not alter the safety profile of ibrutinib monotherapy.

TG Therapeutics, Inc, funded the study. 

*Data in the abstract differ from the meeting presentation.

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

Ibrutinib, the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has transformed the treatment landscape for patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Yet for patients with high-risk molecular features, such as 11q deletion, 17p deletion, or TP53 mutation, relapse remains problematic.

Investigators evaluated whether the addition of ublituximab to ibrutinib would improve the outcome of patients with genetically high-risk CLL in the GENUINE (UTX-IB-301) phase 3 study.

Jeff P. Sharman, MD, of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center in Springfield, Oregon, reported the results at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7504).*

Ublituximab is a glycoengineered, anti-CD20 type 1 monoclonal antibody that maintains complement-dependent cytotoxicity and enhances antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. In a phase 2 study in combination with ibrutinib, it achieved an ORR of approximately 88%.

Protocol design

Originally, the study had co-primary endpoints of overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). To adequately power for both endpoints, the target enrollment was 330 patients.

Dr Sharman explained that after 22 months of open enrollment, the trial sponsor determined that the original enrollment goal could not be met in a timely manner and elected to redesign the protocol.

In the modified protocol, ORR became the primary response rate and PFS a secondary endpoint. This allowed for a reduced target enrollment of 120. However, the study was no longer powered to detect a change in PFS.

Investigators stratified the patients by lines of prior therapy and then randomized them to receive ibrutinib or ublituximab plus ibrutinib.

The ibrutinib dose was 420 mg daily in both arms. Ublituximab dose was 900 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6 and every third cycle thereafter.

The primary endpoint was ORR as assessed by Independent Central Review (IRC) using the iwCLL 2008 criteria.

Secondary endpoints included PFS, the complete response (CR) rate and depth of response (minimal residual disease [MRD] negativity), and safety.

The investigators assessed patients for response on weeks 8, 16, 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter.

The primary endpoint was evaluated when all enrolled patients had at least 2 efficacy evaluations.

The median follow-up was 11.4 months.

 Patient characteristics

 Patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk CLL had their disease centrally confirmed for the presence of deletion 17p, deletion 11q, and/or TP53 mutation.

They had measurable disease, ECOG performance status of 2 or less, no history of transformation of CLL, and no prior BTK inhibitor therapy.

 The investigators randomized 126 patients, and 117 received any dose of therapy.

“The dropout was because in part ibrutinib was via commercial supply and not every patient could get access,” Dr Sharman noted.

Fifty-nine patients were treated in the combination arm and 58 in the monotherapy arm.

All patients had at least one of the specified mutations, which were relatively balanced between the 2 arms.

Patients were a mean age of 67 (range, 43 – 87), had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1 – 8), and more than 70% were male.

Patient characteristics were similar in each arm except for bulky disease, with 45% in the combination arm having bulky disease of 5 cm or more at baseline, compared with 26% in the monotherapy arm.

Twenty percent of the patients were considered refractory to rituximab.

Safety

Infusion reactions occurred in 54% of patients in the combination arm and 5% had grade 3/4 reactions. None occurred in the ibrutinib arm, since the latter is an orally bioavailable drug.

Other adverse events of all grades occurring in 10% of patients or more for the combination and monotherapy arms, respectively, were: diarrhea (42% and 40%), fatigue (27% and 33%), insomnia (24% and 10%), nausea (22% and 21%), headache (20% and 28%), arthralgia (19% and 17%), cough (19% and 24%), abdominal pain (15% and 9%), stomatitis (15% and 9%), upper respiratory infection (15% and 12%), dizziness (15% and 22%), contusion (15% and 29%), anemia (14% and 17%), and peripheral edema (10% and 21%).

Neutropenia was higher in the experimental arm, 22% any grade, compared with 12% in the ibrutinib arm, although grade 3 or higher neutropenia was similar in the 2 arms. Other laboratory abnormalities were similar between the arms.

Efficacy

 The best ORR in the combination arm was 78%, with 7% achieving CR compared with 45% in the monotherapy arm with no CRs (P<0.001).

Nineteen percent of the combination arm achieved MRD negativity in peripheral blood compared with 2% of the monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

The reduction in lymph node size was similar between the arms.

In contrast, lymphocytosis was very different between the arms.

“As has been reported multiple times with targeted B-cell receptor signaling inhibitors,” Dr Sharman said, “patients treated with ibrutinib experienced rapid increase in their lymphocytes, returning approximately to baseline by 3 months and decreasing thereafter.”

“By contrast,” he continued, “those patients treated with the additional antibody had much more rapid resolution of their lymphocytosis. This was true whether patients were considered rituximab refractory or not.”

The investigators performed an additional analysis of ORR, this time including patients who achieved partial response with lymphocytosis (PR-L). These patients were not included in the primary endpoint because the iwCLL 2008 criteria had not yet been updated to include PR-L.

The best overall response including active PR-L patients was 83% in the experimental arm and 59% in the ibrutinib monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

PFS showed a trend toward improvement in the patients treated with the combination, with a hazard ratio of 0.559, which was not of statistical significance at the time of analysis.

The investigators concluded that the study met its primary endpoint, with a greater response rate and a greater depth of response than ibrutinib alone.

And the addition of ublituximab did not alter the safety profile of ibrutinib monotherapy.

TG Therapeutics, Inc, funded the study. 

*Data in the abstract differ from the meeting presentation.

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

Ibrutinib, the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has transformed the treatment landscape for patients with relapsed or refractory (r/r) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Yet for patients with high-risk molecular features, such as 11q deletion, 17p deletion, or TP53 mutation, relapse remains problematic.

Investigators evaluated whether the addition of ublituximab to ibrutinib would improve the outcome of patients with genetically high-risk CLL in the GENUINE (UTX-IB-301) phase 3 study.

Jeff P. Sharman, MD, of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center in Springfield, Oregon, reported the results at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7504).*

Ublituximab is a glycoengineered, anti-CD20 type 1 monoclonal antibody that maintains complement-dependent cytotoxicity and enhances antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. In a phase 2 study in combination with ibrutinib, it achieved an ORR of approximately 88%.

Protocol design

Originally, the study had co-primary endpoints of overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). To adequately power for both endpoints, the target enrollment was 330 patients.

Dr Sharman explained that after 22 months of open enrollment, the trial sponsor determined that the original enrollment goal could not be met in a timely manner and elected to redesign the protocol.

In the modified protocol, ORR became the primary response rate and PFS a secondary endpoint. This allowed for a reduced target enrollment of 120. However, the study was no longer powered to detect a change in PFS.

Investigators stratified the patients by lines of prior therapy and then randomized them to receive ibrutinib or ublituximab plus ibrutinib.

The ibrutinib dose was 420 mg daily in both arms. Ublituximab dose was 900 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1, day 1 of cycles 2 through 6 and every third cycle thereafter.

The primary endpoint was ORR as assessed by Independent Central Review (IRC) using the iwCLL 2008 criteria.

Secondary endpoints included PFS, the complete response (CR) rate and depth of response (minimal residual disease [MRD] negativity), and safety.

The investigators assessed patients for response on weeks 8, 16, 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter.

The primary endpoint was evaluated when all enrolled patients had at least 2 efficacy evaluations.

The median follow-up was 11.4 months.

 Patient characteristics

 Patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk CLL had their disease centrally confirmed for the presence of deletion 17p, deletion 11q, and/or TP53 mutation.

They had measurable disease, ECOG performance status of 2 or less, no history of transformation of CLL, and no prior BTK inhibitor therapy.

 The investigators randomized 126 patients, and 117 received any dose of therapy.

“The dropout was because in part ibrutinib was via commercial supply and not every patient could get access,” Dr Sharman noted.

Fifty-nine patients were treated in the combination arm and 58 in the monotherapy arm.

All patients had at least one of the specified mutations, which were relatively balanced between the 2 arms.

Patients were a mean age of 67 (range, 43 – 87), had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1 – 8), and more than 70% were male.

Patient characteristics were similar in each arm except for bulky disease, with 45% in the combination arm having bulky disease of 5 cm or more at baseline, compared with 26% in the monotherapy arm.

Twenty percent of the patients were considered refractory to rituximab.

Safety

Infusion reactions occurred in 54% of patients in the combination arm and 5% had grade 3/4 reactions. None occurred in the ibrutinib arm, since the latter is an orally bioavailable drug.

Other adverse events of all grades occurring in 10% of patients or more for the combination and monotherapy arms, respectively, were: diarrhea (42% and 40%), fatigue (27% and 33%), insomnia (24% and 10%), nausea (22% and 21%), headache (20% and 28%), arthralgia (19% and 17%), cough (19% and 24%), abdominal pain (15% and 9%), stomatitis (15% and 9%), upper respiratory infection (15% and 12%), dizziness (15% and 22%), contusion (15% and 29%), anemia (14% and 17%), and peripheral edema (10% and 21%).

Neutropenia was higher in the experimental arm, 22% any grade, compared with 12% in the ibrutinib arm, although grade 3 or higher neutropenia was similar in the 2 arms. Other laboratory abnormalities were similar between the arms.

Efficacy

 The best ORR in the combination arm was 78%, with 7% achieving CR compared with 45% in the monotherapy arm with no CRs (P<0.001).

Nineteen percent of the combination arm achieved MRD negativity in peripheral blood compared with 2% of the monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

The reduction in lymph node size was similar between the arms.

In contrast, lymphocytosis was very different between the arms.

“As has been reported multiple times with targeted B-cell receptor signaling inhibitors,” Dr Sharman said, “patients treated with ibrutinib experienced rapid increase in their lymphocytes, returning approximately to baseline by 3 months and decreasing thereafter.”

“By contrast,” he continued, “those patients treated with the additional antibody had much more rapid resolution of their lymphocytosis. This was true whether patients were considered rituximab refractory or not.”

The investigators performed an additional analysis of ORR, this time including patients who achieved partial response with lymphocytosis (PR-L). These patients were not included in the primary endpoint because the iwCLL 2008 criteria had not yet been updated to include PR-L.

The best overall response including active PR-L patients was 83% in the experimental arm and 59% in the ibrutinib monotherapy arm (P<0.01).

PFS showed a trend toward improvement in the patients treated with the combination, with a hazard ratio of 0.559, which was not of statistical significance at the time of analysis.

The investigators concluded that the study met its primary endpoint, with a greater response rate and a greater depth of response than ibrutinib alone.

And the addition of ublituximab did not alter the safety profile of ibrutinib monotherapy.

TG Therapeutics, Inc, funded the study. 

*Data in the abstract differ from the meeting presentation.

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

CHICAGO—The 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions for survivors of childhood cancer has decreased over the past 30 years, from 12.7% for those diagnosed in the 1970s to 10.1% and 8.9% for those diagnosed in the 1980s and 1990s, respectively. And the decreases were greatest for patients with Wilms’ tumor and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), followed by patients with astrocytoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

Investigators of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) undertook a retrospective cohort analysis of children aged 0 – 14 years diagnosed with cancer between 1970 and 1999. Their goal was to determine whether cancer therapy modifications have maintained cure rates while decreasing the risk of late effects of therapy.

Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, presented the findings at the 2017 annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) as abstract LBA10500.

Researchers analyzed data from 23,600 childhood cancer survivors in the CCSS who were alive 5 years after diagnosis. The patients had leukemia, lymphoma, CNS malignancies, Wilms tumor, neuroblastoma, or soft-tissue/bone sarcoma.

Dr Gibson noted that while 83% of children with a malignancy achieve a 5-year survival, more than half develop at least one severe, disabling, life-threatening health condition by age 50.

The survivors were a median age at last follow-up of 28 years (range, 5-63) and the median time since diagnosis was 21 years (range, 5-43).

The investigators found significant decreases in severe health conditions in 6 diagnostic groups:

• Wilms tumor, decreased from 13% to 5% (P<0.0001)
• HL, decreased from 18% to 11% (P<0.0001)
• Astrocytoma, decreased from 15% to 9% (P=0.004)
• NHL, decreased from 10% to 6% (P=0.04)
• ALL, decreased from 9% to 7% (P=0.002)
• Ewings sarcoma, decreased from 19% to 10% (P=0.01)

They found no reductions in subsequent severe health conditions among survivors of neuroblastoma, acute myeloid leukemia (AML), soft tissue sarcoma, or osteosarcoma.

The investigators believe the decreases were driven mainly by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions, subsequent malignant neoplasms, gastrointestinal and neurological conditions, but not cardiac or pulmonary conditions.

They also analyzed the reduction in treatment intensities by decade for different diseases and found they correlated with the reduced incidence of serious chronic health conditions by 15 years after diagnosis.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study.

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

CHICAGO—The 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions for survivors of childhood cancer has decreased over the past 30 years, from 12.7% for those diagnosed in the 1970s to 10.1% and 8.9% for those diagnosed in the 1980s and 1990s, respectively. And the decreases were greatest for patients with Wilms’ tumor and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), followed by patients with astrocytoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

Investigators of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) undertook a retrospective cohort analysis of children aged 0 – 14 years diagnosed with cancer between 1970 and 1999. Their goal was to determine whether cancer therapy modifications have maintained cure rates while decreasing the risk of late effects of therapy.

Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, presented the findings at the 2017 annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) as abstract LBA10500.

Researchers analyzed data from 23,600 childhood cancer survivors in the CCSS who were alive 5 years after diagnosis. The patients had leukemia, lymphoma, CNS malignancies, Wilms tumor, neuroblastoma, or soft-tissue/bone sarcoma.

Dr Gibson noted that while 83% of children with a malignancy achieve a 5-year survival, more than half develop at least one severe, disabling, life-threatening health condition by age 50.

The survivors were a median age at last follow-up of 28 years (range, 5-63) and the median time since diagnosis was 21 years (range, 5-43).

The investigators found significant decreases in severe health conditions in 6 diagnostic groups:

• Wilms tumor, decreased from 13% to 5% (P<0.0001)
• HL, decreased from 18% to 11% (P<0.0001)
• Astrocytoma, decreased from 15% to 9% (P=0.004)
• NHL, decreased from 10% to 6% (P=0.04)
• ALL, decreased from 9% to 7% (P=0.002)
• Ewings sarcoma, decreased from 19% to 10% (P=0.01)

They found no reductions in subsequent severe health conditions among survivors of neuroblastoma, acute myeloid leukemia (AML), soft tissue sarcoma, or osteosarcoma.

The investigators believe the decreases were driven mainly by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions, subsequent malignant neoplasms, gastrointestinal and neurological conditions, but not cardiac or pulmonary conditions.

They also analyzed the reduction in treatment intensities by decade for different diseases and found they correlated with the reduced incidence of serious chronic health conditions by 15 years after diagnosis.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study.

Photo © ASCO/Danny Morton 2017

CHICAGO—The 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions for survivors of childhood cancer has decreased over the past 30 years, from 12.7% for those diagnosed in the 1970s to 10.1% and 8.9% for those diagnosed in the 1980s and 1990s, respectively. And the decreases were greatest for patients with Wilms’ tumor and Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), followed by patients with astrocytoma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

Investigators of the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS) undertook a retrospective cohort analysis of children aged 0 – 14 years diagnosed with cancer between 1970 and 1999. Their goal was to determine whether cancer therapy modifications have maintained cure rates while decreasing the risk of late effects of therapy.

Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tennessee, presented the findings at the 2017 annual meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO) as abstract LBA10500.

Researchers analyzed data from 23,600 childhood cancer survivors in the CCSS who were alive 5 years after diagnosis. The patients had leukemia, lymphoma, CNS malignancies, Wilms tumor, neuroblastoma, or soft-tissue/bone sarcoma.

Dr Gibson noted that while 83% of children with a malignancy achieve a 5-year survival, more than half develop at least one severe, disabling, life-threatening health condition by age 50.

The survivors were a median age at last follow-up of 28 years (range, 5-63) and the median time since diagnosis was 21 years (range, 5-43).

The investigators found significant decreases in severe health conditions in 6 diagnostic groups:

• Wilms tumor, decreased from 13% to 5% (P<0.0001)
• HL, decreased from 18% to 11% (P<0.0001)
• Astrocytoma, decreased from 15% to 9% (P=0.004)
• NHL, decreased from 10% to 6% (P=0.04)
• ALL, decreased from 9% to 7% (P=0.002)
• Ewings sarcoma, decreased from 19% to 10% (P=0.01)

They found no reductions in subsequent severe health conditions among survivors of neuroblastoma, acute myeloid leukemia (AML), soft tissue sarcoma, or osteosarcoma.

The investigators believe the decreases were driven mainly by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions, subsequent malignant neoplasms, gastrointestinal and neurological conditions, but not cardiac or pulmonary conditions.

They also analyzed the reduction in treatment intensities by decade for different diseases and found they correlated with the reduced incidence of serious chronic health conditions by 15 years after diagnosis.

The National Institutes of Health funded the study.

CHICAGO – Severe health problems occurring 5 or more years after diagnosis of a childhood cancer have steadily declined, based on an analysis of 23,600 participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, funded by the National Institutes of Health.

For all childhood cancer survivors, the 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions decreased from 12.7% in those diagnosed in the 1970s, to 10.1% in the 1980s, and to 8.8% among those diagnosed in the 1990s (per 10 years: hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.89]), Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, reported at a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The association with diagnosis decade was attenuated (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-1.00]) when detailed treatment data were included in the model, indicating that treatment reductions mediated risk.

Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols to reduce the intensity of therapy – along with improved screening and early detection – have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity, Dr. Gibson said.

As the data address children diagnosed over 15 years ago, it is likely that improvements since then in determining patient risk and targeting therapy might result in further incremental improvements, he said in an interview.

By cancer type, severe health problems by 15 years after diagnosis decreased from 13% to 5% among survivors of Wilms’ tumor, from 18% to 11% among survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma, from 15% to 9% among survivors of astrocytoma, from 10% to 6% among survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and from 9% to 7% among survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The conclusions are based on the incidence of severe, disabling/life-threatening, or fatal chronic health conditions (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, grades 3-5) among 5-year survivors diagnosed prior to age 21 years from 1970 through 1999.

Adjusted for sex and attained age, significant reduction in risk over time was found among survivors of Wilms tumor (HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.46-0.70]), Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.85]), astrocytoma (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.92]), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.99]), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.76-0.98]).

The decreases in serious health conditions were largely driven by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions (1970s: 4.0% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.59-0.73]) and subsequent malignant neoplasms (1970s: 2.4% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.76-0.96]).

Gastrointestinal (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66-0.97]) and neurological conditions (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91]) also were reduced, but cardiac and pulmonary conditions were not. Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity in this population, Dr. Gibson concluded.

[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales

CHICAGO – Severe health problems occurring 5 or more years after diagnosis of a childhood cancer have steadily declined, based on an analysis of 23,600 participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, funded by the National Institutes of Health.

For all childhood cancer survivors, the 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions decreased from 12.7% in those diagnosed in the 1970s, to 10.1% in the 1980s, and to 8.8% among those diagnosed in the 1990s (per 10 years: hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.89]), Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, reported at a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The association with diagnosis decade was attenuated (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-1.00]) when detailed treatment data were included in the model, indicating that treatment reductions mediated risk.

Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols to reduce the intensity of therapy – along with improved screening and early detection – have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity, Dr. Gibson said.

As the data address children diagnosed over 15 years ago, it is likely that improvements since then in determining patient risk and targeting therapy might result in further incremental improvements, he said in an interview.

By cancer type, severe health problems by 15 years after diagnosis decreased from 13% to 5% among survivors of Wilms’ tumor, from 18% to 11% among survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma, from 15% to 9% among survivors of astrocytoma, from 10% to 6% among survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and from 9% to 7% among survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The conclusions are based on the incidence of severe, disabling/life-threatening, or fatal chronic health conditions (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, grades 3-5) among 5-year survivors diagnosed prior to age 21 years from 1970 through 1999.

Adjusted for sex and attained age, significant reduction in risk over time was found among survivors of Wilms tumor (HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.46-0.70]), Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.85]), astrocytoma (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.92]), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.99]), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.76-0.98]).

The decreases in serious health conditions were largely driven by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions (1970s: 4.0% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.59-0.73]) and subsequent malignant neoplasms (1970s: 2.4% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.76-0.96]).

Gastrointestinal (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66-0.97]) and neurological conditions (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91]) also were reduced, but cardiac and pulmonary conditions were not. Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity in this population, Dr. Gibson concluded.

[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales

CHICAGO – Severe health problems occurring 5 or more years after diagnosis of a childhood cancer have steadily declined, based on an analysis of 23,600 participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study, funded by the National Institutes of Health.

For all childhood cancer survivors, the 15-year cumulative incidence of severe health conditions decreased from 12.7% in those diagnosed in the 1970s, to 10.1% in the 1980s, and to 8.8% among those diagnosed in the 1990s (per 10 years: hazard ratio, 0.84 [95% confidence interval, 0.80-0.89]), Todd M. Gibson, PhD, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, reported at a press conference at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

The association with diagnosis decade was attenuated (HR, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.85-1.00]) when detailed treatment data were included in the model, indicating that treatment reductions mediated risk.

Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols to reduce the intensity of therapy – along with improved screening and early detection – have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity, Dr. Gibson said.

As the data address children diagnosed over 15 years ago, it is likely that improvements since then in determining patient risk and targeting therapy might result in further incremental improvements, he said in an interview.

By cancer type, severe health problems by 15 years after diagnosis decreased from 13% to 5% among survivors of Wilms’ tumor, from 18% to 11% among survivors of Hodgkin lymphoma, from 15% to 9% among survivors of astrocytoma, from 10% to 6% among survivors of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and from 9% to 7% among survivors of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. The conclusions are based on the incidence of severe, disabling/life-threatening, or fatal chronic health conditions (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, grades 3-5) among 5-year survivors diagnosed prior to age 21 years from 1970 through 1999.

Adjusted for sex and attained age, significant reduction in risk over time was found among survivors of Wilms tumor (HR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.46-0.70]), Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.65-0.85]), astrocytoma (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.64-0.92]), non-Hodgkin lymphoma (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.63-0.99]), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.76-0.98]).

The decreases in serious health conditions were largely driven by a reduced incidence of endocrine conditions (1970s: 4.0% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.66 [95% CI, 0.59-0.73]) and subsequent malignant neoplasms (1970s: 2.4% vs. 1990s: 1.6%; HR, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.76-0.96]).

Gastrointestinal (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.66-0.97]) and neurological conditions (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.65-0.91]) also were reduced, but cardiac and pulmonary conditions were not. Changes in childhood cancer treatment protocols have not only extended lifespan for many survivors, but also have reduced the incidence of serious chronic morbidity in this population, Dr. Gibson concluded.

[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales

Photo courtesy of the CDC

A multidisciplinary, international panel of experts has updated earlier clinical practice guidelines on managing fever and neutropenia (FN) in children with cancer and in those undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). And while most of the recommendations remained unchanged from the 2012 guidelines, a few key differences emerged. The changes included addition of a 4^th generation cephalosporin for empirical antifungal therapy and refinements in risk stratification for invasive fungal disease (IFD), among others.

The new guidelines were published by The International Pediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The recommendations were organized into 3 major sections: initial presentation, ongoing management, and empirical antifungal therapy. The guidelines panel followed procedures previously validated for creating evidence-based guidelines and used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument as a framework.

For the initial presentation of FN, the panel increased the quality of evidence from low to moderate in the recommendation to obtain peripheral blood cultures concurrent with central venous catheter cultures.

In the treatment of FN, the panel added a 4^th-generation cephalosporin as empirical therapy in high-risk FN.

The panel refined the IFD risk factors and decreased the quality of evidence from moderate to low. Children with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), relapsed acute leukemia, those undergoing allogeneic HSCT, those with prolonged neutropenia, and those receiving high-dose corticosteroids are at high risk of IFD. All others should be categorized as IFD low risk.

The panel suggested serum galactomannan not be used to guide empirical antifungal management for prolonged FN lasting 96 hours or more in high-risk IFD patients.  GM does not rule out non-Aspergillus molds, and therefore high negative values provide less useful predictions. Previously, the use of galactomannan was a weak recommendation.

The panel added a new recommendation against using fungal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in blood. They explained PCR testing provides poor positive predictive values and negative predictive values are not sufficiently high to be clinically useful. Also, PCR testing is not yet standardized.

Another new recommendation is the addition of imaging of the abdomen in patients without localizing signs or symptoms. Even though the ideal imaging modality is not known, ultrasound is readily available, not associated with radiation exposure, and usually does not require sedation. For these reasons, the panel said it is preferable to computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.

The panel also changed a previously weak recommendation to administer empirical therapy for IFD low-risk patients with prolonged FN to a weak recommendation against administering therapy for these patients.

The panel's recommendations and their rationale can be found in the JCO article.

The guidelines update was supported by meeting grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Garron Comprehensive Cancer Centre.

Photo courtesy of the CDC

A multidisciplinary, international panel of experts has updated earlier clinical practice guidelines on managing fever and neutropenia (FN) in children with cancer and in those undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). And while most of the recommendations remained unchanged from the 2012 guidelines, a few key differences emerged. The changes included addition of a 4^th generation cephalosporin for empirical antifungal therapy and refinements in risk stratification for invasive fungal disease (IFD), among others.

The new guidelines were published by The International Pediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The recommendations were organized into 3 major sections: initial presentation, ongoing management, and empirical antifungal therapy. The guidelines panel followed procedures previously validated for creating evidence-based guidelines and used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument as a framework.

For the initial presentation of FN, the panel increased the quality of evidence from low to moderate in the recommendation to obtain peripheral blood cultures concurrent with central venous catheter cultures.

In the treatment of FN, the panel added a 4^th-generation cephalosporin as empirical therapy in high-risk FN.

The panel refined the IFD risk factors and decreased the quality of evidence from moderate to low. Children with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), relapsed acute leukemia, those undergoing allogeneic HSCT, those with prolonged neutropenia, and those receiving high-dose corticosteroids are at high risk of IFD. All others should be categorized as IFD low risk.

The panel suggested serum galactomannan not be used to guide empirical antifungal management for prolonged FN lasting 96 hours or more in high-risk IFD patients.  GM does not rule out non-Aspergillus molds, and therefore high negative values provide less useful predictions. Previously, the use of galactomannan was a weak recommendation.

The panel added a new recommendation against using fungal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in blood. They explained PCR testing provides poor positive predictive values and negative predictive values are not sufficiently high to be clinically useful. Also, PCR testing is not yet standardized.

Another new recommendation is the addition of imaging of the abdomen in patients without localizing signs or symptoms. Even though the ideal imaging modality is not known, ultrasound is readily available, not associated with radiation exposure, and usually does not require sedation. For these reasons, the panel said it is preferable to computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.

The panel also changed a previously weak recommendation to administer empirical therapy for IFD low-risk patients with prolonged FN to a weak recommendation against administering therapy for these patients.

The panel's recommendations and their rationale can be found in the JCO article.

The guidelines update was supported by meeting grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Garron Comprehensive Cancer Centre.

Photo courtesy of the CDC

A multidisciplinary, international panel of experts has updated earlier clinical practice guidelines on managing fever and neutropenia (FN) in children with cancer and in those undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). And while most of the recommendations remained unchanged from the 2012 guidelines, a few key differences emerged. The changes included addition of a 4^th generation cephalosporin for empirical antifungal therapy and refinements in risk stratification for invasive fungal disease (IFD), among others.

The new guidelines were published by The International Pediatric Fever and Neutropenia Guideline Panel in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

The recommendations were organized into 3 major sections: initial presentation, ongoing management, and empirical antifungal therapy. The guidelines panel followed procedures previously validated for creating evidence-based guidelines and used the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation II instrument as a framework.

For the initial presentation of FN, the panel increased the quality of evidence from low to moderate in the recommendation to obtain peripheral blood cultures concurrent with central venous catheter cultures.

In the treatment of FN, the panel added a 4^th-generation cephalosporin as empirical therapy in high-risk FN.

The panel refined the IFD risk factors and decreased the quality of evidence from moderate to low. Children with acute myeloid leukemia (AML), high-risk acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), relapsed acute leukemia, those undergoing allogeneic HSCT, those with prolonged neutropenia, and those receiving high-dose corticosteroids are at high risk of IFD. All others should be categorized as IFD low risk.

The panel suggested serum galactomannan not be used to guide empirical antifungal management for prolonged FN lasting 96 hours or more in high-risk IFD patients.  GM does not rule out non-Aspergillus molds, and therefore high negative values provide less useful predictions. Previously, the use of galactomannan was a weak recommendation.

The panel added a new recommendation against using fungal polymerase chain reaction (PCR) testing in blood. They explained PCR testing provides poor positive predictive values and negative predictive values are not sufficiently high to be clinically useful. Also, PCR testing is not yet standardized.

Another new recommendation is the addition of imaging of the abdomen in patients without localizing signs or symptoms. Even though the ideal imaging modality is not known, ultrasound is readily available, not associated with radiation exposure, and usually does not require sedation. For these reasons, the panel said it is preferable to computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging.

The panel also changed a previously weak recommendation to administer empirical therapy for IFD low-risk patients with prolonged FN to a weak recommendation against administering therapy for these patients.

The panel's recommendations and their rationale can be found in the JCO article.

The guidelines update was supported by meeting grants from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and the Garron Comprehensive Cancer Centre.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted for priority review the biologics license application (BLA) for axicabtagene ciloleucel (formerly KTE-C19), a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.

Kite Pharma, Inc. is seeking approval for axicabtagene ciloleucel as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The FDA has set a review deadline of November 29, 2017, for the axicabtagene ciloleucel BLA.

Axicabtagene ciloleucel also has breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA as a treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, transformed follicular lymphoma, and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma.

ZUMA-1 trial

The BLA for axicabtagene ciloleucel is supported by data from the phase 2 ZUMA-1 trial, which enrolled 111 patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell NHL.

After a single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel, the objective response rate was 82%. At a median follow-up of 8.7 months, 44% of patients were still in response, which included 39% of patients in complete response.

The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were anemia (43%), neutropenia (39%), decreased neutrophil count (32%), febrile neutropenia (31%), decreased white blood cell count (29%), thrombocytopenia (24%), encephalopathy (21%), and decreased lymphocyte count (20%).

There were 3 deaths during the trial that were not due to disease progression. Two of these deaths were deemed related to axicabtagene ciloleucel. 

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted for priority review the biologics license application (BLA) for axicabtagene ciloleucel (formerly KTE-C19), a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.

Kite Pharma, Inc. is seeking approval for axicabtagene ciloleucel as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The FDA has set a review deadline of November 29, 2017, for the axicabtagene ciloleucel BLA.

Axicabtagene ciloleucel also has breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA as a treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, transformed follicular lymphoma, and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma.

ZUMA-1 trial

The BLA for axicabtagene ciloleucel is supported by data from the phase 2 ZUMA-1 trial, which enrolled 111 patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell NHL.

After a single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel, the objective response rate was 82%. At a median follow-up of 8.7 months, 44% of patients were still in response, which included 39% of patients in complete response.

The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were anemia (43%), neutropenia (39%), decreased neutrophil count (32%), febrile neutropenia (31%), decreased white blood cell count (29%), thrombocytopenia (24%), encephalopathy (21%), and decreased lymphocyte count (20%).

There were 3 deaths during the trial that were not due to disease progression. Two of these deaths were deemed related to axicabtagene ciloleucel. 

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has accepted for priority review the biologics license application (BLA) for axicabtagene ciloleucel (formerly KTE-C19), a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.

Kite Pharma, Inc. is seeking approval for axicabtagene ciloleucel as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) who are ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The FDA has set a review deadline of November 29, 2017, for the axicabtagene ciloleucel BLA.

Axicabtagene ciloleucel also has breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA as a treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, transformed follicular lymphoma, and primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma.

ZUMA-1 trial

The BLA for axicabtagene ciloleucel is supported by data from the phase 2 ZUMA-1 trial, which enrolled 111 patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell NHL.

After a single infusion of axicabtagene ciloleucel, the objective response rate was 82%. At a median follow-up of 8.7 months, 44% of patients were still in response, which included 39% of patients in complete response.

The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were anemia (43%), neutropenia (39%), decreased neutrophil count (32%), febrile neutropenia (31%), decreased white blood cell count (29%), thrombocytopenia (24%), encephalopathy (21%), and decreased lymphocyte count (20%).

There were 3 deaths during the trial that were not due to disease progression. Two of these deaths were deemed related to axicabtagene ciloleucel. 

Photo courtesy of the CDC

New research provides an explanation for the fact that US patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to enroll in hospice care than patients with solid tumor malignancies.

Results of a national survey suggest that concerns about the adequacy of hospice may prevent hematologic oncologists from referring their patients.

Researchers say this finding, published in Cancer, points to potential means of improving end-of-life care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

Oreofe Odejide, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and her colleagues carried out this study.

The team conducted a survey of a national sample of hematologic oncologists listed in the publicly available clinical directory of the American Society of Hematology.

More than 57% of physicians who were contacted provided responses, for a total of 349 respondents.

The survey included questions about views regarding the helpfulness and adequacy of home hospice services for patients with hematologic malignancies, as well as factors that would impact oncologists’ likelihood of referring patients to hospice.

More than 68% of hematologic oncologists strongly agreed that hospice care is “helpful” for patients with hematologic malignancies.

However, 46% of the oncologists felt that home hospice is “inadequate” for the needs of patients with hematologic malignancies, when compared to inpatient hospice.

Still, most of the respondents who believed home hospice is inadequate said they would be more likely to refer patients if platelet and red blood cell transfusions were readily available.

“Our findings are important as they shed light on factors that are potential barriers to hospice referrals,” Dr Odejide said. “These findings can be employed to develop targeted interventions to address hospice underuse for patients with blood cancers.” 

Photo courtesy of the CDC

New research provides an explanation for the fact that US patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to enroll in hospice care than patients with solid tumor malignancies.

Results of a national survey suggest that concerns about the adequacy of hospice may prevent hematologic oncologists from referring their patients.

Researchers say this finding, published in Cancer, points to potential means of improving end-of-life care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

Oreofe Odejide, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and her colleagues carried out this study.

The team conducted a survey of a national sample of hematologic oncologists listed in the publicly available clinical directory of the American Society of Hematology.

More than 57% of physicians who were contacted provided responses, for a total of 349 respondents.

The survey included questions about views regarding the helpfulness and adequacy of home hospice services for patients with hematologic malignancies, as well as factors that would impact oncologists’ likelihood of referring patients to hospice.

More than 68% of hematologic oncologists strongly agreed that hospice care is “helpful” for patients with hematologic malignancies.

However, 46% of the oncologists felt that home hospice is “inadequate” for the needs of patients with hematologic malignancies, when compared to inpatient hospice.

Still, most of the respondents who believed home hospice is inadequate said they would be more likely to refer patients if platelet and red blood cell transfusions were readily available.

“Our findings are important as they shed light on factors that are potential barriers to hospice referrals,” Dr Odejide said. “These findings can be employed to develop targeted interventions to address hospice underuse for patients with blood cancers.” 

Photo courtesy of the CDC

New research provides an explanation for the fact that US patients with hematologic malignancies are less likely to enroll in hospice care than patients with solid tumor malignancies.

Results of a national survey suggest that concerns about the adequacy of hospice may prevent hematologic oncologists from referring their patients.

Researchers say this finding, published in Cancer, points to potential means of improving end-of-life care for patients with hematologic malignancies.

Oreofe Odejide, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, Massachusetts, and her colleagues carried out this study.

The team conducted a survey of a national sample of hematologic oncologists listed in the publicly available clinical directory of the American Society of Hematology.

More than 57% of physicians who were contacted provided responses, for a total of 349 respondents.

The survey included questions about views regarding the helpfulness and adequacy of home hospice services for patients with hematologic malignancies, as well as factors that would impact oncologists’ likelihood of referring patients to hospice.

More than 68% of hematologic oncologists strongly agreed that hospice care is “helpful” for patients with hematologic malignancies.

However, 46% of the oncologists felt that home hospice is “inadequate” for the needs of patients with hematologic malignancies, when compared to inpatient hospice.

Still, most of the respondents who believed home hospice is inadequate said they would be more likely to refer patients if platelet and red blood cell transfusions were readily available.

“Our findings are important as they shed light on factors that are potential barriers to hospice referrals,” Dr Odejide said. “These findings can be employed to develop targeted interventions to address hospice underuse for patients with blood cancers.” 

Follicular lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to the new drug application (NDA) for copanlisib, an intravenous PI3K inhibitor.

The NDA is for copanlisib as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least 2 prior therapies.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The application for copanlisib is supported by data from the CHRONOS-1 trial. This phase 2 trial enrolled 141 patients with relapsed/refractory, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Most of these patients had FL (n=104).

In all patients, copanlisib produced an objective response rate of 59.2%, with a complete response rate of 12%. The median duration of response exceeded 98 weeks.

In the FL subset, copanlisib produced an overall response rate of 58.7%, with a complete response rate of 14.4%. The median duration of response exceeded 52 weeks.

In the entire cohort, there were 3 deaths considered related to copanlisib.

The most common treatment-related adverse events were transient hyperglycemia (all grades: 49%/grade 3-4: 40%) and hypertension (all grades: 29%/grade 3: 23%).

“Patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma have a poor prognosis, and new treatment options which are well tolerated and effective are needed to prolong progression-free survival and improve quality of life for these patients,” said Martin Dreyling, MD, a professor at the University of Munich Hospital (Grosshadern) in Germany and lead investigator of the CHRONOS-1 study.

“Based on the CHRONOS-1 results, where copanlisib showed durable efficacy with a manageable and distinct safety profile, the compound may have the potential to address this unmet medical need.”

Data from CHRONOS-1 were presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2017.

Data from the FL subset of the trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting in June.

Copanlisib is being developed by Bayer. The compound has fast track and orphan drug designations from the FDA.

The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products intended to treat or prevent serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical need.

Through the fast track program, a product may be eligible for priority review. In addition, the company developing the product may be allowed to submit sections of the NDA or biologic license application on a rolling basis as data become available.

Fast track designation also provides the company with opportunities for more frequent meetings and written communications with the FDA. 

Follicular lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to the new drug application (NDA) for copanlisib, an intravenous PI3K inhibitor.

The NDA is for copanlisib as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least 2 prior therapies.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The application for copanlisib is supported by data from the CHRONOS-1 trial. This phase 2 trial enrolled 141 patients with relapsed/refractory, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Most of these patients had FL (n=104).

In all patients, copanlisib produced an objective response rate of 59.2%, with a complete response rate of 12%. The median duration of response exceeded 98 weeks.

In the FL subset, copanlisib produced an overall response rate of 58.7%, with a complete response rate of 14.4%. The median duration of response exceeded 52 weeks.

In the entire cohort, there were 3 deaths considered related to copanlisib.

The most common treatment-related adverse events were transient hyperglycemia (all grades: 49%/grade 3-4: 40%) and hypertension (all grades: 29%/grade 3: 23%).

“Patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma have a poor prognosis, and new treatment options which are well tolerated and effective are needed to prolong progression-free survival and improve quality of life for these patients,” said Martin Dreyling, MD, a professor at the University of Munich Hospital (Grosshadern) in Germany and lead investigator of the CHRONOS-1 study.

“Based on the CHRONOS-1 results, where copanlisib showed durable efficacy with a manageable and distinct safety profile, the compound may have the potential to address this unmet medical need.”

Data from CHRONOS-1 were presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2017.

Data from the FL subset of the trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting in June.

Copanlisib is being developed by Bayer. The compound has fast track and orphan drug designations from the FDA.

The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products intended to treat or prevent serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical need.

Through the fast track program, a product may be eligible for priority review. In addition, the company developing the product may be allowed to submit sections of the NDA or biologic license application on a rolling basis as data become available.

Fast track designation also provides the company with opportunities for more frequent meetings and written communications with the FDA. 

Follicular lymphoma

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to the new drug application (NDA) for copanlisib, an intravenous PI3K inhibitor.

The NDA is for copanlisib as a treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least 2 prior therapies.

The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.

The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.

The application for copanlisib is supported by data from the CHRONOS-1 trial. This phase 2 trial enrolled 141 patients with relapsed/refractory, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Most of these patients had FL (n=104).

In all patients, copanlisib produced an objective response rate of 59.2%, with a complete response rate of 12%. The median duration of response exceeded 98 weeks.

In the FL subset, copanlisib produced an overall response rate of 58.7%, with a complete response rate of 14.4%. The median duration of response exceeded 52 weeks.

In the entire cohort, there were 3 deaths considered related to copanlisib.

The most common treatment-related adverse events were transient hyperglycemia (all grades: 49%/grade 3-4: 40%) and hypertension (all grades: 29%/grade 3: 23%).

“Patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma have a poor prognosis, and new treatment options which are well tolerated and effective are needed to prolong progression-free survival and improve quality of life for these patients,” said Martin Dreyling, MD, a professor at the University of Munich Hospital (Grosshadern) in Germany and lead investigator of the CHRONOS-1 study.

“Based on the CHRONOS-1 results, where copanlisib showed durable efficacy with a manageable and distinct safety profile, the compound may have the potential to address this unmet medical need.”

Data from CHRONOS-1 were presented at the AACR Annual Meeting 2017.

Data from the FL subset of the trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2017 ASCO Annual Meeting in June.

Copanlisib is being developed by Bayer. The compound has fast track and orphan drug designations from the FDA.

The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products intended to treat or prevent serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical need.

Through the fast track program, a product may be eligible for priority review. In addition, the company developing the product may be allowed to submit sections of the NDA or biologic license application on a rolling basis as data become available.

Fast track designation also provides the company with opportunities for more frequent meetings and written communications with the FDA. 

Lab mouse

A nucleoside analog has shown potential for treating primary effusion lymphoma (PEL) and multiple myeloma (MM), according to researchers.

The compound, 6-ethylthioinosine (6-ETI), killed both PEL and MM cells in vitro.

6-ETI also reduced tumor burden and prolonged survival in mouse models of MM and PEL.

Ethel Cesarman, MD, PhD, of Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York, and her colleagues conducted this research and disclosed their results in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

The researchers identified 6-ETI via high-throughput screening, and they initially tested the compound in PEL cell lines. 6-ETI induced necrosis, apoptosis, and autophagy in these cells.

In a xenograft model of PEL, mice treated with 6-ETI experienced “striking and immediate regression of the implanted xenograft within 3 days of treatment,” according to the researchers.

In addition, mice that received 6-ETI had significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than control mice (P<0.0001 for both), and the researchers said there were no obvious toxicities from the treatment.

Looking into the mechanism of 6-ETI, the researchers found that adenosine kinase (ADK) is required to phosphorylate and activate the compound, and PEL cells have high levels of ADK.

Because PEL cells closely resemble plasma cells, the researchers theorized that MM might produce high levels of ADK as well. Experiments in MM cells proved this theory correct.

So the researchers tested 6-ETI in MM cell lines and samples from MM patients. The compound induced apoptosis and autophagy, and it activated a DNA damage response in MM cells.

In a mouse model of MM, 6-ETI treatment significantly reduced tumor burden but did not result in weight loss. And treated mice had significantly longer overall survival than control mice (P<0.005).

Dr Cesarman and her colleagues are now trying to better understand how 6-ETI works and determine what other cancers expressing high levels of ADK might respond to the drug.

“This compound could provide a much-needed approach to treat people with some forms of plasma malignancies as well as other cancers that express ADK,” Dr Cesarman said. 

Lab mouse

A nucleoside analog has shown potential for treating primary effusion lymphoma (PEL) and multiple myeloma (MM), according to researchers.

The compound, 6-ethylthioinosine (6-ETI), killed both PEL and MM cells in vitro.

6-ETI also reduced tumor burden and prolonged survival in mouse models of MM and PEL.

Ethel Cesarman, MD, PhD, of Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York, and her colleagues conducted this research and disclosed their results in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

The researchers identified 6-ETI via high-throughput screening, and they initially tested the compound in PEL cell lines. 6-ETI induced necrosis, apoptosis, and autophagy in these cells.

In a xenograft model of PEL, mice treated with 6-ETI experienced “striking and immediate regression of the implanted xenograft within 3 days of treatment,” according to the researchers.

In addition, mice that received 6-ETI had significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than control mice (P<0.0001 for both), and the researchers said there were no obvious toxicities from the treatment.

Looking into the mechanism of 6-ETI, the researchers found that adenosine kinase (ADK) is required to phosphorylate and activate the compound, and PEL cells have high levels of ADK.

Because PEL cells closely resemble plasma cells, the researchers theorized that MM might produce high levels of ADK as well. Experiments in MM cells proved this theory correct.

So the researchers tested 6-ETI in MM cell lines and samples from MM patients. The compound induced apoptosis and autophagy, and it activated a DNA damage response in MM cells.

In a mouse model of MM, 6-ETI treatment significantly reduced tumor burden but did not result in weight loss. And treated mice had significantly longer overall survival than control mice (P<0.005).

Dr Cesarman and her colleagues are now trying to better understand how 6-ETI works and determine what other cancers expressing high levels of ADK might respond to the drug.

“This compound could provide a much-needed approach to treat people with some forms of plasma malignancies as well as other cancers that express ADK,” Dr Cesarman said. 

Lab mouse

A nucleoside analog has shown potential for treating primary effusion lymphoma (PEL) and multiple myeloma (MM), according to researchers.

The compound, 6-ethylthioinosine (6-ETI), killed both PEL and MM cells in vitro.

6-ETI also reduced tumor burden and prolonged survival in mouse models of MM and PEL.

Ethel Cesarman, MD, PhD, of Weill Cornell Medicine in New York, New York, and her colleagues conducted this research and disclosed their results in the Journal of Clinical Investigation.

The researchers identified 6-ETI via high-throughput screening, and they initially tested the compound in PEL cell lines. 6-ETI induced necrosis, apoptosis, and autophagy in these cells.

In a xenograft model of PEL, mice treated with 6-ETI experienced “striking and immediate regression of the implanted xenograft within 3 days of treatment,” according to the researchers.

In addition, mice that received 6-ETI had significantly longer progression-free and overall survival than control mice (P<0.0001 for both), and the researchers said there were no obvious toxicities from the treatment.

Looking into the mechanism of 6-ETI, the researchers found that adenosine kinase (ADK) is required to phosphorylate and activate the compound, and PEL cells have high levels of ADK.

Because PEL cells closely resemble plasma cells, the researchers theorized that MM might produce high levels of ADK as well. Experiments in MM cells proved this theory correct.

So the researchers tested 6-ETI in MM cell lines and samples from MM patients. The compound induced apoptosis and autophagy, and it activated a DNA damage response in MM cells.

In a mouse model of MM, 6-ETI treatment significantly reduced tumor burden but did not result in weight loss. And treated mice had significantly longer overall survival than control mice (P<0.005).

Dr Cesarman and her colleagues are now trying to better understand how 6-ETI works and determine what other cancers expressing high levels of ADK might respond to the drug.

“This compound could provide a much-needed approach to treat people with some forms of plasma malignancies as well as other cancers that express ADK,” Dr Cesarman said. 

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A new study suggests that patients with double-hit lymphoma (DHL) in first remission only benefit from an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) if they received standard frontline chemotherapy.

Researchers looked at long-term outcomes for DHL patients who achieved remission and, overall, found that auto-HSCT did not significantly prolong remission or survival.

However, patients who received standard chemotherapy as frontline treatment did appear to benefit from auto-HSCT, as these patients had worse outcomes than patients who received intensive frontline chemotherapy.

This finding led the researchers to recommend that DHL patients receive intensive chemotherapy upfront and forgo subsequent auto-HSCT.

Daniel J. Landsburg, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and his colleagues made these recommendations in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

“A major dilemma for oncologists who treat [DHL] was whether or not to recommend the potentially harmful therapy of auto-[H]SCT to patients with this disease as a strategy to help keep them in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

To gain some insight into the issue, Dr Landsburg and his colleagues looked at data on 159 patients from 19 academic medical centers across the US.

Patients were diagnosed with DHL between 2006 and 2015, and all achieved remission following frontline chemotherapy.

Thirty-five patients received standard frontline therapy—R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The remaining patients received intensive frontline chemotherapy:

• 81 received DA-EPOCH-R (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophos­phamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab)
• 32 received R-hyperCVAD (rituximab, cyclophos­phamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, dexamethasone, methotrexate, and cytarabine)
• 11 received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, methotrexate/ifosfamide, etoposide, high-dose cytarabine).

Sixty-two patients underwent auto-HSCT, and 97 patients did not. There were no significant differences between these 2 patient groups at baseline.

“Our result is not explained by differences in patients’ overall health or disease features,” Dr Landsburg said. “The transplant and non-transplant arms of this study were very well-matched.”

Relapse and survival

For the entire patient cohort, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was 80%, and the 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 87%.

There was no significant difference in RFS or OS between patients who underwent auto-HSCT and those who did not.

The RFS rate was 89% in patients who underwent auto-HSCT and 75% in patients who did not (P=0.12). The OS rate was 91% and 85%, respectively (P=0.74).

“Once these patients achieve remission, the data show they are likely to stay in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

“In the absence of a large, randomized, controlled trial, which would be very challenging to carry out in this case, this is the best evidence we have, and it shows there’s no clear benefit to these patients undergoing auto-[H]SCT.”

Impact of frontline therapy

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront had worse RFS and OS than those who received intensive chemotherapy, although the OS difference was not significant.

RFS rates were 56% in patients who received R-CHOP, 88% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 87% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 91% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (P=0.003).

OS rates were 77% in patients who received R-CHOP, 87% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 90% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 100% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC, respectively (P=0.36).

When the 3 intensive regimens were combined, the RFS rate was 88% (vs 56% for R-CHOP, P=0.002), and the OS rate was 90% (vs 77% for R-CHOP, P=0.13).

Frontline therapy and HSCT

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront benefited from auto-HSCT, but patients who received intensive chemotherapy did not.

The RFS was 51% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 83% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The RFS was 86% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 91% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 89% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 92% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

An intergroup comparison showed a significant difference in RFS (P=0.003), which was driven by a significantly lower rate of RFS for patients who received R-CHOP without auto-HSCT, compared with patients who received intensive chemotherapy without auto-HSCT (P=0.003) or intensive chemotherapy with auto-HSCT (P=0.001).

“[I]f patients do go into remission with R-CHOP, it appears to be less durable, so, in these cases, going forward with auto-[H]SCT may still make sense,” Dr Landsburg said.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to OS (P=0.50).

Dr Landsburg said the next step for this research will be to study features of patients who don’t go into remission in order to understand why their disease is resistant to therapy and if that can be overcome with different treatment strategies. He also said it’s important to try to find more effective therapies for DHL patients who relapse. 

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A new study suggests that patients with double-hit lymphoma (DHL) in first remission only benefit from an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) if they received standard frontline chemotherapy.

Researchers looked at long-term outcomes for DHL patients who achieved remission and, overall, found that auto-HSCT did not significantly prolong remission or survival.

However, patients who received standard chemotherapy as frontline treatment did appear to benefit from auto-HSCT, as these patients had worse outcomes than patients who received intensive frontline chemotherapy.

This finding led the researchers to recommend that DHL patients receive intensive chemotherapy upfront and forgo subsequent auto-HSCT.

Daniel J. Landsburg, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and his colleagues made these recommendations in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

“A major dilemma for oncologists who treat [DHL] was whether or not to recommend the potentially harmful therapy of auto-[H]SCT to patients with this disease as a strategy to help keep them in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

To gain some insight into the issue, Dr Landsburg and his colleagues looked at data on 159 patients from 19 academic medical centers across the US.

Patients were diagnosed with DHL between 2006 and 2015, and all achieved remission following frontline chemotherapy.

Thirty-five patients received standard frontline therapy—R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The remaining patients received intensive frontline chemotherapy:

• 81 received DA-EPOCH-R (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophos­phamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab)
• 32 received R-hyperCVAD (rituximab, cyclophos­phamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, dexamethasone, methotrexate, and cytarabine)
• 11 received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, methotrexate/ifosfamide, etoposide, high-dose cytarabine).

Sixty-two patients underwent auto-HSCT, and 97 patients did not. There were no significant differences between these 2 patient groups at baseline.

“Our result is not explained by differences in patients’ overall health or disease features,” Dr Landsburg said. “The transplant and non-transplant arms of this study were very well-matched.”

Relapse and survival

For the entire patient cohort, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was 80%, and the 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 87%.

There was no significant difference in RFS or OS between patients who underwent auto-HSCT and those who did not.

The RFS rate was 89% in patients who underwent auto-HSCT and 75% in patients who did not (P=0.12). The OS rate was 91% and 85%, respectively (P=0.74).

“Once these patients achieve remission, the data show they are likely to stay in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

“In the absence of a large, randomized, controlled trial, which would be very challenging to carry out in this case, this is the best evidence we have, and it shows there’s no clear benefit to these patients undergoing auto-[H]SCT.”

Impact of frontline therapy

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront had worse RFS and OS than those who received intensive chemotherapy, although the OS difference was not significant.

RFS rates were 56% in patients who received R-CHOP, 88% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 87% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 91% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (P=0.003).

OS rates were 77% in patients who received R-CHOP, 87% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 90% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 100% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC, respectively (P=0.36).

When the 3 intensive regimens were combined, the RFS rate was 88% (vs 56% for R-CHOP, P=0.002), and the OS rate was 90% (vs 77% for R-CHOP, P=0.13).

Frontline therapy and HSCT

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront benefited from auto-HSCT, but patients who received intensive chemotherapy did not.

The RFS was 51% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 83% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The RFS was 86% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 91% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 89% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 92% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

An intergroup comparison showed a significant difference in RFS (P=0.003), which was driven by a significantly lower rate of RFS for patients who received R-CHOP without auto-HSCT, compared with patients who received intensive chemotherapy without auto-HSCT (P=0.003) or intensive chemotherapy with auto-HSCT (P=0.001).

“[I]f patients do go into remission with R-CHOP, it appears to be less durable, so, in these cases, going forward with auto-[H]SCT may still make sense,” Dr Landsburg said.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to OS (P=0.50).

Dr Landsburg said the next step for this research will be to study features of patients who don’t go into remission in order to understand why their disease is resistant to therapy and if that can be overcome with different treatment strategies. He also said it’s important to try to find more effective therapies for DHL patients who relapse. 

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A new study suggests that patients with double-hit lymphoma (DHL) in first remission only benefit from an autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) if they received standard frontline chemotherapy.

Researchers looked at long-term outcomes for DHL patients who achieved remission and, overall, found that auto-HSCT did not significantly prolong remission or survival.

However, patients who received standard chemotherapy as frontline treatment did appear to benefit from auto-HSCT, as these patients had worse outcomes than patients who received intensive frontline chemotherapy.

This finding led the researchers to recommend that DHL patients receive intensive chemotherapy upfront and forgo subsequent auto-HSCT.

Daniel J. Landsburg, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, and his colleagues made these recommendations in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

“A major dilemma for oncologists who treat [DHL] was whether or not to recommend the potentially harmful therapy of auto-[H]SCT to patients with this disease as a strategy to help keep them in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

To gain some insight into the issue, Dr Landsburg and his colleagues looked at data on 159 patients from 19 academic medical centers across the US.

Patients were diagnosed with DHL between 2006 and 2015, and all achieved remission following frontline chemotherapy.

Thirty-five patients received standard frontline therapy—R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The remaining patients received intensive frontline chemotherapy:

• 81 received DA-EPOCH-R (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophos­phamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab)
• 32 received R-hyperCVAD (rituximab, cyclophos­phamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, dexamethasone, methotrexate, and cytarabine)
• 11 received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, methotrexate/ifosfamide, etoposide, high-dose cytarabine).

Sixty-two patients underwent auto-HSCT, and 97 patients did not. There were no significant differences between these 2 patient groups at baseline.

“Our result is not explained by differences in patients’ overall health or disease features,” Dr Landsburg said. “The transplant and non-transplant arms of this study were very well-matched.”

Relapse and survival

For the entire patient cohort, the 3-year relapse-free survival (RFS) rate was 80%, and the 3-year overall survival (OS) rate was 87%.

There was no significant difference in RFS or OS between patients who underwent auto-HSCT and those who did not.

The RFS rate was 89% in patients who underwent auto-HSCT and 75% in patients who did not (P=0.12). The OS rate was 91% and 85%, respectively (P=0.74).

“Once these patients achieve remission, the data show they are likely to stay in remission,” Dr Landsburg said.

“In the absence of a large, randomized, controlled trial, which would be very challenging to carry out in this case, this is the best evidence we have, and it shows there’s no clear benefit to these patients undergoing auto-[H]SCT.”

Impact of frontline therapy

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront had worse RFS and OS than those who received intensive chemotherapy, although the OS difference was not significant.

RFS rates were 56% in patients who received R-CHOP, 88% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 87% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 91% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC (P=0.003).

OS rates were 77% in patients who received R-CHOP, 87% in those who received DA-EPOCH-R, 90% in those who received R-hyperCVAD, and 100% in those who received R-CODOX-M/IVAC, respectively (P=0.36).

When the 3 intensive regimens were combined, the RFS rate was 88% (vs 56% for R-CHOP, P=0.002), and the OS rate was 90% (vs 77% for R-CHOP, P=0.13).

Frontline therapy and HSCT

Patients who received R-CHOP upfront benefited from auto-HSCT, but patients who received intensive chemotherapy did not.

The RFS was 51% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 75% for patients who received R-CHOP and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 83% for patients who received R-CHOP followed by auto-HSCT.

The RFS was 86% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 91% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

The OS was 89% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy and did not undergo auto-HSCT, and it was 92% for patients who received intensive chemotherapy followed by auto-HSCT.

An intergroup comparison showed a significant difference in RFS (P=0.003), which was driven by a significantly lower rate of RFS for patients who received R-CHOP without auto-HSCT, compared with patients who received intensive chemotherapy without auto-HSCT (P=0.003) or intensive chemotherapy with auto-HSCT (P=0.001).

“[I]f patients do go into remission with R-CHOP, it appears to be less durable, so, in these cases, going forward with auto-[H]SCT may still make sense,” Dr Landsburg said.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the groups with regard to OS (P=0.50).

Dr Landsburg said the next step for this research will be to study features of patients who don’t go into remission in order to understand why their disease is resistant to therapy and if that can be overcome with different treatment strategies. He also said it’s important to try to find more effective therapies for DHL patients who relapse.