User login
FDA approves lenalidomide/rituximab for previously treated FL, MZL
The Food and Drug Administration has approved lenalidomide (Revlimid), in combination with rituximab, for the treatment of adult patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma.
FDA approval is based on results from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 AUGMENT trial, which evaluated lenalidomide/rituximab versus rituximab and placebo in patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. The median progression-free survival in those receiving lenalidomide/rituximab was 39.4 months, compared with 14.1 months for those receiving rituximab/placebo (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.62; P less than .0001).
A numeric trend was seen in overall survival over the follow-up period of 28.3 months (16 vs. 26 deaths; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.33-1.13).
The most common adverse events associated with lenalidomide/rituximab are neutropenia, diarrhea, constipation, cough, fatigue, rash, pyrexia, leukopenia, pruritus, upper respiratory tract infections, abdominal pain, anemia, headache, and thrombocytopenia. Lenalidomide also contains a boxed warning for embryo-fetal toxicity, hematologic toxicity, and venous and arterial thromboembolism.
“Chemotherapy continues to be a standard of care for indolent forms of NHL, but most patients will relapse or become refractory to their current treatment. This approval represents a new therapeutic option for previously treated patients with follicular and marginal zone lymphomas, including those who relapse or no longer respond to initial treatment,” Meghan Gutierrez, CEO of the Lymphoma Research Foundation, said in a statement.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved lenalidomide (Revlimid), in combination with rituximab, for the treatment of adult patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma.
FDA approval is based on results from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 AUGMENT trial, which evaluated lenalidomide/rituximab versus rituximab and placebo in patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. The median progression-free survival in those receiving lenalidomide/rituximab was 39.4 months, compared with 14.1 months for those receiving rituximab/placebo (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.62; P less than .0001).
A numeric trend was seen in overall survival over the follow-up period of 28.3 months (16 vs. 26 deaths; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.33-1.13).
The most common adverse events associated with lenalidomide/rituximab are neutropenia, diarrhea, constipation, cough, fatigue, rash, pyrexia, leukopenia, pruritus, upper respiratory tract infections, abdominal pain, anemia, headache, and thrombocytopenia. Lenalidomide also contains a boxed warning for embryo-fetal toxicity, hematologic toxicity, and venous and arterial thromboembolism.
“Chemotherapy continues to be a standard of care for indolent forms of NHL, but most patients will relapse or become refractory to their current treatment. This approval represents a new therapeutic option for previously treated patients with follicular and marginal zone lymphomas, including those who relapse or no longer respond to initial treatment,” Meghan Gutierrez, CEO of the Lymphoma Research Foundation, said in a statement.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved lenalidomide (Revlimid), in combination with rituximab, for the treatment of adult patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma.
FDA approval is based on results from the randomized, double-blind, phase 3 AUGMENT trial, which evaluated lenalidomide/rituximab versus rituximab and placebo in patients with previously treated follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. The median progression-free survival in those receiving lenalidomide/rituximab was 39.4 months, compared with 14.1 months for those receiving rituximab/placebo (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.34-0.62; P less than .0001).
A numeric trend was seen in overall survival over the follow-up period of 28.3 months (16 vs. 26 deaths; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.33-1.13).
The most common adverse events associated with lenalidomide/rituximab are neutropenia, diarrhea, constipation, cough, fatigue, rash, pyrexia, leukopenia, pruritus, upper respiratory tract infections, abdominal pain, anemia, headache, and thrombocytopenia. Lenalidomide also contains a boxed warning for embryo-fetal toxicity, hematologic toxicity, and venous and arterial thromboembolism.
“Chemotherapy continues to be a standard of care for indolent forms of NHL, but most patients will relapse or become refractory to their current treatment. This approval represents a new therapeutic option for previously treated patients with follicular and marginal zone lymphomas, including those who relapse or no longer respond to initial treatment,” Meghan Gutierrez, CEO of the Lymphoma Research Foundation, said in a statement.
CD23 expression linked to improved survival in MCL
In a large cohort of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved survival outcomes, according to a retrospective analysis.
“Mantle cell lymphoma has a distinctive immunophenotype, typically positive for pan B-cell markers, CD5 and cyclin D1, but negative for CD10, CD23, and CD200. Although most cases show this immunophenotype, some MCL cases have atypical immunophenotypic features, such as expression of CD10, CD23, or rarely CD200 or lack of expression of CD5,” wrote Annapurna Saksena, MD, of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and colleagues. Their report is in Human Pathology.
They retrospectively reviewed medical records from a pathology database at MD Anderson from the period of 2008-2016. In all, 798 patients with MCL were identified, of which 103 were classified as CD23-positive via flow cytometry.
The team collected data related to the immunophenotypic and clinicopathologic characteristics of the disease, in addition to survival-related outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). They compared outcomes for the CD23-positive group against 240 patients with CD23-negative MCL.
After analysis, Dr. Saksena and colleagues found that patients with CD23-positive MCL more frequently had bone marrow involvement (89% vs. 78%, P = .02), a leukemic nonnodal presentation (42% vs. 11%, P = .0001), an elevated leukocyte count (33% vs. 18%, P = .009), and stage 4 disease (87% vs. 77%, P = .03).
The researchers reported that CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved PFS and OS (P = .029 and P = .02, respectively) in the univariate analysis.
However, the prognostic significance was partially lost when leukemic nonnodal cases were excluded, the researchers reported.
In addition to the higher frequency of leukemic nonnodal presentation with CD23-positive MCL cases, there was a higher frequency of CD200 expression and a lower frequency of SOX11 expression.
The researchers acknowledged that a key limitation of the study was the loss of prognostic significance in the multivariate analysis. Further studies are needed to fully understand the links between CD23 expression and MCL survival, they noted.
No funding sources were reported. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Saksena A et al. Hum Pathol. 2019 May 2. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2019.04.010.
In a large cohort of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved survival outcomes, according to a retrospective analysis.
“Mantle cell lymphoma has a distinctive immunophenotype, typically positive for pan B-cell markers, CD5 and cyclin D1, but negative for CD10, CD23, and CD200. Although most cases show this immunophenotype, some MCL cases have atypical immunophenotypic features, such as expression of CD10, CD23, or rarely CD200 or lack of expression of CD5,” wrote Annapurna Saksena, MD, of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and colleagues. Their report is in Human Pathology.
They retrospectively reviewed medical records from a pathology database at MD Anderson from the period of 2008-2016. In all, 798 patients with MCL were identified, of which 103 were classified as CD23-positive via flow cytometry.
The team collected data related to the immunophenotypic and clinicopathologic characteristics of the disease, in addition to survival-related outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). They compared outcomes for the CD23-positive group against 240 patients with CD23-negative MCL.
After analysis, Dr. Saksena and colleagues found that patients with CD23-positive MCL more frequently had bone marrow involvement (89% vs. 78%, P = .02), a leukemic nonnodal presentation (42% vs. 11%, P = .0001), an elevated leukocyte count (33% vs. 18%, P = .009), and stage 4 disease (87% vs. 77%, P = .03).
The researchers reported that CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved PFS and OS (P = .029 and P = .02, respectively) in the univariate analysis.
However, the prognostic significance was partially lost when leukemic nonnodal cases were excluded, the researchers reported.
In addition to the higher frequency of leukemic nonnodal presentation with CD23-positive MCL cases, there was a higher frequency of CD200 expression and a lower frequency of SOX11 expression.
The researchers acknowledged that a key limitation of the study was the loss of prognostic significance in the multivariate analysis. Further studies are needed to fully understand the links between CD23 expression and MCL survival, they noted.
No funding sources were reported. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Saksena A et al. Hum Pathol. 2019 May 2. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2019.04.010.
In a large cohort of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved survival outcomes, according to a retrospective analysis.
“Mantle cell lymphoma has a distinctive immunophenotype, typically positive for pan B-cell markers, CD5 and cyclin D1, but negative for CD10, CD23, and CD200. Although most cases show this immunophenotype, some MCL cases have atypical immunophenotypic features, such as expression of CD10, CD23, or rarely CD200 or lack of expression of CD5,” wrote Annapurna Saksena, MD, of MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, and colleagues. Their report is in Human Pathology.
They retrospectively reviewed medical records from a pathology database at MD Anderson from the period of 2008-2016. In all, 798 patients with MCL were identified, of which 103 were classified as CD23-positive via flow cytometry.
The team collected data related to the immunophenotypic and clinicopathologic characteristics of the disease, in addition to survival-related outcomes, including progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). They compared outcomes for the CD23-positive group against 240 patients with CD23-negative MCL.
After analysis, Dr. Saksena and colleagues found that patients with CD23-positive MCL more frequently had bone marrow involvement (89% vs. 78%, P = .02), a leukemic nonnodal presentation (42% vs. 11%, P = .0001), an elevated leukocyte count (33% vs. 18%, P = .009), and stage 4 disease (87% vs. 77%, P = .03).
The researchers reported that CD23 expression was associated with significantly improved PFS and OS (P = .029 and P = .02, respectively) in the univariate analysis.
However, the prognostic significance was partially lost when leukemic nonnodal cases were excluded, the researchers reported.
In addition to the higher frequency of leukemic nonnodal presentation with CD23-positive MCL cases, there was a higher frequency of CD200 expression and a lower frequency of SOX11 expression.
The researchers acknowledged that a key limitation of the study was the loss of prognostic significance in the multivariate analysis. Further studies are needed to fully understand the links between CD23 expression and MCL survival, they noted.
No funding sources were reported. The authors reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Saksena A et al. Hum Pathol. 2019 May 2. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2019.04.010.
FROM HUMAN PATHOLOGY
Lenalidomide may reduce risk of progression from SMM to MM
Lenalidomide can reduce the risk of progression from smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) to multiple myeloma (MM), according to a phase 2/3 trial.
At 3 years, the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) was 91% in SMM patients randomized to lenalidomide and 66% in those randomized to observation.
However, more than half of patients randomized to lenalidomide discontinued treatment because of toxicity.
These results are scheduled to be presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Sagar Lonial, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, discussed the results in a press briefing in advance of the meeting.
A prior trial suggested that lenalidomide plus dexamethasone can improve time to MM development and overall survival in patients with high-risk SMM (Mateos MV et al. NEJM 2013). However, inferior imaging was used in this trial, and the addition of dexamethasone hindered researchers’ ability to isolate the effects of lenalidomide, Dr. Lonial said.
With their trial (NCT01169337), Dr. Lonial and colleagues tested lenalidomide alone and screened patients using magnetic resonance imaging.
The trial enrolled patients with intermediate or high-risk SMM in two phases. In phase 2, all 44 patients received lenalidomide at 25 mg daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle. They also received aspirin at 325 mg on days 1-28.
In the phase 3 portion of the trial, 182 patients were randomized to observation or lenalidomide and aspirin at the aforementioned dose and schedule. Patients were stratified according to time since SMM diagnosis – 1 year or less vs. more than 1 year.
Safety
Dr. Lonial said, in general, lenalidomide was “very well tolerated.” However, 80% of patients in phase 2 and 51% in phase 3 discontinued lenalidomide due to toxicity.
The rates of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in the phase 2 portion were 34.1% for grade 3 AEs, 11.4% for grade 4, and 4.5% for grade 5. In the phase 3 portion, 35.2% of patients had grade 3 treatment-related AEs, and 5.7% had grade 4 treatment-related AEs.
Common AEs in phase 3 were grade 4 neutrophil count decrease (4.5%) and grade 3 infections (20.5%), hypertension (9.1%), fatigue (6.8%), skin AEs (5.7%), dyspnea (5.7%), and hypokalemia (3.4%).
Efficacy
“It is worth noting that about 50% of patients had an objective response to lenalidomide in both the phase 2 and the phase 3 trial,” Dr. Lonial said. “I think it’s also important to realize that, in the phase 2 portion of this study, of the 44 patients enrolled, 78% of them did not progress to myeloma with a median follow-up of over 5 years.”
In phase 2, PFS was 98% at 1 year, 87% at 3 years, and 78% at 5 years.
In phase 3, PFS was 98% in the lenalidomide arm and 89% in the observation arm at 1 year. At 2 years, PFS was 93% in the lenalidomide arm and 76% in the observation arm. At 3 years, PFS was 91% in the lenalidomide arm and 66% in the observation arm.
“What’s really quite interesting is that each [risk] group appeared to benefit almost equally from the early intervention of lenalidomide as a single agent,” Dr. Lonial said. “[W]hile the high-risk group may be the target now, this may be a fertile area for investigation in the intermediate-risk group as well.”
Dr. Lonial has relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Juno Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, and Takeda. The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Lonial S et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8001.
Lenalidomide can reduce the risk of progression from smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) to multiple myeloma (MM), according to a phase 2/3 trial.
At 3 years, the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) was 91% in SMM patients randomized to lenalidomide and 66% in those randomized to observation.
However, more than half of patients randomized to lenalidomide discontinued treatment because of toxicity.
These results are scheduled to be presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Sagar Lonial, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, discussed the results in a press briefing in advance of the meeting.
A prior trial suggested that lenalidomide plus dexamethasone can improve time to MM development and overall survival in patients with high-risk SMM (Mateos MV et al. NEJM 2013). However, inferior imaging was used in this trial, and the addition of dexamethasone hindered researchers’ ability to isolate the effects of lenalidomide, Dr. Lonial said.
With their trial (NCT01169337), Dr. Lonial and colleagues tested lenalidomide alone and screened patients using magnetic resonance imaging.
The trial enrolled patients with intermediate or high-risk SMM in two phases. In phase 2, all 44 patients received lenalidomide at 25 mg daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle. They also received aspirin at 325 mg on days 1-28.
In the phase 3 portion of the trial, 182 patients were randomized to observation or lenalidomide and aspirin at the aforementioned dose and schedule. Patients were stratified according to time since SMM diagnosis – 1 year or less vs. more than 1 year.
Safety
Dr. Lonial said, in general, lenalidomide was “very well tolerated.” However, 80% of patients in phase 2 and 51% in phase 3 discontinued lenalidomide due to toxicity.
The rates of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in the phase 2 portion were 34.1% for grade 3 AEs, 11.4% for grade 4, and 4.5% for grade 5. In the phase 3 portion, 35.2% of patients had grade 3 treatment-related AEs, and 5.7% had grade 4 treatment-related AEs.
Common AEs in phase 3 were grade 4 neutrophil count decrease (4.5%) and grade 3 infections (20.5%), hypertension (9.1%), fatigue (6.8%), skin AEs (5.7%), dyspnea (5.7%), and hypokalemia (3.4%).
Efficacy
“It is worth noting that about 50% of patients had an objective response to lenalidomide in both the phase 2 and the phase 3 trial,” Dr. Lonial said. “I think it’s also important to realize that, in the phase 2 portion of this study, of the 44 patients enrolled, 78% of them did not progress to myeloma with a median follow-up of over 5 years.”
In phase 2, PFS was 98% at 1 year, 87% at 3 years, and 78% at 5 years.
In phase 3, PFS was 98% in the lenalidomide arm and 89% in the observation arm at 1 year. At 2 years, PFS was 93% in the lenalidomide arm and 76% in the observation arm. At 3 years, PFS was 91% in the lenalidomide arm and 66% in the observation arm.
“What’s really quite interesting is that each [risk] group appeared to benefit almost equally from the early intervention of lenalidomide as a single agent,” Dr. Lonial said. “[W]hile the high-risk group may be the target now, this may be a fertile area for investigation in the intermediate-risk group as well.”
Dr. Lonial has relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Juno Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, and Takeda. The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Lonial S et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8001.
Lenalidomide can reduce the risk of progression from smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) to multiple myeloma (MM), according to a phase 2/3 trial.
At 3 years, the rate of progression-free survival (PFS) was 91% in SMM patients randomized to lenalidomide and 66% in those randomized to observation.
However, more than half of patients randomized to lenalidomide discontinued treatment because of toxicity.
These results are scheduled to be presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Sagar Lonial, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University, Atlanta, discussed the results in a press briefing in advance of the meeting.
A prior trial suggested that lenalidomide plus dexamethasone can improve time to MM development and overall survival in patients with high-risk SMM (Mateos MV et al. NEJM 2013). However, inferior imaging was used in this trial, and the addition of dexamethasone hindered researchers’ ability to isolate the effects of lenalidomide, Dr. Lonial said.
With their trial (NCT01169337), Dr. Lonial and colleagues tested lenalidomide alone and screened patients using magnetic resonance imaging.
The trial enrolled patients with intermediate or high-risk SMM in two phases. In phase 2, all 44 patients received lenalidomide at 25 mg daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle. They also received aspirin at 325 mg on days 1-28.
In the phase 3 portion of the trial, 182 patients were randomized to observation or lenalidomide and aspirin at the aforementioned dose and schedule. Patients were stratified according to time since SMM diagnosis – 1 year or less vs. more than 1 year.
Safety
Dr. Lonial said, in general, lenalidomide was “very well tolerated.” However, 80% of patients in phase 2 and 51% in phase 3 discontinued lenalidomide due to toxicity.
The rates of treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in the phase 2 portion were 34.1% for grade 3 AEs, 11.4% for grade 4, and 4.5% for grade 5. In the phase 3 portion, 35.2% of patients had grade 3 treatment-related AEs, and 5.7% had grade 4 treatment-related AEs.
Common AEs in phase 3 were grade 4 neutrophil count decrease (4.5%) and grade 3 infections (20.5%), hypertension (9.1%), fatigue (6.8%), skin AEs (5.7%), dyspnea (5.7%), and hypokalemia (3.4%).
Efficacy
“It is worth noting that about 50% of patients had an objective response to lenalidomide in both the phase 2 and the phase 3 trial,” Dr. Lonial said. “I think it’s also important to realize that, in the phase 2 portion of this study, of the 44 patients enrolled, 78% of them did not progress to myeloma with a median follow-up of over 5 years.”
In phase 2, PFS was 98% at 1 year, 87% at 3 years, and 78% at 5 years.
In phase 3, PFS was 98% in the lenalidomide arm and 89% in the observation arm at 1 year. At 2 years, PFS was 93% in the lenalidomide arm and 76% in the observation arm. At 3 years, PFS was 91% in the lenalidomide arm and 66% in the observation arm.
“What’s really quite interesting is that each [risk] group appeared to benefit almost equally from the early intervention of lenalidomide as a single agent,” Dr. Lonial said. “[W]hile the high-risk group may be the target now, this may be a fertile area for investigation in the intermediate-risk group as well.”
Dr. Lonial has relationships with AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Oncology, Juno Therapeutics, Merck, Novartis, and Takeda. The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health.
SOURCE: Lonial S et al. ASCO 2019. Abstract 8001.
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2019
Trial follow-up spotlights survival gains in follicular lymphoma
Results from a 13-year follow-up of a trial comparing two types of rituximab-based chemotherapy as upfront treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma show an “extraordinary improvement” in overall survival, compared with the prerituximab era.
In a finding that the researchers termed “somewhat unexpected,” complete remission was the strongest factor in long-term survival.
Between March 2000 and May 2005, researchers enrolled 136 high-risk follicular lymphoma patients in the GITMO-IIL trial to evaluate the superiority of high-dose chemotherapy with rituximab and autograft (R-HDS) versus conventional chemotherapy with rituximab (R-CHOP) as frontline therapy. At a median follow-up of 4 years, there was no survival advantage for R-HDS.
In the current analysis – that had a 13-year median follow-up – median survival had not yet been reached. As of February 2017, two-thirds of all patients were alive at their last follow-up. Overall survival was 68.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 64.5% in the R-HDS arm, Riccardo Bruna, MD, of the European Institute of Oncology in Milano, Italy, and his colleagues, reported in Haematologica.
The main causes of death for the 46 patients who had died as of long-term follow-up were disease progression and secondary malignancies. Other causes included cardiovascular events, infections, graft failure following autograft, anaphylactic shock, and late sudden death.
Complete remission was seen in 98 patients (73.1%) overall – 59.1% in the R-CHOP arm and 86.7% in the R-HDS arm. Achieving durable complete remission was associated with prolonged survival, the researchers reported. Of the 79 patients in complete remission at 2 years after the start of treatment, 65 (82.3%) were alive at 13 years, compared with 21 (58.3%) of 36 patients who had an early relapse (P = .003).
“[Complete remission] achievement was the most important factor for prolonged survival,” the researchers wrote. “The importance of disease response is further emphasized by the first-time observation that [molecular remission] achievement is associated with survival duration and a high proportion of patients had prolonged survival in the absence of disease recurrence.”
The researchers reported that this is longest ever follow-up reported for first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma with rituximab-based chemotherapy.
This work was supported in part by the Ministero Italiano Università e Ricerca and by Banca del Piemonte. The initial clinical trial was supported by Compagnia di San Paolo, Regione Piemonte, and Roche, which provided rituximab for the study.
SOURCE: Bruna R et al. Haematologica. 2019 Apr 11. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.209932.
Results from a 13-year follow-up of a trial comparing two types of rituximab-based chemotherapy as upfront treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma show an “extraordinary improvement” in overall survival, compared with the prerituximab era.
In a finding that the researchers termed “somewhat unexpected,” complete remission was the strongest factor in long-term survival.
Between March 2000 and May 2005, researchers enrolled 136 high-risk follicular lymphoma patients in the GITMO-IIL trial to evaluate the superiority of high-dose chemotherapy with rituximab and autograft (R-HDS) versus conventional chemotherapy with rituximab (R-CHOP) as frontline therapy. At a median follow-up of 4 years, there was no survival advantage for R-HDS.
In the current analysis – that had a 13-year median follow-up – median survival had not yet been reached. As of February 2017, two-thirds of all patients were alive at their last follow-up. Overall survival was 68.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 64.5% in the R-HDS arm, Riccardo Bruna, MD, of the European Institute of Oncology in Milano, Italy, and his colleagues, reported in Haematologica.
The main causes of death for the 46 patients who had died as of long-term follow-up were disease progression and secondary malignancies. Other causes included cardiovascular events, infections, graft failure following autograft, anaphylactic shock, and late sudden death.
Complete remission was seen in 98 patients (73.1%) overall – 59.1% in the R-CHOP arm and 86.7% in the R-HDS arm. Achieving durable complete remission was associated with prolonged survival, the researchers reported. Of the 79 patients in complete remission at 2 years after the start of treatment, 65 (82.3%) were alive at 13 years, compared with 21 (58.3%) of 36 patients who had an early relapse (P = .003).
“[Complete remission] achievement was the most important factor for prolonged survival,” the researchers wrote. “The importance of disease response is further emphasized by the first-time observation that [molecular remission] achievement is associated with survival duration and a high proportion of patients had prolonged survival in the absence of disease recurrence.”
The researchers reported that this is longest ever follow-up reported for first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma with rituximab-based chemotherapy.
This work was supported in part by the Ministero Italiano Università e Ricerca and by Banca del Piemonte. The initial clinical trial was supported by Compagnia di San Paolo, Regione Piemonte, and Roche, which provided rituximab for the study.
SOURCE: Bruna R et al. Haematologica. 2019 Apr 11. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.209932.
Results from a 13-year follow-up of a trial comparing two types of rituximab-based chemotherapy as upfront treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma show an “extraordinary improvement” in overall survival, compared with the prerituximab era.
In a finding that the researchers termed “somewhat unexpected,” complete remission was the strongest factor in long-term survival.
Between March 2000 and May 2005, researchers enrolled 136 high-risk follicular lymphoma patients in the GITMO-IIL trial to evaluate the superiority of high-dose chemotherapy with rituximab and autograft (R-HDS) versus conventional chemotherapy with rituximab (R-CHOP) as frontline therapy. At a median follow-up of 4 years, there was no survival advantage for R-HDS.
In the current analysis – that had a 13-year median follow-up – median survival had not yet been reached. As of February 2017, two-thirds of all patients were alive at their last follow-up. Overall survival was 68.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 64.5% in the R-HDS arm, Riccardo Bruna, MD, of the European Institute of Oncology in Milano, Italy, and his colleagues, reported in Haematologica.
The main causes of death for the 46 patients who had died as of long-term follow-up were disease progression and secondary malignancies. Other causes included cardiovascular events, infections, graft failure following autograft, anaphylactic shock, and late sudden death.
Complete remission was seen in 98 patients (73.1%) overall – 59.1% in the R-CHOP arm and 86.7% in the R-HDS arm. Achieving durable complete remission was associated with prolonged survival, the researchers reported. Of the 79 patients in complete remission at 2 years after the start of treatment, 65 (82.3%) were alive at 13 years, compared with 21 (58.3%) of 36 patients who had an early relapse (P = .003).
“[Complete remission] achievement was the most important factor for prolonged survival,” the researchers wrote. “The importance of disease response is further emphasized by the first-time observation that [molecular remission] achievement is associated with survival duration and a high proportion of patients had prolonged survival in the absence of disease recurrence.”
The researchers reported that this is longest ever follow-up reported for first-line treatment of follicular lymphoma with rituximab-based chemotherapy.
This work was supported in part by the Ministero Italiano Università e Ricerca and by Banca del Piemonte. The initial clinical trial was supported by Compagnia di San Paolo, Regione Piemonte, and Roche, which provided rituximab for the study.
SOURCE: Bruna R et al. Haematologica. 2019 Apr 11. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2018.209932.
FROM HAEMATOLOGICA
Atypical case of cutaneous MCL mimics SPTCL
An atypical case of cutaneous mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) with histomorphological features mimicking subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (SPTCL) highlights a “potential pitfall,” according to investigators.
This unusual case stresses the importance of molecular cytogenetics and/or immunohistochemistry for panniculitis-type lymphomas, reported lead author Caroline Laggis, MD of the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, and colleagues.
“While morphologic features of SPTCL, specifically rimming of adipocytes by neoplastic lymphoid cells, have been documented in other types of lymphomas, this case is exceptional in that the morphologic features of SPTCL are showed in secondary cutaneous involvement by MCL,” the investigators wrote. Their report is in Journal of Cutaneous Pathology.
The patient was a 69-year-old man who presented with 2-year history of night sweats and fever of unknown origin, and, closer to presentation, weight loss and tender bumps under the skin of his pelvic region.
Subsequent computed tomography and excisional lymph node biopsy led to a diagnosis of MCL, with a Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index of 5, suggesting aggressive, intermediate-risk disease. Further imaging showed involvement of the nasopharynx, and cervical and mediastinal lymph nodes.
Bendamustine and rituximab chemotherapy was given unremarkably until the final cycle, at which point the patient presented with tender subcutaneous nodules on his lower legs. Histopathology from punch biopsies revealed “a dense infiltrate of monomorphic, mitotically active lymphoid cells with infiltration between the deep dermal collagen and the adipocytes in subcutaneous fat,” the investigators wrote, noting that the infiltrative cells were blastoid and 70% expressed cyclin D1, supporting cutaneous involvement of his systemic MCL.
Treatment was switched to ibrutinib and selinexor via a clinical trial, which led to temporary improvement of leg lesions; when the lesions returned, biopsy was performed with the same histopathological result. Lenalidomide and rituximab were started, but without success, and disease spread to the central nervous system.
Another biopsy of the skin lesions again supported cutaneous MCL, with tumor cells rimming individual adipocytes.
Because of this atypical morphology, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was conducted, revealing t(11;14)(q13:32) positivity, thereby “confirming the diagnosis of cutaneous involvement by systemic MCL,” the investigators wrote.
Genomic sequencing revealed abnormalities of “ataxia-telangiectasia mutated, mechanistic target of rapamycin kinase (mTOR), BCL6 corepressor, and FAS-associated factor 1, as well as the expected mutation in IGH-CCND1, leading to cyclin D1 upregulation.”
Subsequent treatment was unsuccessful, and the patient died from his disease.
“The complex and central role that mTOR plays in adipose homeostasis may link our tumor to its preference to the adipose tissue, although further investigation is warranted regarding specific genomic alterations in lymphomas and the implications these mutations have in the involvement of tumor cells with cutaneous and adipose environments,” the investigators wrote.
The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Laggis C et al. 2019 Apr 8. doi:10.1111/cup.13471.
An atypical case of cutaneous mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) with histomorphological features mimicking subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (SPTCL) highlights a “potential pitfall,” according to investigators.
This unusual case stresses the importance of molecular cytogenetics and/or immunohistochemistry for panniculitis-type lymphomas, reported lead author Caroline Laggis, MD of the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, and colleagues.
“While morphologic features of SPTCL, specifically rimming of adipocytes by neoplastic lymphoid cells, have been documented in other types of lymphomas, this case is exceptional in that the morphologic features of SPTCL are showed in secondary cutaneous involvement by MCL,” the investigators wrote. Their report is in Journal of Cutaneous Pathology.
The patient was a 69-year-old man who presented with 2-year history of night sweats and fever of unknown origin, and, closer to presentation, weight loss and tender bumps under the skin of his pelvic region.
Subsequent computed tomography and excisional lymph node biopsy led to a diagnosis of MCL, with a Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index of 5, suggesting aggressive, intermediate-risk disease. Further imaging showed involvement of the nasopharynx, and cervical and mediastinal lymph nodes.
Bendamustine and rituximab chemotherapy was given unremarkably until the final cycle, at which point the patient presented with tender subcutaneous nodules on his lower legs. Histopathology from punch biopsies revealed “a dense infiltrate of monomorphic, mitotically active lymphoid cells with infiltration between the deep dermal collagen and the adipocytes in subcutaneous fat,” the investigators wrote, noting that the infiltrative cells were blastoid and 70% expressed cyclin D1, supporting cutaneous involvement of his systemic MCL.
Treatment was switched to ibrutinib and selinexor via a clinical trial, which led to temporary improvement of leg lesions; when the lesions returned, biopsy was performed with the same histopathological result. Lenalidomide and rituximab were started, but without success, and disease spread to the central nervous system.
Another biopsy of the skin lesions again supported cutaneous MCL, with tumor cells rimming individual adipocytes.
Because of this atypical morphology, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was conducted, revealing t(11;14)(q13:32) positivity, thereby “confirming the diagnosis of cutaneous involvement by systemic MCL,” the investigators wrote.
Genomic sequencing revealed abnormalities of “ataxia-telangiectasia mutated, mechanistic target of rapamycin kinase (mTOR), BCL6 corepressor, and FAS-associated factor 1, as well as the expected mutation in IGH-CCND1, leading to cyclin D1 upregulation.”
Subsequent treatment was unsuccessful, and the patient died from his disease.
“The complex and central role that mTOR plays in adipose homeostasis may link our tumor to its preference to the adipose tissue, although further investigation is warranted regarding specific genomic alterations in lymphomas and the implications these mutations have in the involvement of tumor cells with cutaneous and adipose environments,” the investigators wrote.
The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Laggis C et al. 2019 Apr 8. doi:10.1111/cup.13471.
An atypical case of cutaneous mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) with histomorphological features mimicking subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (SPTCL) highlights a “potential pitfall,” according to investigators.
This unusual case stresses the importance of molecular cytogenetics and/or immunohistochemistry for panniculitis-type lymphomas, reported lead author Caroline Laggis, MD of the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, and colleagues.
“While morphologic features of SPTCL, specifically rimming of adipocytes by neoplastic lymphoid cells, have been documented in other types of lymphomas, this case is exceptional in that the morphologic features of SPTCL are showed in secondary cutaneous involvement by MCL,” the investigators wrote. Their report is in Journal of Cutaneous Pathology.
The patient was a 69-year-old man who presented with 2-year history of night sweats and fever of unknown origin, and, closer to presentation, weight loss and tender bumps under the skin of his pelvic region.
Subsequent computed tomography and excisional lymph node biopsy led to a diagnosis of MCL, with a Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index of 5, suggesting aggressive, intermediate-risk disease. Further imaging showed involvement of the nasopharynx, and cervical and mediastinal lymph nodes.
Bendamustine and rituximab chemotherapy was given unremarkably until the final cycle, at which point the patient presented with tender subcutaneous nodules on his lower legs. Histopathology from punch biopsies revealed “a dense infiltrate of monomorphic, mitotically active lymphoid cells with infiltration between the deep dermal collagen and the adipocytes in subcutaneous fat,” the investigators wrote, noting that the infiltrative cells were blastoid and 70% expressed cyclin D1, supporting cutaneous involvement of his systemic MCL.
Treatment was switched to ibrutinib and selinexor via a clinical trial, which led to temporary improvement of leg lesions; when the lesions returned, biopsy was performed with the same histopathological result. Lenalidomide and rituximab were started, but without success, and disease spread to the central nervous system.
Another biopsy of the skin lesions again supported cutaneous MCL, with tumor cells rimming individual adipocytes.
Because of this atypical morphology, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was conducted, revealing t(11;14)(q13:32) positivity, thereby “confirming the diagnosis of cutaneous involvement by systemic MCL,” the investigators wrote.
Genomic sequencing revealed abnormalities of “ataxia-telangiectasia mutated, mechanistic target of rapamycin kinase (mTOR), BCL6 corepressor, and FAS-associated factor 1, as well as the expected mutation in IGH-CCND1, leading to cyclin D1 upregulation.”
Subsequent treatment was unsuccessful, and the patient died from his disease.
“The complex and central role that mTOR plays in adipose homeostasis may link our tumor to its preference to the adipose tissue, although further investigation is warranted regarding specific genomic alterations in lymphomas and the implications these mutations have in the involvement of tumor cells with cutaneous and adipose environments,” the investigators wrote.
The investigators did not report conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Laggis C et al. 2019 Apr 8. doi:10.1111/cup.13471.
FROM JOURNAL OF CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY
Inhibitor may overcome ibrutinib resistance in MCL
Investigators have identified a mechanism of ibrutinib resistance in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and showed that a small molecule can overcome that resistance in vitro and in vivo.
The team found that ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells rely on oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and glutaminolysis to survive.
Targeting the OXPHOS pathway with a small molecule, IACS-010759, inhibited the proliferation of ibrutinib-resistant cells in vitro.
IACS-010759 also decreased tumor volume and improved survival in mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL and double-hit B-cell lymphoma.
Now, IACS-10759 is being tested in phase 1 trials of lymphoma and solid tumors (NCT03291938) as well as acute myeloid leukemia (NCT02882321).
Liang Zhang, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and his colleagues conducted the preclinical research and described their findings in Science Translational Medicine.
The investigators sequenced samples from MCL patients with ibrutinib-sensitive and -resistant disease and found that “glutamine-fueled OXPHOS appears to be a prominent energy metabolism pathway in ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells.”
This finding prompted the team to test IACS-010759, an inhibitor of ETC complex I, in ibrutinib-resistant MCL. They theorized that the inhibitor would be effective because, during OXPHOS, electrons are transferred from electron donors to acceptors through the ETC in redox reactions that release energy to form ATP, and OXPHOS generates ATP to meet requirements for cell growth.
In experiments, IACS-010759 inhibited the proliferation of two ibrutinib-resistant MCL cell lines, Z-138 and Maver-1, in a dose-dependent manner.
The investigators also tested IACS-010759 in two mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL. In both models, mice treated with IACS-010759 had a significant reduction in tumor volume, compared with controls. In one model, IACS-010759 extended survival by a median of 11 days.
Finally, the team tested IACS-010759 in a model of ibrutinib-resistant, double-hit (MYC and BCL-2) B-cell lymphoma with central nervous system involvement. Again, IACS-010759 significantly inhibited tumor growth. Compared to ibrutinib and vehicle control, IACS-010759 provided a median survival benefit of more than 20 days.
There were no toxicities associated with IACS-010759 treatment, according to the investigators.
This research was supported by the MD Anderson B Cell Lymphoma Moon Shot Project, Gary Rogers Foundation, Kinder Foundation, Cullen Foundation, Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas, and the National Institutes of Health. Most investigators reported having no competing interests, but two reported a patent (WO/2015/130790).
SOURCE: Zhang L et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 May 8. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau1167.
Investigators have identified a mechanism of ibrutinib resistance in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and showed that a small molecule can overcome that resistance in vitro and in vivo.
The team found that ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells rely on oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and glutaminolysis to survive.
Targeting the OXPHOS pathway with a small molecule, IACS-010759, inhibited the proliferation of ibrutinib-resistant cells in vitro.
IACS-010759 also decreased tumor volume and improved survival in mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL and double-hit B-cell lymphoma.
Now, IACS-10759 is being tested in phase 1 trials of lymphoma and solid tumors (NCT03291938) as well as acute myeloid leukemia (NCT02882321).
Liang Zhang, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and his colleagues conducted the preclinical research and described their findings in Science Translational Medicine.
The investigators sequenced samples from MCL patients with ibrutinib-sensitive and -resistant disease and found that “glutamine-fueled OXPHOS appears to be a prominent energy metabolism pathway in ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells.”
This finding prompted the team to test IACS-010759, an inhibitor of ETC complex I, in ibrutinib-resistant MCL. They theorized that the inhibitor would be effective because, during OXPHOS, electrons are transferred from electron donors to acceptors through the ETC in redox reactions that release energy to form ATP, and OXPHOS generates ATP to meet requirements for cell growth.
In experiments, IACS-010759 inhibited the proliferation of two ibrutinib-resistant MCL cell lines, Z-138 and Maver-1, in a dose-dependent manner.
The investigators also tested IACS-010759 in two mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL. In both models, mice treated with IACS-010759 had a significant reduction in tumor volume, compared with controls. In one model, IACS-010759 extended survival by a median of 11 days.
Finally, the team tested IACS-010759 in a model of ibrutinib-resistant, double-hit (MYC and BCL-2) B-cell lymphoma with central nervous system involvement. Again, IACS-010759 significantly inhibited tumor growth. Compared to ibrutinib and vehicle control, IACS-010759 provided a median survival benefit of more than 20 days.
There were no toxicities associated with IACS-010759 treatment, according to the investigators.
This research was supported by the MD Anderson B Cell Lymphoma Moon Shot Project, Gary Rogers Foundation, Kinder Foundation, Cullen Foundation, Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas, and the National Institutes of Health. Most investigators reported having no competing interests, but two reported a patent (WO/2015/130790).
SOURCE: Zhang L et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 May 8. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau1167.
Investigators have identified a mechanism of ibrutinib resistance in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and showed that a small molecule can overcome that resistance in vitro and in vivo.
The team found that ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells rely on oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and glutaminolysis to survive.
Targeting the OXPHOS pathway with a small molecule, IACS-010759, inhibited the proliferation of ibrutinib-resistant cells in vitro.
IACS-010759 also decreased tumor volume and improved survival in mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL and double-hit B-cell lymphoma.
Now, IACS-10759 is being tested in phase 1 trials of lymphoma and solid tumors (NCT03291938) as well as acute myeloid leukemia (NCT02882321).
Liang Zhang, MD, PhD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, and his colleagues conducted the preclinical research and described their findings in Science Translational Medicine.
The investigators sequenced samples from MCL patients with ibrutinib-sensitive and -resistant disease and found that “glutamine-fueled OXPHOS appears to be a prominent energy metabolism pathway in ibrutinib-resistant MCL cells.”
This finding prompted the team to test IACS-010759, an inhibitor of ETC complex I, in ibrutinib-resistant MCL. They theorized that the inhibitor would be effective because, during OXPHOS, electrons are transferred from electron donors to acceptors through the ETC in redox reactions that release energy to form ATP, and OXPHOS generates ATP to meet requirements for cell growth.
In experiments, IACS-010759 inhibited the proliferation of two ibrutinib-resistant MCL cell lines, Z-138 and Maver-1, in a dose-dependent manner.
The investigators also tested IACS-010759 in two mouse models of ibrutinib-resistant MCL. In both models, mice treated with IACS-010759 had a significant reduction in tumor volume, compared with controls. In one model, IACS-010759 extended survival by a median of 11 days.
Finally, the team tested IACS-010759 in a model of ibrutinib-resistant, double-hit (MYC and BCL-2) B-cell lymphoma with central nervous system involvement. Again, IACS-010759 significantly inhibited tumor growth. Compared to ibrutinib and vehicle control, IACS-010759 provided a median survival benefit of more than 20 days.
There were no toxicities associated with IACS-010759 treatment, according to the investigators.
This research was supported by the MD Anderson B Cell Lymphoma Moon Shot Project, Gary Rogers Foundation, Kinder Foundation, Cullen Foundation, Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas, and the National Institutes of Health. Most investigators reported having no competing interests, but two reported a patent (WO/2015/130790).
SOURCE: Zhang L et al. Sci Transl Med. 2019 May 8. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aau1167.
FROM SCIENCE TRANSLATIONAL MEDICINE
FDA opts not to ban textured breast implants
The Food and Drug Administration decided to continue to allow U.S. sales of textured breast implants, which have been identified as the cause of a rare but significant cancer, breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma.
A statement the agency released on May 2 said “The FDA does not believe that, on the basis of available data and information, the device [textured implants] meets the banning standard set forth in the Federal Food and Drug Cosmetic Act.” roughly half of them in the United States.
In coming to this decision, following 2 days of public testimony and discussions by an advisory committee in late March, the FDA is bucking the path taken by regulatory bodies of the European Union as well as several other counties. The EU acted in December 2018 to produce the equivalent of a ban on sales of textured breast implants marketed by Allergan. Then in April 2019, the French drug and device regulatory agency expanded this ban to textured breast implants sold by five other companies.
During the FDA advisory committee meeting in March, one of the world’s experts on BIA-ALCL, Mark W. Clemens, MD, a plastic surgeon at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said that of about 500 case reports received by the FDA, not one had involved a confirmed and “pure” episode of BIA-ALCL linked with a smooth breast implant. A team of experts recently reached the same conclusion when reviewing the reported worldwide incidence of BIA-ALCL in a published review (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 March;143[3S]:30S-40S).
Despite these reports, the FDA said in its new statement that “While the majority of women who develop BIA-ALCL have had textured implants, there are known cases in women with smooth-surface breast implants, and many reports do not include the surface texture of the implant at the time of diagnosis.” The agency added that it is “focused on strengthening the evidence generated to help inform future regulatory action.” During the March advisory committee meeting, some members of the panel spoke against a marketing ban on textured implants for reasons such as the modest number of reported cases and because of the importance of having a textured implant option available.
The FDA took several other notable steps in its May 2 statement:
The agency formally acknowledged that many breast implant recipients have reported experiencing adverse effects that include chronic fatigue, cognitive issues, and joint and muscle pain. “While the FDA doesn’t have definitive evidence demonstrating breast implants cause these symptoms, the current evidence supports that some women experience systemic symptoms that may resolve when their breast implants are removed.” The agency also cited the term that patients have coined for these symptoms: Breast Implant Illness.
The FDA made a commitment to “take steps to improve the information available to women and health care professionals about the risks of breast implants,” including the risk for BIA-ALCL, the increased risk for this cancer with textured implants, and the risk for systemic symptoms. The agency said it would work with stakeholders on possible changes to breast implant labeling, including a possible boxed warning, and a patient-decision checklist.
The FDA announced a change in how manufacturers will file medical device reports for breast implants. The agency will no longer allow these filings to be “summary” reports and will instead require manufacturers to file full individual medical device reports for each case that will be publicly available, with the intent to make reporting more transparent and complete.
Finally, the FDA announced that it would partner with two U.S. breast implant registries, the PROFILE registry of BIA-ALCL cases, and the National Breast Implant Registry, both run by the Plastic Surgery Foundation.
The FDA did not address in its statement other issues that came up during the March advisory committee hearings, including a panel recommendation to change follow-up imaging from MRI to ultrasound for monitoring women with implants for rupture, and the extensive, off-label use of surgical mesh during breast implant surgery.
The Food and Drug Administration decided to continue to allow U.S. sales of textured breast implants, which have been identified as the cause of a rare but significant cancer, breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma.
A statement the agency released on May 2 said “The FDA does not believe that, on the basis of available data and information, the device [textured implants] meets the banning standard set forth in the Federal Food and Drug Cosmetic Act.” roughly half of them in the United States.
In coming to this decision, following 2 days of public testimony and discussions by an advisory committee in late March, the FDA is bucking the path taken by regulatory bodies of the European Union as well as several other counties. The EU acted in December 2018 to produce the equivalent of a ban on sales of textured breast implants marketed by Allergan. Then in April 2019, the French drug and device regulatory agency expanded this ban to textured breast implants sold by five other companies.
During the FDA advisory committee meeting in March, one of the world’s experts on BIA-ALCL, Mark W. Clemens, MD, a plastic surgeon at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said that of about 500 case reports received by the FDA, not one had involved a confirmed and “pure” episode of BIA-ALCL linked with a smooth breast implant. A team of experts recently reached the same conclusion when reviewing the reported worldwide incidence of BIA-ALCL in a published review (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 March;143[3S]:30S-40S).
Despite these reports, the FDA said in its new statement that “While the majority of women who develop BIA-ALCL have had textured implants, there are known cases in women with smooth-surface breast implants, and many reports do not include the surface texture of the implant at the time of diagnosis.” The agency added that it is “focused on strengthening the evidence generated to help inform future regulatory action.” During the March advisory committee meeting, some members of the panel spoke against a marketing ban on textured implants for reasons such as the modest number of reported cases and because of the importance of having a textured implant option available.
The FDA took several other notable steps in its May 2 statement:
The agency formally acknowledged that many breast implant recipients have reported experiencing adverse effects that include chronic fatigue, cognitive issues, and joint and muscle pain. “While the FDA doesn’t have definitive evidence demonstrating breast implants cause these symptoms, the current evidence supports that some women experience systemic symptoms that may resolve when their breast implants are removed.” The agency also cited the term that patients have coined for these symptoms: Breast Implant Illness.
The FDA made a commitment to “take steps to improve the information available to women and health care professionals about the risks of breast implants,” including the risk for BIA-ALCL, the increased risk for this cancer with textured implants, and the risk for systemic symptoms. The agency said it would work with stakeholders on possible changes to breast implant labeling, including a possible boxed warning, and a patient-decision checklist.
The FDA announced a change in how manufacturers will file medical device reports for breast implants. The agency will no longer allow these filings to be “summary” reports and will instead require manufacturers to file full individual medical device reports for each case that will be publicly available, with the intent to make reporting more transparent and complete.
Finally, the FDA announced that it would partner with two U.S. breast implant registries, the PROFILE registry of BIA-ALCL cases, and the National Breast Implant Registry, both run by the Plastic Surgery Foundation.
The FDA did not address in its statement other issues that came up during the March advisory committee hearings, including a panel recommendation to change follow-up imaging from MRI to ultrasound for monitoring women with implants for rupture, and the extensive, off-label use of surgical mesh during breast implant surgery.
The Food and Drug Administration decided to continue to allow U.S. sales of textured breast implants, which have been identified as the cause of a rare but significant cancer, breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma.
A statement the agency released on May 2 said “The FDA does not believe that, on the basis of available data and information, the device [textured implants] meets the banning standard set forth in the Federal Food and Drug Cosmetic Act.” roughly half of them in the United States.
In coming to this decision, following 2 days of public testimony and discussions by an advisory committee in late March, the FDA is bucking the path taken by regulatory bodies of the European Union as well as several other counties. The EU acted in December 2018 to produce the equivalent of a ban on sales of textured breast implants marketed by Allergan. Then in April 2019, the French drug and device regulatory agency expanded this ban to textured breast implants sold by five other companies.
During the FDA advisory committee meeting in March, one of the world’s experts on BIA-ALCL, Mark W. Clemens, MD, a plastic surgeon at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said that of about 500 case reports received by the FDA, not one had involved a confirmed and “pure” episode of BIA-ALCL linked with a smooth breast implant. A team of experts recently reached the same conclusion when reviewing the reported worldwide incidence of BIA-ALCL in a published review (Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 March;143[3S]:30S-40S).
Despite these reports, the FDA said in its new statement that “While the majority of women who develop BIA-ALCL have had textured implants, there are known cases in women with smooth-surface breast implants, and many reports do not include the surface texture of the implant at the time of diagnosis.” The agency added that it is “focused on strengthening the evidence generated to help inform future regulatory action.” During the March advisory committee meeting, some members of the panel spoke against a marketing ban on textured implants for reasons such as the modest number of reported cases and because of the importance of having a textured implant option available.
The FDA took several other notable steps in its May 2 statement:
The agency formally acknowledged that many breast implant recipients have reported experiencing adverse effects that include chronic fatigue, cognitive issues, and joint and muscle pain. “While the FDA doesn’t have definitive evidence demonstrating breast implants cause these symptoms, the current evidence supports that some women experience systemic symptoms that may resolve when their breast implants are removed.” The agency also cited the term that patients have coined for these symptoms: Breast Implant Illness.
The FDA made a commitment to “take steps to improve the information available to women and health care professionals about the risks of breast implants,” including the risk for BIA-ALCL, the increased risk for this cancer with textured implants, and the risk for systemic symptoms. The agency said it would work with stakeholders on possible changes to breast implant labeling, including a possible boxed warning, and a patient-decision checklist.
The FDA announced a change in how manufacturers will file medical device reports for breast implants. The agency will no longer allow these filings to be “summary” reports and will instead require manufacturers to file full individual medical device reports for each case that will be publicly available, with the intent to make reporting more transparent and complete.
Finally, the FDA announced that it would partner with two U.S. breast implant registries, the PROFILE registry of BIA-ALCL cases, and the National Breast Implant Registry, both run by the Plastic Surgery Foundation.
The FDA did not address in its statement other issues that came up during the March advisory committee hearings, including a panel recommendation to change follow-up imaging from MRI to ultrasound for monitoring women with implants for rupture, and the extensive, off-label use of surgical mesh during breast implant surgery.
CAR T-cell therapy bb2121 performs well in phase 1 trial of refractory multiple myeloma
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy bb2121, which targets B-cell maturation agent (BCMA), appears safe and effective for treating patients with refractory multiple myeloma, according to results of a phase 1 trial.
The objective response rate of 85% among 33 heavily pretreated patients suggests “promising efficacy,” reported lead author Noopur Raje, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston and colleagues.
“Although comparisons among studies are complicated by differences in patient populations, CAR constructs, administered doses, and grading scales of toxic effects, the results observed with bb2121 indicate a favorable safety profile,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The study initially involved 36 patients with refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least three lines of prior therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. Although leukapheresis and therapy manufacturing were successful in all patients, three patients were excluded from receiving the infusion because of disease progression.
The 33 remaining patients were lymphodepleted with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. Bridging therapy was allowed during the manufacturing process but was stopped at least 2 weeks prior to infusion. In the dose-escalation phase of the study, b2121 was delivered as a single infusion at one of four dose levels: 50 × 106, 150 × 106, 450 × 106, or 800 × 106 CAR T cells. In the expansion phase, the treatment was given at either 150 x 106 or 450 x 106 CAR T cells. The primary endpoint was safety; the secondary endpoints were response rate and duration of response.
After a median follow-up of 11.3 months, most patients (85%) had responded to therapy, and almost half (45%) had achieved a complete response. Of the 15 complete responders, 6 relapsed. The median progression-free survival was 11.8 months; stated differently, two out of five patients (40%) had not experienced disease progression after 1 year. CAR T cells were detectable 1 month after infusion in 96% of patients; however, this value dropped to 86% at 3 months, 57% at 6 months, and 20% at 12 months. The investigators noted that CAR T-cell persistence was associated with treatment response.
All patients had adverse events. Most (85%) had grade 3 or higher hematologic toxicity, which the investigators considered to be the “expected toxic effects of lymphodepleting chemotherapy.” Although other adverse events occurred in the majority of patients, these were generally mild to moderate. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 25 patients (76%), including two instances of grade 3 toxicity but none of grade 4 or higher. Fourteen patients (42%) developed neurologic toxicities: Most were grade 1 or 2, but one patient had a grade 4 toxicity that resolved after a month. Infections occurred at the same rate (42%), although, again, most were grade 1 or 2.
The study was funded by Bluebird Bio and Celgene. The investigators disclosed financial relationships with Bluebird and other drug companies.
SOURCE: Raje N et al. NEJM. 1 May 2019. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1817226.
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy bb2121, which targets B-cell maturation agent (BCMA), appears safe and effective for treating patients with refractory multiple myeloma, according to results of a phase 1 trial.
The objective response rate of 85% among 33 heavily pretreated patients suggests “promising efficacy,” reported lead author Noopur Raje, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston and colleagues.
“Although comparisons among studies are complicated by differences in patient populations, CAR constructs, administered doses, and grading scales of toxic effects, the results observed with bb2121 indicate a favorable safety profile,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The study initially involved 36 patients with refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least three lines of prior therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. Although leukapheresis and therapy manufacturing were successful in all patients, three patients were excluded from receiving the infusion because of disease progression.
The 33 remaining patients were lymphodepleted with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. Bridging therapy was allowed during the manufacturing process but was stopped at least 2 weeks prior to infusion. In the dose-escalation phase of the study, b2121 was delivered as a single infusion at one of four dose levels: 50 × 106, 150 × 106, 450 × 106, or 800 × 106 CAR T cells. In the expansion phase, the treatment was given at either 150 x 106 or 450 x 106 CAR T cells. The primary endpoint was safety; the secondary endpoints were response rate and duration of response.
After a median follow-up of 11.3 months, most patients (85%) had responded to therapy, and almost half (45%) had achieved a complete response. Of the 15 complete responders, 6 relapsed. The median progression-free survival was 11.8 months; stated differently, two out of five patients (40%) had not experienced disease progression after 1 year. CAR T cells were detectable 1 month after infusion in 96% of patients; however, this value dropped to 86% at 3 months, 57% at 6 months, and 20% at 12 months. The investigators noted that CAR T-cell persistence was associated with treatment response.
All patients had adverse events. Most (85%) had grade 3 or higher hematologic toxicity, which the investigators considered to be the “expected toxic effects of lymphodepleting chemotherapy.” Although other adverse events occurred in the majority of patients, these were generally mild to moderate. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 25 patients (76%), including two instances of grade 3 toxicity but none of grade 4 or higher. Fourteen patients (42%) developed neurologic toxicities: Most were grade 1 or 2, but one patient had a grade 4 toxicity that resolved after a month. Infections occurred at the same rate (42%), although, again, most were grade 1 or 2.
The study was funded by Bluebird Bio and Celgene. The investigators disclosed financial relationships with Bluebird and other drug companies.
SOURCE: Raje N et al. NEJM. 1 May 2019. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1817226.
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy bb2121, which targets B-cell maturation agent (BCMA), appears safe and effective for treating patients with refractory multiple myeloma, according to results of a phase 1 trial.
The objective response rate of 85% among 33 heavily pretreated patients suggests “promising efficacy,” reported lead author Noopur Raje, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston and colleagues.
“Although comparisons among studies are complicated by differences in patient populations, CAR constructs, administered doses, and grading scales of toxic effects, the results observed with bb2121 indicate a favorable safety profile,” the investigators wrote in a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine.
The study initially involved 36 patients with refractory multiple myeloma who had received at least three lines of prior therapy, including an immunomodulatory agent and a proteasome inhibitor. Although leukapheresis and therapy manufacturing were successful in all patients, three patients were excluded from receiving the infusion because of disease progression.
The 33 remaining patients were lymphodepleted with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide. Bridging therapy was allowed during the manufacturing process but was stopped at least 2 weeks prior to infusion. In the dose-escalation phase of the study, b2121 was delivered as a single infusion at one of four dose levels: 50 × 106, 150 × 106, 450 × 106, or 800 × 106 CAR T cells. In the expansion phase, the treatment was given at either 150 x 106 or 450 x 106 CAR T cells. The primary endpoint was safety; the secondary endpoints were response rate and duration of response.
After a median follow-up of 11.3 months, most patients (85%) had responded to therapy, and almost half (45%) had achieved a complete response. Of the 15 complete responders, 6 relapsed. The median progression-free survival was 11.8 months; stated differently, two out of five patients (40%) had not experienced disease progression after 1 year. CAR T cells were detectable 1 month after infusion in 96% of patients; however, this value dropped to 86% at 3 months, 57% at 6 months, and 20% at 12 months. The investigators noted that CAR T-cell persistence was associated with treatment response.
All patients had adverse events. Most (85%) had grade 3 or higher hematologic toxicity, which the investigators considered to be the “expected toxic effects of lymphodepleting chemotherapy.” Although other adverse events occurred in the majority of patients, these were generally mild to moderate. Cytokine release syndrome occurred in 25 patients (76%), including two instances of grade 3 toxicity but none of grade 4 or higher. Fourteen patients (42%) developed neurologic toxicities: Most were grade 1 or 2, but one patient had a grade 4 toxicity that resolved after a month. Infections occurred at the same rate (42%), although, again, most were grade 1 or 2.
The study was funded by Bluebird Bio and Celgene. The investigators disclosed financial relationships with Bluebird and other drug companies.
SOURCE: Raje N et al. NEJM. 1 May 2019. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1817226.
FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE
High-dose MTX-based chemo is well tolerated in older PCNSL patients
GLASGOW – Most older patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) can tolerate high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy and achieve similar outcomes as younger and fitter patients, according to a retrospective analysis of 244 patients in the United Kingdom.
For older patients – at least 65 years old – who received methotrexate-based regimens, treatment-related mortality was 6.8%, which is comparable with rates seen in trials involving younger patients, reported lead author Edward Poynton, MD, of University College Hospital in London.
Specifically, Dr. Poynton cited the phase 2 IELSG32 trial, which had a treatment-related mortality rate of 6% among patients up to age 70 years. These patients were treated with the established protocol for younger patients: chemotherapy with methotrexate, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab (MATRix) followed by autologous stem cell transplant or whole-brain radiotherapy.
Introducing Dr. Poynton’s presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Simon Rule, MD, of the University of Plymouth (England), added historical context to the new findings.
“When I started in hematology ... [PCNSL] was a universally fatal disease, pretty much,” Dr. Rule said. “And then we had methotrexate, and it worked occasionally. And then we had a randomized trial, which was randomization of methotrexate plus or minus high-dose cytarabine, showing benefit.”
This combination became the benchmark against which subsequent randomized trials were measured; however, such high-intensity regimens have raised concerns about safety and efficacy in older patients, Dr. Rule said, noting that the present study serves to inform clinicians about real-world outcomes in this population.
The retrospective analysis reviewed 244 patients who were aged at least 65 years when histologically diagnosed with PCNSL at 14 U.K. tertiary centers between 2012 and 2017. All patients received first-line care of any kind, ranging from best supportive care to clinical trial therapy. Patients were grouped into three treatment cohorts divided by level of frailty. Analysis showed that these divisions correlated with age, renal function, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and treatment intensity.
The frail group received palliative treatment consisting of whole-brain radiotherapy, an oral alkylator, or best supportive care. The less-fit group received methotrexate in combination with rituximab, an oral alkylator, or both. The fit group was most intensively treated, receiving high-dose methotrexate and cytarabine – with or without rituximab – or MATRix.
The primary objective was overall response rate, while the secondary objectives were median overall survival and progression-free survival.
The analysis showed that 79% of patients (n = 193) received methotrexate-based therapy of some kind, with 61% receiving three or more cycles of therapy and 30% requiring dose reductions. The overall response rate was 63%.
Dr. Poynton noted that about two-thirds of patients who achieved a partial response in early assessment went on to achieve a complete response. Patients in the fit group more often responded than those who were less fit (87% vs. 65%; P = .01) and more often received consolidation therapy (42% vs. 23%; P = .01).
Fitness level was also associated with median overall survival, which was longest in the fit group at 42 months. The other two groups had dramatically shorter survival times: 8 months in the less-fit group and just 2 months in the frail group.
A closer look at the data revealed some patterns, Dr. Poynton said.
“What we see is that age at diagnosis is significantly correlated with progression-free survival but not with overall survival,” he said, noting that, in contrast, performance status was associated with both survival measures.
Methotrexate dose also impacted both survival measures. Patients who received 75% or more of their induction dose over the course of treatment had better median overall survival and progression-free survival than those who received less than 75%. Similarly, consolidation therapy improved both survival measures.
Patients aged older than 70 years who received intensive chemotherapy had a treatment-related mortality rate of 4.8%, which is lower than the overall treatment-related mortality, Dr. Poynton reported.
Considering the correlation between methotrexate dose and survival, Dr. Poynton suggested that “dose reductions should be carefully considered.”
He also noted that patients in the fit cohort who received intensive chemotherapy had comparable outcomes with younger patients in prospective trials, and yet 44% of patients older than 65 years in the real world who received high-dose methotrexate with cytarabine would have been ineligible for the IELSG32 trial.
“We’ve been able to identify this cohort of patients retrospectively,” Dr. Poynton said. “They definitely exist, and I think we need to work harder at how are going to identify these patients prospectively in the future, so we know which of our patients who are older can benefit from intensive chemotherapy and which patients won’t.”
Dr. Poynton reported having no relevant financial disclosures. His coinvestigators reported relationships with AbbVie, Merck, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and others.
GLASGOW – Most older patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) can tolerate high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy and achieve similar outcomes as younger and fitter patients, according to a retrospective analysis of 244 patients in the United Kingdom.
For older patients – at least 65 years old – who received methotrexate-based regimens, treatment-related mortality was 6.8%, which is comparable with rates seen in trials involving younger patients, reported lead author Edward Poynton, MD, of University College Hospital in London.
Specifically, Dr. Poynton cited the phase 2 IELSG32 trial, which had a treatment-related mortality rate of 6% among patients up to age 70 years. These patients were treated with the established protocol for younger patients: chemotherapy with methotrexate, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab (MATRix) followed by autologous stem cell transplant or whole-brain radiotherapy.
Introducing Dr. Poynton’s presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Simon Rule, MD, of the University of Plymouth (England), added historical context to the new findings.
“When I started in hematology ... [PCNSL] was a universally fatal disease, pretty much,” Dr. Rule said. “And then we had methotrexate, and it worked occasionally. And then we had a randomized trial, which was randomization of methotrexate plus or minus high-dose cytarabine, showing benefit.”
This combination became the benchmark against which subsequent randomized trials were measured; however, such high-intensity regimens have raised concerns about safety and efficacy in older patients, Dr. Rule said, noting that the present study serves to inform clinicians about real-world outcomes in this population.
The retrospective analysis reviewed 244 patients who were aged at least 65 years when histologically diagnosed with PCNSL at 14 U.K. tertiary centers between 2012 and 2017. All patients received first-line care of any kind, ranging from best supportive care to clinical trial therapy. Patients were grouped into three treatment cohorts divided by level of frailty. Analysis showed that these divisions correlated with age, renal function, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and treatment intensity.
The frail group received palliative treatment consisting of whole-brain radiotherapy, an oral alkylator, or best supportive care. The less-fit group received methotrexate in combination with rituximab, an oral alkylator, or both. The fit group was most intensively treated, receiving high-dose methotrexate and cytarabine – with or without rituximab – or MATRix.
The primary objective was overall response rate, while the secondary objectives were median overall survival and progression-free survival.
The analysis showed that 79% of patients (n = 193) received methotrexate-based therapy of some kind, with 61% receiving three or more cycles of therapy and 30% requiring dose reductions. The overall response rate was 63%.
Dr. Poynton noted that about two-thirds of patients who achieved a partial response in early assessment went on to achieve a complete response. Patients in the fit group more often responded than those who were less fit (87% vs. 65%; P = .01) and more often received consolidation therapy (42% vs. 23%; P = .01).
Fitness level was also associated with median overall survival, which was longest in the fit group at 42 months. The other two groups had dramatically shorter survival times: 8 months in the less-fit group and just 2 months in the frail group.
A closer look at the data revealed some patterns, Dr. Poynton said.
“What we see is that age at diagnosis is significantly correlated with progression-free survival but not with overall survival,” he said, noting that, in contrast, performance status was associated with both survival measures.
Methotrexate dose also impacted both survival measures. Patients who received 75% or more of their induction dose over the course of treatment had better median overall survival and progression-free survival than those who received less than 75%. Similarly, consolidation therapy improved both survival measures.
Patients aged older than 70 years who received intensive chemotherapy had a treatment-related mortality rate of 4.8%, which is lower than the overall treatment-related mortality, Dr. Poynton reported.
Considering the correlation between methotrexate dose and survival, Dr. Poynton suggested that “dose reductions should be carefully considered.”
He also noted that patients in the fit cohort who received intensive chemotherapy had comparable outcomes with younger patients in prospective trials, and yet 44% of patients older than 65 years in the real world who received high-dose methotrexate with cytarabine would have been ineligible for the IELSG32 trial.
“We’ve been able to identify this cohort of patients retrospectively,” Dr. Poynton said. “They definitely exist, and I think we need to work harder at how are going to identify these patients prospectively in the future, so we know which of our patients who are older can benefit from intensive chemotherapy and which patients won’t.”
Dr. Poynton reported having no relevant financial disclosures. His coinvestigators reported relationships with AbbVie, Merck, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and others.
GLASGOW – Most older patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) can tolerate high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy and achieve similar outcomes as younger and fitter patients, according to a retrospective analysis of 244 patients in the United Kingdom.
For older patients – at least 65 years old – who received methotrexate-based regimens, treatment-related mortality was 6.8%, which is comparable with rates seen in trials involving younger patients, reported lead author Edward Poynton, MD, of University College Hospital in London.
Specifically, Dr. Poynton cited the phase 2 IELSG32 trial, which had a treatment-related mortality rate of 6% among patients up to age 70 years. These patients were treated with the established protocol for younger patients: chemotherapy with methotrexate, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab (MATRix) followed by autologous stem cell transplant or whole-brain radiotherapy.
Introducing Dr. Poynton’s presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Simon Rule, MD, of the University of Plymouth (England), added historical context to the new findings.
“When I started in hematology ... [PCNSL] was a universally fatal disease, pretty much,” Dr. Rule said. “And then we had methotrexate, and it worked occasionally. And then we had a randomized trial, which was randomization of methotrexate plus or minus high-dose cytarabine, showing benefit.”
This combination became the benchmark against which subsequent randomized trials were measured; however, such high-intensity regimens have raised concerns about safety and efficacy in older patients, Dr. Rule said, noting that the present study serves to inform clinicians about real-world outcomes in this population.
The retrospective analysis reviewed 244 patients who were aged at least 65 years when histologically diagnosed with PCNSL at 14 U.K. tertiary centers between 2012 and 2017. All patients received first-line care of any kind, ranging from best supportive care to clinical trial therapy. Patients were grouped into three treatment cohorts divided by level of frailty. Analysis showed that these divisions correlated with age, renal function, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and treatment intensity.
The frail group received palliative treatment consisting of whole-brain radiotherapy, an oral alkylator, or best supportive care. The less-fit group received methotrexate in combination with rituximab, an oral alkylator, or both. The fit group was most intensively treated, receiving high-dose methotrexate and cytarabine – with or without rituximab – or MATRix.
The primary objective was overall response rate, while the secondary objectives were median overall survival and progression-free survival.
The analysis showed that 79% of patients (n = 193) received methotrexate-based therapy of some kind, with 61% receiving three or more cycles of therapy and 30% requiring dose reductions. The overall response rate was 63%.
Dr. Poynton noted that about two-thirds of patients who achieved a partial response in early assessment went on to achieve a complete response. Patients in the fit group more often responded than those who were less fit (87% vs. 65%; P = .01) and more often received consolidation therapy (42% vs. 23%; P = .01).
Fitness level was also associated with median overall survival, which was longest in the fit group at 42 months. The other two groups had dramatically shorter survival times: 8 months in the less-fit group and just 2 months in the frail group.
A closer look at the data revealed some patterns, Dr. Poynton said.
“What we see is that age at diagnosis is significantly correlated with progression-free survival but not with overall survival,” he said, noting that, in contrast, performance status was associated with both survival measures.
Methotrexate dose also impacted both survival measures. Patients who received 75% or more of their induction dose over the course of treatment had better median overall survival and progression-free survival than those who received less than 75%. Similarly, consolidation therapy improved both survival measures.
Patients aged older than 70 years who received intensive chemotherapy had a treatment-related mortality rate of 4.8%, which is lower than the overall treatment-related mortality, Dr. Poynton reported.
Considering the correlation between methotrexate dose and survival, Dr. Poynton suggested that “dose reductions should be carefully considered.”
He also noted that patients in the fit cohort who received intensive chemotherapy had comparable outcomes with younger patients in prospective trials, and yet 44% of patients older than 65 years in the real world who received high-dose methotrexate with cytarabine would have been ineligible for the IELSG32 trial.
“We’ve been able to identify this cohort of patients retrospectively,” Dr. Poynton said. “They definitely exist, and I think we need to work harder at how are going to identify these patients prospectively in the future, so we know which of our patients who are older can benefit from intensive chemotherapy and which patients won’t.”
Dr. Poynton reported having no relevant financial disclosures. His coinvestigators reported relationships with AbbVie, Merck, Takeda, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and others.
REPORTING FROM BSH 2019
Monitoring, early intervention key to CAR T safety
GLASGOW – Constant patient monitoring and early intervention with tocilizumab and steroids are essential to the safe delivery of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to a leading expert.
As a clinical researcher at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Loretta Nastoupil, MD has played an active role in the evolution of CAR T-cell therapy, from early trials to ongoing development of treatment protocols. During a presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Dr. Nastoupil discussed leading topics in CAR T-cell therapy, with an emphasis on safe delivery.
“[Toxicity] is something we don’t talk about as much as we should, partly because this therapy works and it’s really exciting,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But the toxicity is not something that I minimize, and it’s very challenging. It’s led us to restructure our inpatient services. It’s led to a lot of sleepless nights. These patients can do very, very well, or they can do very, very poorly in terms of toxicity and I think the most important strategy is recognition and early intervention.”
Monitoring
Early recognition depends on close monitoring, Dr. Nastoupil said, which is carried out by highly trained nursing staff who follow therapy-specific decision algorithms.
“We have nurses that are on the front line,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “They’re the most important group. We have staff that round on [patients] daily, but the nurses are there 24 hours a day. We have a flow sheet where they grade cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity every 8 hours, or if there is an acute change in symptoms or toxicity, they’ll do it in real time.”
Dr. Nastoupil said that if these toxicities are detected, intervention is occurring sooner than it did with some of the first patients to receive CAR-T cell therapy.
“Initially there was a lot of fear surrounding anything that would abort the CAR-T cell therapy,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “There was concern that if you were trying to mitigate some of the toxicity you might have a negative impact on efficacy ... [W]ith the first iteration of studies, generally we were waiting until grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome before initiating either tocilizumab and/or steroids. As the studies evolved, it started to move into grade 2 toxicity that we started using therapy, mostly because we started to see that those patients were still responding.”
At MD Anderson, these earlier interventions have decreased severity of adverse events.
“It’s rare nowadays to have grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome because we are generally introducing abortive therapy at grade 2,” Dr. Nastoupil said, citing increased use of steroids and tocilizumab.
Currently, no consensus exists for managing these events, partly because clinicians are still learning about best management practices.
“There will be a consensus on management,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “I think that’s needed. The problem is, it will probably evolve as we get more experience with managing these patients. I think there’s been a little hesitation to put something out on paper knowing that a year from now that might change.”
Grading toxicity
In contrast, Dr. Nastoupil said that a consensus has been reached for grading acute toxicity. Of note, fever is now considered an essential element of cytokine release syndrome.
“The first thing we see [with cytokine release syndrome] is fever, generally speaking,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “That will prompt a workup for infection because these patients are going to be neutropenic. And we initiate broad spectrum antimicrobials.”
She said that some patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy have had disseminated fungal infections, so clinicians need to be on the lookout for septic shock.
To assess neurotoxicity, the team at MD Anderson uses an objective scoring system, called “CARTOX.” This helps maintain consistency when facing broadly different neurological presentations.
“There’s such a wide ranging spectrum of patients that are undergoing neurotoxicity you can’t expect someone, even myself, to be consistent when you are trying to tease out how serious it is,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
With CARTOX, nurses can easily score patients and call clinicians with results. Still, this doesn’t eliminate difficulties inherent to managing neurotoxicity, particularly when it is severe.
“I’d say one of the areas that is still very challenging is when [patients with neurotoxicity] are no longer responding,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “You have to be very mindful of seizure activity. We’ve had a couple of patients with status [epilepticus]. You don’t see seizure activity physically, but when you do an EEG, you pick it up.”
Dr. Nastoupil added that most centers are now giving patients prophylactic levetiracetam (Keppra) to lower seizure risk.
Choosing therapy
When selecting between the two therapies currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration – tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) – based on safety, Dr. Nastoupil said that rates of cytokine release syndrome appear similar, but neurotoxicity rates may differ.
“Cytokine release syndrome in my opinion is probably more similar than different in terms of grade 3 or higher because tocilizumab and steroids work quite well in aborting those toxicities,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But neurotoxicity still sticks out in my mind as the most striking difference, where with axicabtagene you see more grade 3 or higher neurotoxicity, though very, very few deaths as a result of this. But it’s very challenging in terms of management.”
According to Dr. Nastoupil, comparisons between CAR T-cell therapies have been complicated by differences in clinical trial methodologies. However, she offered a general conclusion regarding efficacy.
“[W]hat I’ll tell you, at the end of the day, is [that existing CAR T-cell therapies] all seem to sort of settle out around 30%-40% in terms of durable responses,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
Dr. Nastoupil concluded her presentation with an overview and look to the future.
“I do think [CAR T-cell therapy] is transformative, particularly for our chemo refractory patients,” she said. “There is nothing else like it. The problem right now is that it is only durable in 40% of patients. So can we be better at selecting out patients that are more likely to respond? Does introducing this in earlier lines of therapy increase that fraction of patients that are potentially cured?”
Considering these questions, she said: “We need more patients. We need more data. We need longer follow-up to understand the nuances of this therapy.”
Dr. Nastoupil previously reported financial relationships with Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Merck, Novartis, Spectrum, and TG Therapeutics.
GLASGOW – Constant patient monitoring and early intervention with tocilizumab and steroids are essential to the safe delivery of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to a leading expert.
As a clinical researcher at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Loretta Nastoupil, MD has played an active role in the evolution of CAR T-cell therapy, from early trials to ongoing development of treatment protocols. During a presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Dr. Nastoupil discussed leading topics in CAR T-cell therapy, with an emphasis on safe delivery.
“[Toxicity] is something we don’t talk about as much as we should, partly because this therapy works and it’s really exciting,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But the toxicity is not something that I minimize, and it’s very challenging. It’s led us to restructure our inpatient services. It’s led to a lot of sleepless nights. These patients can do very, very well, or they can do very, very poorly in terms of toxicity and I think the most important strategy is recognition and early intervention.”
Monitoring
Early recognition depends on close monitoring, Dr. Nastoupil said, which is carried out by highly trained nursing staff who follow therapy-specific decision algorithms.
“We have nurses that are on the front line,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “They’re the most important group. We have staff that round on [patients] daily, but the nurses are there 24 hours a day. We have a flow sheet where they grade cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity every 8 hours, or if there is an acute change in symptoms or toxicity, they’ll do it in real time.”
Dr. Nastoupil said that if these toxicities are detected, intervention is occurring sooner than it did with some of the first patients to receive CAR-T cell therapy.
“Initially there was a lot of fear surrounding anything that would abort the CAR-T cell therapy,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “There was concern that if you were trying to mitigate some of the toxicity you might have a negative impact on efficacy ... [W]ith the first iteration of studies, generally we were waiting until grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome before initiating either tocilizumab and/or steroids. As the studies evolved, it started to move into grade 2 toxicity that we started using therapy, mostly because we started to see that those patients were still responding.”
At MD Anderson, these earlier interventions have decreased severity of adverse events.
“It’s rare nowadays to have grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome because we are generally introducing abortive therapy at grade 2,” Dr. Nastoupil said, citing increased use of steroids and tocilizumab.
Currently, no consensus exists for managing these events, partly because clinicians are still learning about best management practices.
“There will be a consensus on management,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “I think that’s needed. The problem is, it will probably evolve as we get more experience with managing these patients. I think there’s been a little hesitation to put something out on paper knowing that a year from now that might change.”
Grading toxicity
In contrast, Dr. Nastoupil said that a consensus has been reached for grading acute toxicity. Of note, fever is now considered an essential element of cytokine release syndrome.
“The first thing we see [with cytokine release syndrome] is fever, generally speaking,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “That will prompt a workup for infection because these patients are going to be neutropenic. And we initiate broad spectrum antimicrobials.”
She said that some patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy have had disseminated fungal infections, so clinicians need to be on the lookout for septic shock.
To assess neurotoxicity, the team at MD Anderson uses an objective scoring system, called “CARTOX.” This helps maintain consistency when facing broadly different neurological presentations.
“There’s such a wide ranging spectrum of patients that are undergoing neurotoxicity you can’t expect someone, even myself, to be consistent when you are trying to tease out how serious it is,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
With CARTOX, nurses can easily score patients and call clinicians with results. Still, this doesn’t eliminate difficulties inherent to managing neurotoxicity, particularly when it is severe.
“I’d say one of the areas that is still very challenging is when [patients with neurotoxicity] are no longer responding,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “You have to be very mindful of seizure activity. We’ve had a couple of patients with status [epilepticus]. You don’t see seizure activity physically, but when you do an EEG, you pick it up.”
Dr. Nastoupil added that most centers are now giving patients prophylactic levetiracetam (Keppra) to lower seizure risk.
Choosing therapy
When selecting between the two therapies currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration – tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) – based on safety, Dr. Nastoupil said that rates of cytokine release syndrome appear similar, but neurotoxicity rates may differ.
“Cytokine release syndrome in my opinion is probably more similar than different in terms of grade 3 or higher because tocilizumab and steroids work quite well in aborting those toxicities,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But neurotoxicity still sticks out in my mind as the most striking difference, where with axicabtagene you see more grade 3 or higher neurotoxicity, though very, very few deaths as a result of this. But it’s very challenging in terms of management.”
According to Dr. Nastoupil, comparisons between CAR T-cell therapies have been complicated by differences in clinical trial methodologies. However, she offered a general conclusion regarding efficacy.
“[W]hat I’ll tell you, at the end of the day, is [that existing CAR T-cell therapies] all seem to sort of settle out around 30%-40% in terms of durable responses,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
Dr. Nastoupil concluded her presentation with an overview and look to the future.
“I do think [CAR T-cell therapy] is transformative, particularly for our chemo refractory patients,” she said. “There is nothing else like it. The problem right now is that it is only durable in 40% of patients. So can we be better at selecting out patients that are more likely to respond? Does introducing this in earlier lines of therapy increase that fraction of patients that are potentially cured?”
Considering these questions, she said: “We need more patients. We need more data. We need longer follow-up to understand the nuances of this therapy.”
Dr. Nastoupil previously reported financial relationships with Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Merck, Novartis, Spectrum, and TG Therapeutics.
GLASGOW – Constant patient monitoring and early intervention with tocilizumab and steroids are essential to the safe delivery of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to a leading expert.
As a clinical researcher at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Loretta Nastoupil, MD has played an active role in the evolution of CAR T-cell therapy, from early trials to ongoing development of treatment protocols. During a presentation at the annual meeting of the British Society for Haematology, Dr. Nastoupil discussed leading topics in CAR T-cell therapy, with an emphasis on safe delivery.
“[Toxicity] is something we don’t talk about as much as we should, partly because this therapy works and it’s really exciting,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But the toxicity is not something that I minimize, and it’s very challenging. It’s led us to restructure our inpatient services. It’s led to a lot of sleepless nights. These patients can do very, very well, or they can do very, very poorly in terms of toxicity and I think the most important strategy is recognition and early intervention.”
Monitoring
Early recognition depends on close monitoring, Dr. Nastoupil said, which is carried out by highly trained nursing staff who follow therapy-specific decision algorithms.
“We have nurses that are on the front line,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “They’re the most important group. We have staff that round on [patients] daily, but the nurses are there 24 hours a day. We have a flow sheet where they grade cytokine release syndrome and neurotoxicity every 8 hours, or if there is an acute change in symptoms or toxicity, they’ll do it in real time.”
Dr. Nastoupil said that if these toxicities are detected, intervention is occurring sooner than it did with some of the first patients to receive CAR-T cell therapy.
“Initially there was a lot of fear surrounding anything that would abort the CAR-T cell therapy,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “There was concern that if you were trying to mitigate some of the toxicity you might have a negative impact on efficacy ... [W]ith the first iteration of studies, generally we were waiting until grade 3 or higher cytokine release syndrome before initiating either tocilizumab and/or steroids. As the studies evolved, it started to move into grade 2 toxicity that we started using therapy, mostly because we started to see that those patients were still responding.”
At MD Anderson, these earlier interventions have decreased severity of adverse events.
“It’s rare nowadays to have grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome because we are generally introducing abortive therapy at grade 2,” Dr. Nastoupil said, citing increased use of steroids and tocilizumab.
Currently, no consensus exists for managing these events, partly because clinicians are still learning about best management practices.
“There will be a consensus on management,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “I think that’s needed. The problem is, it will probably evolve as we get more experience with managing these patients. I think there’s been a little hesitation to put something out on paper knowing that a year from now that might change.”
Grading toxicity
In contrast, Dr. Nastoupil said that a consensus has been reached for grading acute toxicity. Of note, fever is now considered an essential element of cytokine release syndrome.
“The first thing we see [with cytokine release syndrome] is fever, generally speaking,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “That will prompt a workup for infection because these patients are going to be neutropenic. And we initiate broad spectrum antimicrobials.”
She said that some patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy have had disseminated fungal infections, so clinicians need to be on the lookout for septic shock.
To assess neurotoxicity, the team at MD Anderson uses an objective scoring system, called “CARTOX.” This helps maintain consistency when facing broadly different neurological presentations.
“There’s such a wide ranging spectrum of patients that are undergoing neurotoxicity you can’t expect someone, even myself, to be consistent when you are trying to tease out how serious it is,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
With CARTOX, nurses can easily score patients and call clinicians with results. Still, this doesn’t eliminate difficulties inherent to managing neurotoxicity, particularly when it is severe.
“I’d say one of the areas that is still very challenging is when [patients with neurotoxicity] are no longer responding,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “You have to be very mindful of seizure activity. We’ve had a couple of patients with status [epilepticus]. You don’t see seizure activity physically, but when you do an EEG, you pick it up.”
Dr. Nastoupil added that most centers are now giving patients prophylactic levetiracetam (Keppra) to lower seizure risk.
Choosing therapy
When selecting between the two therapies currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration – tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) and axicabtagene ciloleucel (Yescarta) – based on safety, Dr. Nastoupil said that rates of cytokine release syndrome appear similar, but neurotoxicity rates may differ.
“Cytokine release syndrome in my opinion is probably more similar than different in terms of grade 3 or higher because tocilizumab and steroids work quite well in aborting those toxicities,” Dr. Nastoupil said. “But neurotoxicity still sticks out in my mind as the most striking difference, where with axicabtagene you see more grade 3 or higher neurotoxicity, though very, very few deaths as a result of this. But it’s very challenging in terms of management.”
According to Dr. Nastoupil, comparisons between CAR T-cell therapies have been complicated by differences in clinical trial methodologies. However, she offered a general conclusion regarding efficacy.
“[W]hat I’ll tell you, at the end of the day, is [that existing CAR T-cell therapies] all seem to sort of settle out around 30%-40% in terms of durable responses,” Dr. Nastoupil said.
Dr. Nastoupil concluded her presentation with an overview and look to the future.
“I do think [CAR T-cell therapy] is transformative, particularly for our chemo refractory patients,” she said. “There is nothing else like it. The problem right now is that it is only durable in 40% of patients. So can we be better at selecting out patients that are more likely to respond? Does introducing this in earlier lines of therapy increase that fraction of patients that are potentially cured?”
Considering these questions, she said: “We need more patients. We need more data. We need longer follow-up to understand the nuances of this therapy.”
Dr. Nastoupil previously reported financial relationships with Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Merck, Novartis, Spectrum, and TG Therapeutics.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM BSH 2019