Search

The panel would like to acknowledge the work of Klizia Marinoni and Delanie Young, from the Scientific and Medical Division at ESMO, for the project coordination and editorial assistance. None declared. CB reports honoraria from Roche/Genentech, Janssen, BeiGene, Novartis, Pfizer, Incyte, AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Celltrion, MorphoSys, Regeneron; he reports consulting or advisory role: Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Roche, Pfizer, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Incyte, Regeneron, MorphoSys, Novartis; he reports speaker's engagement: Roche, Janssen, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Pfizer, Gilead Sciences; he reports research funding: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, Celltrion, Merck Sharp & Dohme (MSD), Pfizer, Amgen. MD reports honoraria as Advisory Board Member of AstraZeneca, Bayer, BeiGene, Celgene, Genmab, Gilead, Incyte, Janssen, Lilly, MorphoSys, Novartis, Roche; he reports honoraria for speaker's engagement from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Roche; he reports institutional research grants from AbbVie, Bayer, Gilead, Celgene, Janssen, Roche. AA-L has declared no conflicts of interest. JA reports personal financial interests as advisory board and invited speaker from Incyte, advisory board from Mallinckrodt, advisory board and invited speaker from Novartis, advisory board and invited speaker from Pfizer; she reports non-financial interests as principal investigator from Incyte, principal investigator from Novartis. LA received advisory honoraria from Roche, Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Verastem, Eusa Pharma, Incyte, ADC Therapeutics and Gilead; research support from Gilead, and travel expenses from Roche, Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, and Eusa Pharma; speakers bureau from Novartis. CB has declared no conflicts of interest. LB reports Advisory Committee activities for AbbVie, Amgen, Astellas, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead, Hexal, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Menarini, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics and has research support from Bayer and Jazz Pharmaceuticals. PC has declared no conflicts of interest. MGDP has declared no conflicts of interest. MD reports personal fees from Amgen, personal fees from Takeda, personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from BeiGene, personal fees from BMS, outside the submitted work. SD reports personal financial interests as advisory board, invited speaker, fellow funding, and coordinating PI from BeiGene, writing engagement from Karger, advisory board and coordinating PI from Sanofi, funding, and other from Janssen; she reports non-financial interests as advisory role at British Society for Haematology Lymphoma Special Interest Group, advisory role at Lymphoma Action, member of board of directors at WMUK Charity. HTE has declared no conflicts of interest. RF reports honoraria for advisory boards and/or speaker bureau from Janssen, Gilead, AbbVie, Amgen, Novartis, Roche, Incyte, Pfizer, all outside the submitted work. PG reports grants and personal fees from AbbVie, grants and personal fees from Acerta/AstraZeneca, personal fees from BeiGene, personal fees from Celgene/Juno/BMS, grants and personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Lilly/Loxo, personal fees from MEI, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from Sanofi, personal fees from ArQule/MSD, outside the submitted work;, MGdS reports grants, personal fees, non-financial support and other from Gilead Sciences, grants from AstraZeneca, personal fees, non-financial support, and other from Janssen Cilag, personal fees and non-financial support from Roche, non-financial support from AbbVie, personal fees and non-financial support from BMS, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD, personal fees and non-financial support from Takeda, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from ADC Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. JG reports personal fees from AbbVie, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from BMS/Celgene, grants and personal fees from Janssen, personal fees from Kite/Gilead, personal fees from MorphoSys, personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from TG Therapeutics, outside the submitted work. RH has had a consultant or advisory relationship with Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, AbbVie, BMS, Novartis, PharmaMar, and Takeda; has received honoraria from Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, BMS, PharmaMar, and Takeda; has received research funding from Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, BMS, Novartis, and Takeda. CH reports grants and personal fees from Novartis, grants and personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Sierra Oncology, personal fees from CTI pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Jannsen, personal fees from Geron, grants and personal fees from AOP Orphan Pharma, personal fees from Galecto, grants, personal fees and other from Constellation, outside the submitted work. MH reports personal fees from Novartis, personal fees from Pfizer, personal fees from Roche, personal fees from AbbVie, personal fees from Daiichi Sankyo, personal fees from Bayer Pharma AG, personal fees from Jazz Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from BMS, personal fees from Tolremo, outside the submitted work. BK has received honoraria for lectures from Ipsen, Novartis and MSD (all outside of the submitted work). J-JK reports consulting fees and honoraria from Novartis, consulting fees from AbbVie, honoraria from AOP Orphan Pharma, participation on a monitoring board or advisory board from BMS/Celgene, participation on a monitoring board or advisory board from Incyte. NK reports grants and honoraria from Neovii, honoraria from Sanofi, grants and honoraria from Jazz, grants and honoraria from Celgene, grants and honoraria from Riemser, honoraria from Gilead/Kite, honorarium from AOP Oprhan Pharma, grants and honorarium from Novartis, honorarium from Amgen. PM reports personal fees from Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, AbbVie, Sanofi, outside the submitted work. JP has declared no conflicts of interest. FP has declared no conflicts of interest. DR received honoraria from Incyte, Novartis Pharma, Pfizer; clinical trial steering committee membership: Novartis; membership on advisory boards: Incyte, Novartis Pharma, Pfizer. J-MR reports grants and honoraria from Novartis, Amgen, Pfizer, Takeda, Incyte, and Servier. TR has declared no conflicts of interest. JF-M reports consulting and advisory boards honoraria (received by CUN) from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Karyopharm, MSD, Novartis, Takeda, Sanofi, SecuraBio, Regeneron, Roche, outside the submitted work. VS has declared no conflicts of interest. GFS reports personal fees and other from AbbVie, other from Amgen, other from Astellas, other from Boehringer-Ingelheim, grants, personal fees and other from Celgene, other from Helsinn Healthcare, grants, personal fees, and other from Janssen-Cilag, grants and other from Novartis, other from Onconova, grants, personal fees and other from Roche, and other from Takeda, outside the submitted work. PS reports honoraria from Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Karyopharm, SkylineDx, Takeda, and research support from Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda, BMS, SkylineDx, Karyopharm, all outside the submitted work. MvL-T has received travel grants and honoraria from Celgene, Gilead, Chugai, Janssen, Novartis, Amgen, Takeda, BMS, Medac, Oncopeptides, Merck, CDDF, Pfizer, Medac, Thermo Fisher, AstraZeneca; is a consultant for Celgene, Gilead, Oncopeptides, MSD, 4D Pharma, Janssen, Shionogi and received research funding from BMBF, Deutsche Jose Carreras Leukämie-Stiftung, IZKF Jena, Novartis, Gilead, Deutsche Krebshilfe, Celgene, Oncopeptides, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). CW has declared no conflicts of interest. GP reports grants from Amgen, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck, grants and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from BMS, grants from Lilly, grants and personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. FP reports grants from Novartis, Celgene, BMS, Abbvie, Karyopharma, Janssen. GP reports grants from Amgen, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Merck, grants and non-financial support from AstraZeneca, grants and personal fees from Roche, grants and personal fees from BMS, grants from Lilly, grants and personal fees from MSD, grants and personal fees from Novartis, outside the submitted work. Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has created enormous challenges for the clinical management of patients with hematological malignancies (HMs), raising questions about the optimal care of this patient group. Methods: This consensus manuscript aims at discussing clinical evidence and providing expert advice on statements related to the management of HMs in the COVID-19 pandemic. For this purpose, an international consortium was established including a steering committee, which prepared six working packages addressing significant clinical questions from the COVID-19 diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation strategies to specific HMs management in the pandemic. During a virtual consensus meeting, including global experts and lead by the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Hematology Association, statements were discussed and voted upon. When a consensus could not be reached, the panel revised statements to develop consensual clinical guidance. Results and conclusion: The expert panel agreed on 33 statements, reflecting a consensus, which will guide clinical decision making for patients with hematological neoplasms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has created enormous challenges for the clinical management of patients with hematological malignancies (HMs), raising questions about the optimal care of this patient group. Methods: This consensus manuscript aims at discussing clinical evidence and providing expert advice on statements related to the management of HMs in the COVID-19 pandemic. For this purpose, an international consortium was established including a steering committee, which prepared six working packages addressing significant clinical questions from the COVID-19 diagnosis, treatment, and mitigation strategies to specific HMs management in the pandemic. During a virtual consensus meeting, including global experts and lead by the European Society for Medical Oncology and the European Hematology Association, statements were discussed and voted upon. When a consensus could not be reached, the panel revised statements to develop consensual clinical guidance. Results and conclusion: The expert panel agreed on 33 statements, reflecting a consensus, which will guide clinical decision making for patients with hematological neoplasms during the COVID-19 pandemic. © 2022 The Authors

Zanubrutinib is a selective Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor evaluated in multiple B-cell malignancy studies. We constructed a pooled safety analysis to better understand zanubrutinib-associated treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and identify treatment-limiting toxicities. Data were pooled from 6 studies (N 5 779). Assessments included type, incidence, severity, and outcome of TEAEs. Median age was 65 years; 20% were $75 years old. Most patients had Waldenstrom € macroglobulinemia (33%), chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (29%), or mantle-cell lymphoma (19%). Median treatment duration was 26 months (range, 0.1-65); 16% of patients were treated for $3 years. Common nonhematologic TEAEs were upper respiratory tract infection (URI, 39%), rash (27%), bruising (25%), musculoskeletal pain (24%), diarrhea (23%), cough (21%), pneumonia (21%), urinary tract infection (UTI), and fatigue (15% each). Most common grade $3 TEAEs were pneumonia (11%), hypertension (5%), URI, UTI, sepsis, diarrhea, and musculoskeletal pain (2% each). Atrial fibrillation and major hemorrhage occurred in 3% and 4% of patients, respectively. Atrial fibrillation, hypertension, and diarrhea occurred at lower rates than those reported historically for ibrutinib. Grade $3 adverse events included neutropenia (23%), thrombocytopenia (8%), and anemia (8%). Serious TEAEs included pneumonia (11%), sepsis (2%), and pyrexia (2%).Treatment discontinuations and dose reductions for adverse events occurred in 10% and 8% of patients, respectively. Thirty-nine patients (4%) had fatal TEAEs, including pneumonia (n 5 9), sepsis (n 5 4), unspecified cause (n 5 4), and multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (n 5 5). This analysis demonstrates that zanubrutinib is generally well tolerated with a safety profile consistent with known BTK inhibitor toxicities; these were manageable and mostly reversible. © 2022 by The American Society of Hematology.

Poster-Abstract

Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibition is an effective treatment approach for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). The phase 3 ASPEN study compared the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib, a first-generation BTK inhibitor, with zanubrutinib, a novel highly selective BTK inhibitor, in patients with WM. Patients with MYD88L265P disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with ibrutinib or zanubrutinib. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a complete response (CR) or a very good partial response (VGPR) by independent review. Key secondary end points included major response rate (MRR), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), disease burden, and safety. A total of 201 patients were randomized, and 199 received ‡1 dose of study treatment. No patient achieved a CR. Twenty-nine (28%) zanubrutinib patients and 19 (19%) ibrutinib patients achieved a VGPR, a nonstatistically significant difference (P 5 .09). MRRs were 77% and 78%, respectively. Median DOR and PFS were not reached 84% and 85% of ibrutinib and zanubrutinib patients were progression free at 18 months. Atrial fibrillation, contusion, diarrhea, peripheral edema, hemorrhage, muscle spasms, and pneumonia, as well as adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, were less common among zanubrutinib recipients. Incidence of neutropenia was higher with zanubrutinib, although grade ‡3 infection rates were similar in both arms (1.2 and 1.1 events per 100 person-months). These results demonstrate that zanubrutinib and ibrutinib are highly effective in the treatment of WM, but zanubrutinib treatment was associated with a trend toward better response quality and less toxicity, particularly cardiovascular toxicity. © 2020 American Society of Hematology. All rights reserved.

Waldenström macroglobulinaemia is an indolent B-cell lymphoma with clearly defined criteria for diagnosis, initiation of therapy, and response, which was established by consensus panels at previous International Workshops for Waldenström Macroglobulinaemia (IWWM). The treatment options for Waldenström macroglobulinaemia continued to be researched after the publication of the eighth IWWM consensus recommendations in 2016, and at the tenth IWWM in New York, USA (October, 2018) an international consensus panel was formed to update treatment recommendations. Participants were selected as members of the consensus panel based on their expertise on Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. The initial live discussion took place during the tenth IWWM meeting and two separate teleconferences were held in June, 2019, and January, 2020, to refine recommendations. No external or financial support was received for the elaboration of these recommendations. According to these updated consensus recommendations, alkylating drugs (bendamustine, cyclophosphamide) and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib), both in combination with rituximab, as well as BTK inhibitors (ibrutinib), alone or in combination with rituximab, are preferred first-line therapy options for symptomatic patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. In previously treated patients with Waldenström macroglobulinaemia who had an initial durable response, reuse of a previous regimen or another primary therapy regimen are acceptable options. Novel BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib, zanubrutinib, tirabrutinib) and the BCL2 antagonist venetoclax appear safe and active, and represent emerging options for the treatment of Waldenström macroglobulinaemia. The choice of therapy should be guided by the patient's clinical profile, genomic features, and drug availability. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd

Background: Chemoimmunotherapy is typically the standard of care for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia; however, infectious and hematologic toxic effects are problematic. Acalabrutinib is a selective, potent Bruton tyrosine-kinase inhibitor. The aim of this trial was to evaluate the activity and safety of acalabrutinib in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Methods: This single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 trial was done in 19 European academic centres in France, Italy, Greece, the Netherlands, and the UK, and eight academic centres in the USA. Eligible patients were 18 years or older and had treatment naive (declined or not eligible for chemoimmunotherapy) or relapsed or refractory (at least one previous therapy) Waldenström macroglobulinemia that required treatment, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, and received no previous Bruton tyrosine-kinase inhibitor therapy. Patients received 100 mg oral acalabrutinib twice per day in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed overall response (at least a minor response) according to the 6th International Workshop for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (IWWM) and the modified 3rd IWWM workshop criteria. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02180724, and is ongoing, but no longer enrolling. Findings: Between Sept 8, 2014, and Dec 24, 2015, 122 patients were assessed for eligibility, of which 106 (87%) patients were given acalabrutinib (14 were treatment naive and 92 had relapsed or refractory disease). With a median follow-up of 27·4 months (IQR 26·0–29·7), 13 (93% [95% CI 66–100]) of 14 treatment naive patients achieved an overall response and 86 (93% [86–98]) of 92 relapsed or refractory patients per both the modified 3rd and 6th IWWM criteria. Seven (50%) of 14 treatment naive patients and 23 (25%) of 92 relapsed or refractory patients discontinued treatment on study. Grade 3–4 adverse events occurring in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (17 [16%] of 106 patients) and pneumonia (7 [7%]). Grade 3–4 atrial fibrillation occurred in one (1%) patient and grade 3–4 bleeding occurred in three (3%) patients. The most common serious adverse events were lower respiratory tract infection (n=7 [7%]), pneumonia (n=7 [7%]), pyrexia (n=4 [4%]), cellulitis (n=3 [3%]), fall (n=3 [3%]), and sepsis (n=3 [3%]). Pneumonia (n=5 [5%]) and lower respiratory tract infection (n=4 [4%]) were considered treatment related. One treatment-related death was reported (intracranial hematoma). Interpretation: This study provides evidence that acalabrutinib is active as single-agent therapy with a manageable safety profile in patients with treatment-naive, or relapse or refractory Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Further studies are needed to establish its efficacy against current standard treatments and to investigate whether outcomes can be improved with combination therapies. Funding: Acerta Pharma. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd

In the light of the COVID-19 pandemic, the International Workshop on Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (IWWM) Treatment Recommendations Panel felt the need to provide a consensus statement for the management of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM) patients during this challenging time. We followed the current recommendations by the American Society of Hematology, which have been modified accordingly to fit the specific realities associated with the management of WM. In this Consensus Statement, the Panel addresses questions related to treatment initiation, preferred therapies, minimizing visit to clinics and infusions centers, supportive care and guidance for WM patients in clinical trials. Finally, we also provide information on timing and appropriateness of testing and management of COVID-19 infected patients, as well as ways to get physicians and patients involved in registry studies that could help others. Copyright © 2020 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the European Hematology Association. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) lacking activating mutations in the MYD88 gene (MYD88WT) have demonstrated relatively poor outcomes to ibrutinib monotherapy, with no major responses reported in a phase 2 pivotal study. Zanubrutinib is a novel, selective Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor designed to maximize BTK occupancy and minimize off-target activity. The ASPEN study consisted of a randomized comparison of zanubrutinib and ibrutinib efficacy and safety in patients with WM who have the MYD88 mutation, as well as a separate cohort of patients without MYD88 mutation (MYD88WT) or with unknown mutational status who received zanubrutinib. Results from the latter single-arm cohort are reported herein. Efficacy endpoints included overall, major and complete (CR) or very good partial response (VGPR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS). Twenty-eight patients (23 relapsed/ refractory; 5 treatment-naïve) were enrolled, including 26 with centrally confirmed MYD88WT disease and 2 with unknown MYD88 mutational status. At a median follow-up of 17.9 months, 7 of 26 MYD88WT patients (27%) had achieved a VGPR and 50% a major response (partial response or better); there were no CRs. At 18 months, the estimated PFS and OS rates were 68% and 88%, respectively, while the median DOR had not been reached. Two patients discontinued zanubrutinib due to adverse events. Treatment-emergent hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and major hemorrhages were reported in 3, 1 and 2 patients (including 1 concurrent with enoxaparin therapy), respectively. Results of this substudy demonstrate that zanubrutinib monotherapy can induce high quality responses in patients with MYD88WT WM. This trial is registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT #03053440. © 2020 by The American Society of Hematology

Bing Neel syndrome is a rare disease manifestation of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia that results from infiltration of the central nervous system by malignant lymphoplasmacytic cells. In this guideline we describe the clinical symptoms, as well as the appropriate laboratory and radiological studies, that can aid in the diagnosis. The presentation of Bing Neel syndrome may be very diverse, and includes headaches, cognitive deficits, paresis, and psychiatric symptoms. The syndrome can present in patients with known Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia, even in the absence of systemic progression, but also in previously undiagnosed patients. Diagnostic work-up should include cerebral spinal fluid analysis with multiparameter flow cytometry to establish B-cell clonality, protein electrophoresis and immunofixation for the detection and classification of a monoclonal protein as well as molecular diagnostic testing for immunoglobulin gene rearrangement and mutated MYD88. MRI of the brain and spinal cord is also essential. The second challenge is to expand our knowledge of prognosis and treatment outcome. Prospective clinical trials on Bing Neel syndrome patients that employ uniform treatment along with appropriate laboratory cerebral spinal fluid assessments and standardized MRI protocols will be invaluable, constituting a significant step forward in delineating treatment outcome for this intriguing disease manifestation. © 2017 Ferrata Storti Foundation.

Paraproteinaemic neuropathies are a heterogeneous group of disorders most frequently associated with IgM monoclonal gammopathies including Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (WM). Their consequences are significant for affected patients, and their management challenging for their physicians. The variability in clinical presentation and time course hamper classification and management. The indications for invasive investigations such as cerebrospinal fluid analysis, nerve conduction tests and sensory nerve biopsies are unclear, and the optimum way to measure clinical response to treatment unknown. When to intervene and and how to treat, also present challenges to physicians. As part of its latest deliberations at the International Workshops on WM (IWWM) in London, UK (August 2014), the IWWM8 panel have proposed a consensus approach to the diagnosis and management of peripheral neuropathies associated with IgM monoclonal gammopathies, including WM. Importantly, a consensus regarding the use of clinical outcome measures and recommended models of care for this group of patients is discussed, as well as appropriate treatment interventions. © 2017 John Wiley & Sons Ltd

Patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) lacking activating mutations in the MYD88 gene (MYD88WT) have demonstrated relatively poor outcomes to ibrutinib monotherapy, with no major responses reported in a phase 2 pivotal study. Zanubrutinib is a novel, selective Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor designed to maximize BTK occupancy and minimize off-target activity. The ASPEN study consisted of a randomized comparison of zanubrutinib and ibrutinib efficacy and safety in patients with WM who have the MYD88 mutation, as well as a separate cohort of patients without MYD88 mutation (MYD88WT) or with unknown mutational status who received zanubrutinib. Results from the latter single-arm cohort are reported herein. Efficacy endpoints included overall, major and complete (CR) or very good partial response (VGPR) rates, progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS). Twenty-eight patients (23 relapsed/refractory; 5 treatment-naïve) were enrolled, including 26 with centrally confirmed MYD88WT disease and 2 with unknown MYD88 mutational status. At a median follow-up of 17.9 months, 7 of 26 MYD88WT patients (27%) had achieved a VGPR and 50% a major response (partial response or better); there were no CRs. At 18 months, the estimated PFS and OS rates were 68% and 88%, respectively, while the median DOR had not been reached. Two patients discontinued zanubrutinib due to adverse events. Treatment-emergent hypertension, atrial fibrillation, and major hemorrhages were reported in 3, 1 and 2 patients (including 1 concurrent with enoxaparin therapy), respectively. Results of this substudy demonstrate that zanubrutinib monotherapy can induce high quality responses in patients with MYD88WT WM. This trial is registered on www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT #03053440.