Search

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare phenomenon with dismal prognosis, where no standard therapy exists. Since the covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor ibrutinib is effective in relapsed/refractory MCL and penetrates the blood–brain barrier (BBB), on behalf of Fondazione Italiana Linfomi and European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network we performed a multicenter retrospective international study to investigate the outcomes of patients treated with ibrutinib or chemoimmunotherapy. In this observational study, we recruited patients with MCL with CNS involvement at relapse who received CNS-directed therapy between 2000 and 2019. The primary objective was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients treated with ibrutinib or BBB crossing chemotherapy. A propensity score based on a multivariable binary regression model was applied to balance treatment cohorts. Eighty-eight patients were included. The median age at study entry was 65 years (range, 39-87), 76% were males, and the median time from lymphoma diagnosis to CNS relapse was 16 months (range, 1-122). Patients were treated with ibrutinib (n = 29, ibrutinib cohort), BBB crossing chemotherapy (ie, high-dose methotrexate ± cytarabine; n = 29, BBB cohort), or miscellaneous treatments (n = 30, other therapy cohort). Both median OS (16.8 vs 4.4 months; P = .007) and median progression-free survival (PFS) (13.1 vs 3.0 months; P = .009) were superior in the ibrutinib cohort compared with the BBB cohort. Multivariable Cox regression model revealed that ibrutinib therapeutic choice was the strongest independent favorable predictive factor for both OS (hazard ratio [HR], 6.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.2-21.3; P < .001) and PFS (HR, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.7-12.5; P = .002), followed by CNS progression of disease (POD) >24 months from first MCL diagnosis (HR for death, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.1-5.3; P = .026; HR for death or progression, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.1-4.6; P = .023). The addition of intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy to systemic CNS-directed therapy was not associated with superior OS (P = .502) as the morphological variant (classical vs others, P = .118). Ibrutinib was associated with superior survival compared with BBB-penetrating chemotherapy in patients with CNS relapse of MCL and should be considered as a therapeutic option.

•Ibrutinib provided superior survival compared with BBB crossing chemotherapy in patients with CNS relapse of mantle cell lymphoma.•Addition of intrathecal therapy was not associated with improved OS, and CNS POD ≤24 months was an independent adverse prognostic factor.

Prophylactic high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) is often used for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients at high risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse, despite limited evidence demonstrating efficacy or the optimal delivery method. We conducted a retrospective, international analysis of 1384 patients receiving HD-MTX CNS prophylaxis either intercalated (i-HD-MTX) (n = 749) or at the end (n = 635) of R-CHOP/R-CHOP-like therapy (EOT). There were 78 CNS relapses (3-year rate 5.7%), with no difference between i-HD-MTX and EOT: 5.7% vs 5.8%, P = .98; 3-year difference: 0.04% (−2.0% to 3.1%). Conclusions were unchanged on adjusting for baseline prognostic factors or on 6-month landmark analysis (n = 1253). In patients with a high CNS international prognostic index (n = 600), the 3-year CNS relapse rate was 9.1%, with no difference between i-HD-MTX and EOT. On multivariable analysis, increasing age and renal/adrenal involvement were the only independent risk factors for CNS relapse. Concurrent intrathecal prophylaxis was not associated with a reduction in CNS relapse. R-CHOP delays of ≥7 days were significantly increased with i-HD-MTX vs EOT, with 308 of 1573 (19.6%) i-HD-MTX treatments resulting in a delay to subsequent R-CHOP (median 8 days). Increased risk of delay occurred in older patients when delivery was later than day 10 in the R-CHOP cycle. In summary, we found no evidence that EOT delivery increases CNS relapse risk vs i-HD-MTX. Findings in high-risk subgroups were unchanged. Rates of CNS relapse in this HD-MTX-treated cohort were similar to comparable cohorts receiving infrequent CNS prophylaxis. If HD-MTX is still considered for certain high-risk patients, delivery could be deferred until R-CHOP completion.

Prophylactic high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) is often used for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients at high risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse, despite limited evidence demonstrating efficacy or the optimal delivery method. We conducted a retrospective, international analysis of 1384 patients receiving HD-MTX CNS prophylaxis either intercalated (i-HD-MTX) (n = 749) or at the end (n = 635) of R-CHOP/R-CHOP-like therapy (EOT). There were 78 CNS relapses (3-year rate 5.7%), with no difference between i-HD-MTX and EOT: 5.7% vs 5.8%, P= .98; 3-year difference: 0.04% (−2.0% to 3.1%). Conclusions were unchanged on adjusting for baseline prognostic factors or on 6-month landmark analysis (n = 1253). In patients with a high CNS international prognostic index (n = 600), the 3-year CNS relapse rate was 9.1%, with no difference between i-HD-MTX and EOT. On multivariable analysis, increasing age and renal/adrenal involvement were the only independent risk factors for CNS relapse. Concurrent intrathecal prophylaxis was not associated with a reduction in CNS relapse. R-CHOP delays of ≥7 days were significantly increased with i-HD-MTX vs EOT, with 308 of 1573 (19.6%) i-HD-MTX treatments resulting in a delay to subsequent R-CHOP (median 8 days). Increased risk of delay occurred in older patients when delivery was later than day 10 in the R-CHOP cycle. In summary, we found no evidence that EOT delivery increases CNS relapse risk vs i-HD-MTX. Findings in high-risk subgroups were unchanged. Rates of CNS relapse in this HD-MTX-treated cohort were similar to comparable cohorts receiving infrequent CNS prophylaxis. If HD-MTX is still considered for certain high-risk patients, delivery could be deferred until R-CHOP completion.

This open-label phase 2 study (CONTRALTO) assessed the safety and efficacy of BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) plus rituximab (R), and VEN plus bendamustine (B) and R, vs B + R (BR) alone in relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma. Patients in the chemotherapy-free arm (arm A: VEN + R) received VEN 800 mg/d plus R 375 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. After a safety run-in with VEN 600 mg, patients in the chemotherapy-containing cohort were randomized to either VEN + BR (arm B; VEN 800 mg/d for 1 year + 6 cycles of BR [B 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 and R 375 mg/m2 on day 1]) or 6 cycles of BR (arm C). Overall, 163 patients were analyzed (9 in the safety run-in and 52, 51, and 51 in arms A, B, and C, respectively). Complete metabolic/complete response rates were 17% (arm A), 75% (arm B), and 69% (arm C). Of patients in arm B, only 61% received ≥90% of the planned B dose vs 96% of patients in arm C. More frequent hematologic toxicity resulted in more reduced dosing/treatment discontinuation in arm B vs arm C. Rates of grade 3/4 adverse events were 51.9%, 93.9%, and 60.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. VEN + BR led to increased toxicity and lower dose intensity of BR than in arm C, but efficacy was similar. Optimizing dose and schedule to maintain BR dose intensity may improve efficacy and tolerability of VEN + BR, while VEN + R data warrant further study. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02187861.

This open-label phase 2 study (CONTRALTO) assessed the safety and efficacy of BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) plus rituximab (R), and VEN plus bendamustine (B) and R, vs B + R (BR) alone in relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma. Patients in the chemotherapy-free arm (arm A: VEN + R) received VEN 800 mg/d plus R 375 mg/m2on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12. After a safety run-in with VEN 600 mg, patients in the chemotherapy-containing cohort were randomized to either VEN + BR (arm B; VEN 800 mg/d for 1 year + 6 cycles of BR [B 90 mg/m2on days 1 and 2 and R 375 mg/m2on day 1]) or 6 cycles of BR (arm C). Overall, 163 patients were analyzed (9 in the safety run-in and 52, 51, and 51 in arms A, B, and C, respectively). Complete metabolic/complete response rates were 17% (arm A), 75% (arm B), and 69% (arm C). Of patients in arm B, only 61% received ≥90% of the planned B dose vs 96% of patients in arm C. More frequent hematologic toxicity resulted in more reduced dosing/treatment discontinuation in arm B vs arm C. Rates of grade 3/4 adverse events were 51.9%, 93.9%, and 60.0% in arms A, B, and C, respectively. VEN + BR led to increased toxicity and lower dose intensity of BR than in arm C, but efficacy was similar. Optimizing dose and schedule to maintain BR dose intensity may improve efficacy and tolerability of VEN + BR, while VEN + R data warrant further study. This study was registered at www.clinicaltrials.govas #NCT02187861.

Background: Interim PET (PET-2), performed after two cycles of chemotherapy (CT), is widely adopted to select patients (pt) with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL), who might benefit from omitting radiotherapy (RT) or reducing the number of CT cycles in early stages, as well as intensifying or de-escalating first-line therapy in advanced stages. Furthermore, PET-2 has prognostic value in the front-line and in the salvage treatment. In a retrospective multicenter Italian study on patients experiencing failure of first-line treatment, we recently observed that PET-2 seems to be an early unfavorable predictor for subsequent salvage high-dose (HD) CT and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT).

Introduction:

Introduction: In the general HIV negative population, patients (pts) with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or high grade B cell lymphoma (HGBCL) carrying MYC rearrangements and BCL2 and/or BCL-6 translocations [double hit (DHL) or triple hit lymphomas (THL)] have shown a dismal prognosis when treated with standard R-CHOP and are frequently candidates to intensive therapeutic regimens, without having a standard of care. Moreover, several authors have demonstrated a negative prognostic impact of isolated MYC rearrangements [single hit lymphomas (SHL)] and the best therapeutic approach for SHL are even less clear. In HIV-associated “non Burkitt” large B cell lymphomas (Ly), scanty data are available on the prevalence and the clinical and prognostic impact of MYC rearrangements, with or without BCL2 and BCL6 concomitant translocations. Due to the peculiar biology and pathogenesis of HIV-associated Ly, data from HIV negative population cannot be simply translated to the HIV positive pts.

Bastos-Oreiro: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; BMS-Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Arcaini: Celgene, Roche, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead: Other: Travel expenses; Bayer, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Roche, Sandoz, Janssen-Cilag, VERASTEM: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Rossi: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tucci: janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentili: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Wilson: Takeda: Other: Conference fees; Janssen: Other: Conference fees; Abbvie: Honoraria. Eyre: Janssen: Honoraria; Secura Bio: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead/KITE: Honoraria, Other: Travel support for conferences, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel to conferences; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Beigene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ahearne: Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Schorb: Roche: Research Funding; Riemser Pharma GmbH: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Ku: Antegene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Genor Biopharma: Consultancy. Narkhede: Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genmab: Other: Medical writing support, Research Funding; TG Therapeautics: Research Funding. Lewis: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Patents & Royalties; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Øvlisen: Abbvie: Other: Travel expenses. Santarsiere: Janssen: Honoraria. Shah: Abbvie, Janssen and Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roulin: Janssen: Other: Travel and meetings. Manos: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Travel and meetings. Hamad: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Lopez-Garcia: Roche: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Travel and accommodation grants; Janssen: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Advisor, Travel and accommodation grants, Research Funding; Abbvie: Other: Speaker Honoraria, Advisor, Travel and accommodation grants; Celgene: Other: Speaker Honoraria; Fresenius: Other: Speaker Honoraria; Novonordisk: Other: Speaker Honoraria. El-Galaly: ROCHE Ltd: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Abbvie: Other: Speakers fee. Cheah: Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Loxo/Lilly: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory and travel expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory; Ascentage pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: advisory. Ferreri: Gilead, Novartis, Juno, PletixaPharm, Roche, Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS, Beigene, Pharmacyclics, Hutchison Medipharma, Amgen, Genmab, ADC Therapeutics, Gilead, Novartis, Pfizer: Research Funding. Fox: Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: speaker fees. Cwynarski: Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Atara: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: travel to scientific conferences, Speakers Bureau; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Other: travel to scientific conferences, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: travel to scientific conferences; Roche: Consultancy, Other: travel to scientific conferences, Speakers Bureau; BMS/Celgene: Other: travel to scientific conferences. McKay: Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; KITE: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Beigene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) isolability, rate of viral replication, HIV phenotype, type 1 and type 2 cytokine production, and CD4 counts were cross sectionally analyzed in 63 HIV seropositive (HIV+) individuals to establish possible correlations between virologic and immunologic markers of protection and progression. We observed that these markers are tightly correlated. Thus, lack or low prevalence of HIV isolability and the presence of nonsyncitium inducing strains are associated with the strongest type 1 cytokine production, the weakest type 2 cytokine production, and highest CD4 counts. Conversely, the isolation of highly replicating, syncitium-inducing HIV strains is associated with the weakest type 1 cytokine production, the strongest type 2 cytokine production, and lowest CD4 counts. Additionally, it was determined that the interleukin (IL)-10/IL-2 ratio best discriminates among different virologic scenarios. These data suggest that the virologic and immunologic correlates of disease protection and progression might be associated variables that define two different subsets of HIV+ individuals and lend support to a viro-immunologic hypothesis of HIV infection.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) isolability, rate of viral replication, HIV phenotype, type 1 and type 2 cytokine production, and CD4 counts were cross-sectionally analyzed in 63 HIV-seropositive (HIV+) individuals to establish possible correlations between virologic and immunologic markers of protection and progression. We observed that these markers are tightly correlated. Thus, lack or low prevalence of HIV isolability and the presence of nonsyncitium inducing strains are associated with the strongest type 1 cytokine production, the weakest type 2 cytokine production, and highest CD4 counts. Conversely, the isolation of highly replicating, syncitium-inducing HIV strains is associated with the weakest type 1 cytokine production, the strongest type 2 cytokine production, and lowest CD4 counts. Additionally, it was determined that the interleukin (ID-10/IL-2 ratio best discriminates among different virologic scenarios. These data suggest that the virologic and immunologic correlates of disease protection and progression might be associated variables that define two different subsets of HIV+individuals and lend support to a viro-immunologic hypothesis of HIV infection.

Ladetto: Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Jannsen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria. Di Rocco:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rossi:Novartis: Honoraria; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Travel expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Alexion: Other: Travel expenses. Chiappella:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Roche: Other: lecture fees; Teva: Other: lecture fees; Nanostring: Other: lecture fees; Amgen: Other: lecture fees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees. Rusconi:Celgene: Research Funding. Gomes da Silva:Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees, Institution's payment for consultancy, Travelling support; Celgene: Other: Travelling support; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Roche: Other: Institution's payment for consultancy, Travelling support; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees, Research Funding. Vitolo:Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Martelli:Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffman-La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Zinzani: Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Flinn:Portola: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Forma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kite: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; ArQule: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Verastem: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Yuen:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Topp:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Research Funding; Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rusconi:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria. Fleury:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Lundbeck: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Pro:Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; kiowa: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; portola: Honoraria. Gritti:Autolus: Consultancy. Crump:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Servier Canada: Consultancy; Jansen-Ortho: Consultancy. Samineni:Genentech Inc: Employment, Other: Ownership interests non-PLC. Sinha:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Punnoose:Roche: Equity Ownership; Genentech Inc: Employment. Szafer-Glusman:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment, Other: Ownership interests PLC. Danesi:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Petrich:Abbvie: Employment, Other: Ownership interests PLC. Kornacker:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Humphrey:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mobasher:Genentech Inc: Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Ownership interests non-PLC. Hiddemann:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Rusconi: Celgene: Research Funding.

Rusconi: Celgene: Research Funding.

Background.Ara-c based chemo-immunotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the most effective approach in young mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients, though few if any patients are cured. Recent data indicate that subsequent Rituximab maintenance (RM) prolongs PFS and OS (Le Gouill NEJM 2017). Lenalidomide is an oral agent effective in MCL, considered suitable for prolonged maintenance programs, but has never been tested in this setting. The FIL MCL0208 trial (NCT02354313) is a prospective, international randomized, phase III trial, comparing Lenalidomide maintenance (LM) vs observation (OBS) after an intensive Ara-c containing chemo-immunotherapy (R-HDS) program, followed by ASCT in previously untreated MCL patients.

Ferreri: Celgene: Research Funding. Zaja:Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria. Di Rocco:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rusconi:Celgene: Research Funding.

Townsend: Gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Buske:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding. Cartron:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cunningham:Roche pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Dyer:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gribben:Medical Research Council: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Wellcome Trust: Research Funding; Unum: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; NIH: Research Funding; Cancer Research UK: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria. Hess:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel expenses, Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Keller:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Roche: Consultancy. Kneba:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Malladi:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Neidhart:Gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support and lecture fees. Rusconi:Celgene: Research Funding. Zhu:Beijing Cancer Hospital (Peking University Cancer Hospital): Employment. Catalani:Roche: Employment. Knapp:Roche: Employment. Zeuner:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hiddemann:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Marcus:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support and lecture fees ; Gilead: Consultancy; F. Hoffman-La Roche: Other: Travel support and lecture fees.

Background: Lenalidomide (LENA) maintenance is associated with significantly improved outcome in patients (pts) with chemosensitive relapse of DLBCL not eligible for ASCT or experiencing relapse after ASCT. Preliminary results of a multicentre phase II trial (NCT00799513), reported after a median follow-up of 25 months, showed a 1-yr PFS of 70 ± 7% and a 1-yr OS of 81 ± 6%, with good tolerability (Ferreri AJM, et al.Lancet Haematol 2017). However, LENA was ongoing in 41% of pts at time of analysis, and late side effects and events after maintenance completion remained to be defined. Herein, we report efficacy and safety results of the trial after a median follow-up of 56 (range 27-100) months.

Introduction

Introduction:Immunochemotherapy is standard of care treatment for previously untreated patients (pts) with advanced stage follicular lymphoma (FL). However, the majority of pts relapse, with around 20% relapsing within 2 years. Obinutuzumab (GA101; G) is a glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb) with increased antibody-dependent cell-mediated phagocytosis and cytotoxicity, and direct B-cell killing, compared with the type I mAb rituximab (R). The randomized Phase III GALLIUM study (NCT01332968) compared the efficacy and safety of G-chemotherapy (G-chemo) vs R-chemotherapy (R-chemo) in previously untreated pts with advanced stage FL. In the primary analysis (PA), a significant improvement in the primary study endpoint of investigator (INV)-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) was demonstrated with G-chemo relative to R-chemo after 34.5 months' median follow-up. Results for other time-to-event outcomes (including time-to-next treatment; TTNT) were supportive, and additional analyses demonstrated a higher rate of minimal residual disease, and a lower risk of disease progression within 24 months, in the G-chemo arm. Here we report the results from an updated analysis of time-to-event endpoints and safety in the GALLIUM study.

BACKGROUND

Introduction: Diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an heterogeneous disease in terms of biology, clinical presentation and prognosis. According to the putative Cell-Of-Origin (COO), DLBCL of the general HIV negative population can be classified into three molecular subtypes by gene expression profiling (GEP): the germinal center B-cell type (GCB), the activated B-cell type (ABC) and the unclassifiable type (UC). Immuno-histochemistry (IHC) models routinely surrogate GEP in the COO assignment, identifying GCB and non-GCB type. Hans algorithm is one of the most widely used IHC models and its concordance with GEP varies from 70 to 90% (Meyer PN et al, JCO 2011). NanoString (NS) 20-genes assay has emerged as a feasible technique for DLBCL molecular subgroups identification and shows a high concordance with GEP (Scott DW et al, Blood 2014). DLBCL classification according to COO categories has shown prognostic impact in the HIV negative population, since clinical outcome of non-GCB type is inferior if compared to GCB type in patients (pts) receiving CHOP or Rituximab-CHOP. DLBCL in HIV positive population have shown different biological features. COO subtypes distribution and its prognostic impact has not been extensively studied in HIV setting and still needs to be defined.

Introduction.

Spina: Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee. Rusconi:Teva: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance. Couto:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ren:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Rusconi: Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance; Teva: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance; Takeda: Consultancy. Spina:Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee. Zinzani:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celegene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Rusconi: Takeda: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance. Spina:Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee; Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee. Zinzani:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celegene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Zinzani: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celegene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Topp:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Other: travel; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: Travel; Boehringer: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy. Rusconi:Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance; Takeda: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy, Other: Congress attendance. Fleury:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Lundbeck: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Pro:Celegene: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Hsu:Genetech, Inc.: Employment. Punnoose:Genetech, Inc.: Employment. Hilger:Genetech, Inc.: Employment. Mobasher:Genentech, Inc.: Employment. Hiddermann:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding.

From November 2012 to July 2014, brentuximab vedotin (BV) was available in Italy for patients with relapsed Hodgkin’s lymphoma (HL) outside a clinical trial context based on a local disposition of the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA) issued according to a national law (Law 648/96: "medicinal products that are provided free of charge on the national health service"). A large Italian observational retrospective study was conducted on the use of BV in the everyday clinical practice to check if clinical trial results are confirmed even in a real life context. Primary endpoint was the best response; secondary endpoints were the overall response rate at the end of the treatment, duration of response, survival and the safety profile. BV was infused intravenously at the dose of 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks. A total of 234 HL patients were treated in 40. All patients had histologically documented CD30+ HL; 49% had relapsed and 51% had refractory disease. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 3 previous therapies (including autologous stem cell transplant [SCT] in the 69% of cases). Best response was observed after a median of 4 cycles in 140 patients (59.8%): 74 (31.6%) patients obtained a complete response (CR) and 66 (28.2%) achieved a partial response (PR); overall response rate at the end of the treatment was 48.3% (62 CR and 51 PR). The best response rate was higher in the elderly subset (>60 years): 14 (50%) CR and 5 (17.8%) PR. Disease free survival was 26.3% at 29 months and progression free survival 31.9% at 55 months. We identified 30 long term responders (patients with a response ≥ 12 months) of whom 18 are still in CR, 7 with a consolidative SCT and 11 without any consolidative procedure. Duration of response did not differ who achieved at least PR and then either did or did not undergo consolidative SCT. All patients were included in the safety profile for the analysis; in general, the treatment was well tolerated in everyday clinical practice and the toxicity profile was closely similar to the previously published data; no death has been linked to BV-induced toxicity. This preliminary analysis could indicate that BV displays a number of features favoring its use as a bridge to transplant in patients with active disease who achieve a suboptimal response to salvage treatment. Even in a real life context, BV induces clinical responses quite rapidly, i.e. within the first 4 cycles in most responders, thus permitting the timely application of the transplantation phase. BV displays a favorable toxicity profile, without overlapping toxicities with most of the agents employed in high-dose conditioning regimens. Furthermore, for HL patients ineligible for transplant or for who transplant failed, may represent a feasible effective therapeutic option.

▪

From November 2012 to July 2014, brentuximab vedotin (BV) was available in Italy for patients with relapsed systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) outside a clinical trial context based on a local disposition of the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA) issued according to a national law (Law 648/96: "medicinal products that are provided free of charge on the national health service"). A large Italian observational retrospective study was conducted on the use of BV in the everyday clinical practice to check if clinical trial results are confirmed even in a real life context. Primary endpoint was the best response; secondary endpoints were the overall response rate at the end of the treatment, duration of response, survival and the safety profile. BV was infused intravenously at the dose of 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks for a maximum of 16 cycles. A total of 40 ALCL (18 anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK] negative and 22 ALK-positive status) patients were treated with BV in 40 Hematology Centers. All patients had histologically documented CD30+ ALCL; 16 (40%) had relapsed and 24 (60%) had refractory disease. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of 2 previous therapies (including autologous transplant in the 32.5% of cases). Best response was observed after a median of 4 cycles in 31 patients (77.5%): 19 (47.5%) patients obtained a complete response (CR) and 12 (30%) achieved a partial response (PR); overall response rate at the end of the treatment was 62.5% (18 CR and 7 PR). The best response rate was higher in the elderly subset (>60 years): 9 (64.2%) CR and 3 (21.4%) PR, achieving a total of 85.6%. At the latest follow up 15/18 patients are still in CR (3 with consolidative procedure). Global progression free survival was 39.1% at 29 months and disease free survival 54% at 23.9 months (median not reached). Median duration of response was 12 months (range 9-24 months). We identified 5 long term responders (patients with a response ≥ 12 months), all were still in CR at the latest follow up (1 underwent allogeneic transplant). Particularly, all the long term responders were aged <30 years at first BV infusion.

Introduction

No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Rusconi: Roche: Honoraria.

Luminari: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Rusconi: Roche: Honoraria.

Rule: Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; J&J: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement. Rusconi:Roche: Honoraria. Joao:Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen, Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzens-Harig:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Hess:Pfizer, Janssen, Roche, Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Roche, , Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy. Balasubramanian:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Equity Ownership. Bandyopadhyay:Janssen: Employment. Sun:Janssen/J&J: Employment, Equity Ownership. Goldberg:Janssen: Employment. Bothos:Janssen: Employment. Traina:Janssen: Employment. Enny:Janssen: Employment. Rizo:Janssen: Employment. Vermeulen:Janssen: Employment.

Introduction: Transformation of Marginal Zone Lymphoma (MZL) into an aggressive histology is uncommon phenomenon that can occur at any time after diagnosis and is expected to have a detrimental impact on prognosis. Biological and clinical knowledge on transformed Marginal Zone Lymphoma (tMZL) is poor and no standard treatment is established in the Rituximab era for these patients (pts). We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive biopsy proven tMZL in two Italian Hematological Divisions from 2002 to 2014 and we focused on post-transformation treatment and outcome.

Introduction: we previously reported (Vitolo U, JCO 2013) the results of a randomized study with brief first-line chemoimmunotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance vs observation. With a median follow-up of 42 months, 3-year Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) were 66% and 89%, respectively. The addition of Rituximab maintenance gave a benefit to the patients: 2-year PFS was 81% for rituximab maintenance versus 69% for observation with a HR of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.38-1.05, p=0.079), although not statistically significant. Moreover we also found that achievement of Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) negativity predicted a better PFS: 3-year PFS 72% vs 39%, HR 3.1 (Ladetto M, Blood 2013). Overall these data showed the good efficacy of this brief chemoimmunotherapy regimen in elderly FL patients. Aim of this analysis was to report long-term outcome and long-term toxicities of this regimen.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon type of non- Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) comprising <10% of all newly diagnosed patients. Classified as an aggressive NHL subtype, MCL has the worst prognosis of B-cell subtypes owing to its aggressive clinical disease course and incurability with standard chemo-immunotherapy. Conventional first-line therapy for bulky or advanced disease primarily consists of chemotherapy combined with rituximab, with possible consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation for younger patients in remission to improve overall patient outcomes. However, options for relapsed MCL are limited although several single agents have been studied. Lenalidomide is available in Italy for patients with MCL (without any other therapeutic options) since May 2011, based on a local disposition of the Italian Drug Agency (AIFA) issued according to a national law (Law 648/96: "medicinal products that are provided free of charge on the national health service"). An observational retrospective study was conducted in 24 Italian hematology centers with the aim to improve information on efficacy and safety of lenalidomide use in real practice. Seventy patients received lenalidomide for 21/28 days with a median of 8 cycles. Doses (range 5-25 mg/day) were according to hematologic parameters. At the end of therapy there were 22 complete responses (31.4%), 9 partial responses, 6 stable diseases and 33 progressions with an overall response rate of 44.3%. Sixteen patients (22.9%) received lenalidomide in combination either with dexamethasone (N=12) or with rituximab (N=4). At 62 months overall survival (OS) was 26.2% (median reached at 33 months) and disease free survival (DFS) 37% at 42 months: 14/22 patients are in continuous complete response with a median of 26 months. We compared patients who received lenalidomide alone with patients who received lenalidomide in combination with other drugs: OS and DFS did not differ. Progression free survivals are significantly different: at 56 months 36% in combination group vs13% in patients who received lenalidomide alone (p=0.04, hazard ratio 0.52). Toxicities were manageable, even if 17 of them led to an early drug discontinuation. Two secondary malignancies occurred: a myelodysplastic syndrome and a lung cancer after 10 and 15 months of therapy, respectively. There is a boundary zone in the passage from phase III to phase IV trials, i.e. from experimental to marketing and free use phases: in this zone we can find named patient program, compassionate and off-label use and, in Italy, request based on a local disposition. Despite the known potential bias of all the observational studies, reports on the real life experience make an important contribution to medical knowledge prior to market authorization: lenalidomide therapy is effective and tolerable also in compassionate use patients with good survival. Our results, in fact, are superimposable to those obtained in clinical trials.

Background: Histologic transformation (HT) refers to a biologic event leading to the development of a high grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma, mostly diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL), in patients (pts) with an underlying follicular lymphoma (FL), whose recently reported risk is 2% to 3% per year. The prognosis of t-FL has been considered historically very poor, but several studies in the Rituximab (RTX) era suggest that survival may be more favorable than previously recognized.

BACKGROUND: Patients (pts) with relapsed DLBCL who cannot be treated with consolidative ASCT or allogeneic transplantation exhibit a poor prognosis, with a 1-year PFS of 30-40%. Despite a high response rate to salvage therapy, these pts invariably experience early relapse and die of lymphoma. Single-drug maintenance may be a good alternative to intensified consolidation to prolong response duration in these high-risk pts. Lenalidomide is an oral immunomodulatory agent, active against DLBCL, which can be taken for years with an excellent safety profile. Accordingly, we designed a multicenter phase II trial addressing safety and efficacy of lenalidomide maintenance in pts with chemosensitive relapse of DLBCL not eligible for consolidative ASCT or experiencing relapse after ASCT (NCT00799513). Herein, we report the primary endpoint analysis.

Introduction

Background. Bortezomib, an inhibitor of the proteasome, is effective in relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and indolent lymphomas and it is synergistic with Rituximab to enhance apoptosis and NFkB depletion. On these basis, the FIL conducted a phase II multicenter study aimed to evaluate safety and efficacy of Bortezomib in association with Rituximab in relapsed/refractory non-follicular Lymphoma (Linfocytic, LL and Marginal Zone Lymphoma, MZL) and MCL, not eligible to high dose chemotherapy with stem cell transplantation. Patients and methods. The study was a prospective single arm phase II trial, designed on Simon two-stage Optimal Design. Primary end-point was to obtain an Overall Response Rate (ORR) > 40%. The aim of this analysis is to evaluate long term follow-up of Bortezomib and Rituximab combination. A central histological revision was planned in all the patients at the enrollment. Inclusion criteria were: 18-75 years, relapsed/refractory LL, MZL, MCL after 1-4 lines. Treatment schedule was: one course of 1.6 mg/sqm Bortezomib weekly in combination with standard 375 mg/sqm Rituximab on days 1, 8, 15, 22 followed by two courses of four weekly intravenous bolus of Bortezomib alone; patients with complete (CR), partial remission and stable disease at the intermediate evaluation were planned to be given three further courses with the same schedule. Results. From September 2006 to March 2008, 55 patients were enrolled and six were excluded at central histological revision. Clinical characteristics were: median age 68 (50-74); 16 (33%) LL, 8 (16%) MZL, 25 (51%) MCL; 42 (86%) stage III/IV; 33 (67%) bone marrow involvement. Median number of previous treatments was 2 (range 1-7); 34 (69%) were Rituximab pretreated; 21 (43%) had refractory disease. Thirty (61%) patients completed the treatment and 233 courses were delivered (median: 4.7 courses/patient); 19 (39%) patients did not because of no response in 13, adverse events in five, with only one toxic death due to interstitial pneumonia. ORR was 53% (CR 26.5%); no response was seen in 43% and 4% were not evaluable for response. ORRs by clinical subgroup were: LL 37%, MZL 50%, MCL 64%; Rituximab pretreated 62%, Rituximab naïve 33%; relapsed 64% and refractory 38%. With a median follow-up of 85 months, median Overall Survival (OS) was 61.5 months (95%CI: 35.0-81.5), with 5-years OS 51% (95% CI: 36-65) and median Progression Free Survival (PFS) was 8.9 months (95%CI: 5.3-18.3), with 5-years PFS 16% (95% CI: 7-28%). Five-years PFS by histology was: 12% (95% CI: 2-31) for LL, 17% (95% CI: 5-34) for MCL and 19% (95% CI: 11-53) for MZL. PFS rates were not different between Rituximab pretreated versus naïve nor international prognostic index 1-2 versus 3-4-5 nor refractory versus relapsed. By number of previous therapies, 5-years PFS for 1 previous therapy versus 2 versus 3 or more was: 24%, 14% and 13%, respectively, p=0.36. Conclusions. Weekly infusion of Bortezomib in combination with Rituximab is effective in relapsed/refractory indolent and MCL and represents a treatment option in this setting of patients.

Introduction:Follicular lymphoma grade 3 is recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization classification of lymphoma. It is further classified into grade 3a and 3b depending on percentage of centroblasts. There is no consensus about its clinical course because some studies indicate an indolent behavior but others describe a more aggressive. Large systematic studies are missing in particular for 3b follicular lymphoma which is often considered as a separate entity.