Search

Recent advances in the understanding of Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) biology have impacted the development of effective novel agents and improved our knowledge of how the genomic background of WM may influence selection of therapy. Consensus Panel 7 (CP7) of the 11thInternational Workshop on WM was convened to examine the current generation of completed and ongoing clinical trials involving novel agents, consider updated data on WM genomics, and make recommendations on the design and prioritization of future clinical trials. CP7 considers limited duration and novel-novel agent combinations to be the priority for the next generation of clinical trials. Evaluation of MYD88, CXCR4and TP53at baseline in the context of clinical trials is crucial. The common chemoimmunotherapy backbones, bendamustine-rituximab (BR) and dexamethasone, rituximab and cyclophosphamide (DRC), may be considered standard-of-care for the frontline comparative studies. Key unanswered questions include the definition of frailty in WM; the importance of attaining a very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), within stipulated time frame, in determining survival outcomes; and the optimal treatment of WM populations with special needs

The consensus panel 2 (CP2) of the 11th International Workshop on Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (IWWM-11) has reviewed and incorporated current data to update the recommendations for treatment approaches in patients with relapsed or refractory WM (RRWM). The key recommendations from IWWM-11 CP2 include: (1) Chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and/or a covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase (cBTKi) strategies are important options; their use should reflect the prior upfront strategy and are subject to their availability. (2) In selecting treatment, biological age, co-morbidities and fitness are important; nature of relapse, disease phenotype and WM-related complications, patient preferences and hematopoietic reserve are also critical factors while the composition of the BM disease and mutational status (MYD88, CXCR4, TP53) should also be noted. (3) The trigger for initiating treatment in RRWM should utilize knowledge of patients’ prior disease characteristics to avoid unnecessary delays. (4) Risk factors for cBTKi related toxicities (cardiovascular dysfunction, bleeding risk and concurrent medication) should be addressed when choosing cBTKi. Mutational status (MYD88, CXCR4) may influence the cBTKi efficacy, and the role of TP53 disruptions requires further study) in the event of cBTKi failure dose intensity could be up titrated subject to toxicities. Options after BTKi failure include CIT with a non-cross-reactive regimen to one previously used CIT, addition of anti-CD20 antibody to BTKi, switching to a newer cBTKi or non-covalent BTKi, proteasome inhibitors, BCL-2 inhibitors, and new anti-CD20 combinations are additional options. Clinical trial participation should be encouraged for all patients with RRWM.