Search

Jeanette K Doorduijn,1 Hanneke C Kluin-Nelemans2 1Department of Hematology, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; 2Department of Hematology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands Abstract: Mantle cell lymphoma is a relatively rare B-cell lymphoma with a specific genetic lesion and a typical immunophenotypic profile. The median age is 65 years. There is no curative treatment, except allogeneic stem cell transplantation for a selected group of patients. For the majority of patients, especially the elderly, the aim of therapy should therefore be a long progression-free survival. Age and comorbidity may hamper the use of the most active treatment regimen, such as high dose cytarabine and autologous stem cell transplantation. Therefore, it is a challenge to select the most appropriate therapy for an elderly patient. Studies specifically designed for elderly patients are rare. A recently performed large randomized study for elderly patients, however, has shown that R-CHOP (rituximab with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) chemotherapy followed by maintenance rituximab can result in a long progression-free survival. For patients too frail for R-CHOP chemotherapy, a treatment should be offered that benefits the patient in reducing the symptoms of the disease without causing too many side effects. Progression or relapse will occur in all patients sooner or later. Second-line treatment should again be carefully selected. Several options are mentioned. New drugs are being developed, and new combinations are investigated. Further improvement in the outcome of patients with mantle cell lymphoma is expected. Participation in well-designed clinical trials, also by elderly patients, is important to find the real benefit that can be achieved, and to get information on the tolerability of these treatments in this age group. Keywords: treatment, chemotherapy, malignant lymphoma, mantle cell lymphoma, elderly, MCL

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) manifests heterogeneously with varying outcomes. This population-based study examined causes of death (CODs), as registered by the physician who established the death, among 20,588 CLL patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between 1996 and 2020. Utilizing cause-specific flexible parametric survival models, we estimated cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and cumulative incidences of death due to CLL, solid malignancies, other hematological malignancies, infections, and other causes. Our findings reveal CLL as the predominant COD, contributing to around 40% of relative mortality, with a declining 5-year death probability from 16.8% in 1996-2002 to 7.6% in 2010-2020. Also, deaths attributed to solid malignancies, other hematological malignancies, and other COD diminished over time, as evidenced by respective HRs (95% confidence interval) of 0.68 (0.60%-0.77%), 0.45 (0.38%-0.53%), and 0.77 (0.66%-0.90%). In summary, our comprehensive, population-based analysis underscores a noticeable reduction in CLL-attributed deaths and other competing causes over the studied period. Nonetheless, CLL is registered as the most prevalent cause of mortality among contemporary diagnosed patients with CLL, emphasizing the continued relevance of CLL-centric clinical strategies and research., Competing Interests: Arnon P. Kater has received personal fees from AbbVie, LAVA, Genmab, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, and Bristol Myers Squibb; and research funding from AbbVie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, and Bristol Myers Squibb. Mark‐David Levin has received personal fees from AbbVie, Janssen, and Roche; and research funding from AbbVie, Janssen, AstraZeneca, and Roche/Genentech. Anton W. Langerak has received research funding via an unrestricted grant from Roche‐Genentech and speaker fees from Janssen. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Author(s). HemaSphere published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Hematology Association.)

Given the rarity of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), evaluations of different high-dose methotrexate-(HD-MTX)-based treatment regimens is sparse. This retrospective, multicenter study evaluates clinical characteristics and outcomes (progression-free, overall and disease-specific survival) after five HD-MTX-based polychemotherapeutic regimens and two consolidation therapies. 346 patients with histologically confirmed PCNSL, treated with ≥ 1 cycle HD-MTX-based strategies (≥3g/m 2 /cycle) were included. The regimens included MATRIX (HD-MTX, HD-AraC, thiotepa, and rituximab), (R)MBVP±HD-AraC (HD-MTX, teniposide/etoposide, carmustine, prednisolone, ± HD-AraC, ± rituximab), (R)MP (HD-MTX, procarbazine, ± rituximab), and a combination of HD-MTX and HD-AraC. The overall response rate after induction was 69 %, 28 % complete remission and progressive disease was observed in 100 (29 %) patients. 126 (36 %) patients received consolidation, including high-dose-BCNU-thiotepa with autologous stem cell transplantation (HD-BCNU-TT/ASCT, n = 59 (17 %)) or whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT, n = 67 (19 %)). Clinical characteristics associated with adverse mortality risk by multivariable prognostication contained age > 60 years (HR 1.61, p = 0.011), elevated LDH (HR 1.75, p = 0.004) and WHO status ≥ 2 (HR 1.56, p = 0.010). Independently, induction regimens containing HD-AraC demonstrated survival benefit compared to induction regimens without HD-AraC (HR 0.59, p = 0.002). Without preference for HD-BCNU-TT/ASCT or WBRT, a favorable effect of consolidation (HR 0.44 and HR 0.42, p < 0.001) was confirmed, also with consolidation as time-dependent variable. Competing risk analysis showed similar low incidence of lymphoma-unrelated deaths in consolidated and unconsolidated patients. This study confirms that age, elevated LDH and WHO status increase the mortality risk. HD-AraC containing treatment regimens and consolidation with HD-BCU-TT/ASCT or WBRT were associated with superior survival, including a favorable low incidence of lymphoma-unrelated deaths., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest JKD: honoraria from Eli Lilly/Loxo. MJK: honoraria from and consulting/advisory role for BMS/Celgene, Kite, a Gilead Company, Miltenyi Biotech, Novartis, Adicet Bio, and Roche; research funding from Kite, Roche, Takeda, and Celgene; and travel support from Kite, Miltenyi Biotech, Novartis, Abbvie and Roche. AD: Millennium Takeda: research funding and advisory board. FJSHWAJ: research funding from Kyowa Kirin, Takeda. DD: honoraria from Takeda, Novartis, Amgen, Atara Biotherapeutics, Incyte and Pierre Fabre; Institutional research grants: Kom op tegen Kanker, Stichting tegen Kanker. TT: holds a Mandate for Fundamental and Translational Research from the ‘Stichting tegen Kanker’ (2019–091) and is a co-founder of the Fund ‘Me To You’ supporting research in lymphoma/leukemia (https://www.kuleuven.be/mecenaat/fondsen/geneeskunde/fonds-me-to-you). MCH: research funding GenMab, Celgene/BMS, Gilead, Advisory AbbVie, Novartis. JMZ: research funding Roche, Gilead, Takeda. JSPV: Secura Bio: Consulting or Advisory Role. MN: Genmab: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. MWMP: Takeda: Consulting or Advisory Role. All remaining authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

This EHA-ESMO Clinical Practice Guideline provides key recommendations for managing primary DLBCL of the CNS.The guideline covers clinical, imaging and pathological diagnosis, staging and risk assessment, treatment and follow-up.Algorithms for first-line and salvage treatments are provided.The author group encompasses a multidisciplinary group of experts from different institutions and countries in Europe.Recommendations are based on available scientific data and the authors' collective expert opinion., Competing Interests: AJMF reports personal financial interests for advisory board membership for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb (BMS), Genmab, Gilead, Incyte, Juno, Novartis, PletixaPharm and Roche; institutional financial interests as local Principal Investigator (PI) for ADC Therapeutics, Amgen, BeiGene, BMS, Genmab, Gilead, Hutchison Medipharma, Incyte, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics and Takeda; institution research grants from BTG Therapeutics; institutional funding from Roche; non‐financial interests as a member of the Global Outreach Committee of the EHA and as a member of the Board of Directors (President) of Fondazione Italiana Linfomi. GI reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for Gilead, Incyte, Roche and as an invited speaker for Riemser; non‐financial interests as a member of Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hämatologie und Onkologie (DGHO) and a leadership role for the German Lymphoma Alliance (Mitglied des Vorstandes). JKD reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for Eli Lilly. DPA reports non‐financial interests as a member of an academic subcommittee for the British Society of Neuroradiologists. JECB reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for Gilead and lecture honorarium from Novartis; institutional financial interests for funding of educational symposia from Roche and TEVA. TC reports personal financial interests for advisory board membership and consultancy for Janssen‐Cilag S.p.A; speaking honoraria from Takeda; participation in the Hema for the Future project for Sandoz. KC reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for AbbVie, Atara, Celgene, Incyte, Janssen, Kite, Roche and Takeda; personal financial interests as an invited speaker for Incyte, Kite, Roche and Takeda; non‐financial interests as a member of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the EHA, and leadership roles with the National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI; chair of UK NCRI T‐cell lymphoma study group). CPF reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Atarabio, BMS, Genmab, Gilead/Kite, Incyte, Janssen, Lilly, MorphoSys, Ono, Roche, SERB and Sobi; personal financial interests as an invited speaker for AbbVie, Gilead/Kite, Incyte, Janssen, Roche and Takeda; institutional financial interests as coordinating PI for BeiGene and Roche; institutional financial interests as a steering committee member for Genmab and MorphoSys; non‐financial interests for an advisory role for Blood Cancer UK (clinical trials funding committee member) and Lymphoma Action (medical advisory panel member); non‐financial interests for leadership roles with Cure Leukaemia (clinical trials steering committee member) and the NCRI (chair of UK NCRI aggressive lymphoma study group). KHX reports personal financial interests as an invited speaker for BTG. MP reports personal financial interests as an invited speaker for BeiGene and Novartis; personal financial interests for expert testimony for Ventana Roche. ES reports personal financial interests as an invited speaker for Riemser Pharma; personal financial interests for a writing engagement for Riemser Pharma; personal financial interests as an advisory board member for SERB Pharmaceuticals; institutional financial interests as a coordinating PI for Riemser Pharma and as a local PI for AbbVie, Riemser Pharma and Roche; non‐financial interests as a PI for AbbVie and Roche; non‐financial interests as a member of the DGHO and German Lymphoma Alliance. CS reports institutional funding from AstraZeneca. LS reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for Kyowa Kirin and Takeda; personal financial interests as author royalties from Munksgaard Publishing and Springer Verlag; institutional financial interests as a steering committee member for Varian and ViewRay; non‐financial interests for leadership roles with the International Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (Vice Chair) and the Danish Lymphoma Radiation Oncology Group (Chair); non‐financial interests as a PI for the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC); non‐financial interests as a member of ASCO, American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO) and European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ESTRO). EZ reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for AbbVie, BeiGene, BMS, Curis, Eli Lilly, Incyte, Ipsen, Janssen, Merck, Miltenyi Biomedicine and Roche; institutional financial interests for travel grants from BeiGene, Gilead, Janssen and Roche; institutional financial interests for trial sponsorship from AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Janssen and Roche. CB reports personal financial interests as an invited speaker for AbbVie, Pfizer and Sobi; personal financial interests as an advisory board member for BeiGene, Celltrion, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Janssen, MorphoSys, Novartis, Regeneron and Roche; institutional funding from AbbVie, Amgen, Celltrion, Janssen, MSD, Pfizer and Roche. MJ reports personal financial interests as an advisory board member for BMS, Genmab, Gilead, Janssen and Novartis; personal financial interests as an invited speaker for Incyte; institutional financial interests as an invited speaker for Roche; institutional funding from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, Janssen and Roche; institutional financial interests as coordinating PI for BioInvent. MD reports personal financial interests as an invited speaker for AstraZeneca, Gilead/Kite, Janssen, Novartis and Roche; personal financial interests as an advisory board member for AstraZeneca, BeiGene, BMS/Celgene, Genmab, Gilead, Janssen, Lilly/Loxo, Novartis and Roche; institutional research grants from AbbVie, Bayer, Celgene, Janssen and Roche; institutional funding from Gilead/Kite; non‐financial interests as a member of ASCO, American Society of Hematology (ASH; subcommittee member), DGHO (prior Board member), EHA (Executive Board member), ESMO (Faculty member) and Lymphoma Research Foundation [LRF; Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) Consortium member]. DM has declared no conflicts of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. HemaSphere Published by John Wiley & Sons on behalf of European Hematology Association and by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Society for Medical Oncology.)

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a rare type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) manifesting in the brain, spinal cord, cerebrospinal fluid and/or eyes, in the absence of systemic manifestations. With an increasing incidence and a 30% 5-year overall survival if promptly treated, timely diagnosis and subsequent treatment is paramount. The typical MRI appearance for PCNSL is a solitary or multiple T2-hypointense, homogeneous gadolinium-enhancing lesion with restricted diffusion. Dexamethasone treatment might compromise and delay the diagnosis. Hallmark of treatment is induction with intravenous high-dose methotrexate consisting polychemotherapy followed by consolidation treatment. Consolidation treatment consists of either whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) or autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Given the (cognitive) side effects of WBRT, ASCT is increasingly being used as the first choice of treatment., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany.)

Background: Studies on the efficacy of rituximab in primary CNS lymphoma (PCNSL) reported conflicting results. Our international randomized phase 3 study showed that the addition of rituximab to high-dose methotrexate, BCNU, teniposide, and prednisolone (MBVP) in PCNSL was not efficacious in the short term. Here we present long-term results after a median follow-up of 82.3 months., Methods: One hundred and ninety-nine eligible newly diagnosed, nonimmunocompromised patients with PCNSL aged 18-70 years with WHO performance status 0-3 was randomized between treatment with MBVP chemotherapy with or without rituximab, followed by high-dose cytarabine consolidation in responding patients, and reduced-dose WBRT in patients aged ≤ 60 years. Event-free survival was the primary endpoint. Overall survival rate, neurocognitive functioning (NCF), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were additionally assessed, with the IPCG test battery, EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires, respectively., Results: For event-free survival, the hazard ratio was 0.85, 95% CI 0.61-1.18, P = .33. Overall survival rate at 5 years for MBVP and R-MBVP was 49% (39-59) and 53% (43-63) respectively. In total, 64 patients died in the MBVP arm and 55 in the R-MBVP arm, of which 69% were due to PCNSL. At the group level, all domains of NCF and HRQoL improved to a clinically relevant extent after treatment initiation, and remained stable thereafter up to 60 months of follow-up, except for motor speed which deteriorated between 24 and 60 months. Although fatigue improved initially, high levels persisted in the long term., Conclusions: Long-term follow-up confirms the lack of added value of rituximab in addition to MBVP and HD-cytarabine for PCNSL., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology.)

The real-world results of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy for patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) substantially differ across countries. In the Netherlands, the CAR-T tumorboard facilitates a unique nationwide infrastructure for referral, eligibility assessment and data collection. The aim of this study was to evaluate real-world outcomes of axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) in the Dutch population, including the thus-far underreported effects on health-related quality of life (HR-QoL). All patients with R/R LBCL after ≥2 lines of systemic therapy referred for axi-cel treatment between May 2020-May 2022 were included (N = 250). Of the 160 apheresed patients, 145 patients received an axi-cel infusion. The main reason for ineligibility was rapidly progressive disease. The outcomes are better or at least comparable to other studies (best overall response rate: 84% (complete response: 66%); 12-month progression-free-survival rate and overall survival rate: 48% and 62%, respectively). The 12-month NRM was 5%, mainly caused by infections. Clinically meaningful improvement in several HR-QoL domains was observed from Month 9 onwards. Expert-directed patient selection can support effective and sustainable application of CAR-T treatment. Matched comparisons between cohorts will help to understand the differences in outcomes across countries and select best practices. Despite the favorable results, for a considerable proportion of patients with R/R LBCL there still is an unmet medical need.

Background: Invasive aspergillosis (IA) by a triazole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus is associated with high mortality. Real-time resistance detection will result in earlier initiation of appropriate therapy., Methods: In a prospective study, we evaluated the clinical value of the AsperGenius polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay in hematology patients from 12 centers. This PCR assay detects the most frequent cyp51A mutations in A. fumigatus conferring azole resistance. Patients were included when a computed tomography scan showed a pulmonary infiltrate and bronchoalveolar fluid (BALf) sampling was performed. The primary end point was antifungal treatment failure in patients with azole-resistant IA., Results: Of 323 patients enrolled, complete mycological and radiological information was available for 276 (94%), and probable IA was diagnosed in 99/276 (36%). Sufficient BALf for PCR testing was available for 293/323 (91%). Aspergillus DNA was detected in 116/293 (40%) and A. fumigatus DNA in 89/293 (30%). The resistance PCR was conclusive in 58/89 (65%) and resistance detected in 8/58 (14%). Two had a mixed azole-susceptible/azole-resistant infection. In the 6 remaining patients, treatment failure was observed in 1. Galactomannan positivity was associated with mortality (P = .004) while an isolated positive Aspergillus PCR was not (P = .83)., Conclusions: Real-time PCR-based resistance testing may help to limit the clinical impact of triazole resistance. In contrast, the clinical impact of an isolated positive Aspergillus PCR on BALf seems limited. The interpretation of the EORTC/MSGERC PCR criterion for BALf may need further specification (eg, minimum cycle threshold value and/or PCR positive on >1 BALf sample)., Competing Interests: Potential conflicts of interest J. M. reports grants from Gilead Sciences, Inc; consulting fees, payment for lectures/presentations, and support for meetings/travel expenses from Gilead Sciences, Inc, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, and F2G; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Gilead Sciences, Inc, MSD, Pfizer, Takeda, F2G, and Cidara. P. G. reports partial support for travel to Trends In Medical Mycology conference. K. L. reports grants from Thermo Fisher Scientific and TECOmedical paid to their institution; consulting fees from Gilead, MSD, and MRM Health, all paid to their institution; and personal fees for lectures/presentations for Pfizer, Gilead, and FUJIFILM Wako. M. R. reports support for travel to Trends In Medical Mycology conference. J. J. reports grants from Novartis and BMS, both paid to their institution; payment for lectures from AbbVie, Novartis, Pfizer, and Incyte; and serving as president of the Apps for Care and Science, a nonprofit organization, supported by AbbVie, Alexion, Amgen, Astellas, BMS, Daiichi-Sankyo, Janssen-Cilag, Olympus, Incyte, Sanofi Genzyme, Servier, Jazz, and Takeda. J. B. reports research grants from Gilead Sciences, Inc, and F2G. P. V. reports research grants from F2G and Gilead, paid to their institution; honoraria for lectures from F2G, Gilead, and Pfizer, all paid to their institution; and participation on a data safety monitoring board for F2G, paid to their institution. S. H. reports support from Gilead for travel to the International Society for Human and Animal Mycology 2022 conference. B. R. reports research grants from Gilead Sciences, Inc; support for meetings/travel expenses from Gilead Sciences, Inc, F2G, and Pfizer; consulting fees from F2G; payment/honoraria for lectures/presentations from Gilead Sciences, Inc; and participation on a data safety monitoring board/advisory board for Exevir. All other authors report no potential conflicts. All authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

The longevity of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) has improved progressively over the past decades, making it essential to understand long-term health outcomes, such as second primary malignancies (SPMs). Therefore, this nationwide, population-based study assessed the risk of SPM development in CLL patients diagnosed during 1989-2019 in the Netherlands compared to the expected number of malignancies in an age-, sex-, and period-matched group from the general Dutch population. In 24,815 CLL patients followed for 162,698.49 person-years, 4369 SPMs were diagnosed with a standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of 1.63 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.59-1.68). This elevated risk was observed for solid (SIR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.65-1.75) and hematological SPMs (SIR 1.42; 95% CI, 1.24-1.62). The highest risk for SPMs was noted beyond five years post-diagnosis (SIR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.62-1.77), for male individuals (SIR, 1.70; 95% CI, 1.64-1.77), and patients aged 18-69 years (SIR, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.79-2.05). The risk of SPMs was higher in CLL patients who received anti-neoplastic therapy (SIR, 2.12; 95% CI, 1.96-2.28), as compared with those who did not (SIR, 1.58; 95% CI, 1.53-1.63). Routine surveillance activities and tailored interventions to counteract the increased morbidity and excess mortality associated with SPMs are essential for improving long-term outcomes in CLL patients., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Management of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is changing due to considerable advances in the therapeutic armamentarium, and new therapies will possibly continue to emerge in the near future. Therefore, the CLL working group of the Dutch-Belgium Haemato-Oncology Cooperative Group for Adults in the Netherlands (HOVON) necessitated revising the Dutch CLL guidelines. The current guideline is based on the expert opinion of the HOVON CLL working group members and focusses on well-designed clinical trials taking into account efficacy with special emphasis on toxicity, treatment duration and treatment intensity. This article provides recommendations on diagnosis, treatment strategies in front-line and relapsed setting and provides supportive care measurements during novel-based therapies as well as for infectious CLL-related complications. The recommendations presented here are intended to provide guidance for the management of CLL patients in the Netherlands, and take into account the availability of treatment strategies at the time of this publication.

Purpose: Proteasome inhibitors are effective in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM) but require parenteral administration and are associated with polyneuropathy. We investigated efficacy and toxicity of the less neurotoxic oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib combined with rituximab, in patients with relapsed WM., Methods: We conducted a multicenter phase I/II trial with ixazomib, rituximab, and dexamethasone (IRD). Induction consisted of eight cycles IRD wherein rituximab was started in cycle 3, followed by rituximab maintenance. Phase I showed feasibility of 4 mg ixazomib. Primary end point for phase II was overall response rate (ORR [≥ minimal response]) after induction., Results: A total of 59 patients were enrolled (median age, 69 years; range, 46-91 years). Median number of prior treatments was 2 (range, 1-7); 70% had an intermediate or high WM-IPSS (International Prognostic Scoring System for WM) score. After eight cycles, ORR was 71% (42 out of 59) (14% very good partial response [PR], 37% PR, and 20% minor response). Depth of response improved until month 12 (best ORR 85% [50 out of 59]: 15% very good PR, 46% PR, and 24% minor response). Median duration of response was 36 months. The average hematocrit level increased significantly (0.33-0.38 L/L) after induction ( P < .001). After two cycles of ixazomib and dexamethasone, immunoglobulin M levels decreased significantly (median 3,700-2,700 mg/dL, P < .0001). Median time to first response was 4 months. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were not reached. After median follow-up of 24 months (range, 7.4-54.3 months), progression-free survival and overall survival were 56% and 88%, respectively. Toxicity included mostly grade 2 or 3 cytopenias, grade 1 or 2 neurotoxicity, and grade 2 or 3 infections. No infusion-related reactions or immunoglobulin M flare occurred with use of subcutaneous rituximab. Quality of life improved significantly after induction. In total, 48 patients (81%) completed at least six cycles of IRD., Conclusion: Combination of IRD shows promising efficacy with manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed or refractory WM., Competing Interests: Marie José KerstenHonoraria: Novartis, Kite, a Gilead Company, RocheConsulting or Advisory Role: Novartis, Kite, a Gilead Company, Miltenyi Biotec, TakedaResearch Funding: Kite, a Gilead CompanyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Novartis, Kite, a Gilead Company, Roche, Celgene Monique C. MinnemaConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Alnylam, Gilead SciencesSpeakers' Bureau: Celgene/Bristol Myers SquibbTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Josephine M. I. VosConsulting or Advisory Role: Sanofi PasteurTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Efstathios KastritisHonoraria: Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Prothena, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Prothena, PfizerResearch Funding: Janssen Oncology, AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Genesis Pharma, Takeda, Pfizer Maria GavriatopoulouHonoraria: Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, TakedaConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Karyopharm TherapeuticsResearch Funding: NovartisTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Janssen Martine ChamuleauResearch Funding: BMS, Gilead Sciences, Genmab Dries DeerenConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Takeda, SanofiTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences Jeanette K. DoorduijnConsulting or Advisory Role: LillyTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Celgene Lara H. BöhmerTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Servier Meletios A. DimopoulosHonoraria: Amgen, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeigeneConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeigeneNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Studies on conditional relative survival (CRS) in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) have hitherto been lacking in the literature. We predicted up-to-date estimates of 5-year RS at diagnosis and for each additional year survived (i.e., CRS) up to 15 years post-diagnosis among CLL patients diagnosed during 2007-2020. We showed that 5-year CRS continues to decline gradually with each additional year survived in a contemporary era with access to novel-based agents, irrespective of age. This finding indicates that CLL patients continue to experience substantial excess mortality compared to an age- and sex-matched group from the general population., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest., (© 2021 The Authors. eJHaem published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: To analyze the effect of treatment on neurocognitive functioning and the association of neurocognition with radiological abnormalities in primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL)., Methods: One hundred and ninety-nine patients from a phase III trial (HOVON 105/ALLG NHL 24), randomized to standard chemotherapy with or without rituximab, followed in patients ≤60 years old by 30-Gy whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), were asked to participate in a neuropsychological evaluation before and during treatment, and up to 2 years posttreatment. Scores were transformed into a standardized z-score; clinically relevant changes were defined as a change in z-score of ≥1 SD. The effect of WBRT was analyzed in irradiated patients. All MRIs were centrally assessed for white matter abnormalities and cerebral atrophy, and their relation with neurocognitive scores over time in each domain was calculated., Results: 125/199 patients consented to neurocognitive evaluation. Statistically significant improvements in neurocognition were seen in all domains. A clinically relevant improvement was seen only in the motor speed domain, without differences between the arms. In the follow-up of irradiated patients (n = 43), no change was observed in any domain score, compared to after WBRT. Small but significant inverse correlations were found between neurocognitive scores over time and changes in white matter abnormalities (regression coefficients: -0.048 to -0.347) and cerebral atrophy (-0.212 to -1.774)., Conclusions: Addition of rituximab to standard treatment in PCNSL patients did not impact neurocognitive functioning up to 2 years posttreatment, nor did treatment with 30-Gy WBRT in patients ≤60 years old. Increased white matter abnormalities and brain atrophy showed weak associations with neurocognition., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma limited to the central nervous system. It has a poor prognosis. Consensus has been reached on the treatment of newly diagnosed patients with high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy, but whether the addition of the monoclonal anti-CD20 antibody rituximab improves survival, as it does in systemic B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, remains disputed. In this review, we reflect on the available evidence of the use of rituximab in PCNSL. Whether rituximab has any beneficial effect remains uncertain.

Introduction: To assess the value of the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)-score at baseline in predicting survival in adult primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) patients., Methods: In the HOVON 105/ ALLG NHL 24 phase III study patients with newly-diagnosed PCNSL were randomized between high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy with or without rituximab. Data on potential (MMSE-score), and known baseline prognostic factors (age, performance status, serum LDH, cerebrospinal fluid total protein, involvement of deep brain structures, multiple cerebral lesions, and the IELSG-score) were collected prospectively. Multivariable stepwise Cox regression analyses were used to assess the prognostic value of all factors on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) among patients with available MMSE score at baseline. Age was analyzed as continuous variable, the MMSE-score both as a continuous and as a categorical variable., Results: In univariable analysis, age, MMSE-score and whether the patient received rituximab were statistically significantly prognostic factors for PFS. Age and MMSE-score were statistically significantly associated with OS. In a multivariable analysis of the univariately significant factors only MMSE-score was independently associated with the survival endpoints, as a continuous variable (HR for PFS 1.04, 95% CI 1.01-1.08; OS 1.06 (95% CI 1.02-1.10) and as categorical variable HR (< 27 versus ≥ 27 for PFS 1.55 (1.02-2.35); OS 1.68 (1.05-2.70). In our population, performance status, serum LDH, and CSF protein level were not of prognostic value., Conclusion: Neurocognitive disturbances, measured with the MMSE at baseline, are an unfavorable prognostic factor for both PFS and OS in adult PCNSL patients up to 70 years-old.

Background: In primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), small enhancing lesions can persist after treatment. It is unknown whether a difference in response category (complete response [CR], complete response unconfirmed [CRu], or partial response [PR]) reflects survival. We aimed to determine the value of a central radiology review on response assessment and whether the extent of response influenced progression-free and/or overall survival., Methods: All patients in the HOVON 105/ALLG NHL 24 study with at least a baseline MRI and one MRI made for response evaluation available for central review were included. Tumor measurements were done by 2 independent central reviewers, disagreements were adjudicated by a third reviewer. Crude agreement and interobserver agreement (Cohen's kappa) were calculated. Differences in progression-free and overall survival between different categories of response at the end-of-protocol-treatment were assessed by the log-rank test in a landmark survival-analysis., Results: Agreement between the central reviewers was 61.7% and between local and central response assessment was 63.0%. Cohen's kappa's, which corrects for expected agreement, were 0.44 and 0.46 (moderate), respectively. Progression agreement or not was 93.3% (kappa 0.87) between local and central response assessment. There were no significant differences in progression-free and overall survival between patients with CR, CRu, or PR at the end-of-protocol-treatment, according to both local and central response assessment., Conclusions: Reliability of response assessment (CR/CRu/PR) is moderate even by central radiology review and these response categories do not reliably predict survival. Therefore, primary outcome in PCNSL studies should be survival rather than CR or CR/CRu-rate., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)

Background: Secondary CNS lymphoma is a rare but potentially lethal event in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. We aimed to assess the activity and safety of an intensive, CNS-directed chemoimmunotherapy consolidated by autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with secondary CNS lymphoma., Methods: This international, single-arm, phase 2 trial was done in 24 hospitals in Italy, the UK, the Netherlands, and Switzerland. Adults (aged 18-70 years) with histologically diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and CNS involvement at the time of primary diagnosis or at relapse and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of 3 or less were enrolled and received three courses of MATRix (rituximab 375 mg/m 2 , intravenous infusion, day 0; methotrexate 3·5 g/m 2 , the first 0·5 g/m 2 in 15 min followed by 3 g/m 2 in a 3 h intravenous infusion, day 1; cytarabine 2 g/m 2 every 12 h, in 1 h intravenous infusions, days 2 and 3; thiotepa 30 mg/m 2 , 30 min intravenous infusion, day 4) followed by three courses of RICE (rituximab 375 mg/m 2 , day 1; etoposide 100 mg/m 2 per day in 500-1000 mL over a 60 min intravenous infusion, days 1, 2, and 3; ifosfamide 5 g/m 2 in 1000 mL in a 24 h intravenous infusion with mesna support, day 2; carboplatin area under the curve of 5 in 500 mL in a 1 h intravenous infusion, day 2) and carmustine-thiotepa and autologous HSCT (carmustine 400 mg/m 2 in 500 mL glucose 5% solution in a 1-2 h infusion, day -6; thiotepa 5 mg/kg in saline solution in a 2 h infusion every 12 h, days -5 and -4). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival at 1 year. Overall and complete response rates before autologous HSCT, duration of response, overall survival, and safety were the secondary endpoints. Analyses were in the modified intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02329080. The trial ended after accrual completion; the database lock was Dec 31, 2019., Findings: Between March 30, 2015, and Aug 3, 2018, 79 patients were enrolled. 75 patients were assessable. 319 (71%) of the 450 planned courses were delivered. At 1 year from enrolment the primary endpoint was met, 42 patients were progression free (progression-free survival 58%; 95% CI 55-61). 49 patients (65%; 95% CI 54-76) had an objective response after MATRix-RICE, 29 (39%) of whom had a complete response. 37 patients who responded had autologous HSCT. At the end of the programme, 46 patients (61%; 95% CI 51-71) had an objective response, with a median duration of objective response of 26 months (IQR 16-37). At a median follow-up of 29 months (IQR 20-40), 35 patients were progression-free and 33 were alive, with a 2-year overall survival of 46% (95% CI 39-53). Grade 3-4 toxicity was most commonly haematological: neutropenia in 46 (61%) of 75 patients, thrombocytopenia in 45 (60%), and anaemia in 26 (35%). 79 serious adverse events were recorded in 42 (56%) patients; four (5%) of those 79 were lethal due to sepsis caused by Gram-negative bacteria (treatment-related mortality 5%; 95% CI 0·07-9·93)., Interpretation: MATRix-RICE plus autologous HSCT was active in this population of patients with very poor prognosis, and had an acceptable toxicity profile., Funding: Stand Up To Cancer Campaign for Cancer Research UK, the Swiss Cancer Research foundation, and the Swiss Cancer League., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

PTCL patients exhibit poor survival with existing treatments. We investigated the efficacy of CHOP combined with alemtuzumab in 116 PTCL patients age 61-80 in an open-label, randomized phase 3 trial. Alemtuzumab was given on day 1, to a total of 360 mg in 21 patients, or 120 mg in 37. Hematotoxicity was increased with A-CHOP resulting in more grade ≥3 infections (40% versus 21%) and 4 versus 1 death due to infections, respectively. CR/CRu rate was 60% for A-CHOP and 43% for CHOP, and OR rate was 72% and 66%, respectively. Three-year-EFS, PFS and OS were 27% [15%-39%], 28% [15%-40%], and 37% ([23%-50%] for A-CHOP, and 24% [12%-35%], 29% [17%-41%], and 56% [44%-69%] for CHOP, respectively, showing no significant differences. Multivariate analyses, adjusted for strata and sex confirmed these results (hazard ratio HR EFS : 0.7 ([95% CI: 0.5-1.1]; p = 0.094), HR PFS : 0.8 ([95% CI: 0.5-1.2]; p = 0.271), HR OS : 1.4 ([95% CI: 0.9-2.4]; p = 0.154). The IPI score was validated, and male sex (HR EFS 2.5) and bulky disease (HR EFS 2.2) were significant risk factors for EFS, PFS, and OS. Alemtuzumab added to CHOP increased response rates, but did not improve survival due to treatment-related toxicity.

Purpose: Immunochemotherapy with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) has become standard of care for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This randomized trial assessed whether rituximab intensification during the first 4 cycles of R-CHOP could improve the outcome of these patients compared with standard R-CHOP., Patients and Methods: A total of 574 patients with DLBCL age 18 to 80 years were randomly assigned to induction therapy with 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP-14 with (RR-CHOP-14) or without (R-CHOP-14) intensification of rituximab in the first 4 cycles. The primary end point was complete remission (CR) on induction. Analyses were performed by intention to treat., Results: CR was achieved in 254 (89%) of 286 patients in the R-CHOP-14 arm and 249 (86%) of 288 patients in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82; 95% CI, 0.50 to 1.36; P = .44). After a median follow-up of 92 months (range, 1-131 months), 3-year failure-free survival was 74% (95% CI, 68% to 78%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 69% (95% CI, 63% to 74%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.61; P = .07). Progression-free survival at 3 years was 74% (95% CI, 69% to 79%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 71% (95% CI, 66% to 76%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.55; P = .15). Overall survival at 3 years was 81% (95% CI, 76% to 85%) in the R-CHOP-14 arm versus 76% (95% CI, 70% to 80%) in the RR-CHOP-14 arm (HR, 1.27; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.67; P = .09). Patients between ages 66 and 80 years experienced significantly more toxicity during the first 4 cycles in the RR-CHOP-14 arm, especially neutropenia and infections., Conclusion: Early rituximab intensification during R-CHOP-14 does not improve outcome in patients with untreated DLBCL.

Despite recent identification of several prognostic markers, there is still a need for new prognostic parameters able to predict clinical outcome in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients. Here, we aimed to validate the prognostic ability of known (proteomic) markers measured pretreatment and to search for new proteomic markers that might be related to treatment response in CLL. To this end, baseline serum samples of 51 CLL patients treated with chemo-immunotherapy were analyzed for 360 proteomic markers, using Olink technology. Median event-free survival (EFS) was 23 months (range: 1.25-60.9). Patients with high levels of sCD23 (>11.27, p = 0.026), sCD27 (>11.03, p = 0.04), SPINT1 (>1.6, p = 0.001), and LY9 (>8.22, p = 0.0003) had a shorter EFS than those with marker levels below the median. The effect of sCD23 on EFS differed between immunoglobulin heavy chain variable gene-mutated and unmutated patients, with the shortest EFS for unmutated CLL patients with sCD23 levels above the median. Taken together, our results validate the prognostic impact of sCD23 and highlight SPINT1 and LY9 as possible promising markers for treatment response in CLL patients., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest disclosure None of the authors declared a conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2020 ISEH -- Society for Hematology and Stem Cells. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Avadomide (CC-122) is a novel oral cereblon-modulating agent with promising activity in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. We aimed to examine the safety and preliminary activity of avadomide plus obinutuzumab in patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma., Methods: CC-122-NHL-001 was a phase 1b dose escalation and expansion study at eight sites in France, Italy, and the Netherlands. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) had histologically confirmed CD20-positive relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, and had received previous treatment. In the dose expansion phase, only patients with previously treated relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (grade 1, 2, or 3a) were included. Avadomide was administered in escalating doses and two formulations: active pharmaceutical ingredient in capsule in 1·0 mg, 2·0 mg, 3·0 mg, and 4·0 mg doses and as formulated capsules in 3·0 mg and 4·0 mg doses orally once daily on days 1-5 followed by 2 days off (5-7-day schedule) every week of each 28-day cycle. Obinutuzumab 1000 mg was administered intravenously on days 2, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2-8. Primary objectives were to determine the safety and tolerability, the non-tolerated dose, maximum tolerated dose, and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). All patients who received treatment were included in the safety analyses. Efficacy-evaluable patients completed at least one cycle of treatment and had baseline and at least one post-baseline assessment. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02417285 and EudraCT 2014-003333-26, and is ongoing., Findings: Between June 24, 2015, and Dec 5, 2018, 73 patients were enrolled and treated; 19 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 53 follicular lymphoma, and one marginal zone lymphoma. Median follow-up was 253 days (IQR 127-448). The median number of previous anticancer regimens was three (IQR 2-4). The maximum tolerated dose and non-tolerated dose were not reached in the dose escalation phase. On the basis of safety and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic data, the avadomide RP2D was established as 3·0 mg as formulated capsules on a 5-7-day schedule in combination with 1000 mg of obinutuzumab. Patients enrolled in the expansion cohort received the established RP2D of avadomide. Across all doses, three patients had dose-limiting toxicities; one patient treated at the RP2D had dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 sepsis). The most common adverse events of grade 3 and above were neutropenia (41 [56%] of 73) and thrombocytopenia (17 [23%] of 73). 34 (47%) patients had serious adverse events, which were considered to be avadomide-related in 23 (32%) of 73 patients and obinutuzumab-related in 20 (27%) of 73 patients. Two treatment-related deaths occurred, one owing to tumour flare and one from acute myeloid leukaemia after study discontinuation., Interpretation: Avadomide plus obinutuzumab has a manageable toxicity, being a tolerable treatment option for most patients. Although the prespecified threshold for activity was not met in the trial, we believe that the preliminary antitumour activity of cereblon modulators plus next-generation anti-CD20 antibodies in heavily pretreated relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma warrants further investigation as a chemotherapy-free option in this setting., Funding: Celgene Corporation., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Rituximab-containing induction followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard first-line treatment for young mantle cell lymphoma patients. However, most patients relapse after ASCT. We investigated in a randomised phase II study the outcome of a chemo-immuno regimen and ASCT with or without maintenance therapy with bortezomib. Induction consisted of three cycles R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone), two cycles high-dose cytarabine, BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan) and ASCT. Patients responding were randomised between bortezomib maintenance (1·3 mg/m 2 intravenously once every 2 weeks, for 2 years) and observation. Of 135 eligible patients, 115 (85%) proceeded to ASCT, 60 (44%) were randomised. With a median follow-up of 77·5 months for patients still alive, 5-year event-free survival (EFS) was 51% (95% CI 42-59%); 5-year overall survival (OS) was 73% (95% CI 65-80%). The median follow-up of randomised patients still alive was 71·5 months. Patients with bortezomib maintenance had a 5-year EFS of 63% (95% CI 44-78%) and 5-year OS of 90% (95% CI 72-97%). The patients randomised to observation had 5-year PFS of 60% (95% CI, 40-75%) and OS of 90% (95% CI 72-97%). In conclusion, in this phase II study we found no indication of a positive effect of bortezomib maintenance after ASCT., (© 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The impact of rituximab on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in primary central nervous system lymphoma patients is not well known. We determined the impact of rituximab added to standard high-dose methotrexate-based treatment on HRQoL in patients in a large randomised trial., Patients and Methods: Patients from a large phase III trial (HOVON 105/ALLG NHL 24), randomly assigned to receive standard chemotherapy with or without rituximab and followed by 30 Gy whole brain radiotherapy (WBRT) in patients ≤60 years, completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BN20 questionnaires before and during treatment, and up to 24 months of follow-up or progression. Differences between treatment arms over time in global health status, role functioning, social functioning, fatigue, and motor dysfunction were assessed. Differences ≥10 points were deemed clinically relevant. The effect of WBRT on HRQoL was analysed in irradiated patients., Results: A total of 160/175 patients eligible for the HRQoL study completed at least one questionnaire and were included. Over time, scores improved statistically significantly and were clinically relevant in both arms. Between arms, there were no differences on any scale (range: -3.8 to +4.0). Scores on all scales were improved to a clinically relevant extent at 12 and 24 months compared with baseline in both arms, except for fatigue and motor dysfunction at 12 months (-7.4 and -8.8, respectively). In irradiated patients (n = 59), scores in all preselected scales, except motor dysfunction, remained stable up to 24 months compared with shortly after WBRT, overall mean difference ranging between 0.02 and 4.570., Conclusion: Compared with baseline, treatment resulted in improved HRQoL scores. The addition of rituximab to standard chemotherapy did not impact HRQoL over time. WBRT did not result in deterioration of HRQoL in the first 2 years., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors have declared no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 European Society for Medical Oncology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The treatment of primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is still under debate. One of the issues is the role of rituximab in improving the outcome. Here, we summarize the existing evidence, and comment on the literature on this topic., Recent Findings: Two randomized controlled studies have been published recently, with conflicting results. Although the evidence of the benefit of rituximab is limited, it is already incorporated into many treatment regimens, both in studies and in standard clinical practice. The use of rituximab in PCNSL is still a matter of debate. A positive effect on the outcome is uncertain. However, there are no clinical signs of significantly increased toxicity. The uncertain positive effect should therefore be weighed against the increased costs of the treatment.

Rituximab-containing chemotherapy remains a viable frontline treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the era of novel agents. However, its effectiveness in the second-line setting-in relation to previous rituximab exposure in first-line-has hardly been evaluated in a population-based setting. Therefore, in this comprehensive, population-based study, we assessed the impact of first-line treatment with rituximab-containing chemotherapy on the effectiveness of second-line treatment with rituximab-containing chemotherapy. We selected all 1735 patients diagnosed with CLL between 2004 and 2010 from the Dutch Population-based HAematological Registry for Observational Studies (PHAROS). The primary endpoint was treatment-free survival (TFS). First- and second-line treatment was instituted in 663 (38%) and 284 (43%) patients, respectively. In first line, the median TFS was 19.7 and 67.1 months for chemotherapy without (n = 445; 67%) and with rituximab (n = 218; 33%), respectively (adjusted hazard ratio [HR adjusted ], 0.83; P = 0.031). The median TFS among recipients of second-line chemotherapy without (n = 165; 57%) and with rituximab (n = 121; 42%) was 15.0 and 15.3 months, respectively (HR adjusted , 0.93; P = 0.614). Of the 121 patients who received rituximab-containing chemotherapy in second-line, 89 (74%) and 32 (26%) received first-line chemotherapy without and with rituximab, respectively. Median TFS in these two treatment groups was 18.3 and 12.1 months, respectively (HR adjusted , 1.71; P = 0.060). Collectively, in this population-based study, the effectiveness of first-line treatment with rituximab-containing chemotherapy was less pronounced in second-line treatment. The hampered effectiveness of rituximab-containing chemotherapy in second-line could not be explained by previous rituximab exposure.

Purpose: In an update of the randomized, open-label, phase III European Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) Elderly trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00209209), published in 2012, we aimed to confirm results on long-term outcome focusing on efficacy and safety of long-term use of rituximab maintenance., Patients and Methods: Five hundred sixty patients with newly diagnosed MCL underwent a first random assignment between rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) and rituximab, fludarabine, and cyclophosphamide (R-FC) induction, followed by a second random assignment in 316 responders between rituximab and interferon alfa maintenance, to be continued until progression. We compared progression-free survival from the second randomization and overall survival (OS) from the first or second randomizations., Results: After a median follow-up time of 7.6 years, the previously described difference in OS between the induction arms persisted (median, 6.4 years after R-CHOP [n = 280] v 3.9 years after R-FC [n = 280]; P = .0054). Patients responding to R-CHOP had median progression-free survival and OS times of 5.4 and 9.8 years, respectively, when randomly assigned to rituximab (n = 87), compared with 1.9 years ( P < .001) and 7.1 years ( P = .0026), respectively, when randomly assigned to interferon alfa (n = 97). In 58% and 32% of patients treated with R-CHOP, rituximab maintenance was still ongoing 2 and 5 years from start of maintenance, respectively. After R-FC, rituximab maintenance was associated with an unexpectedly high cumulative incidence of death in remission (22% at 5 years). Toxicity of rituximab maintenance was low after R-CHOP (grade 3-4 leukopenia or infection < 5%) but more prominent in patients on rituximab maintenance after R-FC, in whom grade 3-4 leukopenia (up to 40%) and infections were frequent (up to 15%)., Conclusion: The excellent results of R-CHOP followed by rituximab maintenance until progression for older patients with MCL persisted in a mature follow-up. Prolongation of rituximab maintenance beyond 2 years is effective and safe.

The CD-20 antibody rituximab is a standard component of treatment of non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphomas, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Primary DLBCL of the central nervous system, also called primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL), is a DLBCL confined to the central nervous system. There has been debate whether intravenous rituximab accumulates sufficiently in the central nervous system to exert an effect. In this systematic review, we assess the benefits and harms of rituximab in the treatment of immunocompetent patients with PCNSL. By searching MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClincialTrials.gov up to March 2019, we identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of rituximab in patients with PCNSL. We extracted study characteristics and results, assessed risk of bias, performed trial-level random-effects meta-analyses, and graded the certainty of evidence. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42019121965). Main outcomes were overall survival (time to death), progression-free survival (time to progression or death), quality of life, grades 3 and 4 toxicity, and treatment-related mortality. We included two RCTs with a total of 343 participants. Overall survival was not statistically significantly improved (HR 0.76; 95% CI, 0.52-1.12; low certainty), with 187 fewer to 39 more deaths after 2 years in 1000 treated patients. Low certainty of evidence indicated that rituximab improved progression-free survival (HR 0.65; 95% CI, 0.45-0.95), which translated into 137 fewer progressions or deaths after 2 years in 1000 treated patients (231 to 18 fewer). None of the RCTs provided data on quality of life. We found no evidence that rituximab increased grades 3 and 4 toxicity or treatment-related mortality (RR 0.53; 95% CI, 0.20-1.37; low certainty). Overall, the available evidence suggests with low certainty that rituximab in combination with methotrexate-based chemotherapy may improve progression-free survival in immunocompetent patients with newly diagnosed PCNSL, the pooled effect estimates did not show evidence for improvement of overall survival., (©2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Infectious mononucleosis may mimic lymphoma, both clinically and histopathologically. We present a patient with neurological symptoms and lymphadenopathy, initially diagnosed as Epstein-Barr virus (EBV)-positive angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) localisation based on lymph node pathology and a 30-fold higher EBV load in the CSF compared with serum. However, the patient fully recovered spontaneously and EBV became negative in both CSF and serum, suggestive of a dramatic presentation of EBV meningoencephalitis.

Patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) after, or ineligible for, autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) have a dismal prognosis. This phase II study evaluated treatment with R-PECC (rituximab, prednisolone, etoposide, chlorambucil, lomustine), every 28 days for 4 cycles in 62 patients, followed by radio-immunotherapy consolidation with 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan in responsive patients. Primary endpoints were failure-free survival (FFS) and incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events from start of 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan. The overall response rate after R-PECC was 50%. Twenty-nine of 31 responsive patients proceeded to 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan. Five out of 15 partial remission patients converted to complete remission after 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan. One-year FFS and overall survival (OS) from start of 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan was 52% (95% confidence interval [CI], 33-68%) and 62% (95% CI, 42-77%), respectively. One-year FFS and OS from start of R-PECC was 28% (95% CI, 17-39%) and 49% (95% CI, 36-61%), respectively. Toxicities of R-PECC and 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan were mainly haematological. In conclusion, for relapsed DLBCL patients the largely oral R-PECC regimen achieves promising response rates, combined with an acceptable safety profile. Consolidation with 90 Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan resulted in long-term response durations in approximately one third of the patients that received it., (© 2019 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The prognosis for primary CNS lymphoma has improved with the use of high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy, but patient outcomes remain poor. Rituximab, a chimeric monoclonal antibody that targets the CD20 cell surface protein, has substantial activity in systemic CD20-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, but its efficacy in primary CNS lymphoma is unknown and low penetration of the large rituximab molecule through the blood-brain barrier could limit its effect. We aimed to investigate the addition of rituximab to a high-dose methotrexate-based chemotherapy regimen in patients with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma., Methods: This intergroup, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 study was done at 23 hospitals in the Netherlands, Australia, and New Zealand. Non-immunocompromised patients aged 18-70 years with newly diagnosed primary CNS lymphoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive methotrexate-based chemotherapy with or without intravenous rituximab. We used a web-based randomisation system with stratification by centre, age, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-WHO performance status, and a minimisation procedure. All group assignment was open label and neither investigators nor patients were masked to allocation. All patients were treated with two 28-day cycles of induction chemotherapy, consisting of intravenous methotrexate 3 g per m 2 on days 1 and 15, intravenous carmustine 100 mg per m 2 on day 4, intravenous teniposide 100 mg per m 2 on days 2 and 3, and oral prednisone 60 mg per m 2 on days 1-5, with (R-MBVP) or without (MBVP) intravenous rituximab 375 mg per m 2 on days 0, 7, 14, and 21 in cycle one and days 0 and 14 in cycle two. Patients with response at the end of induction subsequently received high-dose cytarabine and, in patients aged 60 years or younger, low-dose whole-brain radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was event-free survival, with events defined as not reaching complete response or complete response unconfirmed at the end of treatment, or progression or death after response; analysis was adjusted for age and performance score. Patients were analysed on a modified intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with the Nederlands Trial Register, number NTR2427, and the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, number ACTRN12610000908033. The trial was closed on May 27, 2016, after achieving complete accrual, and follow-up is ongoing., Findings: Between Aug 3, 2010, and May 27, 2016, we recruited 200 patients (109 men and 91 women; median age was 61 years [IQR 55-67]). We randomly assigned 100 patients to MBVP and 99 patients to R-MBVP. One patient was randomly assigned to the R-MBVP group but found to be ineligible because of an incorrect diagnosis and was excluded from all analyses. After a median follow-up of 32·9 months (IQR 23·9-51·5), 98 patients had had an event (51 in the MBVP group and 47 in the R-MBVP group), of whom 79 had died (41 in the MBVP group and 38 in the R-MBVP group). Event-free survival at 1 year was 49% (95% CI 39-58) in the MBVP group (no rituximab) and 52% (42-61) in the R-MBVP group (with rituximab; hazard ratio 1·00, 95% CI 0·70-1·43, p=0·99). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 58 (58%) patients in the MBVP group and 63 (64%) patients in the R-MBVP group, with infections (24 [24%] patients receiving MBVP vs 21 [21%] patients receiving R-MBVP), haematological toxicity (15 [15%] vs 12 [12%]), and nervous system disorders (ten [10%] vs 15 [15%]) being the most common. Life-threatening or fatal serious adverse events occurred in 12 (12%) patients in the MBVP group and ten (10%) patients in the R-MBVP group, and five (5%) patients in the MBVP group and three (3%) in the R-MBVP group died from treatment-related causes., Interpretation: We found no clear benefit of addition of rituximab to methotrexate, carmustine, teniposide, and prednisone chemotherapy in primary CNS lymphoma. Therefore, the results of this study do not support the use of rituximab as a component of standard treatment in primary CNS lymphoma., Funding: Roche, the Dutch Cancer Society, and Stichting STOPhersentumoren., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Lenalidomide has been proven to be effective but with a distinct and difficult to manage toxicity profile in the context of chronic lymphocytic leukemia, potentially hampering combination treatment with this drug. We conducted a phase 1-2 study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of six cycles of chlorambucil (7 mg/m 2 daily), rituximab (375 mg/m 2 cycle 1 and 500 mg/m 2 cycles 2-6) and individually-dosed lenalidomide (escalated from 2.5 mg to 10 mg) (induction-I) in first-line treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia unfit for treatment with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab. This was followed by 6 months of 10 mg lenalidomide monotherapy (induction-II). Of 53 evaluable patients in phase 2 of the study, 47 (89%) completed induction-I and 36 (68%) completed induction-II. In an intention-to-treat analysis, the overall response rate was 83%. The median progression-free survival was 49 months, after a median follow-up time of 27 months. The 2- and 3-year progression-free survival rates were 58% and 54%, respectively. The corresponding rates for overall survival were 98% and 95%. No tumor lysis syndrome was observed, while tumor flair reaction occurred in five patients (9%, 1 grade 3). The most common hematologic toxicity was grade 3-4 neutropenia, which occurred in 73% of the patients. In conclusion, addition of lenalidomide to a chemotherapy backbone followed by a fixed duration of lenalidomide monotherapy resulted in high remission rates and progression-free survival rates, which seem comparable to those observed with novel drug combinations including novel CD20 monoclonal antibodies or kinase inhibitors. Although lenalidomide-specific toxicity remains a concern, an individualized dose-escalation schedule is feasible and results in an acceptable toxicity profile. EuraCT number: 2010-022294-34 ., (Copyright© 2019 Ferrata Storti Foundation.)

Background: To assess the sensitivity, specificity and turnaround time of flow cytometric analysis on brain biopsies compared to histology plus immunohistochemistry analysis in tumors with clinical suspicion of lymphoma., Methods: All brain biopsies performed between 2010 and 2015 at our institution and analyzed by both immunohistochemistry and flow cytometry were included in this retrospective study. Immunohistochemistry was considered the gold standard., Results: In a total of 77 biopsies from 71 patients, 49 lymphomas were diagnosed by immunohistochemistry, flow cytometry results were concordant in 71 biopsies (92.2%). We found a specificity and sensitivity of flow cytometry of 100% and 87.8%, respectively. The time between the biopsy and reporting the result (turnaround time) was significantly shorter for flow cytometry, compared to immunohistochemistry (median: 1 vs. 5 days)., Conclusions: Flow cytometry has a high specificity and can confirm the diagnosis of a lymphoma significantly faster than immunohistochemistry. This allows for rapid initiation of treatment in this highly aggressive tumor. However, since its sensitivity is less than 100%, we recommend to perform histology plus immunohistochemistry in parallel to flow cytometry. © 2018 The Authors. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Clinical Cytometry Society., (© 2018 The Authors. Cytometry Part B: Clinical Cytometry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Clinical Cytometry Society.)

Patients with haematological malignancies are at risk for invasive fungal diseases (IFD). A survey was conducted in all Dutch academic haematology centres on their current diagnostic, prophylactic and therapeutic approach towards IFD in the context of azole-resistance. In all 8 centres, a haematologist and microbiologist filled in the questionnaire that focused on different subgroups of haematology patients. Fungal prophylaxis during neutropaenia was directed against Candida and consisted of fluconazole and/or amphotericin B suspension. Mould-active prophylaxis was given to acute myeloid leukaemia patients during chemotherapy in 2 of 8 centres. All centres used azole prophylaxis in a subset of patients with graft-versus-host disease. A uniform approach towards the diagnosis and treatment of IFD and in particular azole-resistant Aspergillus fumigatus was lacking. In 2017, all centres agreed to implement a uniform diagnostic and treatment algorithm regarding invasive aspergillosis with a central role for comprehensive diagnostics and PCR-based detection of azole-resistance. This study (DB-MSG 002) will re-evaluate this algorithm when 280 patients have been treated. A heterogeneous approach towards antifungal prophylaxis, diagnosis and treatment was apparent in the Netherlands. Facing triazole-resistance, consensus was reached on the implementation of a uniform diagnostic approach in all 8 centres., (© 2018 The Authors. Mycoses Published by Blackwell Verlag GmbH.)

Introduction: Central nervous system (CNS) involvement, especially involvement of the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), is common in several haematological malignancies. Intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy can be used to manage CSF involvement., Methods: Here we evaluated the effectiveness of IT chemotherapy among 80 patients with haematological malignancies and CSF localization who were treated with IT chemotherapy from 2001 to 2012., Results: The majority of patients was diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (26%) or acute lymphoblastic leukaemia/lymphoblastic lymphoma (19%). After first-line IT chemotherapy, which mainly consisted of methotrexate (MTX) and corticosteroids, CSF complete response (CSF CR) was achieved in 76% of patients. 91% reached CSF CR when including second-line IT-chemotherapy. Clinical response was documented in 75%. Although most patients were additionally treated with systemic chemotherapy, response rate did not differ between patients treated with CNS-penetrating and CNS-non-penetrating drugs. CNS progression/relapse occurred in 40% of patients with median progression-free survival of 12.2 months. The median overall survival was 18.3 months; 55% of the patients died during follow-up., Conclusions: Our analysis shows a high response rate after first-line IT chemotherapy, but also a relatively high progression/relapse percentage.

Purpose: Cyclosporine A (CsA) is the most widely used immunosuppressive agent after a hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Although recommendations for CsA dose conversion from intravenous to oral administration differ from 1:1 to 1:3, most studies did not consider the role of azole antifungals as an important confounder. Therefore, we assess the optimal conversion rate of CsA from intravenous to oral administration in HSCT recipients, taking into account the concomitant use of azole antifungals., Methods: We retrospectively included patients from a large database of 483 patients who underwent a HSCT and received intravenous CsA as part of the conditioning regimen and peritransplant immunosuppression. All patients were converted from intravenous to oral administration in a 1:1 conversion rate. We collected for each patient three CsA trough concentrations during intravenous and oral administration, directly before and after conversion to oral administration., Results: We included 71 patients; 50 patients co-treated with fluconazole, 10 with voriconazole, and 11 without azole co-medication. In patients with voriconazole, the dose-corrected CsA concentration (CsA concentration divided by CsA dosage) was not different between intravenous and oral administration (2.6% difference, p = 0.754), suggesting a CsA oral bioavailability of nearly 100%. In patients with fluconazole and without azole co-medication, the dose-corrected CsA concentration was respectively 21.5% (p < 0.001) and 25.2% (p = 0.069) lower during oral administration., Conclusions: In patients with voriconazole, CsA should be converted 1:1 from intravenous to oral administration. In patients with fluconazole and without azole co-medication, a 1:1.3 substitution is advised to prevent subtherapeutic CsA concentrations.