Search

PDF file - 45KB

Clinical Study Protocol: A Phase I Trial of Sirolimus or Everolimus or Temsirolimus (mTOR inhibitor) and Vorinostat (Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor) in Patients with Advanced Cancer

Representative images of selected patients with therapy response.

In patients treated with vorinostat and sirolimus, there was a trend towards a longer median progression-free survival in patients with ECOG performance status 0 compared to ECOG 1 or 2 (not reached vs. 4.6 months, 95% CI 1.5-7.7; P = 0.06).

Purpose: The antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) brentuximab vedotin comprises a CD30-directed antibody covalently attached to the potent antimicrotubule agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) via a protease-cleavable linker. This study explored the safety, maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), and activity of weekly dosing of brentuximab vedotin in patients with relapsed or refractory CD30-positive hematologic malignancies.Experimental Design: In this phase I dose-escalation study, brentuximab vedotin was administered intravenously on Days 1, 8, and 15, of each 28-day cycle at doses ranging from 0.4 to 1.4 mg/kg. Forty-four patients were enrolled: 38 with Hodgkin lymphoma, five with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma, and one with peripheral T-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified. Doses were escalated in increments of 0.2 mg/kg until dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed. Patients were monitored for antitherapeutic antibodies and pharmacokinetic parameters. Antitumor assessments were carried out every two cycles.Results: The MTD was 1.2 mg/kg. The most common adverse events were peripheral sensory neuropathy, fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, arthralgia, and pyrexia; and the majority of events were mild to moderate in severity. Tumor regression occurred in 85% of patients and the overall objective response rate was 59% (n = 24), with 34% (n = 14) complete remissions. The median duration of response was not reached at a median follow-up of 45 weeks on study.Conclusions: Weekly administration of brentuximab vedotin resulted in tumor regression and durable remissions in patients with CD30-positive malignancies. This ADC was associated with manageable toxicity, including peripheral neuropathy. Further study in CD30-positive malignancies is warranted. Clin Cancer Res; 18(1); 248–55. ©2011 AACR.

Protocol: Data Analysis of Patients Treated Off-protocol

Purpose:Preclinical and early clinical data suggested that combining histone deacetylase (HDAC) and mTOR inhibitors can synergistically inhibit Hodgkin lymphoma.Patients and Methods:During the dose-escalation study (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01087554) with the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat and the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus (V+S), a patient with Hodgkin lymphoma refractory to nine prior therapies demonstrated a partial response (PR) lasting for 18.5 months, which promoted additional enrollment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma as well as exploration of an alternative combination of vorinostat and mTOR inhibitor everolimus (V+E).Results:A total of 40 patients with refractory Hodgkin lymphoma received V+S (n = 22) or V+E (n = 18). Patients received a median of five prior therapies, including brentuximab (n = 39), autologous stem cell transplantation (n = 26), and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (n = 12). The most frequent grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event was thrombocytopenia in 55% and 67% of patients treated with V+S and V+E, respectively. Complete response was reported in 6 (27%) patients treated with V+S and 2 (11%) patients treated with V+E, and PR was reported in 6 patients (27%) treated with V+S and 4 (22%) patients treated with V+E (objective response rate of 55% and 33%, respectively). In summary, combined HDAC and mTOR inhibition had encouraging activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and warrants further investigation.Conclusions:Combined HDAC and mTOR inhibition has salutary activity in patients with relapsed refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and warrants further investigation.

PDF file - 67KB, Median duration of overall objective response and complete remission by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

In patients treated with vorinostat and everolimus, there was a longer median progression-free survival in patients with normal albumin compared to patients with low albumin (5.8 months, 4.4 - 7.2 vs. 1.6 months, 95% CI 1.3-1.9; P < 0.001).

In patients treated with vorinostat and everolimus, there was a longer median progression-free survival in patients with normal LDH compared to patients with high LDH (5.8 months, 4.4 - 7.2 vs. 1.6 months, 95% CI 1.3-1.9; P < 0.001).

PDF file - 73KB, Suppl Table 1. Multiple Dose Pharmacokinetic Parameters for MMAE Suppl Table 2. Best Clinical Response Rate by Diagnosisa (efficacy evaluable population).

Supplementary Table 1. Durations of dose interruptions in vorinostat and sirolimus arm; Supplementary Table 2. Durations of dose interruptions in vorinostat and everolimus arm

PDF file - 76KB, Dose proportionality. (A) --- Area under the curve for brentuximab vedotin; (B) --- Area under the curve for free MMAE

Background Since Food and Drug Administration approval of brentuximab vedotin in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A + CHP) as initial therapy for previously untreated CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL), there has been limited research on real-world patient characteristics, treatment patterns, and clinical outcomes. Methods We retrospectively analyzed claims of patients with PTCL treated with frontline A + CHP or CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) using the Symphony Health Solutions database. Adults with International Classification of Diseases-9/10 PTCL diagnosis codes who initiated A + CHP or CHOP between November 2018 and July 2021 were included. A 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed that adjusted for potential confounders between groups. Results A total of 1344 patients were included (A + CHP, n = 749; CHOP, n = 595). Before matching, 61% were men; median age at index was 62 (A + CHP) and 69 (CHOP) years. The most common A + CHP-treated PTCL subtypes were systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL; 51%), PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS; 30%), and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL; 12%); the most common CHOP-treated subtypes were PTCL-NOS (51%) and AITL (19%). After matching, similar proportions of patients treated with A + CHP and CHOP received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (89% vs. 86%, P = .3). Fewer patients treated with A + CHP received subsequent therapy than CHOP overall (20% vs. 30%, P Conclusions Characteristics and management of this real-world PTCL population who were older and had a higher comorbidity burden than that in the ECHELON-2 trial demonstrate the importance of retrospective studies when assessing the impact of new regimens on clinical practice.

PURPOSE We surveyed oncologists who treat classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) as part of the CONNECT study to understand the treatment decision‐making process, including the impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging. METHODS US physicians self-identifying as oncologists, hematologists, or hematologists/oncologists with ≥2 years of practice experience who treated ≥1 adult with stage III/IV cHL in the frontline setting in the last year were surveyed (October 19-November 16, 2020). Physician demographics, guideline adherence, and PET/CT utilization, interpretation, and access barriers were assessed. RESULTS In total, 301 physicians participated in the survey. Eighty-eight percent of physicians gave somewhat-to-significant consideration to NCCN guidelines. Most physicians (94%; n = 284) reported obtaining a PET/CT scan at diagnosis; of these physicians, 97% reported obtaining an interim PET/CT scan for stage III/IV cHL, with 65% typically obtaining an interim PET/CT scan after cycle 2. The Deauville 5-point scale (5PS) was the primary scoring system used to review PET/CT results by 62% of physicians, with a positive score defined as ≥3 by 44%, ≥4 by 37%, and ≥2 by 12% of physicians. Fifty-five percent of physicians reported difficulty in obtaining PET/CT scans. CONCLUSION Although most physicians considered NCCN guidelines when treating patients with stage III/IV cHL, interim PET/CT scans after cycle 2 were not universally obtained. When PET/CT scans were obtained, Deauville 5PS scores were not always provided, and variability existed on what defined a positive score. These findings suggest that opportunities exist for education and improved PET-adapted treatment approaches.

Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) are a unique subset of lymphomas with a poor prognosis due to limited treatment options. We performed a phase 1 study of carfilzomib in patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL to determine the safety profile and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this agent. The study was a classical 3 + 3 phase 1 design with intra-patient dose escalation allowed beginning on day 8 of cycle 1 and subsequently. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as the occurrence of any grade 3/4 adverse event. Carfilzomib was given on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of a 28-day cycle. Fifteen patients were enrolled from 3 centers. The median age of patients was 62. The median number of prior therapies for subjects on this trial was five. The MTD of carfilzomib was 36 mg/m2. Dose-limiting toxicities included anemia and sepsis. Serious adverse events were seen in 45% of patients. Single-agent carfilzomib leads to a complete response in one patient and a partial response in one patient. Overall, the drug was reasonably tolerated for a heavily pretreated population, but the limited response rate and short duration of response demonstrate a lack of promise for carfilzomib as a single agent in this patient population.

R-FND (rituximab, fludarabine, mitoxantrone, and dexamethasone) can induce molecular remissions in indolent lymphoma. The addition of 90yttrium ibritumomab tiuxetan (90YIT) radioimmunotherapy following first-line induction treatment in patients with advanced follicular lymphoma (FL) may improve remission rates. We now report 10-year follow-up results from our sequential treatment approach with an abbreviated regimen of R-FND followed by 90YIT consolidation and rituximab maintenance. Forty-nine patients were enrolled; 47 received treatment. Patients had high-risk (FLIPI score ≥3) FL of grade 1-3A and stage III/IV with adequate hematologic function. Following R-FND, the complete and partial response rates were 91% and 8.5%, respectively. After 90YIT consolidation, the CR rate increased to 97%. The 10-year PFS rate was 49%. The most common non-hematologic, grade 3 or 4 adverse events were fatigue, dyspnea, and myalgia. Five developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). This treatment approach is most appropriate in FLIPI-based high-risk patients whose outlook with standard therapy is inadequate.

PURPOSE Burkitt lymphoma is an aggressive B-cell lymphoma curable with dose-intensive chemotherapy derived from pediatric leukemia regimens. Treatment is acutely toxic with late sequelae. We hypothesized that dose-adjusted etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone, and rituximab (DA-EPOCH-R) may obviate the need for highly dose-intensive chemotherapy in adults with Burkitt lymphoma. METHODS We conducted a multicenter risk-adapted study of DA-EPOCH-R in untreated adult Burkitt lymphoma. Low-risk patients received three cycles without CNS prophylaxis, and high-risk patients received six cycles with intrathecal CNS prophylaxis or extended intrathecal treatment if leptomeninges were involved. The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS), and secondary endpoints were toxicity and predictors of EFS and overall survival (OS). RESULTS Between 2010 and 2017, 113 patients were enrolled across 22 centers, and 98 (87%) were high risk. The median age was 49 (range, 18-86) years, and 62% were ≥ 40 years. Bone marrow and/or CSF was involved in 29 (26%) of patients, and 28 (25%) were HIV positive. At a median follow-up of 58.7 months, EFS and OS were 84.5% and 87.0%, respectively, and EFS was 100% and 82.1% in low- and high-risk patients. Therapy was equally effective across age groups, HIV status, and International Prognostic Index risk groups. Involvement of the CSF identified the group at greatest risk for early toxicity-related death or treatment failure. Five treatment-related deaths (4%) occurred during therapy. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 16% of cycles, and tumor lysis syndrome was rare. CONCLUSION Risk-adapted DA-EPOCH-R therapy is effective in adult Burkitt lymphoma regardless of age or HIV status and was well tolerated. Improved therapeutic strategies for adults with CSF involvement are needed (funded by the National Cancer Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01092182 ).

7528 Background: Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) is a rare disease that commonly occurs in adolescents and young adults (AYAs) which is typically defined as 15 to 39 years. Given their young age at presentation, key factors in treatment selection include a high cure rate and limiting long-term toxicities. Brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris®; A) is a CD30-directed ADC approved in combination with doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine chemotherapy (A+AVD) for adults with previously untreated stage III/IV cHL based on results from the phase 3 ECHELON-1 trial. Recent 5-year data demonstrated a significantly improved PFS per investigator (INV) vs doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) (HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54–0.9; P = 0.003) (Straus 2020). Here we describe key efficacy and safety results for AYA pts enrolled in ECHELON-1. Methods: ECHELON-1 (N = 1334) is a global, open-label, multicenter, randomized trial of pts with previously untreated stage III/IV cHL. A total of 771 AYAs (57.8%) received either A+AVD (n = 396) or ABVD (n = 375) with a PET scan after cycle 2 (PET2). An analysis of PFS (time from randomization to progression or death from any cause) per INV was conducted. Results: After a median follow-up of 60.7 months (95% CI, 60.4-61.0), there was a 36% reduction in the risk of progression or death in AYAs receiving A+AVD vs ABVD (HR 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45-0.92; P = 0.013) with a 5-year PFS of 86.3% vs 79.4%, respectively, similar to the ITT population. The PFS benefit of A+AVD vs ABVD was independent of PET2 status; PET2 positivity (Deauville 4-5) was 6% and 8%, respectively. On the A+AVD arm, 81 AYAs (20%) had at least 1 subsequent anticancer therapy vs 96 AYAs (26%) on the ABVD arm; 26 AYAs (7%) received subsequent high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant vs 32 AYAs (9%) on the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively. Resolution or improvement of peripheral neuropathy (PN) were similar in both arms; 224 AYAs (88%) on the A+AVD had resolution or improvement of PN vs 133 AYAs (89%) on the ABVD arm. Ongoing PN was predominantly Gr 1 (62%) and Gr 2 (26%), with 8 AYAs (13%) on the A+AVD arm and 1 AYA (5%) on the ABVD arm reporting ongoing Gr 3 PN. Finally, 7 AYAs (1.8%) and 5 AYAs (1.4%) on the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively, reported a secondary malignancy. Subsequent pregnancies were reported in female pts (44 A+AVD; 26 ABVD) and partners of male pts (31 A+AVD; 30 ABVD). No stillbirths were reported. All but 1 pt in each arm was < 40. Conclusions: Consistent with the ITT population, AYAs treated with A+AVD compared to ABVD had a durable PFS benefit at this significant 5-year milestone. No impact on the rate of secondary malignancies and a numerically greater number of pregnancies were observed, outcomes of interest to AYAs. Additionally, the majority of PN events improved or resolved over time. A+AVD should be considered a treatment option for AYAs with stage III/IV cHL. Clinical trial information: NCT01712490.

Introduction Historically, nearly all relapses in classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) occur within the first 5 years (Radford et al, BMJ 1997). In the phase 3 ECHELON-1 study (NCT01712490), treatment with brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (A+AVD) significantly improved modified progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with newly-diagnosed Stage III/IV cHL compared with doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) (Connors et al, NEJM 2018). 3- and 4-year follow-up (Straus et al, Blood 2020; Bartlett et al, Blood 2019) reported durable PFS benefit with A+AVD vs ABVD in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population that was consistent across most key pt subgroups, irrespective of interim positron emission tomography (PET) scan status, disease stage, and baseline disease risk factor score. We report updated efficacy and safety results for pts in the ECHELON-1 study after a median follow-up of 55.6 months. Methods In this evaluation of longer follow-up, an exploratory analysis of PFS (time from randomization to relapse, progression, or death from any cause) per investigator (INV) was conducted, with a cutoff date of May 18, 2020. Pts with previously untreated Stage III or IV cHL were randomized 1:1 to receive up to six cycles of A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670) intravenously on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. An interim PET scan after cycle 2 (PET2) was required. Resolution and improvement (defined as improvement by ≥1 grade from worst grade as of the latest assessment) of peripheral neuropathy (PN) in pts with ongoing symptoms at the end of treatment (EoT) were monitored during the extended follow-up period. The rate of secondary malignancies, and the incidence and outcomes of pregnancies among pts and their partners were also assessed. Results With extended follow-up (median 55.6 months; 95% CI 55.2-56.7) estimated 5-year PFS rates were 82.0% (95% CI 78.7-84.8) for A+AVD and 75.2% (95% CI 71.5-78.4) for ABVD. Overall, PFS per INV favored A+AVD over ABVD (HR 0.691; 95% CI 0.543-0.880; p=0.003) (Table). Exploratory subgroup analyses by PET2 status and age demonstrated PFS benefits regardless of PET2 status (Table); estimated 5-year PFS per INV with A+AVD vs ABVD in the ITT population was 84.7% vs 78.8% in PET2-negative pts (HR 0.676; 95% CI 0.512-0.892; p=0.005), and 60.6% vs 45.9% in PET2-positive pts (HR 0.703; 95% CI 0.393-1.256; p=0.230). PFS benefit with A+AVD over ABVD was also independent of the number of International Prognostic Factors Project (IPFP) risk factors (Figure). After a median follow-up of almost 5-years, 84% (370/442) and 86% (245/286) of pts with treatment-emergent PN reported complete resolution or improvement of symptoms in the A+AVD and ABVD arms, respectively. Median time to complete resolution of PN events that were ongoing at EoT was 30 weeks (range 0-262) in the A+AVD arm and 16 weeks (range 0-267) in the ABVD arm; median time to improvement was 49 weeks (range 8-270) and 12 weeks (range 2-70) , respectively. Of the 132 (30%) pts with ongoing PN in the A+AVD arm, 77 (17%), 39 (9%), 15 (3%) and 1 ( Conclusions After a median follow-up of 55.6 months, A+AVD continues to demonstrate a robust and durable treatment benefit independent of disease stage, risk factor score, and PET2 status. In addition, compared with ABVD, treatment adaptation by interim PET2 status is not required and bleomycin exposure is avoided. The sustained PFS benefit with A+AVD is coupled with a manageable safety profile with symptoms of PN improving or resolving over time and similar pregnancy rates in both treatment arms. The benefits observed with A+AVD at this important milestone suggest that A+AVD is an attractive treatment option for all pts with previously untreated Stage III or IV cHL. Disclosures Straus: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imedex, Inc.: Speakers Bureau; Targeted Oncology: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; NY Lymphoma Rounds: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; OncLive: Speakers Bureau; Elsevier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: CME writer; ASH: Other: Conference in December 2019 on HL to other physicians during ASH; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Connors:Seattle Genetics: Other: Sponsorship to educational presentations; Takeda: Other: Sponsorship to educational presentations. Illés:Takeda, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche;: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Novartis Pharma SAS, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Israel, Roche;: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene, Janssen, Novartis,Roche, Takeda: Consultancy. Lech-Marańda:Roche, Novartis, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Amgen, Gilead, AbbVie, Sanofi: Consultancy; Roche, Amgen, Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Feldman:KITE: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosis: Other: Ad board; AstraZeneca: Other: Ad board; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Smolewski:Roche Poland: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Honoraria; Morphosis: Honoraria. Savage:Roche (institutional): Research Funding; Merck, BMS, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Servier: Consultancy; BeiGene: Other: Steering Committee; Merck, BMS, Seattle Genetics, Gilead, AstraZeneca, AbbVie: Honoraria. Bartlett:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Autolus: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Walewski:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Ramchandren:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Zinzani:Eusapharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kirin Kyowa: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Consultancy, 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, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hutchings:Celgene, Genmab, Janssen, Novartis, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Takeda: Research Funding; Genmab, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Munoz:Juno/Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Fosunkite: Consultancy; Innovent: Consultancy; Acrotech/Aurobindo: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kim:JJ: Research Funding; Celltrion: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirn: Research Funding; Donga: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding. Advani:Astra Zeneca, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Cell Medica, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, KitePharma, Kyowa, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene, Forty Seven, Inc., Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Kura, Merck, Millenium, Pharmacyclics, Regeneron, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; AI Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Younes:HCM: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; BioPath: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Current Employment; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Gallamini:Takeda: Other: Speaker. Liu:Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment. Little:Takeda: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fenton:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fanale:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Radford:GlaxoSmithKline: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Spouse; AstraZeneca: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Spouse; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; ADCT: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Introduction The phase 3 ECHELON-2 study (NCT01777152) demonstrated that frontline treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) is superior to cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) for patients (pts) with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL) or other CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) (Horowitz S, et al. Lancet 2019). With a median follow-up of 36.2 months for progression-free survival (PFS), the hazard ratio (HR) (0.71 [95% confidence interval {CI}: 0.54, 0.93], P=0.01) favored A+CHP over CHOP. The median PFS was 48.2 months (95% CI: 35.2, not evaluable) versus 20.8 months (95% CI: 12.7, 47.6) for A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. With a median follow-up of 42.1 months for overall survival (OS), the HR (0.66 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.95], P=0.02) also favored A+CHP over CHOP. Median OS was not reached for either arm. With these results, A+CHP was the first treatment regimen to show an OS benefit over CHOP in this pt population. Herein, we report results with a median follow-up of 44.3 months for PFS and 55.5 months for OS. Methods ECHELON-2 is a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, active-comparator, multicenter study. Eligible adult pts with previously untreated CD30-positive PTCL (targeting 75% ± 5% with sALCL) were randomized to A+CHP or CHOP for six or eight cycles. Randomization was stratified by histological subtype and international prognostic index score. The primary endpoint of PFS was assessed per blinded independent central review in the primary analysis and per investigator in this updated analysis. Key secondary endpoints were OS, PFS in sALCL, complete remission (CR) rate, and objective response rate (ORR). Subsequent therapies, including BV or BV-containing regimens, were permitted. Results A total of 452 pts were enrolled and randomized 1:1 with 226 pts in each arm. The study included pts with advanced disease (Stage III [27%] and Stage IV [53%]; IPI ≥2 [78%]); given target enrollment, most pts (316 [70%]) had sALCL (218 [48%] anaplastic lymphoma kinase [ALK]-negative and 98 pts [22%] ALK-positive). With additional follow-up, the HRs for PFS per investigator (0.70 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.91], P=0.0075) (Figure 1) and OS (0.74 [95% CI: 0.54, 1.02], P=0.0688) continue to favor A+CHP over CHOP. The median PFS was 63.5 months (95% CI: 42.0, not evaluable) versus 23.8 months (95% CI: 13.6, 55.9) for A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. The estimated 5-year PFS was 50.9% (95% CI: 42.1, 59.1) for the A+CHP arm versus 42.7% (95% CI: 35.3, 49.8) for the CHOP arm. Median OS was not reached for either arm. The estimated 5-year OS was 68.7% (95% CI: 61.3, 75.0) for the A+CHP arm versus 60.3% (95% CI: 52.8, 67.0) for the CHOP arm. The PFS analyses for key prespecified subgroups were generally consistent with the overall study results (Figure 2). In the subset of pts with sALCL, the HR for PFS (0.55 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.78]) also favors A+CHP over CHOP, with an estimated 5-year PFS of 59.8% (95% CI: 48.0, 69.7) for the A+CHP arm versus 48.1% (95% CI: 39.1, 56.6) for the CHOP arm. A total of 23 pts (10%) in the A+CHP arm (16 pts with sALCL, 4 pts with PTCL not otherwise specified, and 3 pts with angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma) and 51 pts (23%) in the CHOP arm received subsequent systemic therapy with BV. In the A+CHP arm, the median time to retreatment was 12.3 months (range, 3, 51); 15 pts (ORR: 65%) had CR (9 pts) or partial remission (6 pts) after retreatment with BV monotherapy (21 pts) or BV-containing regimen (2 pts). With additional follow-up in pts with treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) (117 pts A+CHP and 124 pts CHOP), 68% of pts in the A+CHP arm had either resolution or improvement of these events compared with 77% of pts in the CHOP arm. Of the pts with ongoing PN events at last follow-up, 73% in A+CHP arm and 74% in the CHOP arm had grade 1 events, 25% and 23% of pts, respectively, had grade 2 events, and 2% of pts in each arm had grade 3 events. Conclusions At 5 years, frontline treatment with A+CHP continues to provide clinically meaningful improvement in PFS and OS versus CHOP, including ongoing remission in ~60% of pts with sALCL, with a manageable safety profile, including continued resolution or improvement of PN. Additional 5-year results, including data from prespecified subgroups, will be presented. Disclosures Horwitz: C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Affirmed: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Myeloid Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; ASTEX: Consultancy; Vividion Therapeutics: Consultancy; Beigene: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aileron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty Seven: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakka Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Corvus: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy, Research Funding. Pro:Verastem Oncology: Research Funding. Illidge:Takeda: Current Employment, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Iyer:Legend Biotech: Consultancy; Rhizen: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; CRISPR: Research Funding; Curio Biosciences: Honoraria; Trillium: Research Funding; Target Oncology: Honoraria; Afffimed: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Advani:Astra Zeneca, Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, Cell Medica, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, Gilead, KitePharma, Kyowa, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene, Forty Seven, Inc., Genentech/Roche, Janssen Pharmaceutical, Kura, Merck, Millenium, Pharmacyclics, Regeneron, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Bartlett:BTG: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Christensen:Odense University Hospital: Current Employment; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Morschhauser:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy. Domingo-Domenech:Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Travel, accomodations and expenses , Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Travel, Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel, accomodations and expenses ; Janssen: Other: Travel, accomodations and expenses ; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Rossi:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; 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; Pfizer: 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. Kim:Donga: Research Funding; Joihnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celltrion: Research Funding. Feldman:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Rhizen: Research Funding; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Portola: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Viracta: Research Funding. Menne:Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Travel expenses; Pfizer: Honoraria, Other; Roche: Honoraria; Bayer: Other: Travel expenses; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Takeda: Honoraria; Atara: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Belada:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Illés:Celgene, Janssen, Novartis,Roche, Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche;: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Novartis Pharma SAS, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Israel, Roche;: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Tobinai:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ono Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Solasia: Honoraria; SymBio: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; HUYA Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eisai: Honoraria; Yakult: Consultancy, Honoraria; Zenyaku Kogyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Chugai Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tsukasaki:Ono Pharma: Consultancy; Mundy Pharma: Honoraria; HUYA: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Chugai Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Eizai: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Yeh:AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shustov:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Hüttmann:Lead Discovery Center GmbH: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Gilead: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES (paid by any for-profit health care company); Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; University Hospital Essen, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany: Current Employment. Savage:Verastem: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zinzani:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, 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, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kirin Kyowa: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Miao:Takeda: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bunn:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Current Employment. Fenton:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fanale:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Puhlmann:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Truemper:Janssen: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda Europe: Consultancy, Research Funding.

CD5+ diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), NOS represents a distinct subset of DLBCL associated with poorer outcomes and extranodal disease. We analyzed characteristics and outcomes for 10...

Lack of consensus for first-line marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) treatment and toxicities associated with currently available systemic therapies have inspired evaluation of immunotherapeutic agents yielding robust outcomes with improved tolerability. We previously reported durable efficacy with first-line lenalidomide and rituximab (R2 ) in follicular lymphoma, MZL and small lymphocytic lymphoma with a subsequent long-term follow-up shown here in MZL patients. This phase 2 investigator-initiated study included previously untreated, stage III/IV MZL patients treated with lenalidomide 20 mg/day on days 1-21 and rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of each 28-day cycle, continuing in responders for ≥6-12 cycles. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints were complete and partial response (CR, PR), safety, and progression-free survival (PFS). The ORR was 93% with 70% attaining CR/CR unconfirmed. At median follow-up of 75·1 months, median PFS was 59·8 months and 5-year OS was 96%. Most non-haematological adverse events (AE) were grade 1/2. Grade 3 haematological AEs were neutropenia (33%) and leucopenia (7%), and grade 4 were leucopenia (3%) and thrombocytopenia (3%). Two patients died of secondary malignancies; no treatment-related fatalities occurred. With extended follow-up, outcomes for MZL patients receiving R2 were robust with no unexpected late or delayed toxicities.

Summary Background MYC gene rearrangement is present in approximately 10% of aggressive B-cell lymphomas, with half also harbouring a BCL2 gene rearrangement. Multiple retrospective studies of R-CHOP (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone or prednisolone) have shown a worse outcome in patients with MYC rearrangement (alone or with rearrangement of BCL2 or BCL6, or both) than in patients without MYC rearrangement, and suggest improved outcomes after more intensive treatment. We aimed to determine the outcome of dose-adjusted EPOCH-R (etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab; DA-EPOCH-R), an intensive infusional treatment regimen, in untreated aggressive B-cell lymphoma with MYC rearrangement. Methods We present the final analysis of a prospective, multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study of DA-EPOCH-R in patients with untreated aggressive B-cell lymphoma with MYC rearrangement. DA-EPOCH-R was scheduled to be administered with CNS prophylaxis for six cycles. Primary endpoints included event-free and overall survival. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01092182 ). Findings 53 patients were enrolled, with median age of 61 years (range 29–80; IQR 50–70); 43 (81%) patients had stage III–IV disease and 26 (49%) had high-intermediate or high international prognostic index (IPI) scores. 19 patients had confirmed MYC rearrangement alone (single-hit) and 24 also had rearrangement of BCL2, BCL6, or both (double-hit), with similar characteristics between these two groups. After a median follow-up of 55·6 months (IQR 50·5–61·1), 48-month event-free survival was 71·0% (95% CI 56·5–81·4) and 48-month overall survival was 76·7% (95% CI 62·6–86·1) for all patients. Toxicity included grade 4 neutropenia in 160 (53%) of 301 cycles, grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 40 (13%) cycles, and any grade of fever with neutropenia in 56 (19%) cycles. There were three treatment-related deaths (all infections). Interpretation In this study, DA-EPOCH-R produced durable remission in patients with MYC-rearranged aggressive B-cell lymphomas and should be considered for the treatment of these diseases. Funding Cancer Trials Support Unit and Center for Cancer Research of the National Cancer Institute and Genentech.

Context R/R PMBL has limited treatment options. CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631), an open-label phase 1/2 study, assessed combination nivolumab (anti–PD-1) and brentuximab vedotin (anti-CD30) in patients with R/R PMBL; the primary analysis (median follow-up 11.1 months) showed an objective response rate (ORR) of 73% and complete remission (CR) rate of 37%. Objective Report extended follow-up data from CheckMate 436. Patients Cohort of patients with R/R PMBL after autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) or ≥2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens if ineligible for auto-HCT. Interventions Nivolumab (240 mg IV) + BV (1.8 mg/kg IV) every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Outcome Measure(s) Primary: investigator-assessed ORR (Lugano 2014) and safety. Secondary: duration of response (DOR), CR rate and duration, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results Among 30 patients with a median follow-up of 33.7 months, ORR was 73% (95% CI, 54–88; CR, 37%). Median DOR was 31.6 months (95% CI, 23.3–not estimable [NE]), and median duration of CR was not reached. Estimated median PFS was 26.0 months (95% CI, 2.6–NE). Among patients censored in the PFS analysis, 13/17 received consolidation therapy, including auto-HCT (n=6) or allogeneic HCT (n=6) +/- radiotherapy, and radiotherapy alone (n=1). Four patients remained progression free in follow-up for 5+, 9+, 12+, and 20+ months after discontinuation of nivolumab + BV (maximum clinical benefit, n=3; study drug toxicity, n=1) without subsequent therapy. OS was 79% (95% CI, 59–90) at 12 months and 76% (95% CI, 55–88) at 24 months; median OS was not reached. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 83% of patients, most frequently neutropenia (30%; all grade 3/4) and peripheral neuropathy (27%; 10% grade 3/4). Six patients discontinued due to TRAEs. Eight patients died, 5 due to disease progression, and none was considered related to treatment. Conclusions Nivolumab + BV demonstrated durable responses and long-term survival benefits; 4 patients remained progression-free without consolidation after nivolumab + BV. Safety was consistent with prior findings. These results further support nivolumab + BV as a treatment option for patients with R/R PMBL. Funding BMS. Previous Presentation: ICML 2021

Summary Background Despite advances in the treatment of Hodgkin lymphoma with the introduction of PET-adapted regimens, practical challenges prevent more widespread use of these approaches. The ECHELON-1 study assessed the safety and efficacy of front-line A+AVD (brentuximab vedotin, doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) versus ABVD (doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) in patients with stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma. The primary analysis showed improved modified progression-free survival with A+AVD. We present an updated analysis of ECHELON-1 at 5 years, an important landmark for this patient population. Methods ECHELON-1 was an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial done at 218 clinical sites, including hospitals, cancer centres, and community clinics, in 21 countries. Previously untreated patients (≥18 years with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of ≤2) with stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive A+AVD (brentuximab vedotin, 1·2 mg/kg of bodyweight, doxorubicin 25 mg/m2 of body surface area, vinblastine 6 mg/m2, and dacarbazine 375 mg/m2) or ABVD (doxorubicin 25 mg/m2, bleomycin 10 U/m2, vinblastine 6 mg/m2, and dacarbazine 375 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for up to six cycles. Stratification factors included region (Americas vs Europe vs Asia) and International Prognostic Score risk group (low, intermediate, or high risk). The primary endpoint was modified progression-free survival; this 5-year update includes analysis of progression-free survival as per investigator assessment in the intention-to-treat population, which was an exploratory endpoint, although the 5-year analysis was not prespecified in the protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01712490 ) and EudraCT (2011-005450-60), and is ongoing. Findings Between Nov 19, 2012, and Jan 13, 2016, 1334 patients were randomly assigned to receive A+AVD (n=664) or ABVD (n=670). At a median follow-up of 60·9 months (IQR 52·2–67·3), 5-year progression-free survival was 82·2% (95% CI 79·0–85·0) with A+AVD and 75·3% (71·7–78·5) with ABVD (hazard ratio [HR] 0·68 [95% CI 0·53–0·87]; p=0·0017). Among PET-2-negative patients, 5-year progression-free survival was higher with A+AVD than with ABVD (84·9% [95% CI 81·7–87·6] vs 78·9% [75·2–82·1]; HR 0·66 [95% CI 0·50–0·88]; p=0·0035). 5-year progression-free survival for PET-2-positive patients was 60·6% (95% CI 45·0–73·1) with A+AVD versus 45·9% (32·7–58·2) with ABVD (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·39–1·26]; p=0·23). Peripheral neuropathy continued to improve or resolve over time with both A+AVD (375 [85%] of 443 patients) and ABVD (245 [86%] of 286 patients); more patients had ongoing peripheral neuropathy in the A+AVD group (127 [19%] of 662) than in the ABVD group (59 [9%] of 659). Fewer secondary malignancies were reported with A+AVD (19 [3%] of 662) than with ABVD (29 [4%] of 659). More livebirths were reported in the A+AVD group (n=75) than in the ABVD group (n=50). Interpretation With 5 years of follow-up, A+AVD showed robust and durable improvement in progression-free survival versus ABVD, regardless of PET-2 status, and a consistent safety profile. On the basis of these findings, A+AVD should be preferred over ABVD for patients with previously untreated stage III or IV classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Funding Millennium Pharmaceuticals (a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company), and Seagen.

Purpose: Preclinical and early clinical data suggested that combining histone deacetylase (HDAC) and mTOR inhibitors can synergistically inhibit Hodgkin lymphoma. Patients and Methods: During the dose-escalation study (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT01087554) with the HDAC inhibitor vorinostat and the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus (V+S), a patient with Hodgkin lymphoma refractory to nine prior therapies demonstrated a partial response (PR) lasting for 18.5 months, which promoted additional enrollment of patients with Hodgkin lymphoma as well as exploration of an alternative combination of vorinostat and mTOR inhibitor everolimus (V+E). Results: A total of 40 patients with refractory Hodgkin lymphoma received V+S (n = 22) or V+E (n = 18). Patients received a median of five prior therapies, including brentuximab (n = 39), autologous stem cell transplantation (n = 26), and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (n = 12). The most frequent grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse event was thrombocytopenia in 55% and 67% of patients treated with V+S and V+E, respectively. Complete response was reported in 6 (27%) patients treated with V+S and 2 (11%) patients treated with V+E, and PR was reported in 6 patients (27%) treated with V+S and 4 (22%) patients treated with V+E (objective response rate of 55% and 33%, respectively). In summary, combined HDAC and mTOR inhibition had encouraging activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and warrants further investigation. Conclusions: Combined HDAC and mTOR inhibition has salutary activity in patients with relapsed refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and warrants further investigation.

Background: Involvement of the central nervous system (CNS) by mycosis fungoides (MF) is rare; however, it portends a poor prognosis. While aggressive multimodality therapy may improve outcomes, the role of radiation therapy (RT) is not well defined. Objectives: We sought to explore the efficacy of RT in the management of CNS involvement by MF. Method: We retrospectively identified five patients with MF and CNS involvement who received cranial or craniospinal RT at a single institution. Patient characteristics, disease features, radiographic findings, treatments delivered, and outcome data were extracted from the electronic medical record. Results: All 5 patients had neurologic deficits at RT initiation, and 4 experienced at least a partial improvement. Of 4 patients evaluated by MRI after RT completion, 3 had complete resolution of CNS disease within the irradiated field. At the time of last follow-up, all patients had died of MF. The median time to death was 7.4 months (range 1.0–21 months) from their diagnosis with CNS involvement and 1.2 months (range 0.4–7.1 months) from the end of RT treatment. Conclusions: We observed high rates of radiographic response and palliation of neurological symptoms. Nonetheless, all patients succumbed to their disease shortly after treatment, confirming the poor prognosis of this condition. Our findings suggest that RT may play a valuable palliative role for these patients.

Purpose To improve the curability of older patients with newly diagnosed Hodgkin lymphoma. Patients and Methods We conducted a multicenter phase II study that administered brentuximab vedotin (Bv) sequentially before and after standard doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD) for untreated patients with Hodgkin lymphoma age 60 years or older. After two lead-in doses of single-agent Bv (1.8 mg/kg once every 3 weeks), patients received six cycles of AVD chemotherapy followed by four consolidative doses of Bv in responding patients. Results Patient characteristics included median age of 69 years (range, 60 to 88 years), 63% male, median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 1, 81% stage III to IV disease, 60% International Prognostic Score 3 to 7, median Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric comorbidity score of 7 (52% grade 3 to 4); and 12% had loss of instrumental activities of daily living at diagnosis. Thirty-seven (77%) of 48 patients completed six cycles of AVD, and 35 patients (73%) received at least one Bv consolidation. Overall response and complete remission rates after initial Bv lead-in dose were 18 (82%) of 22 and 8 (36%) of 22, respectively, and 40 (95%) of 42 and 34 (90%) of 42, respectively, after six cycles of AVD among 42 response-evaluable patients. Twenty (42%) of 48 patients experienced a grade 3 to 4 adverse event, most commonly neutropenia (44%), febrile neutropenia and pneumonia (8%), or diarrhea (6%); 33% had grade 2 peripheral neuropathy, which was reversible in a majority of patients. By intent-to-treat, the 2-year event-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival rates were 80%, 84%, and 93%, respectively. Furthermore, 2-year progression-free survival rates for patients with a Cumulative Illness Rating Scale-Geriatric comorbidity score of ≥ 10 versus < 10 were 45% versus 100%, respectively ( P < .001), and with baseline loss versus no loss of instrumental activities of daily living were 25% versus 94% ( P < .001), respectively, the latter persisting on multivariable analyses. Conclusion Altogether, sequential Bv-AVD was well tolerated and was associated with robust outcomes. Furthermore, geriatric-based measures were strongly associated with patient survival.

Background For patients with primary diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the central nervous system (PCNSL), whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) to doses of ≥45 Gy are often given after a partial response (PR) to methotrexate-based induction chemotherapy. We conducted an exploratory analysis to determine whether lower-dose WBRT, given with a boost to sites of persistent disease, might be a reasonable alternative. Methods and materials We retrospectively reviewed the records of 22 patients with PCNSL who received WBRT, with or without a boost, after methotrexate-based induction chemotherapy. Outcomes were compared among patients according to response to chemotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results Median follow-up was 52 months. All patients with a complete response (CR) (n = 5) received WBRT to 23.4 Gy. One CR patient died after an in-field relapse. Patients with partial response (PR) (n = 10) received a median whole-brain dose of 23.4 Gy with (n = 8) or without (n = 2) a boost; there were 2 relapses within the central nervous system (CNS). All PR patients were alive at the time of analysis. The overall survival ( P = .127) and freedom from relapse within the CNS ( P = .967) were not different for patients with CR versus PR. Baseline and follow-up neurocognitive evaluations were available for 4 PR patients, and there were no significant differences between pre- and post-treatment evaluations ( P > .05 for language, memory, visual-spatial, attention, or motor functions). All patients who progressed or did not respond to chemotherapy and then received WBRT had died at a median time of 3.4 months. Patients who progressed or did not respond to chemotherapy had worse overall survival ( P = .001) and freedom from CNS relapse ( P = .005) compared with CR patients. Conclusions Among patients with a PR to induction chemotherapy, reduced-dose WBRT with a boost to residual PCNSL may be a viable treatment approach that merits further investigation.

Purpose: To identify predictors of hypothyroidism after chemoradiation therapy for Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and to compare outcomes after intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with those after 3-dimensional (3D) conformal radiation therapy (CRT). Methods and Materials: Ninety patients who underwent involved-site IMRT in 2009 through 2014 were evaluated for treatment-induced hypothyroidism, defined as elevated thyroid-stimulating hormone or decreased free thyroxine levels (or both). Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis identified individuals at low versus high risk based on dosimetric variables. Dosimetric cutoff points were verified with an external data set of 50 patients who underwent 3D-CRT. Results: In the IMRT group, most patients (75 [83%]) had stage II HL, and the median prescribed dose was 30.6 Gy; in the 3D-CRT group, 32 patients (64%) had stage II HL, and the median prescribed dose was 32.0 Gy. No differences were found in the proportions of patients with bilateral (P =.982) or unilateral (P =.074) neck involvement between the 2 groups. Hypothyroidism rates were marginally higher in the IMRT group, with estimated 3-year rates of freedom from hypothyroidism of 56.1% in the 3D-CRT group and 40% in the IMRT group (P =.057). Univariate analysis showed that smaller thyroid volume and higher thyroid dose were associated with hypothyroidism in both groups (P =25 Gy (V25) and the absolute volume of the thyroid gland spared from 25 Gy (VS25Gy) were the strongest predictors of hypothyroidism (P =.001 and P

Purpose: We identified lung dosimetric constraints to assist in predicting the radiation pneumonitis (RP) risk in patients with mediastinal lymphoma and then identified the clinical prognostic factors that were associated with the achievement of key dosimetric constraints. Methods and Materials: In 190 patients who received mediastinal intensity modulated radiation therapy, we used univariate χ2 and multivariate logistic models to identify the predictors of RP and achievement of lung dose-volume histogram (DVH) constraints and build a predictive nomogram for RP. Results: An increased risk of RP was strongly associated with mean lung dose (MLD) > 13.5 Gy (odds ratio [OR]: 8.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.01-21.93; P 55% (OR: 7.01; 95% CI, 2.94-16.72; P

Primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) is a rare and aggressive extranodal presentation of lymphoma; however, the data for outcomes of patients with subtypes other than diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are limited. Therefore, we analyzed overall survival (OS) of adult patients diagnosed with PCNSL by histologic subtype between 1998 and 2014 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results. A total of 4375 patients were identified. The median age of the patients was 64 years (range: 18-96). DLBCL was the most common histology (N=3,091), followed by follicular lymphoma (FL, N=83), peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL, N=64), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL, N=63), Burkitt lymphoma (BL, N=27), small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL, N=22), Hodgkin lymphoma (HL, N=13) and others (N=1,012). The 5-year OS rates were 30% in DLBCL, 66% in FL, 33% in PTCL, 79% in MZL, 42% in BL, 38% in SLL and 45% in HL. Radiation alone showed similar OS compared to no treatment in DLBCL, BL and PTCL, while radiation alone was associated with similar OS to chemotherapy or chemo-radiation in FL and MZL. The outcomes of patients with PCNSL are unfavorable; with the exception of FL and MZL which can potentially show prolonged survival with surgical resection or radiation monotherapy.

Dose-adjusted rituximab plus etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin (DA-R-EPOCH) has produced good outcomes in primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), but predictors of resistance to this treatment are unclear. We investigated whether [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) findings could identify patients with PMBCL who would not respond completely to DA-R-EPOCH. We performed a retrospective analysis of 65 patients with newly diagnosed stage I to IV PMBCL treated at 2 tertiary cancer centers who had PET-CT scans available before and after frontline therapy with DA-R-EPOCH. Pretreatment variables assessed included metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG). Optimal cutoff points for progression-free survival (PFS) were determined by a machine learning approach. Univariate and multivariable models were constructed to assess associations between radiographic variables and PFS. At a median follow-up of 36.6 months (95% confidence interval, 28.1-45.1), 2-year PFS and overall survival rates for the 65 patients were 81.4% and 98.4%, respectively. Machine learning-derived thresholds for baseline MTV and TLG were associated with inferior PFS (elevated MTV: hazard ratio [HR], 11.5; P = .019; elevated TLG: HR, 8.99; P = .005); other pretreatment clinical factors, including International Prognostic Index and bulky (>10 cm) disease, were not. On multivariable analysis, only TLG retained statistical significance (P = .049). Univariate analysis of posttreatment variables revealed that residual CT tumor volume, maximum standardized uptake value, and Deauville score were associated with PFS; a Deauville score of 5 remained significant on multivariable analysis (P = .006). A model combining baseline TLG and end-of-therapy Deauville score identified patients at increased risk of progression.

This phase 1 study evaluated frontline brentuximab vedotin in combination with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (BV+CHP; 6 cycles, then up to 10 cycles of brentuximab vedotin monotherapy) in 26 patients with CD30+ peripheral T-cell lymphoma, including 19 with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma. All patients (100%) achieved an objective response, with a complete remission (CR) rate of 92%; none received a consolidative stem cell transplant. After a median observation period of 59.6 months (range, 4.6-66.0) from first dose, neither the median progression-free survival (PFS) nor the median overall survival (OS) was reached. No progression or death was observed beyond 35 months. The estimated 5-year PFS and OS rates were 52% and 80%, respectively. Eighteen of 19 patients (95%) with treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy (PN) reported resolution or improvement of symptoms. Thirteen patients (50%) remained in remission at the end of the study, with PFS ranging from 37.8+ to 66.0+ months. Eight of these 13 patients received the maximum 16 cycles of study treatment. These final results demonstrate durable remissions in 50% of patients treated with frontline BV+CHP, suggesting a potentially curative treatment option for some patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01309789.

Background Although the outcomes of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) have improved, there is still no cure. Bortezomib has a 33% response rate in relapsed/refractory MCL and has shown additive and/or synergistic effects in preclinical trials with known effective agents. Methods This is a report of a prospective phase 2 trial of bortezomib added to rituximab plus hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (BzR-hyperCVAD)/rituximab, high-dose methotrexate, and high-dose cytarabine (BzR-MA) for 95 patients with newly diagnosed MCL. Results The overall and complete response rates were 100% and 82%, respectively. Hematologic toxicity was high but expected and did not lead to an increased incidence of neutropenic fever or dose reductions in comparison with a similar reported regimen without bortezomib. After a median follow-up of 44 months, the median overall survival had not been reached, and the time to treatment failure (TTF) was 55 months, which is not different from that of historical controls. Conclusions BzR-hyperCVAD/BzR-MA at the dose and schedule studied produced high rates of response and a TTF similar to that of historical reports without bortezomib. Cancer 2018;124:2561-9. © 2018 American Cancer Society.

Immune-based treatment strategies, such as checkpoint inhibition and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, have started a new frontier for treatment in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Checkpoint inhibition has been most successful in Hodgkin lymphoma, where higher expression of PD-L1 is correlated with better overall response rate. Combinations of checkpoint inhibition with various chemotherapy or biologics are in clinical trials, with initially promising results and manageable safety profiles. CAR T-cell therapies that target CD19 are a promising and attractive therapy for B-cell NHLs, with a product approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2017. Changes in the target, hinge, or costimulatory domain can dramatically alter the persistence and efficacy of the CAR T cells. The ZUMA trials from Kite used CD19-(CD28z) CAR T cells, whereas the TRANSCEND studies from Juno and the JULIET studies from Novartis used CD19-(4-1BBz) CARs. Despite the recent successes with CAR T-cell clinical trials, major concerns associated with this therapy include cytokine release syndrome, potential neurotoxicities, B-cell aplasia, loss of tumor antigen leading to relapse, and cost and accessibility of the treatment. Although first-generation CAR T-cell therapies have failed in solid malignancies, newer second- and third-generation CAR T cells that target antigens other than CD19 (such as mesothelin or B-cell maturation antigen) are being studied in clinical trials for treatment of lung cancer or multiple myeloma. Overall, immune-based treatment strategies have given oncologists and patients hope when there used to be none, as well as a new basket of tools yet to come with further research and development.

Cardiophrenic lymph nodes (CPLNs) are occasionally involved in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). We characterized the incidence of CPLN involvement among 169 HL patients and evaluated outcomes after treatment with omission of the CPLN region from the involved-site radiation therapy (ISRT) field. Three types of RT fields were used: standard (S)-ISRT, reduced-dose (RD)-ISRT (lower dose to CPLNs, standard to other sites), or modified (M)-ISRT (omission of CPLNs). CPLNs were involved at diagnosis in 29 patients (17%). Of the 20 patients who received RT after complete response to chemotherapy, 4(20%) received S-ISRT, 8(40%) RD-ISRT, and 8(40%) M-ISRT. The four-year progression-free survival was 94.7%. One relapse occurred at a non-CPLN site after RD-ISRT. The mean heart dose and volume of the heart that received 25 Gy was higher for S-ISRT patients compared to M-ISRT (p = .043 and p = .025, respectively). Re-planning the M-ISRT cases as S-ISRT resulted in significant increase in cardiac doses.

Preclinical data suggest that combining a checkpoint inhibition with immunomodulatory derivative can increase anticancer response. We designed a dose-escalation study using a 3 + 3 design to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase II dose (R2PD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of the anti–CTLA-4 antibody ipilimumab (1.5–3 mg/kg intravenously every 28 days × 4) and lenalidomide (10–25 mg orally daily for 21 of 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity) in advanced cancers. Total of 36 patients (Hodgkin lymphoma, 7; melanoma, 5; leiomyosarcoma, 4; renal cancer, 3; thyroid cancer, 3; other cancers, 14; median of 3 prior therapies) were enrolled. The MTD has not been reached and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and lenalidomide 25 mg have been declared as R2PD. DLT were grade (G) 3 rash (3 patients) and G3 pancreatitis (1 patient). G3/4 drug-related toxicities other than DLT were G3 anemia (5 patients), G3 thromboembolism (2 patients), G3 thrombocytopenia, G3 rash, G3 hypopituitarism, G3 pneumonitis, G3 transaminitis, and G4 hypopituitarism (all in 1 patient). Eight patients had tumor shrinkage per immune-related response criteria (−79% to −2%) including a PR (−79% for 7.2+ months) in a refractory Hodgkin lymphoma. Using comprehensive genomic profiling, a total mutation burden (mutations/Mb) was evaluated in 17 patients, with one of the patients achieving a PR demonstrated intermediate mutation burden. In conclusion, combination of ipilimumab and lenalidomide is well tolerated and demonstrated preliminary signals of activity in patients with refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and other advanced cancers. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(3); 671–6. ©2017 AACR.