Search

Background: Primary refractory (PREF) follicular lymphoma (FL) has a completely different clinical course from that of FL that responds to front-line treatments. In addition to having poor responses to salvage therapies, it seems that patients with PREF are at increased risk of histological transformation (HT). The Aristotle consortium presented the opportunity of investigating the risk of HT in a very large series of cases. Thus, we investigated the risk of HT in patients with PREF FL compared with that of responding patients or in stable disease and ultimately their outcome. Methods: Six thousand three hundred thirty-nine patients from the Aristotle database were included in the analysis. These patients had a histologically confirmed grade 1, 2 or 3a FL diagnosed between 1997 and 2013. The primary end-points were the cumulative incidence (CI) of HT at the first progression or relapse and the survival after transformation. Findings.: The 5-year CI of HT among patients with PREF was 34% (95% confidence interval (CI): 27–43), whilst it was 7.1% (95% CI: 6.0–8.5) in the group of patients with partial response (PR) or stable disease (SD) (PR + SD) and 3.5% (95% CI: 3.0–4.2) in the group of patients achieving complete response (CR). The 5-year survival after relapse (SAR) was 33% (95% CI: 28–39) for the PREF group, 57% (95% CI 54–61) in patients with PR, 51% (95% CI 43–58) in the SD group after first-line therapy and 63% (95% CI: 66–72) in patients with CR after initial treatment (p-value

We investigated incidence, risk factors and outcome for follicular lymphoma (FL) patients with histologic transformation (HT) found at primary diagnosis (discordant/composite, dc-tFL) or sequentially (s-tFL). Between 2000 and 2015, 2773 patients were identified. The majority of patients (2252, 81%) did not experience HT (nt-FL), while 224 (8%) had dc-tFL and 297 (11%) s-tFL. The risk of HT was 2.2% per year and 9.6% at 5 years. Age ≥60, a high FLIPI risk score and LDH-elevation were associated with increased risk of HT. Calculated from primary diagnosis and compared with nt-FL, 5-year overall survival (OS) was inferior in both s-tFL and dc-tFL (nt-FL: 82%, s-tFL: 68%, dc-tFL: 68%; p =.001), whereas 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was worse only in s-tFL (s-tFL: 18%, dc-tFL: 58%, nt-FL: 60%). Calculated from time of HT, s-tFL had inferior outcome compared to dc-tFL for both OS (s-tFL: 47%, dc-tFL: 68%, p =.001) and PFS (s-tFL: 35%, dc-tFL: 58%, p =.001).

Low absolute lymphocyte counts (ALC) and high absolute monocyte counts (AMC) are associated with poor survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). We studied the prognostic impact of the ALC and AMC in patients with testicular DLBCL (T-DLBCL). T-DLBCL patients were searched using Southern Finland University Hospital databases and the Danish lymphoma registry. The progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards methods. We identified 178 T-DLBCL patients, of whom 78 (44%) had a low ALC at diagnosis. The ALC did not correlate with survival in the whole cohort. However, among the patients treated with rituximab (R) containing regimen, a pre-therapeutic low ALC was associated with an increased risk of progression (HR 1.976, 95% CI 1.267&ndash, 3.086, p = 0.003). Conversely, intravenous (iv) CNS directed chemotherapy translated to favorable outcome. In multivariate analyses, the advantage of an iv CNS directed chemotherapy was sustained (PFS, HR 0.364, 95% CI 0.175&ndash, 0.757, p = 0.007). The benefit of R and intravenous CNS directed chemotherapy was observed only in non-lymphopenic patients. The AMC did not correlate with survival. A low ALC is an adverse prognostic factor in patients with T-DLBCL. Alternative treatment options for lymphopenic patients are needed.

The European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) consensus conference onmalignant lymphoma was held on 20 June 2015 in Lugano, Switzerland, and included a multidisciplinary panel of 25 leading experts. The aim of the conference was to develop recommendations on critical subjects difficult to consider in detail in the ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. The following areas were identified: (1) the elderly patient, (2) prognostic factors suitable for clinical use and (3) the 'ultra-high-risk' group. Before the conference, the expert panel was divided into three working groups; each group focused on one of these areas in order to address clinically relevant questions relating to that topic. All relevant scientific literature, as identified by the experts, was reviewed in advance. During the consensus conference, each working group developed recommendations to address each of the questions devised by their group. These recommendations were then presented to the entire multidisciplinary panel and a consensus was reached. This manuscript presents recommendations regarding the management of the following 'ultra-high-risk' situations: (1) early central nervous system relapse of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, (2) primary refractory Hodgkin lymphoma and (3) plasmablastic lymphoma. Results, including a summary of evidence supporting each recommendation, are detailed in this manuscript. All expert panel members approved this final article.

This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the value of pretransplant FDG-PET in predicting outcome after autologous stem cell transplantation in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma. MEDLINE was systematically searched; included studies were methodologically assessed and meta-analyzed, when possible. Overall methodological quality of included studies (n = 11) was poor, with moderate risk of bias in the domains of study participation (n = 7) and prognostic factor measurement (n = 7), and high risk of bias in the domains of outcome measurement (n = 10), and study confounding (n = 11). In all aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 54.0% and 73.1% in predicting treatment failure, and 54.5% and 68.7% in predicting death. Because of interstudy heterogeneity, additional subgroup analyses were performed. In newly diagnosed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 20.0% and 70.0% in predicting treatment failure, and 8.3% % and 30.5% in predicting death. In refractory/relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 68.1% and 72.1% in predicting treatment failure, and 77.3% and 69.6% in predicting death. At present, pretransplant FDG-PET cannot be recommended in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, because available studies suffer from major methodological flaws, and reported prognostic estimates are low (i.e., poor in newly diagnosed and moderate in refractory/relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma).

CNS relapse is reported in 2–5% of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients, dramatically decreasing overall survival (OS). Very few studies address incidence and risk factors of CNS relapse in very elderly patients, a challenging population to treat given their commonly associated comorbidities. A retrospective analysis was performed of 270 DLBCL patients >80 years treated between 2004 and 2013 in two multicentre phase II LYSA trials (LNH03‐7B, LNH09‐7B) evaluating the addition of rituximab or ofatumumab to mini‐CHOP as front‐line therapy. No patients received CNS prophylaxis. CNS relapse was evaluated according to cumulative incidence, patient characteristics, risk factors, and survival. Median age was 83 years (range: 79–95). After a median follow‐up of 28.7 months, eight patients had CNS relapse (3.0%). Median time between inclusion and CNS relapse was 19.2 months (range: 3.2–32.6). Patients survived a median of 1.5 months after CNS relapse (range: 0.4–4.1). Median OS from relapse was significantly lower in CNS relapse patients (1.5 months, 95% CI: 0.4–3.5) compared to patients with non‐CNS relapse (6.6 months; 95% CI: 4.6–11.9). No baseline characteristics were associated with CNS relapse. The proportion of patients with CNS disease did not differ significantly between patients with low‐intermediate risk according to CNS‐IPI and patients with high risk (3% vs. 2.8%, P = 1.00). CNS relapse cumulative incidence in very elderly treatment‐naive patients is 1.8% at 2 years and is associated with poor survival. This population had a long median time to CNS relapse. Absence of prophylaxis did not strongly impact CNS relapse incidence.

This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze the value of pretransplant FDG-PET in predicting outcome after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Medline was systematically searched, included studies were methodologically assessed and meta-analyzed, when possible. Overall methodological quality of included studies (n=11) was poor, with moderate risk of bias in the domains of study participation (n=7) and prognostic factor measurement (n=7), and high risk of bias in the domains of outcome measurement (n=10), and study confounding (n=11). In all aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphomas, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 54.0% and 73.1% in predicting treatment failure, and 54.5% and 68.7% in predicting death. Because of interstudy heterogeneity, additional subgroup analyses were performed. In newly diagnosed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 20.0% and 70.0% in predicting treatment failure, and 8.3% % and 30.5% in predicting death. In refractory/relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 68.1% and 72.1% in predicting treatment failure, and 77.3% and 69.6% in predicting death. At present, pretransplant FDG-PET cannot be recommended in aggressive non-Hodgkin, because available studies suffer from major methodological flaws, and reported prognostic estimates are low (i.e., poor in newly diagnosed and moderate in refractory/relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

The purpose of this work was to determine whether the outcome of patients with transformed indolent lymphoma improved if they, after R-chemo, also received upfront autologous stem-cell transplantation. Upfront autologous stem-cell transplant improved the outcome in sequential, but not composite/discordant TIL. The beneficial impact of ASCT was greater in patients, who were rituximab-naive at transformation. Background Transformation of indolent lymphomas (IL) to an aggressive histology (TIL) often results in a rapid clinical course, treatment refractoriness and shortened survival. Although rituximab-containing regimens (R-chemo) have become standard of care in CD20-positive TIL, the role of autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is still debated. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the outcome of TIL patients improved if they, at transformation, also received ASCT. Furthermore, we investigated the outcome of cases with histologically low- and high-grade components diagnosed either simultaneously or after a period of overt indolent disease. We also analyzed, whether prior rituximab treatment during the indolent course of the disease affected outcome after transformation. Patients and methods Eighty-five patients (≤68 years) with histologically confirmed TIL were included. Five-year overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were calculated. Selected parameters were tested in a multivariate analysis. All analyses were conducted on three cohorts: (i) whole cohort (all TIL), (ii) patients with co-existing evidence of both indolent and aggressive histology at diagnosis (Composite/discordant TIL) and (iii) patients transformed after prolonged prior indolent disease (sequential TIL). Results Fifty-four patients (64%) received ASCT consolidation and 31 (36%) did not. Within the ‘all TIL’ cohort, the 5-year OS and PFS for R-chemo + ASCT versus R-chemo alone, were 67% versus 48% (P = 0.11) and 60% versus 30% (P = 0.02), respectively. Furthermore, in ‘Composite/discordant TIL’ R-chemo + ASCT showed no impact on OS (76% versus 67%; P = 0.66) or PFS (71% versus 62%; P = 0.54). Conversely, R-chemo + ASCT improved the outcome of ‘sequential TIL’ (OS 62% versus 36%; P = 0.07; PFS 53% versus 6%; P = 0.002), regardless of prior rituximab therapy. The beneficial effect of ASCT was significantly higher in patients who had not received rituximab at IL stage. Conclusions ASCT improved the outcome in sequential, but not composite/discordant TIL. The beneficial impact of ASCT was greater in patients, who were rituximab-naive at transformation.