Search

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, incurable hematological malignancy with a heterogenous presentation and clinical course. A wide variety of chemotherapy-based regimens are currently utilized in untreated patients. Several targeted or small molecule therapies have shown efficacy in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting over the last several years and have since been explored in the frontline setting. Lenalidomide plus rituximab was explored in a phase II study of 38 untreated patients with MCL ineligible for transplant, where the combination produced durable remissions. We looked to build upon this regimen by adding venetoclax to the combination. We conducted a multi-center, open-label, non-randomized, single arm study to evaluate this combination. We enrolled 28 unselected patients with untreated disease irrespective of age, fitness or risk factors. Lenalidomide was dosed at 20 mg daily on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle. The dose of venetoclax was determined using the TITE-CRM model. Rituximab was dosed at 375 mg/m2 weekly starting on cycle 1 day 1 until cycle 2 day 1. No DLTs were noted. All patients were treated with venetoclax at the maximum tolerated dose of 400 mg daily. The most common Adverse Events noted were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. The overall and complete response rates were 96% and 86% respectively. 86% of patients achieved minimal residual disease undetectability by NGS. The median overall and progression-free survivals were not reached. The combination of lenalidomide, rituximab and venetoclax is a safe and effective regimen in patients with untreated MCL. Clinical trial # NCT03523975.

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the second most common non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the United States and Western Europe. Overall outcomes for patients with FL have continued to improve over the last several decades—most notably, with the addition of the CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab to the treatment armamentarium. More recently, we have seen advances in the management of patients with relapsed/refractory FL with the approval of several new treatments including lenalidomide, axicabtagene ciloleucel, copanlisib, umbralisib, and tazemetostat. Unfortunately, there remains a group of patients for which treatment outcomes, especially overall survival (OS), are suboptimal. This group has been identified as patients who relapse within 24 months (POD24) of completion of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT). Data indicate that patients who relapse within this window have a 5-year OS of around 50%, compared to 80% for those who remain in remission beyond 24 months. POD24 patients have been included and evaluated in the studies of the novel agents mentioned. While not specifically designed to treat this high-risk group, early data suggest that outcomes are not significantly impacted by this designation, unlike CIT. While to date the optimal management of POD24 patients has not been elucidated, the future appears bright with the continued use of the approved agents and several others in clinical development.

Introduction The COVID-19 pandemic has introduced new challenges to healthcare access and delivery. It is critical to identify areas for innovation within oncologic clinical practice to maintain high quality care. We evaluated the potential utility of telemedicine initiatives for patients with lymphoma undergoing immunochemotherapy. We conducted a retrospective review of adult lymphoma patients receiving R-CHOP + /- R, R-ICE, R-GEMOX, and R-DHAP at our institution in the last three years (2017-2019) and identified cycles for which dose modifications were required. Methods We reviewed 1290 total treatment cycles in 301 unique patients, 1102 cycles (85.4%) were R-CHOP + /- R, 105 (8.1%) were R-ICE, 71 (5.5%) were R-GEMOX, and 12 (0.9%) were R-DHAP. We identified that 144 cycles (11.2%) were subject to dosing adjustments. We retrospectively reviewed laboratory results, patient history, and/or physical exam findings that informed dose modifications. Results Of the 144 dose adjustments, 11% of cycles contained dose increases due to a well-tolerated previous dose noted in the clinical assessment. The remaining 128 modified cycles were dose reductions. Notably, only 7/128 dose reductions were based on physical exam findings alone, due solely to a change in patient body weight. As patients are routinely weighed immediately prior to chemotherapy administration, effectively no dose modifications (0/144) were exclusively based on abnormal physical exam finding during a pre-infusion assessment. Conclusion These findings suggest that pre-infusion assessments may be amenable to virtual visits for lymphoma patients undergoing immunochemotherapy.

Introduction: In the phase 3 ECHELON-2 study (NCT01777152), treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) demonstrated significantly longer progression-free and overall survival compared with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in the frontline (FL) treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL) or other CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL). This study supported the November 2018 US FDA approval of A+CHP as FL therapy for adults with sALCL or other CD30-expressing PTCL. The current analysis describes patient characteristics, PTCL subtypes, and supportive care use of FL A+CHP and CHOP outside of the clinical trial setting in the US. Methods: Using medical and pharmacy claims data in the Symphony Health Solutions database, a retrospective cohort analysis of patients with PTCL treated with FL A+CHP or CHOP was conducted to compare treatment and utilization characteristics. Patients ≥18 years with 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient ICD-9/10 PTCL diagnosis codes, newly initiated on A+CHP or CHOP (index date) between November 2018 and January 2020, and with ≥6 months continuous activity before and ≥3 months after the index date were included. To adjust for confounding factors, a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed based on age, gender, baseline comorbidities, geographic region and length of follow-up. Results: A total of 755 patients met inclusion criteria (335 A+CHP; 420 CHOP) with a median follow-up period of 10.1 and 10.6 months, respectively. In the unmatched cohorts, 61% were male, and median age at index was 62 and 69 years for A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. The prevalence of comorbidities based on the Charlson Comorbidity Index was similar between the cohorts; prevalent conditions included diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and liver disease (Table 1). PTCL subtypes treated with A+CHP included sALCL (54%), PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS; 27%), and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL; 13%); subtypes treated with CHOP included PTCL-NOS (35%), adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL; 35%), and AITL (11%) (Table 2). After matching, the proportion of patients who received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF; A+CHP: 91%, CHOP: 86%, p=0.1) and the incidence rate of neutropenia (A+CHP: 45%, CHOP: 42%, p=0.4) during FL treatment for both study cohorts was similar. Of patients who received G-CSF, the majority received it as primary prophylaxis given within the first 5 days of FL treatment initiation (A+CHP: 89%, CHOP: 85%, p=0.2). The rate of subsequent therapy (ie, therapy change after FL), was similar between A+CHP and CHOP (18% vs 21%; p=0.3) and for the sALCL subtype (16% vs 26%, p=0.2). Of the A+CHP patients who received subsequent therapy, 32% were retreated with a BV-containing regimen and 19% of CHOP patients received a BV-containing regimen. Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, US patients with PTCL newly initiated on A+CHP or CHOP were older (67 vs 58 years) than those in ECHELON-2. There was a high comorbidity burden; over half of the patients in both cohorts had 1+ comorbidities, a potential reflection of the older population. As would be expected due to a high rate of CD30-positivity in the disease, A+CHP was more commonly used than CHOP in sALCL. In PTCL subtypes in which CD30 is more variably expressed, A+CHP and CHOP were used with similar frequencies. Although clinical trials in ATLL have demonstrated improved outcomes with more complex and intensive regimens than CHOP, CHOP remains commonly used in ATLL. A+CHP was also used in PTCL subtypes not included in ECHELON-2, such as NK/T cell lymphomas. G-CSF was used as primary prophylaxis in the large majority of patients in both cohorts. The use of a BV-containing regimen as subsequent therapy was more common in A+CHP vs CHOP, probably because the tumors of A+CHP patients were more likely to have expressed CD30. Confounding by unmeasured characteristics cannot be ruled out due to inherent limitations in claims data (eg, lack of disease stage, CD30 testing and response outcomes). Characteristics and management of this real-world population with PTCL differed from those in the ECHELON-2 trial, demonstrating the importance of retrospective studies to assess the impact of new regimens on clinical practice and to identify areas for further education of practitioners. Disclosures Burke: Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Liu:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu-Isenberg:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fanale:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Surinach:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Flores:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Lisano:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Phillips:Beigene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Lymphoma Connect: Other; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cardinal Health: Consultancy; University of Michigan: Current Employment; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy.

Extranodal non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the oral region can present similarly to diseases of odontogenic origin. The objective of this report was to describe a rare case of maxillary and mandibular NHL that presented similarly to and concurrently with lesions of odontogenic origin.A unique case of extranodal NHL, which presented at the apices of maxillary and mandibular teeth in conjunction with lesions of odontogenic origin in a 68-year-old white man, is described. The patient sought care because of a lesion in the right maxillary paranasal region that caused him paresthesia. Radiographically, periapical radiolucencies were present along teeth #5-8, #23 and 24, and #30 and 31. Biopsies of the right maxillary and anterior mandibular lesions were completed and led to a diagnosis of NHL at the apices of teeth #5-8 extending to the hard palate and granulation tissue at the apices of teeth #23 and 24. Two years later, the patient returned because of pressure and sensitivity associated with teeth #30 and 31. Vestibular swelling was noted clinically, and a multilocular periapical radiolucency was present radiographically. Via endodontic therapy and a positron emission tomographic scan, the lesion associated with teeth #30 and 31 was determined to be of both odontogenic and nonodontogenic origin because it possessed both a sinus tract associated with tooth #30 and NHL. Lesions of odontogenic and nonodontogenic origin possess diagnostic and treatment challenges because they may present similarly and/or concurrently. Thoughtful and conservative management of odontogenic lesions with associated NHL is imperative. Interprofessional collaboration and communication among providers must be thorough and clear to properly coordinate care and prevent delays in diagnosis and treatment when these entities occur together.