Search

Abstract: In the phase 2 clinical trial (AIM) of venetoclax-ibrutinib, 24 patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL; 23 with relapsed/refractory [R/R] disease) received ibrutinib 560 mg and venetoclax 400 mg both once daily. High complete remission (CR) and measurable residual disease negative (MRD-negative) CR rates were previously reported. With median survivor follow-up now exceeding 7 years, we report long-term results. Treatment was initially continuous, with elective treatment interruption (ETI) allowed after protocol amendment for patients in MRD-negative CR. For R/R MCL, the estimated 7-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 14-49; median, 28 months; 95% CI, 13-82) and overall survival (OS) was 43% (95% CI, 23-62; median, 32 months; 95% CI, 15 to not evaluable). Eight patients in MRD-negative CR entered ETI for a median of 58 months (95% CI, 37-79), with 4 experiencing disease recurrence. Two of 3 reattained CR on retreatment. Time-to-treatment failure (TTF), which excluded progression in ETI for those reattaining response, was 39% overall and 68% at 7 years for responders. Beyond 56 weeks, grade ≥3 and serious adverse events were uncommon. Newly emergent or increasing cardiovascular toxicity were not observed beyond 56 weeks. We demonstrate long-term durable responses and acceptable toxicity profile of venetoclax-ibrutinib in R/R MCL and show feasibility of treatment interruption while maintaining ongoing disease control. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02471391., (© 2024 American Society of Hematology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

The BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax has established therapeutic roles in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). As BCL2 is an important determinant of survival of both myeloid progenitor and B cells, we investigated whether clinical and molecular abnormalities arise in the myeloid compartment during long-term continuous venetoclax treatment of CLL in 89 patients (87 with relapsed/refractory CLL). Over a median follow-up of 75 (range 21-98) months, persistent cytopenias (≥1 of neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia) lasting ≥4 months and unrelated to CLL occurred in 25 patients (28%). Of these patients, 20 (80%) displayed clonal hematopoiesis, including 10 with therapy-related myeloid neoplasms (t-MNs). t-MNs occurred exclusively in patients previously exposed to fludarabine-alkylator combination therapy with a cumulative 5-year incidence of 10.4% after venetoclax initiation, consistent with rates reported for patients exposed to fludarabine-alkylator combination therapy without venetoclax. To determine whether the altered myelopoiesis reflected the acquisition of mutations, we analyzed samples from patients with no or minimal bone marrow CLL burden (n = 41). Mutations in the apoptosis effector BAX were identified in 32% (13/41). In cellular assays, C-terminal BAX mutants abrogated outer mitochondrial membrane localization of BAX and engendered resistance to venetoclax killing. BAX-mutated clonal hematopoiesis occurred independently of prior fludarabine-alkylator combination therapy exposure and was not associated with t-MNs. Single-cell sequencing revealed clonal co-occurrence of mutations in BAX with DNMT3A or ASXL1. We also observed simultaneous BCL2 mutations within CLL cells and BAX mutations in the myeloid compartment of the same patients, indicating lineage-specific adaptation to venetoclax therapy., (© 2022 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Purpose: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III iNNOVATE study showed sustained efficacy of ibrutinib-rituximab in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM). Here, we present the final analysis from iNNOVATE., Methods: Patients had confirmed symptomatic WM, either previously untreated or previously treated; patients with prior rituximab had at least a minor response to their last rituximab-based regimen. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab (n = 75 per arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included response rate, time to next treatment, hemoglobin improvement, overall survival, and safety., Results: With a median follow-up of 50 (range, 0.5-63) months, median (95% CI) PFS was not reached (57.7 months to not evaluable) with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 20.3 months (13.0 to 27.6) with placebo-rituximab (hazard ratio, 0.250; P < .0001). PFS benefit was regardless of prior treatment status, MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status, or key patient characteristics. Higher response rates (partial response or better) were observed with ibrutinib-rituximab (76% v 31% with placebo-rituximab; P < .0001) and were sustained over time. Median time to next treatment was not reached with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 18 months with placebo-rituximab. More patients receiving ibrutinib-rituximab versus placebo-rituximab had sustained hemoglobin improvement (77% v 43%; P < .0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. Ibrutinib-rituximab maintained a manageable safety profile; the prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events of clinical interest generally decreased over time., Conclusion: In the final analysis of iNNOVATE with a median follow-up of 50 months, ibrutinib-rituximab showed ongoing superiority across clinical outcomes in patients with WM regardless of MYD88 or CXCR4 mutation status, prior treatment, and key patient characteristics., Competing Interests: Christian BuskeHonoraria: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, BeiGene, Novartis, Pfizer, Incyte, AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Celltrion, MorphoSys, RegeneronConsulting or Advisory Role: Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Roche, Pfizer, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Incyte, Regeneron, MorphoSys, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Janssen, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Pfizer, Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, Celltrion, MSD, Pfizer, Amgen, Alessandra TedeschiConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, AbbVieSpeakers' Bureau: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, BeiGene Judith TrotmanResearch Funding: BeiGene, Roche/Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, CelgeneTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech Ramón García-SanzHonoraria: Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, BeiGene, NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: JanssenResearch Funding: Gilead Sciences, IncytePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: BIOMED-2 primersTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Takeda (I)Other Relationship: Spanish Society of Hematology (SEHH) David MacDonaldResearch Funding: Celgene, Servier Veronique LeblondHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Roche Pharma AG, BeiGene, Amgen, Janssen Oncology, AbbVie, MSD Oncology, LillyConsulting or Advisory Role: BeiGene, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Lilly, AbbVieSpeakers' Bureau: BeiGene, AstraZeneca, AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Charles HerbauxHonoraria: Roche, Janssen-Cilag, AbbVieResearch Funding: TakedaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Roche Jeffrey V. MatousConsulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, BeiGene Constantine S. TamHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Novartis, BeiGene, PharmacyclicsConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Loxo, Roche, AbbVieResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie Leonard T. HeffnerSpeakers' Bureau: Kite, a Gilead companyResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Kite, a Gilead Company, ADC Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Loxo, Cellectar Marzia VarettoniConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Janssen, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences, Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Janssen Lia PalombaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seres Therapeutics (I)Honoraria: Flagship Biosciences (I), Evelo Therapeutics (I), Jazz Pharmaceuticals (I), Therakos (I), Amgen (I), Merck (I), Seres Therapeutics (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: Flagship Biosciences (I), Novartis (I), Evelo Therapeutics (I), Jazz Pharmaceuticals (I), Therakos (I), Amgen (I), Merck (I), Seres Therapeutics (I), Kite, a Gilead Company, BeiGeneResearch Funding: Seres Therapeutics (I)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property Rights (I), Juno Intellectual Property Rights Chaim ShustikExpert Testimony: Janssen Oncology Efstathios KastritisHonoraria: Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Prothena, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Prothena, PfizerResearch Funding: Janssen Oncology, AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Genesis Pharma, Takeda, Pfizer Steven P. TreonConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene, X4 Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Bristol Myers Squibb, X4 Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, BeiGene, AbbViePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: My institution holds patents related to the use of MYD88 and CXCR4 testing for which a predetermined financial distribution to the laboratory and individuals is provided. I have not received any income to this date related to these patents.Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen OncologyOther Relationship: Janssen, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene Jerry PingEmployment: AbbVieStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Bernhard HaunsEmployment: AbbVie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Israel Arango-HisijaraEmployment: Janssen Oncology, Abbvie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, AbbvieHonoraria: Janssen Oncology, Abbvie/Pharmacyclics Meletios A. DimopoulosHonoraria: Amgen, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGeneConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGeneNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Both BTKi and BCL2i are regarded as standards of care for frontline treatment of CLL. In this paper, I present the arguments for favoring BTKi as initial therapy. Venetoclax-based regimens have the advantage of being fixed in duration, but patients with select high-risk features may experience inferior PFS relative to those without high-risk features., (Copyright © 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Purpose: CAPTIVATE (NCT02910583), a randomized phase II study, evaluates minimal residual disease (MRD)-guided treatment discontinuation following completion of first-line ibrutinib plus venetoclax treatment in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)., Methods: Previously untreated CLL patients age < 70 years received three cycles of ibrutinib and then 12 cycles of combined ibrutinib plus venetoclax. Patients in the MRD cohort who met the stringent random assignment criteria for confirmed undetectable MRD (Confirmed uMRD) were randomly assigned 1:1 to double-blind placebo or ibrutinib; patients without Confirmed uMRD (uMRD Not Confirmed) were randomly assigned 1:1 to open-label ibrutinib or ibrutinib plus venetoclax. Primary end point was 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate with placebo versus ibrutinib in the Confirmed uMRD population. Secondary end points included response rates, uMRD, and safety., Results: One hundred sixty-four patients initiated three cycles of ibrutinib lead-in. After 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax, best uMRD response rates were 75% (peripheral blood) and 68% (bone marrow). Patients with Confirmed uMRD were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 43) or ibrutinib (n = 43); patients with uMRD Not Confirmed were randomly assigned to ibrutinib (n = 31) or ibrutinib plus venetoclax (n = 32). Median follow-up was 31.3 months. One-year DFS rate was not significantly different between placebo (95%) and ibrutinib (100%; arm difference: 4.7% [95% CI, -1.6 to 10.9]; P = .15) in the Confirmed uMRD population. After ibrutinib lead-in tumor debulking, 36 of 40 patients (90%) with high tumor lysis syndrome risk at baseline shifted to medium or low tumor lysis syndrome risk categories. Adverse events were most frequent during the first 6 months of ibrutinib plus venetoclax and generally decreased over time., Conclusion: The 1-year DFS rate of 95% in placebo-randomly assigned patients with Confirmed uMRD suggests the potential for fixed-duration treatment with this all-oral, once-daily, chemotherapy-free regimen in first-line CLL., Competing Interests: William G. WierdaConsulting or Advisory Role: SanofiResearch Funding: GlaxoSmithKline/Novartis, AbbVie, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Acerta Pharma, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Juno Therapeutics, Kite, a Gilead Company, Oncternal Therapeutics, Loxo, Xencor, miRagen, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Cyclacel John N. AllanHonoraria: AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, BeiGeneConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie/Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Ascentage Pharma, BeiGene, Janssen Oncology, Epizyme, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics, ADC TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Genentech, Janssen, Celgene, TG Therapeutics Tanya SiddiqiConsulting/Advisory Role: Juno Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Pharmacyclics/JanssenSpeakers Bureau: Pharmacyclics/Janssen, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb/CelgeneResearch Funding: Juno Therapeutics (Inst), Kite, a Gilead Company (Inst), Acerta Pharma (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Oncternal Therapeutics (Inst) Thomas J. KippsEmployment: Moores Cancer CenterStock and Other Ownership Interests: Oncternal TherapeuticsHonoraria: Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Janssen, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, DAVAOncology, AstraZenecaConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Janssen, DAVAOncologySpeakers Bureau: Verastem/Pharmacyclics, Pharmacyclics/Janssen, AbbVie/Genentech, Gilead Sciences, DAVA PharmaceuticalsResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics/Janssen (Inst), Breast Cancer Research Foundation (Inst), Oncternal Therapeutics (Inst), Leukemia and Lymphoma Society (Inst), California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM) (Inst), National Cancer Institute (Inst), NIH (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Cirmtuzumab was developed by Thomas J. Kipps in the Thomas J. Kipps laboratory and licensed by the University of California to Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc, which provided stock options and research funding to the Thomas J. Kipps laboratory. (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie/Pharmacyclics, Genentech/Roche, Janssen, Gilead Sciences, Celgene, DAVAOncology, Breast Cancer Research Foundation, TG Therapeutics, Verastem, AstraZeneca Stephen OpatHonoraria: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Roche, Gilead Sciences, Mundipharma, Takeda, Merck, and CSL BehringConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Gilead Sciences, Takeda, Merck, Mundipharma, CSL BehringResearch Funding: AstraZeneca (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Roche (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Merck (Inst), Epizyme (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche Alessandra TedeschiConsulting/Advisory Role: Janssen, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, AbbVieSpeakers Bureau: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, BeiGene Xavier C. BadouxHonoraria: Janssen/Pharmacyclics, AbbVie Bryone J. KussStock and Other Ownership Interests: Commonwealth Serum Laboratories (CSL)Honoraria: Roche, Janssen Oncology, AstraZeneca, AbbVie, Merck, Mundipharma, Takeda, SandozConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie, Janssen Oncology, Kyowa Kirin International, AstraZenecaSpeakers Bureau: AstraZeneca, Janssen-Ortho Sharon JacksonHonoraria: AbbVie NZ LtdConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie NZSpeakers Bureau: AbbVie NZTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche NZ Carol MorenoConsulting/Advisory Role: Janssen Oncology, Abbott/AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BieGeneSpeakers Bureau: Janssen OncologyResearch Funding: AbbVie Ryan JacobsConsulting/Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Janssen Oncology, Secura Bio, Genentech, Adaptive Biotechnologies, ADC Therapeutics, TG TherapeuticsSpeakers Bureau: Pharmacyclics, Janssen Oncology, AbbVie, TG Therapeutics, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: TeneoBio (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), MEI Pharma (Inst) John M. PagelConsulting/Advisory Role: Gilead Sciences, AstraZeneca, Actinium Pharmaceuticals, BeiGene, Loxo, MEI Pharma, TG Therapeutics, MorphoSys, Epizyme Ian FlinnConsulting/advisory role: AbbVie (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), Verastem (Inst), Roche (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), Kite, a Gilead Company (Inst), Janssen (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Takeda (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Juno Therapeutics (Inst), Unum Therapeutics (Inst), MorphoSys (Inst), Nurix (Inst), Shanghai Yingli Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Great Point Partners (Inst), Iksuda Therapeutics (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Century Therapeutics (Inst), Hutchison MediPharma (Inst), Servier (Inst), Vincerx (Inst)Research Funding: Acerta Pharma (Inst), Agios (Inst), Calithera Biosciences (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Constellation Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Gilead Sciences (Inst), Incyte (Inst), Infinity Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Karyopharm Therapeutics (Inst), Kite, a Gilead Company (Inst), Novartis (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Portola Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Roche (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), Trillium Therapeutics (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), ArQule (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Curis (Inst), Forma Therapeutics (Inst), Forty Seven (Inst), Merck (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Teva (Inst), Verastem (Inst), AstraZeneca (Inst), Juno Therapeutics (Inst), Unum Therapeutics (Inst), MorphoSys (Inst), Seattle Genetics (Inst), IGM Biosciences (Inst), Loxo (Inst), Rhizen Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Triact Therapeutics (Inst) Yvonne PakEmployment: BridgeBio Pharma, AbbVieStock and Other Ownership Interests: BridgeBio Pharma, AbbVie Cathy ZhouEmployment: Abbvie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Abbvie/Pharmacyclics Edith Szafer-GlusmanStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie Joi NinomotoEmployment: AbbVieStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie James P. DeanEmployment: PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie Danelle F. JamesEmployment: Abbvie/PharmacyclicsLeadership: Abbvie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVie/PharmacyclicsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: AbbVie/PharmacyclicsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Abbvie/Pharmacyclics Paolo GhiaHonoraria: AbbVie, BeiGene, Janssen Oncology, Gilead Sciences, Juno Therapeutics, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, ArQule, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Dynamo Therapeutics, MEI Pharma, Acerta Pharma/AstraZeneca, Juno/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, MSD, Lilly, RocheConsulting/Advisory Role: AbbVie, BieGene, Janssen, Gilead Sciences, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Juno Therapeutics, ArQule, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Dynamo Therapeutics, MEI Pharma, Acerta Pharma/AstraZeneca, MSD, Lilly, RocheResearch Funding: AbbVie, Janssen Oncology, Gilead Sciences, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, AstraZeneca Constantine S. TamHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Novartis, BeiGene, PharmacyclicsConsulting/Advisory Role: Janssen, Loxo, Roche, BeiGene, AbbVieResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVieNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Ibrutinib plus venetoclax, given with an ibrutinib lead-in, has shown encouraging clinical activity in early phase studies in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). The ongoing phase 3 SYMPATICO study evaluates the safety and efficacy of concurrently administered, once-daily, all-oral ibrutinib plus venetoclax in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL. A safety run-in (SRI) cohort was conducted to inform whether an ibrutinib lead-in should be implemented for the randomized portion. Patients received concurrent ibrutinib 560 mg continuously plus venetoclax in a 5-week ramp-up to venetoclax 400 mg for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was occurrence of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The SRI cohort enrolled 21 patients; six and 15 were in low- or increased-risk categories for TLS, respectively. During the 5-week venetoclax ramp-up, three patients had DLTs, and one patient at increased risk for TLS had a laboratory TLS; no additional TLS events occurred during follow-up. With a median follow-up of 31 months, the overall response rate was 81% (17/21); 62% (13/21) of patients had a complete response. SRI data informed that the randomized portion should proceed with concurrent ibrutinib plus venetoclax, with no ibrutinib lead-in. Ibrutinib plus venetoclax demonstrated promising efficacy; no new safety signals were observed.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03112174. Registered 13 April 2017, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03112174 ., (© 2021. The Author(s).)

Mantle cell lymphoma is an aggressive B-cell malignancy. Current frontline chemoimmunotherapies produce high response rates but relapse is inevitable. Furthermore, the elderly and those with comorbidities are precluded from standard regimens and stem cell transplant, leaving them with limited options. Targeted therapies, including Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors, are an effective treatment strategy in mantle cell lymphoma. Zanubrutinib is a potent next-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has demonstrated complete and sustained Bruton tyrosine kinase occupancy, minimal off-target effects and favorable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties. Described herein is an ongoing Phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of zanubrutinib plus rituximab followed by zanubrutinib monotherapy versus bendamustine plus rituximab followed by observation in transplant-ineligible patients with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04002297 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

High-dose chemotherapy (HDC) and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) are used as consolidation in first remission (CR1) in some centres for untreated, transformed indolent B-cell lymphoma (Tr-iNHL) but the evidence base is weak. A total of 319 patients with untreated Tr-iNHL meeting prespecified transplant eligibility criteria [age <75, LVEF ≥45%, no severe lung disease, CR by positron emission tomography or computed tomography ≥3 months after at least standard cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisolone with rituximab (R-CHOP) intensity front-line chemotherapy] were retrospectively identified. Non-diffuse large B-cell lymphoma transformations were excluded. About 283 (89%) patients had follicular lymphoma, 30 (9%) marginal-zone lymphoma and six (2%) other subtypes. Forty-nine patients underwent HDC/ASCT in CR1, and a 1:2 propensity-score-matched cohort of 98 patients based on age, stage and high-grade B-cell lymphoma with MYC, BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangements (HGBL-DH) was generated. After a median follow-up of 3·7 (range 0·1-18·3) years, ASCT was associated with significantly superior progression-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) 0·51, 0·27-0·98; P = 0·043] with a trend towards inferior overall survival (OS; HR 2·36;0·87-6·42; P = 0·1) due to more deaths from progressive disease (8% vs. 4%). Forty (41%) patients experienced relapse in the non-ASCT cohort - 15 underwent HDC/ASCT with seven (47%) ongoing complete remission (CR); 10 chimeric antigen receptor-modified T-cell (CAR-T) therapy with 6 (60%) ongoing CR; 3 allogeneic SCT with 2 (67%) ongoing CR. Although ASCT in CR1 improves initial duration of disease control in untreated Tr-iNHL, the impact on OS is less clear with effective salvage therapies in this era of CAR-T., (© 2020 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Limited information is available on the efficacy of front-line bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with reduced renal function or coexisting conditions. We therefore analyzed a cohort of real-world patients and performed a matched adjusted indirect comparison with a cohort of patients treated with ibrutinib. One hundred and fifty-seven patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) <70 mL/min and/or CIRS score >6 were treated with BR. The median age was 72 years; 69% of patients had ≥2 comorbidities and the median CrCl was 59.8 mL/min. 17.6% of patients carried TP53 disruption. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 45 months; TP53 disruption was associated with a shorter PFS (P = 0.05). The overall survival (OS) at 12, 24, and 36 months was 96.2%, 90.1%, and 79.5%, respectively. TP53 disruption was associated with an increased risk of death (P = 0.01). Data on 162 patients ≥65 years treated with ibrutinib were analyzed and compared with 165 patients ≥65 years treated with BR. Factors predicting for a longer PFS at multivariable analysis in the total patient population treated with BR and ibrutinib were age (HR 1.06, 95% CI 1.02-1.10, P < 0.01) and treatment with ibrutinib (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.33-0.93, P = 0.03). In a post hoc analysis of patients in advanced stage, a significant PFS advantage was observed in patient who had received ibrutinib (P = 0.03), who showed a trend for OS advantage (P = 0.08). We arrived at the following conclusions: (a) BR is a relatively effective first-line regimen in a real-world population of unfit patients without TP53 disruption, (b) ibrutinib provided longer disease control than BR in patients with advanced disease stage., (© 2020 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibition is an effective treatment approach for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). The phase 3 ASPEN study compared the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib, a first-generation BTK inhibitor, with zanubrutinib, a novel highly selective BTK inhibitor, in patients with WM. Patients with MYD88L265P disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with ibrutinib or zanubrutinib. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a complete response (CR) or a very good partial response (VGPR) by independent review. Key secondary end points included major response rate (MRR), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), disease burden, and safety. A total of 201 patients were randomized, and 199 received ≥1 dose of study treatment. No patient achieved a CR. Twenty-nine (28%) zanubrutinib patients and 19 (19%) ibrutinib patients achieved a VGPR, a nonstatistically significant difference (P = .09). MRRs were 77% and 78%, respectively. Median DOR and PFS were not reached; 84% and 85% of ibrutinib and zanubrutinib patients were progression free at 18 months. Atrial fibrillation, contusion, diarrhea, peripheral edema, hemorrhage, muscle spasms, and pneumonia, as well as adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, were less common among zanubrutinib recipients. Incidence of neutropenia was higher with zanubrutinib, although grade ≥3 infection rates were similar in both arms (1.2 and 1.1 events per 100 person-months). These results demonstrate that zanubrutinib and ibrutinib are highly effective in the treatment of WM, but zanubrutinib treatment was associated with a trend toward better response quality and less toxicity, particularly cardiovascular toxicity., (© 2020 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Purpose: In the phase III DUO trial, duvelisib, an oral dual PI3K-δ,γ inhibitor, demonstrated significantly improved efficacy versus ofatumumab [median (m) progression-free survival (PFS), 13.3 vs. 9.9 months (HR, 0.52; P < 0.0001); overall response rate [ORR], 74% vs. 45% ( P < 0.0001)], with a manageable safety profile in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). We report results from patients with progressive disease (PD) after ofatumumab who crossed over to duvelisib in the DUO trial., Patients and Methods: Patients with radiographically confirmed PD after ofatumumab received duvelisib 25 mg twice daily in 28-day cycles until PD, intolerance, death, or study withdrawal. The primary endpoint was ORR per investigator. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), PFS, and safety., Results: As of December 14, 2018, 90 ofatumumab-treated patients in the DUO trial prior to crossover had an ORR of 29%, mDOR of 10.4 months, and mPFS of 9.4 months. After crossover, 77% of patients (69/90) achieved a response, with an mDOR of 14.9 months and mPFS of 15.7 months. Patients with del(17p) and/or TP53 mutations had similar outcomes [ORR, 77% (20/26); mPFS, 14.7 months]. Notably, 73% of patients (47/64) with disease previously refractory to ofatumumab achieved a response. The most frequent any-grade/grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea (47%/23%), neutropenia (26%/23%), pyrexia (24%/4%), cutaneous reactions (23%/4%), and thrombocytopenia (10%/6%)., Conclusions: Duvelisib demonstrated high response rates with good durability and a manageable safety profile in patients with R/R CLL/SLL who progressed on ofatumumab, including patients with high-risk disease and disease previously refractory to ofatumumab., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

The relationship between hematological malignancy and chemotherapy on the prevalence of antibiotic allergy label (AAL) is ill-defined. We performed a multicenter retrospective case-control study comparing AAL rates among cladribine-treated hairy cell leukemia (C-HCL) cases, non-HCL cladribine-treated controls (control-1), and fludarabine-treated controls (control-2). The prevalence of AALs in C-HCL patients was 60%, compared with control-1 (14%, p  < .01) and control-2 patients (25%, p  < .01). The predominant phenotype was maculopapular exanthem (92%). The drugs implicated in AAL causality in C-HCL patients included beta-lactams (81%), trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (58%), and allopurinol (69%). C-HCL patients demonstrate high rates of AAL, potentially due to immune dysregulation, impacting beta-lactam utilization.

Novel strategies, such as chemosensitization with targeted agents, that build on the success of standard immunochemotherapy show promise for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). Here, we report a phase 1b study investigating dose escalation of the BCL2 inhibitor, venetoclax, in combination with rituximab or obinutuzumab and cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-/G-CHOP) chemotherapy in B-cell NHL. Objectives included safety assessment and determination of a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Fifty-six patients were enrolled, most with follicular lymphoma (43%) or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL; 32%). Dose-limiting toxicities were reported in 3/14 patients at the first venetoclax dose (200 mg/d), after which dosing was changed from daily to 10 days per cycle and escalated to 800 mg. A further reduction to 5 days per cycle occurred at the 800-mg dose level in the G-CHOP arm. Cytopenias were predominant among grade 3/4 events and reported at a higher rate than expected, particularly in the G-CHOP arm; however, safety was manageable. Overall response rates were 87.5% (R-CHOP and G-CHOP combinations); complete response (CR) rates were 79.2% and 78.1%, respectively. Most double-expressor (BCL2 + and MYC + ) DLBCL patients (87.5%; n = 7/8) achieved CR. Although the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, the RP2D for venetoclax with R-CHOP was established at 800 mg days 4 to 10 of cycle 1 and days 1 to 10 of cycles 2 to 8; higher doses were not explored, and this dosing schedule demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. This regimen is subsequently being evaluated in first-line DLBCL in the phase 2 portion of the study. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02055820., (© 2019 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: Both the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax are active as monotherapy in the treatment of mantle-cell lymphoma. Complete response rates of 21% have been observed for each agent when administered as long-term continuous therapy. Preclinical models predict synergy in combination., Methods: We conducted a single-group, phase 2 study of daily oral ibrutinib and venetoclax in patients, as compared with historical controls. Patients commenced ibrutinib monotherapy at a dose of 560 mg per day. After 4 weeks, venetoclax was added in stepwise, weekly increasing doses to 400 mg per day. Both drugs were continued until progression or an unacceptable level of adverse events. The primary end point was the rate of complete response at week 16. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed by flow cytometry in bone marrow and by allele-specific oligonucleotide-polymerase chain reaction (ASO-PCR) in blood., Results: The study included 24 patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma (23 patients) or previously untreated mantle-cell lymphoma (1 patient). Patients were 47 to 81 years of age, and the number of previous treatments ranged from none to six. Half the patients had aberrations of TP53, and 75% had a high-risk prognostic score. The complete response rate according to computed tomography at week 16 was 42%, which was higher than the historical result of 9% at this time point with ibrutinib monotherapy (P<0.001). The rate of complete response as assessed by positron-emission tomography was 62% at week 16 and 71% overall. MRD clearance was confirmed by flow cytometry in 67% of the patients and by ASO-PCR in 38%. In a time-to-event analysis, 78% of the patients with a response were estimated to have an ongoing response at 15 months. The tumor lysis syndrome occurred in 2 patients. Common side effects were generally low grade and included diarrhea (in 83% of the patients), fatigue (in 75%), and nausea or vomiting (in 71%)., Conclusions: In this study involving historical controls, dual targeting of BTK and BCL2 with ibrutinib and venetoclax was consistent with improved outcomes in patients with mantle-cell lymphoma who had been predicted to have poor outcomes with current therapy. (Funded by Janssen and others; AIM ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02471391 .).

The anti-CD20 antibodies represent a major advancement in the therapeutic options available for chronic lymphocytic leukemia. The addition of rituximab, ofatumumab and obinutuzumab to various chemotherapy regimens has led to considerable improvements in both response and survival. Ocaratuzumab, veltuzumab and ublituximab are currently being explored within the trial setting. We review the current status of these antibodies, and discuss how their mechanisms of action may impact on the choice of combinations with novel small molecule agents., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is a neoplastic disorder of mature B lymphocytes. While traditionally treated with combinations of chemoimmunotherapy, the therapeutic options for CLL have expanded in recent years with the emergence of novel oral agents, such as the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib, that are well tolerated and highly efficacious. The role of novel agents in the first-line setting is now being investigated in head-to-head clinical trials. In this discussion paper, we consider the role of novel agents in the up-front setting, using three case studies of treatment-naive patients to highlight how choice of therapy may be individualized depending on the characteristics of the patient and the disease, as well as patient preferences.

Background: Selective BCL2 inhibition with venetoclax has substantial activity in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Combination therapy with rituximab enhanced activity in preclinical models. The aim of this study was to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of venetoclax in combination with rituximab., Methods: Adult patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (according to the 2008 Modified International Workshop on CLL guidelines) or small lymphocytic lymphoma were eligible for this phase 1b, dose-escalation trial. The primary outcomes were to assess the safety profile, to determine the maximum tolerated dose, and to establish the recommended phase 2 dose of venetoclax when given in combination with rituximab. Secondary outcomes were to assess the pharmacokinetic profile and analyse efficacy, including overall response, duration of response, and time to tumour progression. Minimal residual disease was a protocol-specified exploratory objective. Central review of the endpoints was not done. Venetoclax was dosed daily using a stepwise escalation to target doses (200-600 mg) and then monthly rituximab commenced (375 mg/m 2 in month 1 and 500 mg/m 2 in months 2-6). Adverse events were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for adverse events version 4.0. Protocol-guided drug cessation was allowed for patients who achieved complete response (including complete response with incomplete marrow recovery) or negative bone marrow minimal residual disease. Analyses were done per protocol for all patients who commenced drug and included all patients who received at least one dose of venetoclax. Data were pooled across dose cohorts. Patients are still receiving therapy and follow-up is ongoing. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01682616., Findings: Between Aug 6, 2012, and May 28, 2014, we enrolled 49 patients. Common grade 1-2 toxicities included upper respiratory tract infections (in 28 [57%] of 49 patients), diarrhoea (27 [55%]), and nausea (25 [51%]). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 37 (76%) of 49 patients; most common were neutropenia (26 [53%]), thrombocytopenia (eight [16%]), anaemia (seven [14%]), febrile neutropenia (six [12%]), and leucopenia (six [12%]). The most common serious adverse events were pyrexia (six [12%]), febrile neutropenia (five [10%]), lower respiratory tract infection, and pneumonia (each three [6%]). Clinical tumour lysis syndrome occurred in two patients (resulting in one death) who initiated venetoclax at 50 mg. After enhancing tumour lysis syndrome prophylaxis measures and commencing venetoclax at 20 mg, clinical tumour lysis syndrome did not occur. The maximum tolerated dose was not identified; the recommended phase 2 dose of venetoclax in combination with rituximab was 400 mg. Overall, 42 (86%) of 49 patients achieved a response, including a complete response in 25 (51%) of 49 patients. 2 year estimates for progression-free survival and ongoing response were 82% (95% CI 66-91) and 89% (95% CI 72-96), respectively. Negative marrow minimal residual disease was attained in 20 (80%) of 25 complete responders and 28 (57%) of 49 patients overall. 13 responders ceased all therapy; among these all 11 minimal residual disease-negative responders remain progression-free off therapy. Two with minimal residual disease-positive complete response progressed after 24 months off therapy and re-attained response after re-initiation of venetoclax., Interpretation: A substantial proportion of patients achieved an overall response with the combination of venetoclax and rituximab including 25 (51%) of 49 patients who achieved a complete response and 28 (57%) of 49 patients who achieved negative marrow minimal residual disease with acceptable safety. The depth and durability of responses observed with the combination offers an attractive potential treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and could allow some patients to maintain response after discontinuing therapy, a strategy that warrants further investigation in randomised studies., Funding: AbbVie Inc and Genentech Inc., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Despite its efficacy in prospective trials, full dose fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) may be too toxic for elderly patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in clinical practice. We retrospectively reviewed the impact of dose reductions in FCR therapy on the outcomes of 42 consecutive patients aged 65-87 (median 72) years. Despite a median cumulative fludarabine dose reduction of 50% from full dose, the objective response and complete response rates were 86% and 38% respectively (frontline 94%/59%; previously treated 80%/24%). Dose reductions of 25-75% were not significantly associated with inferior progression free survival compared to minimal reductions (≤25%) (p=0.49), and did not preclude deep responses, including six cases (14%) of minimal residual disease negativity. Although hematological and infectious toxicities were common, treatment limiting adverse effects were infrequent. Dose attenuated FCR appears to have preserved efficacy and may be a viable therapeutic option for elderly patients with CLL.

Accurate identification of patients likely to achieve long-progression-free survival (PFS) after chemoimmunotherapy is essential given the availability of less toxic alternatives, such as ibrutinib. Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) achieved a high response rate, but continued relapses were seen in initial reports. We reviewed the original 300 patient phase 2 FCR study to identify long-term disease-free survivors. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed posttreatment by a polymerase chain reaction-based ligase chain reaction assay (sensitivity 0.01%). At the median follow-up of 12.8 years, PFS was 30.9% (median PFS, 6.4 years). The 12.8-year PFS was 53.9% for patients with mutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable (IGHV) gene (IGHV-M) and 8.7% for patients with unmutated IGHV (IGHV-UM). 50.7% of patients with IGHV-M achieved MRD-negativity posttreatment; of these, PFS was 79.8% at 12.8 years. A plateau was seen on the PFS curve in patients with IGHV-M, with no relapses beyond 10.4 years in 42 patients (total follow-up 105.4 patient-years). On multivariable analysis, IGHV-UM (hazard ratio, 3.37 [2.18-5.21]; P < .001) and del(17p) by conventional karyotyping (hazard ratio, 7.96 [1.02-61.92]; P = .048) were significantly associated with inferior PFS. Fifteen patients with IGHV-M had 4-color MRD flow cytometry (sensitivity 0.01%) performed in peripheral blood, at a median of 12.8 years posttreatment (range, 9.5-14.7). All were MRD-negative. The high rate of very long-term PFS in patients with IGHV-M after FCR argues for the continued use of chemoimmunotherapy in this patient subgroup outside clinical trials; alternative strategies may be preferred in patients with IGHV-UM, to limit long-term toxicity., (© 2016 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) relapse in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a devastating complication; the optimal prophylactic strategy remains unclear., Methods: We performed a multicentre, retrospective analysis of patients with DLBCL with high risk for CNS relapse as defined by two or more of: multiple extranodal sites, elevated serum LDH and B symptoms or involvement of specific high-risk anatomical sites. We compared three different strategies of CNS-directed therapy: intrathecal (IT) methotrexate (MTX) with (R)-CHOP 'group 1'; R-CHOP with IT MTX and two cycles of high-dose intravenous (IV) MTX 'group 2'; dose-intensive systemic antimetabolite-containing chemotherapy (Hyper-CVAD or CODOXM/IVAC) with IT/IV MTX 'group 3'., Results: Overall, 217 patients were identified (49, 125 and 43 in groups 1-3, respectively). With median follow-up of 3.4 (range 0.2-18.6) years, 23 CNS relapses occurred (12, 10 and 1 in groups 1-3 respectively). The 3-year actuarial rates (95% CI) of CNS relapse were 18.4% (9.5-33.1%), 6.9% (3.5-13.4%) and 2.3% (0.4-15.4%) in groups 1-3, respectively (P=0.009)., Conclusions: The addition of high-dose IV MTX and/or cytarabine was associated with lower incidence of CNS relapse compared with IT chemotherapy alone. However, these data are limited by their retrospective nature and warrant confirmation in prospective randomised studies.

Objective: Fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) therapy for lymphoid malignancies has historically been associated with a low reported incidence of Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP). However, prophylaxis was routinely used in early studies, and molecular diagnostic tools were not employed. The objective of this study was to review the incidence of PJP during and post-FCR in the era of highly sensitive molecular diagnostics and (18) F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET)-computerised tomography (CT)., Methods: All patients treated with standard FCR at the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (March 2009 to June 2012) were identified from a medications management database. Laboratory-confirmed PJP cases during this time were identified from an electronic database., Results: Overall, 66 patients were treated with a median of 5.5 FCR cycles. Eight PJP cases were identified, 6 of whom had received chemotherapy prior to FCR. In 5 cases, (18) F-FDG PET demonstrated bilateral ground-glass infiltrates. Median CD4(+) lymphocyte counts at time of PJP diagnosis and 9-12 months following FCR were 123 and 400 cells/μL, respectively. In patients receiving no prophylaxis, 9.1% developed PJP during FCR. The rate following FCR was 18.4%, with median onset at 6 months (2.4-24 months)., Conclusion: Given the high rate of late-onset PJP, consideration should be given for extended PJP prophylaxis for up to 12 months post-FCR, particularly in pretreated patients. Further evaluation of the role of CD4(+) monitoring is warranted to quantify risk of disease development and to guide duration of prophylaxis., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Treatment with single-agent chemotherapy or rituximab (R) is safe and moderately effective for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). We analyzed the efficacy and toxicity of fludarabine (F)-combinations. Twenty-nine treatment episodes were administered to 27 patients, including FC (F 25 mg/m(2) days 1-3, cyclophosphamide [C] 250 mg/m(2) days 1-3; n = 7), FCR (FC + R 375 mg/m(2) day 1; n = 18), FM (F + mitoxantrone [M] 10 mg/m(2) day 1; n = 3), and FR (n = 1). Patient characteristics were median age 57 years (36-89), 83% male, 10 previously untreated (34%). In total, 123 cycles were administered, a median of four (2-6) per patient. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia and infections complicated 28% and 3% of cycles, respectively. Responses were achieved in 26 cases (90%), one complete, 23 partial, and two minor. The median progression-free survival was 43.1 months, and at a median follow-up of 66.5 months the actuarial 5- and 10-year overall survival-rates were 88% and 75%, respectively. All 10 previously untreated patients responded (one CR, nine PR), and were alive at a median follow-up of 50 (6-106) months. Three heavily pretreated patients subsequently developed AML/MDS (one fatal) at 56, 61, and 91 months post F-based treatment. F-combination therapy is highly active in WM, both untreated and alkylator-refractory. However, a possible contribution to the cumulative risk of treatment-related MDS/AML requires ongoing monitoring.

The risk of infection with Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PCP) in patients undergoing chemotherapy is closely related to the intensity of corticosteroid exposure. PCP is uncommon with classical (3-weekly) R-CHOP, but the risk may be higher with biweekly R-CHOP (R-CHOP-14) due to the increased frequency of prednisolone pulses. Among 47 consecutive patients treated with R-CHOP-14 at our institution, five (11%) developed microbiologically proven PCP, with a further two (4%) having classical clinical and radiological features of PCP, but without microbiological confirmation. None of these patients were HIV-positive or had additional risk factors for PCP. Our experience suggests that PCP prophylaxis should be considered in institutions using R-CHOP-14 for the treatment of patients with aggressive lymphomas.

Although immunoglobulin V(H) mutation status (IgV(H) MS) is prognostic in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who are treated with alkylating agents or single-agent fludarabine, its significance in the era of chemoimmunotherapy is not known. We determined the IgV(H) somatic mutation status (MS) in 177 patients enrolled in a phase 2 study of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) and in 127 patients treated with subsequent chemoimmunotherapy protocols. IgV(H) MS did not impact significantly on the complete remission (CR) rate of patients receiving FCR or related regimens. However, CR duration was significantly shorter in patients with CLL that used unmutated IgV(H) than those whose CLL used mutated IgV(H) (TTP 47% vs 82% at 6 years, P < .001). In a multivariate model considering all baseline characteristics, IgV(H) MS emerged as the only determinant of remission duration (hazard ratio 3.8, P < .001). Our results suggest that postremission interventions should be targeted toward patients with unmutated IgV(H) status.

Early results of the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) regimen in 224 patients showed that it was highly active as initial therapy of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. In this report, we present the final results of all 300 study patients at a median follow up of 6 years. The overall response rate was 95%, with complete remission in 72%, nodular partial remission in 10%, partial remission due to cytopenia in 7%, and partial remission due to residual disease in 6%. Two patients (< 1%) died within 3 months of starting therapy. Six-year overall and failure-free survival were 77% and 51%, respectively. Median time to progression was 80 months. Pretreatment characteristics independently associated with inferior response were age 70 years or older, beta2-microglobulin twice the upper limit of normal (2N) or more, white cell count 150 x 10(9)/L or more, abnormal chromosome 17, and lactate dehydrogenase 2N or more. No pretreatment characteristic was independently associated with decreased complete remission duration. The risk of late infection was 10% and 4% for the first and second years of remission, respectively, and less than 1.5% per year for the third year onward. In a multivariate analysis of patients receiving fludarabine-based therapy at our center, FCR therapy emerged as the strongest independent determinant of survival.

Background: Fludarabine-based combination chemotherapy regimens are highly effective in the treatment of patients with indolent lymphoproliferative disorders. Despite the prevalence of such disorders in older patients, the effect of increasing age on the deliverability of these regimes has not been assessed., Methods: The authors analyzed the effect of increasing age on the deliverability and toxicity of 3 fludarabine-based regimens, all using fludarabine 25 mg/m2 per day for 3 days intravenously every 28 days, in 180 patients who were stratified into 2 age groups (age <60 years and age > or =60 years), with multivariate analysis to control for other differences between groups. The authors also explored the impact of age > or =70 years within the older cohort., Results: Older patients were more likely to experience an episode of nonsevere hematologic or infectious toxicity, but there was no difference in the rate of severe toxicity. Toxicity rates per cycle did not differ between age groups. The rates of neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC], < 1.0 x 10(9)/L) and severe neutropenia (ANC, 0.5 x 10(9)/L) were 22% and 13%, respectively, in older patients versus 20% and 11%, respectively, in younger patients (P > .1 for both). The rates of thrombocytopenia (platelet count, <100 x 10(9)/L) and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count, <50 x 10(9)/L) were 21% and 5%, respectively, in older patients and 16% and 5%, respectively, in younger patients (each P value > .1). The rate of infection was 18% per cycle in older patients and 15% per cycle in younger patients (P = .2), with no difference noted in severity. Other organ toxicities were uncommon and showed no difference between age groups. The treatment-related mortality rate was <1% in both cohorts (P > .5). In multivariate analysis, increasing age and performance status influenced the incidence of hematologic toxicity, whereas only performance status influenced the rate of infection and severe infection., Conclusions: Fludarabine-based combination chemotherapy regimens were well tolerated and can be delivered safely to older patients who have a good performance status with modestly increased myelosuppression but no increase in severe infectious complications or treatment-related mortality.

Background: The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FC-R) shows significant in vitro synergism and may improve patient outcome with little overlapping toxicity., Methods: Between December 2000 and June 2005, 77 patients completed therapy after a median of 4 cycles of FC-R (fludarabine at a dose of 25 mg/m2 intravenously [i.v.] on Days 1-3, cyclophosphamide at a dose of 250 mg/m2 i.v. on Days 1-3, and rituximab at a dose of 375 mg/m2 on Day 1). The median age of the patients was 59 years, 65% were male; 31% had previously untreated disease; and 44% had chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 29% had follicular lymphoma, and 27% other indolent lymphoid malignancies. In addition to standard disease response criteria, patients underwent evaluation using flow cytometric and/or molecular studies., Results: Objective responses (OR) and complete responses (CR) were observed in 83% and 42%, respectively, of evaluable patients (n=76), respectively. For patients with CLL, the respective OR and CR rates were 100% and 67% as firstline therapy, and 95% and 14% as salvage therapy. For patients with follicular lymphoma, the respective OR and CR rates were 100% and 86% as firstline therapy, and 87% and 67% as salvage therapy. Responders who had no detectable disease on flow cytometric and/or molecular studies experienced prolonged remissions with no recurrences reported at a median 25 months of follow-up. Peripheral stem cell collection using stem cell factor plus granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor was successful in 10 of 13 patients who underwent mobilization (77%)., Conclusions: FC-R is highly active as initial or salvage therapy in patients with CLL or indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Collection of autologous stem cells during molecular remission is feasible and may facilitate future exploration of high-dose therapy in these patients., (Copyright (c) 2006 American Cancer Society.)

Alkylating agents or single-agent purine analogues are modestly effective as front-line therapy for Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM), but response rates of < 50% are exhibited in the salvage therapy setting. Fludarabine combination therapy may be more effective, but no large studies exploring these regimens specifically in WM are available. We report our results of 18 cycles of fludarabine combination therapy: FC (fludarabine 25 mg/m2 for 3 days plus cyclophosphamide 250 mg/m2 for 3 days; n = 9), FM (fludarabine 25 mg/m2 for 3 days plus mitoxantrone 10 mg/m2 for 1 day; n = 3), FCR (FC plus rituximab 375 mg/m2; n = 5), or fludarabine/rituximab (n = 1). Four patients had previously untreated disease, and 14 had pretreated disease; 67% had elevated serum levels of beta2-microglobulin, and 86% had hemoglobin levels < or = 12 g/dL. Patients received a median of 4 cycles (range, 1-6 cycles), with grade > or = 3 neutropenia and infection complicating 25% and 4% of cycles, respectively. Objective responses (all partial) were attained in 13 patients (76%). Response rates did not significantly differ by regimen, previous treatment, age, performance status, beta2-microglobulin level, hemoglobin level, time from diagnosis, previous fludarabine exposure, or alkylator refractoriness. Median remission duration was 38 months; no previously untreated patient had died at a median of 37 months of follow-up, and the actuarial 5-year survival rate was 55% for pretreated patients. No cases of secondary myelodysplasia or leukemia were encountered.

Background: Fludarabine-containing combination chemotherapy regimens are increasingly used in the treatment of indolent lymphoid malignancies, with the associated risk of infection being the major toxicity. Predictors of infection during fludarabine-containing combination therapy are poorly defined and optimal strategies for infection prophylaxis are not known. The authors analyzed their experience with patients treated with the fludarabine-mitoxantrone (FM) or fludarabine-cyclophosphamide (FC) regimens to develop a predictive model for infections., Methods: Ninety-two patients with indolent lymphoid malignancies were treated with FM (n = 29) or FC (n = 63). Baseline variables including age, gender, regimen, disease histology, previous therapy, time from diagnosis to current treatment, performance status, renal function, absolute neutrophil count (ANC), lymphocyte count, and immunoglobulin G levels were examined retrospectively for their association with risk of infectious complications during or within 4 weeks of therapy., Results: Six risk factors were associated with infectious complications: age > 60 years, > or = 3 previous therapies, previous fludarabine exposure, time from diagnosis to current treatment of > 3 years, performance status > or = 2, and baseline ANC < 2.0 x 10(9)/L. Compared with patients with 0-2 risk factors, patients with > or = 3 risk factors had higher infection rates (26% vs. 7% per cycle, P < 0.0001), more Grade 4 neutropenia (41% vs. 8% per cycle, P < 0.0001), and more neutropenic sepsis (15% vs. 1% per cycle, P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Infection risk during fludarabine-containing combination chemotherapy was predicted with a model comprising six baseline risk factors. Patients predicted to be at high risk of infection were an appropriate group for consideration of prophylactic strategies.

Background: Preclinical data have supported the use of fludarabine and cyclophosphamide (FC) in combination for the treatment of indolent lymphoid malignancies. Previously reported schedules were highly effective, but were complicated by significant myelotoxicity and infectious complications. In the current study, the authors analyzed their experience with an attenuated dose regimen to determine whether equivalent efficacy could be achieved with reduced toxicity., Methods: Sixty-four patients with indolent lymphoid malignancies were treated with intravenous fludarabine at a dose of 25 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 250 mg/m(2), each given on Days 1-3 for a median of 4 cycles. The median age of the patients was 60 years. Nineteen percent of the patients were previously untreated, and 45% had refractory disease; the patients had received a median of 2 prior therapies. With regard to histology, 41% of the patients had chronic lymphocytic leukemia or its variants, whereas the remainder of patients had low-grade non-Hodgkin lymphoma, predominantly follicule center cell lymphoma., Results: A total of 237 cycles were delivered. The principal toxicities reported were neutropenia (NCI CTC Grade 4 in 17% of cycles) and infection (Grade >/= 3 in 6% of cycles). The overall response rate and complete response rate were 86% and 29%, respectively. No significant difference could be discerned with regard to response rates for patients with untreated, recurrent, or refractory disease., Conclusions: The FC schedule used in the current study was found to be highly effective in patients with indolent lymphoid malignancies. Toxicity was lower compared with higher dose schedules, whereas efficacy appeared to be equivalent., (Copyright 2004 American Cancer Society.)