Search

The article offers information on a study related to second-line, subsequent therapy and outcomes for follicular lymphoma (FL) in U.S. Topics discussed include data taken the observational National LymphoCare Study; quarterly observations regarding disease characteristics, subsequent therapies and observed responses; and frequent utilization of rituximab in second and subsequent treatments.

Data from the National LymphoCare Study (a prospective, multicentre registry that enrolled follicular lymphoma ( FL) patients from 2004 to 2007) were used to determine disease characteristics, treatment patterns, outcomes and prognosis for elderly FL ( eFL) patients. Of 2650 FL patients, 209 (8%) were aged >80 years; these eFL patients more commonly had grade 3 disease, less frequently received chemoimmunotherapy and anthracyclines, and had lower response rates when compared to younger patients. With a median follow-up of 6.9 years, 5-year overall survival ( OS) for eFL patients was 59%; 38% of deaths were lymphoma-related. No treatment produced superior OS among eFL patients. In multivariate Cox models, anaemia, B-symptoms and male sex predicted worse OS ( P < 0·01); a prognostic index of these factors (0, 1 or ≥2 present) predicted OS [hazard ratio (95% CI): ≥2 vs. 0, 4·72 (2·38-9·33); 1 vs. 0, 2·63 (1·39-4·98)], with a higher concordance index (0·63) versus the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (0·55). The index was validated in an independent cohort. In the largest prospective US-based eFL cohort, no optimal therapy was identified and nearly 40% of deaths were lymphoma-related, representing baseline outcomes in the modern era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan or 131I-tositumomab combines a radiation-emitting radionuclide with an antibody targeting CD20 to treat B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Multiple studies demonstrate favorable RIT efficacy and safety profiles in follicular lymphoma (FL). The primary toxicity is reversible myelosuppression. Various FL treatment options include single-agent immunotherapy, radiation, chemoimmunotherapy, and RIT. Examining RIT clinical effects and position within treatment algorithms is important to optimal patient benefit. Clinical studies support using single-agent RIT in relapsed/refractory FL, in selected patients with new, untreated FL, and as consolidation after induction chemotherapy or chemoimmunotherapy. RIT as consolidation enhances response rates (with conversion of partial to complete responses following induction therapy) and prolongs disease control versus observation. The overall response rate is 60--80%% in the relapsed setting. Time to progression is longer with low-bulk disease, fewer prior therapies, and retained rituximab sensitivity. RIT apparently does not preclude subsequent therapies or increase risk of secondary malignancies compared with chemotherapy's known risk. This article summarizes consensus recommendations for RIT and presents RIT treatment algorithms developed by hematologists/oncologists who regularly treat patients with FL. Maximizing RIT benefit requires healthcare providers to utilize algorithms assisting with treatment decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To improve curability and limit long-term adverse effects for newly diagnosed early-stage (ES), unfavorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma., Methods: In this multicenter study with four sequential cohorts, patients received four cycles of brentuximab vedotin (BV) and doxorubicin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (AVD). If positron emission tomography (PET)-4-negative, patients received 30-Gy involved-site radiotherapy in cohort 1, 20-Gy involved-site radiotherapy in cohort 2, 30-Gy consolidation-volume radiotherapy in cohort 3, and no radiotherapy in cohort 4. Eligible patients had ES, unfavorable-risk disease. Bulk disease defined by Memorial Sloan Kettering criteria (> 7 cm in maximal transverse or coronal diameter on computed tomography) was not required for cohorts 1 and 2 but was for cohorts 3 and 4. The primary end point was to evaluate safety for cohort 1 and to evaluate complete response rate by PET for cohorts 2-4., Results: Of the 117 patients enrolled, 116 completed chemotherapy, with the median age of 32 years: 50% men, 98% stage II, 86% Memorial Sloan Kettering-defined disease bulk, 27% traditional bulk (> 10 cm), 52% elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate, 21% extranodal involvement, and 56% > 2 involved lymph node sites. The complete response rate in cohorts 1-4 was 93%, 100%, 93%, and 97%, respectively. With median follow-up of 3.8 years (5.9, 4.5, 2.5, and 2.2 years for cohorts 1-4), the overall 2-year progression-free and overall survival were 94% and 99%, respectively. In cohorts 1-4, the 2-year progression-free survival was 93%, 97%, 90%, and 97%, respectively. Adverse events included neutropenia (44%), febrile neutropenia (8%), and peripheral neuropathy (54%), which was largely reversible., Conclusion: BV + AVD × four cycles is a highly active and well-tolerated treatment program for ES, unfavorable-risk Hodgkin lymphoma, including bulky disease. The efficacy of BV + AVD supports the safe reduction or elimination of consolidative radiation among PET-4-negative patients., Competing Interests: Anita KumarStock and Other Ownership Interests: BridgebioConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Kite, a Gilead company, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: AbbVie/Genentech, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics Carla CasuloHonoraria: Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Celgene, Verastem, Gilead SciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences, Roche Ranjana H. AdvaniConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech/Roche, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Sanofi, Kura Oncology, Merck, Karyopharm Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Epizyme, IncyteResearch Funding: Millennium, Seattle Genetics, Genentech/Roche, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Merck, Kura Oncology, Regeneron, Forty Seven, Cyteir Elizabeth BuddeHonoraria: AstraZenecaConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, Kite/Gilead, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Kite, a Gilead company, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Merck, Amgen, MustangBio, AstraZenecaPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: CCR4 CAR T cells for treatment of patients with CCR4 positive cancer, CD33CAR for treatment of patients with CD33+ acute myeloid leukemiaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech, Kite/Gilead, AstraZeneca Paul M. BarrConsulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, Genentech, Novartis, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Janssen, Merck, TG Therapeutics, MorphoSys, AstraZeneca, BeiGene, MEI Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, BayerResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, AstraZeneca Connie L. BatleviStock and Other Ownership Interests: Moderna Therapeutics, Novavax, Pfizer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Regeneron, ViatrisHonoraria: DAVAOncologyConsulting or Advisory Role: Lifesci Capital, GLG, Juno Therapeutics, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Kite, a Gilead company, TG Therapeutics, Karyopharm TherapeuticsResearch Funding: Janssen Biotech, Novartis, Epizyme, Xynomic Pharma, Bayer, Roche, AutolusOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/2778694 Philip CaronStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva Louis S. ConstineHonoraria: UpToDate, Springer, Lippincott Savita V. DandapaniResearch Funding: Bayer Pamela DrullinskyResearch Funding: Novartis Jonathan W. FriedbergConsulting or Advisory Role: Astellas Pharma, NovartisResearch Funding: Seattle GeneticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent on bone marrow microenvironment signals Paul A. HamlinConsulting or Advisory Role: Juno Therapeutics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene, Sandoz, AstraZeneca/MerckResearch Funding: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Portola Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Molecular Templates, Incyte Richard T. HoppeStock and Other Ownership Interests: Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer Steven M. HorwitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Millennium, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Seattle Genetics, ADC Therapeutics, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Verastem, Takeda, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, C4 Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Trillium Therapeutics, Vividion Therapeutics, Myeloid Therapeutics, Ono PharmaceuticalResearch Funding: Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Aileron Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Verastem, Forty Seven, Trillium Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Affimed Therapeutics, Corvus Pharmaceuticals Niloufer KhanResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics Matthew J. MatasarStock and Other Ownership Interests: MerckHonoraria: Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, IGM Biosciences, ImmunovaccineConsulting or Advisory Role: Genentech, Bayer, Merck, Juno Therapeutics, Roche, Teva, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, TakedaResearch Funding: Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Immunovaccine, IGM BiosciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Bayer Alison J. MoskowitzHonoraria: Seattle GeneticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Imbrium Therapeutics, Merck, Janpix, Kyowa Kirin International, miRagen, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, miRagen, ADC Therapeutics Ariela NoyConsulting or Advisory Role: MorphoSys, Janssen Biotech, Prime OncologyResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Rafael PharmaceuticalsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pharmacyclics, Janssen Oncology Maria Lia PalombaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seres TherapeuticsHonoraria: Merck, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Flagship Biosciences, Novartis, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Seres TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck, Celgene, Flagship Biosciences, Novartis, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Seres Therapeutics, Kite, Gilead Company, NovartisResearch Funding: Seres TherapeuticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property Rights, Juno intellectual property rights David J. StrausConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Seattle Genetics Anas YounesEmployment: AstraZenecaStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZenecaHonoraria: Merck, Roche, Takeda, Janssen, AbbVie, Curis, EpizymeConsulting or Advisory Role: Bio-Path Holdings Inc, Xynomic Pharma, Epizyme, Roche, Celgene, HCMResearch Funding: Janssen, Curis, Roche, Genentech, Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, SyndaxOther Relationship: AstraZeneca Andrew D. ZelenetzHonoraria: NCCN, Clinical Care Options, Oncology Information Group, PER, PlexusConsulting or Advisory Role: Gilead Sciences, Amgen, Genentech/Roche, Celgene, AstraZeneca, DAVAOncology, MorphoSys, BeiGene, MEI Pharma, Vaniam Group, Verastem, Pharmacyclics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Debiopharm Group, Seattle Genetics, Quant Health Ltd, Kite, Gilead Company, Curis, Coherus Biosciences, Juno/Celgene/Bristol Myers Squibb, Curio ScienceResearch Funding: Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, MEI Pharma, BeiGene Craig H. MoskowitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Molecular Templates, Takeda, AstraZeneca, IncyteResearch Funding: AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & DohmeNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Purpose: A randomized, double-blind, phase III study of idelalisib (IDELA) plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab in patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was terminated early because of superior efficacy of the IDELA-plus-rituximab (IDELA/R) arm. Patients in either arm could then enroll in an extension study to receive IDELA monotherapy. Here, we report the long-term efficacy and safety data for IDELA-treated patients across the primary and extension studies., Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to receive rituximab in combination with either IDELA 150 mg twice daily (IDELA/R; n = 110) or placebo (placebo/R; n = 110). Key end points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and safety., Results: The long-term efficacy and safety of treatment with IDELA was assessed in 110 patients who received at least one dose of IDELA in the primary study, 75 of whom enrolled in the extension study. The IDELA/R-to-IDELA group had a median PFS of 20.3 months (95% CI, 17.3 to 26.3 months) after a median follow-up time of 18 months (range, 0.3 to 67.6 months). The ORR was 85.5% (94 of 110 patients; n = 1 complete response). The median OS was 40.6 months (95% CI, 28.5 to 57.3 months) and 34.6 months (95% CI, 16.0 months to not reached) for patients randomly assigned to the IDELA/R and placebo/R groups, respectively. Prolonged exposure to IDELA increased the incidence of all-grade, grade 2, and grade 3 or greater diarrhea (46.4%, 17.3%, and 16.4%, respectively), all-grade and grade 3 or greater colitis (10.9% and 8.2%, respectively) and all-grade and grade 3 or greater pneumonitis (10.0% and 6.4%, respectively) but did not increase the incidence of elevated hepatic aminotransferases., Conclusion: IDELA improved PFS and OS compared with rituximab alone in patients with relapsed CLL. Long-term IDELA was effective and had an expected safety profile. No new IDELA-related adverse events were identified with longer exposure.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphomas (DLBCLs) and follicular lymphoma (FL) are the most common subtypes of B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas in adults. Histologic transformation of FL to DLBCL (TFL) occurs in approximately 15% of patients and is generally associated with a poor clinical outcome. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors have shown promising results in the treatment of relapsed/refractory FL. CAR T-cell therapy (axicabtagene ciloleucel and tisagenlecleucel) has emerged as a novel treatment option for relapsed/refractory DLBCL and TFL. These NCCN Guidelines Insights highlight important updates to the NCCN Guidelines for B-Cell Lymphomas regarding the treatment of TFL and relapsed/refractory FL and DLBCL.

Purpose: Twenty percent of patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) experience progression of disease (POD) within 2 years of initial chemoimmunotherapy. We analyzed data from the National LymphoCare Study to identify whether prognostic FL factors are associated with early POD and whether patients with early POD are at high risk for death., Patients and Methods: In total, 588 patients with stage 2 to 4 FL received first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Two groups were defined: patients with early POD 2 years or less after diagnosis and those without POD within 2 years, the reference group. An independent validation set, 147 patients with FL who received first-line R-CHOP, was analyzed for reproducibility., Results: Of 588 patients, 19% (n = 110) had early POD, 71% (n = 420) were in the reference group, 8% (n = 46) were lost to follow-up, and 2% (n = 12) died without POD less than 2 years after diagnosis. Five-year overall survival was lower in the early-POD group than in the reference group (50% v 90%). This trend was maintained after we adjusted for FL International Prognostic Index (hazard ratio, 6.44; 95% CI, 4.33 to 9.58). Results were similar for the validation set (FL International Prognostic Index-adjusted hazard ratio, 19.8)., Conclusion: In patients with FL who received first-line R-CHOP, POD within 2 years after diagnosis was associated with poor outcomes and should be further validated as a standard end point of chemoimmunotherapy trials of untreated FL. This high-risk FL population warrants further study in directed prospective clinical trials., Competing Interests: Authors' disclosures of potential conflicts of interest are found in the article online at www.jco.org. Author contributions are found at the end of this article., (© 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Purpose: The optimal management of stage I follicular lymphoma, according to consensus guidelines, is based on uncontrolled experiences of select institutions. Diverse treatment approaches are used despite guidelines that recommend radiation therapy (XRT)., Patients and Methods: We analyzed outcomes of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma enrolled onto the National LymphoCare database., Results: Of 471 patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, 206 patients underwent rigorous staging as defined by both a bone marrow aspirate and biopsy and an imaging study (a computed tomography [CT] scan of the whole body, a positron emission tomography [PET]/CT scan, or both). Rigorously staged patients had superior progression-free survival (PFS) compared with nonrigorously staged patients (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63). Treatments given to rigorously staged patients were rituximab/chemotherapy (R-chemo; 28%), XRT (27%), observation (17%), systemic therapy + XRT (13%), rituximab monotherapy (12%), and other (3%). With a median follow-up of 57 months for PFS, there were 44 progression events (in 21% of patients) for rigorously staged patients. For these patients, PFS was significantly improved with either R-chemo or systemic therapy + XRT compared with patients receiving XRT alone after adjustment for histology, LDH, and the presence of B symptoms. There were no differences in overall survival., Conclusion: In this largest, prospectively enrolled group of patients with stage I follicular lymphoma, variable treatment approaches resulted in similar excellent outcomes, which challenges the paradigm that XRT should be standard for this presentation.

We aimed to characterize surveillance imaging and circumstances of relapse for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma Outcomes Database, a prospective cohort study collecting clinical and outcome data at seven comprehensive cancer centers. Patients presenting with newly diagnosed DLBCL in remission ≥3 months after initial therapy and who had accrued 2 years of follow-up were eligible for analysis (n = 625). The median number of imaging studies was 2.5/year (institutional range 0.5-3.5, p < 0.0001); 48.4% received only dedicated computed tomography (CT) scans, 14.6% received only positron emission tomography (PET)-inclusive modalities, 32.8% received a combination and 4.2% received no imaging. Among all eligible patients, 50 (8.0%) experienced relapse, and approximately one-quarter of subclinical relapses were detected through routine imaging. Our results suggest that despite limited data regarding its effect on outcomes, surveillance imaging is prevalent in DLBCL, and a majority of patients receive PET scans at some point during follow-up.

Biologics are essential to oncology care. As patents for older biologics begin to expire, the United States is developing an abbreviated regulatory process for the approval of similar biologics (biosimilars), which raises important considerations for the safe and appropriate incorporation of biosimilars into clinical practice for patients with cancer. The potential for biosimilars to reduce the cost of biologics, which are often high-cost components of oncology care, was the impetus behind the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, a part of the 2010 Affordable Care Act. In March 2011, NCCN assembled a work group consisting of thought leaders from NCCN Member Institutions and other organizations, to provide guidance regarding the challenges health care providers and other key stakeholders face in incorporating biosimilars in health care practice. The work group identified challenges surrounding biosimilars, including health care provider knowledge, substitution practices, pharmacovigilance, naming and product tracking, coverage and reimbursement, use in off-label settings, and data requirements for approval.

In the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, cancer has many epidemiologic and clinical features that are different from those in the rest of the world. Additionally, the region has a relatively young population and large disparities in the availability of resources at diagnostic and treatment levels. A critical need exists for regional guidelines on cancer care, including those for lymphoid malignancies. A panel of lymphoma experts from MENA reviewed the 2009 version of the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) on Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Hodgkin Lymphoma and suggested modifications for the region that were discussed with the United States NCCN Lymphoma Panels. This article presents the consensus recommendations.

Purpose: Before the implementation of the WHO lymphoma classification system, disagreement about pathologic diagnosis was common. We sought to estimate the impact of expert review in the modern era by comparing final pathologic diagnoses at five comprehensive cancer centers with diagnoses assigned at referring centers., Patients and Methods: Patients in the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) database with a documented pathologic diagnosis before presentation and a final pathologic diagnosis of any of five common B-cell NHLs were eligible. After central review of discordant cases, we estimated the rate of pathologic concordance, then investigated the etiology of discordance as well its potential impact on prognosis and treatment., Results: The overall pathologic discordance rate was 6% (43 of 731 patients; 95% CI, 4% to 8%). For the majority of cases in which the referring diagnosis was apparently final, no additional studies were conducted at the NCCN center, and the change in diagnosis reflected a different interpretation of existing data. Concordance was highest for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (95%) and follicular lymphoma (FL; grades 1, 2, and not otherwise specified, 95%) and lowest for grade 3 FL (88%). Of the 43 pathologically discordant cases, 81% (35 patients) might have experienced a change in treatment as a result of the pathologic reclassification., Conclusion: In the era of the WHO lymphoma classification system, the majority of common B-cell NHLs diagnosed in the community were unchanged by second opinion review by an expert hematopathologist. However, for one patient in 20, there was a discordance in diagnosis that could have altered therapy.