Search

Zachary H Word1, Matthew J Matasar1,21Lymphoma Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan–Kettering Cancer Center, 2Department of Medicine, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USAAbstract: The lymphomas are a heterogeneous group of cancers that have played a prominent role in the history of oncology, being among the first cancers to respond to radiotherapy or systemic chemotherapy. Progressive improvement in the understanding of the biology and natural history of these diseases has led to changes in both classification and management. Because of the heterogeneity present among the lymphomas, accurate diagnosis and staging are essential prerequisites to their effective management. Lymphoma stage frequently informs treatment decisions, but in contrast with solid tumor malignancies carries limited prognostic value. This has led to the development of prognostic models in lymphoma, which use patient and disease characteristics to stratify patients by risk. Modern approaches to Hodgkin's lymphoma include chemotherapy only, combined-modality therapy with both chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and risk-adapted approaches that modify treatment based on initial response. Management of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) varies widely depending upon histology. Use of rituximab, the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, is included in the management of most B cell lymphomas and has improved outcomes in these diseases. The T cell lymphomas are less common and generally less well understood than the B cell diseases, and their management has only recently become disease-specific. Though effective therapy is available for many types of lymphoma, relapse remains common in a number of subtypes, and management of relapsed and refractory disease remain research priorities.Keywords: lymphoma, diagnosis, treatment

The treatment of colorectal cancer has evolved dramatically over the last 15 years. Advances in surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy have enabled oncologists to cure more patients and offer improved quality of life to patients not amenable to cure. Specific knowledge of colorectal cancer care of the elderly, while lagging behind the treatment of younger patients, is beginning to emerge. Informed by recent trials, the approach towards elderly patients is shifting towards more aggressive treatment and multimodal therapy. Surgeons are operating on the elderly with greater frequency, less operative mortality and greater success; 5-year survival following potentially curative surgery has risen from 50% to 67%.Research of adjunctive therapy for colorectal cancer is enrolling more elderly patients, and with this has come an understanding of the role of chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of the elderly, used individually and within multi-drug regimens. This research offers insight into how the elderly respond to chemotherapy, informing clinicians on anticipated benefits and toxicities of treatment. Fluorouracil-based regimens, which have long been the standard adjuvant chemotherapy, have been shown to offer benefits to the elderly compared with those not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (71% versus 64% 5-year survival), and to cause similar toxicities as seen in younger patients. The role of novel chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of elderly patients with colorectal cancer is also emerging, with studies finding that irinotecan, in combination with a fluorouracil-based regimen, can offer a further survival benefit of over 2 months compared with fluorouracil alone. While newer agents such as capecitabine, oxaliplatin, raltitrexed and tegafur/uracil (UFT) have been focused upon by clinical researchers, data on their use in the elderly remain unconvincing.Not only are we approaching a clearer understanding of the effectiveness of cancer care among the elderly, but research is also beginning to identify the cost effectiveness of both standard and emerging chemotherapeutic agents. Cost effectiveness of fluorouracil-based regimens, depending on delivery strategy, use of modulating agents and stage of cancer vary from US dollars 2000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) to US dollars 20200 per QALY (1992 values). Irinotecan therapy has not been fully investigated from the perspective of cost effectiveness; the figure of US dollars 10000 per QALY (1998 values) for irinotecan monotherapy over fluorouracil regimens is likely an underestimate, while cost analysis of irinotecan and fluorouracil combination therapy has not yet been reported. Our understanding of cost effectiveness of other novel agents has lagged behind; further research on these agents is needed. Nonetheless, as the effects of these novel agents upon both outcomes and costs continue to be defined, both curative and palliative treatment of colorectal cancer in the elderly patient will become more sophisticated and effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mosunetuzumab and other CD20/CD3 bispecific antibodies (BsAbs) have efficacy in B-cell lymphomas relapsing after or refractory to CD19-directed chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells (CAR-T). The optimal timing of BsAbs and biomarkers of BsAb response after CAR-T are unknown. We addressed these questions using clinical data and blood samples from patients previously treated with CAR-T treated on a phase I/II study of mosunetuzumab (clinicaltrials.gov; NCT02500407). Thirty patients had paired samples at baseline and after 1 cycle of mosunetuzumab. Median time from CAR-T to mosunetuzumab was significantly longer for responding than for nonresponding patients (p=0.006, unadjusted for multiple comparisons). Most patients (20/30) did not receive intervening therapy between CAR-T administration and mosunetuzumab. The remainder of patients received one intervening therapy after a protocol-mandated drug washout. After mosunetuzumab, responding patients had higher lymphocytes (995 vs 400 cells/µL, p = 0.02) and greater increases in CD4 and CD8 cells (median change, 73 vs -90 cells/µL, p=0.005; 243 vs -103 cells/µL, p=0.004, respectively). Additionally, responding patients had an increase in activated CD8 cells (median 1.7-fold-change, p=0.02). Non-responders had a relative decrease in CAR transgene levels (N=16; p=0.04). This is the first study to assess changes in lymphocytes, T cells, and CAR transgene levels in patients treated with BsAb after CAR-T. These findings suggest an interaction between prior CAR-T and BsAb outcomes, and have implications for optimal timing of BsAb after CAR-T., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

Mosunetuzumab, a CD20xCD3 T-cell engaging bispecific antibody, redirects T cells to eliminate malignant B cells. We present updated efficacy and safety data of a pivotal phase 1/2 study after a median follow-up of 37.4 months in 90 patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL) and ≥2 prior lines of therapy treated with fixed-duration mosunetuzumab. Investigator-assessed complete response (CR) rate and objective response rate (ORR) were 60.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.1-70.2) and 77.8% (95% CI, 67.8-85.9), respectively. Among 70 responders, median duration of response was 35.9 months (95% CI, 20.7-not estimable [NE]). Among 54 patients who achieved CR, 49 remained in CR at the end of treatment; median duration of complete response was not reached (NR) (95% CI, 33.0-NE); Kaplan-Meier-estimated 30-month remission rate was 72.4% (95% CI, 59.2-85.6). Estimated 36-month overall survival (OS) rate was 82.4% (95% CI, 73.8-91.0); median OS was NR (95% CI, NE-NE). Median progression-free survival was 24.0 months (95% CI, 12.0-NE). Median time to CD19+ B-cell recovery was 18.4 months (95% CI, 12.8-25.0) following 8 cycles of mosunetuzumab treatment. No new cytokine release syndrome events or fatal, serious, or Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported. With extended follow-up, mosunetuzumab demonstrated high response rates, durable remissions and manageable safety with no long-term concerns. This supports outpatient mosunetuzumab administration as an off-the-shelf, fixed-duration, safe and effective treatment for patients with R/R FL, including those with high-risk disease. Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02500407)., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported. Mosunetuzumab is a CD20xCD3 T-cell-engaging bispecific antibody administered as an off-the-shelf, fixed-duration treatment in an outpatient setting. We report an updated analysis of the durability of response, by investigator assessment, after an overall median follow-up of 3.5 years in patients with relapsed/refractory indolent or aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL/aNHL) from the dose-escalation stage of a phase I/II study of mosunetuzumab (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02500407). Across dose levels, 65.7% of patients with iNHL and 36.4% with aNHL achieved a complete or partial response to mosunetuzumab. Median duration of response (DoR) in patients with iNHL for all responders was 23.2 months (95% CI, 13.8 to not estimable [NE]), but was not reached in complete responders (95% CI, 21.0 to NE). After a median time on study of 38.9 months, no relapses were observed beyond 26 months in complete responders. In patients with aNHL, median DoR for all responders was 7.8 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 22.8). Among 12 complete responders who progressed postmosunetuzumab treatment and were retreated with mosunetuzumab, 83.3% had an objective response and 58.3% achieved a second complete response. Our study reports the longest follow-up using bispecific antibodies in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma and demonstrates that mosunetuzumab can mediate durable remissions with time-limited treatment.

Abstract: Rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is considered the standard-of-care for patients with advanced-stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), despite findings that patients with nongerminal center B-cell like (non-GCB) have significantly worse outcome with this regimen. We evaluated the prognostic significance of baseline risk factors, including cell of origin (COO) classified by the Hans algorithm, within an alternative chemoimmunotherapy program. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), 151 patients with DLBCL received sequential R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE (rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide) consolidation. Outcome analysis based on COO was validated with a propensity score-matched cohort treated with R-CHOP from the Mayo Clinic component of the Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER). Among the patients with GCB (n = 69) and non-GCB (n = 69) at MSK, event-free survival (EFS) of non-GCB was superior to that of GCB (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.98). Overall survival (OS) demonstrated an association in the same direction but was not statistically significant (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.33-1.42). Propensity score-matched patients from MSK (n = 108) demonstrated a small attenuation in the HRs for EFS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.27-1.18) and OS (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.33-1.79) and were no longer statistically significant. In contrast, the matched MER cohort (n = 108) demonstrated an EFS association (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.70-1.95) and OS association (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.64-2.00) in the opposite direction, but were also not statistically significant. R-CHOP induction and (R)-ICE consolidation may overcome the negative prognostic impact of the non-GCB phenotype, per the Hans algorithm, and can be preferentially selected for this population. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT00039195 and #NCT00712582., (© 2024 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.)

Chemoimmunotherapy followed by consolidative high-dose therapy with autologous stem cell rescue was a standard upfront treatment for fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) in first remission; however, treatment paradigms are evolving in the era of novel therapies. Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory agent with known efficacy in treating MCL. We conducted a single-center, investigator-initiated, phase II study of immunochemotherapy incorporating lenalidomide, without autologous stem cell transplant consolidation, enriching for patients with high-risk MCL (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT02633137). Patients received four cycles of lenalidomide-R-CHOP, two cycles of R-HiDAC, and six cycles of R-lenalidomide. The primary endpoint was rate of 3-year progression-free survival. We measured measurable residual disease (MRD) using a next-generation sequencing-based assay after each phase of treatment and at 6 months following end-oftreatment. We enrolled 49 patients of which 47 were response evaluable. By intent-to-treat, rates of overall and complete response were equivalent at 88% (43/49), one patient with stable disease, and two patients had disease progression during study; 3-year progression-free survival was 63% (primary endpoint not met) and differed by TP53 status (78% wild-type vs. 38% ALT; P=0.043). MRD status was prognostic and predicted long-term outcomes following R-HiDAC and at 6 months following end-of-treatment. In a high-dose therapy-sparing, intensive approach, we achieved favorable outcomes in TP53- wild-type MCL, including high-risk cases. We confirmed that sequential MRD assessment is a powerful prognostic tool in patients with MCL.

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common type of indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Despite treatment advances that have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) FL, many patients still die from progressive disease or treatment-related toxicities. In the phase Ib/II GO29365 study (clinicaltrials.gov 02257567), the safety and efficacy of polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab (Pola-BR) versus bendamustine and rituximab (BR) alone, and polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and obinutuzumab (Pola-BG) as a single-arm cohort were evaluated in patients with R/R FL. Following the phase Ib safety run-in, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive Pola-BR or BR alone in the phase II stage; a separate non-randomized Pola-BG cohort was examined in the phase Ib/II expansion stage. Primary endpoints included safety and tolerability (phase Ib) and positron emission tomography complete response (PET-CR) rate by independent review committee (phase II). Overall, 112 patients were enrolled (phase Ib safety run-in: Pola-BR, N=6; phase II randomized cohort: Pola-BR, N=39; BR, N=41; phase Ib/II expansion cohort: Pola-BG, N=26). PET-CR rates were 66.7% (phase Ib safety run-in, Pola-BR); 69.2% (phase II randomized, Pola-BR); 63.4% (phase II randomized, BR); and 65.4% (phase Ib/II expansion Pola-BG). There was a higher occurrence of cytopenias with Pola-BR and Pola-BG than with BR; serious adverse events were more frequent with Pola-BR (61.4%) and Pola-BG (46.2%) than with BR (29.3%). Overall, this analysis does not demonstrate a benefit of adding Pola to BR or BG regimens for patients with R/R FL.

Abstract: CD20 is an established therapeutic target in B-cell malignancies. The CD20 × CD3 bispecific antibody mosunetuzumab has significant efficacy in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs). Because target antigen loss is a recognized mechanism of resistance, we evaluated CD20 expression relative to clinical response in patients with relapsed and/or refractory NHL in the phase 1/2 GO29781 trial investigating mosunetuzumab monotherapy. CD20 was studied using immunohistochemistry (IHC), RNA sequencing, and whole-exome sequencing performed centrally in biopsy specimens collected before treatment at predose, during treatment, or upon progression. Before treatment, most patients exhibited a high proportion of tumor cells expressing CD20; however, in 16 of 293 patients (5.5%) the proportion was <10%. Analyses of paired biopsy specimens from patients on treatment revealed that CD20 levels were maintained in 29 of 30 patients (97%) vs at progression, where CD20 loss was observed in 11 of 32 patients (34%). Reduced transcription or acquisition of truncating mutations explained most but not all cases of CD20 loss. In vitro modeling confirmed the effects of CD20 variants identified in clinical samples on reduction of CD20 expression and missense mutations in the extracellular domain that could block mosunetuzumab binding. This study expands the knowledge about the occurrence of target antigen loss after anti-CD20 therapeutics to include CD20-targeting bispecific antibodies and elucidates mechanisms of reduced CD20 expression at disease progression that may be generalizable to other anti-CD20 targeting agents. These results also confirm the utility of readily available IHC staining for CD20 as a tool to inform clinical decisions. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT02500407., (© 2024 American Society of Hematology. Published by Elsevier Inc. 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.)

This study aims to evaluate the predictive value of routine pulmonary function testing (PFT) at the 12-month mark post-autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (AHCT) in identifying clinically significant lung disease in lymphoma survivors. In 247 patients, 173 (70%) received BEAM (carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan), and 49 (20%) received TBC (thiotepa, busulfan, cyclophosphamide) conditioning regimens. Abnormal baseline PFT was noted in 149 patients (60%). Thirty-four patients had a significant decline (reduction of >/= 20% in DLCO or FEV1 or FVC) in post-AHCT PFT, with the highest incidence in the CNS lymphoma group (39%). The incidence of clinically significant lung disease post-transplant was low at 2% and there was no association between abnormal pre- and 1-year post-transplant PFTs with the development of clinical lung disease. While this study illustrates the impact of treatment regimens on PFT changes, it did not demonstrate a predictive value of scheduled PFTs in identifying clinically significant post-AHCT lung disease.

Nodal peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL), the most common PTCLs, are generally treated with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP)-based curative-intent chemotherapy. Recent molecular data have assisted in prognosticating these PTCLs, but most reports lack detailed baseline clinical characteristics and treatment courses. We retrospectively evaluated cases of PTCL treated with CHOP-based chemotherapy that had tumors sequenced by the Memorial Sloan Kettering Integrated Mutational Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets next-generation sequencing panel to identify variables correlating with inferior survival. We identified 132 patients who met these criteria. Clinical factors correlating with an increased risk of progression (by multivariate analysis) included advanced-stage disease and bone marrow involvement. The only somatic genetic aberrancies correlating with inferior progression-free survival (PFS) were TP53 mutations and TP53/17p deletions. PFS remained inferior when stratifying by TP53 mutation status, with a median PFS of 4.5 months for PTCL with a TP53 mutation (n = 21) vs 10.5 months for PTCL without a TP53 mutation (n = 111). No TP53 aberrancy correlated with inferior overall survival (OS). Although rare (n = 9), CDKN2A-deleted PTCL correlated with inferior OS, with a median of 17.6 months vs 56.7 months for patients without CDKN2A deletions. This retrospective study suggests that patients with PTCL with TP53 mutations experience inferior PFS when treated with curative-intent chemotherapy, warranting prospective confirmation., (© 2023 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.)

Nodal marginal zone lymphoma (NMZL) is a rare non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma that has historically been difficult to define, though is now formally recognized by the World Health Organization Classification. To better characterize the clinical outcomes of patients with NMZL, we reviewed a sequential cohort of 187 patients with NMZL to describe baseline characteristics, survival outcomes, and time-to-event data. Initial management strategies were classified into five categories: observation, radiation, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy, chemoimmunotherapy, or other. Baseline Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index scores were calculated to evaluate prognosis. A total of 187 patients were analyzed. The five-year overall survival was 91% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87-95), with a median follow-up time of 71 months (range, 8-253) among survivors. A total of 139 patients received active treatment at any point, with a median follow-up time of 56 months (range, 13-253) among survivors who were never treated. The probability of remaining untreated at five years was 25% (95% CI, 19-33). For those initially observed, the median time to active treatment was 72 months (95% CI, 49-not reached). For those who received at least one active treatment, the cumulative incidence of receiving a second active treatment at 60 months was 37%. Transformation to large B-cell lymphoma was rare, with a cumulative incidence of 15% at 10 years. In summary, our series is a large cohort of uniformly diagnosed NMZL with detailed analyses of survival and time to event analyses. We showed that NMZL commonly presents as an indolent lymphoma for which initial observation is often a reasonable strategy., (© 2023 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.)

Objective: To describe the incidence of cardiotoxicity in patients with anthracycline exposure who subsequently receive EPOCH for non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL)., Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with anthracycline exposure who subsequently received EPOCH for NHL at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The primary outcome was cumulative incidence of arrhythmia, heart failure (HF), left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, or cardiac death., Results: Among 140 patients, most had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Inclusive of EPOCH, median cumulative doxorubicin-equivalent dose was 364 mg/m 2 ; exposure was 400 mg/m 2 or higher in 41%. With median 36-month follow-up, 23 cardiac events were noted in 20 patients. Cumulative incidence of cardiac events at 60 months was 15% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9%-21%). When limited to LV dysfunction/HF, cumulative incidence at 60 months was 7% (95% CI: 3%-13%), with most events occurring after the first year. Univariate analysis indicated only history of cardiac disease and dyslipidemia to be associated with cardiotoxicity; no other risk factors, including cumulative anthracycline dose, were identified., Conclusions: In this retrospective cohort, representing the largest experience in this setting with extended follow-up, cumulative incidence of cardiac events was low. Rates of LV dysfunction or HF were particularly low, suggesting infusional administration may mitigate risk despite prior exposure., (© 2023 The Authors. European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Recent prospective clinical trial data suggest that patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma who continue treatment with ABVD, despite failing to attain a complete metabolic response on interim PET (PET2+), may fare better than previously published. We describe the outcomes of PET2+ patients who continued ABVD and compare the performance of a quantitative measure based on the lesion-to-liver SUV ratio (LLS qPET2+) to that of the subjective Deauville criteria (dvPET2+). We analyzed all patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage Hodgkin lymphoma treated with frontline ABVD at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 2008 and 2017. Eligibility was set to correspond with the RATHL inclusion criteria. Images were reviewed by two nuclear medicine physicians and discordant cases were resolved with a third expert in consensus. qPET2+ was defined as LLS ≥ 1.3. We identified 227 patients of whom 25% (57) were qPET2+, but only 14% (31) were dvPET2+. Forty-eight patients (84%) continued ABVD with a 3-year PFS of 70% for qPET2+ and 64% for dvPET2+. In conclusion, interim PET interpretation in clinical practice may be associated with a higher rate of scans deemed positive. Irrespective of the criteria for PET2 positivity, a subset of patients may continue ABVD without a dismal outcome.

Background: Mediastinal radiation is associated with increased risk of myocardial infarction (MI) among non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) survivors., Objective: To evaluate how preexisting cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) modify the association of mediastinal radiation and MI among a national population of NHL survivors with a range of CVRFs., Material and Methods: Using Danish registries, we identified adults diagnosed with lymphoma 2000-2010. We assessed MI from one year after diagnosis through 2016. We ascertained CVRFs (hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes), vascular disease, and intrinsic heart disease prevalent at lymphoma diagnosis. We used multivariable Cox regression to test the interaction between preexisting CVRFs and receipt of mediastinal radiation on subsequent MI., Results: Among 3151 NHL survivors (median age 63, median follow-up 6.5 years), 96 were diagnosed with MI. Before lymphoma, 32% of survivors had ≥1 CVRF. 8.5% of survivors received mediastinal radiation. In multivariable analysis, we found that mediastinal radiation (HR = 1.96; 95% CI = 1.09-3.52), and presence of ≥1 CVRF (HR = 2.71; 95% CI = 1.77-4.15) were associated with an increased risk of MI. Although there was no interaction on the relative scale ( p  = 0.14), we saw a clinically relevant absolute increase in risk for patients with CVRF from 10-year of MI of 10.5% without radiation to 29.5% for those undergoing radiation., Conclusion: Patients with CVRFs have an importantly higher risk of subsequent MI if they have mediastinal radiation. Routine evaluation of CVRFs and optimal treatment of preexisting cardiovascular disease should continue after receiving cancer therapy. In patients with CVRFs, mediastinal radiation should only be given if oncologic benefit clearly outweighs cardiovascular harm.

Remarkable improvements in outcomes for many haematological malignancies have been driven primarily by a proliferation of novel therapeutics over the past two decades. Targeted agents, immune and cellular therapies, and combination regimens have adverse event profiles distinct from conventional finite cytotoxic chemotherapies. In 2018, a Commission comprising patient advocates, clinicians, clinical investigators, regulators, biostatisticians, and pharmacists representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examined issues of adverse event evaluation in the context of both newer and existing therapies for haematological cancers. The Commission proposed immediate actions and long-term solutions in the current processes in adverse event assessment, patient-reported outcomes in haematological malignancies, toxicities in cellular therapies, long-term toxicity and survivorship in haematological malignancies, issues in regulatory approval from an international perspective, and toxicity reporting in haematological malignancies and the real-world setting. In this follow-up report, the Commission describes progress that has been made in these areas since the initial report., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CAJ reports personal fees from Kite/Gilead, Novartis, BMS/Celgene, Precision Biosciences, Nkarta, AbbVie, Bluebird Bio, Epizyme, Lonza, and Ipsen, outside the submitted work. DV reports personal fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Kite/Gilead, Kyowa Kirin, Sandoz Canada, Nanostring, Immunovaccine, Roche, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, and Lundbeck/Teva; and research funding (to his institution) from AstraZeneca and Roche, outside the submitted work. GV reports personal fees from Roche, Eisai, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics; and grants from Breast Cancer Now, EORTC, Yorkshire Cancer Research, Pfizer, and IQVIA, outside the submitted work. JaG reports grants from Novartis, Pfizer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Incyte, Takeda, Servier, UCB, Amgen, Roche, Alnylam, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Biomarin, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen, Sobi, Gilead, and Bayer, outside the submitted work. JFS reports grants, personal fees, non-financial support, and speakers bureau participation for AbbVie and Roche; personal fees and non-financial support from BMS; personal fees from Genentech, Mei Pharma, Morphosys, Sunesis, and Takeda; and grants and personal fees from Janssen, outside the submitted work. JRW reports personal fees from Merck, Celgene, Cidara, ReViral, Shire, Ansun, Janssen, and Behring, outside the submitted work. KM reports grants from Pfizer, outside the submitted work. LN reports honoraria from ADC Therapeutics, Bayer, and Morphosys; grants and honoraria from BMS/Celgene, Epizyme, Genentech, Gilead/Kite, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda, and TG Therapeutics; and grants from Caribou Biosciences and IGM Biosciences, outside the submitted work. M-VM reports personal fees from Janssen, BMS-Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, Sanofi, Oncopeptides, Adaptive, GSK, AbbVie, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Pfizer, and Regeneron, outside the submitted work. MH reports grants from U24 CA076518 National Cancer Institute and grants from U24 HL138660 National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute, during the conduct of the study; grants from Amgen, Vor BioPharma, Gamida Cell, Medac, Magenta Therapeutics, Astellas, OncoImmune, and Genentech; and consulting fees from AlloVir, outside the submitted work. MJM reports personal fees from Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Immunovaccine Technology, and Takeda; consulting advisory roles for Merck, Juno Therapeutics, Teva, and Daiichi Sankyo; research funding from IGM Biosciences; and a consulting advisory role and research funding from Rocket Medical, outside the submitted work. PM reports personal fees from Janssen, Celgene, BMS, AbbVie, Sanofi, and Amgen, outside the submitted work. PS reports research support from Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, and Takeda; and honoraria and serving on advisory boards for Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Takeda, BMS, and SkylineDx, outside the submitted work. SS reports grants and consulting fees from BMS, Janssen, and Magenta; grants from Allogene; and consulting fees from Oncopeptides, outside the submitted work. TCE-G reports previous employment at Roche and personal fees from AbbVie, outside the submitted work. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) predominantly affects older adults with suboptimal therapeutic outcomes due to increased treatment-related mortality and toxicities in vulnerable patients, clinically defined by geriatric impairments such as functional limitation, multimorbidity, or cognitive deficits. In this prospective pilot study, we evaluated a rituximab/prednisone prephase treatment strategy in 33 older, vulnerable patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL, defined by either age ≥70 years or age 60-70 years with Karnofsky performance scale (KPS) <80. A single dose of rituximab 375 mg/m2 between 3-10 days and oral prednisone for at least 5 days prior to the first dose of chemoimmunotherapy was administered. All patients completed prephase treatment and all but one commenced anthracycline-based chemoimmunotherapy. Only one early cycle death occurred. Toxicity events, defined by either unplanned hospitalization, unplanned dose reduction/delay, or chemotherapy discontinuation, occurred in 22 patients (67%). Sixteen patients (48%) experienced grade 3 or higher non-hematologic toxicities and/or grade 4 or higher hematologic toxicities. With a median follow-up of 4.4 years, both 5-year progression-free survival and overall survival were at 81% (95% confidence interval: 69-96). Importantly, we found that phenotypic impairments in basic and instrumental activities of daily living, physical function, mobility, KPS, and Cancer and Aging Research Group chemotherapy toxicity risk score were significantly associated with senescence-associated, proinflammatory cytokine milieu which was readily reversed with prephase treatment, potentially explaining its clinical effectiveness. Prephase therapy with rituximab/prednisone should be considered for all older, vulnerable DLBCL patients prior to curative intent, anthracycline-based chemoimmunotherapy. This trial was registered as clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT89028394.

R ± DHAX has been traditionally administered to inpatient due to the timing of chemotherapy administration and the perceived need for close monitoring of adverse effects. To administer R ± DHAX outpatient, a multidisciplinary task force created clinical and educational guidelines which were implemented through two phases: pilot and expansion. The pilot program determined the feasibility of transitioning R ± DHAX outpatient at a single infusion site. The expansion phase led to a service-wide implementation across all outpatient sites. A total of 40 patients were included, of which 23 patients completed all cycles, outpatient, 12 transitioned inpatient to outpatient administration, and 5 transitioned outpatient to inpatient administration. The success rate of outpatient R ± DHAX administration was 90% (36 patients successfully completed outpatient administration/40 total patients). No cytarabine-related cerebellar or ophthalmic toxicity was reported. Outpatient R ± DHAX saved 192 hospital days. R ± DHAX could be successfully administered outpatient with minimal safety concerns and reduced hospital bed utilization.

Between 1998 and 2009, a total of 295 patients (median age 58, 53% females) with newly diagnosed early-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) were managed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Approximately half of patients (137, 46%) underwent initial observation and half (158, 54%) immediate treatment: radiation alone (n = 108), systemic treatment alone (n = 29), or combined modality treatment (n = 21). Median follow-up was 8.4 years (range 0.3-17.2), and 10-year overall survival (OS) was 87.2%. OS was similar between initially-observed and immediately-treated patients (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.25, 95% CI: 0.67-2.36, p = 0.49). For patients receiving radiation alone, 5-year OS was 98.0%. Patients selected for systemic therapy alone had high-risk baseline features and had shorter OS than patients treated with radiation alone (HR 3.38, 95% CI 1.29-8.86, p = 0.01). Combined modality treatment did not yield superior survival compared with radiation alone (P > 0.05) but was associated with better progression-free survival (HR 0.36, 95% CI 0.14-0.90, p = 0.03). The rate of transformation increased steadily over time and was 4.2% at 5 years and 10.8% at 10 years. This modern-era analysis rationalized the role of initial observation in patients with early-stage FL although patients receiving radiation therapy also demonstrate excellent outcome., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Mosunetuzumab is a bispecific antibody targeting CD20 and CD3 that redirects T cells to engage and eliminate malignant B cells and is being developed for relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHLs)., Methods: This first-in-human trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02500407) evaluated the safety and tolerability and efficacy of mosunetuzumab in patients with R/R B-NHL and established the recommended phase II dose. Data from dose escalation are presented. Single-agent mosunetuzumab was administered intravenously in 3-week cycles, at full dose in cycle 1 day 1 (group A) or with ascending (step-up) doses during cycle 1 on days 1, 8, and 15 (group B), for eight or 17 cycles on the basis of tumor response., Results: Two hundred thirty patients were enrolled. Doses up to 2.8 mg and 60 mg were assessed in groups A and B, respectively; maximum tolerated dose was not exceeded. In group B (n = 197), common adverse events (≥ 20% of patients) were neutropenia (28.4%), cytokine release syndrome (27.4%), hypophosphatemia (23.4%), fatigue (22.8%), and diarrhea (21.8%). Cytokine release syndrome was mostly low-grade (grade ≥ 3: 1.0%) and mainly confined to cycle 1. Across the doses investigated (group B), best overall response rates were 34.9% and 66.2% in patients with aggressive and indolent B-NHL, respectively, and complete response rates were 19.4% and 48.5%. Among patients with a complete response, the median duration of response was 22.8 months (95% CI, 7.6 to not estimable) and 20.4 (95% CI, 16 to not estimable) in patients with aggressive and indolent B-NHL, respectively., Conclusion: Mosunetuzumab, administered with step-up dosing, has a manageable safety profile and induces durable complete responses in R/R B-NHL. The expansion stage of the study is ongoing at the dose level of 1/2/60/60/30 mg selected for further study., Competing Interests: Lihua E. BuddeConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, Kite/Gilead, Novartis, BeiGeneResearch 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 Sarit AssoulineStock and Other Ownership Interests: Knight PharmaceuticalsHonoraria: Janssen Oncology, Pfizer, AbbVie, Novartis Canada Pharmaceuticals Inc, AstraZeneca, BMSConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, BeiGeneResearch Funding: Roche Canada (Inst), Takeda (Inst), Astex Pharmaceuticals (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Novartis (Inst)Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche Canada Laurie H. SehnHonoraria: Amgen, Apobiologix, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Janssen-Ortho, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite, a Gilead company, Lundbeck, Merck, Roche/Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Teva, TG Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Acerta Pharma, morphosys, Incyte, Debiopharm Group, Sandoz-Novartis, Verastem, GenmabConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, AbbVie, Seattle Genetics, TG Therapeutics, Janssen, Amgen, Roche/Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Lundbeck, Amgen, apobiologix, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite, a Gilead company, Merck, Takeda, Teva, TG therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Acerta Pharma, MorphoSys, Incyte, Debiopharm Group, Sandoz-Novartis, Genmab, VerastemResearch Funding: Roche/Genentech (Inst), Teva (Inst) Stephen J. SchusterConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Nordic Nanovector, Novartis, AbbVie, Acerta Pharma/AstraZeneca, Alimera Sciences, BeiGene, Juno Therapeutics, Loxo Oncology, Tessa Therapeutics, Genentech/RocheResearch Funding: Novartis (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Adaptive Biotechnologies (Inst), Merck (Inst), Genentech/Roche (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Juno Therapeutics (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Incyte (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), DTRM (Inst)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent Combination Therapies of CAR and PD-1 Inhibitors (via University of Pennsylvania with royalties to Novartis) Sung-Soo YoonHonoraria: NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, Celgene/JazzResearch Funding: Kyowa Kirin, Roche/Genentech, Yuhan Dok Hyun YoonHonoraria: Celltrion, Roche, Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, Samyang, Kirin Pharmaceuticals, TakedaConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche, Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, Green Cross, NovartisResearch Funding: Samyang, Abclone, Roche/Genentech, Janssen Oncology, Amgen, Genmab, Boryung, Eutilex Matthew J. MatasarStock and Other Ownership Interests: MerckHonoraria: Genentech, Roche, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Immunovaccine, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm TherapeuticsConsulting 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 Biosciences , IGM BiosciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech, Roche, Seattle Genetics, Bayer Francesc BoschConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Roche/Genentech, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, AbbVie, Kite, a Gilead company, BeiGene, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: AbbVie, Janssen, Roche, AstraZenecaResearch Funding: Janssen, AstraZeneca Loretta J. NastoupilHonoraria: Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, Bayer, Janssen Oncology, Pfizer, Gamida Cell, TG Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Morphosys, Epizyme, GenmabResearch Funding: TG Therapeutics, Janssen Biotech, Celgene, Genentech/Roche, LAM Therapeutics, Epizyme, Novartis, IgM Biosciences, Caribou Biosciences, Gilead Sciences, Allogene Therapeutics, Takeda Ian W. FlinnConsulting or 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 Pharma (Inst), Genmab (Inst), InnoCare Pharma (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) Mazyar ShadmanConsulting or Advisory Role: AbbVie, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Sound Biologics, Cellectar, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, MorphoSys, Innate Pharma, Kite, a Gilead company, Adaptive Biotechnologies, EpizymeResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics (Inst), Acerta Pharma (Inst), Merck (Inst), TG Therapeutics (Inst), BeiGene (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Genentech (Inst), MustangBio (Inst), AbbVie (Inst), Sunesis Pharmaceuticals (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene Catherine DiefenbachStock and Other Ownership Interests: Gilead SciencesConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech/Roche, Merck, Janssen, Celgene, MorphoSysResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics (Inst), Genentech (Inst), Incyte (Inst), LAM Therapeutics (Inst), Merck (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Millennium (Inst), Roche/Genentech (Inst), Janssen (Inst), MEI Pharma (Inst), Trillium Therapeutics (Inst), Astex Pharmaceuticals (Inst)Expert Testimony: Jim Harmon Carol O'HearEmployment: Genentech/RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: Genentech/RochePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Antibody bufferingTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech/Roche Huang HuangEmployment: Roche Canada Antonia KwanEmployment: Genentech/RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche/Genentech Chi-Chung LiEmployment: Roche/GenentechStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche/GenentechPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Patent applications pertaining to the development and dosing of bispecific antibodies Emily C. PiccioneEmployment: GenentechStock and Other Ownership Interests: Roche/Genentech Michael C. WeiEmployment: Genentech/RocheStock and Other Ownership Interests: RocheTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech/Roche Shen YinEmployment: GenentechStock and Other Ownership Interests: GenentechTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Genentech Nancy L. BartlettConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Roche/Genentech, ADC Therapeutics, BTG, Acerta PharmaResearch Funding: Seattle Genetics (Inst), Kite, a Gilead company (Inst), Merck (Inst), Bristol Myers Squibb (Inst), Celgene (Inst), Immune Design (Inst), Forty Seven (Inst), Janssen (Inst), Pharmacyclics (Inst), Millennium (Inst), ADC Therapeutics (Inst), Autolus (Inst), Roche/Genentech (Inst), Pfizer (Inst), Affimed Therapeutics (Inst)No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is characterized by clinical and molecular heterogeneity; however, this heterogeneity is rarely taken into account by standard-of-care treatment approaches. While the disease was traditionally classified based on transcriptome signatures purporting the tumor cell of origin, recent classification systems have further differentiated these subtypes into clusters based on molecular and genetic features. Alongside a better understanding of the biology of the disease and the signaling pathways involved, emerging therapeutic agents may be better aimed at attacking distinct disease subsets. It is hoped that molecular subtyping at diagnosis will allow patients to be allocated to the appropriate treatment that targets their specific disease subtype, thus advancing the promise of precision medicine in lymphoma, an approach that is most needed. For high-risk disease subsets, this is particularly important, and much research is still needed to develop agents effective in this population. Here, we review recent advances in DLBCL biology and how they can be translated into clinical care., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.)

Polatuzumab vedotin plus bendamustine and rituximab (pola + BR) received regulatory approvals for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) based on primary results from the randomized arms of the GO29365 study. After the randomized phase, 106 additional patients received pola + BR in a single-arm extension cohort. We report updated results from the randomized arms and results of the extension cohort. In this phase 1b/2 study, patients with R/R DLBCL who were transplant ineligible received up to six 21-day cycles of pola + BR or BR. The primary end point of the randomized arms was the complete response (CR) rate at end of treatment. Primary objectives of the extension cohort were safety, pharmacokinetic profile, and efficacy of pola + BR. As of 7 July 2020, a total of 192 patients with R/R DLBCL were enrolled in the pola + BR cohort (n = 152 [safety run-in, n = 6; randomized, n = 40; extension cohort, n = 106]) or the BR cohort (n = 40). Significant survival benefit with pola + BR vs BR persisted in the randomized arms (median progression-free survival, 9.2 vs 3.7 months [hazard ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.66]; median overall survival, 12.4 vs 4.7 months [hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.72]). In the extension cohort, the independent review committee-assessed objective response rate was 41.5%, and the CR rate was 38.7%; median independent review committee-assessed progression-free survival and overall survival were 6.6 months and 12.5 months, respectively. No new safety signals with pola + BR were identified. Pola + BR is an effective treatment option for patients with R/R DLBCL, with a well-characterized and manageable safety profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02257567., (© 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: Activation of Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) and phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase (PI3K) represent parallel, synergistic pathways in lymphoma pathogenesis. As predominant PI3Kδ inhibition is a possible mechanism of tumor escape, we proposed a clinical trial of dual BTK and pan-PI3K inhibition., Patients and Methods: We conducted a single-center phase I/Ib trial combining a BTK inhibitor (ibrutinib) and a pan-PI3K inhibitor (buparlisib) in 37 patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) B-cell lymphoma. Buparlisib and ibrutinib were administered orally, once daily in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The clinical trial is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02756247., Results: Patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) receiving the combination had a 94% overall response rate (ORR) and 33-month median progression-free survival; ORR of 31% and 20% were observed in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma, respectively. The maximum tolerated dose was ibrutinib 560 mg plus buparlisib 100 mg and the recommended phase II dose was ibrutinib 560 mg plus buparlisib 80 mg. The most common grade 3 adverse events were rash/pruritis/dermatitis (19%), diarrhea (11%), hyperglycemia (11%), and hypertension (11%). All grade mood disturbances ranging from anxiety, depression, to agitation were observed in 22% of patients. Results from serial monitoring of cell-free DNA samples corresponded to radiographic resolution of disease and tracked the emergence of mutations known to promote BTK inhibitor resistance., Conclusions: BTK and pan-PI3K inhibition in mantle cell lymphoma demonstrates a promising efficacy signal. Addition of BCL2 inhibitors to a BTK and pan-PI3K combination remain suitable for further development in mantle cell lymphoma., (©2021 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Background: We hypothesised that combining zanubrutinib with obinutuzumab and venetoclax (BOVen) as an initial therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma would lead to high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD), and we explored MRD as a biomarker for directing treatment duration., Methods: This multicenter, investigator-initiated, single-arm, phase 2 trial took place at two two academic medical centres in the USA. Patients were eligible for the primary cohort if they had treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, required therapy, and were at least 18 years of age with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status up to 2. BOVen was administered in 28 day cycles (oral zanubrutinib at 160 mg twice per day starting in cycle 1 on day 1; intravenous obinutuzumab at 1000 mg on day 1 [split over day 1 with 100 mg and day 2 with 900 mg for an absolute lymphocyte count >25 000 cells per μL or lymph nodes >5 cm in diameter], day 8, and day 15 of cycle 1, and day 1 of cycles 2-8; and oral venetoclax ramp up to 400 mg per day starting in cycle 3 on day 1) and discontinued after 8-24 cycles when prespecified undetectable MRD criteria were met in the peripheral blood and bone marrow. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients that reached undetectable MRD in both the peripheral blood and bone marrow (flow cytometry cutoff less than one chronic lymphocytic leukaemia cell per 10 000 leukocytes [<10 -4 ]) assessed per protocol. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03824483). The primary cohort is closed to recruitment, and recruitment continues in the TP53-mutated mantle cell lymphoma cohort., Findings: Between March 14, 2019, and Oct 10, 2019, 47 patients were screened for eligibility, and 39 patients were enrolled and treated. Median age was 62 years (IQR 52-70) with 30 (77%) of 39 male participants and nine (23%) of 39 female participants. 28 (72%) of 39 patients had unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable-region and five (13%) of 39 had 17p deletion or TP53 mutation. After a median follow-up of 25·8 months (IQR 24·0-27·3), 33 (89%) of 37 patients (95% CI 75-97) had undetectable MRD in both blood and bone marrow, meeting the prespecified undetectable MRD criteria to stop therapy after a median of ten cycles (IQR 8-12), which includes two cycles of zanubrutinib and obinutuzumab before starting venetoclax. After median surveillance after treatment of 15·8 months (IQR 13·0-18·6), 31 (94%) of 33 patients had undetectable MRD. The most common adverse events were thrombocytopenia (23 [59%] of 39), fatigue (21 [54%]), neutropenia (20 [51%]), and bruising (20 [51%]), and the most common adverse event at grade 3 or worse was neutropenia (seven [18%]) in the intention-to-treat population. One death occurred in a patient with intracranial haemorrhage on day 1 of cycle 1 after initiating intravenous heparin for pulmonary emboli., Interpretation: BOVen was well tolerated and met its primary endpoint, with 33 (89%) of 37 previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma reaching undetectable MRD in both peripheral blood and bone marrow despite a median treatment duration of only 10 months, owing to our undetectable MRD-driven treatment discontinuation design. These data support further evaluation of the BOVen regimen in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and small lymphocytic lymphoma with treatment duration guided by early MRD response kinetics., Funding: Beigene, Genentech (Roche), Grais-Cutler Fund, Lymphoma Research Fund, Lymphoma Research Foundation, American Cancer Society, Farmer Family Foundation, and the National Instititutes of Health and National Cancer Institute., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests JDS reports consulting fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, TG Therapeutics, and Verastem, and research funding from Adaptive Biotechnologies, Beigene, BostonGene, Genentech (Roche), GSK, Moderna, and TG Therapeutics. ARM reports consulting fees from Curio, Dava, Medscape, GenMab, PeerView, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Adaptive, Beigene, Genentech, LOXO, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and TG Therapeutics, research funding from DTRM, Nurix, GenMab, AstraZeneca, Abbvie, Adaptive, Beigene, Genentech, LOXO, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and TG Therapeutics, and Data Safety Monitoring Board membership for TG Therapeutics. AD reports consulting fees from Physician's Education Resource, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, EUSA Pharma, and Abbvie, and research funding from Roche and Takeda. EJ reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca and Epizyme. EH reports consulting fees from Leuko and Intervention Insights. JSA reports consulting fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Celgene, Gilead, Juno Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Genentech, Amgen, Novartis, Karyopharm, Verastem, Janssen, Merck, and Seattle Genetics. CLB reports consulting fees from Life Sci, GLG, Juno (Celgene), Seattle Genetics, Kite, Karyopharm, TG Therapeutics, and ADC Therapeutics, honoraria from Dava Oncology, TouchIME, and Medscape, stock ownership in BMS, Pfizer, Viatris, Regeneron, Moderna, and Novavax, and research funding from Autolus, Bayer, Janssen, Novartis, Epizyme, Xynomics, Bayer, Autolus, and Genentech (Roche). MJM reports consulting fees from Genentech (Roche), Merck, Bayer, Juno, Teva, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Daiichi Sankyo, Takeda, honoraria from Genentech (Roche), GSK, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, Immunovaccine Technologies, and Takeda, travel, accommodation, or other expenses from Genentech (Roche), Bayer, and Seattle Genetics, and research funding from Genentech (Roche), Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, IGM Biosciences, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, and Immunovaccine Technologies, and minority ownership interest in Merck. AN reports consulting fees from Epizyme, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Medscape, Targeted Oncology, and Morphosys, and research funding from Pharmacyclics and Rafael Pharma. MLP reports consulting fees from Beigene, Celgene, Novartis, Merck, and Synthekine, research funding from Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Juno, and Regeneron, and an immediate family member who receives royalties from Juno and Seres. AK reports consulting fees from Kite Pharmaceuticals, AstraZeneca, and Janssen, and research funding from Abbvie, Adaptive, Celgene, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, and AstraZeneca, and serves on a steering committee for mantle cell lymphoma Registry for AstraZeneca. LER reports consulting fees from Abbvie, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Janssen, Loxo Oncology, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, TG Therapeutics, and Vaniam Group, minority ownership interest in Abbott Laboratories and Abbvie, and research funding from Pfizer. MT reports honoraria from the Massachusetts Medical Society, the Brazilian Association of Haematology, MJH Life Sciences, Curio Science, and VJHemeOnc. MR reports consulting fees from Celgene, Auron Therapeutics, and Physician's Education Resource, research funding from Cellularity, NGM, Genentech, and Beat AML, and ownership or equity interest in Auron Therapeutics. JH reports employment from Beigene. JB reports employment from Genentech. QW reports employment from Genentech. AJ reports employment from Adaptive Biotechnologies. OA-W reports consulting fees from H3 Biomedicine, Envisagenics, Janssen, and Merck. ADZ reports consulting fees from Adaptive Biotechnologies, Abbvie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Beigene, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Genentech (Roche), Gilead, MEI Pharma, MorphoSys, NCCN, Novartis, and Verastem, data safety monitoring committee membership for BMS, Celgene, and Juno, data safety monitoring committee membership chair for Beigene, and research funding from MEI Pharma, Gilead, Beigene, and Roche. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: When treating indolent B-cell lymphoma, combining continuously administered oral phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors with immunochemotherapy has been associated with toxicity. CHRONOS-4 (Phase III; NCT02626455) investigates the intravenous, intermittently administered pan-class I PI3K inhibitor copanlisib in combination with rituximab plus bendamustine (R-B) or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) in patients with relapsed indolent B-cell lymphoma. We report safety run-in results., Patients and Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with relapsed CD20-positive indolent B-cell lymphoma received copanlisib (45 mg, increasing to 60 mg if no dose-limiting toxicities) weekly on an intermittent schedule with R-B or R-CHOP. Primary objective was to identify a recommended Phase III dose (RP3D). We also assessed objective response, safety, and tolerability., Results: Ten patients received copanlisib plus R-B and 11 received copanlisib plus R-CHOP. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported; RP3D was 60 mg. All patients had ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), most commonly (all grade/grade 3/4) for copanlisib plus R-B: decreased neutrophil count (80%/50%), nausea (70%/0%), decreased platelet count (60%/10%), hyperglycemia (60%/50%); for copanlisib plus R-CHOP: hyperglycemia (82%/64%), hypertension (73%/64%), decreased neutrophil count (64%/64%). Two and 8 patients had serious TEAEs with copanlisib plus R-B and R-CHOP, respectively. Among evaluable patients, objective response rates were 90% (5 complete, 4 partial) and 100% (3 complete, 7 partial) with copanlisib plus R-B and R-CHOP, respectively., Conclusion: Copanlisib is the first PI3K inhibitor to demonstrate safe, tolerable, and effective combinability with immunochemotherapy in patients with relapsed indolent B-cell lymphoma at full dose (60 mg). Further evaluation is ongoing., Competing Interests: Disclosure MJM: consultancy: Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, Roche, Genentech, Juno Therapeutics, Merck, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Teva; honoraria: Bayer, Roche, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, ImmunoVaccine Technologies, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Takeda; research funding: Bayer, Roche, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, ImmunoVaccine Technologies, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics. MD: scientific advisory boards: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Beigene, BMS/Celgene, Genmab, Gilead/Kite, Janssen, Novartis, Roche; speaker honoraria: Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bayer, BMS/Celgene, Gilead/Kite, Janssen, Roche; institutional research support: AbbVie, Bayer, Celgene, Janssen, Roche. SL: consultancy: Celgene, CHO Pharma USA, Incyte, Gilead, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche, Takeda; honoraria: Merck, Roche, Takeda; research funding: Bayer, Celgene, Genmab, Janssen, Nanovector, Novartis, Roche, Takeda. AS: speaker bureau: AbbVie, Amgen, ArQule, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eisai, Gilead, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, Servier, Takeda; advisory boards: Bayer, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eisai, Gilead, MSD, Pfizer, Servier; consultancy: ArQule. VB, BHC: employees of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Inc. MF: employee of Bayer AG. PLZ: honoraria: AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Roche, Servier, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, Verastem; board of directors or advisory committee memberships: AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Immune Design, Incyte, Janssen-Cilag, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Portola, Roche, Sandoz, Servier, Takeda, Verastem; speaker bureau: AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Immune Design, Incyte, Janssen, Janssen-Cilag, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Portola, Roche, Servier, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, Verastem; consultancy: EUSA Pharma, Janssen, MSD, Sanofi, Verastem; research funding: Portola. MP: none., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Romidepsin (histone deacetylase inhibitor), lenalidomide (immunomodulatory agent), and carfilzomib (proteasome inhibitor), have efficacy and lack cumulative toxicity in relapsed/refractory lymphoma. We performed two investigator initiated sequential phase I studies to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of romidepsin and lenalidomide (regimen A) and romidepsin, lenalidomide, and carfilzomib (regimen B) in relapsed/refractory lymphoma. Cohorts in T-cell lymphoma (TCL), B-cell lymphoma (BCL) were enrolled at the MTD. Forty-nine patients were treated in study A (27 TCL, 17 BCL, 5 Hodgkin lymphoma (HL)) and 27 (16 TCL, 11 BCL) in study B. The MTD of regimen A was romidepsin 14 mg/m 2 IV on days 1, 8, and 15 and lenalidomide 25 mg oral on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle. The MTD of regimen B was romidepsin 8 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8, lenalidomide 10 mg oral on days 1-14 and carfilzomib 36 mg/m 2 IV on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In study A, 94% had AEs ≥Grade 3, most commonly neutropenia (49%), thrombocytopenia (53%), and electrolyte abnormalities (49%). In study B 59% had AEs ≥Grade 3, including thrombocytopenia (30%) and neutropenia (26%). In study A the ORR was 49% (50% TCL, 47% BCL, 50% HL). In study B the ORR was 48% (50% TCL, 50% BCL). For study A and B the median progression free survival (PFS) was 5.7 months and 3.4 months respectively with 11 patients proceeding to allogeneic transplant. The combinations of romidepsin and lenalidomide and of romidepsin, lenalidomide and carfilzomib showed activity in relapsed/refractory lymphoma with an acceptable safety profile., (© 2021 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: We conducted a phase II study evaluating pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine, vinorelbine, and liposomal doxorubicin (pembro-GVD) as second-line therapy for relapsed or refractory (rel/ref) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03618550)., Methods: Transplant eligible patients with rel/ref cHL following first-line therapy were treated with two to four cycles of pembrolizumab (200 mg intravenous [IV], day 1), gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m 2 IV, days 1 and 8), vinorelbine (20 mg/m 2 IV, days 1 and 8), and liposomal doxorubicin (15 mg/m 2 , days 1 and 8), given on 21-day cycles. The primary end point was complete response (CR) following up to four cycles of pembro-GVD. Patients who achieved CR by labeled fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (Deauville ≤ 3) after two or four cycles proceeded to high-dose therapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (HDT/AHCT). HDT/AHCT was carried out according to institutional standards, and brentuximab vedotin maintenance was allowed following HDT/AHCT., Results: Of 39 patients enrolled, 41% had primary ref disease and 38% relapsed within 1 year of frontline treatment. 31 patients received two cycles of pembro-GVD, and eight received four cycles. Most adverse events were grade 1 or two, whereas few were grade 3 and included transaminitis (n = 4), neutropenia (n = 4), mucositis (n = 2), thyroiditis (n = 1), and rash (n = 1). Of 38 evaluable patients, overall and CR rates after pembro-GVD were 100% and 95%, respectively. Thirty-six (95%) patients proceeded to HDT/AHCT, two received pre-HDT/AHCT involved site radiation, and 13 (33%) received post-HDT/AHCT brentuximab vedotin maintenance. All 36 transplanted patients are in remission at a median post-transplant follow-up of 13.5 months (range: 2.66-27.06 months)., Conclusion: Second-line therapy with pembro-GVD is a highly effective and well-tolerated regimen that can efficiently bridge patients with rel/ref cHL to HDT/AHCT., Competing Interests: 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, BeiGene Gunjan ShahResearch Funding: Janssen, Amgen Anita KumarStock and Other Ownership Interests: BridgebioConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Kite, a Gilead company, AstraZeneca/MedImmuneResearch Funding: AbbVie/Genentech, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, AstraZeneca/MedImmune, Pharmacyclics Oscar LahoudConsulting or Advisory Role: MorphoSysTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: MorphoSysOpen Payments Link: https://openpaymentsdata.cms.gov/physician/225358/summary 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 Paul HamlinConsulting or Advisory Role: Juno Therapeutics, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene, Sandoz, AstraZeneca/MerckResearch Funding: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Seattle Genetics, Janssen, Portola Pharmaceuticals, GlaxoSmithKline, Molecular Templates, Incyte David J. StrausConsulting or Advisory Role: Takeda, Seagen, EpizymeResearch Funding: Takeda Ildefonso Rodriguez-RiveraStock and Other Ownership Interests: Pfizer Philip CaronStock and Other Ownership Interests: AstraZeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Johnson & Johnson/Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Teva Steven M. HorwitzConsulting or Advisory Role: Celgene, Millennium, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Seattle Genetics, ADC Therapeutics, Verastem, Takeda, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, C4 Therapeutics, Janssen Oncology, Trillium Therapeutics, Vividion Therapeutics, Myeloid Therapeutics, Ono Pharmaceutical, Secura Bio, Shoreline Biosciences Inc, TubulisResearch Funding: Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Aileron Therapeutics, ADC Therapeutics, Verastem, 47, Trillium Therapeutics, Daiichi Sankyo, Affimed Therapeutics, Secura Bio Lorenzo FalchiConsulting or Advisory Role: GenmabResearch Funding: Roche, Genmab Erel JoffeConsulting or Advisory Role: AstraZeneca, Epizyme Christina LeeHonoraria: WebMDConsulting or Advisory Role: Intellisphere LLC M. Lia PalombaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seres TherapeuticsHonoraria: Flagship Biosciences, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Merck, Seres TherapeuticsConsulting or Advisory Role: Flagship Biosciences, Novartis, Evelo Therapeutics, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Therakos, Amgen, Merck, Seres Therapeutics, Kite, a Gilead company, Novartis, BeiGeneResearch Funding: Seres TherapeuticsPatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property Rights, Juno intellectual property rights Ariela NoyConsulting or Advisory Role: MorphoSys, Janssen Biotech, Prime OncologyResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Rafael PharmaceuticalsTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Pharmacyclics, Janssen Oncology Matthew J. MatasarStock and Other Ownership Interests: MerckHonoraria: Genentech, Roche, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Immunovaccine, ADC Therapeutics, Karyopharm TherapeuticsConsulting 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 Georgios PongasHonoraria: Atara Biotherapeutics, Curio Science, OncLive/MJH Life SciencesTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Atara Biotherapeutics Gilles SallesHonoraria: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Novartis, AbbVie, MorphoSysConsulting or Advisory Role: Roche/Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, MorphoSys, Epizyme, Alimera Sciences, Genmab, Debiopharm Group, Velosbio, BMS, BeiGene, Incyte, Miltenyi Biotec, Ipsen Santosha VardhanaHonoraria: AgiosConsulting or Advisory Role: Immunai, ADC Therapeutics Gottfried von KeudelllHonoraria: PharmacyclicsConsulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, Merck, Incyte Ahmet DoganConsulting or Advisory Role: Seattle Genetics, Takeda, EUSA Pharma, AbbVie, Peerview, Physicans' Education ResourceResearch Funding: Roche/Genentech 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, a 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: 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.

High-dose chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation is an effective consolidation therapy in lymphoma; however, its use in elderly patients has been limited because of concerns for greater toxicity in this group. We investigated the toxicities of carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, and melphalan (BEAM) and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (AHCT) in 346 patients in 2 age groups: 279 patients aged 60 to 69 years and 67 patients aged ≥70 years. The majority developed severe toxicities; the most common were febrile neutropenia, gastrointestinal, infections, and cardiovascular. Older patients were at higher risk for grade ≥3 cardiovascular toxicities (hazard ratio [HR], 3.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.25-5.00; P < .001) and skin toxicities (HR, 2.45; 95% CI, 1.08-5.54, P = .032). In the older group, nonrelapse mortality at 100 days and at 2 years was 2.99% (95% CI, 0.55-9.32) and 6.2% (95% CI, 1.97-13.95), respectively, vs 1.79% (95% CI, 0.68-3.92) and 2.91% (95% CI, 1.37-5.42), respectively, in the younger group. When adjusting for the number of grade ≥3 toxicities within the first 100 days, older patients had a 1.71-fold (95% CI, 1.08-2.71) increased risk for progression or death relative to younger patients. Although BEAM followed by AHCT is effective, it is associated with significant organ toxicities, especially in patients aged ≥70 years. Interventions to mitigate toxicities while maintaining efficacy are much needed., (© 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Although methotrexate (MTX) is the most widely used therapy for central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the optimal regimen remains unclear. We examined the efficacy of different prophylactic regimens in 585 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL and high-risk for CNS relapse, treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or R-CHOP-like regimens from 2001 to 2017, of whom 295 (50%) received prophylaxis. Intrathecal (IT) MTX was given to 253 (86%) and high-dose MTX (HD-MTX) to 42 (14%). After a median follow-up of 6.8 years, 36 of 585 patients relapsed in the CNS, of whom 14 had received prophylaxis. The CNS relapse risk at 1 year was lower for patients who received prophylaxis than patients who did not: 2% vs. 7.1%. However, the difference became less significant over time (5-year risk 5.6% vs. 7.5%), indicating prophylaxis tended to delay CNS relapse rather than prevent it. Furthermore, the CNS relapse risk was similar in patients who received IT and HD-MTX (5-year risk 5.6% vs. 5.2%). Collectively, our data indicate the benefit of MTX for CNS prophylaxis is transient, highlighting the need for more effective prophylactic regimens. In addition, our results failed to demonstrate a clinical advantage for the HD-MTX regimen.

Background: Copanlisib, an intravenous pan-class I PI3K inhibitor, showed efficacy and safety as monotherapy in patients with relapsed or refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma who had received at least two therapies. The CHRONOS-3 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of copanlisib plus rituximab in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma., Methods: CHRONOS-3 was a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in 186 academic medical centres across Asia, Australia, Europe, New Zealand, North America, Russia, South Africa, and South America. Patients aged 18 years and older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of no more than 2 and histologically confirmed CD20-positive indolent B-cell lymphoma relapsed after the last anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody-containing therapy and progression-free and treatment-free for at least 12 months, or at least 6 months for patients unwilling or unfit to receive chemotherapy, were randomly assigned (2:1) with an interactive voice-web response system via block randomisation (block size of six) to copanlisib (60 mg given as a 1-h intravenous infusion on an intermittent schedule on days 1, 8, and 15 [28-day cycle]) plus rituximab (375 mg/m 2 given intravenously weekly on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 during cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 3, 5, 7, and 9) or placebo plus rituximab, stratified on the basis of histology, progression-free and treatment-free interval, presence of bulky disease, and previous treatment with PI3K inhibitors. The primary outcome was progression-free survival in the full analysis set (all randomised patients) by masked central review. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of any study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02367040 and is ongoing., Findings: Between Aug 3, 2015, and Dec 17, 2019, 652 patients were screened for eligibility. 307 of 458 patients were randomly assigned to copanlisib plus rituximab and 151 patients were randomly assigned to placebo plus rituximab. With a median follow-up of 19·2 months (IQR 7·4-28·8) and 205 total events, copanlisib plus rituximab showed a statistically and clinically significant improvement in progression-free survival versus placebo plus rituximab; median progression-free survival 21·5 months (95% CI 17·8-33·0) versus 13·8 months (10·2-17·5; hazard ratio 0·52 [95% CI 0·39-0·69]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were hyperglycaemia (173 [56%] of 307 patients in the copanlisib plus rituximab group vs 12 [8%] of 146 in the placebo plus rituximab group) and hypertension (122 [40%] vs 13 [9%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 145 (47%) of 307 patients receiving copanlisib plus rituximab and 27 (18%) of 146 patients receiving placebo plus rituximab. One (<1%) drug-related death (pneumonitis) occurred in the copanlisib plus rituximab group and none occurred in the placebo plus rituximab group., Interpretation: Copanlisib plus rituximab improved progression-free survival in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma compared with placebo plus rituximab. To our knowledge, copanlisib is the first PI3K inhibitor to be safely combined with rituximab and the first to show broad and superior efficacy in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma., Funding: Bayer., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests MJM reports consultancy with Bayer, Daiichi Sankyo, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, ImmunoVaccine Technologies, Juno Therapeutics, Merck, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, Teva, and TG Therapeutics; honoraria from Bayer, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, ImmunoVaccine Technologies, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, Takeda, and TG Therapeutics; and research funding from Bayer, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, IGM Biosciences, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Rocket Medical, and Seattle Genetics. MÖ reports research funding from AbbVie, Archigen Biotech, Bayer, Celgene, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, MSD, and Takeda; travel support from AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, F Hoffmann-La Roche, Janssen, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen and Takeda; and other financial relationships with Abdi İbrahim, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi. WJ reports research funding from Bayer, Gilead, MEI Pharma, and TG Therapeutics. RB reports clinical trial support from AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Alexion, Amgen, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, CSL Behring, Daiichi Sankyo, Janssen-Cilag, MorphoSys, Pfizer, Portola, Rigel Pharmaceuticals, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda, and Technoclone; institutional research support from Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, Portola, Takeda, and Technoclone; and clinical advisory board participation with Janssen-Cilag and Roche. KG reports honoraria for advisory boards from Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, Ratiopharm, and Roche. TU reports personal fees from Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Chugai Pharmaceutical, Eisai, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Mundipharma, Nippon Shinyaku, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Otsuka, Pfizer, and Takeda. LMS, AC, AM, and BHC are employees of Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals. FH is an employee of Bayer. PLZ reports honoraria from AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Incyte, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Roche, Servier, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, and Verastem; board of directors or advisory committee memberships with AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Immune Design, Incyte, Janssen-Cilag, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Portola, Roche, Sandoz, Servier, Takeda, and Verastem; speakers' bureau involvement with AbbVie, ADC Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Celltrion, EUSA Pharma, Gilead, Immune Design, Incyte, Janssen, Janssen-Cilag, Kyowa Kirin, Merck, MSD, Portola, Roche, Servier, Takeda, TG Therapeutics, and Verastem; consultancy for EUSA Pharma, Janssen, MSD, Sanofi, and Verastem; and research funding from Portola. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Although patients with bronchus-associated lymphoid tissue (BALT) lymphoma show an indolent clinical course, appropriate disease management at diagnosis is not well defined. This study aimed to compare 3 treatment strategies for patients with BALT lymphoma: active surveillance, systemic chemotherapy or immunotherapy at diagnosis, or complete surgical resection at diagnosis. We conducted a retrospective study of all patients with new diagnoses of marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) involving the lung who were treated at the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center between 1995 and 2017. Primary BALT lymphoma was defined as disease confined to the lungs and adjacent lymph nodes. Active surveillance was defined as a documented observation plan and ≥3 months of follow-up before initiating treatment. Overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared between treatment groups. We reviewed 200 consecutive patients with MZL involving the lung; 123 met the inclusion criteria and were managed by active surveillance (47%), complete surgical resection (41%), or systemic chemotherapy or immunotherapy (11%). With a median follow-up of >60 months, surgical resection was associated with a superior EFS compared with active surveillance and systemic treatment (6-year EFS: 74% vs 65% vs 62%, respectively; P = .013). Larger lesions and thrombocytopenia were associated with shorter EFS. All groups had excellent OS at 6 years (93%), albeit with a slight superiority for surgical resection (100%) over active surveillance (91%) and systemic treatment (76%) (P = .024). BALT lymphoma is an indolent disease that can often be managed expectantly and not require therapy for many years., (© 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

This retrospective study aimed to better define the characteristics and outcomes of extranodal stage I diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the rituximab era. Patients diagnosed with stage I DLBCL from 2001 to 2015 treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone (R-CHOP) or R-CHOP-like regimens with or without radiation (RT) were included. We identified 1955 patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL, of whom 341 had stage I and were eligible for this analysis. Extranodal presentation was observed in 224 (66%) patients, whereas 117 (34%) had nodal involvement. The most common extranodal sites were as follows: bone, 21%; stomach, 19%; testis, 9%; intestine, 8%; breast, 8%. Overall, 69% extranodal patients and 68% nodal patients received RT. Median follow-up was 5.5 years (interquartile range, 4.3-8.2). Ten-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival were 77% (95% confidence interval [CI], 67%-83%) and 77% (95% CI, 68%-85%). In the multivariable analyses, extranodal involvement was associated with worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 3.44; 95% CI, 1.05-11.30) and progression-free survival (PFS; HR, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.08-9.72) compared with nodal involvement. Consolidation RT was associated with better OS (HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.12-0.49) and PFS (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.18-0.69) in the extranodal population; however, the benefit was no longer observed in patients that were positron emission tomography (PET) negative at the end of immunochemotherapy. Relapses occurred usually late (median, 37 months), and the most common sites were the lymph nodes (31%) and the central nervous system (27%). Extranodal stage I DLBCL had a worse outcome than nodal stage 1 DLBCL. End of immunochemotherapy PET results may help select extranodal patients for consolidation RT., (© 2021 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) frequently require multiple treatments during their disease course; however, survival based on lines of treatment remains poorly described in the post-rituximab era. Also, the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) score was developed to predict survival at diagnosis, yet it remains unknown whether increase in FLIPI score following an initial observation period is associated with less-favorable outcomes. To address these knowledge gaps, we retrospectively studied 1088 patients with FL grade 1-3A managed between 1998 and 2009 at our institution. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after first-line treatment were not reached and 4.73 years, respectively. Following successive lines of treatment, years of median OS and PFS were, respectively: after second-line, 11.7 and 1.5; third-line, 8.8 and 1.1; fourth-line, 5.3 and 0.9; fifth-line, 3.1 and 0.6; sixth-line, 1.9 and 0.5. In initially observed, subsequently treated patients, FLIPI score increase after observation was associated with inferior survival following first-line treatment. The reduced survival we observed after second-line and later therapy supports the development of new treatments for relapsed patients and benchmarks historical targets for clinical endpoints. This study also highlights the utility of changes in FLIPI score at diagnosis and after observation in identifying patients likely to have worse outcomes.

Objective: This study examined the impact of a survivorship planning consultation (SPC) for patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma and diffuses large B-cell lymphoma on quality of life (QOL). We specifically assessed two potential moderators, cancer worry and perceived empathy, of the intervention effects on QOL., Methods: This cluster randomized, four-site trial examined the efficacy of a SPC; physicians received communication skills training and applied these skills in a survivorship-focused office visit using a care plan vs a control arm in which physicians were trained to and subsequently provided a time-controlled, manualized wellness rehabilitation consultation focused only on discussion of healthy nutrition and exercise. We examined the effect of the intervention on patients' QOL and examined potential moderators-cancer worry and perceived physician empathy., Results: Forty-two physicians and 198 patients participated. There was no main effect of the intervention on any of the QOL dimensions (ps > 0.10). However, cancer worry was a significant moderator of the effects of the intervention on three QOL domains (physical P = .04; social P = .04; spiritual P = .01) and perceived empathy was a significant moderator of QOL (physical P = .004; psychological P = .04; social P = .01). Specifically, the beneficial effects of the intervention were more pronounced among patients who initially reported higher levels of cancer worry and lower levels of physician empathy., Conclusions: This study identified two factors, perceived empathy and cancer worry, that were found to impact the QOL of patients who participated in this communication-based survivorship intervention., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objectives: Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common experience among cancer survivors and often persists after the termination of cancer treatments. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate FCR in survivors of Hodgkin's and diffuse large B-cell lymphomas, given a high rate of survivorship in this patient population. Research Approach: The parent study was a multi-site, cluster-randomized trial to assess a communication skills intervention: survivorship planning consultation (versus a time-attention control - wellness rehabilitation intervention) to promote transition to survivorship. Participants & Methodological Approach: 199 patients enrolled in the study and completed a survivorship (or control) consultation one-month after receiving the news of their survivorship status; 141 of those patients ( n  = 92 experimental arm, n  = 49 control arm) completed an interview at their 6-month follow-up consultation. In the interview, participants described frequency of FCR, causes of FCR, coping mechanisms, and specific things oncologists said to reduce FCR. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were utilized for analyzing participant responses. Findings: The majority (88%) of participants reported experiencing FCR, with a higher number of participants in the experimental arm significantly more likely to endorse FCR compared to the control group participants. The main causes of FCR were having medical appointments and concerns about potential relapse and secondary cancers. Participants endorsed utilizing self-sufficient coping mechanisms. As well, participants reported that oncologists most frequently cited specific cure rates of lymphoma to reduce patients' FCR. Interpretation & Implications for Psychosocial Providers: Communication skills training programs should emphasize FCR in survivorship consultations.

Background: Previous studies reported that early progression of disease (POD) after initial therapy predicted poor overall survival (OS) in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL). Here, we investigated whether pre-treatment imaging modality had an impact on prognostic significance of POD., Methods: In this retrospective study, we identified 1088 patients with grade I-IIIA FL; of whom, 238 patients with stage II-IV disease were initially treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP), and 346 patients were treated with rituximab-based chemotherapy. Patients (N = 484) from the FOLL05 study served as an independent validation cohort. We risk-stratified patients based on pre-treatment radiographic imaging (positron-emission tomography [PET] versus computed tomography [CT]) and early POD status using event-defining and landmark analyses. A competing risk analysis evaluated the association between early POD and histologic transformation., Results: In the discovery cohort, patients with POD within 24 months (PFS24) of initiating R-CHOP therapy had a 5-year OS of 57.6% for CT-staged patients compared with 70.6% for PET-staged patients. In the validation cohort, the 5-year OS for patients with early POD was 53.9% and 100% in CT- and PET-staged patients, respectively. The risk of histologic transformation in patients whose disease progressed within one year of initiating therapy was higher in CT-staged patients than in PET-staged patients (16.7% versus 6.3%, respectively), which was associated with a 9.7-fold higher risk of death., Conclusion: In FL, pre-treatment PET staging reduced the prognostic impact of early POD compared with CT staging. Patients with early POD and no histologic transformation have an extended OS with standard therapy., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest statement C.L.B. reports research support from Janssen, Novartis, Epizyme, Xynomic and Bayer; reports honoraria from Dava Oncology and is a consultant for from Kite and Juno. J.F.G. is presently employed by Janssen and reports honoraria from Bayer, Epizyme, Roche, Genentech and AbbVie. P.A.H. reports research support from Portola, Molecular Templates, Incyte and J&J Pharmaceuticals and is a consultant for Portola Pharmaceutics, Celgene, Karyopharm and Juno Therapeutics. S.M.H. reports research support from ADCT Therapeutics, Aileron, Celgene, Forty Seven, Infinity/Verastem, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, Millenium/Takeda, Seattle Genetics and Trillium and is a consultant for ADCT Therapeutics, Aileron, Corvus, Forty Seven, Innate Pharma, Kyowa Hakka Kirin, Millenium/Takeda, Mundipharma, Portola and Seattle Genetics. A.K. reports research support from AbbVie, Adaptive Biotechnologies, Celgene, Pharmacyclics and Seattle Genetics and serves on the scientific advisory board for Celgene. M.J.M. reports research support from Genentech, Roche, GlaxoSmithKline, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Rocket Medical and Seattle Genetics; reports honoraria from Genentech, Roche, Bayer, Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Seattle Genetics and GlaxoSmithKline and is a consultant for Genentech, Bayer, Merck, Juno, Roche, Teva, Rocket Medical, Seattle Genetics, Genentech, Roche, Seattle Genetics and Bayer. A.J.M. reports research support from Incyte, Seattle Genetics, BMS and Merck and is a consultant for Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma, Miragen Therapeutics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Cell Medica, Bristol-Myers Squibb and Erytech Pharma. C.H.M. reports research support from BMS, Merck and Seattle Genetics; is a consultant for AstraZeneca, BMS, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaniam Group and serves on the scientific advisory board for AstraZeneca, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Takeda and Vaniam Group. A.N. reports research support from Pharmacyclics, NIH and Rafael Pharma and is a consultant for Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Medscape and Targeted Oncology. M.L.P. reports research support from Genentech, Juno and Regeneron; reports honoraria from Novartis, Merck, Celgene, Juno and Pharmacyclics and is not a consultant for any firms. D.S. reports research support from and serves on the scientific advisory board for Seattle Genetics. G.v.K. reports research support from Pharmacyclics, Genentech and Bayer. A.D.Z. reports research support from MEI Pharma, MorphoSys, Sandoz, Celgene, Roche and Gilead; is a consultant for Genentech/Roche, Gilead, Celgene, Janssen, Amgen, Novartis and Adaptive Biotechnology and serves on the board of directors (DMC Chair) for BeiGene. S.L. is a consultant for and serves on the scientific advisory board for Roche, Celgene, Sandoz and Gilead. M.F. reports research support from Mundipharma s.r.l., Cephalon/Teva, Celgene, Millennium/Takeda and Roche and is a consultant for and serves on the scientific advisory boards for Takeda, Roche, Celgene, Sandoz and Spectrum. A.Y. reports research support from Janssen, Curis, Merck, BMS, Syndax and Roche; reports honorarium from Janssen, AbbVie, Merck, Curis, Epizyme, Roche and Takeda and is a consultant for BioPath, Xynomic, Epizyme and Roche. F.S., A.A., A.N., K.S., L.M., V.E.S., E.J., C.O. and Z.Y. declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Patients with transplantation-ineligible relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) fare poorly, with limited treatment options. The antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin targets CD79b, a B-cell receptor component., Methods: Safety and efficacy of polatuzumab vedotin with bendamustine and obinutuzumab (pola-BG) was evaluated in a single-arm cohort. Polatuzumab vedotin combined with bendamustine and rituximab (pola-BR) was compared with bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in a randomly assigned cohort of patients with transplantation-ineligible R/R DLBCL (primary end point: independent review committee [IRC] assessed complete response [CR] rate at the end of treatment). Duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods., Results: Pola-BG and pola-BR had a tolerable safety profile. The phase Ib/II pola-BG cohort (n = 27) had a CR rate of 29.6% and a median OS of 10.8 months (median follow-up, 27.0 months). In the randomly assigned cohort (n = 80; 40 per arm), pola-BR patients had a significantly higher IRC-assessed CR rate (40.0% v 17.5%; P = .026) and longer IRC-assessed PFS (median, 9.5 v 3.7 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.36, 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.63; P < .001) and OS (median, 12.4 v 4.7 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.75; P = .002; median follow-up, 22.3 months). Pola-BR patients had higher rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (46.2% v 33.3%), anemia (28.2% v 17.9%), and thrombocytopenia (41% v 23.1%), but similar grade 3-4 infections (23.1% v 20.5%), versus the BR group. Peripheral neuropathy associated with polatuzumab vedotin (43.6% of patients) was grade 1-2 and resolved in most patients., Conclusion: Polatuzumab vedotin combined with BR resulted in a significantly higher CR rate and reduced the risk of death by 58% compared with BR in patients with transplantation-ineligible R/R DLBCL.

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is a heterogeneous disease with varying prognosis owing to differences in clinical, laboratory, and disease parameters. Although generally considered incurable, prognosis for early- and advanced-stage disease has improved because of therapeutic advances, several of which have resulted from elucidation of the biologic and molecular basis of the disease. The choice of treatment for FL is highly dependent on patient and disease characteristics. Several tools are available for risk stratification, although limitations in their routine clinical use exist. For limited disease, treatment options include radiotherapy, rituximab monotherapy or combination regimens, and surveillance. Treatment of advanced disease is often determined by tumor burden, with surveillance or rituximab considered for low tumor burden and chemoimmunotherapy for high tumor burden disease. Treatment for relapsed or refractory disease is influenced by initial first-line therapy and the duration and quality of the response. Presently, there is no consensus for treatment of patients with early or multiply relapsed disease; however, numerous agents, combination regimens, and transplant options have demonstrated efficacy. Although the number of therapies available to treat FL has increased together with an improved understanding of the underlying biologic basis of disease, the best approach to select the most appropriate treatment strategy for an individual patient at a particular time continues to be elucidated. This review considers prognostication and the evolving treatment landscape of FL, including recent and emergent therapies as well as remaining unmet needs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: In follicular lymphoma, a personalized approach to management based on disease biology, patient characteristics, and other factors continues to emerge. However, application of current management requires an understanding of the available therapeutic options for first-line treatment and knowledge of current development in therapies for previously untreated and for relapsed or refractory disease. Thus, this work reviews for clinicians the contemporary data in follicular lymphoma, from advances in characterizing disease biology to current treatments and emerging novel therapies., Competing Interests: Disclosures of potential conflicts of interest may be found at the end of this article., (© 2019 The Authors. The Oncologist published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of AlphaMed Press.)

High-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (HDT-ASCT) is the standard of care for relapsed or primary refractory (rel/ref) chemorefractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Only 50% of patients are cured with this approach. We investigated safety and efficacy of CD19-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells administered following HDT-ASCT. Eligibility for this study includes poor-risk rel/ref aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma chemosensitive to salvage therapy with: (1) positron emission tomography-positive disease or (2) bone marrow involvement. Patients underwent standard HDT-ASCT followed by 19-28z CAR T cells on days +2 and +3. Of 15 subjects treated on study, dose-limiting toxicity was observed at both dose levels (5 × 10 6  and 1 × 10 7  19-28z CAR T per kilogram). Ten of 15 subjects experienced CAR T-cell-induced neurotoxicity and/or cytokine release syndrome (CRS), which were associated with greater CAR T-cell persistence ( P  = .05) but not peak CAR T-cell expansion. Serum interferon-γ elevation ( P  < .001) and possibly interleukin-10 ( P  = .07) were associated with toxicity. The 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) is 30% (95% confidence interval, 20% to 70%).  Subjects given decreased naive-like (CD45RA + CCR7 + ) CD4 +  and CD8 +  CAR T cells experienced superior PFS ( P  = .02 and .04, respectively). There was no association between CAR T-cell peak expansion, persistence, or cytokine changes and PFS. 19-28z CAR T cells following HDT-ASCT were associated with a high incidence of reversible neurotoxicity and CRS. Following HDT-ASCT, effector CD4 +  and CD8 +  immunophenotypes may improve disease control. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01840566., (© 2019 by The American Society of Hematology.)

As the survival of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) continues to improve, patients are increasingly being treated with multiple regimens. However, outcome after each line remains poorly characterized in the modern era. To address this knowledge gap, we retrospectively studied 404 consecutive MCL patients who were managed between 2000 and 2014 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Histologic diagnosis was centrally confirmed, and patients were followed longitudinally from diagnosis throughout their disease course. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined by Kaplan-Meier method. The median OS and PFS after first-line treatment were 9.7 and 4.0 years, respectively. After second-line therapy, the median OS and PFS were 41.1 and 14.0 months, third line were 25.2 and 6.5 months, and fourth line were 14.4 and 5.0 months. In patients less than 65 years, stem cell transplant (SCT)-based frontline regimens were associated with improved PFS compared with non-SCT regimens (median PFS: 86.2 versus 40.0 months; P < 0.01), with a trend toward longer OS (median OS: 165.0 versus 120.0 months; P = 0.06). Early treatment failure after first-line regimens was associated with worse OS (5.9 versus 2.5 years; P < 0.01). Our study should facilitate establishing proper endpoints for future clinical trials using novel treatment approaches.

Nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL) is a rare subtype of lymphoma that, like other Hodgkin lymphomas, has historically been treated aggressively. However, in most cases, NLPHL has an indolent course, which raises the question of to what extent these patients require aggressive upfront treatment. We describe the management and outcomes of consecutive NLPHL patients diagnosed at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK), with a focus on evaluating active surveillance. All patients aged 16 years or older diagnosed and followed at MSK between 1974 and 2016 were included. Treatment outcomes were compared between management with active surveillance and other strategies. We identified 163 consecutive patients who were treated with radiotherapy alone (46%), active surveillance (23%), chemotherapy (16%), combined modality (12%), or rituximab monotherapy (4%). Median follow-up was 69 months. Five-year progression-free survival (PFS), second PFS (PFS2), and overall survival (OS) estimates were 85% (95% confidence interval [CI], 78-90), 97% (95% CI, 92-99), and 99% (95% CI, 95-100), respectively. Only 1 of 7 deaths was lymphoma related. Patients managed with active surveillance had slightly shorter PFS than those receiving any active treatment, with 5-year PFS of 77% (95% CI, 56-89) vs 87% (95% CI, 79-92; P = .017). This difference did not translate into better PFS2 or OS. Only 10 patients managed with active surveillance (27%) eventually required treatment, after a median of 61 months, and none died. NLPHL has an excellent prognosis. Within the limitations of a retrospective analysis, active surveillance is a viable initial management strategy for selected NLPHL patients., (© 2019 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Background: Survivors of cancer often describe a sense of abandonment after treatment along with heightened uncertainty and limited knowledge of what lies ahead. This study examined the efficacy of a survivorship care plan (SCP) intervention to help physicians to address survivorship issues through communication skills training plus a new consultation focused on the use of an SCP for patients with Hodgkin lymphoma and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma., Methods: This 4-site cluster randomized trial examined the efficacy of a survivorship planning consultation (SPC) in patients who achieved complete remission after the completion of first-line therapy (for the SPC, physicians received communication skills training and, using an SCP, applied those skills in a survivorship-focused office visit) versus a control arm in which physicians were trained in and subsequently provided a time-controlled, manualized wellness rehabilitation consultation (WRC) focused only on discussion of healthy nutrition and exercise as rehabilitation after chemotherapy. The primary outcomes for patients were changes in knowledge about lymphoma and adherence to physicians' recommendations for vaccinations and cancer screenings., Results: Forty-two physicians and 198 patients participated across the 4 sites. Patients whose physicians were in the SPC arm had greater knowledge about their lymphoma (P = .01) and showed greater adherence to physician recommendations for influenza vaccinations (P = .02) and colonoscopy (P = .02) than patients whose physicians were in the WRC arm., Conclusions: A dedicated consultation using an SCP and supported by communication skills training may enhance patients' knowledge and adherence to some health promotion recommendations., (© 2018 American Cancer Society.)

Tremendous progress in treatment and outcomes has been achieved across the whole range of haematological malignancies in the past two decades. Although cure rates for aggressive malignancies have increased, nowhere has progress been more impactful than in the management of typically incurable forms of haematological cancer. Population-based data have shown that 5-year survival for patients with chronic myelogenous and chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, indolent B-cell lymphomas, and multiple myeloma has improved markedly. This improvement is a result of substantial changes in disease management strategies in these malignancies. Several haematological malignancies are now chronic diseases that are treated with continuously administered therapies that have unique side-effects over time. In this Commission, an international panel of clinicians, clinical investigators, methodologists, regulators, and patient advocates representing a broad range of academic and clinical cancer expertise examine adverse events in haematological malignancies. The issues pertaining to assessment of adverse events examined here are relevant to a range of malignancies and have been, to date, underexplored in the context of haematology. The aim of this Commission is to improve toxicity assessment in clinical trials in haematological malignancies by critically examining the current process of adverse event assessment, highlighting the need to incorporate patient-reported outcomes, addressing issues unique to stem-cell transplantation and survivorship, appraising challenges in regulatory approval, and evaluating toxicity in real-world patients. We have identified a range of priority issues in these areas and defined potential solutions to challenges associated with adverse event assessment in the current treatment landscape of haematological malignancies., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)