Multi-center phase II trial of bortezomib and rituximab maintenance combination therapy in patients with mantle cell lymphoma after consolidative autologous stem cell transplantation.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive and incurable lymphoma. Standard of care for younger patients with MCL is induction chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT). Rituximab maintenance after auto-HCT has been shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in MCL. Bortezomib maintenance therapy has also been shown to be tolerable and feasible in this setting. However, the combination of bortezomib and rituximab as maintenance therapy post-auto-HCT has not been studied. METHODS:We conducted a multicenter, phase II trial of bortezomib given in combination with rituximab as maintenance in MCL patients after consolidative auto-HCT. Enrolled patients (n?=?23) received bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 subcutaneously weekly for 4 weeks every 3 months (up to 24 months) and rituximab 375 mg/m2 intravenously weekly for 4 weeks every 6 months (up to 24 months) for a total duration of 2 years. The primary study endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS:With a median follow-up of 35.9 months, the 2-year DFS probability was 90.2% (95% CI 66-97), and 2-year OS was 94.7% (95% CI 68-99). The most frequent grade 3/4 toxic events were neutropenia (in 74% of patients) and lymphopenia (in 35%). The incidence of peripheral neuropathy was 48% for grade 1, 9% for grade 2, and 0% for grade 3/4. We also examined the role of quantitative cyclin D1 (CCND1) mRNA in monitoring minimal residual disease. CONCLUSION:Combined bortezomib and rituximab as maintenance therapy in MCL patients following auto-HCT is an active and well-tolerated regimen. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01267812 , registered Dec 29, 2010.
Project description:Importance:Maintenance therapies are often considered as a therapeutic strategy in patients with lymphoma following autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) to mitigate the risk of disease relapse. With an evolving therapeutic landscape, where novel drugs are moving earlier in therapy lines, evidence relevant to contemporary practice is increasingly limited. The American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), and European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) jointly convened an expert panel with diverse expertise and geographical representation to formulate consensus recommendations regarding the use of maintenance and/or consolidation therapies after auto-HCT in patients with lymphoma. Observations:The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements where at least 75% vote in favor of a recommendation was considered as consensus. The process included 3 online surveys moderated by an independent methodological expert to ensure anonymity and an in-person meeting. The panel recommended restricting the histologic categories covered in this project to Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and follicular lymphoma. On completion of the voting process, the panel generated 22 consensus statements regarding post auto-HCT maintenance and/or consolidation therapies. The grade A recommendations included endorsement of: (1) brentuximab vedotin (BV) maintenance and/or consolidation in BV-naïve high-risk HL, (2) rituximab maintenance in MCL undergoing auto-HCT after first-line therapy, (3) rituximab maintenance in rituximab-naïve FL, and (4) No post auto-HCT maintenance was recommended in DLBCL. The panel also developed consensus statements for important real-world clinical scenarios, where randomized data are lacking to guide clinical practice. Conclusions and Relevance:In the absence of contemporary evidence-based data, the panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a rigorous framework for developing consensus recommendations for post auto-HCT maintenance and/or consolidation therapies in lymphoma.
Project description:Lymphomas constitute the second most common indication for high dose therapy (HDT) followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT). The intent of administering HDT in these heterogeneous disorders varies from cure (e.g., in relapsed aggressive lymphomas) to disease control (e.g., most indolent lymphomas). Regardless of the underlying histology or remission status at transplantation, disease relapse remains the number one cause of post auto-HCT therapy failure and mortality. The last decade has seen a proliferation of clinical studies looking at prevention of post auto-HCT therapy failure with various maintenance strategies. The benefit of such therapies is in turn dependent on disease histology and timing of transplantation. In relapsed, chemosensitive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), although post auto-HCT maintenance rituximab seems to be safe and feasible, it does not provide improved survival outcomes and is not recommended. The preliminary results with anti- programmed death -1 (PD-1) antibody therapy as post auto-HCT maintenance in DLBCL is promising but requires randomized validation. Similarly in follicular lymphoma, maintenance therapies including rituximab following auto-HCT should be considered investigational and offered only on a clinical trial. Rituximab maintenance results in improved progression-free survival but has not yet shown to improve overall survival in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), but given the poor prognosis with post auto-HCT failure in MCL, maintenance rituximab can be considered on a case-by-case basis. Ongoing trials evaluating the efficacy of post auto-HCT maintenance with novel compounds (e.g., immunomodulators, PD-1 inhibitors, proteasome inhibitors and bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitors) will likely change the practice landscape in the near future for B cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas patients following HDT and auto-HCT.
Project description:Grade 3 follicular lymphoma (FL) has aggressive clinical behavior. To evaluate the optimal first transplantation approach in relapsed/refractory grade 3 FL patients, we compared the long-term outcomes after allogeneic (allo-) vs autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in the rituximab era. A total of 197 patients undergoing first reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) allo-HCT or first auto-HCT during 2000-2012 were included. Rituximab-naive patients were excluded. Allo-HCT recipients were younger, more heavily pretreated and had a longer interval between diagnosis and HCT. The 5-year probabilities of non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse/progression, PFS and overall survival (OS) for auto-HCT vs allo-HCT groups were 4% vs 27% (P<0.001), 61% vs 20% (P<0.001), 36% vs 51% (P=0.07) and 59% vs 54% (P=0.7), respectively. On multivariate analysis, auto-HCT was associated with reduced risk of NRM (relative risk (RR)=0.20; P=0.001). Within the first 11 months post HCT, auto- and allo-HCT had similar risks of relapse/progression and PFS. Beyond 11 months, auto-HCT was associated with higher risk of relapse/progression (RR=21.3; P=0.003) and inferior PFS (RR=3.2; P=0.005). In the first 24 months post HCT, auto-HCT was associated with improved OS (RR=0.42; P=0.005), but in long-time survivors (beyond 24 months) it was associated with inferior OS (RR=3.6; P=0.04). RIC allo-HCT as the first transplant approach can provide improved PFS and OS, in long-term survivors.
Project description:Bortezomib is active in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), with approval in upfront and relapsed settings. Given inevitable recurrence following induction chemoimmunotherapy, maintenance approaches are a rational strategy to improve clinical outcomes. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of six cycles of R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone) plus bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1 and 4 of 21 d cycles) followed by bortezomib maintenance (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 3 months for 2 years). Sixty-five eligible patients were enrolled. The treatment was well tolerated and toxicities were mainly haematological. The rate of grade ?3 peripheral neuropathy was low (5%). With a median follow-up of 6.8 years, 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 62%, and 2-year overall survival (OS) was 85%. At 5 years, PFS was 28% and OS was 66%. MCL International Prognostic Index scores were significantly associated with 2-year PFS, but did not predict long-term (?5-year) PFS. Baseline Ki-67 index was significantly associated with survival. Combination R-CHOP with bortezomib followed by maintenance bortezomib appears to improve outcomes compared historically with R-CHOP alone, with prolonged remissions in a subset of patients. These results suggest that inclusion of bortezomib with induction chemotherapy and/or maintenance is promising in MCL and warrants further exploration.
Project description:In vitro studies in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) cell lines and patient-derived cells have demonstrated synergistic apoptosis with combined rituximab and bortezomib (R-bortezomib) compared with single-agent bortezomib. Therefore, the authors of this report evaluated R-bortezomib in a preclinical model and in a phase 2 clinical trial.A Hu-MCL-severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) model engrafted with the Jeko cell line was treated with R-bortezomib, bortezomib, or rituximab. Twenty-five patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma (n = 11) and MCL (n = 14) received 375 mg/m(2) rituximab on Days 1 and 8 and 1.3 to 1.5 mg/m(2) bortezomib on Days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 21 days for a median of 3 cycles (range, 1-5 cycles).R-bortezomib resulted in a statistically significant improvement in overall survival in Hu-MCL-SCID mice. In the clinical trial, the overall response rate was 40% in all 25 patients, 55% in patients with follicular lymphoma, and 29% in patients with MCL. The estimated 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate was 24% (95% confidence interval [CI], 10%-53%) in all patients and 60% (95% CI, 20%-85%) in responding patients. Thirteen patients (52%) developed grade 3 neurotoxicity, which consisted of constipation/ileus, sensory or motor neuropathy, or orthostatic hypotension. Patients who were heterozygous for the CD32a (Fc? receptor IIa) 131 histidine (H) to arginine (R) polymorphism had a significantly decreased PFS (P = .009) after R-bortezomib compared with HH and RR homozygotes.R-bortezomib had significant activity in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma and MCL, although an unexpectedly high incidence of grade 3 neurologic toxicity was a potential limiting factor with this combination.
Project description:This study was conducted to compare long-term outcomes in patients with refractory/relapsed grades 1 and 2 follicular lymphoma (FL) after allogeneic (allo) versus autologous (auto) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) in the rituximab era. Adult patients with relapsed/refractory grades 1 and 2 FL undergoing first reduced-intensity allo-HCT or first autograft during 2000 to 2012 were evaluated. A total of 518 rituximab-treated patients were included. Allo-HCT patients were younger and more heavily pretreated, and more patients had advanced stage and chemoresistant disease. The 5-year adjusted probabilities, comparing auto-HCT versus allo-HCT groups for nonrelapse mortality (NRM) were 5% versus 26% (P < .0001); relapse/progression: 54% versus 20% (P < .0001); progression-free survival (PFS): 41% versus 58% (P < .001), and overall survival (OS): 74% versus 66% (P = .05). Auto-HCT was associated with a higher risk of relapse/progression beyond 5 months after HCT (relative risk [RR], 4.4; P < .0001) and worse PFS (RR, 2.9; P < .0001) beyond 11 months after HCT. In the first 24 months after HCT, auto-HCT was associated with improved OS (RR, .41; P < .0001), but beyond 24 months, it was associated with inferior OS (RR, 2.2; P = .006). A landmark analysis of patients alive and progression-free at 2 years after HCT confirmed these observations, showing no difference in further NRM between both groups, but there was significantly higher risk of relapse/progression (RR, 7.3; P < .0001) and inferior PFS (RR, 3.2; P < .0001) and OS (RR, 2.1; P = .04) after auto-HCT. The 10-year cumulative incidences of second hematological malignancies after allo-HCT and auto-HCT were 0% and 7%, respectively. Auto-HCT and reduced-intensity-conditioned allo-HCT as first transplantation approach can provide durable disease control in grades 1 and 2 FL patients. Continued disease relapse risk after auto-HCT translates into improved PFS and OS after allo-HCT in long-term survivors.
Project description:Current treatment of patient with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is insufficient and does not result in cure. To assess the efficacy and safety of maintenance therapy for patients with MCL, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Six trials randomizing 858 patients were included in the meta-analysis. In 5 trials, maintenance therapy consisted of rituximab. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) of death with rituximab maintenance compared to observation was 0.79, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.06 (4 trials, 737 patients). Progression free survival was longer with rituximab maintenance in each of the trials and in the pooled analysis (HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.45-0.73). The risk of neutropenia was higher with maintenance compared to observation risk ratio (RR) 1.31, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.66. None of the trials reported on quality of life outcomes. The grade 3 to 4 infection rate was 7% in each of the treatment groups. The risk of grade 3 to 4 infection was not affected by allocation to maintenance. Rituximab maintenance is recommended after R-CHOP or R-cytarabine-containing induction in the frontline setting for transplant eligible and ineligible patients, and after R-CHOP in the relapse setting. It is unclear if maintenance is of benefit after different induction chemotherapy such as bendamustine or fludarabine. It is too early to conclude on other type of maintenance for MCL patients.
Project description:The randomized phase 3 LYM3001 trial in relapsed follicular lymphoma (FL) demonstrated higher overall (ORR) and complete response (CR) rates and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) with bortezomib-rituximab versus rituximab. We report findings in high-risk patients (FL International Prognostic Index [FLIPI] score ?3, and high tumor burden by modified Groupe d'Etude des Lymphomas Folliculaires [GELF] criteria).Patients aged ?18 years with grade 1/2 FL, ?1 measurable lesion, and documented relapse or progression following prior therapy, rituximab-naïve or rituximab-sensitive, were enrolled at 164 centers in 29 countries across Europe, the Americas, and Asia-Pacific. Patients were randomized (1:1) to five 5-week cycles of bortezomib-rituximab (bortezomib 1.6 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15, and 22, all cycles; rituximab 375 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15, and 22, cycle 1, and day 1, cycles 2-5; N=336) or rituximab alone (N=340). Randomization was stratified by FLIPI score, prior rituximab, time since last dose of anti-lymphoma therapy, and geographical region. The primary endpoint of the study was PFS.103 bortezomib-rituximab and 98 rituximab patients had high-risk FL. The ORR was 59% versus 37% (p=0.002), the CR/CRu rate was 13% versus 6% (p=0.145), and the durable response rate was 45% versus 26% (p=0.008) with bortezomib-rituximab versus rituximab. Median PFS was 9.5 versus 6.7 months (hazard ratio [HR] 0.667, p=0.012) with bortezomib-rituximab versus rituximab; median time to progression was 10.9 versus 6.8 months (HR 0.656, p=0.009); median time to next anti-lymphoma treatment was 14.8 versus 9.1 months (HR 0.762, p=0.103); and the 1-year Overall Survival rate was 83.1% versus 76.6%. Overall, 51% of bortezomib-rituximab and 32% of rituximab patients reported grade ?3 adverse events, including neutropenia (18%, 6%), anemia (4%, 5%), diarrhea (8%, 0%), thrombocytopenia (5%, 2%), and sensory neuropathy (1%, 0%).High-risk FL patients treated with bortezomib-rituximab had significantly higher ORR and longer PFS than patients receiving rituximab alone, with greater clinical benefit than in the overall study population; additional toxicity was acceptable and did not affect treatment feasibility.The phase 3 LYM3001 trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, with the identifier NCT00312845.
Project description:Standard therapy for acute myeloid leukemia (AML) consists of hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) including autologous-HCT (AUTO) and allogeneic-HCT from a matched-sibling donor (MSD) or well-matched unrelated donor (WM-URD). When a conventional donor is not available, HCT from a partially-matched (PM)-URD or familial-mismatched donor (FMMD) is typically considered. We analyzed 561 patients with intermediate to poor-risk molecular cytogenetics who underwent transplant from 2002 to 2013 in their first remission. Engraftment was successful in all donor types except five patients who died in aplasia. Disease-free survival (DFS) at 5 years was 61.4% for MSD, 62.1% for WM-URD, 65.3% for FMMD, 44.7% for AUTO and 36.8% for PM-URD. AUTO showed the highest relapse rate (51.0%) compared to MSD (23.5%) and FMMD (18.5%), but showed the lowest 5-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) rate (3.8%). PM-URD showed the highest NRM (29.3%) with more instances of acute graft-vs.-host disease (GVHD) with grade?III (29.3%), compared to MSD (15.6%) and FMMD (15.7%). In a poor-risk subgroup, the 5-year DFS for FMMD and MSD was 59.8% and 46.7%, respectively, while for AUTO and PM-URD it was 12.6% and 0.0%, respectively, which was caused by a high relapse rate (87.1% in AUTO, 83.3% in PM-URD). In the intermediate-risk subgroup, the 5-year DFS of AUTO (53.9%) was not different from the conventional donors in multivariate analysis, presenting a low NRM rate (5.1%). FMMD should be considered prior to PM-URD in intermediate-to-poor-risk AML and GVHD prophylaxis should be intensified when PM-URD is needed. AUTO might be considered for selected patients in the intermediate-risk group.
Project description:PURPOSE:Treatment options are limited for patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Tumor cells can exploit the programmed death-1 checkpoint pathway to evade immune surveillance. In the current study, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of programmed death-1 blockade by nivolumab in patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL. METHODS:In this phase II, open-label study, patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL who were ineligible for autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) or who had experienced failure with auto-HCT received nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab as well as genetic alterations of 9p24.1. RESULTS:Among 121 treated patients, patients in the auto-HCT-failed cohort (n = 87) received a median of four nivolumab doses and a median of three doses were administered to those in the auto-HCT-ineligible cohort (n = 34). At a median follow-up of 9 months in the auto-HCT-failed cohort and 6 months in the auto-HCT-ineligible cohort, independently assessed objective response rates were 10% and 3%, and median durations of response were 11 and 8 months, respectively. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.9 and 12.2 months in the auto-HCT-failed cohort and 1.4 and 5.8 months in the auto-HCT-ineligible cohort respectively. All three patients with complete remission-3% of the auto-HCT-failed cohort-had durable response (11 or more, 14 or more, and 17 months). Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events were reported in 24% of patients. The most common were neutropenia (4%), thrombocytopenia (3%), and increased lipase (3%). Of all evaluable samples for 9p24.1 analysis, 16% exhibited low-level copy gain and 3% had amplification. CONCLUSION:Nivolumab monotherapy is associated with a favorable safety profile but a low overall response rate among patients with DLBCL who are ineligible for auto-HCT or who experienced failure with auto-HCT. Genetic alterations of 9p24.1 are infrequent in DLBCL.