Purpose Given the paucity of data on higher-grade transformation (HGT) to aggressive lymphoma in patients with marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), we report on a large cohort of patients, identify risk factors, and determine HGT impact on overall survival (OS). Methods We analyzed 453 patients with biopsy-proven MZL seen at our institution between 1995 and 2016. Kaplan-Meier, Cox proportional hazards regression, and competing risk methods were used in analyses of time-to-event outcomes. Results Thirty-four patients (7.5%) had biopsy-proven HGT to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, including seven (21%) diagnosed at the time of initial MZL diagnosis. Among 27 incident patients, median time to HGT was 29 months (range, 1.3 to 135 months). Higher risk of HGT was observed in those with nodal/splenic MZL (subdistribution hazard ratio [SHR], 2.60; P = .023). On multivariable competing risk analysis, elevated lactate dehydrogenase (SHR, 2.71), more than four nodal sites (SHR, 2.97), and failure to achieve complete remission (CR) after initial treatment (SHR, 3.76) conveyed significantly higher risk for HGT ( P < .02). International Prognostic Index (IPI), Follicular Lymphoma IPI, and Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma IPI were only significant predictors of HGT univariably. Patients with HGT had shorter OS (5-year rate, 65% v 86%; P < .001). Patients who presented with HGT within 12 months since MZL diagnosis had shorter OS than those with HGT at MZL diagnosis combined with those with HGT more than 12 months later (4-year rate, 43% v 81%, P < .001). Non-CR and higher scores of IPI, Follicular Lymphoma IPI, and Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma IPI were the main significant predictors for shorter progression-free survival and OS. Conclusion Failure to achieve CR after initial treatment, elevated lactate dehydrogenase, and more than four nodal sites at the time of MZL diagnosis are the main predictors of increased risk of HGT. Patients with HGT have shorter OS.
Between 11 and 37% of extranodal marginal zone lymphoma (EMZL) patients present with disease involvement in multiple mucosal sites (MMS). We analyzed 405 EMZL patients seen between 1995 and 2017: 265 (65.4%) patients presented with stage I disease, 49 of 309 (15.8%) patients with bone marrow involvement, and 35 of 328 (10.7%) patients with monoclonal gammopathy (MG). Forty-three (10.6%) patients had MMS presentation, which was more frequently seen in patients aged >60 years (55.8%). Five (17.9%) of 28 MMS patients had MG. MMS patients commonly exhibited the International Prognostic Index (IPI) >2 (79.1%), Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) >2 (39.5%), and Mucosa-Associated Lymphoid Tissue Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MALT-IPI) 2-3 (60.5%). Both MMS presentation and MG were associated with shorter survival univariately. In multivariable Cox regression models, shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were observed in patients with MMS (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.08 and 2.92, respectively), age ≥60 years (HR = 1.52 and 2.45, respectively), and in patients who failed to attain a complete remission following initial therapy (HR = 3.27 and 2.13, respectively). Elevated lactate dehydrogenase was associated with shorter PFS (HR = 1.92), while anemia (HR = 2.46) was associated with shortened OS. MALT-IPI ≥2 (HR = 2.47 and 4.75), FLIPI >2 (HR = 1.65 and 2.09), and IPI >2 (HR = 2.09 and 1.73) were associated with shorter PFS and OS, respectively. Higher grade transformation (HGT) occurred in 11 (25.6%) MMS patients with a 5-year cumulative incidence of 13.2% (95% CI 4.7-26.1%). EMZL patients with MMS presentation represent a novel clinical subset associated with shorter PFS, OS, and higher incidence of HGT that needs novel therapeutic approaches.
We examined adults with untreated Burkitt lymphoma (BL) from 2009 to 2018 across 30 US cancer centers. Factors associated with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated in univariate and multivariate Cox models. Among 641 BL patients, baseline features included the following: median age, 47 years; HIV+, 22%; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) 2 to 4, 23%; >1 extranodal site, 43%; advanced stage, 78%; and central nervous system (CNS) involvement, 19%. Treatment-related mortality was 10%, with most common causes being sepsis, gastrointestinal bleed/perforation, and respiratory failure. With 45-month median follow-up, 3-year PFS and OS rates were 64% and 70%, respectively, without differences by HIV status. Survival was better for patients who received rituximab vs not (3-year PFS, 67% vs 38%; OS, 72% vs 44%; P < .001) and without difference based on setting of administration (ie, inpatient vs outpatient). Outcomes were also improved at an academic vs community cancer center (3-year PFS, 67% vs 46%, P = .006; OS, 72% vs 53%, P = .01). In multivariate models, age ≥ 40 years (PFS, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.70, P = .001; OS, HR = 2.09, P < .001), ECOG PS 2 to 4 (PFS, HR = 1.60, P < .001; OS, HR = 1.74, P = .003), lactate dehydrogenase > 3× normal (PFS, HR = 1.83, P < .001; OS, HR = 1.63, P = .009), and CNS involvement (PFS, HR = 1.52, P = .017; OS, HR = 1.67, P = .014) predicted inferior survival. Furthermore, survival varied based on number of factors present (0, 1, 2 to 4 factors) yielding 3-year PFS rates of 91%, 73%, and 50%, respectively; and 3-year OS rates of 95%, 77%, and 56%, respectively. Collectively, outcomes for adult BL in this real-world analysis appeared more modest compared with results of clinical trials and smaller series. In addition, clinical prognostic factors at diagnosis identified patients with divergent survival rates.
The Endothelial Activation and Stress Index (EASIX) score, defined as [(creatinine × lactate dehydrogenase [LDH])/platelets], is a marker of endothelial activation that has been validated in the allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant setting. Endothelial activation is one of the mechanisms driving immune-mediated toxicities in patients treated with chimeric antigen receptor-T (CAR-T)-cell therapy. This study’s objective was to evaluate the association between EASIX and other laboratory parameters collected before lymphodepletion and the subsequent onset of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and immune effector cell–associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) those patients. Toxicity data were collected prospectively on 171 patients treated with axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) for large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). CRS grades 2 to 4 were diagnosed in 81 (47%) patients and ICANS grades 2 to 4 in 84 (49%). EASIX combined with ferritin (EASIX-F) identified 3 risk groups with CRS grades 2 to 4 cumulative incidence of 74% (hazards ratio [HR], 4.8; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.1-11; P < .001), 49% (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.02-5; P = .04), and 23% (reference), respectively. EASIX combined with CRP and ferritin (EASIX-FC) identified 3 risk groups with an ICANS grade 2 to 4 cumulative incidence of 74% (HR, 3.6; 95% CI, 1.9-6.9; P < .001), 51% (HR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.1-3.9; P = .025), and 29% (reference). Our results indicate that common laboratory parameters before lymphodepletion correlate with CAR-T–related toxicities and can help support clinical decisions, such as preemptive toxicity management, hospitalization length, and proper setting for CAR-T administration.
Introduction: Historically, outcomes for BL have improved in adults using dose intensive chemotherapy regimens and early CNS prophylaxis. More recent data using a less intensive regimen, DA-EPOCH, have been reported. We analyzed detailed patient (pt) & disease characteristics and treatment patterns across 26 US CCs over a recent 9 year (yr) period and also determined survival rates & prognostication. Methods: We conducted a large multicenter retrospective study of newly diagnosed (dx) adult BL pts (6/2009 - 6/2018). Dx was established by institutional expert pathology review; all cases were verified for BL based on 2016 WHO criteria (high grade B cell lymphoma, BL like, etc were excluded). Survival rates were estimated by Kaplan-Meier with differences assessed by log rank test. Univariate (UVA) associations were derived via Cox model with variables P ≤0.05 entered stepwise into a multivariate (MVA) model. Using significant factors from the MVA, a prognostic survival model was constructed. Results: Among N=557 verified BL cases, clinical features included: median age 47 yrs (17-88 yrs; 24% ≥60 yrs); male 76%; HIV+ 22%; ECOG PS 0/1 76%; B symptoms 51%; elevated LDH 78% (3, 5, & 10x elevation: 44%, 29% & 15%, respectively); hemoglobin <10.5 gm/dL 32%; albumin <3.5 30%; bone marrow (BM) involved 35%; non-BM extranodal (EN) in 80%; >1 EN 43%; and 76% stage 3-4 disease (10% stage 1). Additionally, 16% and 3% of pts had baseline leptomeningeal (CSF or cranial nerve palsy) or parenchymal CNS involvement, respectively (see Zayac A et al. ASH 2019 for details). For MYC partner, 68% had t(8;14), 4% light chain, 5% negative FISH (otherwise classic BL) and 23% + break apart probe. HIV+ pts had several clinical differences: CSF+ 23% vs 12% P=0.003; CNS 19% vs 8% P<0.001; ECOG PS 2-4 32% vs 21% P=0.002; BM 64% vs 34% P=0.03; and >1 EN 60% vs 38% P<0.001. For all pts, 87% had Tx at an academic CC (13% at community CC). Tx regimens were: CODOX-M/IVAC (Magrath) 31%, HyperCVAD/MA 29%, DA-EPOCH 28%, other 10% (mostly CHOP-based & CALGB Tx) & 1% were never treated. 90% of pts received rituximab as part of Tx (69% inpatient (inpt) & 31% outpatient) & 2% had consolidative autologous SCT. Response among all pts were CR 72%, PR 6%, SD 1%, PD 14%, 7% not evaluable. The treatment related mortality (TRM) rate across all pts was 8.9% (HIV+ vs not: 13% vs 8% P=0.09); most common: sepsis 48%, GI bleed/perforation 14% & respiratory failure 12%. TRM by Tx: hyperCVAD/MA 11.5%, EPOCH 6.4%, Magrath 6.3% & other 18.9%. With 39 month median follow-up, 3 year progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 65% and 72%, respectively (Fig 1A). Among all pts who experienced disease progression, 90% occurred <12 months from dx (4% after 2 yrs). There were 20 cases (4%) of 2nd cancers seen including 7 secondary MDS/AML (median 26 months) & 6 cases of Hodgkin or other NHL (median 54 months). For prognostication, outcomes were inferior for pts ages ≥40 yrs & LDH >3x normal (Fig 1B/C). Notably, survival rates were not different based on HIV status (Fig 1D) or by the 3 most common Tx regimens (Fig 1E). However, there were important Tx differences based on presence of CNS involvement (see Zayac A et al. ASH 2019). Additionally, use of rituximab was associated with improved PFS & OS (Fig 1F), while outcomes were similar whether rituximab was given inpt vs outpatient (inpt PFS HR 1.25, P=0.19). Furthermore, Tx at an academic CC was associated with improved outcomes, which persisted on MVA (PFS HR 0.54, 95%CI 0.33-0.88 P=0.01; OS HR 0.50, 95%CI 0.29-0.87 P=0.01) & achievement of initial CR was strongly prognostic (Fig 1G). Baseline factors significant on UVA for PFS & OS were: age ≥40 yrs; PS 2-4; LDH >3x; anemia, low albumin; BM involvement; Stage 3-4; CSF+; & >1 EN. On MVA, factors associated with inferior survival were: age ≥40 yrs (PFS HR 1.57, P<0.001; OS HR 1.89, P=0.001); PS 2-4 (PFS HR 1.57, P=0.002; OS HR 2.16, P<0.001); & LDH >3x (PFS HR 2.28, P<0.0001; OS HR 1.96, P<0.0001). Collectively, these factors yielded a BL survival model (Fig 1H/I). Conclusions: Outcomes for adult BL in this contemporary, large, multicenter RW analysis appear inferior to smaller published series. Interestingly, despite increased adverse prognostic factors, survival rates appeared similar in HIV+ pts. In addition, use of rituximab, achievement of initial CR, and Tx at an academic CC were associated with improved survival. Finally, a novel BL-specific survival model identified pts with markedly divergent outcomes. Disclosures Evens: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tesaro: Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Honoraria. Danilov:Janssen: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; MEI: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel Reimbursement , Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding. Reddy:KITE Pharma: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy. Farooq:Celgene: Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Khan:Janssen: Other: Educational Content/Symposium; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers: Other: Research Funds; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yazdy:Genentech: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; Octapharma: Consultancy. Karmali:Gilead/Kite; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astrazeneca: Speakers Bureau; Takeda, BMS: Other: Research Funding to Institution. Martin:Janssen: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; I-MAB: Consultancy. Diefenbach:LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding. Epperla:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau. Feldman:Eisai: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cell Medica: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Corvus: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Viracta: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses, Speakers Bureau; Portola Pharma: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding. Lossos:Janssen Scientific: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NIH: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Naik:Celgene: Other: Advisory board. Kamdar:Celgene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; University of Colorado: Employment; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Portell:AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Olszewski:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding. Alderuccio:Agios: Other: Immediate family member; Puma Biotechnology: Other: Immediate family member; Foundation Medicine: Other: Immediate family member; Targeted Oncology: Honoraria; Inovio Pharmaceuticals: Other: Immediate family member; OncLive: Consultancy.
Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) can potentially salvage large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL) patients experiencing treatment failure after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (CAR-T). Nonetheless, data on the efficacy and toxicities of alloHCT after receipt of CAR-T are limited. We report a multicenter retrospective study assessing the safety, toxicities, and outcomes of alloHCT in LBCL patients following CAR-T failure. Eighty-eight patients with relapsed, refractory LBCL received an alloHCT following anti-CD19 CAR-T failure. The median number of lines of therapy between CAR-T infusion and alloHCT was 1 (range 0-7). Low intensity conditioning was used in 77% (n=68) and peripheral blood was the most common graft source (86%, n=76). The most common donor types were matched unrelated donor (39%), followed by haploidentical (30%) and matched related donor (26%). Median follow-up of survivors was 15 months (range 1-72). One-year overall survival, progression-free survival, and graft-versus-host disease-free relapse-free survival were 59%, 45%, and 39% respectively. One-year non-relapse mortality and progression/relapse were 22% and 33% respectively. On multivariate analysis,
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant is an established treatment modality for hematologic and non-hematologic diseases. However, it is associated with acute and long-term sequelae which can translate into mortality. Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) remains a glaring obstacle, especially with the advent of reduced-intensity conditioning. Serotherapy capitalizes on antibodies which target T cells and other immune cells to mitigate this effect. This article focuses on the utility of two such agents: anti-thymocyte globulin (ATG) and alemtuzumab. ATG has demonstrated benefit in prophylaxis against GVHD, especially in the chronic presentation. However, there is limited impact of ATG on overall survival and it has little utility in the treatment context. There may be an initial improvement, particularly in skin manifestations, but no substantial benefit has been elicited. Alemtuzumab has shown benefit in both prophylaxis and treatment of GVHD, but at the consequence of a more profound immunosuppressive phase, mandating aggressive viral prophylaxis. There remains heterogeneity in the doses and regimens of the agents, with no standardized protocol in place. Furthermore, it seems that once steroid-refractory GVHD has been established, there is little that can be offered to offset the ultimately dismal outcome. Here we present a systematic overview of ATG- or alemtuzumab-based serotherapy in the prophylaxis and management of GVHD.
Relapse after allogeneic hematopoietic stem‐cell transplantation (AHSCT) is associated with very poor outcomes. A second transplant offers the possibility of long‐term disease control. We analyzed outcomes with haploidentical donors for second allograft at our institution. All consecutive patients with hematological malignancies (N = 29) who relapsed after AHSCT and underwent a haploidentical transplant (haploSCT) as second transplant between February 2009 and October 2018 were included. Median age was 36 years (interquartile range (IQR) 24‐60); 83% of patients had high/very high disease risk index; 61% of AML/MDS patients had high‐risk cytogenetics; and only 24% were in complete remission at transplant. With a median follow‐up of 46.9 months, the 3‐year relapse, non‐relapse mortality (NRM), progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 30%, 39%, 31% and 40%, respectively. In multivariable analysis (MVA), comorbidity index (HCT‐CI) and detectable donor‐specific anti‐HLA antibodies (DSA) prior to second transplant were significantly associated with worse outcomes. Patients with HCT‐CI <3 and without DSA had 3‐year PFS and OS of 53% and 60.3%, respectively. Our findings suggest that haploSCT as second AHSCT is feasible and potentially curative. Lower HCT‐CI and no DSA were associated with lower NRM and improved survival. Haploidentical grafts might be a preferred donor source for second AHSCT as these are high‐risk patients who frequently need to proceed urgently to transplant.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.