FCM significantly improves the sensitivity of CC for the identification of leptomeningeal disease in aggressive B-NHL at higher risk of CNS disease, particularly in paucicellular samples.

No abstract

Background Relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive cancer with a median overall survival of less than 6 months. We aimed to assess the response to single-agent selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who had no therapeutic options of potential clinical benefit. Methods SADAL was a multicentre, multinational, open-label, phase 2b study done in 59 sites in 19 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with pathologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, who had received two to five lines of previous therapies, and progressed after or were not candidates for autologous stem-cell transplantation were enrolled. Germinal centre B-cell or non-germinal centre B-cell tumour subtype and double or triple expressor status were determined by immunohistochemistry and double or triple hit status was determined by cytogenetics. Patients received 60 mg selinexor orally on days 1 and 3 weekly until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The study was initially designed to evaluate both 60 mg and 100 mg twice-weekly doses of selinexor; however, the 100 mg dose was discontinued in the protocol (version 7.0) on March 29, 2017, when an improved therapeutic window was observed at 60 mg. Primary outcome was overall response rate. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in all patients who received 60 mg selinexor under protocol version 6.0, or enrolled under protocol versions 7.0 or higher and received at least one dose of selinexor. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02227251 (active but not enrolling).

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers. L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

The study included 1848 diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL)patients treated with chemotherapy/rituximab. The aims were to validate the National Comprehensive Cancer Network International Prognostic Index (NCCN-IPI) and explore the effect of adding high Beta-2 microglobulin (β2M), primary extranodal presentation and intense treatment to the NCCN-IPI variables in order to develop an improved index. Comparing survival curves, NCCN-IPI discriminated better than IPI, separating four risk groups with 5-year overall survival rates of 93%, 83%, 67% and 49%, but failing to identify a true high-risk population. For the second aim the series was split into training and validation cohorts: in the former the multivariate model identified age, lactate dehydrogenase, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, Stage III-IV, and β2M as independently significant, whereas the NCCN-IPI-selected extranodal sites, primary extranodal presentation and intense treatments were not. These results were confirmed in the validation cohort. The Grupo Español de Linfomas/Trasplante de Médula ósea (GELTAMO)-IPI developed here, with 7 points, significantly separated four risk groups (0, 1-3, 4 or ≥5 points) with 11%, 58%, 17% and 14% of patients, and 5-year overall survival rates of 93%, 79%, 66% and 39%, respectively. In the comparison GELTAMO IPI discriminated better than the NCCN-IPI. In conclusion, GELTAMO-IPI is more accurate than the NCCN-IPI and has statistical and practical advantages in that the better discrimination identifies an authentic high-risk group and is not influenced by primary extranodal presentation or treatments of different intensity.

Treatment options for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL) are limited with no standard of care; prognosis is poor, with 4- to 6-month median survival. Avadomide (CC-122) is a cereblon-modulating agent with immunomodulatory and direct antitumor activities. This phase 1 dose expansion study assessed safety and clinical activity of avadomide monotherapy in patients with R/R de novo DLBCL and transformed lymphoma. Additionally, a novel gene expression classifier, which identifies tumors with a high immune cell infiltration, was shown to enrich for response to avadomide in R/R DLBCL. Ninety-seven patients with R/R DLBCL, including 12 transformed lymphoma, received 3 to 5 mg of avadomide administered on continuous or intermittent schedules until unacceptable toxicity, disease progression, or withdrawal. Eighty-two patients (85%) experienced ≥1 grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), most commonly neutropenia (51%), infections (24%), anemia (12%), and febrile neutropenia (10%). Discontinuations because of AEs occurred in 10% of patients. Introduction of an intermittent 5/7‑day schedule improved tolerability and reduced frequency and severity of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and infections. Among 84 patients with de novo R/R DLBCL, overall response rate (ORR) was 29%, including 11% complete response (CR). Responses were cell-of-origin-independent. Classifier-positive DLBCL patients (de novo) had an ORR of 44%, median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 6 months, and 16% CR versus an ORR of 19%, mPFS of 1.5 months, and 5% CR in classifier-negative patients (P = .0096). Avadomide is being evaluated in combination with other antilymphoma agents. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01421524.

Axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and tisagenlecleucel (tisa-cel) are CD19-targeted chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells approved for relapsed/refractory (R/R) large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). We performed a retrospective study to evaluate safety and efficacy of axi-cel and tisa-cel outside the setting of a clinical trial. Data from consecutive patients with R/R LBCL who underwent apheresis for axi-cel or tisa-cel were retrospectively collected from 12 Spanish centers. A total of 307 patients underwent apheresis for axi-cel (n=152) and tisa-cel (n=155) from Nov-2018 to Aug-2021, of which 261 (85%) received a CAR-T infusion (88% and 82%, respectively). Median time from apheresis to infusion was 41 days for axi-cel and 52 days for tisa-cel (p=0.006). None of the baseline characteristics were significantly different between both cohorts. Both cytokine release syndrome and neurologic events (NE) were more frequent in the axi-cel group (88% vs 73%, p=0.003, and 42% vs 16%, p

Summary The International Prognostic Index (IPI) is the most widely used score for non‐Hodgkin lymphoma but lacks the ability to identify a high‐risk population in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Low absolute lymphocyte count and high monocytes have proved to be unfavourable factors. Red‐cell distribution width (RDW) has been associated with inflammation and beta‐2 microglobulin (B2M) with tumour load. The retrospective study included 992 patients with DLBCL treated with R‐CHOP. In the multivariate analysis, age, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG‐PS), stage, bulky mass, B2M, RDW, and lymphocyte/monocyte ratio (LMR) were independently related to progression‐free survival (PFS). A new prognosis score was generated with these variables including age categorized into three groups (0, 1, 2 points); ECOG ≥ 3–4 with two; stage III/IV, bulky mass, high B2M, LMR < 2·25 and RDW > 0·96 with one each; for a maximum of 9. This score could improve the discrimination of a very high‐risk subgroup with five‐year PFS and overall survival (OS) of 19% and 24% versus 45% and 59% of R (revised)‐IPI respectively. This score also showed greater predictive ability than IPI. A new score is presented including complete blood cell count variables and B2M, which are readily available in real‐life practice without additional tests. Compared to R‐IPI, it shows a more precise high‐risk assessment and risk discrimination for both PFS and OS.