Comparative outcome of initial therapy for younger patients with mantle cell lymphoma: an analysis from the NCCN NHL Database.

Few randomized trials have compared therapies in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and the role of aggressive induction is unclear. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) Database, a prospective cohort study collecting clinical, treatment, and outcome data at 7 NCCN centers, provides a unique opportunity to compare the effectiveness of initial therapies in MCL. Patients younger than 65 diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 were included if they received RHCVAD (rituximab fractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, adriamycin, and dexamethasone), RCHOP+HDT/ASCR (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone + high-dose therapy/autologous stem cell rescue), RHCVAD+HDT/ASCR, or RCHOP. Clinical parameters were similar for patients treated with RHCVAD (n = 83, 50%), RCHOP+HDT/ASCR (n = 34, 20%), RCHOP (n = 29, 17%), or RHCVAD+HDT/ASCR (n = 21, 13%). Overall, 70 (42%) of the 167 patients progressed and 25 (15%) expired with a median follow-up of 33 months. There was no difference in progression-free survival (PFS) between aggressive regimens (P > .57), which all demonstrated superior PFS compared with RCHOP (P < .004). There was no difference in overall survival (OS) between the RHCVAD and RCHOP+HDT/ASCR (P = .98). RCHOP was inferior to RHCVAD and RCHOP+HDT/ASCR, which had similar PFS and OS. Despite aggressive regimens, the median PFS was 3 to 4 years. Future trials should focus on novel agents rather than comparing current approaches.

Stem cell transplantation for follicular lymphoma relapsed/refractory after prior rituximab: a comprehensive analysis from the NCCN lymphoma outcomes project.

BACKGROUND: Stem cell transplant (SCT)-related outcomes and prognostication for relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) are not well-defined in the post-rituximab era. METHODS: Through the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) lymphoma outcomes study, 184 patients with relapsed/refractory FL who underwent autologous SCT (autoSCT) or allogenic SCT (alloSCT) following disease relapse after prior rituximab-based therapy were examined. RESULTS: Patients who underwent autoSCT (N=136) were older compared with patients who underwent alloSCT (N=48) (54 versus 51 years, respectively, P=.01) and more frequently had grade 3 FL (35% versus 8%, respectively, P=.006). Patients who underwent alloSCT received more prior therapies (4 versus 3, respectively, P<.0001) and more often had resistant disease at SCT (19% versus 6%, respectively, P=.008). Cumulative 100-day nonrelapse mortality (NRM) for autoSCT and alloSCT were 1% and 6%, respectively (P<.0001), whereas 3-year NRM rates were 3% versus 24%, respectively (P<.0001). For autoSCT and alloSCT, cumulative rates of relapse, progression, and/or transformation were 32% versus 16%, respectively (P=.03), whereas 3-year overall survival rates were 87% versus 61% (P<.0001); there were no differences in failure-free survival. AlloSCT was associated with increased risk of death on multivariate analysis (hazard ratio=2.77, 95% confidence interval=1.46-5.26, P=.002). This finding persisted on propensity scoring/matching. Multivariate analysis for autoSCT patients identified age>60 years and>3 prior therapies as adverse factors. Furthermore, a survival model was created for the autoSCT cohort based on number of factors present (0, 1, 2); 3-year failure-free survival was 72%, 47%, and 20%, respectively (P=.0003), and 3-year overall survival was 96%, 82%, and 62%, respectively (P<.0001). CONCLUSIONS: AutoSCT remains an effective therapy for patients with FL. For alloSCT, continued strategies to reduce NRM are needed.

Lack of benefit of central nervous system prophylaxis for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in the rituximab era: findings from a large national database.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about the utility of central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) in the rituximab era. The objective of this study was to characterize patterns of CNS prophylaxis for patients who received combined rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) chemotherapy using the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Outcomes Database, a prospective cohort study that collects clinical and outcomes data for patients at 7 participating centers. METHODS: Patients who were eligible for this analysis presented with newly diagnosed DLBCL between January 2001 and July 2008, had no evidence of baseline CNS disease, and had received R-CHOP within 180 days of diagnosis. The authors assessed incidence and covariates of prophylaxis, prophylaxis modality, and, using propensity score analysis, outcomes such as overall survival. RESULTS: Of 989 eligible patients, 117 received CNS prophylaxis (11.8%), most intrathecally (71.8%). Involvement of bone marrow, other high-risk site, >1 extranodal site, higher International Prognostic Index score, and higher stage were associated individually with the receipt of prophylaxis (all P < .0001). At a median follow-up of 2.5 years, there were 20 CNS recurrences (2% [95% confidence interval, 1.1%-2.9%]) among all patients, and overall survival was not affected by prophylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Given the overall low rate of CNS recurrence and lack of prophylaxis-associated survival benefit, the current data called into question the practice of CNS prophylaxis in the rituximab era.

High rates of surveillance imaging for treated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: findings from a large national database.

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