Health-related quality of life in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia: results from the ASPEN trial.

Aim ASPEN is a randomized, open-label, Phase III study comparing zanubrutinib and ibrutinib in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Materials & methods: Patient-reported outcomes were exploratory end points assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D-5L VAS scores. Results: Overall, 201 patients (102 zanubrutinib; 99 ibrutinib) were enrolled. Clinically meaningful differences were observed in diarrhea and nausea/vomiting in both the intent-to-treat population and in patients attaining very good partial response (VGPR) in earlier cycles of treatment, as well as in long-term physical functioning and fatigue in patients achieving VGPR. Conclusion: Treatment with zanubrutinib was associated with greater improvements in health-related quality of life compared with ibrutinib in patients with WM and MYD88 mutations.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03053440 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Patient quality of life is importantWhat is this article about? This article talks about a study called the ASPEN trial, which compares two medicines used for treating a rare blood cancer that doctors call Waldenström macroglobulinemia. The medicines are called zanubrutinib (ZAN) and ibrutinib (IBR). They work in the same way, by blocking a protein called Bruton tyrosine kinase. When patients take medicines for an illness, it is important to learn about their physical, social, emotional and mental well-being (quality of life). In this study, we asked patients to fill out questionnaires about their well-being before starting the study treatment for their blood cancer, and again a few times while taking the medication, to see if there were any changes.What were the results of the study? There were two groups of patients. One group took ZAN and the other took IBR. The patients could not choose which medicine they were going to take. Results from both groups of patients were compared. Patients taking ZAN did not feel worse or better about their diarrhea and sickness, but those taking IBR said these symptoms had become worse. Both medicines improved how patients were feeling. However, improvement in tiredness and physical ability was larger in patients taking ZAN than those on IBR, especially for the patients whose cancer was getting better.What do the results mean? For patients with a rare blood cancer in this study, those taking ZAN had a better quality of life than those taking IBR.

Epstein-Barr Virus and immune status imprint the immunogenomics of non-Hodgkin lymphomas occurring in immune-suppressed environments.

Non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHL) commonly occur in immune-deficient (ID) patients, both HIV-infected and transplanted, and are often EBV-driven with cerebral localization, raising the question of tumor immunogenicity, a critical issue for treatment responses. We investigated the immunogenomics of 68 lymphoproliferative disorders from 51 ID (34 posttransplant, 17 HIV+) and 17 immunocompetent patients. Overall, 72% were Large B Cells Lymphoma (LBCL) and 25% were primary central-nervous-system lymphoma (PCNSL) while 40% were EBV-positive. Tumor whole-exome and RNA sequencing, along with a bioinformatics pipeline allowed analysis of tumor mutational burden (TMB), tumor landscape and microenvironment (TME) and prediction of tumor neoepitopes. Both TMB (2.2 vs 3.4/Mb, p=0.001) and neoepitopes numbers (40 vs 200, p=0.00019) were lower in EBVpositive than in EBV-negative NHL, regardless of the immune status. In contrast both EBV and the immune status influenced the tumor mutational profile, with HNRNPF and STAT3 mutations exclusively observed in EBV-positive and ID NHL, respectively. Peripheral blood T-cell responses against tumor neoepitopes were detected in all EBV-negative cases but in only half EBV-positive ones, including responses against IgH-derived MHC-class-II restricted neoepitopes. The TME analysis showed higher CD8 T cell infiltrates in EBVpositive vs EBV-negative NHL, together with a more tolerogenic profile composed of Tregs, type-M2 macrophages and an increased expression of negative immune-regulators. Our results highlight that the immunogenomics of NHL in patients with immunodeficiency primarily relies on the tumor EBV status, while T cell recognition of tumor- and IgH-specific neoepitopes is conserved in EBV-negative patients, offering potential opportunities for future T cell-based immune therapies.

Prognostic impact of genetic abnormalities in 536 first-line chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients without 17p deletion treated with chemoimmunotherapy in two prospective trials: Focus on IGHV-mutated subgroups (a FILO study).

The potential prognostic influence of genetic aberrations on chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) can vary based on various factors, such as the immunoglobulin heavy variable (IGHV) status. We conducted an integrative analysis on genetic abnormalities identified through cytogenetics and targeted next-generation sequencing in 536 CLL patients receiving first-line chemo(immuno)therapies (CIT) as part of two prospective trials. We evaluated the prognostic implications of the main abnormalities, with specific attention to their relative impact according to IGHV status. In the entire cohort, unmutated (UM)-IGHV, complex karyotype, del(11q) and ATM mutations correlated significantly with shorter progression-free survival (PFS). Focusing on the subset of mutated IGHV (M-IGHV) patients, univariate analysis showed that complex karyotype, del(11q), SF3B1 and SAMHD1 mutations were associated with significant lower PFS. The prognostic influence varied based on the patient's IGHV status, as these abnormalities did not affect outcomes in the UM-IGHV subgroup. TP53 mutations had no significant impact on outcomes in the M-IGHV subgroup. Our findings highlight the diverse prognostic influence of genetic aberrations depending on the IGHV status in symptomatic CLL patients receiving first-line CIT. The prognosis of gene mutations and cytogenetic abnormalities needs to be investigated with a compartmentalized methodology, taking into account the IGVH status of patients receiving first-line BTK and/or BCL2 inhibitors.

Final results on effectiveness and safety of Ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia from the non-interventional FIRE study.

We conducted an observational study (FIRE) to understand the effectiveness and safety outcomes of ibrutinib in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in France, after a maximum follow-up of five years. Patients were included according to the French marketing authorization in 2016 (i.e. patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or to previously untreated CLL patients with deletion 17p and/or tumor protein p53 mutations unsuitable for chemoimmunotherapy) and could have initiated ibrutinib more than 30 days prior their enrolment in the study (i.e. retrospective patients) or between 30 days before and 14 days after their enrolment (i.e. prospective patients). The results showed that in the effectiveness population (N = 388), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 53.1 (95% CI: 44.5-60.5) months for retrospective patients and 52.9 (95% CI: 40.3-60.6) months for prospective patients and no difference was shown between the PFS of patients who had at least one dose reduction versus the PFS of patients without dose reduction (p = 0.7971 for retrospective and p = 0.3163 for prospective patients). For both retrospective and prospective patients, the median overall survival was not reached. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event of interest was infections (57.6% retrospective; 71.4% prospective). A total of 14.6% of the retrospective patients and 22.4% of the prospective patients had an adverse event leading to death. Our findings on effectiveness were consistent with other studies and the fact that patients with dose reductions had similar PFS than patients without dose reduction is reassuring. No additional safety concerns than those already mentioned in previous studies could be noticed.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03425591. Registered 1 February 2018 - Retrospectively registered.

Long-term results of Waldenström macroglobulinaemia treatment by bendamustine and rituximab: A study on behalf of the French Innovative Leukemia Organization (FILO).

The bendamustine-rituximab (BR) schedule is an efficient first-line therapy in Waldenström macroglobulinaemia (WM). A previous analysis of 69 patients who received this treatment confirmed a high response rate and good progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). With a median follow-up of 76.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 69.9-80.6), 5-year outcome is still excellent at 66.63% (95% CI 56.09-79.17) for PFS and 80.01% (95% CI 70.82-90.41) for OS. The rate of secondary cancers is 17.66% (IQR 7.99-27.64) at 66 months. Relapsed patients who received ibrutinib as second-line clearly benefited from this schedule. This confirms current recommendations suggesting BR long-term efficacy as first-line option in WM.

Biomarker analysis of the ASPEN study comparing zanubrutinib with ibrutinib for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia.

ABSTRACT: The phase 3 ASPEN trial (NCT03053440) compared Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKis), zanubrutinib and ibrutinib, in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Post-hoc biomarker analysis was performed using next-generation sequencing on pretreatment bone marrow samples from 98 patients treated with zanubrutinib and 92 patients treated with ibrutinib with mutated (MUT) MYD88 and 20 patients with wild-type (WT) MYD88 treated with zanubrutinib. Of 329 mutations in 52 genes, mutations in CXCR4 (25.7%), TP53 (24.8%), ARID1A (15.7%), and TERT (9.0%) were most common. TP53MUT, ARID1AMUT, and TERTMUT were associated with higher rates of CXCR4MUT (P < .05). Patients with CXCR4MUT (frameshift or nonsense [NS] mutations) had lower very good partial response (VGPR) and complete response rates (CR; 17.0% vs 37.2%, P = .020) and longer time to response (11.1 vs 8.4 months) than patients with CXCR4WT treated with BTKis. CXCR4NS was associated with inferior progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 3.39; P = .017) in patients treated with ibrutinib but not in those treated with zanubrutinib (HR, 0.67; P = .598), but VGPR + CR rates were similar between treatment groups (14.3% vs 15.4%). Compared with ibrutinib, patients with CXCR4NS treated with zanubrutinib had a favorable major response rate (MRR; 85.7% vs 53.8%; P = .09) and PFS (HR, 0.30; P = .093). In patients with TP53MUT, significantly lower MRRs were observed for patients treated with ibrutinib (63.6% vs 85.7%; P = .04) but not for those treated with zanubrutinib (80.8% vs 81.9%; P = .978). In TP53MUT, compared with ibrutinib, patients treated with zanubrutinib had higher VGPR and CR (34.6% vs 13.6%; P < .05), numerically improved MRR (80.8% vs 63.6%; P = .11), and longer PFS (not reached vs 44.2 months; HR, 0.66; P = .37). Collectively, patients with WM with CXCR4MUT or TP53MUT had worse prognosis compared with patients with WT alleles, and zanubrutinib led to better clinical outcomes.