Outcomes of stage I/II follicular lymphoma in the PET era: an international study from the Australian Lymphoma Alliance.

Management practices in early-stage (I/II) follicular lymphoma (FL) are variable and include radiation (RT), systemic therapy, or combined modality therapy (CMT). There is a paucity of data regarding maintenance rituximab in this cohort. We conducted an international retrospective study of patients with newly diagnosed early-stage FL staged with positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography and bone marrow biopsy. Three hundred sixty-five patients (stage I, n = 221), median age 63 years, treated from 2005-2017 were included, with a median follow-up of 45 months. Management included watchful waiting (WW; n = 85) and active treatment (n = 280). The latter consisted of RT alone (n = 171) or systemic therapy (immunochemotherapy [n = 63] or CMT [n = 46]). Forty-nine systemically treated patients received maintenance rituximab; 72.7% of stage I patients received RT alone, compared to 42.6% with stage II (P < .001). Active therapies yielded comparable overall response rates (P = .87). RT alone and systemic therapy without maintenance rituximab yielded similar progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR], 1.32; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-2.34; P = .96). Maintenance rituximab improved PFS (HR, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.095-0.64; P = .017). The incidence of transformation was lower with systemic therapy compared to RT or WW (HR, 0.20; 95% CI, 0.070-0.61; P = .034). Overall survival was similar among all practices, including WW (P = .40). In the largest comparative assessment of management practices in the modern era, variable practices each resulted in similar excellent outcomes. Randomized studies are required to determine the optimal treatment in early-stage FL.

A multicenter retrospective comparison of induction chemoimmunotherapy regimens on outcomes in transplant-eligible patients with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma.

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon and typically aggressive form of lymphoma. Although often initially chemosensitive, relapse is common. Several induction and conditioning regimens are used in transplant-eligible patients, and the optimal approach remains unknown. We performed an international, retrospective study of transplant-eligible patients to assess impact of induction chemoimmunotherapy and conditioning regimens on clinical outcomes. We identified 228 patients meeting inclusion criteria. Baseline characteristics were similar among the induction groups except for some variation in age. The type of induction chemoimmunotherapy received did not influence overall response rates (ORRs) (0.43), progression-free survival (PFS) (P > .67), or overall survival (OS) (P > .35) on multivariate analysis (PFS and OS). Delivery of autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) was associated with favorable PFS and OS (0.01) on univariate analysis only; this benefit was not seen on multivariate analysis-PFS (0.36) and OS (0.21). Compared with busulfan and melphalan (BuMel), the use of the carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan (BEAM)-conditioning regimen was associated with inferior PFS (HR = 2.0 [95% CI 1.1-3.6], 0.02) but not OS (HR = 1.1 [95% CI 0.5-2.3], 0.81) on univariate analysis only. Within the limits of a retrospective study and modest power for some comparisons, type of induction therapy did not influence ORR, PFS, or OS for transplant-eligible patients with MCL. International efforts are required to perform randomized clinical trials evaluating chemoimmunotherapy induction regimens.