ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Contemporary data of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) and natural-killer/T-cell lymphoma (NKTL) patients treated with ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide (ICE) are limited. AIMS: We performed a retrospective analysis to estimate outcomes of ICE-treated PTCL and NKTL patients at three tertiary cancer centres in Singapore. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients were identified through lymphoma databases from National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS), National University Hospital, Singapore (NUHS), and Singapore General Hospital (SGH). Responses and survival outcomes were determined from electronic medical records. A total of 75 patients with a median age of 50 were included. ICE was used as first-line treatment in 14 patients (19%) and as subsequent lines of treatment in 61 patients (81%). The overall response rates (ORR) for all patients was 63% (40% complete response [CR]). The ORR and CR in the first line were 86% and 64% respectively. At a median follow-up duration of 71.0 months, the median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients were 4.4 months (95%CI, 2.7-6.0) and 16 months (95%CI, 8.3-45.4) respectively. CONCLUSION: In summary, ICE showed high ORR but poor PFS in relapsed/refractory PTCL and NKTL. ORR of ICE in the first line setting appears better than real-world CHOP data and warrants further study.
Subject(s)
Lymphoma, T-Cell , Lymphoma , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Carboplatin , Etoposide , Humans , Ifosfamide/adverse effects , Lymphoma, T-Cell/chemically induced , Lymphoma, T-Cell/drug therapy , Retrospective Studies , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patient outcomes are poor for aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphomas not responding to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Tisagenlecleucel is an anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy approved for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma after at least two treatment lines. METHODS: We conducted an international phase 3 trial involving patients with aggressive lymphoma that was refractory to or progressing within 12 months after first-line therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tisagenlecleucel with optional bridging therapy (tisagenlecleucel group) or salvage chemotherapy and autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) (standard-care group). The primary end point was event-free survival, defined as the time from randomization to stable or progressive disease at or after the week 12 assessment or death. Crossover to receive tisagenlecleucel was allowed if a defined event occurred at or after the week 12 assessment. Other end points included response and safety. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent randomization. At baseline, the percentage of patients with high-grade lymphomas was higher in the tisagenlecleucel group than in the standard-care group (24.1% vs. 16.9%), as was the percentage with an International Prognostic Index score (range, 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a worse prognosis) of 2 or higher (65.4% vs. 57.5%). A total of 95.7% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group received tisagenlecleucel; 32.5% of the patients in the standard-care group received autologous HSCT. The median time from leukapheresis to tisagenlecleucel infusion was 52 days. A total of 25.9% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group had lymphoma progression at week 6, as compared with 13.8% of those in the standard-care group. The median event-free survival in both groups was 3.0 months (hazard ratio for event or death in the tisagenlecleucel group, 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.82 to 1.40; P = 0.61). A response occurred in 46.3% of the patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and in 42.5% in the standard-care group. Ten patients in the tisagenlecleucel group and 13 in the standard-care group died from adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Tisagenlecleucel was not superior to standard salvage therapy in this trial. Additional studies are needed to assess which patients may obtain the most benefit from each approach. (Funded by Novartis; BELINDA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03570892.).
Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Immunotherapy, Adoptive , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/drug therapy , Receptors, Antigen, T-Cell/therapeutic use , Receptors, Chimeric Antigen/antagonists & inhibitors , Adult , Aged , Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Combined Modality Therapy , Female , Humans , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/mortality , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/therapy , Male , Middle Aged , Progression-Free Survival , Salvage Therapy , Transplantation, AutologousABSTRACT
CNS prophylaxis is commonly used in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) patients with risk features for CNS relapse. This systematic review and meta-analysis compares CNS relapse rates with and without CNS prophylaxis, for patients at intermediate to high CNS relapse risk. Studies reporting CNS relapse risk category and CNS outcomes with and without CNS prophylaxis for antiCD20-CHOP treated DLBCL patients were included. 10 studies with 3770 patients at intermediate to high CNS relapse risk were analyzed. No significant difference in the pooled Absolute Risk Difference (ARD 0.01, 95 % CI -0.01 to 0.02, P = 0.61) or Risk (RR 1.22, 95 % CI 0.81-1.83, P = 0.34) was noted in patients with and without CNS prophylaxis. There were also no differences within pre-specified subgroups of IV Methotrexate or IT chemotherapy. However, the quality of evidence supporting these observations was low. A meta-analysis of individual patient data will help evaluate the benefit of CNS prophylaxis strategies.
