Improved survival for dose-intensive chemotherapy in primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4,068 patients.

Primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) is a distinct clinicopathologic entity. Currently, there is a paucity of randomized prospective data to inform on optimal front-line chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) and use of consolidative mediastinal radiation (RT). To assess if distinct CIT approaches are associated with disparate survival outcomes, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing dose-intensive (DI-CIT) versus standard CIT for the front-line treatment of PMBCL. Standard approach (S-CIT) was defined as R-CHOP-21/CHOP-21, with or without RT. DI-CIT were defined as regimens with increased frequency, dose, and/or number of systemic agents. We reviewed data on 4,068 patients (2,517 DI-CIT; 1,551 S-CIT) with a new diagnosis of PMBCL. Overall survival for DI-CIT patients was 88% (95% CI: 85-90) compared to 80% for the S-CIT cohort (95% CI: 74-85). Meta-regression revealed an 8% overall survival (OS) benefit for the DI-CIT group (P<0.01). Survival benefit was maintained when analyzing rituximab only regimens; OS was 91% (95% CI: 89-93) for the rituximab-DI-CIT arm compared to 86% (95% CI: 82-89) for the R-CHOP-21 arm (P=0.03). Importantly, 55% (95% CI: 43-65) of the S-CIT group received RT compared to 22% (95% CI: 15-31) of DI-CIT patients (meta-regression P<0.01). To our knowledge, this is the largest meta-analysis reporting efficacy outcomes for the front-line treatment of PMBCL. DI-CIT demonstrates a survival benefit, with significantly less radiation exposure, curtailing long-term toxicities associated with radiotherapy. As we await results of randomized prospective trials, our study supports the use of dose-intensive chemoimmunotherapy for the treatment of PMBCL.

Toxicity and efficacy of CAR T-cell therapy in primary and secondary CNS lymphoma: a meta-analysis of 128 patients.

Relapsed/refractory primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) and secondary central nervous system lymphoma (SCNSL) are associated with short survival and represent an unmet need, requiring novel effective strategies. Anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells, effective in systemic large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), have shown responses in PCNSL and SCNSL in early reports, but with limited sample size. We, therefore, performed a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of all published data describing CAR T-cell use in PCNSL and SCNSL. This identified 128 patients with PCNSL (30) and SCNSL (98). Our primary objectives were to evaluate CAR T-cell specific toxicity (immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome [ICANS] and cytokine release syndrome [CRS]) as well as response rates in these 2 populations. Seventy percent of patients with PCNSL had CRS of any grade (13% grade 3-4) and 53% had ICANS of any grade (18% grade 3-4). Comparatively, 72% of the SCNSL cohort experienced CRS of any grade (11% grade 3-4) and 48% had ICANS of any grade (26% grade 3-4). Of the patients with PCNSL, 56% achieved a complete remission (CR) with 37% remaining in remission at 6 months. Similarly, 47% of patients with SCNSL had a CR, with 37% in remission at 6 months. In a large meta-analysis of central nervous system (CNS) lymphomas, toxicity of anti-CD19-CAR T-cell therapy was similar to that of registrational studies in systemic LBCL with no increased signal of neurotoxicity observed. Encouraging efficacy was demonstrated in patients with CNS lymphoma with no discernible differences between PCNSL and SCNSL.

The Risk of Opportunistic Infections and the Role of Antibiotic Prophylaxis in Patients on Checkpoint Inhibitors Requiring Steroids.

BACKGROUND: Immune-related adverse events (irAEs) often require treatment with high-dose systemic steroids (SS) and other immunosuppressive agents (ISAs). NCCN Guidelines recommend prophylactic antibiotics for Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) for patients receiving prolonged SS/ISAs. However, there is a paucity of evidence regarding the incidence of opportunistic infections (OIs) and non-OIs and the role of prophylactic antibiotics in patients on SS/ISAs for irAEs. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted of patients treated using immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy at 5 MedStar Health hospitals from January 2011 to April 2018. OIs were defined per the Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines for the prevention and treatment of OIs in patients with HIV. The study cohort included patients who received ≥20 mg daily of a prednisone equivalent for ≥4 weeks to manage irAEs. RESULTS: The study cohort identified 112 (15%) of 758 total patients treated using ICIs. Baseline characteristics included the following: median age was 64 years, 74% (n=82) of patients were White, 89% (n=100) had an ECOG performance status ≤1, 61% (n=68) had melanoma, 19% (n=21) had non-small cell lung cancer, 45% (n=50) were treated using an anti-PD-(L)1 ICI, and 33% (n=37) were treated using an anti-PD-1/anti-CTLA-4 combination. The median starting SS dose was 100 mg of a prednisone equivalent, and 25% of patients required additional ISAs, with infliximab (n=15) and mycophenolate mofetil (n=9) being the most common. We found that 20% (n=22) of patients developed any infection, including 7% (n=8) with OIs (oral candidiasis [n=4], nondisseminated varicella zoster infection [n=2], PJP [n=1], and Listeria monocytogenes endophthalmitis [n=1]) and 13% (n=14) with non-OIs (most common: Clostridium difficile and pneumonia [n=5 each]). PJP prophylaxis with sulfamethoxazole/trimethoprim was given to 13% (n=14) patients, of whom 43% (n=6) developed OIs/non-OIs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study highlights the fundamental issues for patients on ICI therapy who require SS/ISAs for irAEs: the degree of immunosuppression and the relative risk of OI. We noted a low incidence of OIs overall and breakthrough infections despite PJP prophylaxis. We question whether PJP prophylaxis is efficacious or necessary. Prospective trials are required to answer these questions.

The spectrum of genetic mutations in myelodysplastic syndrome: Should we update prognostication?

The natural history of patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is dependent upon the presence and magnitude of diverse genetic and molecular aberrations. The International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) and revised IPSS (IPSS-R) are the most widely used classification and prognostic systems; however, somatic mutations are not currently incorporated into these systems, despite evidence of their independent impact on prognosis. Our manuscript reviews prognostic information for TP53, EZH2, DNMT3A, ASXL1, RUNX1, SRSF2, CBL, IDH 1/2, TET2, BCOR, ETV6, GATA2, U2AF1, ZRSR2, RAS, STAG2, and SF3B1. Mutations in TP53, EZH2, ASXL1, DNMT3A, RUNX1, SRSF2, and CBL have extensive evidence for their negative impact on survival, whereas SF3B1 is the lone mutation carrying a favorable prognosis. We use the existing literature to propose the incorporation of somatic mutations into the IPSS-R. More data are needed to define the broad spectrum of other genetic lesions, as well as the impact of variant allele frequencies, class of mutation, and impact of multiple interactive genomic lesions. We postulate that the incorporation of these data into MDS prognostication systems will not only enhance our therapeutic decision making but lead to targeted treatment in an attempt to improve outcomes in this formidable disease.

Targeting The Tumor Microenvironment in Lymphomas: Emerging Biological Insights and Therapeutic Strategies.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review aims to discuss recent advances in elucidating the tumor microenvironment (TME) in B lymphomas and resultant novel therapeutic development. RECENT FINDINGS: While tumor morphology, immunophenotype, and molecular profile are established factors that predict outcome and guide therapy, the prognostic impact of infiltrating, non-tumor cells is now emerging. This is simultaneously facilitating the development of new therapies that target non-tumor cells. The tumor microenvironment (TME) is a complex ecosystem composed of infiltrating cells and byproducts, extracellular matrix, and other non-cellular tissues. In lymphomas, our current understanding of the role of the TME is principally informed by studies in B-cell lineage diseases. As we improve our understanding of lymphoma biology, the importance of the impact of the non-tumor cell microenvironment is becoming more apparent. This lays the foundation for the investigation and development of novel therapies and combination strategies that target non-tumor cells and tumor cell/non-tumor cell interactions.

Thrombotic and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Hematologic Malignancy and COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a common complication in acute COVID-19 and those with hematologic malignancy (HM) may be at an even higher risk. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with history of HM and acute COVID-19 to evaluate thrombotic and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Patients with COVID-19 were identified by positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. Our primary endpoints were rate of VTE and CVA in patients with HM compared to the general population (GP). Secondary outcomes included composite thrombotic events (CVA + VTE), COVID-19 fatality, respiratory support, ICU admission rates, and length of ICU stay RESULTS: A total of 833 patients were evaluated, 709 in the GP cohort, 124 patients in the HM cohort. CVA was more prevalent in the HM cohort (5.4% vs. 1.6%, P = .011). Rates of VTE were numerically higher for the HM cohort (8.0% vs. 3.6%, P = .069). The composite thrombotic rate was increased in the HM cohort (13.4% vs. 5.2%, P = .005). Patients with HM had a higher inpatient fatality rate (35.5% vs. 11.3%, P < .001), required more respiratory support (74.6% vs. 46.5%, P < .001) and had a higher rate of ICU admission (31.9% vs. 12.1%, P = .001). CONCLUSION: Our data demonstrated an increased rate of composite thrombotic (CVA + VTE) outcomes, indicating HM patients with acute COVID-19 are at increased risk of thrombosis. Irrespective of disease status, HM patients also have significantly increased need for intensive care, respiratory support, and have higher fatality rates.

Safety and Efficacy of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy in Patients With HIV Infection and Advanced-Stage Cancer: A Systematic Review.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with HIV infection are at increased risk for cancer. Cancer is the leading cause of death among non-AIDS-defining illnesses in these patients. Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy has transformed the treatment of cancer. However, clinical trials of ICIs have historically excluded patients with HIV infection. The safety and efficacy profile of ICIs is unknown in this underrepresented population. OBJECTIVE: To summarize results on the safety and efficacy of ICI therapy in HIV-infected patients with advanced-stage cancer. EVIDENCE REVIEW: This systematic review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A literature search of PubMed was performed on April 16, 2018, using the keyword HIV and the names of ICIs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, avelumab, atezolizumab, and durvalumab). Patients with HIV infection who were being treated with ICIs for advanced-stage cancer were included. In addition, abstracts and posters from major oncology and AIDS society annual meetings from 2016 through 2018 were reviewed. FINDINGS: Seventy-three patients (66 [90.4%] male; mean age, 56.1 years [range, 30.0-77.0 years]) were identified from 13 articles (11 case reports and 2 case series) and 4 meeting abstracts. Sixty-two patients were treated with anti-programmed cell death 1 (anti-PD-1) therapy, 6 with anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 (anti-CTLA-4) therapy, 4 with anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 therapy, and 1 with sequential ipilimumab and nivolumab therapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy was generally well tolerated, with grade 3 or higher immune-related adverse events noted in 6 of 70 patients (8.6%). Among 34 patients with known paired pretreatment and posttreatment HIV loads, HIV remained suppressed in 26 of the 28 (93%) with undetectable HIV load. Among the 25 with paired pretreatment and posttreatment CD4 cell counts, the counts increased (mean [SD] change, 12.3 [28.5] /µL). Objective response rates were 30% for non-small cell lung cancer, 27% for melanoma, and 63% for Kaposi sarcoma. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for the treatment of advanced-stage cancer in patients with HIV infection was associated with no new safety signals. Immune checkpoint inhibitors may be a safe and efficacious treatment option in this patient population. Several ongoing prospective clinical trials will shed further light on the safety and efficacy of ICI therapy in HIV-infected patients with cancer.