First-Line Treatment of Patients With Indolent Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma or Mantle-Cell Lymphoma With Bendamustine Plus Rituximab Versus R-CHOP or R-CVP: Results of the BRIGHT 5-Year Follow-Up Study.

PURPOSE: The BRIGHT study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00877006) was initiated to compare the efficacy and safety of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) with either rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CVP) for treatment-naive patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma or mantle-cell lymphoma. This publication provides long-term follow-up data. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were monitored for a minimum of 5 years after completion of study treatment for the time-to-event end points of progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival, duration of response, and overall survival per investigator assessment. Data on the number of patients who received second-line anticancer treatment and the occurrence of other malignancies were also collected. RESULTS: The medians were not reached for any of the time-to event end points for either the BR or R-CHOP/R-CVP study treatment groups by study completion. PFS rates at 5 years were 65.5% in the BR treatment group and 55.8% in the R-CHOP/R-CVP group. The difference in PFS was considered significant with a hazard ratio of 0.61 (95% CI, 0.45 to 0.85; P = .0025). The hazard ratio for event-free survival and duration of response (P = .0020 and .0134, respectively) also favored the BR regimen over R-CHOP/R-CVP. However, no significant difference in overall survival was observed. The overall safety profiles of BR, R-CHOP, and R-CVP were as expected; no new safety data were collected during long-term follow-up. A higher number of secondary malignancies was noted in the BR treatment group. CONCLUSION: Overall, BR demonstrated better long-term disease control than R-CHOP/R-CVP and should be considered as a first-line treatment option for patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphoma.

Randomized trial of bendamustine-rituximab or R-CHOP/R-CVP in first-line treatment of indolent NHL or MCL: the BRIGHT study.

This randomized, noninferiority (NI), global, phase 3 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR) vs a standard rituximab-chemotherapy regimen (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone [R-CHOP] or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone [R-CVP]) for treatment-naive patients with indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or mantle cell lymphoma. Investigators preassigned the standard treatment regimen they considered most appropriate for each patient; patients were randomized to receive BR (n = 224) or standard therapy (R-CHOP/R-CVP, n = 223) for 6 cycles; 2 additional cycles were permitted at investigator discretion. Response was assessed by a blinded independent review committee. BR was noninferior to R-CHOP/R-CVP, as assessed by the primary end point of complete response rate (31% vs 25%, respectively; P = .0225 for NI [0.88 margin]). The overall response rates for BR and R-CHOP/R-CVP were 97% and 91%, respectively (P = .0102). Incidences of vomiting and drug-hypersensitivity reactions were significantly higher in patients treated with BR (P < .05), and incidences of peripheral neuropathy/paresthesia and alopecia were significantly higher in patients treated with standard-therapy regimens (P < .05). These data indicate BR is noninferior to standard therapy with regard to clinical response with an acceptable safety profile. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00877006.

Randomized multicenter phase II trial of bolus plus infusional fluorouracil/leucovorin compared with fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin as third-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: The addition of oxaliplatin to fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin (LV) improves the outcome of patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). This multicenter study evaluated FU/LV with or without oxaliplatin in patients with metastatic CRC after disease progression on sequential fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred fourteen patients were randomly assigned to receive LV 200 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) and FU 400 mg/m2 IV bolus, followed by FU 600 mg/m2 IV over 22 hours on days 1 and 2, every 2 weeks (LV5FU2); or LV and FU as described, plus oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 IV over 2 hours on day 1 of the schedule (FOLFOX4). The primary end point was overall response. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar in the two treatment arms. Objective response (complete + partial) rates for LV5FU2 versus FOLFOX4 were 2% v 13% (P = .0027), respectively. Median time to disease progression was 2.4 v 4.8 months (P < .0001), and median survival was 11.4 v 9.9 months (P = .20) for LV5FU2 and FOLFOX4, respectively. Among the 72 patients who crossed over from LV5FU2 to FOLFOX4, 6% responded. Symptomatic improvement was significantly better for patients in the FOLFOX4 arm (32% v 18% for LV5FU2, P = .05). Grade 3/4 toxicities for LV5FU2 and FOLFOX4 were neutropenia (13% and 42%, respectively), diarrhea (6% and 16%, respectively), and overall neuropathy (0% and 6%, respectively). CONCLUSION: In patients with metastatic CRC, the FOLFOX4 regimen was superior to LV5FU2 with a higher response rate and time to disease progression. FOLFOX4 is an effective regimen even after disease progression on two previous chemotherapy regimens with fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan.