MRD-driven treatment with venetoclax-R2 in mantle cell lymphoma: the Nordic Lymphoma Group MCL7 VALERIA trial.

ABSTRACT: Despite improvements in treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), most patients eventually relapse. In this multicenter phase 1b/2 trial, we evaluated safety and efficacy of minimal residual disease (MRD)-driven venetoclax, lenalidomide, and rituximab (venetoclax-R2) in relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL and explored the feasibility of stopping treatment in molecular remission. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) at 6 months. After dose escalation, the recommended phase 2 dose was lenalidomide 20 mg daily, days 1 to 21; venetoclax 600 mg daily after ramp-up; and rituximab 375 mg/m2 weekly for 4 weeks, then every 8 weeks. MRD monitoring by RQ-PCR was performed every 3 months. When MRD-negativity in the blood was reached, treatment was continued for another 3 months; if MRD-negativity was then confirmed, treatment was stopped. In total, 59 patients were enrolled, with a median age of 73 years. At 6 months, the ORR was 63% (29 complete remission [CR], 8 partial remission [PR]), and 40% (4 CR, 2 PR) for patients previously failing a Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 21 months, with median overall survival of 31 months. TP53 mutation was associated with inferior PFS (P < .01). Overall, 28 patients (48%) discontinued treatment in molecular remission, and 25 remain MRD negative after a median of 17.4 months. Hematological toxicity was frequent, with 52 of 59 (88%) patients with G3-4 neutropenia and 21 of 59 (36%) patients with G3-4 thrombocytopenia. To conclude, MRD-driven venetoclax-R2 is feasible and tolerable and shows efficacy in R/R MCL, also after BTK inhibitor failure. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03505944.

Chemotherapy-Free Initial Treatment of Advanced Indolent Lymphoma Has Durable Effect With Low Toxicity: Results From Two Nordic Lymphoma Group Trials With More Than 10 Years of Follow-Up.

PURPOSE: For indolent lymphoma, the optimal timing, sequence, and choice of therapeutic regimens remain a matter of debate. In two Nordic Lymphoma Group randomized trials, symptomatic or clearly progressing patients were treated first line with a rituximab-containing regimen without chemotherapy. The purpose of this study was to assess long-term survival, risk of transformation, and need of new therapies. METHODS: Data were collected at cross-sectional follow-up for 321 patients with indolent lymphoma (84% with follicular lymphomas [FL]) included in one of two Nordic Lymphoma Group trials (accrual 1998 to 1999 and 2002 to 2008). All patients received first-line therapy with one or two cycles of four weekly infusions of rituximab 375 mg/m2, and 148 were randomly allocated to the addition of interferon alfa-2a. Follow-up data were retrieved from initial trial databases and medical records on repeated clinical evaluations. RESULTS: At the end of follow-up, 73% of patients were alive, with a median follow-up after random assignment of 10.6 years. Among all, 36% (38% with FL) had never needed chemotherapy. For patients with FL who required new therapy within 24 months because of early disease progression, the 10-year survival rate was 59% versus 81% for those with longer remission. Interferon was not shown to improve long-term outcome. Transformation was diagnosed in 20% of all patients (2.4% per person-year) and in 18% with FL. An additional malignancy was found in 12%. CONCLUSION: Approximately one third of patients with symptomatic indolent lymphoma (30% with FL, 23% without FL) did not need new therapy in the long term after first-line rituximab without chemotherapy. In the entire cohort, 10-year survival was excellent with no major safety issues, which suggests that chemotherapy can be delayed safely in the majority of patients.

Ibrutinib, lenalidomide, and rituximab in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (PHILEMON): a multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Regimens based on ibrutinib alone and lenalidomide and rituximab in combination show high activity in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma. We hypothesised that the combination of all three drugs would improve efficacy compared with previously published data on either regimen alone. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma who had previously been treated with at least one rituximab-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-3, and at least one site of measurable disease, and who met criteria for several laboratory-assessed parameters. Treatment was divided into an induction phase of 12 cycles of 28 days with all three drugs and a maintenance phase with ibrutinib and rituximab only (cycle duration 56 days), given until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. In the induction phase, patients received intravenous (375 mg/m2) or subcutaneous (1400 mg) rituximab once a week during cycle 1 and then once every 8 weeks. Oral ibrutinib (560 mg once a day) was given to patients every day in the cycle, whereas oral lenalidomide (15 mg once a day) was given on days 1-21. The primary endpoint was overall response assessed in the intention-to-treat population according to Lugano criteria. Safety analysis included all patients who received the treatment, irrespective of eligibility or duration of treatment. The trial is ongoing, but is no longer accruing patients, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02460276. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2015, and June 1, 2016, we enrolled 50 patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma at ten centres in Sweden, Finland, Norway, and Denmark. At a median follow-up of 17·8 months (IQR 14·7-20·9), 38 (76%, 95% CI 63-86) patients had an overall response, including 28 (56%, 42-69) patients who had a complete response and ten (20%, 11-33) who had a partial response. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 19 [38%] of 50 patients), infections (in 11 [22%] patients), and cutaneous toxicity (in seven [14%] patients). There were three treatment-related deaths during the study, two due to sepsis and one due to embolic stroke. INTERPRETATION: Our results provide preliminary evidence that the triplet combination of ibrutinib, lenalidomide, and rituximab is an active regimen in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma, and should be evaluated in a prospective randomised controlled trial. FUNDING: Janssen and Celgene.

Proteasome inhibitors and IMiDs can overcome some high-risk cytogenetics in multiple myeloma but not gain 1q21.

Chromosomal aberrations have significant prognostic importance in multiple myeloma (MM). However, proteasome inhibitors (PI) and IMiDs may partly overcome the poor prognostic impact of some of them. In this study, we investigated a population-based consecutive cohort newly diagnosed patients with MM admitted during a defined time period to hospitals in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The impact of treatment modality on the prognostic importance of specific chromosomal aberration was investigated, with special reference to gain 1q21. The median follow-up of patients still alive at analysis was 40 months for the high-dose (HDT)-treated ones and 29 months for the whole population. Three hundred forty-seven patients with a known 1q21 status were included in this study. The 347 patients were divided into three groups, that is, 119 patients with the 1q21 gain, 105 patients with other aberrations (OA), that is, del(13q), del(17p), t(4,14), and/or (14;16), and 123 patients with no aberrations (NA). The groups were compared in terms of overall survival (OS), time to progression (TTP), and response. The 3-yr OS for patients with gain 1q21 was 60% compared to patients with OA 74% and NO 82% (gain 1q21 vs. NO P < 0.001; gain 1q21 vs. OA P = 0.095). If treated with PI or IMiDs, the 3-yr OS was 58% for patients with gain 1q21 compared to patients with OA 78% and NO 78%, respectively (P = 0.041, P = 0.140). In HDT patients, the 3-yr OS was 69% for patients with gain 1q21 compared to patients with OA 84% and NO 88%, respectively (P < 0.008, P = 0.600). Thus, neither HDT nor using PI or IMiDs could overcome the poor prognostic impact of gain 1q21, while these drugs and HDT seemed to improve OS in patients with OA, approaching the survival in NO. Further, gain 1q21 appears to be one of the most important poor prognostic chromosomal aberrations in multiple myeloma with current treatments. Trials using new drugs or allogeneic transplantation are warranted.

Activin A inhibits BMP-signaling by binding ACVR2A and ACVR2B.

BACKGROUND: Activins are members of the TGF-ß family of ligands that have multiple biological functions in embryonic stem cells as well as in differentiated tissue. Serum levels of activin A were found to be elevated in pathological conditions such as cachexia, osteoporosis and cancer. Signaling by activin A through canonical ALK4-ACVR2 receptor complexes activates the transcription factors SMAD2 and SMAD3. Activin A has a strong affinity to type 2 receptors, a feature that they share with some of the bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs). Activin A is also elevated in myeloma patients with advanced disease and is involved in myeloma bone disease. RESULTS: In this study we investigated effects of activin A binding to receptors that are shared with BMPs using myeloma cell lines with well-characterized BMP-receptor expression and responses. Activin A antagonized BMP-6 and BMP-9, but not BMP-2 and BMP-4. Activin A was able to counteract BMPs that signal through the type 2 receptors ACVR2A and ACVR2B in combination with ALK2, but not BMPs that signal through BMPR2 in combination with ALK3 and ALK6. CONCLUSIONS: We propose that one important way that activin A regulates cell behavior is by antagonizing BMP-ACVR2A/ACVR2B/ALK2 signaling.

Rituximab blocks protective serologic response to influenza A (H1N1) 2009 vaccination in lymphoma patients during or within 6 months after treatment.

Cancer patients are often encouraged to receive seasonal influenza vaccination. The monoclonal antibody rituximab is widely used in treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This results in a prolonged depletion of normal B cells, which might impair humoral responses. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether lymphoma patients undergoing rituximab-containing treatment regimens or having received such regimens within the past 6 months were able to mount protective antibody responses to the influenza A(H1N1) 2009 virus vaccine Pandemrix during the 2009 "swine flu" pandemic. Contrary to the control group, where 82% responded adequately to the vaccine, none of the 67 patients achieved protective antibody titers, suggesting that lymphoma patients receiving rituximab-containing regimens might not benefit from this vaccine. It is important that doctors who care for such patients are aware that they may fail to respond not only to the influenza vaccine, but also to other common vaccines.