Assessing the efficacy and tolerability of PET-guided BrECADD versus eBEACOPP in advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HD21): a randomised, multicentre, parallel, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Intensified systemic chemotherapy has the highest primary cure rate for advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma but this comes with a cost of severe and potentially life long, persisting toxicities. With the new regimen of brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and dexamethasone (BrECADD), we aimed to improve the risk-to-benefit ratio of treatment of advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma guided by PET after two cycles. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, parallel, open-label, phase 3 trial was done in 233 trial sites across nine countries. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≤60 years) with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (ie, Ann Arbor stage III/IV, stage II with B symptoms, and either one or both risk factors of large mediastinal mass and extranodal lesions). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to four or six cycles (21-day intervals) of escalated doses of etoposide (200 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1-3), doxorubicin (35 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1), and cyclophosphamide (1250 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1), and standard doses of bleomycin (10 mg/m2 intravenously on day 8), vincristine (1·4 mg/m2 intravenously on day 8), procarbazine (100 mg/m2 orally on days 1-7), and prednisone (40 mg/m2 orally on days 1-14; eBEACOPP) or BrECADD, guided by PET after two cycles. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. Hierarchical coprimary objectives were to show (1) improved tolerability defined by treatment-related morbidity and (2) non-inferior efficacy defined by progression-free survival with an absolute non-inferiority margin of 6 percentage points of BrECADD compared with eBEACOPP. An additional test of superiority of progression-free survival was to be done if non-inferiority had been established. Analyses were done by intention to treat; the treatment-related morbidity assessment required documentation of at least one chemotherapy cycle. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02661503). FINDINGS: Between July 22, 2016, and Aug 27, 2020, 1500 patients were enrolled, of whom 749 were randomly assigned to BrECADD and 751 to eBEACOPP. 1482 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The median age of patients was 31 years (IQR 24-42). 838 (56%) of 1482 patients were male and 644 (44%) were female. Most patients were White (1352 [91%] of 1482). Treatment-related morbidity was significantly lower with BrECADD (312 [42%] of 738 patients) than with eBEACOPP (430 [59%] of 732 patients; relative risk 0·72 [95% CI 0·65-0·80]; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 48 months, BrECADD improved progression-free survival with a hazard ratio of 0·66 (0·45-0·97; p=0·035); 4-year progression-free survival estimates were 94·3% (95% CI 92·6-96·1) for BrECADD and 90·9% (88·7-93·1) for eBEACOPP. 4-year overall survival rates were 98·6% (97·7-99·5) and 98·2% (97·2-99·3), respectively. INTERPRETATION: BrECADD guided by PET after two cycles is better tolerated and more effective than eBEACOPP in first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma. FUNDING: Takeda Oncology.

The impact of MICB mismatches in unrelated haematopoietic stem cell transplantation.

MICA polymorphisms have been associated with increased incidence of acute GvHD and adverse outcome in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). MICB is another expressed member of MHC class I-related chain genes and its impact on HSCT outcome is yet to be fully defined. We typed a large cohort of patients and donors for MICB polymorphisms and investigated the impact of MICB matching on outcome after unrelated HSCT. 69.2% of the patients were 10/10 human leukocyte antigen (HLA) matched and 30.8% were 9/10 HLA matched. MICB typing was performed using a short amplicon-based NGS typing assay on the Illumina MiSeq platform. Differences in proteins were considered as mismatches. MICA polymorphisms were identified as possible confounder and were therefore included as parameter in the multivariate analyses. Due to the strong linkage disequilibrium with the classical HLA-genes, sub-stratification for HLA matching status was necessary, and no effect of MICB mismatches was seen in the 10/10 HLA matched group when compared to the MICB matched cases. However, in the 9/10 HLA matched group, MICB mismatched cases showed significantly worse disease free survival (DFS), GvHD and relapse free survival (GRFS) compared to the MICB matched cases (DFS: HR 1.24, p = 0.011; GRFS: HR 1.26, p = 0.002). MICA mismatches had no impact on any outcome parameter. According to our findings, effects previously attributed to MICA differences may have been confounded by MICB polymorphisms. We show that MICB differences contribute a small but relevant effect in 9/10 HLA-matched transplantations, which in turn highlights the possible usefulness of MICB typing in donor selection among similarly suitable 9/10 matched donors, especially when HLA-B mismatches have to be accepted.

Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis: A retrospective analysis of the DRST and GREM registries.

We identified 71 patients with AdvSM (aggressive SM [ASM], SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm [SM-AHN, e.g., acute myeloid leukemia, SM-AML], mast cell leukemia [MCL]) in two national registries (DRST/GREM) who received an allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) performed in Germany from 1999-2021. Median overall survival (OS) of ASM/SM-AHN (n = 30, 45%), SM-AML (n = 28, 39%) and MCL ± AHN (n = 13, 19%) was 9.0, 3.3 and 0.9 years (P = 0.007). Improved median OS was associated with response of SM (17/41, 41%; HR 0.4 [0.2-0.9], P = 0.035) and/or of AHN (26/43, 60%, HR 0.3 [0.1-0.7], P = 0.004) prior to alloHCT. Adverse predictors for OS included absence of KIT D816V (10/61, 16%, HR 2.9 [1.2-6.5], P < 0.001) and a complex karyotype (9/60, 15%, HR 4.2 [1.8-10.0], P = 0.016). HLA-match, conditioning type or transplantation at centers reporting above-average alloHCTs (≥7) had no impact on OS. Taking into account competing events at years 1, 3 and 5, relapse-related mortality and non-relapse mortality rate were 15%/23%, 20%/30% and 23%/35%, respectively. Irrespective of subtype, subsequent treatment response was achieved in 13/30 (43%) patients and was highest on midostaurin/avapritinib (7/9, 78%). We conclude that outcome of alloHCT in AdvSM is more affected by disease phenotype and treatment response prior to transplant than by transplant characteristics.

The protective effect of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors in COVID-19 in patients with inflammatory rheumatic diseases compared to the general population-A comparison of two German registries.

Objectives: To investigate, whether inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) inpatients are at higher risk to develop a severe course of SARS-CoV-2 infections compared to the general population, data from the German COVID-19 registry for IRD patients and data from the Lean European Survey on SARS-CoV-2 (LEOSS) infected patients covering inpatients from the general population with SARS-CoV-2 infections were compared. Methods: 4310 (LEOSS registry) and 1139 cases (IRD registry) were collected in general. Data were matched for age and gender. From both registries, 732 matched inpatients (LEOSS registry: n = 366 and IRD registry: n = 366) were included for analyses in total. Results: Regarding the COVID-19 associated lethality, no significant difference between both registries was observed. Age > 65°years, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes mellitus, rheumatoid arthritis, spondyloarthritis and the use of rituximab were associated with more severe courses of COVID-19. Female gender and the use of tumor necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors (TNF-I) were associated with a better outcome of COVID-19. Conclusion: Inflammatory rheumatic diseases (IRD) patients have the same risk factors for severe COVID-19 regarding comorbidities compared to the general population without any immune-mediated disease or immunomodulation. The use of rituximab was associated with an increased risk for severe COVID-19. On the other hand, the use of TNF-I was associated with less severe COVID-19 compared to the general population, which might indicate a protective effect of TNF-I against severe COVID-19 disease.