A phase 2 study of the PI3Kδ inhibitor parsaclisib in relapsed and refractory marginal zone lymphoma (CITADEL-204)

Parsaclisib, a potent and highly selective PI3K5 inhibitor, has shown clinical benefit in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) B-cell lymphomas. The phase 2 CITADEL-204 study (NCT03144674, EudraCT 2017-000970-12) assessed efficacy and safety of parsaclisib in Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor-experienced (cohort 1) or BTK inhibitor-naive (cohort 2) patients with R/R marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). Patients aged >= 18 years with histologically confirmed R/R MZL, treated with >= 1 prior systemic therapy (including >= 1 anti-CD20 antibody) received parsaclisib 20 mg once daily for 8 weeks then 20 mg once weekly (weekly dosing group [WG]) or parsaclisib 20 mg once daily for 8 weeks then 2.5 mg once daily (daily dosing group [DG]); DG was selected for further assessment. Primary end point of the study was objective response rate (ORR). Owing to slower than expected recruitment, cohort 1 was closed with 10 patients (WG, n = 4; DG, n = 6) enrolled. Based on a planned interim analysis in cohort 2, the futility boundary was not crossed, and enrollment continued to study completion. At data cutoff (15 January 2021), 100 patients were enrolled and treated in cohort 2 (WG, n = 28; DG, n = 72). In the DG, the ORR was 58.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 46.1-69.8), with a complete response rate of 4.2% (95% CI, 0.9-11.7); the lower bound of the ORR 95% CI exceeded the protocol-defined threshold of 40%. The median duration of response was 12.2 months (95% CI, 8.1-17.5) and progression-free survival was 16.5 months (95% CI, 11.5-20.6); median overall survival was not reached. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) among all patients wer

Humoral serological response to the BNT162b2 vaccine is abrogated in lymphoma patients within the first 12 months following treatment with anti-CD2O antibodies

Patients with lymphoma, especially those treated with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, suffer high COVID-19-associated morbidity and mortality. The goal of this study was to assess the ability of lymphoma patients to generate a sufficient humoral response after two injections of BNT162b2 Pfizer vaccine and to identify factors influencing the response. Antibody titers were measured with the SARS-CoV-2 IgG II Quant (Abbott ) assay in blood samples drawn from lymphoma patients 4 2 weeks after the second dose of vaccine. The cutoff for a positive response was set at 50 AU/mL. Positive serological responses were observed in 51% of the 162 patients enrolled in this cross-sectional study. In a multivariate analysis, an interval of 1 year after this therapy. The latter percentage was equal to that of patients never exposed to monoclonal antibodies. In conclusion, lymphoma patients, especially those recently treated with anti- CD20 monoclonal antibodies, fail to develop sufficient humoral response to BNT162b2 vaccine. While a serological response is not the only predictor of immunity, its low level could make this population more vulnerable to COVID-19, which implies the need for a different vaccination schedule for such patients

The Association between Patient Characteristics and the Efficacy and Safety of Selinexor in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the SADAL Study.

Selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, was evaluated in the Phase 2b SADAL study in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who previously received two to five prior systemic regimens. In post hoc analyses, we analyzed several categories of patient characteristics (age, renal function, DLBCL subtype, absolute lymphocyte count, transplant status, number of prior lines of therapy, refractory status, Ann Arbor disease stage, and lactate dehydrogenase) at baseline, i.e., during screening procedures, to determine their potential contributions to the efficacy (overall response rate [ORR], duration of response [DOR], overall survival [OS]) and tolerability of selinexor. Across most categories of characteristics, no significant difference was observed in ORR or DOR. OS was significantly longer for patients ULN. The most common adverse events (AEs) across the characteristics were thrombocytopenia and nausea, and similar rates of grade 3 AEs and serious AEs were observed. With its oral administration, novel mechanism of action, and consistency in responses in heavily pretreated patients, selinexor may help to address an important unmet clinical need in the treatment of DLBCL

The Association between Patient Characteristics and the Efficacy and Safety of Selinexor in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the SADAL Study.

Selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, was evaluated in the Phase 2b SADAL study in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who previously received two to five prior systemic regimens. In post hoc analyses, we analyzed several categories of patient characteristics (age, renal function, DLBCL subtype, absolute lymphocyte count, transplant status, number of prior lines of therapy, refractory status, Ann Arbor disease stage, and lactate dehydrogenase) at baseline, i.e., during screening procedures, to determine their potential contributions to the efficacy (overall response rate [ORR], duration of response [DOR], overall survival [OS]) and tolerability of selinexor. Across most categories of characteristics, no significant difference was observed in ORR or DOR. OS was significantly longer for patients ULN. The most common adverse events (AEs) across the characteristics were thrombocytopenia and nausea, and similar rates of grade 3 AEs and serious AEs were observed. With its oral administration, novel mechanism of action, and consistency in responses in heavily pretreated patients, selinexor may help to address an important unmet clinical need in the treatment of DLBCL

The Association between Patient Characteristics and the Efficacy and Safety of Selinexor in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the SADAL Study.

Selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, was evaluated in the Phase 2b SADAL study in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who previously received two to five prior systemic regimens. In post hoc analyses, we analyzed several categories of patient characteristics (age, renal function, DLBCL subtype, absolute lymphocyte count, transplant status, number of prior lines of therapy, refractory status, Ann Arbor disease stage, and lactate dehydrogenase) at baseline, i.e., during screening procedures, to determine their potential contributions to the efficacy (overall response rate [ORR], duration of response [DOR], overall survival [OS]) and tolerability of selinexor. Across most categories of characteristics, no significant difference was observed in ORR or DOR. OS was significantly longer for patients ULN. The most common adverse events (AEs) across the characteristics were thrombocytopenia and nausea, and similar rates of grade 3 AEs and serious AEs were observed. With its oral administration, novel mechanism of action, and consistency in responses in heavily pretreated patients, selinexor may help to address an important unmet clinical need in the treatment of DLBCL

Primary cutaneous γ/δ T-cell lymphoma. An atypical case with bone marrow granulomas

BACKGROUND: Primary cutaneous γ/δ T-cell lymphoma is a rare variant of peripheral T-cell lymphoma which has been only recently set apart from subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma and is known for its aggressive nature. MAIN OBSERVATION: We hereby report a case of primary cutaneous γ/δ T-cell lymphoma in a 35-year-old man with bone marrow granulomas, an unexpected feature in this lymphoma. The patient was treated with combination chemotherapy. Partial response was obtained, followed by relapse. Allogeneic stem cell transplantation was then carried out, and full remission was achieved. CONCLUSION: Bone marrow granulomas can be an accompanying feature in primary cutaneous γ/δ T-cell lymphoma

The Use of Myeloid Colony-Stimulating Factors in Hematologic Malignancies: The Role of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Myeloid colony-stimulating factors (M-CSFs), which include granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), regulate the proliferation and differentiation of myeloid cells. Their use has an important role in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. Guidelines for the use of colony stimulating factors have been published by the American Society of Oncology (ASCO) in 1996 and have been updated several times, most recently in 2006. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials are regarded as the highest grade of evidence in clinical research and as such, compared to individual studies, they have more power in answering unresolved clinical issues. In this review, our aim is to evaluate the role of M-CSFs in hematologic malignancies based on meta-analyses conducted in the field.</jats:p

Obinutuzumab-Related Adverse Events: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Rituximab, the first FDA-approved anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody has dramatically improved outcomes for patients with CD20 positive lymphoproliferative disorders for 2 decades. Obinutuzumab was developed to potentiate activity and overcome resistance to rituximab. Clinical data suggest obinutuzumab is superior to rituximab in specific lymphoproliferative disorder, at the potential cost of increased toxicity, especially infections. In order to better define the toxicity profile of obinutuzumab as opposed to rituximab, we conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of all randomized controlled trials comparing obinutuzumab with rituximab, either alone or combined with chemotherapy for any CD20 positive lymphoproliferative disorder, in order to assess safety. Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted until June 2019. Two reviewers appraised the quality of trials and extracted data. The Primary outcome was grade 3 to 4 infections; secondary outcomes included any adverse events, serious adverse events, and other grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity. Relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated and pooled. A fixed‐effect model was used to pool data unless there was significant heterogeneity, in which case a random‐effects model was used. Results: Our search yielded 4 randomized controlled trials conducted between the years 2009 and 2014, including 3429 patients. Median age of patients in the trials was 58 to 62 years. The trials included patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) (2 trials), chronic lymphocytic leukemia, (1 trial), and diffuse large B cell lymphoma (1 trial). All trials compared between obinutuzumab and rituximab therapy: in 3 trials the antibody was combined with chemotherapy and in 1 trial it was given alone. In 2 trials, which included FL patients, the antibody was given also as maintenance therapy for up to 2 years. There was a statistically marginally increased rate of grade 3-4 infections (RR 1.17 [95% CI, 1.0‐1.36]) and febrile neutropenia (RR 1.23 [95% CI, 1.0‐1.5]) and a statistically significant increased rate of grade 3-4 adverse events (RR 1.15 [95% CI, 1.09‐1.2]) in the obinutuzumab arm vs rituximab. Also, the obinutuzumab arm showed increased risk of grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia (RR 2.8 [95% CI, 1.92‐4.06]), infusion related reactions (RR 2.8 [95% CI, 2.16‐3.64]) and cardiac events (RR 1.65 [95% CI, 1.11‐2.46]). There was no significant difference in grade 3-4 anemia and neutropenia rates, nor in the mortality rate at 36 months (RR 0.93 [95% CI, 0.78‐1.11]). Conclusions: Our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates that obinutuzumab has a more severe toxicity profile as compared to rituximab. As better clinical outcomes were reported with obinutuzumab in several CD20 positive lymphoproliferative disorders, but with more toxicity, clinicians are faced with a challenge upon deciding which therapy to choose for their patients. Disclosures Gurion: Roche: Consultancy. </jats:sec

Central nervous system involvement in T-cell lymphomas: A single center experience.

8069 Background: Large experiences have reviewed the risk of central nervous system (CNS) involvement in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), but there are limited data on CNS involvement by peripheral T cell lymphomas (PTCL). We characterized the incidence of CNS involvement, risk factors and outcome in a large single institution dataset of PTCL. Methods: Retrospective review of the T-cell lymphoma database at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. We identified 232 patients with any subtype of PTCL between 1994-2011 with a minimum 6 months of follow-up or an event defined as relapse or death. We excluded indolent forms of cutaneous T cell lymphoma. Results: Histologies included PTCL-NOS (31%), angioimmunoblastic (16.8%), anaplastic (ALCL), ALK negative (12%), ALCL, ALK positive (6%), extranodal NK/T cell lymphoma (7.3%), adult T cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL) (7.3%), and transformed MF (8.6%). Median age was 58 years with 59.9% men. CNS disease was found in 17 patients (7.32%). 8 (47%) had pathologic confirmation and 7 (41.2%) were clinically diagnosed. Two had other diagnoses at biopsy: DLBCL and glioblastoma. Median time to CNS involvement was 2.33 months (range, 0.16 to 103.1). CNS prophylaxis was given to 24 (10.34%), primarily intrathecal methotrexate. There was no difference in CNS involvement in patients who received prophylaxis vs. those who did not: 3/24 (12.5%) vs. 12/208 (5.77%) (p=0.192) respectively. Univariate analysis identified: stage III-IV (p=0.03), bone marrow involvement (p=0.018), &gt;1 extranodal site (p&lt;0.001), and ATLL vs. all other subtypes, 23.5% vs. 6.4% (p=0.003) as risk factors for CNS disease. On multivariate analysis, &gt;1 extranodal site (p=0.004) and high intermediate (H-I) and high (H) IPI (IPI 3-5 &amp; 4-5) were predictive for CNS involvement (p&lt;0.05). The median survival of patients with CNS involvement was 2.628 months. Conclusions: Despite high relapse rates, PTCL carries a low risk of CNS involvement other than the ATLL subtype. As with other aggressive lymphomas, survival of patients with CNS involvement is poor and risk factors include: &gt;1 extra nodal site and H-I-H IPI. In this dataset, prophylactic intrathecal chemotherapy does not appear to reduce the risk of CNS disease. </jats:p