Patients with transplantation-ineligible relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) fare poorly, with limited treatment options. The antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin ...targets CD79b, a B-cell receptor component.
Safety and efficacy of polatuzumab vedotin with bendamustine and obinutuzumab (pola-BG) was evaluated in a single-arm cohort. Polatuzumab vedotin combined with bendamustine and rituximab (pola-BR) was compared with bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in a randomly assigned cohort of patients with transplantation-ineligible R/R DLBCL (primary end point: independent review committee IRC assessed complete response CR rate at the end of treatment). Duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were analyzed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression methods.
Pola-BG and pola-BR had a tolerable safety profile. The phase Ib/II pola-BG cohort (n = 27) had a CR rate of 29.6% and a median OS of 10.8 months (median follow-up, 27.0 months). In the randomly assigned cohort (n = 80; 40 per arm), pola-BR patients had a significantly higher IRC-assessed CR rate (40.0%
17.5%;
= .026) and longer IRC-assessed PFS (median, 9.5
3.7 months; hazard ratio HR, 0.36, 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.63;
< .001) and OS (median, 12.4
4.7 months; HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.24 to 0.75;
= .002; median follow-up, 22.3 months). Pola-BR patients had higher rates of grade 3-4 neutropenia (46.2%
33.3%), anemia (28.2%
17.9%), and thrombocytopenia (41%
23.1%), but similar grade 3-4 infections (23.1%
20.5%), versus the BR group. Peripheral neuropathy associated with polatuzumab vedotin (43.6% of patients) was grade 1-2 and resolved in most patients.
Polatuzumab vedotin combined with BR resulted in a significantly higher CR rate and reduced the risk of death by 58% compared with BR in patients with transplantation-ineligible R/R DLBCL.
The American Cancer Society (ACS) recommends that individuals with a cervix initiate cervical cancer screening at age 25 years and undergo primary human papillomavirus (HPV) testing every 5 years ...through age 65 years (preferred); if primary HPV testing is not available, then individuals aged 25 to 65 years should be screened with cotesting (HPV testing in combination with cytology) every 5 years or cytology alone every 3 years (acceptable) (strong recommendation). The ACS recommends that individuals aged >65 years who have no history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 or more severe disease within the past 25 years, and who have documented adequate negative prior screening in the prior 10 years, discontinue all cervical cancer screening (qualified recommendation). These new screening recommendations differ in 4 important respects compared with the 2012 recommendations: 1) The preferred screening strategy is primary HPV testing every 5 years, with cotesting and cytology alone acceptable where access to US Food and Drug Administration‐approved primary HPV testing is not yet available; 2) the recommended age to start screening is 25 years rather than 21 years; 3) primary HPV testing, as well as cotesting or cytology alone when primary testing is not available, is recommended starting at age 25 years rather than age 30 years; and 4) the guideline is transitional, ie, options for screening with cotesting or cytology alone are provided but should be phased out once full access to primary HPV testing for cervical cancer screening is available without barriers. Evidence related to other relevant issues was reviewed, and no changes were made to recommendations for screening intervals, age or criteria for screening cessation, screening based on vaccination status, or screening after hysterectomy. Follow‐up for individuals who screen positive for HPV and/or cytology should be in accordance with the 2019 American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology risk‐based management consensus guidelines for abnormal cervical cancer screening tests and cancer precursors.
Twenty percent of patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) experience progression of disease (POD) within 2 years of initial chemoimmunotherapy. We analyzed data from the National LymphoCare Study to ...identify whether prognostic FL factors are associated with early POD and whether patients with early POD are at high risk for death.
In total, 588 patients with stage 2 to 4 FL received first-line rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Two groups were defined: patients with early POD 2 years or less after diagnosis and those without POD within 2 years, the reference group. An independent validation set, 147 patients with FL who received first-line R-CHOP, was analyzed for reproducibility.
Of 588 patients, 19% (n = 110) had early POD, 71% (n = 420) were in the reference group, 8% (n = 46) were lost to follow-up, and 2% (n = 12) died without POD less than 2 years after diagnosis. Five-year overall survival was lower in the early-POD group than in the reference group (50% v 90%). This trend was maintained after we adjusted for FL International Prognostic Index (hazard ratio, 6.44; 95% CI, 4.33 to 9.58). Results were similar for the validation set (FL International Prognostic Index-adjusted hazard ratio, 19.8).
In patients with FL who received first-line R-CHOP, POD within 2 years after diagnosis was associated with poor outcomes and should be further validated as a standard end point of chemoimmunotherapy trials of untreated FL. This high-risk FL population warrants further study in directed prospective clinical trials.
Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive and clinically heterogeneous malignancy originating from B-cells with up to 40% of patients experiencing primary refractory disease or relapse ...after first-line treatment. However, the past 5 years have seen a flurry of new drug approvals for DLBCL anchored upon new immune therapies, including chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells and antibody-based therapies.
This article summarizes recent advances in the treatment of DLBCL, including in the first line and relapsed and refractory setting (second-line and beyond). A literature search was conducted for publications relevant to the immunotherapeutic approach to DLBCL from 2000 through March 2023 within PubMed and articles were reviewed. The search terms were immunotherapy, monoclonal antibodies, chimeric antigen receptor modified T-cell (CAR-T), and classification of DLBCL. Relevant clinical trials and pre-clinical studies exploring the strengths and weaknesses of current immune therapies against DLBCL were chosen. We additionally explored how intrinsic differences amongst DLBCL subtype biology and endogenous host immune recruitment contribute to variable therapeutic efficacy.
Future treatments will minimize chemotherapy exposure and be chosen by underlying tumor biology, paving the way for the promise of chemotherapeutic free regimens and improved outcomes for poor-risk subgroups.
Purpose Oral targeted therapies represent a significant advance for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL); however, their high cost has raised concerns about affordability ...and the economic impact on society. Our objective was to project the future prevalence and cost burden of CLL in the era of oral targeted therapies in the United States. Methods We developed a simulation model that evaluated the evolving management of CLL from 2011 to 2025: chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) as the standard of care before 2014, oral targeted therapies for patients with del(17p) and relapsed CLL from 2014, and for first-line treatment from 2016 onward. A comparator scenario also was simulated where CIT remained the standard of care throughout. Disease progression and survival parameters for each therapy were based on published clinical trials. Results The number of people living with CLL in the United States is projected to increase from 128,000 in 2011 to 199,000 by 2025 (55% increase) due to improved survival; meanwhile, the annual cost of CLL management will increase from $0.74 billion to $5.13 billion (590% increase). The per-patient lifetime cost of CLL treatment will increase from $147,000 to $604,000 (310% increase) as oral targeted therapies become the first-line treatment. For patients enrolled in Medicare, the corresponding total out-of-pocket cost will increase from $9,200 to $57,000 (520% increase). Compared with the CIT scenario, oral targeted therapies resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $189,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. Conclusion The increased benefit and cost of oral targeted therapies is projected to enhance CLL survivorship but can impose a substantial financial burden on both patients and payers. More sustainable pricing strategies for targeted therapies are needed to avoid financial toxicity to patients.