Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 134, No. Supplement_1 ( 2019-11-13), p. 398-398

Abstract: Introduction: Management of elderly patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) is challenging. A simplified Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (sCGA) based on ADL (Activity of Daily Living), IADL (Instrumental ADL) and CIRS-G (Comorbidity Index Rating Scale for Geriatrics) scales has demonstrated to be better than clinical judgement to stratify patients' outcome but has never been included in initial assessment. To further assess the impact of sCGA on patients' outcome, we conducted a prospective observational study on a large series of elderly patients with DLBCL. Methods: Patients were enrolled if 65 year old or older, with an untreated de novo DLBCL. sCGA was available at a web based platform that classified patients as FIT, UNFIT, and FRAIL, as shown in Table 1. Treatment choice was left at physician discretion. According to anthracycline dose, therapy was classified as curative (≥70% of full anthracycline dose), intermediate ( & lt;70%) or palliative (no anthracycline). Primary study endpoint was Overall Survival (OS). Results: From December 2013 to December 2017, 1353 patients have been registered by 37 centres and 1207 were eligible. Median age was 76 years (65-94), 68% had stage III-IV, and 55% had an International Prognostic Index(IPI) ≥3; 500 (42%), 304 (25%), and 403 (33%) were classified as FIT, UNFIT and FRAIL, respectively. Data on treatment were available in 1164 patients: rituximab was used in 96% of patients; treatment was curative in 89%, 53%, and 36% of FIT, UNFIT, and FRAIL patients, respectively; intermediate in 10%, 39%, and 31%, palliative in 0%, 8%, and 33% of patients. The OS was available in 1158 out 1164 cases. With a median follow up of 30 months (1-59) 3y-OS was 64% (95% CI 61% to 67%). According to sCGA the OS was significantly different among the 3 geriatric groups. Correlation with OS was improved when sCGA was integrated with age & lt; or ≥ 80 years to define 3 groups of patients (Table 2): FIT and UNFIT younger than 80 years (sCGA Group 1; 55%, 3 yr OS 75%), UNFIT ≥ 80 years and FRAIL younger than 80 years (sCGA Group 2: 28%, 3yr OS 58%), FRAIL ≥ 80 years (sCGA Group 3: 17%; 3yr OS 43%). Univariable and multivariable analysis for OS was conducted using the 3 sCGA groups and other clinical and laboratory features. The 3 sCGA groups were shown as independent prognostic factors with IPI and with anemia (Hb & lt; 12 g/dl). We used results of multivariable analysis to build a categorical prognostic index assigning different weights to prognostic features based on their Hazard Ratio (HR) (Table 3). The Elderly Prognostic Index (EPI) was defined as the score obtained from the sum of the weights and allowed to define 3 risk groups: Low Risk (LR: score 0-1; 23% of patients); Intermediate Risk (IR; score 2-4; 48%); High Risk (HiR; score 5-7; 29%). The 3 EPI risk groups had a different 3 year OS of 87%(95%CI 81-91), 69%(95%CI 63-73), and 42% (95%CI 36-49); HR for IR vs LR 2.57 (1.72, 3.84); HiR vs LR 6.21(4.17 -9.25), HiR vs IR 2.42 (1.91-3.05) (Figure1). Regarding treatment modality, curative, intermediate and palliative therapies were adopted in 89%, 10%, and 1% of the LR group; 70%, 24%, 7% of the IR group, and 37%, 35%, 28% of the HiR group. The model was internally validated by means of 1000 procedures confirming good performance (slope shrinkage 0.935 and c-Harrell 0.675 in validation sample compared with 0.682 in training sample). The EPI was also tested in an external validation data set that was identified from the pivotal study of sCGA in DLBCL (N=172 patients, Tucci A. et al, Leuk Lymph, 2015) (Figure 1). Conclusion: Using data from this large prospective observational study on elderly DLBCL patients we were able to build a new prognostic index that allows to identify 3 risk groups with significant differences in terms of 3 years OS. The EPI is the first index that integrates geriatric assessment with clinical features and contributes to improving management and clinical research in elderly patients with DLBCL. Disclosures Spina: Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Roche: Other: lecture fee; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; GILEAD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Celgene: Other: lecture fee; BMS: Other: lecture fee; Sanofi Genzyme: Other: lecture fee; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee, Research Funding; Takeda: Other: lecture fee; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fee; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Merli:Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Gilead: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses. Cavallo:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ladetto:Roche: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; J & J: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Chiappella:Celgene: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau. Nassi:Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Ferrero:Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luminari:ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELGENE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; GILEAD: Other: Lecturer; TAKEDA: Other: Travel Grant.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2019-123027

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2019

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 128, No. 22 ( 2016-12-02), p. 3049-3049

Abstract: Introduction: The initial approach to elderly patients with Diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is usually based on the subjective judgment of the physician on the individual patient's ability to tolerate treatment with curative intent. "Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment" (CGA) is based on the use of the ADL (Activity of Daily Living), IADL (Instrumental ADL) and CIRS-G (Comorbidity Index Rating Scale for Geriatrics) scales and represents a tool to standardize initial patients fitness assessment and for planning systemic therapy. So far CGA has been rarely used in prospective studies and lacks a formal validation in patients with lymphoma. Objectives: FIL is conducting a prospective study with the aim of validating the use of CGA on a large series of elderly patients with DLBCL and to test a CGA based approach to the patient. CGA results will be used to define treatment goals that are the cure for the FIT subjects, and palliation for the FRAILs. Treatment goal for the UNFIT is cure with less toxic regimens. Methods: This study is conducted using a web based platform, accessible from the reserved area of the FIL website, to perform a quick and objective CGA evaluation of consecutive patients ≥ 65 years with untreated DLBCL. Patients younger than 80 years, without impairment of ADL and IADL and without severe comorbidities were considered FIT; those with intermediate fragility or those older than 80 years with FIT profile were classified as UNFIT (UN); those with severe impairment of ADL, IADL and CIRS and those older than 80 years with an UN profile were classified as FRAIL (FR). Informed consent was required to enrol patients in this study; the planned sample size was 1000 patients. Results: The study started in December 2013. At time of current analysis 792 patients have been registered by 45 centres: 328 (41%), 207 (26%), and 257 (33%) were classified as FIT, UN and FR, respectively. Median age was 77 years (yrs) (65-95); 73 (65-79), 80 (65-95) and 81 (65-95) yrs for FIT, UN and FR patients respectively; overall 65% were in stage III-IV. By univariate analysis, the three categories differed in terms of median age (p 〈 0.001), B-symptoms (p=0.035), ECOG PS 〉 1 (p 〈 0.001), elevated LDH (p=0.035) and IPI score (p=0.004). Fourty-nine percent of cases were defined as UN only because of age (≥80 yrs); other reasons for UN were impairment of IADL, ADL in 30% and 18%, respectively. Only 3% of cases were UN due to CIRS (5-8 comorbidities of grade 2). Regarding FRAIL patients 27% of patients were classified in this group due to CIRS impairment, 24% and 18% due to IADL and ADL impairment, respectively. In remaining 31%, patients were FRAIL due to age ≥80 yrs (Figure 1). The most frequent altered ADL items among UN and FR patients were continence (15%) and bathing (30%), respectively; regarding IADL the most frequent altered items were buying and food preparation for either UN (19% and 12%) and FR (53% and 41%). Most frequent grade 3 comorbidities among the 257 FR patients were those referred to heart (16%), vascular system (9%), muscoloskelatal (7%), and genitourinary (5%). Data on planned treatment were available in 643 patients. Rituximab was used in all but 6 (2%), 18 (12%), and 35 (17%) FIT, UN, and FR cases. Treatment with curative intent (full doses R-CHOP-like regimens) was used in 94% and 65% of FIT and UNFIT cases; surprisingly curative intent was declared also in 38% of FRAIL cases. Six percent, 25% and 26% of FIT, UN and FR patients were treated with an attenuated R-CHOP-like immuno-chemotherapy regimens. Palliative regimens were used in 36% and 10% of FR and UN patients respectively. Conclusion: The preliminary data of Elderly Project showed that, with the CGA criteria as adopted in this study, the 59% of elderly patients with DLBCL at diagnosis were not FIT. Rituximab and doxorubicin containing regimen seems to be the reference treatment for FIT, UN and also for a significant proportion of FR patients but the actual value of using this approach for non-FIT patients is not clear and will be assessed with this project. Figure 1 Contribution of Activity of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental ADL (IADL), Comorbidity Index Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G) scales and Age to Fitness Status Figure 1. Contribution of Activity of Daily Living (ADL), Instrumental ADL (IADL), Comorbidity Index Rating Scale for Geriatrics (CIRS-G) scales and Age to Fitness Status Disclosures Merli: Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luminari:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cavallo:JANSSEN: Honoraria; CELGENE: Honoraria; ONYX: Honoraria. Chiappella:Roche: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Spina:Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee; Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker Fee.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood.V128.22.3049.3049

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Hematological Oncology, Wiley, Vol. 40, No. 1 ( 2022-02), p. 32-40

Abstract: The standard management for relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is salvage therapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). This strategy allows almost 50% of patients to be cured. Post‐ASCT maintenance treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) confers improved progression‐free survival (PFS) to cHL patients at high risk of relapse. We investigated the outcome of 105 cHL patients receiving post‐ASCT BV maintenance in the real‐life setting of 23 Italian hematology centers. This population included naïve patients and those previously exposed to BV. Median follow‐up was 20 months. Patients presented a median of two lines of treatment pre‐ASCT, with 51% receiving BV. Twenty‐nine percent of patients had at least two high‐risk factors (refractory disease, complete response [CR] less than 12 months, extranodal disease at relapse), while 16% presented none. At PET‐CT, a Deauville score (DS) of 1–3 was reported in 75% and 78% of pre‐ and post‐ASCT evaluations, respectively. Grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs), mainly peripheral neuropathy, were observed in 16% of patients. Three‐year PFS and overall survival (OS) were 62% and 86%, respectively. According to BV exposure, 3‐year PFS and OS were 54% and 71%, respectively, for naïve and 77% and 96%, respectively, for previously exposed patients. Refractory disease (hazard ratio [HR] 4.46; p  = 0.003) and post‐ASCT DS 4–5 (HR 3.14; p  = 0.005) were the only two factors significantly associated with PFS reduction in multivariable analysis. Post‐ASCT BV maintenance is an effective, safe treatment option for cHL naïve patients and those previously exposed to BV.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0278-0232 , 1099-1069

URL: Issue

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1002/hon.v40.1

DOI: 10.1002/hon.2939

Language: English

Publisher: Wiley

Publication Date: 2022

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2001443-0

In: Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, Wiley, Vol. 12, No. 4 ( 2021-08), p. 1042-1055

Abstract: Elderly classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) (ecHL) is a rare disease with dismal prognosis and no standard treatment. Fitness‐based approaches may help design appropriate treatments. Sarcopenia has been associated with an increased risk of treatment‐related toxicities and worse survival in various solid tumours, but its impact in ecHL is unknown. The aim of this retrospective multicentre study was to investigate the prognostic role of sarcopenia in ecHL. Methods We included newly diagnosed 〉 64 years old cHL patients who performed a baseline comprehensive geriatric assessment and high‐dose computed tomography (CT) or 18fluorine‐fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/CT before any treatment. Sarcopenia was measured as skeletal muscle index (SMI, cm 2 /m 2 ) by the analysis of high‐dose CT or low‐dose positron emission tomography/CT images at the L3 level. The specific cut‐offs for the SMI were determined by receiver operator curve analysis and compared with those proposed in literature and studied in diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma. Survival functions [progression‐free survival [PFS] and overall survival (OS)] were calculated for the whole population and for different subgroups defined as per different sarcopenia cut‐off levels. Results We included 154 patients (median age 71 years old, 76 female). The median L3‐SMI was 42 cm 2 /m 2 . The specific cut‐off derived in our male population was 45 cm 2 /m 2 ; using this cut‐off, 27 male patients (35%) were defined as sarcopenic. After a median follow‐up of 5.9 years, the overall 5‐year PFS and OS rates were 53% and 65%, respectively, and were significantly shorter in sarcopenic male patients compared with non‐sarcopenic (PFS 31% vs. 61%, P  = 0.008; OS 51% vs. 74%, P  = 0.042). Applying diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma‐derived sarcopenic thresholds, there were no significant differences between sarcopenic and non‐sarcopenic patients for both PFS and OS, with a sole exception of a significant reduced PFS in sarcopenic male patients using Namakura cut‐off. The comprehensive geriatric assessment‐determined frail functional status was an independent adverse prognostic factor for both female and male patients. Conclusions Baseline evaluation of sarcopenia through radiological examinations performed for ecHL staging may help define a proportion of male patients with unfavourable outcome with current treatment strategies. Also the functional status evaluation could allow to identify a frail subgroup of patients with worse outcome.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2190-5991 , 2190-6009

URL: Issue

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.v12.4

DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12736

Language: English

Publisher: Wiley

Publication Date: 2021

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2586864-0

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 138, No. Supplement 1 ( 2021-11-05), p. 2427-2427

Abstract: The R-BAC regimen is considered among standard first-line treatment for elderly fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). In the previous R-BAC500 FIL trial, patients with the blastoid variant and/or high Ki67 proliferative index (High Risk - HR-) had a significantly higher risk of progression (2-years PFS of 40%), as compared to classical histologies and low proliferative index (Low Risk -LR-). When treated with R-BAC, LR patients had excellent outcome (median PFS not reached after 7 years), although no maintenance therapy was delivered. For this reason we designed a phase 2 trial that enrolled patients from 35 centers of the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL). At study entry, patients were centrally reviewed and stratified as "low risk (LR)", or "high risk (HR)", depending on morphology (blastoid versus others), Ki67 expression (≥30% versus others), TP53 mutation/TP53 deletions (present versus not). Patients with any of the three risk factors were classified as HR. The primary endpoint was 2-years progression-free survival (PFS) for the HR patients. Patients had to be aged ≥65 years and fit according to the geriatric CGA assessment, or age ≤64 years if not eliglible to high-dose chemotherapy plus transplantation. Asymptomatic patients with non-nodal disease were excluded. Treatment consisted of 6 cycles of R-BAC (rituximab 375 mg/m2 d 1; bendamustine 70 mg/m2 d 1,2; cytarabine 500 mg/m2 d 1,2,3) for LR patients. HR patients received abbreviated induction with a maximum of 4 R-BAC followed by consolidation (4 months, 800 mg/d), and maintenance (20 months, 400 mg/d) with venetoclax. First patient was included on the 3rd of september, 2018, and last patient on the 20th of july, 2021. Overall, 140 patients were enrolled, of whom 52 were HR (37%). Median age was 72 (range 57-79), and 75% were males. The prevalence of TP53 mutations and deletions in the whole series was 21%, and 13%, respectively; Ki67 was ≥30% in 24%, and the blastoid variant was diagnosed in 9%. Demographic characteristics of HR versus LR patients (127 patients with available data at the present time) are reported in Table 1A. Median follow-up was 9 months (range 0-34). The two groups (HR and LR) had similar age, gender, and MIPI, but differed for LDH, and SUVmax at diagnosis, both being significantly more elevated in the HR group. The VR-BAC trial represents the first prospective study that stratified patients with MCL to different frontline treatments according to centralized on-time evaluation of the risk profile. We have shown that almost 40% of elderly patients with MCL in need of treatment have HR features. Data on tolerance, and tumor response will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Tisi: GILEAD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BWS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zilioli: Roche, Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations; Takeda: Other: travel expenses, accommodation; Gentili, Takeda, Gilead, Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Corradini: AbbVie, ADC Theraputics, Amgen, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead/Kite, GSK, Incyte, Janssen, KyowaKirin, Nerviano Medical Science, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Other: Travel and accommodation; Novartis; Gilead; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel and accommodations; Amgen; Takeda; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel and accommodations; KiowaKirin; Incyte; Daiichi Sankyo; Janssen; F. Hoffman-La Roche; Kite; Servier: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; AbbVie, ADC Theraputics, Amgen, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Gilead/Kite, GSK, Incyte, Janssen, KyowaKirin, Nerviano Medical Science, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis, Janssen, Celgene, BMS, Takeda, Gilead/Kite, Amgen, AbbVie: Other: travel and accomodations. Musuraca: janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Puccini: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavallo: Servier: Speakers Bureau; ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Merli: EUSA Pharma: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Ferreri: PletixaPharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Beigene: Research Funding; Hutchison Medipharma: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adienne: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genmab: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; x Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ospedale San Raffaele srl: Patents & Royalties; Pfizer: Research Funding. Santoro: AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Eli-Lilly: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Zinzani: KYOWA KIRIN: Other, Speakers Bureau; SERVIER: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; SANDOZ: Other: Advisory board; TG Therapeutics: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; ROCHE: Other, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; TAKEDA: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Consultancy, Other, Speakers Bureau; EUSAPHARMA: Consultancy, Other, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Other, Speakers Bureau; ADC Therap.: Other; Incyte: Other, Speakers Bureau; JANSSEN-CILAG: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; GILEAD: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; CELLTRION: Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; VERASTEM: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax is off-label in Italy in mantle cell lymphoma

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2021-145421

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2021

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7

In: Blood Advances, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 4, No. 1 ( 2020-01-14), p. 136-140

Abstract: The complete remission (CR) rate achieved with induction chemotherapy prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) represents the strongest prognostic factor in relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). By inducing a CR rate of 75%, the bendamustine, gemcitabine, vinorelbine (BEGEV) regimen represents an optimal chemotherapy regimen prior to ASCT. Presented here are the 5-year results of BEGEV followed by ASCT in R/R cHL. With a median follow-up of 5 years, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for the whole series (n = 59) were 59% and 78%, respectively. ASCT was performed in 43 of 49 responding patients (73% by intention to treat [ITT] ; 88% by response to BEGEV) and resulted in 33 with continuous CR (56% by ITT; 77% of transplanted patients), 7 with disease relapse, and 3 with nonrelapse mortality. For patients who received transplants, the 5-year PFS and OS were 77% and 91%, respectively, with no significant difference between relapsed and refractory patients. No patient experienced secondary leukemia or myelodysplasia. In summary, the long-term efficacy data, the benefits for both relapsed and refractory patients, and the excellent safety profile provide a strong rationale for further development of the BEGEV regimen. This trial was registered at EudraCT as #2010-022169-91 and at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01884441.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 2473-9529 , 2473-9537

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/bloodadvances.2019000984

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2020

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2876449-3

In: British Journal of Haematology, Wiley, Vol. 201, No. 4 ( 2023-05), p. 653-662

Abstract: Up to 10%–15% of diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) are related to hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection, in particular in elderly patients. The Fondazione Italiana Linfomi has recently published a multicentre prospective observational study, the ‘Elderly Project’, on the outcome of DLBCL in patients aged ≥65 years, evaluated using a simplified comprehensive geriatric assessment. The aim of this study was to compare biological and clinical features of HCV positive (HCV+) with HCV negative (HCV−) cases. A total of 89 HCV+ patients were identified out of 1095 evaluated for HCV serology (8.1%). The HCV+ patients were older, less fit, and had frequent extranodal involvement. The cell‐of‐origin determination by Nanostring showed that HCV+ cases less frequently had an activated B‐cell profile compared to HCV− patients (18% vs. 43%). In all, 86% of HCV+ patients received rituximab‐cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine (Oncovin) and prednisone (R‐CHOP)‐like immunochemotherapy. Grade 3–4 liver toxicity occurred in 3% of cases. Among centrally reviewed cases confirmed as DLBCL, the 3‐year overall survival of HCV+ patients was very similar to HCV− (63% vs. 61%, p  = 0.926). In all, 20 HCV+ patients were treated with direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs), with good tolerance and sustained virological response in all cases. The 3‐year progression‐free survival for this subgroup was excellent (77%), suggesting DAAs' possible role in reducing the risk of relapse by eliminating the viral trigger.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0007-1048 , 1365-2141

URL: Issue

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1111/bjh.v201.4

DOI: 10.1111/bjh.18678

Language: English

Publisher: Wiley

Publication Date: 2023

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1475751-5

In: Leukemia & Lymphoma, Informa UK Limited, Vol. 57, No. 10 ( 2016-10-02), p. 2375-2381

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 1042-8194 , 1029-2403

URL: Article

DOI: 10.3109/10428194.2016.1140161

Language: English

Publisher: Informa UK Limited

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2030637-4

In: Journal of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), Vol. 34, No. 27 ( 2016-09-20), p. 3293-3299

Abstract: This multicenter, open-label, phase II study evaluated the combination of bendamustine, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine (BeGEV) as induction therapy before autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). Patients and Methods Patients with HL who were refractory to or had relapsed after one previous chemotherapy line were eligible. The primary end point was complete response (CR) rate after four cycles of therapy. Secondary end points were: overall response rate, stem-cell mobilization activity, and toxicity. Progression-free and overall survival were also evaluated. Results In total, 59 patients were enrolled. After four cycles of therapy, 43 patients (73%) achieved CR, and six (10%) achieved partial response, for an overall response rate of 83%. The most common grade 3 to 4 nonhematologic toxicities included febrile neutropenia (n = 7) and infection (n = 4). Regarding hematologic toxicities, grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia were each experienced by eight patients (13.5%). CD34+ cells were successfully harvested in 55 of 57 evaluable patients, and 43 of 49 responding patients underwent ASCT. With a median follow-up of 29 months, the 2-year progression-free and overall survival rates for the total population were 62.2% and 77.6%, respectively. The same figures for patients undergoing autograft were 80.8% and 89.3%, respectively. Conclusion This phase II study demonstrates that BeGEV is an effective salvage regimen able to induce CR in a high proportion of patients with relapsed or refractory HL before ASCT. These data provide a strong rationale for further development of the BeGEV regimen.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0732-183X , 1527-7755

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.4466

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Publication Date: 2016

detail.hit.zdb_id: 2005181-5

In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 138, No. Supplement 1 ( 2021-11-05), p. 2487-2487

Abstract: Introduction Non-pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (NPLD) is considered a good alternative to conventional doxorubicin for the treatment of older patients (pts) with aggressive lymphomas and/or at high risk for cardiological toxicity. The use of R-COMP for the treatment of older pts with DLBCL has been supported by several small retrospective studies . In this report we describe the characteristics and outcomes of pts who were prospectively enrolled in the Elderly Project (EP) and who were treated with R-COMP and compared them with pts treated with conventional R-CHOP. Methods. This analysis was conducted starting from the dataset of the EP study. The use of NPLD was allowed according to 648/96 law, treatment decision was left to physician discretion and was independent of frailty status. For the purposes of this analysis, we included all pts who were treated with full doses of R-CHOP and R-COMP. The study endpoint were progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A propensity score analysis was conducted to account for the main confounding factors. Results Overall 691 out of 1163 pts of the EP were treated with R-CHOP (383; 55%) or R-COMP (308; 45%); median age was 71 and 76 years for R-CHOP and R-COMP, respectively (p & lt; 0.001) (Table 1). Pts were similarly distributed among different IPI groups for R-COMP or R-CHOP. Based on simplified Geriatric Assessment (sGA) 88%, 11% and & lt;1% of the R-CHOP treated pts and 61%, 32% and 6% of the R-COMP pts were FIT, UNFIT, and FRAIL (p & lt;0.001). Elderly Prognostic Index (EPI) score was low, intermediate, and high in 39%, 54% and 8% of R-CHOP pts and 27%, 49% and 24% of R-COMP pts (p & lt;0.001). PFS at 3-years was 70% for R-CHOP and 64% for R-COMP (p=ns). OS at 3-years was 77% for R-CHOP and 71% for R-COMP (p=ns). The propensity score analysis was conducted in 610 pts and confirmed no significant differences in terms of PFS and OS in the comparison between R-CHOP and R-COMP treated pts (PFS; HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.84-1.63; OS: HR 1.04 95% CI 0.64-1.48). No differences were registered in terms of interruption of treatment due to toxicities (7% for R-CHOP and 11% for R-COMP). Conclusions Data from the prospective observational EP study did not show significant differences in terms of efficacy comparing R-COMP to standard R-CHOP. The higher frequency of UNFIT and FRAIL pts among those treated with NPLD suggests R-COMP is a good strategy to offer a curative treatment to these groups of pts. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Merli: EUSA Pharma: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Tucci: janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentili: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rigacci: Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Cavallo: ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Fabbri: Servier/Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Honoraria. Puccini: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ferrero: Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Clinigen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zilioli: Roche, Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations; Gentili, Takeda, Gilead, Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: travel expenses, accommodation. Nassi: Takeda: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Musuraca: Janssen, Incyte, Roche: Consultancy; Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen, Roche, Incyte: Honoraria. Flenghi: Janssen: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Marcheselli: sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luminari: Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Consultancy; GENELAB SRL: Consultancy.

Type of Medium: Online Resource

ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020

URL: Article

DOI: 10.1182/blood-2021-150337

Language: English

Publisher: American Society of Hematology

Publication Date: 2021

detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3

detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7