Predictive value of the CLL-IPI in CLL patients receiving chemo-immunotherapy as first-line treatment

Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There have been significant advances in the treatment of relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) over the past two decades. However, the intention of treatment remains control of the disease and delay of progression rather than a cure which remains largely elusive. Considering that CLL is mostly seen in older patients, there are multiple factors that play a role in the selection of CLL beyond the frontline treatment. Here, we review the concept of relapsed CLL, factors that predispose to relapse, and therapeutic options available to this patient population. We also review investigational therapies and provide a framework for selection of therapies in this setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Targeted therapies with continuous BTK inhibitors (BTKi) or fixed duration venetoclax plus anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy have established superiority over chemoimmunotherapy in relapsed CLL and have become the preferred standard of care treatment. The second-generation more selective BTK inhibitors (acalabrutinib and zanubrutinib) have shown improved safety profile compared to ibrutinib. However, resistance to the covalent BTK inhibitors may emerge and is commonly associated with mutations in BTK or other downstream enzymes. The novel non-covalent BTK inhibitors such as pirtobrutinib (Loxo-305) and nemtabrutinib (ARQ 531) are showing promising activities for relapsed CLL refractory to prior covalent BTKi. Other novel therapies such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy have also shown significant activities for relapsed and refractory CLL. Measurable residual disease (MRD) assessment has a growing importance in venetoclax-based limited-duration therapy and there is mounting evidence that MRD negativity improves outcomes. However, it remains to be seen if this will become an established clinically significant endpoint. Further, the optimal sequence of various treatment options remains to be determined. Patients with relapsed CLL now have more options for the treatment of the disease. The choice of therapy is best individualized especially in the absence of direct comparisons of targeted therapies, and the coming years will bring more data on the best sequence of use of the therapeutic agents.

Real-world evidence on venetoclax in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: The Italian experience

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common form of adult leukemia in the western world. In Italy, venetoclax was approved for use in patients with CLL as monotherapy in 2017 and in combinations in 2019. As a result of this delayed approval, there are relatively few real-world studies from Italian clinical practice and much of the data are in heavily pretreated patients. We have collected the available studies in Italian routine practice. Three studies confirm the effectiveness and tolerability of this agent in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL and high-risk disease characteristics, many of whom had received prior B-cell receptor signaling treatment. Addition of rituximab to venetoclax produced more complete responses in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL, while higher disease burden and progression while receiving a prior Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor were both associated with poorer outcomes in patients treated with venetoclax. Venetoclax was well-tolerated with low discontinuation rates. No studies of venetoclax plus obinutuzumab for the first-line treatment of patients with CLL were available due to the short time since approval in Italy. Several cohorts addressed the impact of COVID-19 on patient management and outcomes, suggesting that treated patients and those in clinical observation had similar rates of COVID-19-related hospital admission, intensive care unit admission, and mortality. Overall, the responses and tolerance to venetoclax observed in the Italian real-world setting confirm the tolerability and effectiveness of venetoclax regimens in high-risk patients.

Time to second treatment can be used to predict overall survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: identifying risk factors to help guide treatment selection

Targeted therapies have largely replaced chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We aimed to develop a prognostic model to determine who would benefit from first-line CIT vs target therapy. In follicular lymphoma, time from diagnosis to second treatment (TT2T) correlates better with overall survival (OS) than time from diagnosis to first treatment (TT1T). We hypothesized that TT2T is a potential surrogate for OS in CLL. In a model-building cohort (n = 298), we evaluated potential predictors for TT2T and derived a risk score, which we validated in an external cohort (n = 1141). Our data demonstrated that TT2T and OS were more strongly correlated than TT1T and OS. Our risk score model consisted of three predictors (unmutated IGHV, β2-microglobulin >297 nmol/L, and Rai stage I-IV), and was prognostic for TT2T and OS. TT2T is a promising surrogate for OS in CLL, but further validation is needed to establish this association.

From Biomarkers to Models in the Changing Landscape of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Evolve or Become Extinct

Simple Summary

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by a highly variable clinical course. Thus, predicting the outcome of patients with this disease is a topic of special interest. The rapidly changing treatment landscape of CLL has questioned the value of classical biomarkers and prognostic models. Herein we examine the current state-of-the-art of prognostic and predictive biomarkers in the setting of new oral targeted agents with special focus on the most controversial findings over the last years. We also discuss the available information on the role of “old” and “new” prognostic models in the era of oral small molecules.

Abstract

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is an extremely heterogeneous disease. With the advent of oral targeted agents (Tas) the treatment of CLL has undergone a revolution, which has been accompanied by an improvement in patient’s survival and quality of life. This paradigm shift also affects the value of prognostic and predictive biomarkers and prognostic models, most of them inherited from the chemoimmunotherapy era but with a different behavior with Tas. This review discusses: (i) the role of the most relevant prognostic and predictive biomarkers in the setting of Tas; and (ii) the validity of classic and new scoring systems in the context of Tas. In addition, a critical point of view about predictive biomarkers with special emphasis on 11q deletion, novel resistance mutations, TP53 abnormalities, IGHV mutational status, complex karyotype and NOTCH1 mutations is stated. We also go over prognostic models in early stage CLL such as IPS-E. Finally, we provide an overview of the applicability of the CLL-IPI for patients treated with Tas, as well as the emergence of new models, generated with data from patients treated with Tas.

Recent progress of prognostic biomarkers and risk scoring systems in chronic lymphocytic leukemia

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most prevalent adult leukemia with high heterogeneity in the western world. Thus, investigators identified a number of prognostic biomarkers and scoring systems to guide treatment decisions and validated them in the context of immunochemotherapy. A better understanding of prognostic biomarkers, including serum markers, flow cytometry outcomes, IGHV mutation status, microRNAs, chromosome aberrations and gene mutations, have contributed to prognosis in CLL. Del17p/ TP53 mutation, NOTCH1 mutation, CD49d, IGHV mutation status, complex karyotypes and microRNAs were reported to be of predictive values to guide clinical decisions. Based on the biomarkers above, classic prognostic models, such as the Rai and Binet staging systems, MDACC nomogram, GCLLSG model and CLL-IPI, were developed to improve risk stratification and tailor treatment intensity. Considering the presence of novel agents, many investigators validated the conventional prognostic biomarkers in the setting of novel agents and only TP53 mutation status/del 17p and CD49d expression were reported to be of prognostic value. Whether other prognostic indicators and models can be used in the context of novel agents, further studies are required.

Prognostic models for newly-diagnosed chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) is the most common cancer of the lymphatic system in Western countries. Several clinical and biological factors for CLL have been identified. However, it remains unclear which of the available prognostic models combining those factors can be used in clinical practice to predict long-term outcome in people newly-diagnosed with CLL.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, describe and appraise all prognostic models developed to predict overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS) or treatment-free survival (TFS) in newly-diagnosed (previously untreated) adults with CLL, and meta-analyse their predictive performances.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (from January 1950 to June 2019 via Ovid), Embase (from 1974 to June 2019) and registries of ongoing trials (to 5 March 2020) for development and validation studies of prognostic models for untreated adults with CLL. In addition, we screened the reference lists and citation indices of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all prognostic models developed for CLL which predict OS, PFS, or TFS, provided they combined prognostic factors known before treatment initiation, and any studies that tested the performance of these models in individuals other than the ones included in model development (i.e. 'external model validation studies'). We included studies of adults with confirmed B-cell CLL who had not received treatment prior to the start of the study. We did not restrict the search based on study design.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We developed a data extraction form to collect information based on the Checklist for Critical Appraisal and Data Extraction for Systematic Reviews of Prediction Modelling Studies (CHARMS). Independent pairs of review authors screened references, extracted data and assessed risk of bias according to the Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). For models that were externally validated at least three times, we aimed to perform a quantitative meta-analysis of their predictive performance, notably their calibration (proportion of people predicted to experience the outcome who do so) and discrimination (ability to differentiate between people with and without the event) using a random-effects model. When a model categorised individuals into risk categories, we pooled outcome frequencies per risk group (low, intermediate, high and very high). We did not apply GRADE as guidance is not yet available for reviews of prognostic models.

MAIN RESULTS

From 52 eligible studies, we identified 12 externally validated models: six were developed for OS, one for PFS and five for TFS. In general, reporting of the studies was poor, especially predictive performance measures for calibration and discrimination; but also basic information, such as eligibility criteria and the recruitment period of participants was often missing. We rated almost all studies at high or unclear risk of bias according to PROBAST. Overall, the applicability of the models and their validation studies was low or unclear; the most common reasons were inappropriate handling of missing data and serious reporting deficiencies concerning eligibility criteria, recruitment period, observation time and prediction performance measures. We report the results for three models predicting OS, which had available data from more than three external validation studies: CLL International Prognostic Index (CLL-IPI) This score includes five prognostic factors: age, clinical stage, IgHV mutational status, B2-microglobulin and TP53 status. Calibration: for the low-, intermediate- and high-risk groups, the pooled five-year survival per risk group from validation studies corresponded to the frequencies observed in the model development study. In the very high-risk group, predicted survival from CLL-IPI was lower than observed from external validation studies. Discrimination: the pooled c-statistic of seven external validation studies (3307 participants, 917 events) was 0.72 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.67 to 0.77). The 95% prediction interval (PI) of this model for the c-statistic, which describes the expected interval for the model's discriminative ability in a new external validation study, ranged from 0.59 to 0.83. Barcelona-Brno score Aimed at simplifying the CLL-IPI, this score includes three prognostic factors: IgHV mutational status, del(17p) and del(11q). Calibration: for the low- and intermediate-risk group, the pooled survival per risk group corresponded to the frequencies observed in the model development study, although the score seems to overestimate survival for the high-risk group. Discrimination: the pooled c-statistic of four external validation studies (1755 participants, 416 events) was 0.64 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.67); 95% PI 0.59 to 0.68. MDACC 2007 index score The authors presented two versions of this model including six prognostic factors to predict OS: age, B2-microglobulin, absolute lymphocyte count, gender, clinical stage and number of nodal groups. Only one validation study was available for the more comprehensive version of the model, a formula with a nomogram, while seven studies (5127 participants, 994 events) validated the simplified version of the model, the index score. Calibration: for the low- and intermediate-risk groups, the pooled survival per risk group corresponded to the frequencies observed in the model development study, although the score seems to overestimate survival for the high-risk group. Discrimination: the pooled c-statistic of the seven external validation studies for the index score was 0.65 (95% CI 0.60 to 0.70); 95% PI 0.51 to 0.77.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Despite the large number of published studies of prognostic models for OS, PFS or TFS for newly-diagnosed, untreated adults with CLL, only a minority of these (N = 12) have been externally validated for their respective primary outcome. Three models have undergone sufficient external validation to enable meta-analysis of the model's ability to predict survival outcomes. Lack of reporting prevented us from summarising calibration as recommended. Of the three models, the CLL-IPI shows the best discrimination, despite overestimation. However, performance of the models may change for individuals with CLL who receive improved treatment options, as the models included in this review were tested mostly on retrospective cohorts receiving a traditional treatment regimen. In conclusion, this review shows a clear need to improve the conducting and reporting of both prognostic model development and external validation studies. For prognostic models to be used as tools in clinical practice, the development of the models (and their subsequent validation studies) should adapt to include the latest therapy options to accurately predict performance. Adaptations should be timely.

TP53 dysfunction in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: clinical relevance in the era of B-cell receptors and BCL-2 inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

Patients with TP53 dysfunction, assessed by del(17p) or TP53 mutations, respond poorly to chemo-immunotherapy and fare better with the new therapies (BCR and BCL-2 inhibitors); however, it is unclear whether their response is similar to that of patients without anomalies or whether there is currently an adequate determination of TP53 dysfunction.

AREA COVERED

A literature search was undertaken on clinical trials and real-world experience data on patients with TP53 dysfunction treated with different protocols. Moreover, data on the TP53 biological function and on the tests currently employed for its assessment were reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Although TP53 dysfunction has less negative influence on the new biological therapies, patients with these alterations, particularly those with biallelic inactivation of TP53, have a worst outcome with these therapies than those without alterations. At present, a determination of TP53, particularly with next generation sequencing (NGS) methodologies, may be sufficient for the identifications of the patients unsuitable for chemo-immunotherapy, although integration with del(17p) would be advisable. For the future, more extensive determinations of the TP53 status, including functional assays, may become part of the current armamentarium for a better patient stratification and treatment with newer protocols.