Five-year outcomes of the S1106 study of R-hyper-CVAD vs R-bendamustine in transplant-eligible patients with mantle cell lymphoma

Front-line and second-line treatment for mantle cell lymphoma in clinical practice: A multicenter retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

There are few reports of clinical practice treatment patterns and efficacy in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively studied a large, multicenter, cohort of patients with MCL diagnosed between 2000 and 2020 in eight institutions.

RESULTS

536 patients were registered (73% male, median of 70 years). Front-line treatment was based on high-dose cytarabine, bendamustine, and anthracyclines in 42%, 12%, and 15%, respectively. The median PFS for all patients was 45 months; 68, 34, and 30 months for those who received high-dose cytarabine-based, bendamustine-based and anthracycline-based therapy. 204 patients received second-line. Bendamustine-based treatment was the most common second-line regimen (36% of patients). The median second-line PFS (sPFS) for the entire cohort was 14 months; 19, 24, and 31 for bendamustine-, platinum-, and high-dose cytarabine-based regimens, with broad confidence intervals for these latter estimates. Patients treated with cytarabine-based therapies in the front-line and those with front-line PFS longer than 24 months had a substantially superior sPFS.

CONCLUSION

Front-line treatment in this cohort of MCL was as expected and with a median PFS of over 3.5 years. Second-line treatment strategies were heterogeneous and the median second-line PFS was little over 1 year.

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions: Tailoring Upfront Therapy in Mantle Cell Lymphoma

In this article, we will review current strategies for the front-line management of mantle cell lymphoma, an uncommon and biologically and clinically heterogeneous subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma that remains incurable with current therapies. Patients invariably relapse with time, and as a result, treatment strategies involve persistent therapy over the course of months to years, including induction, consolidation, and maintenance. Topics discussed include the historical development of various chemoimmunotherapy backbones with continued modifications to maintain and improve efficacy while limiting off-target, off-tumor effects. Chemotherapy-free induction regimens were developed initially for elderly or less fit patients though are now being utilized for younger, transplant-eligible patients due to deeper, more prolonged remission durations with fewer toxicities. The historic paradigm of recommending autologous hematopoietic cell transplant for fit patients in complete or partial remission is now being challenged based in part on ongoing clinical trials in which minimal residual disease directed approaches influence the consolidation strategy for any particular individual. The addition of novel agents, namely first and second generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors as well as immunomodulatory drugs, BH3 mimetics, and type II glycoengineered anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies have been tested in various combinations with or without immunochemotherapy. We will attempt to help the reader by systematically explaining and simplifying the various approaches for treating this complicated group of disorders.

Efficacy of front-line immunochemotherapy for transplant-ineligible mantle cell lymphoma: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

There is no standard first-line immunochemotherapy regimen for transplant-ineligible patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) currently, and the efficacy of various treatment remains unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of all eligible randomized controlled trials. Pairwise comparisons and ranking of different first-line treatment options were performed.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included in the NMA, involving a total of 2897 MCL patients. The BR-Ibrutinib+R regimen showed the best progression-free survival (PFS), with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) of 0.89 and probability of being the best treatment (PbBT) of 69%. The VR-CAP regimen was the most potential intervention to improve overall survival (OS), with a SUCRA of 0.89 and PbBT of 63%. Compared with the R-CHOP regimen, the BR regimen achieved a better PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.45 [95% credible interval 0.2-0.96]). The BR-Ibrutinib+R regimen (HR 0.14 [0.02-0.99]), BR+R regimen (HR 0.19 [0.034-0.99]), and BR regimen (HR 0.3 [0.08-1.03]) were superior to CHOP regimen with better PFS. The R-FC regimen (HR 2.27 [1.01-5.21]) or FC regimen (HR 3.17 [1.15-8.71]) was inferior to the VR-CAP regimen with a worse OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study presents the most promising first-line treatment strategy for transplant-ineligible MCL patients in terms of PFS and OS, which provides innovative treatment strategy for MCL treatment.

Personalized approaches for treatment-naïve mantle cell lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) can have diverse disease presentations, which vary in aggressiveness and prognosis, and can occur in patients with varying ability to tolerate therapy. Additionally, the options for treatment of MCL have expanded rapidly in the last decade, translating to improved outcome for patients.

AREAS COVERED

We review the initial evaluation of patients with MCL, identifying disease- and patient-specific prognostic factors, along with personalized therapies for patients with MCL. Specific scenarios include indolent and limited-stage MCL, advanced-stage disease in transplant-eligible and ineligible patients, and high-risk TP53 mutant disease. Ongoing trials and future directions in MCL treatment are also highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

Given the wide array of disease and patient presentations with MCL, a personalized therapeutic approach is needed to optimize outcomes. The best therapeutic strategy should incorporate disease prognostic factors, patient status and comorbidities, goals of care, and response to treatment.

Frontline Therapy in Mantle Cell Lymphoma: When Clinical Trial and Real-World Data Collide

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.A large number of frontline treatment options exist for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), making selection of therapy a challenge for the clinician. In this Oncology Grand Rounds article, the case of a 73-year-old woman with MCL who attained remission with bendamustine and rituximab is presented. The relevant literature regarding frontline therapy is then reviewed, with particular focus on selection of induction regimen and the potential roles for autologous transplantation and/or rituximab maintenance. This literature primarily consists of prospective phase 2 and phase 3 clinical trials; however, added to this literature now is a growing body of large retrospective real-world cohorts, such as the new analysis by Martin et al,³⁵ the manuscript that accompanies this Oncology Grand Rounds article. In some cases, the real-world evidence is at odds with data from prospective clinical trials, such as regarding the role of rituximab maintenance after bendamustine plus rituximab induction. These important new real-world data are put into context of an ever-changing treatment landscape, in hopes of aiding clinicians in frontline treatment selection for patients with MCL.

Bendamustine: A review of pharmacology, clinical use and immunological effects (Review)

Bendamustine is an alkylating agent classified into the group of nitrogen mustard analogues, synthesized almost sixty years ago. It was registered in former East Germany in 1971 and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2008 for treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia and indolent B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Considering its beneficial properties in the therapy of relapsed or refractory hematological malignancies, synergistic effects with other antineoplastic agents and increasing recent reports on its immunomodulatory effects, bendamustine has once again gained its justified attention. The uniqueness of bendamustine-mediated effects should be observed keeping in mind its distinctive structure with structural similarities to both alkylating agents and purine analogs. In the present review, the current knowledge on the use of bendamustine in oncology, its pharmacokinetics, mechanism of action and toxicity was summarized. In addition, its immune-modulating effects that have not been fully elucidated so far are emphasized, hoping to encourage further investigations of this unique drug.

Bendamustine or high-dose cytarabine-based induction with rituximab in transplant-eligible mantle cell lymphoma

The objective of this study was to explore differences in outcomes between first-line R-B and R-CHOP/R-DHAP in transplant-eligible patients with MCL. A population-based cohort of 97 patients aged 18-65 years with stage II-IV MCL, consecutively treated with R-B was retrospectively identified at BC Cancer. Baseline characteristics, response rates, and outcomes were compared to the cohort of 232 MCL patients randomized to the R-CHOP/R-DHAP arm of the MCL Younger trial. The primary aim was to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) of the progression-free survival (PFS) comparison between both groups, adjusted for MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI), Ki67 index, and blastoid/pleomorphic morphology. Secondary endpoints included response rate, event free survival, overall survival, and time to next treatment. Ann Arbor stage, lactate dehydrogenase, MIPI, blastoid morphology, and MCL35 assignments were similar between both groups. The overall response rate (ORR) to R-B was 90% (54% complete response [CR]); 77% of patients proceeded to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and 78% received maintenance rituximab (MR). The ORR to R-CHOP/R-DHAP was 94% (54% CR); 78% proceeded to ASCT and 2% received MR. There were no differences in PFS in unadjusted (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.53-1.41], p=0.56) or adjusted (HR 0.79 [95% CI 0.45-1.37], p=0.40) comparisons. There were no clear differences in secondary endpoints in unadjusted or adjusted analyses. This retrospective adjusted comparison of two independent cohorts of younger patients with MCL suggests that R-B with ASCT and maintenance rituximab is a feasible and effective first-line treatment, with outcomes comparable to R-CHOP/R-DHAP with ASCT.

Evolving frontline immunochemotherapy for mantle cell lymphoma and the impact on survival outcomes

Because there have been a dvances in frontline treatment for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) over the last 2 decades, we sought to characterize the changes in frontline treatment patterns and their association with outcomes. Patients with newly diagnosed MCL from September 2002 through June 2015 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study, and clinical characteristics, treatment, and clinical outcomes were compared between patients diagnosed from 2002 to 2009 (Era 1) compared with 2010 to 2015 (Era 2). Patient age, sex, and simplified MCL International Prognostic Index (sMIPI) score were similar between the 2 groups. In patients age 65 years or younger, there was less use of rituximab plus hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, vincristine, doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (R-Hyper-CVAD) (16.1% vs 8.8%) but more use of rituximab plus maximum-strength cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-maxi-CHOP) alternating with rituximab plus high-dose cytarabine (R-HiDAC), also known as the Nordic regimen, and R-CHOP alternating with rituximab plus dexamethasone, high-dose cytarabine, and cisplatin (R-DHAP) (1.1% vs 26.4%) and less use of R-CHOP or R-CHOP-like regimens (64.5% vs 35.2%) but more use of R-bendamustine (0% vs 12.1%) in Era 2 (P < .001). These changes were associated with improved event-free survival (EFS; 5-year EFS, 34.3% vs 50.0%; P = .010) and overall survival (OS; 5-year OS, 68.8% vs 81.6%; P = .017) in Era 2. In patients older than age 65 years, there was less use of R-CHOP or R-CHOP-like therapy (39.0% vs 14.3%) and nonstandard systemic therapy (36.6% vs 13.0%) but more use of R-bendamustine (0% vs 49.4%). These changes were associated with a trend for improved EFS (5-year EFS, 25.4% vs 37.5%; P = .051) in Era 2. The shift from R-CHOP or R-CHOP-like regimens to R-bendamustine was associated with improved EFS (5-year EFS, 25.0% vs 44.6%; P = .008) in Era 2. Results from this prospective cohort study provide critical real-world evidence for improved outcomes with evolving frontline patterns of care in patients with MCL.

Ofatumumab plus HyperCVAD/HD-MA induction leads to high rates of minimal residual disease negativity in patients with newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma, results of a phase 2 study

BACKGROUND

Ofatumumab is a humanized type 1 anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. Preclinical studies show improved complement-mediated cytotoxicity (CMC) compared to rituximab in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). This study evaluates the safety and efficacy of combining ofatumumab with HyperCVAD/MA (O-HyperCVAD) in newly diagnosed MCL.

METHODS

In this single-arm phase 2 study, 37 patients were treated with the combination of O-HyperCVAD for 4 or 6 cycles, followed by high dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant. Primary objectives were overall response rate (ORR) and complete response (CR) rate at the end of therapy. Secondary objectives included minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Median age was 60 years; ORR was 86% and 73% achieved a CR by modified Cheson criteria. The MRD negativity rate was 78% after 2 cycles of therapy, increasing to 96% at the end of induction; median PFS and OS were 45.5 months and 56 months, respectively. Achieving a post-induction CR by both imaging and flow cytometry was associated with improved PFS and OS. Early MRD negativity (post-2 cycles) was also associated with an improved PFS but not OS. There were 3 deaths while on therapy, and grades 3 and 4 adverse events (AEs) were observed in 22% and 68% of the patients.

CONCLUSION

The addition of ofatumumab to HyperCVAD/HD-MA led to high rates of MRD negativity by flow cytometry in patients with newly diagnosed MCL. Achieving a CR post-induction by both imaging and flow cytometry is associated with improved overall survival.

Early Relapse Identifies MCL patients with Inferior Survival after Intensive or Less Intensive Frontline Therapy

POD<24 months was associated with inferior survival among patients with MCL after both intensive and less intensive frontline treatment.

Patients with POD<6 months or progressive disease after frontline treatment had the highest risk of early mortality.

Although an expanding array of effective treatments has resulted in recent improvement in survival of patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), outcomes remain heterogeneous, and identification of prognostic factors remains a priority. We assessed the prognostic impact of time to progression of disease (POD) after first-line therapy among 455 patients with relapsed MCL. Patients were categorized by duration of first remission as PRF/POD6, defined as progressive disease during induction or POD within 6 months of diagnosis (n = 65; 14%); POD6-24, defined as POD between 6 and 24 months after diagnosis (n = 153; 34%); and POD>24, defined as POD >24 months after diagnosis (n = 237; 53%). The median overall survival from POD (OS2) was 1.3 years (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9-2.4) for patients with PRF/POD6, 3 years (95% CI, 2-6.8) for those with POD6-24, and 8 years (95% CI, 6.2-NR) for those with POD>24. Median OS2 was inferior in patients with early POD (defined as PRF/POD6 or POD6-24) after both intensive and less intensive frontline treatment. The prognostic performance of time until POD was replicated in an independent cohort of 245 patients with relapsed MCL, with median OS2 of 0.3 years (95% CI, 0.1-0.5) for PRF/POD6, 0.8 years (95% CI, 0.6-0.9) for POD6-24, and 2.4 years (95% CI 2.1-2.7) for POD>24. Early POD is associated with inferior OS2 in patients with relapsed MCL, identifying a high-risk population for future prospective studies.

Exploiting gene mutations and biomarkers to guide treatment recommendations in mantle cell lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

While there has been an improvement in the treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) in both median progression-free survival (PFS; >7-8 years) and overall survival (OS; >10-12 years), patients with high-risk features such as high risk MIPI (mantle cell international prognostic index), high Ki-67 (≥30%), or blastoid variants still carry poor outcome with a median OS of 3 years. Furthermore, patients with high-risk molecular features, such as TP53 mutations, show dismal outcome, with a median OS of 1.8 years, regardless of therapy used. Further studies have led to the development of six novel drugs approved for the treatment of relapse/refractory (R/R) MCL, leading to improved survival even in refractory or high-risk patients.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers clinical biological and molecular features that impact MCL outcome with current standards. Beyond the recognition of separate subentities, we review how high-risk molecular features have paved the way towards a new paradigm away from chemoimmunotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Progress in novel therapies and in routine diagnostics, particularly next-generation sequencing (NGS), support the development of new treatment strategies, not based on the dose intensity/age dichotomy, which may prevent the need for chemotherapy and improve outcome across MCL including in high-risk subsets.

Bendamustine and rituximab as induction therapy in both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients with mantle cell lymphoma

Rituximab-containing chemotherapy regimens constitute standard first-line therapy for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Since June 2013, 190 patients ≥18 years of age with MCL in British Columbia have been treated with bendamustine and rituximab (BR). The overall response rate to BR was 88% (54% complete response). Of these, 61 of 89 patients (69%) aged ≤65 years received autologous stem cell transplantation and 141 of 190 patients (74%) from the entire cohort received maintenance rituximab. Twenty-three patients (12%) had progressive disease, associated with high risk per the Mantle Cell Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (MIPI), Ki-67 ≥50%, and blastoid/pleomorphic histology. Outcomes were compared with a historical cohort of 248 patients treated with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP; January 2003 to May 2013). Treatment with BR was associated with significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS), but not overall survival (OS), compared with R-CHOP in the whole cohort (3-year PFS, 66% BR vs 51% R-CHOP, P = .003; 3-year OS, 73% BR vs 66% R-CHOP, P = .054) and in those >65 years of age (3-year PFS, 56% BR vs 35% R-CHOP, P = .001; 3-year OS, 64% BR vs 55% R-CHOP, P = .063). Outcomes in transplanted patients were not statistically significantly different compared with R-CHOP (3-year PFS, 85% BR vs 76% R-CHOP, P = .135; 3-year OS, 90% BR vs 88% R-CHOP, P = .305), although in multivariate analyses, treatment with BR was associated with improved PFS (hazard ratio, 0.40 [95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.94]; P = .036) but not OS. BR is an effective first-line option for most patients with MCL, however, outcomes are suboptimal for those with high-risk features and further studies integrating novel agents are warranted.

Cellular Therapies for Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a subtype of B cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma characterized by a heterogeneous clinical presentation. Patients who demonstrate an objective response to induction therapy(ies) and are eligible for intensive therapies are offered an autologous hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) as front-line consolidation followed by rituximab maintenance. Allogeneic HCT is an option for younger and fit patients with high-risk disease or in patients who have relapsed after autologous HCT. Recent advances in T cell engineering brought chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR T) therapy from the bench to the bedside, with brexucabtagene autoleucel being the first CAR T product approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in relapsed/refractory MCL. In this comprehensive review, we summarize the literature on available cellular therapies for MCL and present a treatment algorithm that incorporates HCT, autologous or allogeneic, and CAR T therapies.

First-line therapy, autologous stem-cell transplantation, and post-transplantation maintenance in the management of newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma

Background

In Ontario, no clearly defined standard of care for the management of mantle cell lymphoma (mcl) has been developed, and substantial variability from centre to centre is evident. This guidance document was prompted by the need to harmonize practice in Ontario with respect to first-line, conditioning, and post-transplantation maintenance therapy for patients newly diagnosed with transplantation-eligible mcl.

Methods

The medline and embase databases were systematically searched from January 2013 to January 2020 for evidence, and the best available evidence was used to draft recommendations relevant to first-line therapy, autologous stem-cell transplantation, and post-transplantation maintenance in the management of transplantation-eligible newly diagnosed mcl. Final approval of this guidance document was obtained from the Stem Cell Transplant Advisory Committee.

Recommendations

These recommendations apply to all cases of transplantation-eligible newly diagnosed mcl:■ Alternating cycles of r-chop (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide-doxorubicin-vincristine-prednisolone) and r-dhap [rituximab plus dexamethasone-high-dose cytarabine-cisplatin] is the recommended first-line treatment for symptomatic patients newly diagnosed with mcl before autologous stem-cell transplantation (asct).■ Rituximab plus hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide-vincristine-doxorubicin-dexamethasone (r-hypercvad), alternating with methotrexate and cytarabine, is not recommended for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed mcl.■ beam (carmustine-etoposide-cytarabine-melphalan), beac (carmustine-etoposide-cytarabine-cyclophosphamide), and total-body irradiation-based regimens are reasonable conditioning options for patients with mcl who have responded to first-line therapy and who are undergoing asct.■ Maintenance therapy with rituximab is recommended for patients with newly diagnosed mcl who have undergone asct.

Management of Mantle Cell Lymphoma in the Era of Novel Oral Agents

Objectives: To discuss (1) recent and emerging data for pharmacological management of untreated and relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) with agents approved in the United States, (2) important considerations for toxicity monitoring and management, and (3) preliminary data and ongoing studies for agents in MCL-specific clinical trials. Data Sources: PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Google Scholar, product labeling, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, American Cancer Society, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for studies published between January 1, 2017, and January 31, 2020, and key historical trials. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Relevant studies conducted in humans and selected supporting preclinical data were reviewed. Data Synthesis: MCL is a rare but usually aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma that most commonly affects the older population. Traditionally, the treatment of MCL has been determined based on transplant eligibility. Newer data suggest that more tolerable frontline therapy may produce outcomes similar to intensive historical induction regimens, possibly precluding fewer patients from autologous stem cell transplant and producing better long-term outcomes in transplant-ineligible patients. In the R/R setting, novel regimens are improving outcomes and changing the landscape of treatment. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: This review summarizes and discusses recent and emerging data for management of newly diagnosed and R/R MCL; key supportive care considerations for agents are also discussed. Conclusions: Recent study results are changing management of MCL. Although these data have complicated the picture of regimen selection, increasingly effective and tolerable therapy and additional anticipated data point to a brighter future for patients with MCL.

Key Clinical and Translational Research Questions to Address Unmet Needs in Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Survival for patients with mantle cell lymphoma has improved dramatically over the last 2 decades owing to a better understanding of disease biology and the development of more effective treatment regimens for patients with untreated and relapsed disease. With these advancements, we are now poised to ask questions that challenge old treatment strategies, use new technologies, and improve our understanding of disease heterogeneity. This article focuses on questions that we believe will drive the future of mantle cell lymphoma treatment. Although not an exhaustive list, we review current literature, ongoing studies, and provide expert opinion on future trial design.

Approach to the Initial Treatment of Older Patients with Mantle Cell Lymphoma

With a median age of 65 years, mantle cell lymphoma affects predominantly older patients with comorbidities. Initial treatment of older patients is not standardized but traditionally includes chemoimmunotherapy regimens that are not curative. Incorporation of maintenance strategy after induction and introduction of novel agents have expanded access to effective treatment options and improved survival outcome. Ongoing randomized studies comparing induction regimens and maintenance strategies are expected to further define the role of novel agents and combinations in the initial treatment of older patients with mantle cell lymphoma.