MJR MJR
Treatment of follicular lymphoma
Treatment of follicular lymphoma
Mathias J. Rummel Mathias J. Rummel Med. Klinik IV/ V
Med. Klinik IV/ V -- HämatologieHämatologie Klinikum der Justus
Therapy of Follicular
Therapy of Follicular
Lymphoma
Lymphoma
wait and see policywait and see policy
alkylatingalkylating agentsagents
anthracyclineanthracycline-based chemotherapy-based chemotherapy
purinepurine analogsanalogs
bendamustinebendamustine
unconjugatedunconjugated monoclonal antibodiesmonoclonal antibodies
radiolabelledradiolabelled monoclonal antibodiesmonoclonal antibodies
autologousautologous stem cell transplantationstem cell transplantation
allogeneicallogeneic stem cell transplantationstem cell transplantation
nonnon-myeloablative -myeloablative allogeneicallogeneic SCTSCT
(DNA vaccination, antisense, etc)(DNA vaccination, antisense, etc)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 years 100% 50% NHL Classification Project: NHL Classification Project:
OS for 306 patients with follicular NHL:
OS for 306 patients with follicular NHL:
Adapted from Armitage et al, JCO 1998; 16:2780
Watch & wait or early treatment?
Watch & wait or early treatment?
Ardeshna KM et al. Watch & wait versus immediate systemic treatm
Ardeshna KM et al. Watch & wait versus immediate systemic treatment. Lancet 262: 516, 2003ent. Lancet 262: 516, 2003
Watchful waiting versus Chlorambucil 10 mg daily contin.
Watchful waiting versus Chlorambucil 10 mg daily contin.
prospective randomized, n = 309, recruitement phase 1981
prospective randomized, n = 309, recruitement phase 1981--19901990
Survival
Survival watch & waitwatch & wait immediate treatmentimmediate treatment 5 years 5 years 58 %58 % 57 %57 % 10 years 10 years 34 %34 % 35 %35 % 15 years 15 years 22 %22 % 21 %21 % Median
Watch & wait or early treatment ?
Watch & wait or early treatment ?
Overall survival
Overall survival
Disease
Disease
-
-
associated survival
associated survival
Ardeshna KM et al. Lancet 262: 516, 2003
MJR MJR
Watch & wait or early treatment ?
Watch & wait or early treatment ?
Ardeshna KM et al. Lancet 262: 516, 2003
MJR MJR
Watch & wait: time to first treatment
Watch & wait: time to first treatment
Median time to first treatment: 2,6 years
Median time to first treatment: 2,6 years
Actuarial chance of not needing
Actuarial chance of not needing
chemotherapy at 10 yrs was 19%
chemotherapy at 10 yrs was 19%
and 40% in patients older than 70 years
and 40% in patients older than 70 years
Ardeshna KM et al. Lancet 262: 516, 2003
Ardeshna KM et al. Lancet 262: 516, 2003
Watch & wait or early treatment ?
MJR MJR
Indications for treatment in indolent lymphomas:
Indications for treatment in indolent lymphomas:
Stages I, II, limited stage III (up to 5 involved lymph node regions: curative intention?Stages I, II, limited stage III (up to 5 involved lymph node regions: curative intention?
Disease associated symptoms (B-Disease associated symptoms (B-symptoms) symptoms)
Hematopoetic insufficiency: anemia, granulocytopenia, thrombocytopeniaHematopoetic insufficiency: anemia, granulocytopenia, thrombocytopenia
Rapid tumor progression: doubling of manifestations within 1 yearRapid tumor progression: doubling of manifestations within 1 year
Bulky disease (> 6 cm diameter) Bulky disease (> 6 cm diameter)
Autoimmune phenomens, such as AIHA or ITPAutoimmune phenomens, such as AIHA or ITP
Hypogammaglobulinemia with recurrent infectionsHypogammaglobulinemia with recurrent infections
Indolent
Indolent
Non
Non
-
-
Hodgkin
Hodgkin
-
-
Lymphomas
Lymphomas
100 100 100 80 80 80 60 60 60 40 40 40 20 20 20 00 0 1987 1987--1996 (n=668)1996 (n=668) 1976 1976--1987 (n=513)1987 (n=513) 1960 1960--1976 (n=195)1976 (n=195) Horning et al.
Horning et al.Semin OncolSemin Oncol. 20 (5,. 20 (5,supplsuppl5): 75-5): 75-88, 199688, 1996
00 0 555 101010 151515 202020 252525 303030 Years Years
Overall Survival
Overall Survival
More Intensive Treatment
More Intensive Treatment
Does Not Alter Survival in Follicular
Does Not Alter Survival in Follicular
Peterson BA, et al. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:5–15
1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Proportion disease-free 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 Proportion surviving Cyclophosphamide CHOP + bleomycin Cyclophosphamide CHOP + bleomycin DFS OS 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Years from entry
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Years from entry
MJR MJR
FND
FND
vs Alternating Triple Therapy
vs Alternating Triple Therapy
(ATT) bei
(ATT)
bei
indolenten NHL
indolenten NHL
FND
FND (n=73)(n=73)(max(max88x)x) ATTATT((n=69) (max 12 x, 4 jeweils)n=69) (max 12 x, 4 jeweils)
Fludarabin
Fludarabin CHODCHOD--BB (Cyclophosphamid, Doxorubicin, Vincristin, Dexameth.,(Cyclophosphamid, Doxorubicin, Vincristin, Dexameth., Bleomycin)Bleomycin)
Mitoxantron
Mitoxantron ESHAPESHAP (Etoposid,(Etoposid, AraAra--C,C,CisplatinCisplatin, , Prednison)Prednison)
Dexamethasone
Dexamethasone NOPPNOPP (Mitoxantron,(Mitoxantron, Vincristin,Vincristin,Procarbazin,Procarbazin, Prednison)Prednison)
FND ATT
FND ATT FNDFND ATT ATT pp ORR
ORR (%)(%) 9797 9797 Neutropenie (%)Neutropenie (%) 8181 94 0.003 94 0.003 Deaths
Deaths 1313 12 12 ThrombocytopenieThrombocytopenie 1212 78 0.000178 0.0001 Überleben
Überleben i d e n t i c a l i d e n t i c a l Infektionen (%)Infektionen (%) 1212 27 0.022 27 0.022
Tsimberidou
Secondary Malignancies after ASCT in Follicular Lymphoma
Secondary Malignancies after ASCT in Follicular Lymphoma
Trial
Trial ReferenceReference ChemotherapyChemotherapy ASCTASCT
GLSG
GLSG Lenz et alLenz et al CHOP/IFN (n=236)CHOP/IFN (n=236) CHOP/TBI/Cyclo (n=195) CHOP/TBI/Cyclo (n=195) 2nd malign
2nd malign 0,0 %0,0 % n=5n=5(2 AL, 3 MDS), median follow up 44 months(2 AL, 3 MDS), median follow up 44 months occurred between 9 and 51 months
occurred between 9 and 51 months
estimated risk of
estimated risk of 3,8% at 5 years3,8% at 5 years
(only report of hematological malignancies)
(only report of hematological malignancies)
GOELAMS
GOELAMS DeconinckDeconinck CHVP (n=80)CHVP (n=80) VCAP/TBI/Cyclo (n=86)VCAP/TBI/Cyclo (n=86)
2nd malign
2nd malign 0,0 %0,0 % n=10n=10, 7 were fatal, 3 in CR (3 AL, 3 MDS, 2 BC), 7 were fatal, 3 in CR (3 AL, 3 MDS, 2 BC) occurred between 12 and 45 months
occurred between 12 and 45 months
actuarial risk of
actuarial risk of 18.6% at 5 years18.6% at 5 years
Dana Faber
Dana Faber Brown et alBrown et al all standard chemo plusall standard chemo plusTBI/Cyclo (n=605), median follow up 9.5 yearsTBI/Cyclo (n=605), median follow up 9.5 years
42 solid tumors, 6 non
42 solid tumors, 6 non--MDS hem. Malignancies, 39 nonMDS hem. Malignancies, 39 non--melanoma skin cancers, 68 MDS/AMLmelanoma skin cancers, 68 MDS/AML 10
10--year incidence of secondary malignancies is 21% with 10% nonyear incidence of secondary malignancies is 21% with 10% non--MDS malignancies.MDS malignancies. Incidence of MDS/AML levels off at 14% at 5 years, incidence of
Follicular lymphoma
CHVP + IFN
209
CHOP + auHSCT
192
Sebban. Blood, 2006;108:2540
CHVP + IFN
209
Clinical
Clinical trialstrials comparingcomparing transplantationtransplantation (SCT) versus (SCT) versus conventionalconventional therapytherapy (CT)(CT)
Reference
Reference yearyear propro-- randrand.. multimulti ageage n / n / yrsyrs timetime versusversus PFSPFS Difference in Overall SurvivalDifference in Overall Survival spect
spect.. centercenter
Ladetto
Ladetto 20082008 yesyes yesyes yesyes 5151 136 (5)136 (5) 1st line1st line CHOP+RCHOP+R SCT > CTSCT > CT nono 80% at 4 80% at 4 yrsyrsforforbothboth Lenz
Lenz 20052005 yesyes yesyes yesyes 5959 375 (4)375 (4) 1st line1st line chemochemo SCT > CTSCT > CT n.r.n.r. shortshortobsobs. 2 . 2 yrsyrs Sebban
Sebban 20062006 yesyes yesyes yesyes 4949 401 (7)401 (7) 1st line1st line chemochemo 33 vs 40 mo33 vs 40 mo nono 76 vs 71% at 7 76 vs 71% at 7 yrsyrs Deconninck
Deconninck 20052005 yesyes yesyes yesyes 5151 172 (7)172 (7) 1st line1st line chemochemo SCT > CT**SCT > CT** nono 78 vs 84% at 5 78 vs 84% at 5 yrsyrs
Schouten
Schouten 20032003 yesyes yesyes yesyes 4747 89 (4)89 (4) 2nd line2nd line chemochemo SCT > CTSCT > CT nono SCT > CT, p = 0.079SCT > CT, p = 0.079
Freedman
Freedman 19991999 nono nono nono 4343 153 (10)153 (10) 3 prior3 priortxtx 42% at 8 yrs42% at 8 yrs** 66% at 8 66% at 8 yrsyrs Rohatiner
Rohatiner 20072007 nono nono no, 2no, 2 4343 121 (7)121 (7) 3 priot3 priottxtx 48% at 10 yrs48% at 10 yrs 54% at 10 54% at 10 yrsyrs Ingram
Ingram 20082008 nono nono no, 2no, 2 5656 82 (13)82 (13) 2 prior2 priortxtx 56% at 3 yrs56% at 3 yrs** 67% at 3 67% at 3 yrsyrs
*
MJR MJR
ASCT in follicular lymphomas
ASCT in follicular lymphomas
ASCT is an appropriate treatment choice for younger patients
ASCT is an appropriate treatment choice for younger patients
with chemosensitive recurrent follicular lymphoma
with chemosensitive recurrent follicular lymphoma
ASCT remains investigational in the initial treatment of
ASCT remains investigational in the initial treatment of
follicular lymphoma
follicular lymphoma
¾
¾
No demonstrated overall survival benefit
No demonstrated overall survival benefit
¾
¾
Possible improvement in overall survival by adding
Possible improvement in overall survival by adding
Rituximab in treatment strategies
Rituximab in treatment strategies
¾
¾
Increase of 2nd malignancies
Increase of 2nd malignancies
ASH, 2005
Does combined
immuno-chemotherapy with rituxan improve
overall survival in patients with
indolent non-hodgkin’s
lymphoma compared to
chemotherapy alone?
A Meta-Analysis
Holger Schulz, Nicole Skoetz, Julia F. Bohlius, Sven Trelle, Alexander Greb, Thilo Kober
and Andreas Engert
Cochrane Review
Cochrane Haematological Malignancies Group (CHMG) Internal Medicine I, University of Cologne. www.CHMG.de
Overall
Overall
survival
survival
: Meta
: Meta
-
-
Analysis Total Group
Analysis Total Group
Study HR [95%-CI) Weight [%] HR [95%-CI)
Total events: 100/760 143/718
Test for heterogeneity: (P = 0.60), I² = 0%
Total (95% CI) 100.00 0.62 (0.49 - 0.77) Favors R + Chemo 0.2 0.5 1 2 Favors Chemo Baez 2005 6.90 0.96 0.42 Forstpointner 2005 15.10 Marcus 2005 16.10 0.70 Hiddemann 2005 28.86 0.60 Herold 2005 28.92 0.60 0.96 Lenz 2005 4.11
R
A
N
D
O
M
I
Z
E
D
CHOP every 21 days maximum 6 cycles Rituximab + CHOP every 21 days maximum 6 cyclesIntergroup phase III trial:
study design
R
A
N
D
O
M
I
Z
E
D
Observation Rituximab maintenance* *375mg/m*375mg/m22 every 3 months every 3 months for
for 2 years or until relapse2 years or until relapse
CR PR
Van
(years) 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
O N Number of patients at risk : Treatment
110 167 90 42 17 5
66 167 126 86 47 12
O bservation M abthera
Progression free survival
from 2nd random ization
O verall Logrank test: p<0.0001
Rituximab maintenance median: 51.6months
Observation median: 15 months
Intergroup phase III trial
Progression free survival from 2nd randomization
MJR MJR
Abstr. ASH 2005 (Maint 1 x R, q 3 mo, up to 2 yrs Induction n=465, Maint n=334, med. foll. up 33 months
observation
observation
maintenance
maintenance
Rituximab
Rituximab
PFS* (months)
PFS* (months)
15.0
15.0
51.6
51.6
p < 0.0001
p < 0.0001
after CHOP
after CHOP
11.6
11.6
42
42
after CHOP
after CHOP
-
-
R
R
23.1
23.1
52
52
p = 0.004
p = 0.004
after CR
after CR
14.5
14.5
51.6
51.6
after PR
after PR
15.6
15.6
45.4
45.4
OS (3 years)
OS (3 years)
77.1%
77.1%
85.1%
85.1%
p = 0.011 **
p = 0.011 **
* after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52 * after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52EORTC 20981
MJR MJR
Abstr. ASH 2005 (Maint 1 x R, q 3 mo, up to 2 yrs Induction n=465, Maint n=334, med. foll. up 33 months
observation
observation
maintenance
maintenance
Rituximab
Rituximab
PFS* (months)
PFS* (months)
15.0
15.0
51.6
51.6
p < 0.0001
p < 0.0001
after CHOP
after CHOP
11.6
11.6
42
42
after CHOP
after CHOP
-
-
R
R
23.1
23.1
52
52
p = 0.004
p = 0.004
after CR
after CR
14.5
14.5
51.6
51.6
after PR
after PR
15.6
15.6
45.4
45.4
OS (3 years)
OS (3 years)
77.1%
77.1%
85.1%
85.1%
p = 0.011 **
p = 0.011 **
* after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52 * after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52EORTC 20981
MJR MJR
Abstr. ASH 2005 (Maint 1 x R, q 3 mo, up to 2 yrs Induction n=465, Maint n=334, med. foll. up 33 months
observation
observation
maintenance
maintenance
Rituximab
Rituximab
PFS* (montths)
PFS* (montths)
15.0
15.0
51.6
51.6
p < 0.0001
p < 0.0001
after CHOP
after CHOP
11.6
11.6
42
42
after CHOP
after CHOP
-
-
R
R
23.1
23.1
52
52
p = 0.004
p = 0.004
after CR
after CR
14.5
14.5
51.6
51.6
after PR
after PR
15.6
15.6
45.4
45.4
OS (3 years)
OS (3 years)
77.1%
77.1%
85.1%
85.1%
p = 0.011 **
p = 0.011 **
* after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52 * after 2nd randomization ** HR = 0.52EORTC 20981
(years) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
O N Number of patients at risk : Treatment
39 167 148 99 50 14 2
23 167 155 112 69 19 4
O bservation M abthera
O verall survival
from 2nd random ization
O verall Logrank test: p=0.011
Intergroup phase III trial
Overall survival from 2nd randomization
R-maintenance 3 yrs 85.1 %
observation 3 yrs 77.1 %
Randomized studies Rituximab maintenance
Randomized studies Rituximab maintenance
Study Group
Study Group TreatmentTreatment EntitiesEntities InductionInduction
SAKK
SAKK 1st line1st line FollicularFollicular RituximabRituximab Relapsed
Relapsed Mantle cellMantle cell ECOG
ECOG 1st line1st line FollicularFollicular CVPCVP Small lymphocytic
Small lymphocytic
Hainsworth
Hainsworth RelapsedRelapsed FollicularFollicular RituximabRituximab Refractory
Refractory Small lymphocyticSmall lymphocytic GLSG
GLSG RelapsedRelapsed FollicularFollicular RR--FCM vs FCMFCM vs FCM Refractory
Refractory Manle cellManle cell EORTC
EORTC RelapsedRelapsed FollicularFollicular RR--CHOP vs CHOPCHOP vs CHOP Refractory
Overall PFS for Treatment Groups
90 90YY--ibritumomabibritumomab Control 202 207 173 115 132 80 96 53 34 17 9 6 0 25 50 75 100 months 0 12 24 36 48 60 Cumulat ive Per centage 9090YY--ibritumomab armibritumomab arm
Median PFS: 53.8 months Median PFS: 53.8 months N = 207 N = 207 control arm control arm Median PFS: 13.8 months Median PFS: 13.8 months N = 202 N = 202 Log-rank P = .0001 HR 0.45 (95% CI: 0.35-0.59) The 4
The 4--year overall PFS is year overall PFS is 52% in the
Effect of Treatment Arm on PFS by First-line Treatment
and Response to First-line Treatment
Control 90Y-Ibritumomab Hazard Ratio
PFS No. of Patients No. Failed Median PFS, mo No. of
Patients No. Failed
Median PFS,
mo (95% CI)*
First
First--line treatment*line treatment*
CHOP 57 43 12.4 65 33 36.5 2.39 (1.52-3.78) CVP/COP 53 40 7.9 53 30 29.6 2.25 (1.40-3.63) CHOP-like 31 19 29.1 30 11 > 67 2.11 (1.00-4.44) Fludarabine 11 6 28.7 11 6 41.4 1.11 (0.36-3.46) Chlorambucil 19 15 11.9 20 10 37.2 2.76 (1.23-6.21) Rituximab combination 31 13 > 44 28 9 > 45 1.39 (0.60-3.26)
*Note: FIT was not powered to detect significant differences in outcomes according to individual types of induction therapy.
Overall Survival
All patients
19 deaths
Control
8 deaths
90Y-ibritumomab
11 deaths
• At current follow-up no significant difference in overall survival was observed between treatment arms (P = .593)
• No significant difference in incidence of secondary malignancies
– 6 secondary malignancies in 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 5 in control arm
Secondary Malignancies That Have
Emerged During Extended Follow-up
Control Arm
• Mammary carcinoma
• Basocellular epithelioma
• Endometrial carcinoma
• Papillary carcinoma of thyroid
• Basocellular carcinoma of the skin
90Y-Ibritumomab Arm
• AML after MDS*
• AML**
• Lung cancer (now in remission)
• Pancreas carcinoma
• Basal cell carcinoma skin
• Basocellular carcinoma of the skin
* Patient achieved a CR after 6 cycles of FC from Sept 2003 until Feb 2004.
He received 90Y-ibritumomab in 04/2004. Pat progressed in 09/2004, and received radiotherapy in 12/2004
AML was recorded in Aug 2007
**Patient received 8 cycles of CHOP as the induction regimen
Subsequent Management After PD
Treatment After PD Control (n = 137) 90Y-Ibritumomab (n = 103) Chemotherapy(incl. involved-field radiotherapy), n (%) 9 (7) 6 (6)
Radiotherapy, n (%) 0 6 (6)
Total patients receiving 90Y-ibritumomab, n (%) 11 (8) 1 (1)
Rituximab monotherapy, n (%) 22 (16) 15 (15)
Rituximab-containing chemotherapy combination, n
(%) 47 (34) 26 (25)
Allogeneic transplantation,* n (%) 2 (1) 1
Autologous transplantation,* n (%) 27 (20) 10 (9)
Total patients receiving rituximab, n (%) 93 (68) 50 (49)
No treatment given 30 (22) 39 (38)
Patients in Control and
90Y-Ibritumomab Arms Achieved
Comparable Responses to
Second-Line Therapy
Responders Response to Second-Line Therapy After
Progressive Disease, % Control (n = 108) 90Y-Ibritumomab (n = 63) CR 42% 49% CRu 14% 8% PR 18% 24% No response 27% 19%
MJR MJR
¾
¾ There is still a role for watch & wait in asymptomatic patientsThere is still a role for watch & wait in asymptomatic patients
¾
¾ Combined ImmunoCombined Immuno--ChemotherapyChemotherapy is the standard of is the standard of carecare
¾
¾ RR--chemotherapychemotherapy plus plus RR--maintenancemaintenance appears as appears as the optimal strategy
the optimal strategy for patients for patients with relapsed diseasewith relapsed disease
¾
¾ Which chemotherapy in combination with Rituximab?Which chemotherapy in combination with Rituximab?
Æ
Æ ChlorambucilChlorambucil--based (MCP), Fbased (MCP), F--based (FCM), CHOPbased (FCM), CHOP--like, CVPlike, CVP
Æ
Æ Role of bendamustine in this setting is under investigationRole of bendamustine in this setting is under investigation
¾
¾ RR--maintenance after 1stmaintenance after 1st--line Rline R--containing regimens? containing regimens?
Æ
Æ PRIMA study addresses this question, first results at ASH 2010PRIMA study addresses this question, first results at ASH 2010
Æ
Æ StiL NHL 7StiL NHL 7--2008 study proves duration of maintenance2008 study proves duration of maintenance
Æ
Æ SAKK study proves duration of maintenance after R SAKK study proves duration of maintenance after R
Standard of care in pts with indolent lymphomas
Bendamustine plus Rituximab versus CHOP plus Rituximab in the Fi
Bendamustine plus Rituximab versus CHOP plus Rituximab in the Firstrst--Line Line Treatment of Patients with Indolent and Mantle Cell Lymphoma
Treatment of Patients with Indolent and Mantle Cell Lymphoma –– First Results of a Randomized Phase III Study of the
First Results of a Randomized Phase III Study of the
StiL (Study Group indolent Lymphomas, Germany)
StiL (Study Group indolent Lymphomas, Germany)
Mathias J. Rummel, U. von Grünhagen, N. Niederle, F. Rothmann, H
Mathias J. Rummel, U. von Grünhagen, N. Niederle, F. Rothmann, H. Ballo, E. . Ballo, E. Weidmann, M. Welslau, G. Heil, H. Dürk, M. Stauch, C. Losem, A.
Weidmann, M. Welslau, G. Heil, H. Dürk, M. Stauch, C. Losem, A. Matzdorff, Matzdorff, C. Balser, K. Schalk, D. Kofahl
C. Balser, K. Schalk, D. Kofahl-Krause, U. Kaiser, W. Knauf, A. Banat, D. -Krause, U. Kaiser, W. Knauf, A. Banat, D. Hoelzer, W. Brugger on the behalf of the StiL
Hoelzer, W. Brugger on the behalf of the StiL
Giessen, Cottbus, Leverkusen, Potsdam, Offenbach, Frankfurt, Asc
Giessen, Cottbus, Leverkusen, Potsdam, Offenbach, Frankfurt, Aschaffenburg, haffenburg, Lüdenscheid, Hamm, Kronach, Neuss, Saarbrücken, Marburg, Limburg
Lüdenscheid, Hamm, Kronach, Neuss, Saarbrücken, Marburg, Limburg, , Hannover, Hildesheim, Villingen
Hannover, Hildesheim, Villingen--Schwenningen.Schwenningen. Germany
MJR MJR
CHOP plus Rituximab (CHOP CHOP plus Rituximab (CHOP--R)R) Randomization
Randomization
Bendamustine
Bendamustine plus Rituximab (Bplus Rituximab (B-R)-R)
B = Bendamustine 90 mg/qm day 1+2 29+30 57+58 85+86 113+114 141+142 R = Rituximab 375 mg/qm day 0 29 57 85 113 141 0 1 29 57 85 113 141 R B B-R B-R B-R Tag B-R B-R 0 1 22 43 64 85 106 R
CHOP CHOP-R CHOP-R CHOP-R
Tag
CHOP-R CHOP-R
CHOP day 1 22 43 64 85 106 Rituximab 375 mg/qm day 0 22 43 64 85 106
MJR MJR 30
30thth Nov Nov 20082008 B-B-R CHOPR CHOP--R R 462
462evaluableevaluableptspts.. (n=235)(n=235) (n=227)(n=227)
Age (median)
Age (median) 64 64 yrsyrs 64 64 yrsyrs Age > 70
Age > 70 yrsyrs.. 23 %23 % 2424%% Age > 60
Age > 60 yrsyrs.. 6363%% 6363%% Stage Stage IVIV 7979%% 7676%% B B--Symptoms Symptoms 4040%% 2828%% IPI > 2 IPI > 2 (n=162)(n=162) 37 %37 % 3838%% FLIPI FLIPI 00--1 1 1010%% 2020%% FLIPI FLIPI 2 2 4545%% 3333% % FLIPI FLIPI >>33 4646%% 4747%% LDH > 240 U/l LDH > 240 U/l 3838%% 3232%% Bone
Bone marrowmarrow 6969%% 6767%%
Bulky disease
Bulky disease 2828%% 2626%%
Patients
MJR MJR
462
462 patientspatients evaluable, interim (not final analysis)evaluable, interim (not final analysis)
B B--RR CHOPCHOP--RR (n=235) (n=235) (n=227)(n=227) Alopecia Alopecia 0 %0 % 9191 %% Leucocytopenia Leucocytopenia 3/43/4 1414 %% 3838 %% G G--CSF used CSF used 5 %5 % 21 %21 % Inf.
Inf. complicationscomplications 3131 %% 41 %41 % PNP (any grade)
PNP (any grade) 4 %4 % 9 %9 %
Toxicity
MJR MJR
454
454 patientspatients evaluableevaluable forfor response,response, median median observationobservation periodperiod 2727 monthsmonths
B B--RR CHOPCHOP--RR (n=232) (n=232) (n=224)(n=224) ORR ORR 94 %94 % 93 %93 % CR CR 41 %41 % 32 %32 % SD SD 3 %3 % 4 %4 % Prim.
Prim. refrrefr.. 3 %3 % 3 %3 %
PD /
PD / relapserelapse n = 63n = 63 n = 89n = 89 Deaths
Deaths n = 26n = 26 n = 27n = 27
Results
Bendamustine
Bendamustine
-
-
R
R
vs CHOP
vs CHOP
-
-
R
R
Conclusion
Conclusion
¾
¾ In In thisthis analysisanalysis consistingconsisting of 462 of 462 randomizedrandomized patientspatients Bendamustine plus Rituximab
Bendamustine plus Rituximab isis notnot inferior to inferior to CHOPCHOP--RR in
in regardregard to to efficacyefficacy and and isis againagain associated associated withwith lessless toxicitytoxicity
¾
¾ TheThe final final resultsresults withwith a a longerlonger observationobservation up to 36 up to 36 monthsmonths and and with
with fullfull analysisanalysis of all of all randomizedrandomized patientspatients (n=549) will (n=549) will furtherfurther define
define thethe rolerole of Bendamustine plus Rituximab in of Bendamustine plus Rituximab in thethe treatment treatment algorithm
Bendamustine
Bendamustine
-
-
Rituximab
Rituximab
+ 2
+ 2
years
years
Rituximab
Rituximab
q 2
q 2
months
months
Bendamustine
Bendamustine
-
-
Rituximab
Rituximab
+ 4
+ 4
years
years
Rituximab
Rituximab
q 2
q 2
months
months
Follicular Lymphoma
Follicular Lymphoma
Randomized
Randomized
Phase III
Phase III
Study of the StiL
Study of the StiL
R
R
R
B-R + Watch & Wait vs B-R + 2 years Rituximab
Bendamustine
Bendamustine
-
-
Rituximab
Rituximab
+ Watch & Wait
+ Watch & Wait
Bendamustine
Bendamustine
-
-
Rituximab
Rituximab
+
+
2
2
years
years
Rituximab
Rituximab
q 2
q 2
months
months
Immunocytoma Immunocytoma Marginalzone Marginalzone Mantle cell Mantle cell ((forfor mantlemantlecell not cell not eligibleeligibleforfor APBSCT)APBSCT)
Randomized
Randomized
Phase
Phase
II
II
Studies of the StiL
Studies of the StiL
R
R
R
¾
¾ Which chemotherapy in combination with Rituximab?Which chemotherapy in combination with Rituximab?
-- ChlorambucilChlorambucil--based (MCP), Fbased (MCP), F--based (FCM), CHOPbased (FCM), CHOP--like, CVPlike, CVP
-- Role of bendamustine in this setting is under investigationRole of bendamustine in this setting is under investigation
¾
¾ The analysis with 462 randomized patients shows that BThe analysis with 462 randomized patients shows that B--R is not inferior R is not inferior to CHOP
to CHOP--R in regard to efficacy while being associated with less toxicitR in regard to efficacy while being associated with less toxicityy
¾
¾ The final results (longer observation) will further define the rThe final results (longer observation) will further define the role of Bole of B--R in R in the treatment algorithm of patients with indolent and mantle cel
the treatment algorithm of patients with indolent and mantle cell lymphomal lymphoma
¾
¾ Does BDoes B--R have the potential to change standard approaches in NHL?R have the potential to change standard approaches in NHL?
¾
¾ RR--maintenance after 1stmaintenance after 1st--line Rline R--containing regimens? containing regimens?
Æ
Æ PRIMA study addresses this question, first results at ASH 2010PRIMA study addresses this question, first results at ASH 2010
Æ
Æ NHL 7NHL 7--2008 StiL study: duration of maintenance after B2008 StiL study: duration of maintenance after B--R R
Æ
Æ SAKK study: duration of maintenance after RSAKK study: duration of maintenance after R--monotherapy monotherapy