| 1. |
- Dreyling, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Ibrutinib combined with immunochemotherapy with or without autologous stem-cell transplantation versus immunochemotherapy and autologous stem-cell transplantation in previously untreated patients with mantle cell lymphoma (TRIANGLE) : a three-arm, randomised, open-label, phase 3 superiority trial of the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet. - 0140-6736. ; 403:10441, s. 2293-2306
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Adding ibrutinib to standard immunochemotherapy might improve outcomes and challenge autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) in younger (aged 65 years or younger) mantle cell lymphoma patients. This trial aimed to investigate whether the addition of ibrutinib results in a superior clinical outcome compared with the pre-trial immunochemotherapy standard with ASCT or an ibrutinib-containing treatment without ASCT. We also investigated whether standard treatment with ASCT is superior to a treatment adding ibrutinib but without ASCT. Methods: The open-label, randomised, three-arm, parallel-group, superiority TRIANGLE trial was performed in 165 secondary or tertiary clinical centres in 13 European countries and Israel. Patients with previously untreated, stage II–IV mantle cell lymphoma, aged 18–65 years and suitable for ASCT were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to control group A or experimental groups A+I or I, stratified by study group and mantle cell lymphoma international prognostic index risk groups. Treatment in group A consisted of six alternating cycles of R-CHOP (intravenous rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 0 or 1, intravenous cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenous doxorubicin 50 mg/m2 on day 1, intravenous vincristine 1·4 mg/m2 on day 1, and oral prednisone 100 mg on days 1–5) and R-DHAP (or R-DHAOx, intravenous rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 0 or 1, intravenous or oral dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1–4, intravenous cytarabine 2 × 2 g/m2 for 3 h every 12 h on day 2, and intravenous cisplatin 100 mg/m2 over 24 h on day 1 or alternatively intravenous oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1) followed by ASCT. In group A+I, ibrutinib (560 mg orally each day) was added on days 1–19 of R-CHOP cycles and as fixed-duration maintenance (560 mg orally each day for 2 years) after ASCT. In group I, ibrutinib was given the same way as in group A+I, but ASCT was omitted. Three pairwise one-sided log-rank tests for the primary outcome of failure-free survival were statistically monitored. The primary analysis was done by intention-to-treat. Adverse events were evaluated by treatment period among patients who started the respective treatment. This ongoing trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02858258. Findings: Between July 29, 2016 and Dec 28, 2020, 870 patients (662 men, 208 women) were randomly assigned to group A (n=288), group A+I (n=292), and group I (n=290). After 31 months median follow-up, group A+I was superior to group A with 3-year failure-free survival of 88% (95% CI 84–92) versus 72% (67–79; hazard ratio 0·52 [one-sided 98·3% CI 0–0·86]; one-sided p=0·0008). Superiority of group A over group I was not shown with 3-year failure-free survival 72% (67–79) versus 86% (82–91; hazard ratio 1·77 [one-sided 98·3% CI 0–3·76]; one-sided p=0·9979). The comparison of group A+I versus group I is ongoing. There were no relevant differences in grade 3–5 adverse events during induction or ASCT between patients treated with R-CHOP/R-DHAP or ibrutinib combined with R-CHOP/R-DHAP. During maintenance or follow-up, substantially more grade 3–5 haematological adverse events and infections were reported after ASCT plus ibrutinib (group A+I; haematological: 114 [50%] of 231 patients; infections: 58 [25%] of 231; fatal infections: two [1%] of 231) compared with ibrutinib only (group I; haematological: 74 [28%] of 269; infections: 52 [19%] of 269; fatal infections: two [1%] of 269) or after ASCT (group A; haematological: 51 [21%] of 238; infections: 32 [13%] of 238; fatal infections: three [1%] of 238). Interpretation: Adding ibrutinib to first-line treatment resulted in superior efficacy in younger mantle cell lymphoma patients with increased toxicity when given after ASCT. Adding ibrutinib during induction and as maintenance should be part of first-line treatment of younger mantle cell lymphoma patients. Whether ASCT adds to an ibrutinib-containing regimen is not yet determined. Funding: Janssen and Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Hess, Georg, et al.
(författare)
-
Indirect treatment comparison of brexucabtagene autoleucel (ZUMA-2) versus standard of care (SCHOLAR-2) in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Leukemia and Lymphoma. - 1042-8194. ; 65:1, s. 14-25
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The SCHOLAR-2 retrospective study highlighted poor overall survival (OS) with standard of care (SOC) regimens among patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who failed a covalent Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi). In the ZUMA-2 single-arm trial, brexucabtagene autoleucel (brexu-cel; autologous anti-CD19 CAR T-cell therapy) demonstrated high rates of durable responses in patients with R/R MCL who had previous BTKi exposure. Here, we compared OS in ZUMA-2 and SCHOLAR-2 using three different methods which adjusted for imbalances in prognostic factors between populations: inverse probability weighting (IPW), regression adjustment (RA), and doubly robust (DR). Brexu-cel was associated with improved OS compared to SOC across all unadjusted and adjusted comparisons. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) were 0.38 (0.23, 0.61) for IPW, 0.45 (0.28, 0.74) for RA, and 0.37 (0.23, 0.59) for DR. These results suggest a substantial survival benefit with brexu-cel versus SOC in patients with R/R MCL after BTKi exposure.
|
|
| 5. |
- Hess, Georg, et al.
(författare)
-
Real-world experience among patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma after Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor failure in Europe : The SCHOLAR-2 retrospective chart review study
- 2023
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Haematology. - : Wiley. - 0007-1048 .- 1365-2141. ; 202:4, s. 749-759
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) after relapse is associated with poor prognosis. No standard of care exists and available evidence for treatments is limited, particularly in patients who fail Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor (BTKi) therapy. This multicentre retrospective chart review study, SCHOLAR-2, addresses this knowledge gap and reports on data collected from 240 patients with relapsed/refractory MCL in Europe who were treated with BTKi-based therapy between July 2012 and July 2018, and had experienced disease progression while on BTKi therapy or discontinued BTKi therapy due to intolerance. The median overall survival (OS) from initiation of first BTKi therapy was 14.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.6–20.0) in the overall cohort, 5.5 months (95% CI 3.9–8.2) in 91 patients without post-BTKi therapy, and 23.8 months (95% CI 18.9–30.1) in 149 patients who received post-BTKi therapy (excluding chimeric antigen receptor T-cell treatment). In the latter group, patients received a median of one (range, one to seven) line of post-BTKi therapy, with lenalidomide-containing regimens and bendamustine plus rituximab being the most frequently administered; the median OS from initiation of first post-BTKi therapy was 9.7 months (95% CI 6.3–12.7). These results provide a benchmark for survival in patients with R/R MCL receiving salvage therapy after BTKi failure.
|
|
| 6. |
- Horgan, Denis, et al.
(författare)
-
Tackling Mantle Cell Lymphoma in Europe
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Healthcare (Switzerland). - : MDPI AG. - 2227-9032. ; 10:9
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- An expert panel convened by the European Alliance for Personalized Medicine (EAPM) reflected on achievements and outstanding challenges in Europe in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Through the prism of member state experience, the panel noted advances in outcomes over the last decade, but highlighted issues constituting barriers to better care. The list notably included availability of newer treatments, infrastructure and funding for related testing, and shortages of relevant skills and of research support. The prospect of improvements was held to reside in closer coordination and cooperation within and between individual countries, and in changes in policy and scale of investment at both national and EU levels.
|
|
| 7. |
|
|
| 8. |
|
|
| 9. |
- Munshi, Pashna N., et al.
(författare)
-
American Society of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Center of International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, and European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation Clinical Practice Recommendations for Transplantation and Cellular Therapies in Mantle Cell Lymphoma
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Transplantation and cellular therapy. - : Elsevier BV. - 2666-6367. ; 27:9, s. 720-728
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Autologous (auto-) and allogeneic (allo-) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) are accepted treatment modalities in contemporary treatment algorithms for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy recently received approval for MCL; however, its exact place and sequence in relation to HCT remain unclear. The American Society of Transplantation and Cellular Therapy, Center of International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research, and the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation jointly convened an expert panel to formulate consensus recommendations for role, timing, and sequencing of auto-HCT, allo-HCT, and CAR T cell therapy for patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL. The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements. Seventeen consensus statements were generated, with a few key statements as follows: in the first line setting, auto-HCT consolidation represents standard of care in eligible patients, whereas there is no clear role of allo-HCT or CAR T cell therapy outside of clinical trials. In the R/R setting, the preferential option is CAR T cell therapy, especially in patients with MCL failing or intolerant to at least one Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, while allo-HCT is recommended if CAR T cell therapy fails or is infeasible. Several recommendations were based on expert opinion, where the panel developed consensus statements for important real-world clinical scenarios to guide clinical practice. In the absence of contemporary evidence-based data, the panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a formal framework for developing consensus recommendations for the timing and sequence of cellular therapies for MCL.
|
|
| 10. |
- Munshi, Pashna N., et al.
(författare)
-
ASTCT, CIBMTR, and EBMT clinical practice recommendations for transplant and cellular therapies in mantle cell lymphoma
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Bone Marrow Transplantation. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0268-3369 .- 1476-5365. ; 56:12, s. 2911-2921
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Autologous (auto-) or allogeneic (allo-) hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) are accepted treatment modalities for mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). Recently, chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy received approval for MCL; however, its exact place and sequence in relation to HCT is unclear. The ASTCT, CIBMTR, and the EBMT, jointly convened an expert panel to formulate consensus recommendations for role, timing, and sequencing of auto-, allo-HCT, and CAR T-cell therapy for patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL. The RAND-modified Delphi method was used to generate consensus statements. Seventeen consensus statements were generated; in the first-line setting auto-HCT consolidation represents standard-of-care in eligible patients, whereas there is no clear role of allo-HCT or CAR T-cell therapy, outside of a clinical trial. In the R/R setting, the preferential option is CAR T-cell therapy especially in MCL failing or intolerant to at least one Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor, while allo-HCT is recommended if CAR T-cell therapy has failed or is not feasible. In the absence of contemporary evidence-based data, the panel found RAND-modified Delphi methodology effective in providing a formal framework for developing consensus recommendations for the timing and sequence of cellular therapies for MCL.
|
|
