Brentuximab Vedotin Combination for Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Author(s): Nancy L. Bartlett, MD¹, Uwe Hahn, MD², Won-Seog Kim, MD, PhD³, Isabelle Fleury, MD⁴, Kamel Laribi, MD⁵, Juan-Miguel Bergua, MD⁶, Krimo Bouabdallah, MD⁷, Nicholas Forward, MSc, MD, FRCPC⁸, Fontanet Bijou, MD⁹, David MacDonald, MD¹⁰, Craig A. Portell, MD¹¹, Herve Ghesquieres, MD, PhD¹², Grzegorz Nowakowski, MD¹³, Christopher A. Yasenchak, MD¹⁴, Monica Patterson, PharmD¹⁵, Linda Ho, MD¹⁵, Evelyn Rustia, MD¹⁵, Michelle Fanale, MD¹⁵, Fei Jie, PhD¹⁵, Jeong-A Kim, MD¹⁶;

Source: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO-24-02242

Dr. Anjan Patel's Thoughts

The ECHELON-3 study showed BV + Len + R is an active and (relatively) tolerable in the rrDLBCL patient group. Interestingly, patients did not have to be CD30+ to see a benefit.

PURPOSE

In patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), brentuximab vedotin (BV) as monotherapy or combined with either lenalidomide (Len) or rituximab (R) has demonstrated efficacy with acceptable safety. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of BV + Len + R versus placebo + Len + R in patients with R/R DLBCL.

METHODS

ECHELON-3 is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, phase 3 trial comparing BV + Len + R with placebo + Len + R in patients with R/R DLBCL. Patients received BV or placebo once every 3 weeks, Len once daily, and R once every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points included investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). A prespecified interim analysis was performed after 134 OS events, with two-sided P = .0232 as the efficacy boundary.

RESULTS

Patients (N = 230) were randomly assigned to receive BV + Len + R (n = 112) or placebo + Len + R (n = 118). Two patients in the placebo arm did not receive treatment. With a median follow-up of 16.4 months, the median OS was 13.8 months with BV + Len + R versus 8.5 months with placebo + Len + R (hazard ratio, 0.63 [95% CI, 0.45 to 0.89]; two-sided P = .009). The median PFS was 4.2 months with BV + Len + R versus 2.6 months with placebo + Len + R (hazard ratio, 0.53 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.73]; two-sided P < .001). The ORR was 64% ([95% CI, 55 to 73]; two-sided P < .001) with BV + Len + R and 42% (95% CI, 33 to 51) with placebo + Len + R; complete response rates were 40% and 19%, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) occurred in 97% of patients in both arms. In both arms, the most common treatment-emergent AEs were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, and anemia.

CONCLUSION

BV + Len + R demonstrated a statistically significant survival benefit with a manageable safety profile in heavily pretreated patients with R/R DLBCL.

Author Affiliations

¹ Division of Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, Siteman Cancer Center, St Louis, MO; ² Haematology Unit, Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, Australia; ³ Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea; ⁴ Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Institut Universitaire d’Hématologie-Oncologie et de Thérapie Cellulaire, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada; ⁵ Department of Hematology, Centre Hospitalier Le Mans, Le Mans, France; ⁶ Hospital San Pedro de Alcantara, Cáceres, Spain; ⁷ Service d’Hematologie Clinique et Therapie Cellulaire, CHU Haut-Leveque, Pessac, France; ⁸ Queen Elizabeth II Health Sciences Centre, Halifax, NS, Canada; ⁹ Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer (CLCC)—Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France; ¹⁰ Division of Hematology, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON, Canada; ¹¹ UVA Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA; ¹² Hematology Department, Hôpital Lyon Sud—HCL, Lyon, France; ¹³ Division of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; ¹⁴ Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center/US Oncology Research, Eugene, OR; ¹⁵ Pfizer Inc, Bothell, WA; ¹⁶ St Vincent’s Hospital, The Catholic University of Korea, Suwon, South Korea

Ten-Year Outcomes after CAR T-Cell Therapy for B-Cell Lymphomas

After 10 years one third of the heavily pretreated lymphoma patients who had CAR-T therapy stayed disease free.

Tafasitamab plus lenalidomide and R-CHOP versus R-CHOP for first-line treatment of patients with high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (frontMIND): a global, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Progression-free survival was improved in the tafa-len-R-CHOP group vs the R-CHOP with 2-year progression-free survival rates of 71·1vs 62·9% toxicity was higher with tafa-len-R-CHOP with a higher rate of fatal treatment-emergent adverse events, but more overall deaths the RCHOP arm. It is early to add Len taf because of toxicity esp with OS survival and deep response data being immature.

BRUIN CLL-313: Randomized Phase III Trial of Pirtobrutinib Versus Bendamustine Plus Rituximab in Untreated Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma

Pirtobrutinib demonstrated superiority over bendamustine rituximab in IRC assessed progression free survival (PFS) in treatment naïve CLL/SLL, with a 24 month PFS rate of 93.4% versus 70.7%. Overall survival trends favored pirtobrutinib, despite the study design allowing for crossover. Who would have thought this was coming????

Mosunetuzumab Plus Polatuzumab Vedotin in Transplant-Ineligible Refractory/Relapsed Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Primary Results of the Phase III SUNMO Trial

Median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer with mosunetuzumab plus polatuzumab vedotin (Mosun-Pola) than with R-GemOx (11.5 months vs 3.8 months). The overall response rate (ORR) was significantly higher with Mosun-Pola compared with R-GemOx (70% vs 40%; P < .0001), with complete response rates of 51% and 24%, respectively. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in fewer than 5% of patients.

Five-Year Outcomes of the POLARIX Study Comparing Pola-R-CHP and R-CHOP in Patients With Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Another update demonstrated the superiority of polatuzumab vedotin plus R-CHOP (Pola-R-CHOP) over R-CHOP alone, with improved progression-free survival (PFS) (64% vs 59%). Overall survival (OS) was not statistically significant; however, the hazard ratio was 0.85, with greater benefit observed in high-risk patients.