Unfortunately, another negative study of a drug being accretive to CHOP regimen in T-cell NHL. Newer drugs and concepts hopefully will move the needle in this decade.
Romidepsin, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, has demonstrated activity in relapsed or refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) as a single agent. Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) therapy is widely used as first-line treatment of PTCL; however, it has limited efficacy. Results from a phase Ib and II study showed the feasibility of combining romidepsin with CHOP (Ro-CHOP).
This study is a randomized phase III study of Ro-CHOP versus CHOP in adult patients with previously untreated PTCL. All patients received CHOP in 3-week cycles for six cycles. Romidepsin, 12 mg/m2, was administered intravenously over a 4-hour period on days 1 and 8 of each 3-week cycle for six cycles. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) according to International Working Group 1999 criteria.
Between January 2013 and December 2017, 421 patients were enrolled (Ro-CHOP, n = 211; CHOP, n = 210). The median PFS for Ro-CHOP versus CHOP was 12.0 months (95% CI, 9.0 to 25.8) versus 10.2 months (95% CI, 7.4 to 13.2) with a hazard ratio of 0.81 (P = .096). In the Ro-CHOP versus CHOP arms, the median overall survival was 51.8 versus 42.9 months and the objective response rate was 63% versus 60% with complete response plus unconfirmed complete response rates of 41% versus 37% (P > .1 in all comparisons), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in ≥ 30% of patients in the Ro-CHOP arm included thrombocytopenia (50% v 10% in the Ro-CHOP v CHOP arms, respectively), neutropenia (49% v 33%), anemia (47% v 17%), and leukopenia (32% v 20%).
The addition of romidepsin to CHOP did not improve PFS, response rates, nor overall survival and increased the frequency for grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events. Ro-CHOP does not represent a significant advance in the standard of care for patients with previously untreated PTCL.
This combination had impressive results but led to a high rate of ventricular arrythmias (9%), hence the combination is not recommended. Another study with the combination and rituximab was also suspended, the etiology of the higher rate of Vent arrhythmias is not known. This combination in another lymphoid malignancies did not lead to that rate of toxicity.
Final results from the ASPEN study confirm the strong long-term superiority of zanubrutinib over ibrutinib in symptomatic WM. While overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) end-points are still to be reached, demonstrating the good prognosis of this disease, toxicities and response rates are much better with zanubrutinib. This is a cat-1 indication oof NCCN and a compelling option for use in this population.
There are too many options for DLBCL now with monoclonal antibodies, bispecific and CAR-T therapy, but in frail patients, this might be an option. Tafatistamab with lenalidomide had higher ORR (55vs 50) and CR( 37 vs 27%) but this is comparing different trials, and this trial had mostly elderly pts, I do feel tafatistamab is fairly well tolerated though. But when in doubt this seems to be a fair option.
Speaking of tafatistamab, it seems it is fairly tolerable in first line with almost 75% CR added to RCHOP, adding lenolidomie 86% CR, but this is a phase 1b. Awaiting phase 3 data, we may have another first line option or may the first line option.
CAR-T for second line is better than standard of care, the question is: how about compared to BITE therapy? Future is exciting for those patients.
FCS Hematology Oncology Review creates a platform for our physician network to observe the most recent articles and studies available in the oncology and hematology world. By sharing these articles we are building our wealth of knowledge of new observations and treatments as they come available.
