High-Dose Methotrexate as CNS Prophylaxis in High-Risk Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma

Author(s): Katharine L. Lewis, BMedSci, MBBS (Hons)^1,2,3; Lasse H. Jakobsen, PhD, MSc⁴; Diego Villa, MD, MPH⁵; Karin E. Smedby, MD⁶; Kerry J. Savage, MD, MSc⁵; Toby A. Eyre, MD, MBChB⁷; Kate Cwynarski, MD, PhD⁸; Mark J. Bishton, PhD, MBChB^9,10; Christopher P. Fox, MD, PhD^9,10; Eliza A. Hawkes, MBBS(Hons), DMedSci11,12; Matthew J. Maurer, MS, DMSc¹³; Tarec C. El-Galaly, MD, DMSc¹⁴; Chan Y. Cheah, MBBS, DMSc^1,2,3

Source: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.23.0036

Dr. Maen Hussein's Thoughts

Good review of high-risk patients, showing that prophylactic high dose MTX did not have lower risk of CNS disease.

PURPOSE

CNS progression or relapse is an uncommon but devastating complication of aggressive B-cell lymphoma. There is no consensus regarding the optimal approach to CNS prophylaxis. This study was designed to determine whether high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) is effective at preventing CNS progression in patients at high risk of this complication.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients age 18-80 years with aggressive B-cell lymphoma and high risk of CNS progression, treated with curative-intent anti–CD20-based chemoimmunotherapy, were included in this international, retrospective, observational study. Cause-specific hazard ratios (HRs) and cumulative risks of CNS progression were calculated according to use of HD-MTX, with time to CNS progression calculated from diagnosis for all patients (all-pts) and from completion of frontline systemic lymphoma induction therapy, for patients in complete response at completion of chemoimmunotherapy (CR-pts).

RESULTS

Two thousand four hundred eighteen all-pts (HD-MTX; n = 425) and 1,616 CR-pts (HD-MTX; n = 356) were included. CNS International Prognostic Index was 4-6 in 83.4% all-pts. Patients treated with HD-MTX had a lower risk of CNS progression (adjusted HR, 0.59 [95% CI, 0.38 to 0.90]; P = .014), but significance was not retained when confined to CR-pts (adjusted HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.42 to 1.30]; P = .29), with 5-year adjusted risk difference of 1.6% (95% CI, –1.5 to 4.4; all-pts) and 1.4% (95% CI, –1.5 to 4.1; CR-pts). Subgroups were underpowered to draw definitive conclusions regarding the efficacy of HD-MTX in individual high-risk clinical scenarios; however, there was no clear reduction in CNS progression risk with HD-MTX in any high-risk subgroup.

CONCLUSION

In this large study, high-risk patients receiving HD-MTX had a 7.2% 2-year risk of CNS progression, consistent with the progression risk in previously reported high-risk cohorts. Use of HD-MTX was not associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in risk of CNS progression.

Author Affiliations

¹Linear Clinical Research, Nedlands, WA, Australia; ²Division of Haematology, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Nedlands, WA, Australia; ³Division of Internal Medicine, Medical School, University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia; ⁴Department of Haematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark; ⁵BC Cancer Centre for Lymphoid Cancer, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; ⁶Department of Medicine Solna, Division of Clinical Epidemiology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; ⁷Oxford University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Oxford, United Kingdom; ⁸University College London Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom; ⁹Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, United Kingdom; ¹⁰University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom; ¹¹Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research & Wellness Centre at Austin Health, Heidelberg, VIC, Australia; ¹²Monash University School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Melbourne, VIC, Australia; ¹³Division of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; ¹⁴Department of Haematology, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark

Recent Bendamustine Treatment Before Apheresis Has a Negative Impact on Outcomes in Patients With Large B-Cell Lymphoma Receiving Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Therapy

This gives more credence to the idea of avoiding bendamustine before CAR T therapy. Patients exposed to bendamustine had about a 20% lower overall response rate (ORR), 50% shorter progression-free survival (PFS) and >50% shorter overall survival (OS) compared to those who were bendamustine naive. Although other factors may also play a role here, these seem to be significant differences and should make it clear that one should not use this drug before pursuing CAR T therapy.

Lenalidomide plus rituximab for the initial treatment of frail older patients with DLBCL: the FIL_ReRi phase 2 study

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.

Safety and efficacy of tafasitamab with or without lenalidomide added to first-line R-CHOP for DLBCL: the phase 1b First-MIND study

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.

Survival with Axicabtagene Ciloleucel in Large B-Cell Lymphoma

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.

Pembrolizumab in relapsed or refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma: final analysis of KEYNOTE-170

Pembrolizumab in lymphoma, this is not a common one, usually in young females, could be hard to treat.