All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the Lymphoma Coalition.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your Lymphoma Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe Lymphoma Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the Lymphoma Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The Lymphoma Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
Bookmark this article
There is an unmet clinical need for patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who are not eligible for autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-HSCT) or relapse after it. This specific poor prognosis population, with chemosensitive relapse, are usually good candidates for clinical trials. However, not all of them have access to large referral hospitals or meet the selection criteria.
Andrés J.M. Ferreri and colleagues designed a phase II trial (NCT00799513) to evaluate the approved and available therapy, lenalidomide, as maintenance therapy in relapsed DLBCL for those patients who cannot or refuse to participate in a clinical trial. Preliminary results of this study were previously reported on the Lymphoma Hub. Recently, the investigators published in Hematological Oncology the final study results, with all patients having completed treatment with lenalidomide and with a median follow-up of more than 5 years.1
This is an open-label, single-arm, multicenter, phase II trial that included patients with chemosensitive relapse of DLBCL:
Patients were treated with lenalidomide 25 mg once daily for 21 days every 28 days until progression or unacceptable toxicity. This maintenance therapy could be discontinued as per physician’s choice 2 years after trial registration.
The investigators included 46 patients with centrally confirmed de novo or transformed DLBCL at first (72%) or second (28%) relapse following anthracycline- and/or rituximab-based therapy. Other patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1, including the salvage chemoimmunotherapy regimens administered before starting lenalidomide maintenance.
Table 1. Patient characteristics at trial registration1
Characteristic, n (%) |
N = 46 patients |
Median age (range) |
72 (34-86) |
> 70 years |
28 (61) |
Clinical features registered before salvage chemotherapy |
|
Increased LDH serum level |
21 (46) |
Systemic symptoms (B status) |
5 (11) |
Extranodal disease |
29 (63) |
Bone marrow infiltration |
6 (13) |
DLBCL subtype |
|
De novo |
36 (78) |
Transformed* |
10 (22) |
Relapse |
|
First |
33 (72) |
Second |
13 (28) |
Previous auto-HSCT |
6 (13) |
Induction salvage chemoimmunotherapy |
|
R-DHAP, R-DHAOx, R-GEMOx, or R-ESHAP; 3–4 courses |
27 (59) |
R-ICE; 3–4 courses |
8 (17) |
R-CHOP; 6 courses |
6 (13) |
R-Bendamustine; 6 courses |
5 (11) |
Median TTP after prior treatment line (range), months |
16 (3-121) |
Response at time of trial registration |
|
CR |
26 (57) |
PR |
20 (43) |
auto-HSCT, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; CHOP, cyclophosphamide + doxorubicin + vincristine + prednisone; CR, complete remission; DHAOx, dexamethasone + cytarabine + oxaliplatin; DHAP, dexamethasone + cytarabine + cisplatin; ESHAP, etoposide + cytarabine + cisplatin + methylprednisolone; GEMOx, gemcitabine + oxaliplatin; ICE, ifosfamide + carboplatin + etoposide; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; PR, partial response; R, rituximab; TTP, time to progression *Transformed DLBCL after follicular lymphoma (n = 8), chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and marginal zone lymphoma |
After a median follow-up of 65 (range, 39–124) months, Ferreri et al. report a 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 48% ± 7%. The PFS curve reached a plateau after 2 years of treatment with lenalidomide, with 22 patients remaining progression-free, demonstrating a beneficial effect of lenalidomide even after maintenance completion. Moreover, the 5-year overall survival rate was 62% ± 7%, meaning that 26 patients were alive by the time of the analysis.
Other highlighted findings at the median follow-up of 65 months were:
Lenalidomide courses were administered a total of 849 times, with an average of 19 courses per patient (range, 3–82). Treatment discontinuation before 2 years was related to progressive disease in 17 patients, toxicity in eight patients, and patient request in five cases. However, 17 patients received lenalidomide for ≥ 2 years.
As registered in Table 2, frequent adverse events were Grade 1–2, and Grade 3–4 adverse events only occurred in £ 3% of delivered courses, except for neutropenia.
Table 2. Toxicity of lenalidomide maintenance1
Adverse event, n (%) |
Grade 1–2 |
Grade 3 |
Grade 4 |
Grade 5* |
Neutropenia |
135 (16) |
113 (13) |
30 (4) |
— |
Anemia |
204 (24) |
25 (3) |
— |
— |
Thrombocytopenia |
139 (16) |
15 (2) |
4 (< 1) |
— |
Febrile neutropenia/infections |
13 (2) |
1 (< 1) |
— |
1 (< 1) |
Diarrhea |
39 (5) |
27 (3) |
1 (< 1) |
— |
Nausea/vomiting |
13 (2) |
2 (< 1) |
— |
— |
Hepatotoxicity |
41 (5) |
4 (< 1) |
— |
— |
Constipation |
9 (1) |
5 (1) |
— |
— |
Neurotoxicity |
53 (6) |
1 (< 1) |
— |
— |
Rash |
18 (2) |
6 (1) |
2 (< 1) |
— |
Nephrotoxicity |
19 (2) |
3 (< 1) |
— |
— |
Thrombotic/ischemic events |
1 (< 1) |
1 (< 1) |
— |
2 (< 1) |
Adverse events of Grade 1 or 2 occurring in ≥ 10% of patients and all Grade 3–5 events are reported. Denominator for the different forms of toxicity is the number of delivered courses (n = 849) |
Based on previous publications about patients with relapsed DLBCL, the expected 1-year PFS is nearly 30%.2 Upon adding lenalidomide maintenance, the 1-year PFS improved to 68% ± 7%, above the investigator’s expectations. In this update with longer follow-up, the benefit of lenalidomide is further confirmed and extended beyond maintenance treatment duration, with a 5-year PFS of 48% ± 7% and 5-year overall survival of 60% ± 7%.
Of note, in 50% of patients, response to lenalidomide was twice as long as response duration to the prior treatment line, even when 61% of this cohort were > 70 years, and previously exposed to rituximab, which are features associated with poorer outcomes. Nevertheless, the study cohort does not represent the global population in this setting, since patients with refractory disease were excluded, and 72% were enrolled at first relapse.
In conclusion, the authors state that lenalidomide demonstrated its efficacy in this setting and its positive safety-benefit balance with appropriate and timely dose reductions. It should also be further studied as maintenance therapy for patients with chemosensitive relapsed DLBCL in a randomized controlled trial.
Understanding your specialty helps us to deliver the most relevant and engaging content.
Please spare a moment to share yours.
Please select or type your specialty
Subscribe to get the best content related to lymphoma & CLL delivered to your inbox