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.
The 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.
The Lymphoma Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Roche, AbbVie, BeOne, Miltenyi Biomedicine, Thermo Fisher, Nurix Therapeutics and Caribou Biosciences and supported through independent educational grants from Incyte, Bristol Myers Squibb, Pfizer and Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc. Funders are allowed no direct influence on our content. The levels of sponsorship listed are reflective of the amount of funding given. View funders.
Now you can support HCPs in making informed decisions for their patients
Your contribution helps us continuously deliver expertly curated content to HCPs worldwide. You will also have the opportunity to make a content suggestion for consideration and receive updates on the impact contributions are making to our content.
Find out more
Create an account to access:
Bookmark & personalize site content
Receive alerts for new content in your areas of interest
View lymphoma & CLL content recommended for you
On December 28, 2017, Jonathan W. Friedberg of the Wilmot Cancer Institute in Rochester, New York and colleagues published in Blood, results from a phase II study in patients with treatment-naïve classic Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). In this multi-center, open-label clinical trial, classic HL patients who were ineligible for or declined frontline chemotherapies were administered either brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus dacarbazine (DTIC), or BV plus bendamustine (NCT01716806). The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per investigator based on Revised Response Criteria for Malignant Lymphoma. Key secondary endpoints were safety, complete response (CR) rate, response duration, progression-free survival (PFS), B symptom resolution, and selected pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters. Overall survival (OS) was an additional endpoint.
The results of this study ought to serve as a template and give rise to additional studies of novel induction regimens for elderly HL patients. Because poor outcomes have been well-documented in these vulnerable patients, it is vitally important to refine these patient-specific induction treatment strategies. Demonstrable activity was seen with BV in combination with DTIC or bendamustine in elderly, frail patients with newly diagnosed HL, however, BV plus bendamustine was poorly tolerated by these patients at the frequency and dose levels studied. BV plus DTIC was not only highly active, with 13 of 21 patients achieving a relatively well-tolerated CR and an overall median PFS of 17. 9 months. This study demonstrated favorable tolerability and activity compared with historical chemotherapy regimens in this patient type. Confirmation of these data in larger trials is certainly warranted; nevertheless, given the poor outcomes currently seen with standard chemotherapy, these results suggest BV plus DTIC may be a viable treatment option for elderly patients with newly diagnosed HL.
Patients aged ≥60 years with treatment-naive Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) have few treatment options and inferior survival due to treatment-related toxicities and comorbidities. This phase 2, nonrandomized, open-label study evaluated brentuximab vedotin (BV) monotherapy (results previously reported), BV plus dacarbazine (DTIC), and BV plus bendamustine. Patients had classical HL and were ineligible for or declined frontline chemotherapy. Twenty-two patients received 1.8 mg/kg BV and 375 mg/m2 DTIC for up to 12 cycles, and 20 more patients received 1.8 mg/kg BV plus 90 or 70 mg/m2 bendamustine for up to 6 cycles (dose reduced due to toxicity). Subsequent BV monotherapy was allowed. Approximately 30 patients were to receive BV plus bendamustine; however, the incidence of serious adverse events (65%) and 2 deaths on study led to discontinuation of bendamustine and cessation of enrollment. Most patients had stage III/IV disease, and approximately half had ≥3 comorbidities or were impaired in ≥1 aspect that significantly interfered with quality of life. For BV plus DTIC, the objective response rate (ORR) was 100% and the complete remission (CR) rate was 62%. To date, the median progression-free survival (PFS) is 17.9 months. For BV plus bendamustine, the ORR was 100% and the CR rate was 88%. Neither the median PFS nor overall survival was reached. For elderly patients with HL, BV plus DTIC may be a frontline option based on tolerability and response duration. Despite activity, BV plus bendamustine is not a tolerable regimen in these patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01716806.
References
Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:
The content was clear and easy to understand
The content addressed the learning objectives
The content was relevant to my practice
I will change my clinical practice as a result of this content
This content is accurate as of the date of publication and is not updated retrospectively. Please refer to the latest available evidence, guidelines, and relevant regulatory information when making clinical decisions.
Your opinion matters
When selecting the next therapy for patients with R/R MCL after BTKi progression, what is your most important consideration?