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.
The Lymphoma & CLL Hub is an independent medical education platform, sponsored by Beigene and Roche, and supported through educational grants from Bristol Myers Squibb, Ipsen Biopharmaceuticals, Pfizer, and Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company and Janssen Biotech, Inc., administered by Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC View funders.
Bookmark this article
During the Lymphoma Hub Steering Committee meeting, Francesc Bosch chaired a discussion on: Time-limited therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and lymphoma – who, what, and how? This discussion also featured Gilles Salles, Grzegorz Nowakowski, Andrew Davies, Kieron Dunleavy, Marek Trněný, Miles Prince, Alison Moskowitz, and Astrid Pavlovsky. The panel discussed the advantages, disadvantages, and important considerations for time-limited versus continuous therapy in both CLL and lymphoma.
Time-limited for CLL and lymphoma – who, what, and how?
The first topic discussed was time-limited versus continuous therapy of bispecifics in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), such as gloflitamab versus epcoritamab. Moskowitz and Salles highlighted that complete response (CR) rates and the stage of disease are important factors when choosing continuous versus time-limited therapy, as those achieving CR in earlier stages could warrant the stopping of treatment, whereas those achieving CR after multiply-relapsed disease could be more inclined to continue therapy. Nowakowski mentions that the optimal approach is dependent on the clinical scenario, as continuous therapy may be beneficial in the relapsed/refractory setting given the limited treatment options. Davies points out that there is emerging data on the resistance to bispecifics in DLBCL, and Trněný mentions the importance of patient preference in decision-making.
Key questions in the use of continuous therapy in DLBCL include:
The second topic of discussion was time-limited versus continuous therapy in CLL, such as venetoclax versus Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Pavlovsky and Prince highlighted that patient preference and age is key in this decision. Dunleavy mentioned that there is ongoing data on the role of genetics for therapy selection in CLL.
A key question in CLL is:
Overall, the key considerations in whether to choose continuous versus time-limited therapy include patient preference, stage of disease, genetics, toxicities, and age.
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
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to lymphoma & CLL delivered to your inbox