Dataset Information

A Phase 2/3 Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Versus Investigator's Choice in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

ABSTRACT: Purpose: Randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 2/3 trial investigating lenalidomide versus investigator's choice (IC) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).Experimental Design: Patients with DLBCL who received ≥2 prior therapies were stratified by DLBCL subtype [germinal center B-cell (GCB) vs. non-GCB; determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC)] and then randomized 1:1 to lenalidomide (25 mg/day, 21 days of 28-day cycle) or IC (gemcitabine, rituximab, etoposide, or oxaliplatin). Crossover to lenalidomide was permitted for IC-treated patients with radiologically confirmed progressive disease. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, and subtype analysis [GCB vs. activated B-cell (ABC)] using gene expression profiling (GEP) were exploratory endpoints.Results: Stage 1: 102 DLBCL patients (by IHC: non-GCB, n = 54; GCB, n = 48) received ≥1 dose of lenalidomide or IC. Hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events with lenalidomide versus IC included neutropenia (42.6%; 36.4%), anemia (33.3%; 47.3%), thrombocytopenia (24.1%; 43.6%), and leukopenia (5.6%; 12.7%), respectively. Overall, lenalidomide-treated patients had an ORR of 27.5% versus 11.8% in IC (ORRs were similar regardless of IHC-defined DLBCL subtype). Median PFS was increased in patients receiving lenalidomide (13.6 weeks) versus IC (7.9 weeks; P = 0.041), with greater improvements in non-GCB patients (15.1 vs. 7.1 weeks, respectively; P = 0.021) compared with GCB (10.1 vs. 9.0 weeks, respectively; P = 0.550).Conclusions: The clinical benefit of lenalidomide monotherapy in DLBCL patients was more evident in the non-GCB subtype. Exploratory analyses suggest that this preferential benefit was more pronounced in the GEP-defined ABC population, demonstrating a need for additional studies of lenalidomide in DLBCL using GEP subtyping. Clin Cancer Res; 23(15); 4127-37. ©2017 AACR.

SUBMITTER: Czuczman MS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8171498 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PURPOSE:The aim of this open-label, first-in-setting, randomized phase III trial was to evaluate the efficacy of alisertib, an investigational Aurora A kinase inhibitor, in patients with relapsed/refractory peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL). PATIENTS AND METHODS:Adult patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL-one or more prior therapy-were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive oral alisertib 50 mg two times per day (days 1 to 7; 21-day cycle) or investigator-selected single-agent comparator, including intravenous pralatrexate 30 mg/m2 (once per week for 6 weeks; 7-week cycle), or intravenous gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 or intravenous romidepsin 14 mg/m2 (days 1, 8, and 15; 28-day cycle). Tumor tissue (disease subtype) and imaging were assessed by independent central review. Primary outcomes were overall response rate and progression-free survival (PFS). Two interim analyses and one final analysis were planned. RESULTS:Between May 2012 and October 2014, 271 patients were randomly assigned (alisertib, n = 138; comparator, n = 133). Enrollment was stopped early on the recommendation of the independent data monitoring committee as a result of the low probability of alisertib achieving PFS superiority with full enrollment. Centrally assessed overall response rate was 33% for alisertib and 45% for the comparator arm (odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.08). Median PFS was 115 days for alisertib and 104 days for the comparator arm (hazard ratio, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.637 to 1.178). The most common adverse events were anemia (53% of alisertib-treated patients v 34% of comparator-treated patients) and neutropenia (47% v 31%, respectively). A lower percentage of patients who received alisertib (9%) compared with the comparator (14%) experienced events that led to study drug discontinuation. Of 26 on-study deaths, five were considered treatment related (alisertib, n = 3 of 11; comparator, n = 2 of 15). Two-year overall survival was 35% for each arm. CONCLUSION:In patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL, alisertib was not statistically significantly superior to the comparator arm.

Project description:PurposeTafasitamab, an Fc-modified, humanized, anti-CD19 monoclonal antibody, in combination with lenalidomide, demonstrated efficacy in transplant-ineligible patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), in the single-arm, phase II L-MIND study (NCT02399085). RE-MIND, a retrospective observational study, generated a historic control for L-MIND to delineate the contribution of tafasitamab to the efficacy of the combination.Patients and methodsData were retrospectively collected from patients with R/R DLBCL treated with lenalidomide monotherapy for comparison with tafasitamab + lenalidomide-treated patients (L-MIND). Key eligibility criteria were aligned with L-MIND. Estimated propensity score-based Nearest Neighbor 1:1 Matching methodology balanced the cohorts for nine prespecified prognostic baseline covariates. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed best overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included complete response (CR) rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsData from 490 patients going through lenalidomide monotherapy were collected; 140 qualified for matching with the L-MIND cohort. The primary analysis included 76 patients from each cohort who received a lenalidomide starting dose of 25 mg/day. Cohort baseline covariates were comparable. A significantly better ORR of 67.1% (95% confidence interval, 55.4-77.5) was observed for the combination therapy versus 34.2% (23.7-46.0) for lenalidomide monotherapy [odds ratio, 3.89 (1.90-8.14); P < 0.0001]. Higher CR rates were achieved with combination therapy compared with lenalidomide monotherapy [39.5% (28.4-51.4) vs. 13.2% (6.5-22.9)]. Survival endpoints favored combination therapy. Lenalidomide monotherapy outcomes were similar to previously published data.ConclusionsRE-MIND enabled the estimation of the additional treatment effect achieved by combining tafasitamab with lenalidomide in patients with R/R DLBCL.

Dataset Information

A Phase 2/3 Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Versus Investigator's Choice in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets