Advertisement


Jennifer L. Crombie, MD, on DLBCL: Real-World Outcomes With Novel Therapies in Relapsed or Refractory Disease

2023 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Jennifer L. Crombie, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses the historically poor outcomes for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Her study examined real-world data on the use of novel therapies in this population and found that outcomes with second- and third-line regimens of polatuzumab vedotin-piiq plus bendamustine and rituximab and tafasitamab plus lenalidomide remain suboptimal, with worse outcomes particularly after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (Abstract 7552).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Jennifer L. Crombie, MD: We know that the treatment landscape of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma or DLBCL has significantly evolved over the past few years since the availability of multiple new therapeutic options that are now FDA approved for this disease. The outcomes of patients in the real world setting utilizing these novel agents, however, remains less clearly described. In our study, we utilize the CODA Electronic Health records database, which consists of patient demographic and clinical information from both academic and community practice sites across the United States. We identified over 5,700 patients with a diagnosis of DLBCL in the database. And further within this cohort, we identified 175 patients with relapsed refractory disease, who had been treated with a novel therapy. Novel therapies consisted of chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy, or CAR-T therapy, Tafasitamab plus Lenalidomide, Polatuzumab plus Bendamustine and Rituximab, and along Cetuximab, there were no patients in the database treated with Selinexor. Patients were also required to have at least one post index response assessment or date of death recorded following their treatment with the novel therapy. Patients were further classified as having received two or more versus three or more lines of therapy. We next examined outcomes within each treatment group. We found that outcomes were best among the patients treated with CAR T-cell therapy with overall response rates of approximately 75% and a median overall survival of 27 in 18 months, in patients who had received two or greater versus three or later lines of therapy. Outcomes were poorer among patients who had received other novel therapies. Those patients treated with Polatuzumab based regimens had an overall response of approximately 60% and a median overall survival of 7.5 months. And patients treated with Tafasitamab based regimens had response rates ranging from 35 to 40% depending on the line of therapy and a median overall survival of approximately six months. Patients treated with novel therapies after CAR T-cell had a particularly poor outcomes with overall survivals of less than three months. While it's encouraging that novel therapies are now available for patients with relapse or refractory DLBCL, our data highlight the persistent poor outcomes that are seen in the relapsed refractory setting, particularly after CAR-T relapse and the urgent need for ongoing treatment options in this space. Thankfully, other drugs including CD20, CD3 bispecific antibodies, as well as other novel therapies and combinations are being studied in ongoing clinical trials.

Related Videos

Leukemia

Sarah K. Tasian, MD, on Hematologic Malignancies in Children: Expert Commentary

Sarah K. Tasian, MD, of Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, summarizes three studies presented at ASCO: genomic determinants of outcome in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), a phase III trial of inotuzumab ozogamicin for high-risk B-cell ALL, and preliminary results from the first-in-child phase II trial of bosutinib in pediatric patients with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (Abstracts 10015, 10016, and 10017).

Leukemia
COVID-19

Jennifer A. Woyach, MD, on New Findings on CLL, COVID-19, and Treatment With Obinutuzumab Plus Venetoclax

Jennifer A. Woyach, MD, of The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, discusses results of a phase III study showing that progression-free survival with ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab plus venetoclax is not superior to ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab for treatment-naive older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. Long-term follow-up will determine whether there are advantages to obinutuzumab plus venetoclax, with special attention to measurable residual disease and therapy discontinuation (Abstract 7500).

Prostate Cancer

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, and Karim Fizazi, MD, on Prostate Cancer: Phase III Results on Talazoparib Plus Enzalutamide as First-Line Treatment

Alicia K. Morgans, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Karim Fizazi, MD, of Institut Gustave Roussy, University of Paris-Saclay, discuss findings from the TALAPRO-2 study, which showed that talazoparib plus enzalutamide improved radiographic progression–free survival over standard-of-care enzalutamide as first-line treatment for patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and HRR gene alterations. This regimen also delayed the time to deterioration in global health status and quality of life (Abstract 5004).

Colorectal Cancer

Thierry Conroy, MD, on Rectal Cancer: Long-Term Results on mFOLFIRINOX vs Preoperative Chemoradiation Therapy

Thierry Conroy, MD, of the Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, discusses phase III findings from the PRODIGE 23 trial, showing that neoadjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFIRINOX followed by chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy improved all outcomes, including overall survival, in patients with locally advanced rectal cancer compared with standard chemoradiotherapy, surgery, and adjuvant chemotherapy (Abstract LBA3504).

Breast Cancer

Jennifer A. Ligibel, MD, on Early Breast Cancer and Weight Loss: Results From the BWEL Trial

Jennifer A. Ligibel, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, discusses a telephone-based weight loss intervention that induced clinically meaningful weight loss in patients with breast cancer who had overweight and obesity, across demographic and tumor factors. Additional tailoring of the intervention may possibly enhance weight loss in Black and younger patients as well (Abstract 12001).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement