managing t-cell lymphoma
Post on 19-Oct-2014
1.279 Views
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
PTCLOK, Now What?
Steven M. Horwitz M.D.Assistant AttendingLymphoma Service
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Peripheral T-cell Lymphoma-NOS
Prop
ortio
n
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Time
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Prognosis: Overall and Failure-free Survival
Armitage J, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4124–4130, International T-cell Classification Project
Current Problems with PTCL
Current Problems Confusing terminology/ Difficult Diagnosis Poor Prognosis Results with “Standard” Therapy
Thinking about solutions High-Dose therapy New (or not so new) Drugs Ways to move forward
WHO 2008 CLASSIFICATION OF MATURE T/NK-CELL NEOPLASMS
T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia
T-cell large granular lymphocytic leukemia
Chronic lymphoproliferative NK cells
Aggressive NK-cell leukemia
Adult T-cell lymphoma/leukemia
Systemic EBV-positive T-cell lymphoma
Extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma, nasal type
Enteropathy-type intestinal T-cell lymphoma
Hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma
Angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL)
Anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-positive
Anaplastic large cell lymphoma, ALK-negative
Peripheral T-cell lymphoma, NOS
Mycosis fungoides
Sezary syndrome
Primary cutaneous CD30+ lymphoproliferative
Primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell
Lymphomatoid papulosis
Borderline lesions
Subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell
Primary cutaneous gamma-delta T-cell
Hydroa vacciniforme lymphoma
Primary cutaneous aggressive epidermotropic CD8+ cytotoxic T-cell
Primary cutaneous small/medium CD4+ T-cell lymphoma (provisional)
“Systemic T-cell Lymphoma”Peripheral T-cell lymphoma NOS
Angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma
Anaplastic Large Cell-ALK-1 negative
Anaplastic Large Cell-ALK-1 positive
Enteropathy-type intestinal lymphoma
Extranodal NK/T-cell lymphoma-nasal
Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma
Hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma (may be derived from an immature T-cell)
Peripheral T-cell Lymphomas, PTCL refers to mature T-cell lymphomas (Pathology Definition)
“CTCL”Mycosis FungoidesSezary syndrome
Subcutaneous panniculitis-like Primary cutaneous ALCLLymphomatoid papulosis
Primary cutaneous small/medium CD4+ T-cell lymphoma
Primary cutaneous aggressive epidermotropic CD8+ cytotoxic T-cell
lymphoma
Cancers of Immature T-cells lymphoblastic lymphoma and acute
lymphoblastic leukemia
PTCL
Expert Agreement: Consensus Diagnosis
ALCL, ALK+ 97% PTCL, unspecified 75%
ATLL 93% Panniculitis-like 75%
Nasal NK/T-cell 92% ALCL, ALK- 74%
Angioimmunoblastic 81% Hepatosplenic 72%
Enteropathy-type 79% Cutaneous ALCL 66%
Vose JM, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4124-4130.
Expert Agreement Upon Re-review
Overall agreement 81%
Reviewer 1 67%
Reviewer 2 74%
Reviewer 3 83%
Reviewer 4 87%
Reviewer 5 95%
Data from Dennis Weisenberger, Int PTCL Project
International PTCL StudyMajor NHL Types by Region
Percent NA EU FE
PTCL, unspecified 34.4 34.3 22.4
Angioimmunoblastic 16.0 28.7 17.9
Anaplastic, ALK+ 16.0 6.4 3.2
Anaplastic, ALK- 7.8 9.4 2.6
NK/T-cell 5.1 4.3 22.4
ATLL 2.0 1.0 25.0
Vose JM, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4124-4130.
Time
Prop
ortio
nMature T and NK Lymphomas:
FFS of Different Histologies
.
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
PTCL
ATLL
AITLALCL ALK-
EATCLNK/T-nasal type
Vose JM, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4124-4130.
ALCL ALK+
Savage et al. Annals of Oncology 2004; 15:1467–1475.
Baseline with CHOP/CHOP-Like: PTCL-U BCCA
OS by IPI
N=117
Current Problems with PTCL
Current Problems Confusing terminology/ Difficult Diagnosis Poor Prognosis Results with “Standard” Therapy
Thinking about solutions High-Dose therapy New (or not so new) Drugs Ways to move forward
Autologous stem cell transplantation as first-line therapy in PTCL: Results of a prospective
multicenter study
N=83 CHOP x 4-6 IF CR/PR
mobilized with DexaBEAM or ESHAP
TBI + CY-ASCT Median F/U: 33 months
PTCL 39%AITL 33%ALCL 16%Med age 46.5 (30-65)
AA-IPI L-LI 49%HI-H 51%
CR/CHOP 39%PR/CHOP 40%ASCT 66%POD 29% (22% CHOP)
Reimer, P. et al et al. JCO vol 27, Jan 2009
Overall survival
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
0 12 24 36 48 60
Time (months)
(n=83)
3-year OS: 48%
time (months) (n=83)
Disease-free survival
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
0 12 24 36 48 60
Time (months)
(n=55)
3-year DFS: 53%
time (months) (n=83)
Autologous stem cell transplantation as first-line therapy in PTCL: Survival
Reimer, P. et al et al. JCO vol 27, Jan 2009
Overall Survival(IPI: high/intermediate high vs. low/intermediate low)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
0 12 24 36 48 60
Time (months)
IPI: high/intermediate high (n=42) IPI: low /intermediate low (n=41)
p= 0,1799
Overall survivalIPI: high / interm.high vs. low /
interm.low
time (months)
high / interm.high (n= 42) low / interm.low (n= 41)
Overall Survival(Transplanted vs. non-transplanted)
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
0 12 24 36 48 60
Time (months)
non-transplanted (n=28) transplanted (n=55)
p< 0.001
Overall survivalTransplanted vs. non-transplanted
time (months)
transplanted (n= 55) non-transplanted (n= 28)
estimated 3-year OS: 71% vs. 11%
Autologous stem cell transplantation as first-line therapy in PTCL: Survival
CR vs PR p=0.22PFS 36%-no plateau
Reimer, P. et al. J Clin Oncol; 27:106-113 2009
100
0
20
40
60
80
90
10
30
50
70
Months0 12 24 4836
100
0
20
40
60
80
90
10
30
50
70
Months0 12 24 4836
100
0
20
40
60
80
90
10
30
50
70
Months0 12 24 4836
CIBMTR Auto and Allo for PTCL: Outcomes excluding patients in CR1PFS OS NRM
Auto (N = 75)
Allo (N = 108)
Auto (N = 75)
Allo (N = 108)
Auto (N = 75)
Allo (N = 108)
P=NS
P <0.0001
P=NS
Smith et al, ASH 2010 abstract 689
ICE and Planned ASCT for Relapsed/Refractory T-cell Lymphoma: PFS from ICE
ALL, N=40Rel, N=22
Ref, N=18
Horwitz et al, ASH 2005
Response to ICE 70% (28/40)
Received ASCT 68% (27/40)
0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132
PFS ICE months
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
%
Progress Free Survival
0 12 24 36 48 60 72 84 96 108 120 132
PFS ICE months
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
%
PFS: Relapsed versus Refractory
Le Gouill, S. et al. J Clin Oncol; 26:2264-2271 2008
-Response to DLI 2/2
Retrospective Analysis of 77 PTCL Patients Who Underwent Allogeneic Stem-cell Transplantation
5 year EFS 53%
5 year OS 57%
AITL (n=11) 80%
PTCL (n=27) 63%
ALCL (n=27) 55%
Other (n=12) 33%
Le Gouill, S. et al. J Clin Oncol; 26:2264-2271 2008
Retrospective Analysis of PTCL Patients Who Underwent Allogeneic Stem-cell Transplantation
Societe´ Francaise De Greffe De Moelle Et De Therapie Cellulaire
REL/REFRHistologies-ALCL-27-PTCL-NOS-27-AITL-11-NK/T-cell-5 -HSTCL-3-T-LGL-1-EATCL-1-HTLV– 2
myeloablative conditioning regimen-57
5 year TRM 34%
N=77
Current Problems with PTCL
Current Problems Confusing terminology/ Difficult Diagnosis Poor Prognosis Results with “Standard” Therapy
Thinking about solutions High-Dose therapy New (and not so new) Drugs Ways to move forward
Alemtuzumab- anti-CD52 antibody N=14, Rel/Refr-Phase II, standard dosing (30 mg iv 3x/week)1
10 PTCL, nos, RR 36% (3CR/2PR) 5 deaths-closed early (TB, zoster, aspergillus)
N=10, Phase II -10 mg x 12 doses (4 weeks) 2
PTCL nos 6, CTCL 4 Response 50% in PTCL, CR2/PR1 Less toxic
Denileukin diftitox-fusion protein-IL2-diphtheria toxin N=27, (PTCL 19) Phase II, standard dosing3
48%RR , not myelosuppressive
Is there an “R-CHOP” for TCL?
1. Enblad et al. Blood. 2004;103:2920-2924.2. Zinzani et al Haematologica. 2005;90:702-703. 3. Dang et al British Journ Haematol 136:439-447, 2007
Alemtuzumab and CHOP chemotherapy as first-line treatment of PTCL: results of a GITIL prospective
multicenter trial
2 year FFS 48%
2 year OS 53%
Gallamini et al, Blood 110:2316-2323; 2007
A-30 mg + CHOP Q 4 weeks x 8N=24 (PTCL/AITL 20)
IPI 0-1 33%2-3 58%4-5 8%
CR ALL 70.8%PTCL 50%AITL 100%
Issues with Alemtuzumab + CHOP
Toxicity– Gallamini et al– Grade 4 Infection-17%– Sepsis, Aspergillosis, JC virus, PCP
– Kim et al– Toxicity-Grade 3-4
• Neutropenia 90%, Lymphopenia 95%, Febrile neutropenia 55%• Infectious deaths 10%• Study halted early due to SAE
Heterogeneity of CD52 expression – Series of PTCL 35-40%*– Down-regulated in PTCL?– Varies by technique Flow vs Immunohistochemistry
*Piccaluga et al Haematologica 2007 92:566-567, Rodig et al. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:7174
Foss FM, et al. ASCO 2010. Abstract 8045.
Multicenter phase II study of patients with aggressive T-cell NHL Treatment: DD 18 μg/kg/d on Days 1-2, CHOP on Day 3, G-CSF or
filgrastim on Day 4 N=49 (80% PTCL/AITL/ALCL) 7 patients completed only 1 cycle of therapy
– 3 deaths after cycle 1 (2 cardiac, 1 rhabdomyolysis)– 4 discontinued due to toxicity
Efficacy– ORR overall: 68%; 57% CR– ORR (≥2 cycles): 86%; 73% CR– Median PFS 12 mos; estimated 2-year OS 60%
Denileukin Diftitox (DD) + CHOP in First-Line PTCL (CONCEPT Trial)
Treatment and Prognosis of Mature T-cell and NK-cell Lymphoma: an analysis of patients with T-cell lymphoma treated in studies of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group (DSHNHL)
Schmitz et al., Blood First Edition Paper, prepublished online July 21, 2010
•7 trials: German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group•343 patients•Most received 6-8 courses of CHOP or CHOEP (Hi-CHOEP, or MegaCHOEP)•56% ALCL, 8% AITL
Histology N 3 yr EFS 3 yr OSALCL ALK+ 78 75.8% 89.8% ALCL, ALK- 113 45.7% 62.1% PTCLU 70 41.1% 53.9%AITL 28 50.0% 67.5%
Treatment and Prognosis of Mature T-cell and NK-cell Lymphoma: Event-free survival Younger patients treated on the NHL-B1 trial
Schmitz et al., Blood First Edition Paper, prepublished online July 21, 2010
EFS
Treatment and Prognosis of Mature T-cell and NK-cell Lymphoma: Event-free survival Younger patients treated on NHL-B1/Hi-CHOEP trial
Schmitz et al., Blood First Edition Paper, prepublished online July 21, 2010
EFS ALCL, ALK+
EFS Other subtypes
Current Problems with PTCL
Current Problems Confusing terminology/ Difficult Diagnosis Poor Prognosis Results with “Standard” Therapy
Thinking about solutions High-Dose therapy New (and not so new) Drugs Ways to move forward
Plasma membrane
Lysosome
cysteine cysteine cysteine
cysteine
PDXPDX(& Natural
Folates)
PDXFPGSATP + MgCl2
PDX(G)n
PDX FPGH+ SH
Gn
?
ATP
ADP
Pralatrexate
RFC-1
cMOAT/MRP
ATPase
PDX(G)n
TMTX
Compared to MTXPDX more efficiently enters tumor cells
(RFC-1) and is more readily polyglutamylated (FPGS)
PROPEL Pivotal Trial: Pralatrexate in Relapsed/Refractory PTCL
Pralatexate 30 mg/m² IV x 6 weeks in 7 week cycles*
N=115• Single-arm• Phase II• Relapsed or refractory PTCL
Primary endpoint• Response rateSecondary endpoints• Duration of response• Overall survival• Progression-free survival
*No pre-medications were required and patients also received vitamin B12 every 8-10 weeks, and 1 mg of oral folic acid daily.
O’Conner OA, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1182-1189.
Pralatrexate in Relapsed/Refractory PTCL
Median number prior systemic therapies: 3 (range, 1-12)
O’Conner OA, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1182-1189.
Outcome Patients (N=109 evaluable)ORR 29%• CR 11%• PR 18%Median duration of response 10.1 monthsMedian PFS 3.5 monthsMedian OS 14.5 months
PROPEL: Response Analysis by Subsets
O’Conner OA, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:1182-1189.
FactorNumber of Patients
Proportion of Patients ORR
Age• < 65 years• ≥ 65 years
7039
64%36%
27%33%
Number prior systemic regimens• 1• 2• ≥ 3
232957
21%27%52%
35%24%30%
Prior transplant• Yes• No
1891
17%83%
33%29%
Histology• PTCL-NOS• AILT• ALCL• Transformed MF• Other
591317128
54%12%16%11%7%
32%8%
35%25%38%
*includes 6 MedDRA preferred terms **includes 2 MedDRA preferred terms ***includes 3 MedDRA preferred terms1- Only 5 patients had platelet count < 10,000 μL
PROPELAdverse Events ≥ Gr 3 Occurring in ≥ 3% of Patients (n=111)
Any Grade Grade 3 Grade 4Mucosal inflammation* 70% 17% 4%
Thrombocytopenia** 41% 14% 19%1
Nausea 40% 4% 0%Fatigue 36% 5% 2%Anemia** 34% 16% 2%
Neutropenia** 24% 13% 7%Dyspnea 19% 7% 0%Hypokalemia** 15% 4% 1%Abnormal LFTs* 13% 5% 0%Abdominal pain 11% 4% 0%Leukopenia** 11% 3% 4%Febrile Neutropenia 5% 5% 0%Sepsis 5% 3% 2%Hypotension 5% 3% 1%
O’Connor OA, et al JCO Jan 18 2011
Pralatrexate for CTCL: Efficacy Results
Cohort Pralatrexate Dose mg/m2
ScheduleResponse
RateResponse
Type1 30- 3/4 weeks 100% (2/2) 2 PR2 20- 3/4 weeks 67% (2/3) 2 PR3 20- 2/3 weeks 57% (4/7) 1 CR/3 PR4 15- 3/4 weeks 50% (3/6) 3 PR5 15- 2/3 weeks 0 (0/3) ---6 10- 3/4 weeks 10% (1/10) 1 CR
Overall 39% (12/31) 2 CR/10 PRDoses >15 mg/m2, 3/4 weeks 61% (11/18)
“Optimal” dose 15 mg/m2, 3/4 weeks 10/22 (45%)
Horwitz SM, Kim Y, Foss F, et al, ASH Annual Meeting., 2010;
Response by CTCL Subtype and Stage (N = 54)
CTCL Subtype (perInvestigator)
Stage Rate at OptimalDose/Sched
% (n/N)
Response Rateat ≥ 15 mg/m2
3/4 weeks% (n/N)
OverallResponse
Rate% (n/N)
MF IBIIBIII
IVAIVB
60% (3/5)67% (4/6)50% (1/2)60% (3/5)0% (0/1)
63% (5/8)67% (8/12)50% (1/2)60% (3/5)0% (0/1)
50% (5/10)53% (9/17)50% (1/2)50% (3/6)0% (0/1)
Sézary IIBIII
IVAIVB
0% (0/1)33% (1/3)33% (1/3)0% (0/1)
0% (0/1)25% (1/4)33% (1/3)50% (1/2)
0% (0/1)25% (1/4)13% (1/8)50% (1/2)
PC-ALCL IIB ------- 100% (1/1) 100% (1/1)
All patients 45% (13/29) 51% (21/41) 41% (22/54)
Horwitz SM, Kim Y, Foss F, et al, ASH Annual Meeting., 2010;
Romidepsin in PTCL
A pan-histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor FDA-approved in 2009 for use in patients with CTCL
who have received ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy Pivotal trial in PTCL presented at ASH 2010
Pivotal Trial of Romidepsin in Relapsed/Refractory PTCL
Median age: 61 years (range, 20-83) Median of 2 prior regimens (range, 1-6) 62% refractory to frontline therapy
Romidepsin 14 mg/m2 IV on Days 1,8,15 every 28 days
N=131• Single-arm• Phase II• PCTL failing ≥1 prior systemic therapy
• Systemic disease
Primary endpoint• CR rate by independent review
Secondary endpoints• CR rate by investigator assessment
• ORR• Duration of response• Time to first response• Time to progression• Safety, tolerability
T-cell lymphoma subtypes (n):• PTCL-NOS (53)• AITL (21)• ALCL (ALK-1-neg) (16)• Other (10)
Coiffier B, et al. ASH 2010. Abstract 114.
Romidepsin in Relapsed/Refractory PTCL
ORR (by IRC): 26% (34/130) CR: 13% Median duration of response: 12 months Median duration of CR: not reached (<1 to 26.3+
months) Median time to progression: 6 months Safety profile consistent with CTCL studies
– Most common grade ≥3 AEs: thrombocytopenia (24%); neutropenia (20%)
Coiffier B, et al. ASH 2010. Abstract 114.
Events with a missing toxicity grade are included.
At least one TEAE
Nausea
Fatigue
Vomiting
Thrombocytopenia
Diarrhea
Pyrexia
Neutropenia
Constipation
Anorexia
Anemia
Dysgeusia
Overall
≥ Grade 3
Infection
Treatment-Related Adverse Events in ≥ 20% of Patients (N = 131)
Hematologic Toxicities ≥ 5% (N = 131)
All Grade ≥ 3 Drug-Related
Grade ≥ 3;Drug-
RelatedD/C
Thrombocytopenia* 38% 24% 37% 23% 2%
Neutropenia† 30% 20% 29% 18% 1%
Anemia 24% 10% 20% 5% 0
Leukopenia 12% 6% 12% 6% 1%
39
*9 patients (7%) had a bleeding event [3 pts ≥ Grade 3]. 6/9 related to thrombocytopenia† Febrile neutropenia reported as AE in 5 patients (4%). Growth factors used in 13% of patients
D/C, events leading to discontinuation.
Brentuximab Vedotin (SGN-35) in ALCL
3 components:– Chimeric antibody SGN-30– Synthetic analog (MMAE) of the
antitubulin agent dolastatin 10– Stable drug linker
Proposed mechanism of action– Binds to CD30– Internalized into the tumor cell– MMAE is released – Tumor cell undergoes G2/M
phase cell cycle arrest and apoptosis
Preclinical activity observed both in vitro and in vivo
Reproduced with permission from Seattle Genetics, Inc.; Pro. 2009 ASCO Educational Book. Alexandria, VA: American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2009;486; Younes. EHA. 2009 (abstr 0503).
ADC=antibody-drug conjugate; MMAE= monomethylauristatin E.
G2/M cell cycle arrest and apoptosis
Brentuximab Vedotin in Relapsed/ Refractory Systemic ALCL
Median age: 52 years (range, 14-76) Median of 2 prior regimens (range, 1-6) 62% refractory to frontline therapy
Brentuximab vedotin 1.8 mg/kg IV every 21 days
N=58• Single-arm• Phase II• Relapsed or refractory systemic ALCL
Primary endpoint• ORR by independent review
Secondary endpoints• CR rate• Duration of response• PFS • OS
Shustov AR, et al. ASH 2010. Abstract 961.
Brentuximab Vedotin: Key Response Results
N=58 IRF Investigator
Overall response rate (95% CI) 86% (75, 94) 81% (69, 90)Complete remission 53% 59% Partial remission 33% 22%
Stable disease 3% 9%Progressive disease 5% 3%Histologically ineligible 3% 3%Not evaluable 2% 3%OutcomesMedian duration of OR (95% CI) Not reached (36, −) 36 weeks (31, −)Median duration of CR (95% CI) Not reached (36, −) Not reached (35, −)Median PFS (95% CI) Not reached 41 weeks (23, −)Median OS Not reached
Common Adverse Events*
Preferred Term All GradesNausea 38%
Peripheral sensory neuropathy 38%
Fatigue 34%
Pyrexia 33%
Diarrhea 29%
Neutropenia 21%
Rash 21%* Events of any relationship occurring in ≥20% of patients, N=58
.
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Time
Prop
ortio
n
ALCL, ALK+
Vose, Weisenburger, et al, International T-cell Classification Project
Primary Cutaneous ALCL
ALCL, ALK-
PTCL-NOS
PTCL, if CD30+ in > 80% of cells-worse prognosisHTLV-1/ATLL may be CD30+MF with large cell transformation will be CD30+
Transformed MF
Bendamustine in T-cell lymphoma (BENTLY Trial)
T-cell lymphoma subtypes (n): AILT (24) PTCL-NOS (17) ALCL (4) EATL (1) MF (1)
Bendamustine 120 mg/m2 IV on Days 1,2 every 3 weeks for 3 cycles
N=60• Multicenter, single-arm, phase II study
• Relapsed or refractory T-cell lymphoma
• ≤ 3 prior lines chemotherapy Primary endpoint
• ORR (IWC 1999 criteria)
Secondary endpoints• Safety, tolerability• Duration of response• PFS • OS
If no PD:Additional 3 cycles bendamustine
Damaj G, et al. 11th ICML; Lugano 2011. Abstract 126.
Bendamustine in Relapsed/ Refractory T-cell Lymphoma
ORR: 42%; CR: 23% Median DOR: 5.5 months
– Median duration of CR: 11.9 months
Most common grade 3/4 adverse events:– Neutropenia (49%)– Thrombocytopenia (36%)– Infections (34%)
Damaj G, et al. 11th ICML; Lugano 2011. Abstract 126.
Phase II Trial: Lenalidomide in Relapsed/Refractory TCL
Dueck G, et al. Cancer. 2010;116:4541-4548.
MF=mycosis fungoides.
Lenalidomide 25 mg PO QD on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycleUntil disease progression, death, or unacceptable toxicity
N=24• T-cell lymphoma (other than MF)
• WHO PS ≤3• Previously treated or untreated but not suitable for standard therapy
Primary endpoint• ORRSecondary endpoints• PFS• OS• Safety
Lenalidomide in Relapsed/Refractory TCL
ORR=30% (7/23) Median PFS = 96 days Median OS = 241 days (range, 8-696+ days) Common AEs
– Grade 4: thrombocytopenia (33%)– Grade 3: neutropenia (20.8%), febrile neutropenia (16.7%), pain NOS (16.7%)
Histology No. CR PR ORR, %ALCL 5 0 2 40AITL 7 0 2 29EATCL 1 0 0 0HSTCL 1 0 0 0PTCL 9 0 3 33
Dueck G, et al. Cancer. 2010;116:4541-4548.
Phase II Study of SMILE Chemotherapy in Extranodal NK/T-cell Lymphoma, Nasal Type
• SMILE = Steroid (dexamethasone), Methotrexate, Ifosfamide, L-asparaginase, Etoposide
• Patients with newly diagnosed stage IV or relapsed/refractory ENKL (N=39)
ORR 74%; CR 38% Highly myelosuppressive:– Grade 3/4 neutropenia: 8%/92%– Grade 3/4 leukopenia: 28%/72%– Grade 3/4 infection: 41%/13%– Lymphocyte count ≥ 500/mm3 added to eligibility criteria after first 2 patients
died from infection
Yamaguchi M, et al. ASCO 2010. Abstract 8044.
Current Problems with PTCL
Current Problems Confusing terminology/ Difficult Diagnosis Poor Prognosis Results with “Standard” Therapy
Thinking about solutions High-Dose therapy New (and not so new) Drugs Ways to move forward
Can we move new therapies upfront to change standard treatment paradigms?
New Drug New Drug New Drug Etc.
Combination Alternating or Maintenance
CHOP SGN-35 or similar
•Incorporating new therapies•Adding to existing regimens may be limited (very active single agent)•Otherwise novel approaches
•Novel ways to incorporate new drugs-can be done now•Completely novel regimens-will take time
A Multi-center, Randomized, Phase 3 Study of Sequential Pralatrexate Versus Observation in Patients PTCL Who Have Not Progressed Following Initial Treatment with CHOP-based
Chemotherapy
PTCL-see eligibilityNo prior therapy (1 cycle CHOP-like allowed)Appropriate for CHOP based treatment
RANDOMIZE
Pralatrexate Maintenance
RESTAGING
observation
PD not eligible
CR, PR
“CHOP” x 6 cycles
At progression-treat as physician
discretion, including PDX
2:1
Co-Primary Endpoint OS/PFS
top related