Efficacy and safety of loncastuximab tesirine and rituximab (Lonca-R) followed by dose-adjusted rituximab with etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone (DA-R-EPOCH) in previously untreated high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL): Preliminary results from a University of California Malignancy Consortium (UCHMC) Phase II trial, UCDCC#303.
Abstract
Abstract Background: Newly diagnosed DLBCL is a potentially curable malignancy. However, there are high-risk subsets that respond poorly to and have worse outcomes using standard first-line immunochemotherapy with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP). Double-expressor/double-hit DLBCL (DEL/DHL) is one such subset. Both loncastuximab tesirine and DA-R-EPOCH have previously demonstrated efficacy in this subgroup. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of Lonca-R followed by DA-R-EPOCH in previously untreated patients with DEL/DHL. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed untreated DEL and DHL per 2016 World Health Organization (WHO) criteria (DEL: MYC >40% and BCL2 >50% by immunohistochemistry; DHL: rearrangements in MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6 by fluorescent in-situ hybridization) with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score ≤ 2 were enrolled in this prospective single-arm phase II trial within the UCHMC. A “smart start approach” was used to administer 2 three-week cycles of Lonca-R: rituximab 375 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) given on cycle 1, day 1 followed by loncastuximab tesirine 150 μg/kg IV on cycle 1, day 7. On day 1 of cycle 2, both rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV and loncastuximab tesirine 150 μg/kg IV were administered concurrently. After completing 2 cycles of Lonca-R, patients were assessed for response and received up to 6 cycles of DA-R-EPOCH starting at the level 1 dose with rituximab 375 mg/m^2 IV on day 1, etoposide 50 mg/m2/day continuous intravenous infusion (CIVI) on days 1-4 (D1-4) doxorubicin 10 mg/m2/day CIVI D1-4, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2 on day 5, vincristine 0.4 mg/m2/day CIVI D1-4, and prednisone 60 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1-5. Subsequent cycles of DA-R-EPOCH were escalated/de-escalated per standard protocol. Patients discontinued therapy at completion of 6 cycles of DA-R-EPOCH, progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, treatment non-adherence, or administrative reasons. Computed tomography (CT) of the chest/abdomen/pelvis and positron emission tomography/CT were obtained at baseline, every 2 cycles during treatment, and at the end of treatment to assess response using the 2014 Lugano classification. Toxicity was assessed each cycle as per the CTCAEv5.0. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to calculate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Ten patients have been enrolled; however, only 9 had data available for analysis. 89% (8/9) were male and the median age was 66 years (range, 30-75 years). 67% (6/9) of patients had DEL, 11% (1/9) had DHL, and 22% (2/9) had DHL and DEL. 56% (5/9) had an International Prognostic Index of ≥ 3. All patients had an ECOG of 0-1. 44% (4/9) patients had only nodal disease, 22% (2/9) had only extranodal disease, and 33% (3/9) had both nodal and extranodal disease at the time of diagnosis. 78% (7/9) of patients completed all 8 cycles, with 1 patient stopping study treatment due to disease progression after cycle 1 and the other stopping after cycle 4 as he moved from the area. Overall response rate (ORR) after 2 cycles was 88% (7/8); 1 patient had stable disease (SD) and 1 achieved complete response (CR). ORR after 8 cycles was 100% (7/7); 71% (5/7) achieved and continue to remain in CR. Estimated 1 and 2-year rates of PFS, respectively, were 76.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 52.1-100.0%) and 57.1% (95% CI, 28.9-100%). Estimated 1 and 2-year rates of OS, respectively, were 100% (95% CI, 100-100%) and 75% (95% CI, 42.6-100%). Median PFS and OS were not reached. 89% of possible or probable patient-reported, treatment-related adverse effects (AEs) were either grade 1 (G1) or grade 2 (G2). The most common G1 and G2 AEs were hyperglycemia, peripheral sensory neuropathy, and maculopapular rash. There were 20 possible or probable reported grade 3 (G3) or 4 (G4) AEs. The most common G3 and G4 AEs were decreased neutrophil count, febrile neutropenia, and anemia. Conclusion: Lonca-R followed by DA-R-EPOCH appears to be a promising regimen for patients with DHL and/or DEL. ORR was >80% in patients who had completed at least 2 cycles, and 100% if all 8 cycles were complete. Median PFS and OS were not reached. The regimen is well-tolerated as most AEs are G1 or G2. Compared to DA-R-EPOCH alone, the ORR is improved with fewer G3/G4 AEs. As the trial is ongoing, these results will be explored further within a larger cohort and with longer follow up time.
Article Details
Authors (18)
Jacqueline Hsieh-Wong
1University of California, Davis, Sacramento, United States
Naseem Esteghamat
2University of California Davis School of Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Malignant Hematology/Cellular Therapy and Transplantation, Sacramento, United States
Rasmus Hoeg
34University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
Mehrdad Abedi
5Division of Malignant Hematology/Cellular Therapy and Transplantation, University of California, Davis, Davis, CA
Sheila Firoozan
1University of California, Davis, Sacramento, United States
Aaron Rosenberg
University of California Davis Comprehensive Cancer Center, Sacramento
Ashley Trane
2Intermountain Health, St. George, United States
Aneeqa Zafar
2Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Division of Malignant Hematology/Cellular Therapy and Transplantation, Sacramento, United States
Shuai Chen
Siyao Li
State Key Laboratory of Chemical Engineering, School of Chemical Engineering, East China University of Science and Technology, No.130 Meilong Road, Shanghai, 200237, P. R. China
Matthew Wieduwilt
9UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, San Diego, United States
Lloyd Damon
1University of California, San Francisco, Hematology, Blood and Marrow Transplantation, and Cellular Therapy Program, San Francisco, United States
Benjamin Heyman
13Moores Cancer Center, San Diego, United States
Haifaa Abdulhaq
4University of California, San Francisco, Medicine, Fresno, United States
Elizabeth Brem
14University of Califorina Irvine, Division of Hematology/Oncology, Orange, United States
Deepa Jeyakumar
19UC Irvine Health Cancer Center-Newport, Orange, United States
Gary Schiller
7David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, United States
Joseph Tuscano
11UC Davis Medical Center, Sacramento, United States