Final analysis of the Phase III GHSG HD21 trial: PET-guided brecadd vs. ebeacopp in advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma

J Justin Ferdinandus (1Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Düsseldorf, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany) H Helen Kaul (1Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Düsseldorf, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany) A Alden Moccia (3EOC, Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland) R Richard Greil M Mark Hertzberg V Valdete Schaub (6Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany) A Andreas Hüttmann F Felix Keil (11Hanusch Krankenhaus, Vienna, Austria) J Judith Dierlamm (9University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany) M Mathias Hänel (7Department III of Internal Medicine, Klinikum Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Germany) U Urban Novak (4Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Bern, Switzerland) J Julia Meissner (2Medicine V, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany) J Johannes Hellmuth (16University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU), Munich, Germany) S Stephan Mathas J Josée Zijlstra (21Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands) A Alexander Fosså A Andreas Viardot (24University Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany) S Sonja Martin (10Department of Hematology and Oncology, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany) P Pratyush Giri (26Royal-Adelaide-Hospital, Adelaide, Australia) P Peter Kamper D Daniel Molin (2Uppsala University, Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Cancer Immunotherapy, Uppsala, Sweden) J Janina Jablonski (2German Hodgkin Study Group and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany) M Michael Fuchs A Andreas Rosenwald W Wolfram Klapper H Hans Eich (2German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany) C Christian Baues (12Department of Radiation Oncology and German Hodgkin Study Group, Hospital Bochum, Bochum, Germany) M Markus Dietlein (2German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany) C Carsten Kobe (11Department of Nuclear Medicine and German Hodgkin Study Group, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany) B Bastian von Tresckow (1Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, University of Cologne, and German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany) P Peter Borchmann (Uniklinik Koeln, Koeln, Germany)

Abstract

Abstract INTRODUCTION The German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) HD21 trial for adult patients with newly diagnosed advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (AS-cHL) was designed to reduce treatment-related morbidity (TRMB) and improve efficacy by comparing the novel BrECADD regimen (brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, dexamethasone) to the standard eBEACOPP protocol. Here, we report the final efficacy and safety including long-term progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and late toxicity outcomes. METHODS This open-label, international, randomized phase III trial included adults aged 18-60 with newly diagnosed AS-cHL, randomized 1:1 to treatment with 4–6 cycles of eBEACOPP or BrECADD, guided by positron emission tomography after two cycles (PET2). The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02661503) and conducted according to ICH-GCP guidelines. Co-primary objectives were reduction of TRMB and superiority of PFS with BrECADD vs. eBEACOPP, both of which were met previously. The final analysis focused on long-term PFS, overall survival (OS), and second primary malignancies (SPMs). Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox regression were used for time-to-event analysis in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Additionally, we describe prognostic factors for PET2 response among baseline characteristics including metabolic tumor volume (MTV) and the prognostic value of international prognostic score (IPS) variables and MTV at baseline for PFS, respectively, in the BrECADD arm. Univariate logistic regressions were used to identify associations with interim PET response (p<=.001), which were then compared using multivariate analyses. RESULTS A total of 1,500 patients were enrolled between July 2016 and August 2020 across 233 sites in nine countries. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were well balanced between arms. After 2 cycles of BrECADD, 235/664 patients (35%) with centrally reviewed PET2 were classified as PET-positive. ECOG > 0 (Odds Ratio [OR] 1.62, 95% CI 1.03-2.55) and higher MTV (OR 1.14 per 100 mL, 95% CI 1.06-1.22) at baseline were associated with positive PET after 2x BrECADD in multivariate analysis. Median follow-up for this final analysis was 60 months and seven new PFS-events occurred after the previous analysis at 48 months: Five in the eBEACOPP arm and two in the BrECADD arm. Confirming earlier analysis, the hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.64 (95% CI 0.44–0.93) favoring BrECADD. The absolute 5-year PFS for BrECADD was 93.6% (95% CI 91.7–95.5) vs. 90.6% (95% CI 88.4-92.8) with eBEACOPP, with a particularly pronounced 5y PFS benefit in PET2-negative patients of 96.2% vs. 92.4% (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.25–0.83;). Among the IPS variables, male sex (HR 2.68, CI 95% 1.37-5.27) and hemoglobin < 10.5 g/dL (HR 2.41, 95% CI 1.25-4.68) were associated with higher risk for PFS events in multivariate cox regression, whereas MTV at baseline in univariate cox regression was not (HR 0.95 per 100 mL, 95% CI 0.81-1.11). Salvage therapies were similar across treatment arms: most patients with progression or relapse received autologous stem cell transplantation (52/61 (82%) after eBEACOPP vs 29/38 (76%) after BrECADD). With four (two in each treatment group) new death events since the previous analysis, OS remained at 98% in both arms. The cumulative incidence of SPMs at 60 months was 2.1% after eBEACOPP and 2.8% after BrECADD, with differing patterns: more secondary MDS/AML occurred in the eBEACOPP arm (six vs. one), while more secondary NHL cases were observed in the BrECADD arm (two vs. eight). No new sMDS/AML events occurred beyond the primary analysis. CONCLUSION With 5 years follow-up, this analysis confirms the unprecedented primary cure-rate and long-term safety profile of BrECADD. While higher baseline lymphoma burden associates with incomplete remission at PET2, the risk for treatment failure seems mitigated through response-adaptation. Taken together, our results establish individualized BrECADD as a standard treatment option for adult patients with newly diagnosed AS-cHL.

Article Details

Journal Blood
Volume / Issue Vol. 146, Issue Supplement 1
Published November 03, 2025
Pages 152-152
ISSN 0006-4971
Publisher Elsevier BV

Journal Info

Blood

Elsevier BV

ISSN: 0006-4971 Health Sciences

Authors (31)

J

Justin Ferdinandus

1Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Düsseldorf, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany

H

Helen Kaul

1Department I of Internal Medicine, Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Düsseldorf, University of Cologne, Medical Faculty and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany

A

Alden Moccia

3EOC, Medical Oncology, Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland, Bellinzona, Switzerland

R

Richard Greil

M

Mark Hertzberg

V

Valdete Schaub

6Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany

A

Andreas Hüttmann

F

Felix Keil

11Hanusch Krankenhaus, Vienna, Austria

J

Judith Dierlamm

9University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

M

Mathias Hänel

7Department III of Internal Medicine, Klinikum Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Germany

U

Urban Novak

4Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research, Bern, Switzerland

J

Julia Meissner

2Medicine V, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

J

Johannes Hellmuth

16University Hospital, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU), Munich, Germany

S

Stephan Mathas

J

Josée Zijlstra

21Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit, Cancer Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

A

Alexander Fosså

A

Andreas Viardot

24University Hospital of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

S

Sonja Martin

10Department of Hematology and Oncology, Robert Bosch Hospital, Stuttgart, Germany

P

Pratyush Giri

26Royal-Adelaide-Hospital, Adelaide, Australia

P

Peter Kamper

D

Daniel Molin

2Uppsala University, Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Cancer Immunotherapy, Uppsala, Sweden

J

Janina Jablonski

2German Hodgkin Study Group and University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany

M

Michael Fuchs

A

Andreas Rosenwald

W

Wolfram Klapper

H

Hans Eich

2German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany

C

Christian Baues

12Department of Radiation Oncology and German Hodgkin Study Group, Hospital Bochum, Bochum, Germany

M

Markus Dietlein

2German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany

C

Carsten Kobe

11Department of Nuclear Medicine and German Hodgkin Study Group, University Hospital of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

B

Bastian von Tresckow

1Center for Integrated Oncology Aachen Bonn Cologne Duesseldorf, Department I of Internal Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital of Cologne, University of Cologne, and German Hodgkin Study Group, Cologne, Germany

P

Peter Borchmann

Uniklinik Koeln, Koeln, Germany