Summary Primary and secondary central nervous system lymphomas (PCNSL/SCNSL) are aggressive rare malignancies with dismal outcomes. Encouraging data have emerged from Phase I/II clinical trials treating relapsed/refractory PCNSL/SCNSL with ibrutinib. We analysed 33 patients who received ibrutinib, alone or with other therapies, for PCNSL (n = 9) or SCNSL (n = 24). The objective response rate was 58% (complete response 55%). The median progression‐free survival and overall survival for patients with PCNSL were both 3·1 months; for SCNSL, 10·2 and 11·5 months respectively. Only one invasive fungal infection was observed, despite concurrent or recent use of dexamethasone 8–16 mg daily in 14 patients (42%). Ibrutinib has encouraging activity in these aggressive malignancies.

Summary De novo diffuse large B‐cell lymphoma (DLBCL) presenting with synchronous central nervous system (CNS) and systemic disease (synDLBCL) is not well described and is excluded from clinical trials. We performed a retrospective analysis of 80 synDLBCL patients treated across 10 Australian and UK centres. Of these patients, 96% had extranodal systemic disease. CNS‐directed treatment with combination intravenous cytarabine and high‐dose methotrexate (“CNS‐intensive”) (n = 38) was associated with favourable survival outcomes compared with “CNS‐conservative” strategies such as intravenous high‐dose methotrexate monotherapy, intrathecal therapy and/or radiotherapy (2‐year progression‐free survival [PFS] 50% vs. 31%, P = 0·006; 2‐year overall survival [OS] 54% vs. 44%, P = 0·037). Outcomes were primarily dictated by the ability to control the CNS disease, with 2‐year cumulative CNS relapse incidence of 42% and non‐CNS relapse 21%. Two‐year OS for CNS‐relapse patients was 13% vs. 36% for non‐CNS relapses (P = 0·02). Autologous stem cell transplantation as consolidation (n = 14) was not observed to improve survival in those patients who received CNS‐intensive induction when matched for induction outcomes (2‐year PFS 69% vs. 56%, P = 0·99; 2‐year OS 66% vs. 56%, P = 0·98). Hyperfractionated or infusional systemic treatment did not improve survival compared to R‐CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisolone) (2‐year OS 49% for both groups). Our study suggests that adequate control of the CNS disease is paramount and is best achieved by intensive CNS‐directed induction.

Central nervous system (CNS) relapses are an uncommon yet devastating complication of non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The identification of patients at high risk of secondary CNS relapse is therefore paramount. Retrospective data indicate prophylactic CNS-directed therapies may reduce the risk of CNS involvement; however, no consensus exists about dose, timing, or route of therapy. In addition, prophylaxis is not without risk of treatment-related complications and morbidity. Here, we present a series of case vignettes highlighting our approach to common dilemmas encountered in routine clinical practice. We review the method of assessing CNS relapse risk, factors that increase the likelihood of relapse including histologic subtype, MYC rearrangement, protein expression, and extranodal involvement, and review our clinical practice based on available evidence in administering CNS-directed prophylaxis. (Blood. 2017;130(7):867-874) IntroductionNon-Hodgkin lymphomas are biologically and clinically diverse hematological malignancies. Treatment is influenced by patient fitness, disease biology, and tumor burden. Identifying patients at high risk of central nervous system (CNS) relapse is important as the outcome of secondary CNS lymphoma is poor. [1][2][3][4] Risk of CNS progression is influenced by histologic subtype and subtype-specific clinicopathologic features (eg, site of involvement, protein expression, or gene rearrangements). Patients with highly aggressive lymphomas (eg, lymphoblastic, Burkitt lymphoma) are at high risk and frontline protocols include CNS-directed prophylaxis. In contrast, indolent lymphomas rarely involve the CNS and CNS prophylaxis is not required. Between these extremes fall diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), high-grade B-cell lymphoma (HGBL) with MYC and BCL2 or BCL6 rearrangements, so-called "double-hit" lymphomas (HGBL-DH), and (nodal) peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs). The addition of rituximab has slightly reduced CNS relapse in DLBCL, probably through superior systemic control as there is negligible CNS penetration of the drug across the intact blood-brain barrier. 1,5 However, ;4% of unselected patients with DLBCL treated with prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab (R-CHOP) experience CNS relapse, 6,7 and considerable efforts have been made to identify those at greatest risk. In this review, we will summarize our approach to this problem with case vignettes drawn from our practice. How I identify patients at increased risk for CNS relapseMany investigators have examined risk factors for CNS relapse, but studies have yielded inconsistent results, due to heterogeneity in patient populations, treatment, and/or limited sample size. [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] To address some of these limitations, Schmitz et al developed a 6-point score from 2164 patients treated on prospective German studies and validated in 1597 patients with DLBCL treated with R-CHOP in the British Columbia Cancer Agency (BCCA) Lymphoid Malignancies Database. 6 The components of the s...

Background: Patients with advanced indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL) can develop chemoresistance and most relapse following standard therapy. Although multiple treatment options exist, most are associated with short remission or intolerable side effects. Lenalidomide activates NK cells ± T cells and leads to in vivo expansion of immune effector cells in NHL models. The combination of rituximab and lenalidomide (R2) in relapsed iNHL is highly active and was recently approved. Obinutuzumab is a glycosylated type II anti-CD20 molecule with enhanced affinity for the FcγRIIIa receptors leading to improved ADCC. The primary objective of this phase I/II study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of lenalidomide and obinutuzumab in relapsed indolent lymphoma. Methods: Patients with relapsed small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), marginal zone, and follicular lymphoma (gr 1-3a) were eligible. Patients enrolled in three predefined dose cohorts of lenalidomide (10mg,15mg, 20mg) given on days 2-22 of a 28 day cycle. Obinutuzumab was given at a fixed dose (1000mg) IV on days 1,8,15 and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of subsequent cycles for 6 cycles. The combination was given for up to 12 cycles in responding pts. Antihistamines were given in pts who developed rash. Prophylactic growth factor was not allowed. In the absence of progression or toxicity, single agent obinutuzumab was continued every 2 months for maximum of 30 months on study. Traditional 3+3 dose escalation was used with dose limiting toxicities (DLT) assessed during cycle 1. Once the MTD was established, 60 additional patients were enrolled in the phase II portion of the study. Adverse events were graded using CTCAE version 4.03. Results: 66 pts were enrolled between May 2014 until March 2019, and all are eligible for safety and response assessment. No DLTs were observed in dose escalation, and 60 pts were enrolled in the phase II portion of the study at 20mg of lenalidomide daily. Histologies included follicular lymphoma (FL) n=57, marginal zone n=4, SLL n=5. The median age was 64 (36-81), with 2 (1-5) median prior lines of treatment. For 53% of pts, the combination represented the third or greater line of treatment. The overall response (OR) rate for all pts was 98% with 72% attaining a complete response (CR). Eighteen pts (27%) had a partial response, and stable disease was noted in 1 (2%). At a median follow up of 17 months, 14 pts have progressed, with an estimated 24mo progression-free survival (PFS) of 73% (57-83% 95% CI). The estimated 24 mo PFS for ≥ third line pts was 63%. Twenty five pts (38%) remain on treatment and 95% remain alive at last follow up. The most common grade ≥ 3 non-hematologic toxicities included fatigue (5 pts), rash (4 pts), and cough (3 pts). Grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 11 (17%) and 7 (11%) pts respectively. Two pts stopped treatment due to adverse events, including 1 transient bradycardia and 1 grade 3 fatigue. Conclusion: The combination of 20 mg of lenalidomide and 1000mg obinutuzumab is safe and effective in patients with relapsed indolent lymphoma. Adverse events appeared similar to our prior experience with lenalidomide and rituximab and were generally well tolerated. Overall response rates were high, with many pts achieving prolonged remission, including pts who had relapsed after 2 or more lines of prior therapy. Validation studies in the frontline and salvage setting are ongoing. Disclosures Fowler: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ABBVIE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nastoupil:TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Westin:Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Juno: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Kite: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Unum: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Other: Advisory Board; Genentech: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Curis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; 47 Inc: Research Funding. Neelapu:Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Consultancy.