This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

The addition of rituximab to a variety of chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of patients with CLL has yielded promising results in phase II trials. The R-FC regimen demonstrated particularly high rates of overall response (ORR), complete remission (CR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in relapsed/refractory CLL (Wierda, et al, JCO 2005). REACH was an open-label, multicenter, randomized, phase III study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of R-FC versus FC in relapsed or refractory patients with CD20 positive CLL. The primary endpoint of the study was progression free survival. Five hundred and fifty two patients from 17 countries were randomized (1:1) to receive either R-FC or FC. Rituximab was administered IV before the FC infusion for a total of 6 treatment cycles at intervals of 28 days (Cycle 1: 375 mg/m2 IV; Cycles 2–6: 500 mg/m2 IV). Fludarabine (25 mg/m2 IV/day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2 IV/day) were administered over 3 days for 6 cycles. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and prognostic factors were well balanced between the two arms. Median age was 63 years. All Binet stages were represented (A 10%, B 59%, C 31%). A median of one prior treatment had been administered, consisting of single-agent alkylator therapy (66%), purine-analogs (16%), or combination treatments (CHOP, COP, F-containing, 18%). Patients with prior FC combination treatment or prior rituximab were not eligible. Median observation time was 25 months. The primary endpoint PFS was significantly prolonged by median 10 months in the R-FC arm (30.6 months) compared to FC (20.6 months, p =0.0002, Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.65 [95% CI 0.51; 0.82]). Secondary endpoints EFS, TTNT, DR showed similar results. ORR were higher for R-FC vs. FC (70% vs. 58%, p=0.0034), due to superior CR rates (24% vs. 13%, p=0.0007). Multiple subgroups were analyzed applying a Cox-regression model: all Binet stages experienced similar incremental benefits in PFS (HR Binet A 0.75, B 0.65, C 0.61). Mutational status and cytogenetic subgroups remained prognostic and benefited from the addition of rituximab to FC (HR IgVH unmutated 0.62, mutated 0.7; del17p pos 0.75, neg 0.63; del13q pos 0.56, neg 0.77). Median overall survival was not reached for R-FC and was 53 months for FC, (p=0.29, HR 0.83). Of 47 patients that relapsed and were treated in the R-FC arm, 30% received rituximab again. Sixty-nine patients were treated at relapse in the FC arm, and 49% received rituximab. Grade 3/4 Adverse Events were higher in the R-FC arm (80%) vs. FC (74%), but serious adverse events were similar (50% vs. 48%, respectively). Grade 3/4 neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were only marginally increased for R-FC (42% and 15%) vs. FC (40% and 12%, respectively), the same was seen for thrombocytopenia (R-FC 11% vs. FC 9%). Grade 3/4 infections (R-FC 18%, FC 19%) were similar, and there was no difference in bacterial, viral, or fungal infections between the two arms. Grade 3/4 anemia was slightly increased in the FC arm (R-FC 2%, FC 5%). Slightly higher Fatal Adverse Events were seen with R-FC (13%) vs. FC (10%). Fatal SAEs were mainly due to infections, secondary neoplasms, and cardiac disorders. Summary and conclusion: In this large randomized trial in relapsed or refractory CLL, with 10 months improvement in PFS and a doubling of CR rates, R-FC was statistically significant and clinically meaningful superior to FC in the primary analysis. Improvement in PFS was seen across most subgroups, including all Binet stages. Fatal AEs were relatively high in both arms. However, overall, the addition of rituximab to FC in REACH showed a very favorable risk-benefit profile and did not reveal any new or unexpected safety signals.

No abstract

No abstract

Introduction: Bendamustine (BEN) is a purine analog / alkylator hybrid agent with a particular mechanisms of action that provides effective treatment for a number of hematologic and non-hematologic malignancies. It is used primarily for chemo-naïve, relapsed or refractory B-CLL as well as for other types of non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas. The aim of this randomized phase III, open-label, multicenter study was to compare the efficacy and safety of BEN versus chlorambucil (CLB) in treatment-naïve patients (pts) with B-CLL Binet stage B/C. Patients and Methods: Pts with untreated B-CLL were randomized to receive BEN (100 mg/m2 on days 1+2) or CLB (0.8 mg/kg on days 1+15) for up to 6 treatment cycles. Primary endpoints were overall remission rate (ORR), defined as complete response (CR), nodular partial response (nPR) and partial response (PR), confirmed after 8 weeks, and progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were duration of remission, overall survival (OS), safety, and quality of life (QoL). Follow-up was for ≥12 months after completion of treatment of the last patient, or until progression for pts with CR, nPR or PR and stable disease, or until death or lost to follow-up. A 5-stage, adaptive-group, sequential procedure was used with planned interim analyses to adjust the number of pts. Safety and efficacy were assessed by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee. Results: 305 pts were randomized to receive BEN (n=156) or CLB (n=149). As 7 pts did not receive study medication, 298 pts were included in the safety analysis. At the time of this analysis, 264 pts (139 BEN; 125 CLB) were available for the efficacy analysis. For both treatment groups: median age was 64 years; 70% had Binet stage B and 30% Binet stage C disease; median number of cycles/patient was 6; median follow-up was 18.5 months. ORR was significantly higher with BEN than with CLB (68% vs 39%; p<0.0001), with a CR of 30% vs 2%, respectively. Among the subgroups with Binet stage B and C disease, ORR was 70% and 61%, respectively, with BEN, vs 47% and 22%, respectively, with CLB. Median PFS (Kaplan-Meier estimate) was 21.7 months with BEN and 9.3 months with CLB (p<0.0001), and median duration of remission was 18.9 months with BEN and 6.1 months with CLB (p<0.0001). No difference in OS was seen between groups. Toxicity of BEN was manageable and did not impair QoL when compared with CLB. Infection rates (common toxicity criteria grades III+IV) were low in both groups (5.8% BEN; 3.5% CLB). Conclusions: BEN was significantly more effective than CLB in achieving remissions in treatment-naïve pts with B-CLL Binet stage B/C; median PFS and duration of remission were also significantly longer. Furthermore, safety data indicate that BEN toxicities are manageable and the drug is well tolerated. On the basis of these results, BEN should be considered as first-line chemotherapy for patients with B-CLL Binet stage B or C.