Blood Res 2021; 56(3):
Published online September 30, 2021
https://doi.org/10.5045/br.2021.2021039
© The Korean Society of Hematology
Correspondence to : Pankaj Malhotra, M.D.
Clinical Hematology and BMT Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Nehru Hospital, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, F block, 4th floor, Chandigarh 160012, India
E-mail: malhotrapankaj@hotmail.com
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background
This study evaluated the outcomes of patients with refractory/relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma (RRHL) treated with a bendamustine-based regimen in combination with ifosfamide, etoposide, and vinorelbine (VIBE).
Methods
Consecutive RRHL patients who were treated with the VIBE regimen were identified and studied for clinicopathologic characteristics, response to VIBE regimen, event-free survival (EFS), and feasibility of an autologous stem-cell transplant (autoSCT).
Results
In total, 24 patients received the VIBE regimen, and a median of 3 cycles were administered. In this cohort, 80% of the patients had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy. The overall and complete response rates with VIBE were 79% and 42%, respectively. After a median follow-up (following VIBE regimen) of 14 months (range, 3‒76), the 3-year EFS and OS were 46% and 74%, respectively. Of the eligible patients, 92% underwent successful AutoSCT. The mean CD34+ cell count in the autograft was 5.5×106/kg (SD 2.07). Neutropenia was the commonest hematologic toxicity and it was observed in 42% of the patients. However, only 9% of the patients developed grade III/IV febrile neutropenia. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting were the second most common grade III/IV toxicities in our cohort of patients.
Conclusion
In this retrospective analysis, the combination regimen, VIBE, has shown good efficacy in heavily pre-treated patients with RRHL without compromising stem cell collection. These encouraging results provide a rationale for further development of this regimen.
Keywords Relapsed refractory, Hodgkin Lymphoma, Salvage, Bendamustine, Autologous transplant
Blood Res 2021; 56(3): 134-140
Published online September 30, 2021 https://doi.org/10.5045/br.2021.2021039
Copyright © The Korean Society of Hematology.
Gaurav Prakash1, Arihant Jain1, Kamalkant Sahu1, Amanjit Bal2, Charanpreet Singh1, Rajender Basher3, Harmandeep Singh3, Kundan Mishra1, Aditya Jandial1, Deepesh Lad1, Alka Khadwal1, Radhika Srinivasan4, Ashim Das2, Neelam Varma5, Subhash Varma1, Pankaj Malhotra1
1Clinical Hematology and BMT Division, Department of Internal Medicine, 2Department of Nuclear Medicine, 3Department of Histopathology, 4Department of Cytopathology, 5Department of Hematology, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh, India
Correspondence to:Pankaj Malhotra, M.D.
Clinical Hematology and BMT Division, Department of Internal Medicine, Nehru Hospital, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, F block, 4th floor, Chandigarh 160012, India
E-mail: malhotrapankaj@hotmail.com
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Background
This study evaluated the outcomes of patients with refractory/relapsed Hodgkin lymphoma (RRHL) treated with a bendamustine-based regimen in combination with ifosfamide, etoposide, and vinorelbine (VIBE).
Methods
Consecutive RRHL patients who were treated with the VIBE regimen were identified and studied for clinicopathologic characteristics, response to VIBE regimen, event-free survival (EFS), and feasibility of an autologous stem-cell transplant (autoSCT).
Results
In total, 24 patients received the VIBE regimen, and a median of 3 cycles were administered. In this cohort, 80% of the patients had received ≥2 prior lines of therapy. The overall and complete response rates with VIBE were 79% and 42%, respectively. After a median follow-up (following VIBE regimen) of 14 months (range, 3‒76), the 3-year EFS and OS were 46% and 74%, respectively. Of the eligible patients, 92% underwent successful AutoSCT. The mean CD34+ cell count in the autograft was 5.5×106/kg (SD 2.07). Neutropenia was the commonest hematologic toxicity and it was observed in 42% of the patients. However, only 9% of the patients developed grade III/IV febrile neutropenia. Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting were the second most common grade III/IV toxicities in our cohort of patients.
Conclusion
In this retrospective analysis, the combination regimen, VIBE, has shown good efficacy in heavily pre-treated patients with RRHL without compromising stem cell collection. These encouraging results provide a rationale for further development of this regimen.
Keywords: Relapsed refractory, Hodgkin Lymphoma, Salvage, Bendamustine, Autologous transplant
Table 1 . Patient characteristics and disease-related variables..
Parameters | N (%) |
---|---|
Age, years, median (range) | 25 (13–60) |
Gender ratio | M:F=3:1 |
B-symptoms | 13 (54) |
Bulky disease | 5 (20.8) |
Extranodal disease | 5 (20.8) |
cHL subtypes | |
Nodular sclerosis | 13 (54) |
Mixed cellularity | 4 (16.6) |
Unclassified | 7 (33.3) |
Previous 2 lines failed | 19 (80) |
Stage at the time of starting VIBE stage | |
Stage II | 6 (25) |
Stage III | 10 (41.6) |
Stage IV | 8 (33.3) |
Numbers of VIBE regimen received | |
Two courses | 9 (37.5) |
Three courses | 6 (25) |
Four courses | 9 (37.5) |
Abbreviations: cHL, classical Hodgkin lymphoma; VIBE, vinorelbine, ifosfamide, bendamustine, etoposide..
Table 2 . Characteristics of individual patients..
No. | Age/ sex | Stage at the time of diagnosis | Prior regimen used | Previous N of therapy | Diagnosis to VIBE (mo) | Stage before VIBE | VIBE cycles | Response after VIBE | Auto HSCT yes/no |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Relapsed cases of cHL | |||||||||
1 | 21/F | II-A | ABVD×6 (2012)-CR, IFRT 30Gy, GDP×4 (2013)-PD | 3 | 22 | III | 2 | CR | Yes |
2 | 28/M | II-B | ABVD×6 (2014)-CR, GDP×3 (2016)-PR | 2 | 31 | III | 2 | CRU | Yes |
3 | 13/M | II-A | ABVD×6 (2013)-CR, GDP×4 (2016)-SD | 2 | 54 | III | 2 | CRU | Yes |
4 | 25/M | II-AX | ABVD×6 (2014)-CR, Bendamustine×2, RT (PR) GDP×2-PR, Nivolumab×8 doses-PR but soon progressed | 2 | 41 | III | 2 | PD | No |
5 | 15/M | II-B | ABVD×6 (2010)-CR, IEV×4 RT to mediastinum (2012)-CR, GDP×2 (2019)-SD | 4 | 90 | III | 3 | CR | Yes |
6 | 13/M | III-B | ABVD×6 (2016)-CR GDP×2 (2019)-PD | 2 | 44 | III | 3 | CRU | No |
7 | 29/M | III-BS | ABVD×6 (2016)-CR | 1 | 48 | III | 4 | CRU | Yes |
Primary refractory cases of cHL | |||||||||
8 | 21/M | III-BEX | ABVD×4 (2013)-PR, BEACOPP×3 (2013)-PR, IFRT 30 Gy, GDP× (2014)-PR | 4 | 20 | I | 2 | CR | Yes |
9 | 20/M | III-B | COPP×1 BEACOPP×5,-PD | 2 | 6 | III | 2 | PD | No |
10 | 60/M | IV -BS | ABVD×6 (2016)-PD, Splenectomy | 2 | 16 | IV | 4 | CR | No |
11 | 27/M | IV-AE | CHV+Bleomycin, Etoposide×6 (2014)-PR DHAP×2 (2014)-PD, ICE×4 (2015)-SD | 3 | 27 | IV | 4 | CR | Yes |
12 | 26/M | IV-BE | ABVD×6 (2016)-PD | 1 | 8 | IV | 3 | CRU | Yes |
13 | 33/M | IV AEX | ABVD×4 (2015)-SD, GDP×4 (2016)-PD | 2 | 20 | IV | 4 | CRU | Yes |
14 | 27/M | II-A | ABVD×4 (2017)-PD | 1 | 5 | III | 4 | CR | Yes |
15 | 18/M | III BX | ABVD×4 (2015)-SD | 1 | 5 | III | 3 | CR | No |
16 | 27/F | II-BX | ABVD×6 (2017) PR, GDP×2 (2018)-PR, IFRT-PD | 3 | 13 | I | 4 | PR | No |
17 | 21/F | IV-B | ABVD×6 (2018) PR, GDP×2 (2019)-PR | 2 | 12 | IV | 3 | CRU | No |
18 | 21/M | III-B | ABVD×6 (2018) PD, GDP×4 (2019)-PD | 2 | 10 | III | 3 | CR | Yes |
19 | 26/M | IVB | ABVD×5 (2018)-SD GDP×2 (2019)-PR | 2 | 24 | IV | 4 | PD | No |
20 | 25/M | IVBE | COPP×1 ABVD×5 (2019)-PD GDP×2 (2019)-PD | 2 | 15 | IV | 2 | SD | No |
21 | 14/F | IVA | COPP×2 (2019)-PR ABVD×6 (2020)-PD | 2 | 13 | II | 3 | CR | Yes |
22 | 28/F | IVBS | ABVD×6 (2019)-PR | 1 | 25 | IV | 4 | PD | No |
23 | 22/f | II-B | ABVD×6 (2018)-PD, GDP×2 (2019)-SD | 2 | 19 | IV | 2 | CRU | No |
24 | 25/m | III-A | ABVD×6 (2012-13)-PD COPP×6 (2013)-PD IFRT 10 Fr (2015), CEP×3 (2016)-PR | 4 | 60 | III | 2 | CR | No |
Abbreviations: ABVD, adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine; BEACOPP, bleomycin, etoposide, cytarabine, cyclophosphamide, oncovin, procarbazine, prednisolone; COPP, cyclophosphamide, oncovin, procarbazine, prednisolone; CR, complete remission; CRU, complete remission unconfirmed; DHAP, dexamethasone, cytarabine, cisplatin; GDP, Gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin; ICE, ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide; IFRT, involved field radiotherapy; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial remission; SD, stable disease..
Table 3 . Comparison of various salvage regimens for relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma..
Regimen | Median lines failed | CR (%) | ORR (%) | Successful stem cell mobilisation (%) | PFS |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
ICE [15] | 1 | 26 | 88 | 96 | 58% at 3.5 yr |
GDP [6] | 1 | 10 | 62 | 97 | 74% at 18 mo |
miniBEAM [6] | 1 | 20 | 68 | 57 | 35% at 18 mo |
IGEV [11] | 1 | 54 | 81 | 98 | NR |
BeGEV [12] | 1 | 73 | 83 | 96 | 62% 2 yr |
BV [8] | 3.5 | 34 | 75 | NR | 22% at 5 yr |
BV+nivolumab [9] | 1 | 62 | 85 | NR | NR |
VIBE current study | 3 | 42 | 79 | 92 | 61% 2 yr, EFS |
Abbreviations: BeGEV, bendamustine, gemcitabine, and vinorelbine; BV, brentuximab vedoin; CR, complete remission; EFS, event free survival; GDP, gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin; ICE, ifosfamide, carboplatin, etoposide; IGEV, ifosfamide, gemcitabine, etoposide, and vinorelbine; miniBEAM, carmustine, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan; NR, not reported; ORR, overall response rate; PFS, progression free survival..
Munira Shabbir-Moosajee, Samad Jehangir, Sobiya Sawani, Tariq Muhammed, Natasha Ali, Usman Sheikh, Salman Adil
Blood Res 2019; 54(2): 108-113Adam M. Greenbaum, Damian J. Green, Leona A. Holmberg, Ted Gooley, Brian G. Till, Lihua E. Budde, Heather Rasmussen, Oliver W. Press, and Ajay K. Gopal
Blood Res 2018; 53(3): 223-226Seok Jin Kim, Soo-Mee Bang, Yoon Seok Choi, Deog-Yeon Jo, Jin Seok Kim, Hyewon Lee, Hyeon Seok Eom, Dok Hyun Yoon, Cheolwon Suh, Je-Jung Lee, Junshik Hong, Jae Hoon Lee, Youngil Koh, Kihyun Kim, Sung-Soo Yoon, Chang-Ki Min, and Korean Multiple Myeloma Working Party
Blood Res 2016; 51(3): 193-199