CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen compared with CEOP as the first-line therapy for newly diagnosed patients with peripheral T cell lymphoma: results from a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, controlled clinical trial

Ming-Ci Cai, Shu Cheng, Xin Wang, Jian-Da Hu, Yong-Ping Song, Yao-Hui Huang, Zi-Xun Yan, Yu-Jie Jiang, Xiao-Sheng Fang, Xiao-Yun Zheng, Li-Hua Dong, Meng-Meng Ji, Li Wang, Peng-Peng Xu, Wei-Li Zhao, Ming-Ci Cai, Shu Cheng, Xin Wang, Jian-Da Hu, Yong-Ping Song, Yao-Hui Huang, Zi-Xun Yan, Yu-Jie Jiang, Xiao-Sheng Fang, Xiao-Yun Zheng, Li-Hua Dong, Meng-Meng Ji, Li Wang, Peng-Peng Xu, Wei-Li Zhao

Abstract

Background: Cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP)/CHOP-like chemotherapy is widely used in peripheral T cell lymphoma (PTCL). Here we conducted a phase 2, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, comparing the efficacy and safety of CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen with CEOP in newly diagnosed PTCL.

Methods: PTCL patients, except for anaplastic large cell lymphoma-anaplastic lymphoma kinase positive, were 1:1 randomly assigned to receive CEOP/IVE/GDP (CEOP, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2, epirubicin 70 mg/m2, vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 [maximum 2 mg] on day 1, and prednisone 60 mg/m2 [maximum 100 mg] on days 1-5 every 21 days, at the first and fourth cycle; IVE, ifosfamide 2000 mg/m2 on days 1-3, epirubicin 70 mg/m2 on day 1, and etoposide 100 mg/m2 on days 1-3 every 21 days, at the second and fifth cycle; and GDP, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8, cisplatin 25 mg/m2 on days 1-3, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1-4 every 21 days, at the third and sixth cycle) and CEOP (every 21 days for 6 cycles). Analysis of efficacy and safety was of the intent-to-treatment population. The primary endpoint was a complete response rate at the end of treatment. Meanwhile, whole exome sequencing and targeted sequencing were performed in 62 patients with available tumor samples to explore prognostic biomarkers in this cohort as an exploratory post hoc analysis.

Results: Among 106 patients, 53 each were enrolled to CEOP/IVE/GDP and CEOP. With 51 evaluable patients each in two groups, a complete response rate of the CEOP/IVE/GDP group was similar to that of the CEOP group (37.3% vs. 31.4%, p = 0.532). There was no difference in median progression-free survival (PFS; 15.4 months vs. 9.2 months, p = 0.122) or overall survival (OS; 24.3 months vs. 21.9 months, p = 0.178). Grade 3-4 hematological and non-hematological adverse events were comparable. Histone modification genes were most frequently mutated (25/62, 40.3%), namely KMT2D, KMT2A, SETD2, EP300, and CREBBP. Multivariate analysis indicated that CREBBP and IDH2 mutations were independent factors predicting poor PFS and OS (all p < 0.001), while KMT2D predicting poor PFS (p = 0.002).

Conclusions: CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen showed no remission or survival advantage to standard chemotherapy. Future clinical trials should aim to develop alternative regimen targeting disease biology as demonstrated by recurrent mutations in epigenetic factors.

Trial registration: The study was registered on ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT02533700) on August 27, 2015.

Keywords: Alternating regimen; CHOP; Overall response rate; Peripheral T cell lymphoma; Prognosis; Prognostic biomarker.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
CONSORT diagram of the study. CEOP = cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, vincristine, and prednisone. IVE = ifosmide, epirubicin, and etoposide. GDP = gemcitabine, cisplatin, and dexamethasone
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Gene Mutations in peripheral T cell lymphoma. a Gene mutations identified by whole exome sequencing and targeted sequencing in 62 patients. The percentage of patients with mutations was listed on the right. The mutations are classified into the categories indicated on the left. b Number and type of non-silent somatic mutations presented above, number and percentage of non-silent somatic single-nucleotide variants presented below. c Circos diagram presenting correlation between genes
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Treatment response and survival outcomes. Kaplan-Meier curves showed (a) progression-free survival and (b) overall survival of the CEOP/IVE/GDP group and of the CEOP group. HR = hazard ratio
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Subgroup analysis for complete response at end of treatment. LDH = lactate dehydrogenase, IPI = International Prognostic Index. *PTCL subtype includes PTCL-NOS and other types
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Gene mutations and treatment response/survival outcomes. a Relation between treatment response (including complete response, partial response, and no response) and gene mutation profile. bd Kaplan-Meier curves showed progression-free survival (upper panel) and overall survival (lower panel) of PTCL patients, according to the mutation status of CREBBP (b), IDH2 (c), and KMT2D (d)

References

    1. Hertzberg M, et al. A phase III randomized trial of high-dose CEOP + filgrastim versus standard-dose CEOP in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma: 10-year follow-up data: Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group (ALLG) NHL07 trial. Am J Hematol. 2014;89(5):536–541. doi: 10.1002/ajh.23684.
    1. Vose J, et al. International peripheral T-cell and natural killer/T-cell lymphoma study: pathology findings and clinical outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(25):4124–4130. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.4558.
    1. Abouyabis AN, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of front-line anthracycline-based chemotherapy regimens for peripheral T-cell lymphoma. ISRN Hematol. 2011;2011:623924. doi: 10.5402/2011/623924.
    1. Jia B, et al. Comparison of gemcitabin, cisplatin, and dexamethasone (GDP), CHOP, and CHOPE in the first-line treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphomas. Hematology. 2016;21(9):536–541. doi: 10.1080/10245332.2016.1152084.
    1. Fukunaga A, et al. Dose-modified ifosfamide, epirubicin, and etoposide is a safe and effective salvage therapy with high peripheral blood stem cell mobilization capacity for poorly mobilized Hodgkin's lymphoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patients. J Clin Exp Hematop. 2016;56(1):50–54. doi: 10.3960/jslrt.56.50.
    1. Zinzani PL. Ifosfamide, epirubicin and etoposide (IEV) in non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Hodgkin's disease: the Italian experience. Ann Oncol. 2003;14(Suppl 1):i43–i45. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdg709.
    1. Zinzani PL, et al. Ifosfamide, epirubicin and etoposide regimen as salvage and mobilizing therapy for relapsed/refractory lymphoma patients. Haematologica. 2002;87(8):816–821.
    1. Proctor SJ, et al. High-dose ifosfamide in combination with etoposide and epirubicin (IVE) in the treatment of relapsed/refractory Hodgkin's disease and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma: a report on toxicity and efficacy. Eur J Haematol Suppl. 2001;64:28–32.
    1. Proctor SJ, et al. Strategic approach to the management of Hodgkin's disease incorporating salvage therapy with high-dose ifosfamide, etoposide and epirubicin: a Northern Region Lymphoma Group study (UK) Ann Oncol. 2003;14(Suppl 1):i47–i50. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdg710.
    1. Bishton MJ, et al. Ifosphamide, etoposide and epirubicin is an effective combined salvage and peripheral blood stem cell mobilisation regimen for transplant-eligible patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and Hodgkin disease. Br J Haematol. 2007;136(5):752–761. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2141.2007.06498.x.
    1. Sieniawski M, et al. Evaluation of enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma comparing standard therapies with a novel regimen including autologous stem cell transplantation. Blood. 2010;115(18):3664–3670. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-07-231324.
    1. Ji MM, et al. Histone modifier gene mutations in peripheral T-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified. Haematologica. 2018;103(4):679–687. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2017.182444.
    1. Palomero T, et al. Recurrent mutations in epigenetic regulators, RHOA and FYN kinase in peripheral T cell lymphomas. Nat Genet. 2014;46(2):166–170. doi: 10.1038/ng.2873.
    1. Cai M, et al. CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen compared with CEOP as the first-line therapy for newly diagnosed patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma: results from a phase 2, multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):1556. doi: 10.1182/blood-2019-122369.
    1. WHO . WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. Revsied 4th Edition. 2016.
    1. Cai M, et al. CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen compared with CEOP as the first-line therapy for newly diagnosed patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma: results from a phase 2, multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial: Mendeley; 2020. 10.17632/jcp3kc4tzx.1.
    1. Cai M, et al. CEOP/IVE/GDP alternating regimen compared with CEOP as the first-line therapy for newly diagnosed patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma: results from a phase 2, multi-center, randomized, controlled clinical trial. NODE. OEP000795. 2020. . Accessed 14 Mar 2020.
    1. Cheson BD, et al. Recommendations for initial evaluation, staging, and response assessment of Hodgkin and non-Hodgkin lymphoma: the Lugano classification. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(27):3059–3068. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.8800.
    1. Zinzani PL, et al. Gemcitabine as single agent in pretreated T-cell lymphoma patients: evaluation of the long-term outcome. Ann Oncol. 2010;21(4):860–863. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp508.
    1. Dong M, et al. Gemcitabine-based combination regimen in patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma. Med Oncol. 2013;30(1):351. doi: 10.1007/s12032-012-0351-4.
    1. Li L, et al. The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine, cisplatin, prednisone, thalidomide versus CHOP in patients with newly diagnosed peripheral T-cell lymphoma with analysis of biomarkers. Br J Haematol. 2017;178(5):772–780. doi: 10.1111/bjh.14763.
    1. Zhang Y, et al. Gemcitabine, cisplatin, and dexamethasone (GDP) in combination with methotrexate and pegaspargase is active in newly diagnosed peripheral T cell lymphoma patients: a phase 2, single-center, open-label study in China. Ann Hematol. 2019;98(1):143–150. doi: 10.1007/s00277-018-3488-1.
    1. Gleeson M, et al. CHOP versus GEM-P in previously untreated patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma (CHEMO-T): a phase 2, multicentre, randomised, open-label trial. Lancet Haematol. 2018;5(5):e190–e200. doi: 10.1016/S2352-3026(18)30039-5.
    1. Casulo C, et al. Negative interim FDG-PET scan is predictive of superior outcome in T cell lymphoma. Blood. 2009;114(22):1956. doi: 10.1182/blood.V114.22.1956.1956.
    1. Zhang MC, et al. Prognostic significance of NCCN-international prognostic index (NCCN-IPI) for patients with peripheral T-cell lymphoma treated with CHOP-based chemotherapy. Zhonghua Xue Ye Xue Za Zhi. 2017;38(9):772–777.
    1. Gao LM, et al. Somatic mutations in KMT2D and TET2 associated with worse prognosis in Epstein-Barr virus-associated T or natural killer-cell lymphoproliferative disorders. Cancer Biol Ther. 2019;20(10):1319–1327. doi: 10.1080/15384047.2019.1638670.
    1. Juskevicius D, et al. Distinct genetic evolution patterns of relapsing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma revealed by genome-wide copy number aberration and targeted sequencing analysis. Leukemia. 2016;30(12):2385–2395. doi: 10.1038/leu.2016.135.
    1. Juskevicius D, et al. Mutations of CREBBP and SOCS1 are independent prognostic factors in diffuse large B cell lymphoma: mutational analysis of the SAKK 38/07 prospective clinical trial cohort. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10(1):70. doi: 10.1186/s13045-017-0438-7.
    1. Kernytsky A, et al. IDH2 mutation-induced histone and DNA hypermethylation is progressively reversed by small-molecule inhibition. Blood. 2015;125(2):296–303. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-10-533604.
    1. McKinney M, et al. The genetic basis of hepatosplenic T-cell lymphoma. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(4):369–379. doi: 10.1158/-16-0330.
    1. Trifonov V, et al. MutComFocal: an integrative approach to identifying recurrent and focal genomic alterations in tumor samples. BMC Syst Biol. 2013;7:25. doi: 10.1186/1752-0509-7-25.
    1. O'Connor OA, et al. Oral 5-azacytidine and romidepsin exhibit marked activity in patients with PTCL: a multicenter phase 1 study. Blood. 2019;134(17):1395–1405. doi: 10.1182/blood.2019001285.

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다