Assessing the efficacy and tolerability of PET-guided BrECADD versus eBEACOPP in advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (HD21): a randomised, multicentre, parallel, open-label, phase 3 trial.
Journal
Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
03 Jul 2024
03 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
06
06
2024
revised:
20
06
2024
accepted:
20
06
2024
medline:
7
7
2024
pubmed:
7
7
2024
entrez:
6
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Intensified systemic chemotherapy has the highest primary cure rate for advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma but this comes with a cost of severe and potentially life long, persisting toxicities. With the new regimen of brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and dexamethasone (BrECADD), we aimed to improve the risk-to-benefit ratio of treatment of advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma guided by PET after two cycles. This randomised, multicentre, parallel, open-label, phase 3 trial was done in 233 trial sites across nine countries. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≤60 years) with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (ie, Ann Arbor stage III/IV, stage II with B symptoms, and either one or both risk factors of large mediastinal mass and extranodal lesions). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to four or six cycles (21-day intervals) of escalated doses of etoposide (200 mg/m Between July 22, 2016, and Aug 27, 2020, 1500 patients were enrolled, of whom 749 were randomly assigned to BrECADD and 751 to eBEACOPP. 1482 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The median age of patients was 31 years (IQR 24-42). 838 (56%) of 1482 patients were male and 644 (44%) were female. Most patients were White (1352 [91%] of 1482). Treatment-related morbidity was significantly lower with BrECADD (312 [42%] of 738 patients) than with eBEACOPP (430 [59%] of 732 patients; relative risk 0·72 [95% CI 0·65-0·80]; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 48 months, BrECADD improved progression-free survival with a hazard ratio of 0·66 (0·45-0·97; p=0·035); 4-year progression-free survival estimates were 94·3% (95% CI 92·6-96·1) for BrECADD and 90·9% (88·7-93·1) for eBEACOPP. 4-year overall survival rates were 98·6% (97·7-99·5) and 98·2% (97·2-99·3), respectively. BrECADD guided by PET after two cycles is better tolerated and more effective than eBEACOPP in first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Takeda Oncology.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Intensified systemic chemotherapy has the highest primary cure rate for advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma but this comes with a cost of severe and potentially life long, persisting toxicities. With the new regimen of brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and dexamethasone (BrECADD), we aimed to improve the risk-to-benefit ratio of treatment of advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma guided by PET after two cycles.
METHODS
METHODS
This randomised, multicentre, parallel, open-label, phase 3 trial was done in 233 trial sites across nine countries. Eligible patients were adults (aged ≤60 years) with newly diagnosed, advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma (ie, Ann Arbor stage III/IV, stage II with B symptoms, and either one or both risk factors of large mediastinal mass and extranodal lesions). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to four or six cycles (21-day intervals) of escalated doses of etoposide (200 mg/m
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Between July 22, 2016, and Aug 27, 2020, 1500 patients were enrolled, of whom 749 were randomly assigned to BrECADD and 751 to eBEACOPP. 1482 patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The median age of patients was 31 years (IQR 24-42). 838 (56%) of 1482 patients were male and 644 (44%) were female. Most patients were White (1352 [91%] of 1482). Treatment-related morbidity was significantly lower with BrECADD (312 [42%] of 738 patients) than with eBEACOPP (430 [59%] of 732 patients; relative risk 0·72 [95% CI 0·65-0·80]; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 48 months, BrECADD improved progression-free survival with a hazard ratio of 0·66 (0·45-0·97; p=0·035); 4-year progression-free survival estimates were 94·3% (95% CI 92·6-96·1) for BrECADD and 90·9% (88·7-93·1) for eBEACOPP. 4-year overall survival rates were 98·6% (97·7-99·5) and 98·2% (97·2-99·3), respectively.
INTERPRETATION
CONCLUSIONS
BrECADD guided by PET after two cycles is better tolerated and more effective than eBEACOPP in first-line treatment of adult patients with advanced-stage, classical Hodgkin lymphoma.
FUNDING
BACKGROUND
Takeda Oncology.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38971175
pii: S0140-6736(24)01315-1
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(24)01315-1
pii:
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT02661503']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of interests PB reports consulting fees from Takeda, BMS, Roche, Amgen, Novartis, Celgene, Miltenyi Biotech, and Gilead; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda, Novartis, BMS, Roche, MSD, Celgene, Miltenyi Biotech, Gilead, and AbbVie; and funding for scientific research from Takeda Oncology, MSD, and Novartis. JF reports funding and consulting fees from Takeda Oncology and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda Oncology and Roche Pharma. RG reports consulting fees from Celgene, Novartis, Roche, Takeda, AbbVie, Astra Zeneca, MSD, Merck, Gilead, Daiichi Sanko, and Sanofi; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Celgene, Roche, Merck, Takeda, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Amgen, BMS, MSD, Sandoz, AbbVie, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, and Sanofi; support for attending meetings or travel from Roche, Amgen, Janssen, Astra Zeneca, Novartis, BMS, AbbVie, and Daiichi Sankyo; participating on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Celgene, Novartis, Roche, BMS, Takeda, AbbVie, Astra Zeneca, Janssen, MSD, Merck, Gilead, Daiichi Sankyo, and Sanofi; and stock or stock options from Novo Nordisk and Lilly. MHe reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda. AH reports payment for speakers bureau, funding, and travel support from, and participation on an advisory board for Takeda. FK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events, and support for attending meetings or travel from Takeda. MHä reports consulting fees from Pfizer, Incyte, Roche, Amgen, Sanofi/Aventis, Sobi, Kite/Gilead, Janssen, and BMS and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Sobi, Novartis, Kite/Gilead, Falk Foundation, and BMS. UN reports consulting fees for the institution from Janssen-Cilag, Celgene (BMS), Takeda, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Incyte, BeiGene, Kyowa Kiin, Gileag, and Pierre Fabre; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript, writing or educational events for the institution from Celgene (BMS), Novartis, Takeda, and Gilead; support to the institution for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, Roche, Gilead, and Takeda; and participating on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Janssen-Cilag, Celgene (BMS), Takeda, AstraZeneca, Roche, Novartis, Incyte, BeiGene, Kyowa Kiin, Gileag, and Pierre Fabre. JM reports consulting fees from MSD. AZi reports payment for presentations from Novartis, Oncopeptides, Takeda, Incyte, and Roche and travel support from Oncopeptides, Roche, and Novartis. AF reports consulting fees and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda. AV reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, BMS, and AbbVie; support for attending meetings or travel from Janssen, Kite/Gilead, BMS, and AbbVie; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Roche, BMS, AbbVie, and Kite/Gilead. SS reports travelling support from AbbVie and Jazz and reports support for attending meetings or travel from and having a leadership or fiduciary role in another board, society, committee or advocacy group (paid or unpaid) with Pfizer, Amgen, and Novartis. VV reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda and participation on an advisory board for Takeda and MSD. AK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Roche, Celgene, AbbVie, Sobi, BMS, and Takeda and support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie, BeiGene, Sobi, Takeda, EUSA Pharma, Novartis, and Alexion. KT-G reports consulting fees and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda. PK reports travel support from Roche Pharmaceuticals and Takeda. BvT reports institutional grants or contracts from Esteve, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, and Takeda; consulting fees from Allogene, Amgen, BMS/Celgene, Cerus, Gilead Kite, Incyte, IQVIA, Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Miltenyi, Novartis, Noscendo, Pentixapharm, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre, Qualworld, Roche, Sobi, and Takeda; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, BMS/Celgene, Gilead Kite, Incyte, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Roche, and Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Gilead, Kite, Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pierre Fabre, Roche, Takeda, and Novartis; payment from Takeda and Regeneron (INSIGHTFUL study); payment to institution from the Olympia 3 study; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Takeda and Regeneron. SB reports consulting fees from Galapagos; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events and consultation from Takeda; support for attending meetings or travel from Takeda; having a leadership role in another board, society, committee, or advocacy group (paid or unpaid), and holding stock or stock options for Liqomics. KB reports funding and payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Takeda Oncology. MF reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events from Celgene, BMS, Takeda, and Janssen. AZo reports Takeda stocks and being an employee of Takeda Oncology. SK reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing, or educational events, payment for expert testimony, and support for attending meetings or travel from, and participating on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Takeda. All other authors declare no competing interests.