: Several single-arm studies have explored the inclusion of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) for relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). However, no head-to-head comparisons with standard salvage chemotherapy have been performed. This study presents a propensity score-matched analysis encompassing individual patient data from ten clinical trials to evaluate the impact of BV in transplant-eligible R/R cHL patients. We included 768 patients, of whom 386 were treated with BV +/- chemotherapy (BV-cohort), while 382 received chemotherapy alone (chemo-cohort). Propensity score matching resulted in balanced cohorts of 240 patients each. No significant differences were observed in pre-ASCT complete metabolic response (CMR) rates (p=0.69) or progression free survival (PFS) (p=0.14) between the BV- and chemo-cohorts. However, patients with relapsed disease had a significantly better 3-year PFS of 80% versus 70% in the BV- versus chemo-cohort (p=0.02), while there was no difference for primary refractory patients (56% versus 62%, respectively; p=0.67). Patients with stage IV disease achieved a significantly better 3-year PFS in the BV-cohort (p=0.015). Post-ASCT PFS was comparable for patients achieving a CMR after BV monotherapy and those receiving BV followed by sequential chemotherapy (p=0.24). While 3-year overall survival was higher in the BV-cohort (92% versus 80%, p<0.001, respectively), this is likely attributed to the use of other novel therapies in later lines for patients experiencing progression, given that studies in the BV-cohort were conducted more recently. In conclusion, BV +/- salvage chemotherapy appears to enhance PFS in relapsed but not primary refractory cHL patients.

Brentuximab Vedotin and Chemotherapy in Relapsed/Refractory Hodgkin Lymphoma: a Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Santoro, Armando;
2024-01-01

Abstract

: Several single-arm studies have explored the inclusion of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in salvage chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) for relapsed/refractory (R/R) classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). However, no head-to-head comparisons with standard salvage chemotherapy have been performed. This study presents a propensity score-matched analysis encompassing individual patient data from ten clinical trials to evaluate the impact of BV in transplant-eligible R/R cHL patients. We included 768 patients, of whom 386 were treated with BV +/- chemotherapy (BV-cohort), while 382 received chemotherapy alone (chemo-cohort). Propensity score matching resulted in balanced cohorts of 240 patients each. No significant differences were observed in pre-ASCT complete metabolic response (CMR) rates (p=0.69) or progression free survival (PFS) (p=0.14) between the BV- and chemo-cohorts. However, patients with relapsed disease had a significantly better 3-year PFS of 80% versus 70% in the BV- versus chemo-cohort (p=0.02), while there was no difference for primary refractory patients (56% versus 62%, respectively; p=0.67). Patients with stage IV disease achieved a significantly better 3-year PFS in the BV-cohort (p=0.015). Post-ASCT PFS was comparable for patients achieving a CMR after BV monotherapy and those receiving BV followed by sequential chemotherapy (p=0.24). While 3-year overall survival was higher in the BV-cohort (92% versus 80%, p<0.001, respectively), this is likely attributed to the use of other novel therapies in later lines for patients experiencing progression, given that studies in the BV-cohort were conducted more recently. In conclusion, BV +/- salvage chemotherapy appears to enhance PFS in relapsed but not primary refractory cHL patients.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11699/83543
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 2
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 2
social impact