Tag Archive for: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treatment

An Overview of Current DLBCL Treatment Approaches

/in , , , , , , , /by

An Overview of Current DLBCL Treatment Approaches from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What do diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients need to know about current treatment approaches? Expert Dr. Loretta Nastoupil provides an overview and gives an update about ongoing research comparing two treatment regimens.

Dr. Loretta Nastoupil is Director of the Lymphoma Outcomes Database in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Nastoupil, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

An Expert Review of DLBCL Research and Treatment Advances

 Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treatment and Research News

Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treatment and Research News

 How Is Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated

How Is Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated?

 

Transcript:

Katherine:

Dr. Nastoupil, now that we’ve discussed factors that go into the treatment choices, can you walk us through the currently available DLBCL treatment approaches and who they might be right for?

Dr. Nastoupil:

Absolutely. So, again, this is changing, and that’s good news. So, up until recently, R-CHOP or rituximab in combination with CHOP, which is an acronym for four different drugs, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone, has been our standard.

Again, what would potentially challenge that is the POLARIX study where we exchange vincristine for polatuzumab. We don’t know the results of that study yet. All we know is that it met its primary endpoint, meaning it met what it set out to do in terms of improving upon some of the outcomes achieved with R-CHOP.

We need to see the details to know if that means now every newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patient will be offered the polatuzumab in combination with R-CHP study or whether or not there will still be some patients appropriate for R-CHOP.

But that is generally our first approach. Whether you get six cycles or a shortened course plus/minus radiation depends on your state. Once patients have completed therapy, generally, then we pursue what’s called surveillance.

So, we’re monitoring for any signs that the lymphoma has recurred or has not gone away. That’s a controversial topic in terms of how to conduct surveillance and one that I suspect will change over time. But for most patients, if the lymphoma is going to recur, it generally recurs within the first two years.

So, assessing patients either in the form of a CT scan, a PET CT, or a physical exam with labs every four to six months for the first two years is what most practices will pursue. I’m not saying that there is no chance that you would relapse beyond two years. It’s just that the majority of patients, at least 90 percent, if the lymphoma comes back, it usually does so within two years.

And the relapses that occur beyond two years are less predictable. They could happen at three years. They could happen at 10 years, as it’s hard to know how to do surveillance beyond two years.

If the lymphoma recurs, the first thing we need to do is biopsy it because there are many things that can mimic lymphoma on a scan – infection, inflammation, other tumor types. So, if there is ever a question about whether or not the lymphoma has recurred, I generally advise for all patients they undergo a biopsy to ensure that we know what we’re treating.

Depending on when the lymphoma recurs, if it happens within 12 months, this is another area that we are shifting our practice. In the past, for all patients who had relapsed large cell lymphoma, we would pursue what we call salvage or second-line chemotherapy. So, we mix up the chemo. We keep, generally, the rituximab, but we alter the chemotherapy agents. We wouldn’t give CHOP again.

And then we give a shortened course where we give two to three cycles. We repeat the scan. And for patients who’ve achieved what we call chemo-sensitive disease – so, that’s generally a complete response on scan – we would then move forward with high-dose therapy and an autologous stem cell transplant. So, essentially giving different but more intense chemo and rescuing patients from that maneuver with their own stem cells that will go back to the bone marrow and start making white blood cells, red cells, and platelets again.

What has shifted in the last six months is we now know that CAR T-cell therapy is superior to that approach, at least with two CAR Ts for patients whose lymphoma came back within 12 months. Again, we’re eagerly awaiting the full results of those randomized studies. But three trials were conducted. Two of the three suggest CAR T is better than second chemo and transplant for those patients who relapse within 12 months.

So, currently, we think that you’ll have a CHOP-like therapy with plus rituximab frontline. If you progress within 12 months, you potentially would be a candidate for CAR T-cell therapy. If the CAR T-cell therapy fails, which is true for about half of patients. Or if you’re deemed to not be a candidate for CAR T, we have several other new options that didn’t exist a year ago, including targeted or non-chemotherapy options.

So, there are at least four options in that setting now that are therapies that target the lymphoma cells, either by targeting CD19, which is another surface marker, augmenting that either with an antibody drug conjugate, such as loncastuximab tesirine (Lonca), or with an immune therapy, such as lenalidomide (Revlimid) and tafasitamab. Polatuzumab (Polivy) is available in that third line or later space combined with bendamustine (Treanda) and rituximab (Rituxan). There’s an oral agent called Selinexor (Xpovio).

So, a lot of that is not to burden patients with information but to let them know they’ve got lots of options. And many of these can be sequenced. So, if we can’t achieve cure with R-CHOP and/or CAR T, there are still very good outcomes in that third line or later space. 

Should DLBCL Treatment Begin Immediately?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Should DLBCL Treatment Begin Immediately? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

For a newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patient, should treatment begin right away? Expert Dr. Loretta Nastoupil discusses the optimal time to begin treatment and how it can vary by patient situation.

Dr. Loretta Nastoupil is Director of the Lymphoma Outcomes Database in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Nastoupil, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Should DLBCL Patients Consider a Second Opinion

 Expert Advice for Newly Diagnosed DLBCL Patients

Expert Advice for Newly Diagnosed DLBCL Patients

 Key Steps Following a DLBCL Diagnosis

Transcript:

Katherine:

Does treatment typically start right away?

Dr. Nastoupil:

Hopefully. So, what I mean by that is everyone has to have a diagnosis. And a common story that I hear is that patients generally know when they’re not doing well. They may not be able to pinpoint I have lymphoma.

But they usually will see a primary care doctor or depending on the location of a lymph node if it’s palpable. Oftentimes, men when they’re shaving will pick up a lymph node in the neck. Or women if they’re having a mammogram will pick up a lymph node in the axillae or under the arm. So, that may lead to further investigation based off the location of a lymph node.

Or it may just be those constitutional symptoms where people aren’t feeling well, and a primary care doctor is their first stop. Lymphoma is rare. So, usually it’s a diagnosis of exclusion or something that we eventually get around to. That is important, but it’s not that important.

So, what I mean by that is I hope patients don’t have any guilt or regret if they’ve been sitting on symptoms for a while or even if their primary care doctor missed signs and symptoms of lymphoma because, again, it’s not very specific. There are a lot of things that can cause similar presentations.

But once we have imaging that is suggestive of lymphoma and then we have a diagnosis that’s rendered, again, followed by a biopsy, generally, then it is important that they seek care.

And they get that care in a timely fashion. What’s kind of interesting is the longer time from diagnosis to the initiation of treatment in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma is usually associated with a better prognosis. So, that’s sort of counterintuitive.

One would think that the sooner you get started on treatment, the better your outcome will be. I think the challenge with interpreting that data is that the longer time from diagnosis to initiation of treatment usually means that that patient’s disease is one that lends itself to the affordability of time to be seen by specialists, have all of your staging studies completed, have a return visit to go over all those results and have a shared decision-making process in terms of deciding what’s the best treatment for you, and then getting started on that treatment.

So, those patients where that is agreeable and acceptable, they’re probably going to do very well.

For the patients who are really sick and they need to get started on treatment sooner rather later as a result of their disease putting them at risk, either as a result of organs not functioning well or substantial symptom burden as a result of their disease, then they need to get started. So, that’s usually why their course from diagnosis to treatment is generally shorter.

So, again, it all kind of depends on a given situation. But with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, I tell patients usually within three months of knowing you have lymphoma, we need to get you on treatment, or you’re going to be sick 

How Does Biomarker Testing Impact DLBCL Treatment Options?

/in , , , , , , , /by

How Does Biomarker Testing Impact DLBCL Treatment Options? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

Biomarker test results may help guide diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment options. Expert Dr. Loretta Nastoupil explains how biomarkers are currently used in determining an optimal treatment approach and how research efforts could help create more precise treatments.

Dr. Loretta Nastoupil is Director of the Lymphoma Outcomes Database in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Nastoupil, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Factors that Guide a DLBCL Treatment Decision

 How Does Your DLBCL Subtype Impact Your Treatment Options?

 
 Key Steps Following a DLBCL Diagnosis

Transcript:

Katherine:

What about biomarker testing results?

Dr. Nastoupil:

So, in a perfect world, we would be able to take a patient’s specific tumor, sequence it, and provide a recipe or a solution to solve the problem. And that’s what a biomarker is.

It’s something that’s unique to the patient’s given tumor that then would inform what is the best treatment. So, we’re lacking in some ways a perfect scenario. What we do have, as what I’ve mentioned, some molecular studies where we can look for specific genes or rearrangements in the genes that may help us predict the future.

And in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, one of the most common examples of this is what we call double hit where we’re looking for two genes – MYC, which is M-Y-C, and either BCL-2 or BCL-6. These are genes that we all have. It’s just the lymphoma has moved these genes into sort of more of a prime real estate location that makes it a little bit more resistant to standard treatments.

So, if you move those genes in that tumor DNA, we call that our rearrangement. And we pick that up based off a FISH study. And if both of those features or all three of those features are there, we call it a double or triple hit.

That’s a potential biomarker that may suggest that particularly R-CHOP or standard treatment may not be the best strategy. There’s some limitations to that conclusion in that that’s not true for every patient. For about 20 percent to 30 percent of patients with double hit features, they’re going to do really well with R-CHOP.

So, that’s why we are lacking in how effective these biomarkers are. And it would be great if we had additional biomarkers that were more precise or could tell us more than just that the standard may not be optimal.

So, that’s where we’re spending a great deal of time and effort in our research efforts just trying to identify biomarkers that may tell us what’s the best approach for a given patient or what we like to call personalized medicine. 

What Are the Goals of DLBCL Treatment?

/in , , , , , , , /by

What Are the Goals of DLBCL Treatment? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

A diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment plan may have different goals depending on the patient. Expert Dr. Loretta Nastoupil provides an overview of factors that play into treatment decisions and shares information about current and emerging DLBCL treatments.

Dr. Loretta Nastoupil is Director of the Lymphoma Outcomes Database in the Department of Lymphoma/Myeloma at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center. Learn more about Dr. Nastoupil, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Factors that Guide a DLBCL Treatment Decision

 DLBCL Treatment Decisions: What’s Right for You?

Transcript:

Katherine:

Many factors come in to play when making a treatment decision, including a patient’s age and overall health. So, let’s walk through some of these considerations. Let’s start with treatment goals. What does this mean exactly? And what are the goals of treatment for DLBCL?

Dr. Nastoupil:

Great questions. For diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, my goal was that I want to eradicate this disease with one course of therapy. Now one course of therapy, again, may mean six cycles of treatment, or it may mean three to four plus/minus radiation. And that kind of gets back to the discussion we just had with stage. But the goal is to make it go away and never come back. Now, oncologists are eternal optimists.

And I saw this because we would not be oncologists if we weren’t always focused and hoping for the best outcomes for our patients.

Katherine:

Sure.

Dr. Nastoupil:

So, we, generally, when we’re counseling patients tend to keep the focus on what is the chance that I can cure this, and we use words like cure oftentimes. But there’s always those caveats. And those caveats are – we can’t really look into our crystal ball and predict the future for every given patient. So, we use tools to help us risk stratify patients, meaning if we took 100 people like a given person, we could predict the outcome for the majority of those patients.

So, with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma with no high-risk features – so, that gets back to the molecular subtype. Do they have double hit features – yes or no? The stage and something we call IPI, International Prognostic Index, that takes into account some clinical features. As you mentioned, patient specific factors, their age, their stage, some lab values, whether or not they have more than one extranodal variable. Then we can generally predict.

Again, if I have 100 patients with good risk IPI, 80 percent of them are likely to be cured and alive and well five to 10 years later. If I have someone with poor risk features that may not change exactly what I do for that patient, but that may help them and me in terms of should I be pursuing a trial to potentially have access to something that’s better than this standard option? Or how does this impact their planning?

Some people are close to retirement. Some people have specific life goals, such as a wedding or an anniversary that sometimes we use those sorts of calculators to best predict the future to inform some of that treatment. So, those are what we call sort of the characteristics coming into treatment.

There are comorbidities or sort of concomitant medical problems, such as heart disease, sometimes diabetes. But, generally, more often than not, it’s how healthy your heart is because my objective with treatment is to cure this.

Cure generally results from chemotherapy. And we can spend some time talking about why have we not moved away from chemotherapy in this disease? But, generally, that does involve chemo because that’s generally how I can eradicate this tumor.

But there are certain situations where that chemo may not be beneficial to a given a patient. It usually has to do with how healthy their heart function is at baseline. So, again, we look at all of these factors. What is their risk with the disease? What is their risk from the toxicity of treatment? And am I able to achieve that goal, which is to eradicate the disease?

Katherine:

Well, let’s talk about chemotherapy. Why is that still part of the regimen in a treatment plan?

Dr. Nastoupil:

Yes, I’m going to borrow an analogy that one of my colleagues Jason Westin uses all the time. The CHOP chemotherapy that is the backbone of our treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma was developed in 1976.

There is no other technology that we would commonly use in our day to day. You wouldn’t still be driving your car you had in 1976. Clearly, our methods of communication in regards to phones have changed dramatically. So, why are we still using chemotherapy that was developed in 1976?

Katherine:

True.

Dr. Nastoupil:

Well, it’s not for lack of trying. Over the last four or five decades, we have been trying to improve upon this. And it works. It works for at least 60 percent of patients. When we tack on targeted therapy, such as immune

therapy where we use an antibody that will stick to the surface of a marker on that lymphoma cell and then use the immune system to do some of the heavy lifting, we can probably improve those cure rates from 60 percent to potentially as high as 80 percent. That’s really been the only substantial improvement we’ve made.

Now, there is one caveat. So, just recently, we heard a press release of the POLARIX study, which is the first trial in the last four decades that could potentially replace R-CHOP as the standard of care.

We don’t have the full results yet. It’s essentially utilizing a drug called polatuzumab, which is an antibody drug conjugate. It’s essentially chemo on a stick. But we’re delivering chemo specifically to (CD)79b, which is a target on B cell lymphomas and modifying the CHOPs. We’re not getting rid of chemo altogether. We’re dropping one of the chemotherapy agents and replacing it with this targeted agent. So, it’s essentially CHOP plus rituximab and polatuzumab might be the new standard.

But, again, that’s based off many, many efforts to try and replace CHOP. And we’re making slow incremental improvements, but we’re still keeping the therapies that tend to work. 

Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treatment and Research News

/in , , , , , , , /by

Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treatment and Research News from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo.

What’s the latest diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treatment and research news? Dr. Jean Koff explains study findings shared at the recent American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) 2021 meeting and what they could mean for the future of DBCL treatments.

Dr. Jean Koff is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Hematology and Oncology at Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University. Learn more about Dr. Koff, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

What Is Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphoma (DLBCL)?

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

Cancer researchers came together recently to share findings at the annual American Society of Clinical Oncology meeting. Also known as ASCO. Are there highlights from the meeting that patients should know about?

Dr. Koff:

Well, I think at every meeting, there are lots of exciting updates to possible treatments for DLBCL. I think with the recent ASCO meeting, what a lot of researchers and clinicians are excited about are treatments in the relapse setting for DLBCL. So, there may be shifts where we are more likely to use immunotherapies known as CAR T-cells rather than what we have standardly used for patients who have relapsed after their frontline therapy.

So, that’s one of the exciting updates and we’re eager to see more details on this data. But one of the other exciting areas that we’re following closely in and ask were there several updates are a newer class of drugs, a type of immunotherapy known as fites. And these are immunotherapies that help to target the lymphoma by binding to a marker on the lymphoma tumor surface and recruiting your own immune system to attack the lymphoma. And so, we’re getting more results from clinical trials from lots of these types of agents that are showing very promising results in patients who have relapsed DLBCL.

Katherine Banwell:

What are you excited about when it comes to DLBCL research?

Dr. Koff:

So, I’m very excited about what we call precision medicine.

Which is matching a variety of treatments that we have to what is best for an individual patient. Based on the factors we talked about, like the patient level factors, but more importantly the tumor level factors. Things like gene abnormalities or even abnormalities in the patient’s immune system. We’re still in the infancy of really getting a good understanding of how these molecular factors might be matched to an ideal treatment. But that to me is really the future is matching these patients based on their tumor profiles with a treatment that is the most likely to control the lymphoma, get rid of the lymphoma and offer patients a cure.

How Is Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated?

/in , , , , , , , /by

How Is Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Treated? from Patient Empowerment Network on Vimeo. 

How is diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated? Dr. Jean Koff shares insight about DLBCL treatment types, factors to consider in determining treatment options, reviews approaches for relapsed disease, and explains the role of clinical trials.

Dr. Jean Koff is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Hematology and Oncology at Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University. Learn more about Dr. Koff, here.

See More From The Pro-Active DLBCL Patient Toolkit

Related Programs:

Should DLBCL Patients Consider a Second Opinion?

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

In general, then Dr. Koff, how is DLBCL treated?

Dr. Koff:

So, in general for patients who are getting their first-line therapy, they will receive some sort of combination of chemotherapy and what we call immunotherapy. For the vast majority of patients who are young and otherwise, healthy this will be a combination chemotherapy regimen known as R-CHOP.

Which consists of three what I call conventional chemotherapy drugs, an immunotherapy called cyclophosphamide and a steroid known as prednisone.

Katherine Banwell:

What are the main factors you take into consideration before a treatment approaches decided on? You mentioned age, health.

Dr. Koff:

Yes. So, I divide it into three different categories. The first category is the patient. So, there are patient factors that determine what treatments the patient is able to tolerate. And some of the main factors you mentioned are items like age or what we call co-morbidities, which are other health problems that the patient may have. But there may be other factors as well.

If a patient is not able to take care of themselves very well, because they’re very ill or they’re very debilitated or they’re unable to receive certain treatments because they have social factors that keep them from coming to certain centers or from following-up with care. Those all fall under that patient-centered bracket.

The next factor that I consider are items related to the lymphoma itself. So, we’ve already mentioned factors like, expression of different genes or having certain gene abnormalities. Those may play a role in determining what treatment a patient gets. And then, the last big category is where the lymphoma is in the body. And this refers, generally if the lymphoma is only in one limited site. Then those patients may get fewer cycles of chemotherapy, less time in chemotherapy and may receive radiation as part of their frontline treatment.

Whereas patients who have disease in more than one site who are spread out across the body, make it more cycles of chemotherapy. But also there are patients who have lymphoma in certain sites that requires that we give additional treatment to make sure that the disease in those special sites is treated

Katherine Banwell:

Where do clinical trials fit in, Dr. Koff?

Dr. Koff:

So, our goal in treating diffuse Large B-cell lymphoma in the first-line setting in somebody who’s newly diagnosed in most patients, our goal is to cure. Meaning that we treat the patient with chemo immunotherapy. And our goal is that the lymphoma never comes back, goes away and never comes back. Unfortunately, as of today we’re not able to cure every single patient. And depending on what factors you have in your disease, your likelihood that you will be cured with that first-line therapy may be higher or lower.

But until we’re able to cure every single patient with our first-line therapy, there is definitely room for improvement. And that’s where clinical trials feature in. Because the way that we are able to tell whether new therapies or new approaches to therapies are improving upon our goal of curing or our goal of controlling the lymphoma. We need to test them very rigorously in clinical trials.

Katherine Banwell:

Of course. Now what about for patients with relapsed disease?

Dr. Koff:

So, there are several different approaches that we use to patients who have relapsed depending on a lot of different factors that may play into a particular case. I would argue that in this case, clinical trials are even more important.

Because although we can still treat with the goal of cure for a relapsed patients with DLBCL, the likelihood that somebody will be cured after they’ve received their frontline therapy goes down, regardless of the factors related to the case. And so, this is a setting where it’s even more important that we improve upon our current strategies of treatment and our current treatments that we have available in clinical trials again are the way that we move forward with this.