Barbara Eichhorst1, Anna-Maria Fink2, Jasmin Bahlo2, Raymonde Busch3, Gabor Kovacs2, Christian Maurer2, Elisabeth Lange4, Hubert Köppler5, Michael Kiehl6, Martin Sökler7, Rudolf Schlag8, Ursula Vehling-Kaiser9, Georg Köchling10, Christoph Plöger11, Michael Gregor12, Torben Plesner13, Marek Trneny14, Kirsten Fischer2, Harmut Döhner15, Michael Kneba16, Clemens-Martin Wendtner17, Wolfram Klapper18, Karl-Anton Kreuzer2, Stephan Stilgenbauer15, Sebastian Böttcher16, Michael Hallek19. 1. Department I for Internal Medicine and Centre of Integrated Oncology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. Electronic address: barbara.eichhorst@uk-koeln.de. 2. Department I for Internal Medicine and Centre of Integrated Oncology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany. 3. Technical University, Institute for Medical Statistics and Epidemiology, Munich, Germany. 4. Evangelisches Krankenhaus, Hamm, Germany. 5. Private oncology practice, Koblenz, Germany. 6. Department of Internal Medicine I, Klinikum Frankfurt/Oder, Frankfurt, Germany. 7. Department for Haematology and Oncology, University Hospital Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany. 8. Private oncology practice, Würzburg, Germany. 9. Private oncology practice, Landshut, Germany. 10. Private oncology practice, Villingen-Schwenningen, Germany. 11. Private oncology practice, Mannheim, Germany. 12. Department of Haematology, Luzerner Kantonsspital, Lucerne, Switzerland. 13. Department of Haematology, Section of Internal Medicine, Vejle Hospital, Vejle, Denmark. 14. First Department of Medicine, Charles University General Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. 15. Department of Internal Medicine III, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany. 16. Department of Internal Medicine II, University Hospital of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany. 17. Department I of Internal Medicine, Klinikum Schwabing, Munich, Germany. 18. Haematopathology Section and Lymph Node Registry, Department of Pathology, University of Kiel, Kiel, Germany. 19. Department I for Internal Medicine and Centre of Integrated Oncology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany; Cluster of Excellence on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging (CECAD), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. This international phase 3 study compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combination consisting of bendamustine and rituximab. METHODS:Treatment-naive fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (aged 33-81 years) without del(17p) were enrolled after undergoing a central screening process. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation list using randomly permuted blocks with a block size of eight and were stratified according to participating country and Binet stage. Patients were allocated to receive six cycles of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m(2) per day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 3 days or to intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 2 days of each cycle. Rituximab 375 mg/m(2) was given intravenously in both groups on day 0 of cycle 1 and subsequently was given at 500 mg/m(2) during the next five cycles on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with the objective to assess non-inferiority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy. We aimed to show that the 2-year progression-free survival with bendamustine and rituximab was not 67·5% or less with a corresponding non-inferiority margin of 1·388 for the hazard ratio (HR) based on the 90·4% CI. The final analysis was done by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT%2000769522. FINDINGS:688 patients were recruited between Oct 2, 2008, and July 11, 2011, of which 564 patients who met inclusion criteria were randomly assigned. 561 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 282 patients in thefludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximabgroup and 279 in the bendamustine and rituximab group. After a median observation time of 37·1 months (IQR 31·0-45·5) median progression-free survival was 41·7 months (95% CI 34·9-45·3) with bendamustine and rituximab and 55·2 months (95% CI not evaluable) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (HR 1·643, 90·4% CI 1·308-2·064). As the upper limit of the 90·4% CI was greater than 1·388 the null hypothesis for the corresponding non-inferiority hypothesis was not rejected. Severe neutropenia and infections were more frequently observed with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (235 [84%] of 279 vs 164 [59%] of 278, and 109 [39%] vs 69 [25%], respectively) during the study. The increased frequency of infectious complications with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years. INTERPRETATION: The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab remains the standard front-line therapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, but bendamustine and rituximab is associated with less toxic effects. FUNDING: Roche Pharma AG, Mundipharma, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. This international phase 3 study compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combination consisting of bendamustine and rituximab. METHODS: Treatment-naive fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (aged 33-81 years) without del(17p) were enrolled after undergoing a central screening process. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation list using randomly permuted blocks with a block size of eight and were stratified according to participating country and Binet stage. Patients were allocated to receive six cycles of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m(2) per day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 3 days or to intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m(2) per day) for the first 2 days of each cycle. Rituximab 375 mg/m(2) was given intravenously in both groups on day 0 of cycle 1 and subsequently was given at 500 mg/m(2) during the next five cycles on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with the objective to assess non-inferiority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy. We aimed to show that the 2-year progression-free survival with bendamustine and rituximab was not 67·5% or less with a corresponding non-inferiority margin of 1·388 for the hazard ratio (HR) based on the 90·4% CI. The final analysis was done by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT%2000769522. FINDINGS: 688 patients were recruited between Oct 2, 2008, and July 11, 2011, of which 564 patients who met inclusion criteria were randomly assigned. 561 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 282 patients in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and 279 in the bendamustine and rituximab group. After a median observation time of 37·1 months (IQR 31·0-45·5) median progression-free survival was 41·7 months (95% CI 34·9-45·3) with bendamustine and rituximab and 55·2 months (95% CI not evaluable) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (HR 1·643, 90·4% CI 1·308-2·064). As the upper limit of the 90·4% CI was greater than 1·388 the null hypothesis for the corresponding non-inferiority hypothesis was not rejected. Severe neutropenia and infections were more frequently observed with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (235 [84%] of 279 vs 164 [59%] of 278, and 109 [39%] vs 69 [25%], respectively) during the study. The increased frequency of infectious complications with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years. INTERPRETATION: The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab remains the standard front-line therapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, but bendamustine and rituximab is associated with less toxic effects. FUNDING: Roche Pharma AG, Mundipharma, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
Authors: Jennifer A Woyach; Amy S Ruppert; Nyla A Heerema; Weiqiang Zhao; Allison M Booth; Wei Ding; Nancy L Bartlett; Danielle M Brander; Paul M Barr; Kerry A Rogers; Sameer A Parikh; Steven Coutre; Arti Hurria; Jennifer R Brown; Gerard Lozanski; James S Blachly; Hatice G Ozer; Brittny Major-Elechi; Briant Fruth; Sreenivasa Nattam; Richard A Larson; Harry Erba; Mark Litzow; Carolyn Owen; Charles Kuzma; Jeremy S Abramson; Richard F Little; Scott E Smith; Richard M Stone; Sumithra J Mandrekar; John C Byrd Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-12-01 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Mark B Geyer; Isabelle Rivière; Brigitte Sénéchal; Xiuyan Wang; Yongzeng Wang; Terence J Purdon; Meier Hsu; Sean M Devlin; M Lia Palomba; Elizabeth Halton; Yvette Bernal; Dayenne G van Leeuwen; Michel Sadelain; Jae H Park; Renier J Brentjens Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2019-04-02
Authors: Julio Delgado; Filip Josephson; Jorge Camarero; Blanca Garcia-Ochoa; Lucia Lopez-Anglada; Carolina Prieto-Fernandez; Paula B van Hennik; Irene Papadouli; Christian Gisselbrecht; Harald Enzmann; Francesco Pignatti Journal: Oncologist Date: 2021-02-10
Authors: Tait D Shanafelt; Xin V Wang; Neil E Kay; Curtis A Hanson; Susan O'Brien; Jacqueline Barrientos; Diane F Jelinek; Esteban Braggio; Jose F Leis; Cong C Zhang; Steven E Coutre; Paul M Barr; Amanda F Cashen; Anthony R Mato; Avina K Singh; Michael P Mullane; Richard F Little; Harry Erba; Richard M Stone; Mark Litzow; Martin Tallman Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 91.245