BACKGROUND: There is a need to develop novel therapies for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and to identify biomarkers predictive for therapeutic response. Lenalidomide was previously shown to induce an overall response rate (ORR) of 28% in patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL. It is currently unknown if response rates differ between patients with different DLBCL subtypes. METHODS: The authors retrospectively evaluated clinical outcomes of patients with germinal center B-cell-like versus nongerminal center B-cell-like DLBCL treated with salvage lenalidomide at 4 academic institutions. RESULTS: Forty patients with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were included (24 men; 16 women; median age, 66 years; median of 4 prior treatments, including rituximab chemotherapy). Patients were classified as germinal center B-cell-like (n = 23) or nongerminal center B-cell-like (n = 17) DLBCL according to the Hans algorithm. The subgroups were similar in terms of stage, international prognostic index score, prior number of treatments, and rituximab resistance. A significant difference in clinical response to lenalidomide was observed in nongerminal center B-cell-like versus germinal center B-cell-like patients. ORR was 52.9% versus 8.7% (P = .006); complete response rate was 23.5% versus 4.3%. Median progression-free survival was 6.2 versus 1.7 months (P = .004), although no difference in OS was observed between nongerminal center B-cell-like and germinal center B-cell-like DLBCL patients. CONCLUSIONS: The data suggest that the 2 major subgroups of patients with DLBCL (germinal center B cell and nongerminal center B cell) have different antitumor responsiveness to lenalidomide in the relapsed/refractory setting. A large international trial (NCT01197560) has been opened to enrollment in an attempt to prospectively validate these retrospective observations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hernandez‐Ilizaliturri et al. (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: