CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
PATIENTS
NURSES
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home » Leukemia and Lymphoma

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 24 No. 2
Pages: 1  2  3  
Next
REVIEW ARTICLE 

Monoclonal Antibodies in Advanced B-cell Lymphomas

By Chaitra Ujjani, MD1, Bruce D. Cheson, MD1 | February 9, 2010
1 Georgetown University Hospital, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC

ABSTRACT: The treatment of B-cell malignancies has been revolutionized by the availability of safe and effective monoclonal antibodies. The addition of rituximab(Drug information on rituximab) to standard chemotherapy regimens prolongs the survival of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Nevertheless, indolent and mantle cell lymphomas remain incurable, and 30% to 40% of patients with DLBCL still die from their disease. Much ongoing research has focused on optimizing monoclonal antibody use, integrating them into multiagent regimens, and developing newer antibodies. Attempts to improve on the efficacy of monoclonal antibody–based therapy have included altering the dosing schedule, optimizing patient selection, maintenance therapy, improving upon the rituximab molecule, radioimmunotherapy, as well as combinations with cytotoxic molecules and other novel agents. Preliminary data with a number of treatment regimens are promising in indolent and aggressive lymphomas. The eventual goal of targeted therapies is to individualize treatment to increase response and survival, while reducing treatment-related toxicity.

 B-cell malignancies include the non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs), with an estimated incidence of 65,980 in the United States for 2009, and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), with about 15,000 newly diagnosed patients per year. The NHLs include a wide spectrum of diseases that range from those that are indolent to others that are highly aggressive. In the US, 85% are of B-cell origin and only 15% are T-cell NHLs. Traditionally, advanced B-cell malignancies have been treated with either single-agent or combination chemotherapy. However, over the past decade the availability of safe and effective monoclonal antibodies has altered treatment strategies resulting in improved outcomes. Whereas, as single agents, these antibodies have demonstrated clinically meaningful activity, much of the ongoing research has focused on optimizing their use, finding how best to integrate them into multiagent regimens, and developing newer monoclonal antibodies.

Mechanisms of Action and Resistance

For an antibody to be effective, it needs to target an appropriate antigen, preferably one that is expressed abundantly and exclusively on the malignant cells. Once the antibody binds to its target antigen, it induces cell death through a variety of mechanisms, including complement-dependent cytotoxicity (CDC), antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC), and apoptosis.[1] Other hypothesized mechanisms of action include cytokine inhibition, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte generation, and phagocytosis.

The mechanisms by which malignant lymphocytes become resistant to antibody therapy are not fully elucidated, but include impairment to the above-mentioned mechanisms of action.[1] For example, upregulation of complement inhibitory proteins, such as CD55 and CD59, can lead to decreased CDC.[2,3] ADCC, which occurs as a result of the Fc portion of the monoclonal antibody binding to the Fcγ receptor on the effector cell, can vary with certain Fcγ-receptor polymorphisms. Some are associated with rituximab (Rituxan) resistance, while others are associated with hypersensitivity in NHL.[4-6] Similarly, impaired apoptosis can result in resistance to a variety of therapeutics.[7,8] Retrospective data suggest that certain gene-expression patterns may be associated with rituximab resistance.[9]

The role of genes such as Bcl-2 as prognostic factors has yet to be established. Mounier et al[8] published data from a phase III trial in which diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients were randomized to cyclophosphamide(Drug information on cyclophosphamide), doxorubicin(Drug information on doxorubicin), vincristine, and prednisone(Drug information on prednisone) (CHOP) alone or with rituximab (R-CHOP). In patients whose tumors were bcl-2–positive (greater than 50% expression of the bcl-2 protein), those who received R-CHOP had a higher overall response rate (78% vs 60%, P = .01), longer 2-year overall survival rate (67% vs 48%, P = .004), and longer event-free survival rate (58% vs 32%, P < .001) than those who were treated with CHOP alone. The investigators found no statistically significant difference in overall response rate or overall survival in the bcl-2–negative population. These data suggest that rituximab overcomes bcl-2 resistance.

Wilson et al[9] demonstrated that the addition of rituximab to dose-adjusted etoposide(Drug information on etoposide), prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, and doxorubicin (DA-EPOCH) was also beneficial for DLBCL patients with bcl-2 overexpression, improving the 5-year progression-free survival from 50% to 80%. However, in a study by Winter et al,[10] the addition of rituximab did not improve overall survival or failure-free survival in patients with bcl-2 or bcl-6 overexpression. Discrepancies among the studies may be explained by differences in distribution of activated B-cell vs germinal center B-cell lymphomas, assay techniques, sample size, or other unknown factors.

TABLE 1
Trials of Single-Agent Rituximab in B-cell Lymphoma

Rituximab

Rituximab, a chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, was initially approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1997 as the first monoclonal antibody for the treatment of a human malignancy—relapsed or refractory, follicular or low-grade NHL. This approval was based largely on a study involving 166 patients who received 375 mg/m2 of rituximab weekly for 4 weeks.[11] The overall response rate was 48%, with 6% complete responses (CRs) and a median duration of response of about 1 year. Subsequent trials have confirmed its efficacy as a single agent in both the upfront and refractory disease settings (Table 1).[11-16] Moreover, addition of the antibody to standard chemotherapy regimens has prolonged the survival of patients with DLBCL and follicular NHL (Table 2).[17-27]

TABLE 2
Randomized Trials of Rituximab Plus Chemotherapy vs Chemotherapy Alone in NHL

Nevertheless, indolent and mantle cell lymphomas remain incurable, and 30% to 40% of patients with DLBCL still die from their disease. Attempts to improve on the efficacy of rituximab have included strategies such as altering the dosing schedule, rituximab as maintenance therapy, improving on the molecule, radioimmunotherapy, and combinations with novel agents including immunomodulators, apoptosis targeting drugs, cytotoxic molecules, or other monoclonal antibodies. Other antibodies and related molecules are also in development.

Dose and Schedule
Intensification of dose and schedule of rituximab has been evaluated in a phase I/II trial by Poeschel et al, in which elderly patients (aged 61–80 years, stages I–IV) received six cycles of CHOP every 2 weeks along with 12 infusions of rituximab at 375 mg/m2 on days 0, 1, 4, 8, 15, 22, 29, 43, 57, 71, 85, and 99.[28] Of the first 20 patients, 3 died from therapy-associated complications (1 sepsis, 2 interstitial pneumonitis). Another 4 patients developed interstitial pneumonia. Prophylaxis for Pneumocystis carinii (cotrimoxazole) and cytomegalovirus (acyclovir) was initiated after the first 20 patients, with no additional episodes of interstitial pneumonia. Disease progression was not seen in the 46 patients who completed this regimen during the 9 months of follow-up.

The RICOVER trial (Rituximab With CHOP Over Age 60 Years) was a phase III comparison of six or eight cycles of CHOP or R-CHOP in a 14-day dosing regimen in 1,222 elderly patients with aggressive B-cell lymphoma.[26] Patients who received rituximab had a longer progression-free and overall survival. Fifty patients in the eight-cycle group and 42 patients in the six-cycle group experienced treatment-related deaths, the majority due to infection. However, whether R-CHOP should be administered every 2 (R-CHOP-14) or 3 (R-CHOP-21) weeks remains controversial.

Studies evaluating this question have been conducted by the Groupe d’Etude des Lymphomes de l’Adulte (GELA) and the National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI). Preliminary results from the NCRI trial show similar complete response rates between R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 (47% in both arms), but no final data regarding overall survival are yet available.[29] Nevertheless, CR rates tend to correlate with time-dependent endpoints. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities include neutropenia in 57% of patients given R-CHOP-21 and 31% of R-CHOP-14 recipients. Of note, patients in the latter group received granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (Neupogen) with each cycle, which likely contributed to the decreased frequency of neutropenia. Other adverse effects include thrombocytopenia occurring in 5% and 9% and infection in 22% and 17% of patients, respectively.

Pages: 1  2  3  
Next
 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

This article reviewed

‘Vitamin R’ and Its Younger Siblings

Improving Our Use and Understanding of Antibodies in B-cell Lymphomas






 
RELATED CONTENT

Splenic Marginal Zone Lymphoma: Villous, Not Necessarily Villainous
ONCOLOGY,  February 9, 2012
Splenic Lymphomas: Is There Still a Role for Splenectomy?
ONCOLOGY,  February 9, 2012
Splenic Marginal Zone Lymphoma: Current Knowledge and Future Directions
ONCOLOGY,  February 9, 2012
Nodal Marginal Zone Lymphoma: What Do We Really Know?
ONCOLOGY,  January 17, 2012
Nodal Marginal Zone Lymphoma: Impersonalized Medicine
ONCOLOGY,  January 17, 2012
 
PUBLICATIONS
ONCOLOGY Journal ONCOLOGY Nurse Edition Journal Cancer Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach

ONCOLOGY:
Perspectives on Best Practices

ONCOLOGY:
Nurse Edition

CANCER
MANAGEMENT
:
A Multidisciplinary
Approach

 
TOPIC INDEX

  • Bladder Cancer
  • Bone Metastases
  • Breast Cancer
  • CML
  • Colorectal Cancer
  • End-of-Life
  • GIST
  • Genetics Genomics
  • Gynecologic Cancers
  • Head & Neck Cancer
  • Integrative Oncology
  • Leukemia
  • Lung Cancer
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Nausea & Vomiting
  • Palliative Care
  • Pancreatic Cancer
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy
  • Prostate Cancer
  • RCC
  • Skin Cancer
  • Triple-Negative Breast
  • Testicular Cancer


More Topics 


 
   SEARCH MEDICA RX
   Browse drugs by name:
A B C D E F G H I J
K L M N O P Q R S T
U V W X Y Z All      
   Search for drugs:
Search

 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
'What They Should Really Teach in Medical School'
Julie Schopps, MD , February 6, 2012
The North Carolina-based pediatrician weighs in on why she thinks the real learning doesn't take place until students are out of the classroom.
Improve EHR Systems by Rethinking Medical Billing
Daniel Essin, MA, MD, February 6, 2012
Separating billing-related data from other clinical documentation and transmitting it to a billing system is not difficult …no matter how the charting is done.
Keeping Your Medical Practice’s Accounts Receivable on Track
P.J. Cloud-Moulds, February 4, 2012
Here are the minimum reports you should be running to keep an eye on your practices A/R.
Healthcare Providers Play Crucial Role in Helping Victims of Abuse
Stephen Hanson, PA-C , February 3, 2012
I would urge each and every one of you to be familiar with the warning signs of abuse, and the resources available to you all as healthcare providers.
Protecting Your Medical Practice's Data
Marisa Torrieri, February 3, 2012
Here's the scoop on how to implement a good data-backup plan at your office.
 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • AL Amyloidosis: Who, What, When, Why, and Where
  • The Maze of PARP Inhibitors in Ovarian Cancer
  • The Circuitous Path of PARP Inhibitor Development in Epithelial Ovarian Cancer
  • Podcast: Dr. David Ahlquist on Advances in Colorectal Cancer Screening
  • Lung Cancer Screening: A New Era
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • When to Treat Myelodysplastic Syndromes
  • ASCO 2011: A Paradigm Shift in the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer
  • PSA Screening for Prostate Cancer Put Into Question By the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
  • PSA Screening for Prostate Cancer Put Into Question By the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
  • When to Treat Myelodysplastic Syndromes
  • ASCO 2011: A Paradigm Shift in the Treatment of Endometrial Cancer
  • Are We Ready for Neoadjuvant Therapy in Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Cancer?
  • Evolving Therapeutic Paradigms for Advanced Prostate Cancer
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
JOB LISTINGS

Post a job

Powered by SearchMedica Jobs



CancerNetwork | CME LLC | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2012 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy