Received Central Nervous System Prophylaxis Research Articles

CNS Prophylaxis Among Patients with HIV-Associated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma - a Single Center Retrospective Study

Title: CNS Prophylaxis Among Patients with HIV-Associated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma - A Single Center Retrospective Study Introduction: Patients with Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) are known to develop Lymphoma at a higher rate compared with the general population, with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) being the most common subtype. Historically, before the advent of HIV treatment with antiretroviral therapy (ART), HIV-associated DLBCL was considered a more aggressive type of lymphoma and all patients were treated with central nervous system (CNS) prophylaxis. However, since ART has been widely adopted, there is some data to suggest that HIV-associated DLBCL among those taking ART more closely resembles de-novo DLBCL and may not need to be universally treated with CNS prophylaxis. There are no good prospective trials evaluating which patients who develop HIV-associated DLBCL while on ART should receive CNS prophylaxis. Furthermore, studies that tried to predict which DLBCL patients are at greater risk for CNS relapse explicitly excluded patients with HIV. Despite the absence of data, guidelines have shifted and current NCCN guidelines now recommend that HIV patients with DLBCL should be risk stratified as de-novo DLBCL patients with respect to CNS directed therapy. In this study, patients with HIV-associated DLBCL were retrospectively analyzed to understand the patterns of CNS prophylaxis and effects on relapse free survival. Methods: The Electronic Medical Record was queried at a large academic medical center in New York City for patients with HIV-associated DLBCL between the years of 2012 and 2021 using ICD-10 codes. Other subtypes of Lymphoma such as Burkitt's or Plasmablastic Lymphoma were excluded. Patients who did not receive their entire treatment course within the institution were also excluded. Clinical characteristics at diagnosis, treatment type, CNS prophylaxis, and survival data was collected and analyzed. Results: A total of 38 patients were identified according to the inclusion criteria. 26 patients (68%) underwent screening lumbar punctures (LPs) for CNS disease while 12 patients (32%) did not. The two groups were not statistically different within any categories except for LDH, where the LP group had a median LDH of 492 units/L and the non-LP group had a median LDH of 241 units/L (p-value: 0.031). The two groups were not statistically different in cell of origin subtypes, stage, bone marrow involvement, kidney/adrenal involvement, the use of ART prior to diagnosis, IPI or CNS-IPI scores. In addition, among the group that had an LP done with no CNS involvement (n=25), there was no statistical difference in relapse-free survival among those who received adequate CNS prophylaxis and those who did not (p-value 0.886). Conclusions: Among patients with HIV-associated DLBCL in a large academic medical center in New York City, there is no reliable indicator to predict which were offered screening lumbar punctures and which were not. Clinicians may be using additional measures of aggressiveness not accounted for in standard IPI and CNS-IPI scoring algorithms. Furthermore, there was no clear benefit in relapse free survival among high-risk patients who received adequate CNS prophylaxis versus those who did not in this limited sample size. Further research is needed to determine whether patients with HIV-associated DLBCL should be risk stratified similarly to de-novo DLBCL patients with respect to CNS prophylactic therapy.

A Phase I Study of Venetoclax in Combination with Inotuzumab Ozogamicin for Relapsed or Refractory ALL in Adults

Introduction Adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), especially those who are older and/or have unfavorable disease biology frequently relapse. Inotuzumab ozogamicin (INO), an anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody covalently linked to calicheamicin, is approved for treatment of relapsed or refractory (R/R) CD22+ ALL. Although INO induces measurable residual disease negative (MRD-neg) complete remission (CR) in >75% of patients (pts), the duration of response (DOR) is limited (<6 months). Pre-clinical work demonstrates that malignant lymphoblasts are BCL2-dependent (Del Gaizo Moore Blood 2008). Initial results of the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax (VEN) combination therapies for ALL are promising (Jain ASH 2019, Pullarkat Cancer Discov 2021). Due to distinct mechanisms of activity, non-overlapping toxicity, and possible synergy (Kirchhoff Blood 2021), we hypothesized that INO and VEN can be safely and effectively combined. Study Design and Eligibility This is an investigator-sponsored phase I study (NCT05016947) with a 3+3 dose escalation design. The primary objective is to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of VEN plus INO at the FDA-approved doses in adults with R/R CD22+ ALL. Secondary objectives assess efficacy (hematologic response, MRD by multi-parametric flow cytometry [MFC] threshold <0.01%, and DOR). A 14 pt expansion cohort is planned. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) is defined as treatment-related CTCAE v5 non-heme toxicity grade 3+, sinusoidal obstructive syndrome (SOS) any grade, or liver toxicity during Induction (Ind) Cycle (C) 1 and/or failure of hematologic recovery (ANC ≥500, Plts ≥25 K/mL) by day 42 of Ind C1 in responding pts. Eligibility: ≥18 years (yrs); ALL (≥5% blasts) or LBL (marrow involvement not required); CD22 expression on ≥20% of blasts; R/R to one or more cycles of CC or in the case of Philadelphia-chromosome (Ph)-positive ALL, failed by two or more TKIs, or refractory to/ineligible for ponatinib; ≥60 days from bone marrow transplant (BMT), and off immune suppression ≥2 weeks; adequate liver and kidney function; no history of liver disease including SOS; blast count ≤25 K/mL prior to treatment; no symptomatic central nervous system (CNS) disease. Pts with prior INO or VEN treatment for R/R ALL are excluded. Regimen Pts are treated with a VEN Ramp-Up over 3 days (DL1: 100/200/200; DL2: 100/200/400) followed by Induction C1: IV INO days 1, 8, 15 (0.8/0.5/0.5 mg/m2) and VEN daily per DL days 1-21. DEX 10 mg/m2 IV/PO is administered during Ramp-Up and Ind C1 days 1-4 (7 days total). Pts with >5% blasts after C1 receive Ind C2 without DEX. Pts with <5% blasts after Ind (1 or 2 cycles) continue with up to four 28-day consolidation cycles (INO 0.5 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15 plus VEN per DL days 1-21). Pts receive CNS prophylaxis with intrathecal chemotherapy. Results The 2-level dose-escalation phase has been completed; we enrolled 9 pts (5 female/4 male) with Ph-negative (n=7) or Ph-positive (n=2) ALL. The median age was 45 yrs (range 25 -74). Pts had received 1 (n=5) or 2 (n=4) prior lines of therapy. DL1 enrolled 3 pts without DLT. All DL1 pts achieved an MRD-neg CR and bridged to consolidation: 1 pt XRT to involved disease site (ankle) after 3 cycles and 2 pts to BMT after 2 cycles (Table). Three pts enrolled at DL2; no DLTs were observed. All achieved an MRD-neg CR. Two pts bridged to consolidation (donor lymphocyte infusion after 3 cycles, blinatumomab after 5 cycles) while 1 pt with KMT2A-r ALL experienced early relapse with lineage switch during second cycle. A confirmatory cohort of 3 pts enrolled at DL2 without DLT. All achieved a CR (n=2, MRD-neg; n=1, MRD-pos). The pt with MRD-pos CR as best response proceeded to blinatumomab as bridge to BMT after 2 cycles with 2 pts continuing treatment (currently cycle 2). Overall, CR was achieved in 100% (9/9) of pts with 7/8 (87%) achieving MRD-negativity. With median follow-up of 195 days (95% CI 80 - NR), 2 pts have relapsed 48 (on treatment) and 177 (after BMT) days from registration while other pts remain alive in CR. Non-heme grade 3-4 AEs include febrile neutropenia (2), DIC (1), tumor lysis syndrome (1), anxiety (1), hypertension (1), and hypotension (1). There have been no SOS. There were no delays in count recovery during C1, with median time from C1 to C2 being 30 days (range 27-42). Conclusion VEN 400mg x 21 days in combination with INO at standard doses was well tolerated and declared the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) with a CR rate of 100%.

Risk of Central Nervous System Vs. Systemic Relapse in Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Treated with R-CHOP: What Should We Focus on?

Background: Clinical outcome of patients (pts) with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) has improved during the last two decades. However, a significant proportion of DLBCL pts is still at risk of lymphoma relapse (REL)/progression or death due to progression. DLBCL pts with adverse clinical features, i.e., those with high IPI or CNS IPI scores are at the highest risk of lymphoma REL, systemic (S) or central nervous system (CNS) REL. CNS prophylaxis is questionable based on retrospective analyses. Moreover, the risk of S-REL should be discussed in those pts as well. However, the comparison of the risks of CNS vs S-REL within the different CNS IPI risk groups has not been shown. Methods: Using the prospective observational NiHiL project (NCT03199066), we identified pts ≥ 18 years of age with histologically confirmed DLBCL or high-grade B-cell lymphoma (diagnosed 2011-2021), who received R-CHOP as frontline treatment in 2 centres in Czech Republic. Pts with CNS involvement at diagnosis were excluded. Cumulative incidence of CNS (± S) REL was calculated using Kaplan-Meier statistics treating S-REL and death as competing events. Results: A total of 1242 pts were included; according to CNS IPI score (available in 1225 out of 1242 pts), 344 (28.1%), 539 (44.0%) and 342 (27.9%) pts were categorized as being at low (0-1, LR), intermediate (2-3, IR), and high risk (4-6, HiR) resp. Overall, 308 (24.8%) pts received CNS prophylaxis with either high-dose(HD) Methotrexate (MTX), HD-AraC, intrathecal chemotherapy or combination. By CNS IPI, 150 (43.9%) out of 342 pts with HiR CNS IPI received CNS prophylaxis. CNS prophylaxis was given less frequently in the IR (n 111[20.6%] out of 539 pts) or LR (n 45 [13.1%] out of 344 pts) CNS IPI groups. At a median follow up of 5.3 years (range; 0.1 - 13.3), 307 (24.7%) out of 1242 pts developed lymphoma REL, out of which 45 occurred in CNS (35 isolated CNS REL, 10 simultaneous CNS+S-REL) and 262 lymphoma RELs occurred systemically. CNS prophylaxis had no impact on the incidence of CNS REL in pts with HiR CNS IPI. Median time to CNS (± S) and S-REL was 11.5 months (range; 2.7-116.8) and 11.8 months (range; 0.8 - 144.3), resp. Occurrence of RELs within the first 6, 12 and 24 months after lymphoma diagnosis was as follows: 20%, 53.3% and 80% for CNS (± S) RELs and 21%, 50.4% and 67.2% for S-RELs. In the entire cohort, the 7-year cumulative incidence of CNS (± S) and S-REL were 4.4% and 23.7%, resp. Across all CNS IPI risk groups, there was significantly higher risk of S-REL as compared to CNS (± S) REL. The 7-year cumulative incidence of S-REL vs CNS (± S) REL and the respective HRs were 10.5% vs 1.9%, HR 6.2 (95% CI 3.4-11.2) in the LR-, 25.2% vs 2%, HR 11.7 (95% CI 8.3-16.6) in the IR-, and 35.8% vs. 12.4 %, HR 3.6 (95% CI 2.5-4.9) in the HiR CNS IPI ( Fig1), resp. At the time of analysis, 417 (33.6%) out of 1242 pts were dead. CNS (± S) REL was associated with shorter post-REL overall survival (OS) as compared to S-REL (HR 1.8, p=0.001, median OS 0.38 vs 1.04 years, resp). In the entire cohort, the 7-year cumulative incidence of death due to lymphoma was 19.3% (16.7% and 3.1% due to S-REL and CNS (± S) REL, resp). The 7-year cumulative incidence of death due to R-CHOP-related toxicity, unrelated to lymphoma and unknown causes were 2.5%, 4.2% and 9.8%, resp. In HiR CNS IPI, the 7-year cumulative incidence of death due to lymphoma was 34.9% (28.3% and 9.2% due to S-REL and CNS (± S) REL, resp), while the 7-year cumulative incidence of death due to R-CHOP-related toxicity, unrelated to lymphoma and unknown causes were 5.1%, 5.1% and 14.9%, resp ( Fig2). Conclusion: DLBCL pts are at significantly higher risk of S-REL as compared to CNS (± S) REL overall and across all CNS IPI risk groups. In addition, death due to S-REL is the leading cause of death overall and across all CNS IPI risk groups. However, CNS (± S) REL represents remarkable portion of all lymphoma RELs occurring in the HiR CNS IPI group and non-negligible cause of death in DLBCL. Our results support the conclusion that R-CHOP + HD MTX is not sufficient to reduce the risk of S-REL as well as CNS REL especially in pts with HiR CNS IPI. New 1 st line treatment options able to reduce simultaneously the risk of S-REL as well as CNS REL are needed to improve the outcome of DLBCL pts especially in the subgroup with HiR CNS IPI. Grant support: AZV NU23-03-00127, NU21-03-00411, Charles University Hematology-Oncology Cooperatio Program

Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma CNS Relapse Prophylaxis with Intrathecal or High-Dose Intravenous Methotrexate

Introduction: Central nervous system (CNS) relapse is a relatively infrequent but often fatal complication of the most common subtype of non-Hodgkin lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Median overall survival (OS) after DLBCL relapse in the CNS is about 4 months. Despite identifying patients at high risk of developing CNS relapse using the CNS international prognostic index (CNS-IPI) score, it has been difficult to validate any specific strategy. Various chemotherapies and administration methods have been tested. Thus far, only the addition of rituximab to chemotherapy has yielded significant results. Our objective is to determine if administering prophylactic chemotherapy is efficacious in preventing DLBCL relapse in the CNS. Methodology: We collected retrospective data for patients with newly diagnosed DLBCL treated with rituximab and anthracycline-based chemotherapy from 2010 to 2020 in the Northwell Health system to determine the efficacy of CNS prophylaxis. Patients with CNS disease at diagnosis, primary testicular lymphoma, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, and HIV-associated lymphoma were excluded from this study. CNS prophylaxis was defined as receiving at least two doses of prophylactic chemotherapy, whether intravenous or intrathecal. Follow up for at least one year after diagnosis was required for inclusion. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time difference between the date of definitive diagnosis to death or last date of contact. Other potential prognostic factors including double hit status and cell of origin, germinal center B-cell (GCB) vs. non-germinal center B-cell (non-GCB), were also evaluated. Pearson's chi-square analysis was used to compare the rate of DLBCL relapse in the CNS based on whether patients received CNS prophylaxis. Low risk was defined as CNS-IPI score 0 to 3 and high risk as CNS-IPI score 4 to 6. Kaplan-Meier analysis with log-rank (Mantel-Cox) testing was used to determine if any significant OS benefit was observed for the low and high-risk groups based on CNS-IPI score. Results: Of the 437 charts reviewed, 127 were eligible for inclusion. Most patients were male (56.7%). Median age was 69 years and median Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status was 1. Most cases were non-GCB (44.9%, as 25% of cases were missing data) and not double hit (85%). Of the 35 patients at high risk for CNS relapse, 27 (77%) received prophylaxis. Intrathecal methotrexate (IT MTX) was given to 26 patients (96%) and high dose intravenous methotrexate (HD MTX) was given to 1 patient. CNS relapse occurred in 6 patients, of which 5 had a low-risk CNS-IPI score. One of the five patients in the low-risk group and the one patient in the high-risk group that had CNS relapse received prophylaxis. No significant difference in overall relapse rates were observed based on whether prophylaxis was given, X 2 (1, N = 127) = 0.30, p = .59. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed no difference in OS after stratification of patients by CNS-IPI score into the high-risk ( p = .50) and low-risk ( p = .24) groups. HD MTX was not administered frequently enough to determine its efficacy. Neither cell of origin (X 2 (1, N = 95) = 2.95, p = .086) nor double hit status (X 2 (1, N = 127) = 1.512, p = .22) had any significant effect on OS. Conclusions: We did not observe any clear benefit for administering IT MTX to prevent DLBCL relapse in the CNS. Most of the CNS relapse events occurred in the low-risk group, even though 8 patients in the high-risk group did not receive any CNS prophylaxis. This study did not have sufficient power to make a definitive conclusion. As CNS relapse is a rare event, a much larger sample size is required to determine the true efficacy of CNS prophylaxis. Non-GCB cell origin and positive double hit status are not included in the CNS-IPI score but their potential association with risk of DLBCL relapse in the CNS is understudied. Future studies should build upon these findings.

CNS RELAPSE OF DIFFUSE LARGE B‐CELL LYMPHOMA AND ROLE OF UPFRONT PROPHYLAXIS: A 10‐YEAR SINGLE CENTER EXPERIENCE

Introduction: Central nervous system (CNS) relapse of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a rare event, occurring in about 5% of patients (pts) and correlating with a very dismal prognosis. Much debate has surrounded the use of strategies to avert CNS disease recurrence. Nowadays, CNS prophylaxis is mostly based on high-dose intravenous (iv) methotrexate (HD-MTX), but its effectiveness is controversial. Our study focuses on pts with CNS relapse of DLBCL in order to evaluate their clinical and biological features, the validity of known prognostic scores, the efficacy of CNS prophylaxis, prognosis and treatment at the time of relapse. Methods: All pts with DLBCL diagnosed between January 2010 and December 2021 at AOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino and treated with curative intent were selected: 498 cases with at least 12 months of follow-up were identified. Pts with primary mediastinal lymphoma, primary testicular lymphoma or CNS disease at diagnosis were excluded. Results: The case series included 406 pts. Mean age was 67 years, 56/400 had ECOG PS ≥ 2 (14%), 231/400 elevated LDH levels (58%), 251/404 were stage IV (62%), 192/374 IPI score ≥ 3 (51%), 189/373 CNS-IPI 2–3 (51%), 91/373 CNS-IPI 4–6 (24%). 95/397 pts received CNS prophylaxis (24%): 59 by intrathecal (IT) route only (15%) (n 26 CNS-IPI 2-3; n 29 CNS-IPI 4-6), 25 by iv MTX only (6%) (n 17 HD-MTX ≥3 g/mq; n 6 CNS-IPI 2-3; n 16 CNS-IPI 4-6), and 11 by combined route (3%) (n 5 CNS-IPI 2-3, n 6 CNS-IPI 3–6). 12 pts experienced CNS relapse; 8/12 exclusively CNS and 4/12 along with systemic recurrence. The cumulative incidence at 3 years was 2.8%. In univariate analysis CNS relapse risk was significantly influenced by ECOG PS and elevated LDH levels, while the use of prophylaxis was not shown to impact the risk of CNS recurrence. However, none of the pts who received systemic MTX prophylaxis had subsequent CNS disease, while 2/59 pts who received exclusive IT prophylaxis had CNS relapse with an incidence superimposable to the whole cohort (3.3%). In multivariate analysis, only ECOG PS confirmed significant correlation with the risk of such disease recurrence (Figure 1). With a mean follow-up of 36 months, the 3-year overall survival for pts with SNC recurrence was 30%. Encore Abstract—previously submitted to EHA 2023 Keyword: aggressive B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma No conflicts of interests pertinent to the abstract.

Incidence and risk factors for central nervous system relapse in patients with primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma in the rituximab era.

Central nervous system (CNS) involvement is rare in primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMLBCL). We aimed to evaluate the incidence of CNS relapse as first treatment failure event and the effect of the induction chemotherapy regimen, central nervous system - international prognostic index (CNS-IPI) and other clinical and laboratory variables on the risk of CNS relapse in 564 PMLBCL patients treated with immunochemotherapy. Only 17 patients (3.0%) received CNS prophylaxis. During a 55-month median follow-up only 8 patients experienced CNS relapse as first event, always isolated. The 2-year cumulative incidence of CNS relapse (CI-CNSR) was 1.47% and remained unchanged thereafter. The CI-CNSR was not affected by the chemotherapy regimen (R-CHOP or R-da-EPOCH). None of the established International Prognostic Index factors for aggressive lymphomas predicted CNS relapse in PMLBCL. The 2-year CI-CNSR in patients with versus without kidney involvement was 13.3% versus 0.96% (p<0.001); 14.3% versus 1.13% with versus without adrenal involvement (p<0.001); and 10.2% versus 0.97% with versus without either kidney or adrenal involvement. CNS-IPI was also predictive (2-year CI-CNSR in high-risk vs. intermediate/low-risk: 10.37% vs. 0.84%, p<0.001). However, this association may be driven mainly by kidney and/or adrenal involvement. In conclusion, in PMLBCL, CNS relapse is rare and appears to be strongly associated with kidney and/or adrenal involvement.

Outcomes of high‑dose methotrexate for CNS prophylaxis in diffuse large B‑cell lymphoma with an intermediate or high CNS‑International Prognostic Index: A single‑center retrospective cohort study.

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is rare (2-5% of cases), but is a devastating complication with a poor survival rate. The administration of high-dose methotrexate (HDMTX) for CNS prophylaxis in patients with DLBCL is controversial and variable in the literature. The present study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of HDMTX CNS prophylaxis in patients with intermediate and high CNS-International Prognostic Index (IPI) DLBCL using real-world data. An observational retrospective cohort study was conducted of all patients with intermediate and high CNS-IPI DLBCL treated at Princess Noorah Oncology Center (King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia) between January 2010 and December 2020. Patients were treated with HDMTX either intravenously or intrathecally, according to the physician's evaluation of the patient. Data on patient clinical characteristics, CNS relapses, risk factors and survival rates were obtained from hospital records. Data were analyzed using Student's unpaired t-test and the χ2 test to compare the two subgroups, the Kaplan-Meier survival method with log-rank test to calculate and compare the survival rates, and regression analysis to determine the risk factors for CNS relapse and death. The study included 358 patients (n=32 with HDMTX CNS prophylaxis and n=326 without CNS prophylaxis). Patients in the CNS prophylaxis group had a significantly higher CNS relapse rate than those in the non-CNS prophylaxis group (12.5% vs. 1.8%; P=0.008). Patients who received CNS prophylaxis were younger and had an advanced stage of disease, with extranodal involvement and a high serum lactate dehydrogenase level at presentation. CNS prophylaxis was significantly associated with CNS relapse, while relapsed disease was associated with the risk of death (all P<0.05). In conclusion, the present study found that patients with intermediate and high CNS-IPI who received HDMTX CNS prophylaxis did not have fewer CNS relapses; however, those without CNS relapse had higher survival rates. In addition to CNS prophylaxis, Stage of DLBCL and IPI were significantly associated with CNS relapse. Future randomized control trials are needed to evaluate the efficacy of HDMTX CNS prophylaxis in patients with DLBCL.

Low Incidence of Central Nervous System (CNS) Relapse of Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma despite Limited Use of Intrathecal Prophylaxis

Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the commonest sub type of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) accounting for 30–50 % of NHL cases. Around 2% to 10% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) experience central nervous system (CNS) relapse after initial therapy which is associated with a poor prognosis and most often a fatal outcome. The incidence of CNS relapse can vary from <1% in younger, good-risk patients, to around 30% in patients with multiple risk factors, however, the relapse risk was reported to be lower in the rituximab era in some studies. Moreover, optimal modality of CNS prophylaxis remains to be defined, with both systemic and intrathecal (IT) chemotherapy being widely used. As the incidence of CNS relapse and type of prophylaxis used varies in different reports, it is important to study this risk in different populations to implement optimal prophylaxis strategies. The Objectives of this study was to evaluate the incidence of CNS relapse in DLBCL patients at our institution and to study risk factors and the type and role of CNS prophylaxis. We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed with DLBCL at King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, from January 2011 to June 2019. Data were collected from computerized hospital information system and from the files of the patients. Variables studied included age at diagnosis, stage at diagnosis, international prognostic index (IPI) and CNS-IPI score, site(s) of extra-nodal involvement, type of chemotherapy received, CNS prophylaxis and CNS relapse. CNS prophylaxis was administered on the basis of presence of high-risk features like presence of ≥2 extranodal sites, involvement of bone marrow, bone, testes, nasopharynx and paranasal sinuses. Patients with presence of CNS involvement at diagnosis and primary CNS lymphoma were excluded. A total of 101 patients were diagnosed with DLBCL during the study period. There were 58 males and 43 females with a median age of 56 (range: 16-87) years. Ann Arbor stage of I-IV was assigned in 9, 21, 17 and 50 patients, respectively. The lung was the most common extranodal site involved in 27 (26.7%) patients, and liver and bone marrow involved in 20 (19.8%) patients each. Gastrointestinal tract was involved in 9 (8.9%) patients, kidneys in 5 (4.95%), breast in 4 (4%), and testis and adrenal in 2 (2%) patients each. Twenty-five (24.75%) patients had high risk CNS-IPI score, 44 (43.5%) had intermediate risk score and 32 (31.7%) had low risk score. Ninety-four (93%) patients received R-CHOP chemotherapy while rest of the patients received other types of chemotherapy, mostly a milder regimen (R-CVP), because of comorbidities and poor performance status. Sixteen patients received CNS prophylaxis, which was IT methotrexate (MTX) ± cytarabine/hydrocortisone in all patients. Nine of 25 (36%) patients with high-risk CNS-IPI score did not receive CNS prophylaxis. After a median follow up of 36 months (range 4-114), 2 (2%) patients developed CNS relapse and died shortly after this diagnosis. Both the patients with CNS relapse had high risk CNS-IPI score and did not receive CNS prophylaxis. CNS relapse of DLBCL was uncommon in this patient population despite limited use of IT CNS prophylaxis in high-risk patients. Low incidence of CNS relapse in many high-risk patients despite limited use of IT prophylaxis may be related to rituximab use and/or other factors. Our data indicate that IT CNS prophylaxis may be adequate for DLBCL patients at high risk of CNS relapse.

P1180: ARE EXTRANODAL LIMITED-STAGE DIFFUSE LARGE B-CELL LYMPHOMA MORE AGRESSIVE THAN NODAL FORMS?

Background: Limited-stage diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is associated with favourable outcomes with overall survival of 70-80% at 10 years. Stage-modified IPI (sm-IPI) predicts the risk of relapse and death based on clinical factors that do not include extranodal (EN) involvement, although in some studies it has been associated with worse outcomes. Aims: To analyse the characteristics and outcomes of limited-stage DLBCL in a single center series and evaluate the prognostic impact of EN involvement. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with newly diagnosed stage I-II DLBCL treated with curative intent at a single centre from 2015 to 2019. Primary central nervous system (CNS) lymphoma, primary testicular lymphoma, primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma and transformed lymphoma were excluded. Response to therapy was assessed according to Lugano criteria. Overall (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) were calculated by Kaplan-Meier method and comparisons done by the log rank test. Cumulative incidence of relapse was calculated using competing risk models and Gray test for group comparisons. Cox regression was used to identify prognostic factors for PFS. Results: Of 152 patients identified, 53 (35%) had EN disease and 99 (65%) were nodal (N). The most common EN sites were stomach (30%), sinus/nasal cavity (13%), skin and soft tissue (9%) and breast (9%). Seventy-two (47%) had low risk sm-IPI (45 N; 27 EN). Clinical characteristics were similar between both groups, except for stage (stage I in 50.9% of EN vs 32.3% of N cases) and bulky disease (EN 15.1% vs N 37.4%). All patients received R-CHOP (median 6 cycles; range 1-8). Eight patients, all with EN involvement (3 sinus/nasal cavity, 2 breast, 2 bone and 1 orbit), received CNS prophylaxis. Seventeen out of 152 patients received additional radiotherapy (RT), 71% of whom had nodal involvement; 16/17 were irradiated due to bulky disease and/or treatment with abbreviated immunochemotherapy. Globally, 89% patients had a complete response (CR) to treatment: 85% in the N and 96% in the EN group (p=0.212). Nine patients relapsed at a median of 18 (7-52) months after obtaining CR (6 from the N and 3 from the EN group). The 4-year cumulative incidence of relapse was similar: 11.2% (95%CI 9.0-13.9%) in EN and 6.7% (95%CI 5.9-7.5%) in N group (p=0.778). No gastric lymphomas relapsed. The most common sites of relapse were lymph nodes (3), soft tissue (3) and CNS (2). Nineteen (14 N; 5 EN) patients died at a median of 12 (0-47) months after starting treatment, mostly (52.6%) due to lymphoma progression. With a median follow-up of 43 months, 4-year OS and PFS were 87% and 82%, respectively. No significant survival differences were observed in patients with N or EN presentation with a 4-year PFS of 81.8% and 81.3% (p=0.428), respectively. On multivariable analysis adjusting for RT, sm-IPI and bulky disease, EN involvement was not associated with a decreased PFS compared with N involvement (HR 0.77; 95%CI 0.31-1.90; p=0.570). Image:Summary/Conclusion: Our study corroborates the very favourable outcomes of localized DLBCL. We could not find differences in PFS according to N and EN presentations when controlling for other prognostic factors. These results do not support different treatment strategies for EN disease; however, due to limited sample size the role of RT and the prognostic impact of specific locations cannot be fully ascertained.

Characteristics, Management and Outcomes of Patients with Intravascular Lymphoma: A Mayo Clinic Experience

Introduction: Intravascular lymphoma (IVL) is an extra nodal non-Hodgkin lymphoma with tropism for vascular endothelium. It is characterized by growth of large cells within the lumen of small to medium sized blood vessels. Central nervous system (CNS) and skin are predominantly involved. This report represents a retrospective single-institution review of IVL.Methods: We identified patients (pts) with IVL evaluated at Mayo Clinic Cancer Center between January 2003 and December 2018. Demographic, clinical, radiologic, pathologic, and therapeutic data were extracted. Statistical analysis of overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS)] was performed using Kaplan-Meier method.Results: Total number of pts was 55; 22% (12/55) had CNS-only IVL, 14.5% (8/55) had CNS and non-CNS IVL, and 63.6% (35/55) had non-CNS IVL. Eighty seven percent (47/54) pts were B cell type, 11% (6/54) were T cell type, one pt had NK cell type IVL and another was unknown. Four pts were diagnosed by autopsy. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years (range, 40-85). Sixty-four percent were males. ECOG performance status was <2 in 66%.The median follow-up time from diagnosis was 63 months [CI 95%, 9-NR], and 47% (26/55) were alive. The most common diagnostic biopsy sites were bone marrow (BM) 45% (25/55), skin 25% (14/55), and brain 29% (16/55). Twenty-nine patients had a PET scan. Seventy nine percent (23/29) had abnormal PET findings, with mean SUV of 8.6 (range 2.5-19.1). Of the 35 pts with non-CNS IVL, 76% (16/21) had abnormal PET; furthermore, the diagnosis was made with biopsies of the following sites: bone marrow 54% (19/35), skin 40% (14/35), lung 14% (5/35), liver 5.7% (2/35), spleen 2.8% (1/35), and omentum 2.8% (1/35). Forty-six percent (13/28) received CNS prophylaxis and ten percent (3/55) had relapse in CNS. Two out of the three pts who had CNS relapse had received CNS prophylaxis. The median time to CNS relapse in non-CNS IVL was 9 months. The most common first-line regimen was high-dose methotrexate+ rituximab containing regimen 62% (10/16) in IVL with CNS involvement and RCHOP (60%) (17/28) in non-CNS IVL. Seventeen percent of (8/48) pts received autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and 63% (5/8) pts were transplanted in first complete remission (CR1), and 3 pts after the first relapse.Median OS (mOS) for the whole cohort was 57 months, [CI 95%, 9-NR], and median PFS was 7 months [CI 95%, 2-NR]. There was no significant difference in mOS between groups; CNS-only IVL- 9 months (CI 95%, 1-NR), non-CNS IVL -62 months (CI 95%, 20-NR) vs combined CNS and non-CNS IVL- 4 months (CI 95%, 3-NR). mOS for those who received ASCT in CR1 was not reached (CI 95%, 10-NR) vs 51 months in non-transplant group (CI 95%, 3-NR) p=0.24. In pts with non-CNS IVL, there was no significant difference in mOS between CNS prophylaxis subgroup (NR: CI 95%, 57-NR) vs no-CNS prophylaxis subgroup (20 months: CI 95%, 0-NR), p=0.12. In those with CNS IVL mOS for early diagnosis (0-30 days from symptom onset to diagnosis was NR (CI 95%, 3-NR) vs mOS for late diagnosis (>30 days {31-14,440})-5months (CI 95% 1-NR), p=0.29].Conclusion:1. BM was most frequently involved in our patients. We suggest that BM biopsy should be part of diagnostic testing when IVL is suspected.2. Most cases are of B-cell linage, consistent with reported literature. All non-B cell cases were in non-CNS locations.3. PET scans were abnormal in more than 70% of cases indicating that this imaging modality is vital in the diagnosis due to odd location and small size of lesions.4.Overall prognosis in the literature was poor with most patients surviving <1 year. Our cohort has mOS of 57 months. The reason(s) for better survival in our cohort could not be definitively determined.5. CNS involvement had an overall trend towards poor prognosis; however, those diagnosed early had better outcomes; this did not reach statistical significance due to small sample size.6. mOS was not reached for those transplanted CR1. There was a trend towards a better survival associated with CNS prophylaxis versus no prophylaxis in non-CNS IVL.7. We suggest that CNS-centric therapeutic approach and intensive consolidation with ASCT should be considered in managing IVL. [Display omitted] DisclosuresNowakowski: Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding; Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Habermann: Incyte: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Seagen: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Tess Therapeutics: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Morphosys: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Loxo Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Eli Lilly & Co.,: Other: Scientific Advisor. Witzig: Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS, Acerta Pharma, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ansell: Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Regeneron, Affimed, AI Therapeutics, Pfizer, Trillium and Takeda: Research Funding. Tun: Mundipharma, Celgene, BMS, Acrotech, TG therapeutics, Curis, DTRM: Research Funding; Gossamer Bio, Acrotech: Consultancy.

Characteristics of Patients with Central Nervous System Relapse in Veterans with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma within the Veterans Health Administration

IntroductionAround 2-5% of patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) will experience central nervous system (CNS) relapse resulting in a poor prognosis. The Central Nervous System International Prognostic Index (CNS-IPI) is a validated risk model used to help identify DLBCL patients receiving R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone) chemotherapy who are at risk for CNS relapse. CNS prophylaxis is recommended for those with high-risk CNS-IPI scores; however, the role of CNS prophylaxis has been called into question given recent large datasets showing no impact on CNS relapse. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the characteristics of Veterans who experienced CNS relapse within the Veterans Healthcare Administration (VHA) and to validate the CNS-IPI risk stratification within this population.MethodsTrained abstractors performed a retrospective chart review of 3287 lymphoma patients seen in the VHA nationwide between 01/01/2011 and 12/31/2017. Figure 1 describes the selection of the study cohort. We evaluated baseline patient and disease characteristics including CNS-IPI score, performance of diagnostic lumbar puncture (LP) and first-line chemotherapy regimen. Pathology reports to identify cell of origin (COO), and additional risk factors for CNS relapse present at the time of original diagnosis including HIV associated lymphoma, testicular lymphoma, and high-grade B-cell lymphomas (HGBLs) defined as double or triple-hit DLBCL were evaluated. We also assessed response to first-line treatment, type of CNS prophylaxis used, including number of doses, and time to CNS relapse.ResultsA total of 1621 patients met criteria for analysis. Patients were predominately male, white, had a median age of 67, and presented with advanced disease (Table 1). At the time of diagnosis, 81% of the cohort had an ECOG performance status of 0-2, 73% received a CHOP based regimen, and 52% were designated as having a high-risk CNS-IPI score. Patients were about twice as likely to have a germinal center B-cell (GCB) COO rather than activated B-cell (ABC), but the COO was unavailable for almost 30% of the cohort. About 6% of the patients were known to have HGBLs, but the “hit status” of around 65% of the patients was unknown. Diagnostic LP was performed in 10%, 14%, and 19% of patients in the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk CNS-IPI groups respectively.The median follow-up time for the subjects in the study was 44 months. The low-risk group (12% of all patients analyzed), the intermediate-risk group (36%) and the high-risk group (52%) showed rates of CNS relapse of 1% (with a 95% CI: 0% to 2.4%), 2.4% (CI: 1.2% to 3.7%), and 2.4% (CI: 1.3% to 3.4%) respectively with no statistically significant difference across the risk groups (p=0.30). In patients with CNS relapse, only 35% of patients had a diagnostic LP. More than 90% of patients deemed high-risk for CNS relapse did not receive CNS prophylaxis. Among the 36 patients with CNS relapse, only 3 were given CNS prophylaxis at baseline (Table 2). Of the patients with CNS relapse, 75% of patients achieved a complete response with initial treatment. When categorized by the CNS-IPI score, there is no significant difference between intermediate- and high-risk based on type of CNS relapse, type of CNS prophylaxis used, response to first-line therapy, median time to relapse, median survival time, or median time from relapse to death. Those with CNS relapse had a shorter survival time compared to those with systemic relapse or no relapse (Figure 2).ConclusionsWhen compared to the previously validated CNS-IPI study, there were fewer instances of CNS relapse in our patient population in the intermediate- and high-risk groups, however, about a quarter of the patients in these groups did not receive CHOP based therapy. Although there is published data demonstrating COO and HGBLs as contributing factors to CNS relapse, our data did not show any statistically significant difference in relapse rates. Potential limitations include that the study is a retrospective chart review of a predominately male veteran population. Our data suggests the CNS-IPI may not identify patients at risk for CNS relapse with adequate accuracy. [Display omitted] DisclosuresNooruddin: AstraZeneca: Research Funding.

Impact of Choice of Platinum-Based Salvage Therapy on CNS Relapse in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Impact of Choice of Platinum-Based Salvage Therapy on CNS Relapse in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Clinical Outcomes and CNS Relapse Risk in Patients with Primary Cutaneous DLBCL, Leg Type Treated in the Rituximab Era: Long-Term Follow-up of a Single-Center Experience

Clinical Outcomes and CNS Relapse Risk in Patients with Primary Cutaneous DLBCL, Leg Type Treated in the Rituximab Era: Long-Term Follow-up of a Single-Center Experience

Favorable Outcomes of Patients with Limited-Stage Ocular Adnexal DLBCL Treated in the Rituximab Era: Long-Term Follow-up of a Single Center Experience

Favorable Outcomes of Patients with Limited-Stage Ocular Adnexal DLBCL Treated in the Rituximab Era: Long-Term Follow-up of a Single Center Experience

ABCL-241: Comparing Efficacy of Intrathecal Chemotherapy versus High-Dose Methotrexate for Central Nervous System Prophylaxis in High-Grade B-Cell Lymphomas

Context Outcomes of patients with high-grade B-cell lymphomas have improved with chemoimmunotherapy. However, some patients are at an increased risk of developing secondary central nervous system (CNS) relapse, associated with increased morbidity. Objective The objective of this study was to analyze the efficacy of intrathecal chemotherapy versus high-dose methotrexate for the prevention of secondary CNS relapse in high-grade B-cell lymphoma patients. Design This was a single-institution, retrospective cohort study. A report was created via electronic health records to identify patients that received CNS prophylaxis with a confirmed diagnosis of high-grade B-cell lymphoma from January 2017 to September 2020. Setting This study took place at a general community hospital. Patients or Other Participants Inclusion criteria included age > 18 years, histologically confirmed high-grade B-cell lymphoma, either R-CHOP or DA-R-EPOCH as the primary chemoimmunotherapy regimen, and no CNS involvement at the time of diagnosis. Interventions Arm A included 11 patients that received intrathecal chemotherapy, and arm B included 11 patients that received intravenous high-dose methotrexate for prophylaxis. Main Outcome Measures The primary outcome of this retrospective study was to assess rates of CNS relapse, with a median follow-up of 1 year since diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), toxicity, cost of care, and delays in therapy between both arms. Results Development of secondary CNS relapse occurred in 2 (18.2%) of the patients in arm A and 2 (18.2%) in arm B, which was not statistically significant by Chi-square analysis with Yates correction (p=.58042). PFS was consistent between both arms at 72.7%. One-year OS for each arm was 90.9% vs 72.7%, (p=.0887). Toxicity developed in 36% of high-dose methotrexate patients. Two patients needed a dose reduction of high-dose methotrexate, and two had delays in further cycles of primary chemoimmunotherapy regimen. High-dose methotrexate was associated with a significantly higher cost on average per cycle. Conclusions There was no statistically significant difference in the development of secondary CNS relapse between intrathecal chemotherapy and high-dose methotrexate. Further prospective, randomized studies are needed to assess if CNS prophylaxis improves outcomes and which method of prophylaxis is more efficacious.

Incidence of Central Nervous System (CNS) Relapse in MYC Rearranged Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Does CNS Prophylaxis Improve Outcome?

Introduction:Central nervous system (CNS) relapse in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is rare and associated with poor outcome. The presence of MYC rearrangement (MYC -R)with or without BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangement (high-grade B-cell lymphomas, or HGBCL, per 2016 WHO revision) has been associated with inferior survival with traditional R-CHOP chemotherapy and a higher incidence of CNS relapse. The incidence of CNS relapse and patient outcome in patients with HGBCL and MYC -R with increasing use of aggressive CNS directed chemotherapy or CNS prophylaxis is unknown.Methods:In this single-center retrospective cohort study we compared the incidence of CNS relapse in HGBCL with at least MYC -R (MYC- R group) with DLBCL not otherwise specified (DLBCL NOS, non- MYC -R group). Differences between groups were analyzed using Chi-square, Fisher's exact and t-Student tests. Statistical significance was set at P<0.05. Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Log-rank test was used to determine differences in survival. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS.24 software.Results:Of 205 patients, 72 (35%) were MYC -R and 133 (65%) were non- MYC -RDLBCL. The median age at diagnosis was 62 (range 18-70 years), and 126 patients were male (61%). The MYC -R (HGBCL) group included 58 (80%) patients with concurrent BCL2 and/or BCL6 rearrangement. Among MYC -R patients, 42 (58%) had a high-intermediate or high international prognostic score (IPI) score, 61 (of 68; 90%) were of germinal center B-cell (GCB) type, and 56 (of 69; 81%) presented with advanced stage disease. Among non- MYC -R patients, 49 (of 121; 40%) had high-intermediate or high IPI, and 90 (of 132; 68%) had advanced stage disease. For treatment, 28 (of 66; 42%) MYC -R and 31 (of 120; 25%) non- MYC -R patients received CNS prophylaxis either as intrathecal methotrexate or cytarabine or as systemic therapy with high-dose methotrexate. One MYC -R patient had CNS involvement at presentation. Chemotherapy among MYC -R patients included R-CHOP (23 patients), R-HyperCVAD (8), DA-R-EPOCH (27), R-CHOEP (4) and other diverse regimens including clinical trials (6). Among non- MYC -R patients, regimens included R-CHOP (102), R-HyperCVAD (3), DA-REPOCH (9), and R-CHOEP (13). CNS relapse was seen in 4 patients in the MYC -R group (5.6%) and 1 patient (0.7%) in the non- MYC -R group (P=0.053). Three of the 4 MYC -R patients with CNS relapse had received CNS prophylaxis. The non- MYC -R patient who had CNS relapse initially presented with CNS involvement and had been treated with high dose methotrexate. Twenty-six (26) MYC -R patients and 24 non- MYC -Rpatients had primary refractory disease. Median PFS was 15.9 months in MYC- R vs. not reached in non- MYC- R (HR 2.835; 95% CI 2.291 to 6.757, P<0.0001), and median OS was 30 months in MYC- R vs. not reached in non- MYC- R (HR 4.179; 95% CI 2.945 to 10.55, P<0.0001).Conclusion:The incidence of CNS relapse among both MYC -R (HGBCL) and non- MYC -R (DLBCL NOS) cohorts was overall low and may have been mitigated with the use of prophylaxis. Although, CNS relapse occurred despite CNS prophylaxis in both groups. Both the PFS and OS among MYC -R patients were significantly worse compared to non- MYC -R patients despite the use of more aggressive therapy in a majority of MYC- R patients. Larger studies are needed to confirm these findings and determine optimal strategies for CNS prophylaxis and therapy in HGBCL and DLBCL NOS. [Display omitted] DisclosuresReddy:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau.

Ineffectiveness of high-dose methotrexate for prevention of CNS relapse in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Central nervous system (CNS) relapse affects 5% of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients and portends a poor prognosis. Prophylactic intravenous high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) is frequently employed to reduce this risk, but there is limited evidence supporting this practice. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to determine the CNS relapse risk with HD-MTX in DLBCL patients aged 18-70 years treated in Alberta, Canada between 2012 and 2019. Provincial guidelines recommended HD-MTX for patients at high-risk of CNS relapse based upon CNS-IPI score, double-hit lymphoma, or testicular involvement. Among 906 patients with median follow-up 35.3 months (range 0.29-105.7), CNS relapse occurred in 1.9% with CNS-IPI 0-1, 4.9% with CNS-IPI 2-3, and 12.2% with CNS-IPI 4-6 (p < .001). HD-MTX was administered to 115/326 (35.3%) high-risk patients, of whom 96 (83.5%) had CNS-IPI score 4-6, 45 (39.1%) had double-hit lymphoma, and four (3.5%) had testicular lymphoma. The median number of HD-MTX doses was two (range 1-3). Central nervous system relapse risk was similar with versus without HD-MTX (11.2% vs. 12.2%, p = .82) and comparable to previous reports of high-risk patients who did not receive CNS prophylaxis (10-12%). In multivariate and propensity score analyses, HD-MTX demonstrated no association with CNS relapse, progression-free survival, or overall survival. This study did not demonstrate a benefit of prophylactic HD-MTX in this high-risk patient population. Further study is required to determine the optimal strategy to prevent CNS relapse in DLBCL.

Systemic vs. intrathecal central nervous system prophylaxis in primary adrenal/renal diffuse large b-cell Lymphoma: A multi-institution retrospective analysis and systematic review

Primary adrenal lymphoma (PAL) and primary renal lymphoma (PRL) are rare extranodal lymphomas, predominantly of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma subtype. Primary adrenal and renal lymphomas (PARL) exhibit a high predilection for the central nervous system (CNS). Therefore, current guidelines support the use of CNS prophylaxis in PARL, particularly in cases of high-risk Central Nervous System International Prognostic Index (CNS-IPI). However, the route of administration (i.e. systemic vs. intrathecal chemotherapy) has not been clearly elucidated. With this in mind, we initiated an international collaboration and literature review to analyze 50 patient cases, 20 of whome received CNS prophylaxis. Based on our analysis, we conclude that PARL may indicate a need for CNS chemo-prophylaxis in the form of systemic high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) over intrathecal methotrexate (IT-MTX), although IT-MTX may still have utility in certain cases.

Lenalidomide As Maintenance Therapy after R-CHOP Has No Protecting Effect for Central Nervous System Relapse in Frontline Treatment of Diffuse Large B-Cells Lymphoma. an Ancillary Studies of the Remarc Study

Lenalidomide As Maintenance Therapy after R-CHOP Has No Protecting Effect for Central Nervous System Relapse in Frontline Treatment of Diffuse Large B-Cells Lymphoma. an Ancillary Studies of the Remarc Study

Patterns and Risk of CNS Recurrence after R-EPOCH Treatment for Double/Triple Hit Lymphoma

Patterns and Risk of CNS Recurrence after R-EPOCH Treatment for Double/Triple Hit Lymphoma