Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display & Cocktail

52P - Clinical outcomes of relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma, including those unsuitable or refractory to stem cell transplant

Date

03 Mar 2025

Session

Poster Display & Cocktail

Presenters

Mia Giles

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2025) 10 (suppl_2): 1-8. 10.1016/esmoop/esmoop104198

Authors

M. Giles1, R. Shotton2, B. Phillips2, K. Linton2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Faculty Of Biology, Medicine And Health, The University of Manchester, M13 9PL - Manchester/GB
  • 2 Lymphoma, The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, M20 4BX - Manchester/GB

Resources

This content is available to ESMO members and event participants.

Abstract 52P

Background

In patients (pts) with relaped/refractory classical Hodgkin Lymphoma (R/R cHL) ineligible for stem cell transplant (SCT), contemporary therapy outcomes are under-reported and cure is uncertain. This study assessed the efficacy of contemporary agents in treating R/R cHL in SCT ineligible pts.

Methods

This was a retrospective, single centre study of R/R cHL pts ineligible for SCT per clinician assessment, treated 2010-2022 with brentuximab vedotin (BV), checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and/or bendamustine (Benda). Response was assessed by PET per Lugano 2014.

Results

81 pts were eligible (median age 31, range 15-85, 54.3% male). 95% were aged ≤70 at diagnosis. Therapies at relapse were BV (n=74), CPI (n=42) and Benda monotherapy (n=28). Prior SCT occurred in 16, 15 and 4 pts respectively. All Benda pts underwent SCT (n=5 ASCT, n=10 alloSCT) or further therapy. 13 CPI and 13 BV pts had SCT (n=1 ASCT, n=12 alloSCT and n=6 ASCT, n=7 alloSCT respectively). Third and fourth line therapy was BV (n=46), CPI (n=27) and Benda (n=24). All were transplant ineligible based on poor response to salvage therapy (n=46, 26 and 23) or poor fitness/comorbidity (n=0, 1 and 1 respectively). Median PFS was longest for Benda (46.2 months (m), range 1.1-86.7), followed by CPI (6.2m, 0.8-35.4) and BV (4.4m, 0.4-61.2) (Table). Among prior transplanted pts, median PFS was 81.3 (6.4-86.8), 4.8 (5.1-30.8), 22.3 (5.1-30.8) months respectively. There was no difference in PFS between prior transplanted and SCT ineligible pts. Median follow-up for BV, CPI and Benda was 43.2m, 28m and 34.4m respectively. 4.1% of BV and 14.3% of CPI pts remain progression free without consolidation or further therapy. Table: 52P

Treatment outcomes

BV (n=74) CPI (n=42) Benda (n=28)
N 2L 11 0 0
3L 58 7 1
4L 4 25 18
5L 1 10 9
Median number of cycles (range) 4 (1-14) 8 (1-50) 3 (1-6)
ORR All pts 34/74 (46%) 19/42 (45.2%) 21/28 (75%)
Transplant ineligible 27/58 (46.6%) 8/27 (29.6%) 17/24 (70.8%)
Previously transplanted 7/16 (43.8%) (11/15) 73.3% 4/4 (100%)
CR All pts 18/74 (24.3%) 14/4 (33.3%) 11/28 (39.3%)
Transplant ineligible 15/58 (25.9%) 5/27 (18.6%) 10/24 (41.7%)
Previously transplanted 3/16 (18.8%) 9/15 (60%) 1/4 (25%)
Median PFS (all lines) (months) All pts CR CR CR
37.4 3.1 UD 5.7 UD 6.4
Transplant ineligible 61.2 2.9 UD 5.5 UD 6.2
Prior transplant 19.5 3.9 UD 10.6 81.3 46.6

Conclusions

In this retrospective study of pts with R/R cHL, we show that a small number may achieve durable disease control without transplant consolidation, especially after CPI therapy. Further research is needed to identify factors predicting this outcome.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The Christie NHS Foundation Trust.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

B. Phillips: Financial Interests, Personal, Research Grant: Honoraria; Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Travel Expenses: Takeda. K. Linton: Financial Interests, Personal, Other, Research Support, Consultant, Speaker's Bureau and Scientific Advisory Board: AbbVie / Genmab; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board, Including research support: Roche, Beigene; Financial Interests, Personal, Speaker’s Bureau: Nurix; Financial Interests, Personal, Advisory Board: BMS. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.