Lenalidomide-Rituximab vs. Lenalidomide-Rituximab-Bendamustine in Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: A Phase II Showdown

Lenalidomide-Rituximab vs. Lenalidomide-Rituximab-Bendamustine in Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: A Phase II Showdown

Background

Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, characterized by recurrent relapses and decreasing responsiveness to therapy over time. The advent of immunomodulatory drugs like lenalidomide, combined with anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (rituximab), has expanded treatment options for relapsed/refractory FL (R/R FL). The HOVON110/ReBeL study sought to evaluate whether adding bendamustine to the lenalidomide-rituximab (R2) backbone (forming R2B) could improve outcomes in this challenging patient population.

Study Design

This multinational, prospective, randomized, non-comparative phase II trial (NCT number not provided) enrolled 92 patients with R/R FL from December 2014 to July 2019. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either R2 (Arm A) or R2B (Arm B). Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients achieving partial or complete remission (PR/CR) on CT imaging received rituximab maintenance every 3 months for 2 years. The co-primary endpoints were investigator-assessed CR rates at end-of-induction (EOI) and severe toxicity rates.

Key Findings

The trial was stopped prematurely due to slow accrual. At EOI, CR rates were modest in both arms: 11.4% (95% CI 3.8–24.6%) for R2 and 15.2% (95% CI 6.3–28.9%) for R2B. With a median follow-up of 74 months, severe toxicity rates were 6.8% (Arm A) and 13.0% (Arm B), including two pneumonia-related deaths in Arm A. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 43% (Arm A) and 66% (Arm B) of patients. The 60-month event-free survival (EFS) was 39.5% (Arm A) vs. 56.4% (Arm B), while overall survival (OS) reached 72.1% and 86.3%, respectively.

Expert Commentary

The study highlights the ongoing challenge of achieving durable responses in R/R FL. While R2B showed numerically superior EFS and OS, this came at the cost of increased toxicity—a critical consideration for this typically older patient population. The low CT-based CR rates despite good survival outcomes suggest that functional imaging (e.g., PET) might better capture treatment response in future studies.

Conclusion

Both R2 and R2B remain viable options for R/R FL, with R2B offering potentially better long-term disease control at the expense of higher toxicity. These findings underscore the need for personalized treatment approaches and novel therapeutic strategies in this disease setting.

Comments

No comments yet. Why don’t you start the discussion?

Leave a Reply