90Y-Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin®) Consolidation of First Remission In Advanced-Stage Follicular Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Updated Results After a Median Follow-up of 66.2 Months From the International, Randomized, Phase III First-Line Indolent Trial (FIT) In 414 Patients
Authors: Hagenbeek Anton , Radford John , Van Hoof Achiel , Vitolo Umberto , Rohatiner Ama Z.S. , Salles Gilles , Soubeyran Pierre , Tilly Herve , Delaloye Angelika Bischof , van Putten Wim L.J. , Morschhauser Franck 
Published: October 2019

Abstract 594

The FIT trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (0.4 mCi/kg; maximum dose 32 mCi) when used as consolidation of first complete or partial remission in patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients were randomly assigned to either 90Y-ibritumomab treatment (n = 207) or observation (n = 202) within 3 months (mo) of completing initial induction therapy (chemotherapy only: 86%; rituximab in combination with chemotherapy: 14%). Response status prior to randomization did not differ between the groups: 52% complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) to induction therapy and 48% partial response (PR) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 53% CR/CRu and 44% PR in the control arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results from the first extended follow-up after a median of 3.5 years revealed a significant improvement in PFS from the time of randomization with 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation compared with control (36.5 vs 13.3 mo, respectively; P < 0.0001; Morschhauser et al. JCO. 2008; 26:5156-5164). Here we report a median follow-up of 66.2 mo (5.5 years). Five-year PFS was 47% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 29% in the control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% CI 0.39–0.65; P < 0.0001). Median PFS in the 90Y-ibritumomab group was 49 mo vs 14 mo in the control group. In patients achieving a CR/CRu after induction, 5-year PFS was 57% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group, and the median had not yet been reached at 92 months, compared with a 43% 5-year PFS in the control group and a median of 31 mo (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42–0.89). For patients in PR after induction, the 5-year PFS was 38% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group with a median PFS of 30 mo vs 14% in the control group with a median PFS of 6 mo (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27–0.53). Patients who had received rituximab as part of induction treatment had a 5-year PFS of 64% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 48% in the control group (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.30–1.47). For all patients, time to next treatment (as calculated from the date of randomization) differed significantly between both groups; median not reached at 99 mo in the 90Y-ibritumomab group vs 35 mo in the control group (P < 0.0001). The majority of patients received rituximab-containing regimens when treated after progression (63/82 [77%] in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 102/122 [84%] in the control group). Overall response rate to second-line treatment was 79% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group (57% CR/CRu and 22% PR) vs 78% in the control arm (59% CR/CRu, 19% PR). Five-year overall survival was not significantly different between the groups; 93% and 89% in the 90Y-ibritumomab and control groups, respectively (P = 0.561). To date, 40 patients have died; 18 in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 22 in the control group. Secondary malignancies were diagnosed in 16 patients in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 9 patients in the control arm (P = 0.19). There were 6 (3%) cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 1 MDS in the control arm (P = 0.063). In conclusion, this extended follow-up of the FIT trial confirms the benefit of 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation with a nearly 3 year advantage in median PFS. A significant 5-year PFS improvement was confirmed for patients with a CR/CRu or a PR after induction. Effective rescue treatment with rituximab-containing regimens may explain the observed no difference in overall survival between both patient groups who were – for the greater part – rituximab-naïve.

Disclosures:

Hagenbeek: Roche Global Advisory Board: Consultancy. Radford:Schering (May 2009): Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vitolo:Roche Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Soubeyran:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Bischof Delaloye:Expert Statement (questions of reimbursement in Switzerland): Honoraria. Morschhauser:Roche: Honoraria, Paid expert testimony within the past 2 years; Bayer: Honoraria.