This pilot phase II trial studies how well giving brentuximab vedotin, combination chemotherapy, and radiation therapy works in treating younger patients with stage IIB, IIIB or IV Hodgkin lymphoma. Monoclonal antibodies, such as brentuximab vedotin, can block cancer growth in different ways. Some block the ability of cancer to grow and spread. Others find cancer cells and help kill them or carry cancer killing substances to them. Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as etoposide, prednisone, doxorubicin hydrochloride, cyclophosphamide, and dacarbazine, work in different ways to stop the growth of cancer cells, either by killing the cells or by stopping them from dividing. Radiation therapy uses high-energy x-rays to kill cancer cells. Giving brentuximab vedotin with combination chemotherapy may kill more cancer cells and reduce the need for radiation therapy.
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: * To evaluate the safety of brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, prednisone and doxorubicin hydrochloride (AEPA)/cyclophosphamide, brentuximab vedotin, prednisone and dacarbazine (CAPDac), as well as the efficacy (early complete response) after 2 cycles of AEPA chemotherapy in high risk patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL). * To compare the event-free survival in high risk HL patients treated with AEPA/CAPDac to the historical control unfavorable risk 2 arm (UR2) of the St. Jude HOD99 study. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: * To estimate the number of patients with adequate response according to the definitions in the Euro-Net C1 after 2 cycles of AEPA. * To evaluate the safety of Adcetris (brentuximab vedotin) in the AEPA/CAPDac regimen in children with high risk HL. * To describe acute hematologic, neuropathic, and infectious toxicities as they relate to transfusion requirements, growth factor support, episodes of febrile neutropenia and hospitalizations, according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0. * To study the association between local failure and original lymph node region and volume of radiation (patterns of treatment failure). * To assess patient-reported symptoms and health-related quality of life in children with high risk HL compared to those treated on the unfavorable treatment arm of the St. Jude HOD99 study. OUTLINE: AEPA REGIMEN: Patients receive brentuximab vedotin on days 1, 8, and 15, etoposide on days 1 to 5, prednisone three times daily (TID) on days 1 to 15, and doxorubicin hydrochloride on days 1 and 15. Treatment repeats every 28 days for 2 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. CAPDac REGIMEN: Patients receive cyclophosphamide on days 1 and 8, brentuximab vedotin days 1 and 8, prednisone TID on days 1 to 15, and dacarbazine on days 1 to 3. Treatment repeats every 21-28 days for 4 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Beginning 2-3 weeks after CAPDac chemotherapy, patients with lymph nodes that do not go into remission after 2 courses of AEPA chemotherapy undergo radiation therapy daily, 5 days a week for 3-4 weeks. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 3 months for 1 year, every 4 months for 2 years, every 6 months for 2 years, and then annually for 5 years.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
77
Given intravenously (IV).
Given IV.
Given orally (PO).
Given IV.
Given IV.
Given IV.
Given subcutaneously (SQ) as clinically indicated.
Quality of life assessment will be done at initial clinical visit, and during chemotherapy, completion of therapy, then at 1 year, 2 years and 5 years. It should take no more than 15-20 minutes to complete. Participation is voluntary by participating institution and by participant.
At the end of chemotherapy and recovery of blood counts, radiotherapy will be given to any involved nodes (if any) that are not in complete remission.
Lucile Packard Children's Hospital Stanford University
Palo Alto, California, United States
St. Jude Midwest Affiliate
Peoria, Illinois, United States
Maine Children's Cancer Program (MCCP)
Scarborough, Maine, United States
Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
Dana-Farber Harvard Cancer Center
Boston, Massachusetts, United States
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
Memphis, Tennessee, United States
Percentage of Initially Enrolled Patients That Have a Complete Response at Early Response Assessment Compared to Historical Control
To determine the efficacy of 2 cycles of AEPA chemotherapy, the response rate for the first 32 evaluable participants enrolled was evaluated. If it shown efficacy (detect 20% increase complete rate with 80% power and 5% type I error compared with the proportion of historical control of HOD99 (NCT00145600) unfavorable risk patients had complete rate at week 8 of 17% (24/141), the response results will be reported in a national/international meeting and the study will continue to enroll for a total of 77 patients.
Time frame: After the first 2 cycles of chemotherapy (at approximately 2 months after enrollment)
Percentage of Initially Enrolled Patients That Have a Complete Response at Early Response Assessment Compared to Historical Control
To determine the efficacy of 2 cycles of AEPA chemotherapy, the response rate for the first 32 evaluable participants enrolled was evaluated. If it shown efficacy (detect 20% increase complete rate with 80% power and 5% type I error compared with the proportion of historical control of HOD99 unfavorable risk patients had complete rate at week 8 of 17% (24/141), the response results will be reported in a national/international meeting and the study will continue to enroll for a total of 77 patients.
Time frame: After the first 2 cycles of chemotherapy (at approximately 2 months after enrollment)
Complete Response Rate Estimate for All Evaluable Participants
To evaluate the safety of AEPA/CAPDac, as well as the efficacy (early complete response) after 2 cycles of AEPA chemotherapy in high-risk patients with Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL).
Time frame: After the first 2 cycles of chemotherapy (at 2 months from enrollment for each participant)
Comparison of the Event-free (EFS) Survival in High Risk HL Patients Treated With AEPA/CAPDac to the Historical Control HOD99 Unfavorable Risk 2 Arm (UR2).
Event-free survival (EFS) is defined as the probability of survival between the date of study enrollment to the date of first event (relapsed or progressive disease, second malignancy, or death from any cause) or to last follow-up for patients without events. Under the proportional hazard model assumption, the two-sample log-rank test used to compare the EFS between HLHR13 and historical control of HOD99 unfavorable risk 2 arm (UR2).
Time frame: From start of therapy to 2 years after completion of therapy (up to 3 years after study enrollment)
Local Failure Rate in High Risk HL Patients Treated With AEPA/CAPDac.
The local failure rate within the high-risk HL participants treated with AEPA/CAPDac will be estimated with a 95% confidence interval using appropriate methods (e.g., estimate cumulative incidence in the presence of competing risks).
Time frame: From start of therapy to 2 years after completion of therapy (up to 3 years after study enrollment)
Descriptive of Hematological Adverse Events
To describe acute hematologic, neuropathic, and infectious toxicities as they relate to transfusion requirements, growth factor support, episodes of febrile neutropenia and hospitalizations, according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0.
Time frame: From enrollment to end of therapy (approximately 8 months)
Descriptive of Infectious Adverse Events
To describe acute hematologic, neuropathic, and infectious toxicities as they relate to transfusion requirements, growth factor support, episodes of febrile neutropenia and hospitalizations, according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0.
Time frame: From enrollment to end of therapy (approximately 8 months)
Descriptive of Neuropathic Adverse Events
To describe acute hematologic, neuropathic, and infectious toxicities as they relate to transfusion requirements, growth factor support, episodes of febrile neutropenia and hospitalizations, according to the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.0.
Time frame: From enrollment to end of therapy (approximately 8 months)
To Assess the Patient Reported Symptoms and Health-related Quality of Life in Children With High Risk HL Compared to Those Treated on the Unfavorable HOD99 Treatment Arm (UR2) at Multiple Time Points. (PedsQL v.3.0)
Assess and compare the patient reported quality of life and symptom distress to that of patients treated on the HOD99 unfavorable risk 2 arm (UR2) using the Peds Quality of Life version 3. The QL scoring is a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100. Items are reverse scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, and 4=0. Total score is the sum of all items over the number of items answered on all scales. For both the total score and subscales the range is 0-100. The total score is the sum of all items from each subscale, over the number of items answered on the scale. The total score is the sum of all items on the scale over the number of items answer. If \>50% of the items are missing the score should not be computed. If \>50% are completed, impute the mean of the completed items in a scale. The Higher the score the better quality of life.
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: At Diagnosis (baseline) (T1), completion of 2 cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 2 months) (T2), completion of 4 cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 4 months) (T3), completion of radiation (approximately 8 months) (T4)
To Assess the Patient Reported Symptoms and Health-related Quality of Life in Children With High Risk HL Compared to Those Treated on the Unfavorable HOD99 Treatment Arm (UR2) at Multiple Time Points. (PedsQL v.4.0)
Assess and compare the patient reported quality of life and symptom distress to that of patients treated on the HOD99 unfavorable risk 2 arm (UR2) using the Peds Quality of Life version 4. The QL scoring is a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100. Items are reverse scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, and 4=0. Total score is the sum of all items over the number of items answered on all scales. For both the total score and subscales the range is 0-100. The total score is the sum of all items from each subscale, over the number of items answered on the scale. The total score is the sum of all items on the scale over the number of items answer. If \>50% of the items are missing the score should not be computed. If \>50% are completed, impute the mean of the completed items in a scale. The Higher the score the better quality of life.
Time frame: At Diagnosis (baseline) (T1), completion of 2 cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 2 months) (T2), completion of 4 cycles of chemotherapy (approximately 4 months) (T3), completion of radiation (approximately 8 months) (T4)
Response Rate
Response compared to the Euro-Net C1 after 2 cycles of AEPA.
Time frame: after the first 2 cycles of chemotherapy (at approximately 2 months after enrollment)
Patient Quality of Life (QoL)
Patient QOL will be measured at multiple time points to assess the patient's physical emotional, social, and school functioning. The QL scoring is a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100. Items are reverse scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, and 4=0. Total score is the sum of all items over the number of items answered on all scales. For both the total score and subscales the range is 0-100. The total score is the sum of all items from each subscale, over the number of items answered on the scale. The total score is the sum of all items on the scale over the number of items answer. If \>50% of the items are missing the score should not be computed. If \>50% are completed, impute the mean of the completed items in a scale. The Higher the score the better quality of life.
Time frame: At various time points from diagnosis through 5 years off therapy. (up to approximately 6 years from enrollment).
Parent Proxy Quality of Life (QoL)
Parent's assessment of child's physical, emotional, social and school functioning over multiple time points. The QL scoring is a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100. Items are reverse scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, and 4=0. Total score is the sum of all items over the number of items answered on all scales. For both the total score and subscales the range is 0-100. The total score is the sum of all items from each subscale, over the number of items answered on the scale. The total score is the sum of all items on the scale over the number of items answer. If \>50% of the items are missing the score should not be computed. If \>50% are completed, impute the mean of the completed items in a scale. The Higher the score the better quality of life.
Time frame: At various time points from diagnosis through 5 years off therapy. (up to approximately 6 years from enrollment)
Correlation of Agreement Between Patient QoL and Parent Proxy QoL at Multiple Time Points
The correlation of agreement between patient and parent Quality of Life is calculated by using the Pearson's Correlation Coefficient, which considers only the record with both parent and patient data. The QL scoring is a 5-point Likert scale from 0 (never) to 4 (almost always). Scores are transformed on a scale from 0 to 100. Items are reverse scored and linearly transformed to a 0-100 scale as follows: 0=100, 1=75, 2=50, 3=25, and 4=0. Total score is the sum of all items over the number of items answered on all scales. For both the total score and subscales the range is 0-100. The total score is the sum of all items from each subscale, over the number of items answered on the scale. The total score is the sum of all items on the scale over the number of items answer. If \>50% of the items are missing the score should not be computed. If \>50% are completed, impute the mean of the completed items in a scale. The Higher the score the better quality of life.
Time frame: At various time points from diagnosis through 5 years off therapy. (up to approximately 6 years from enrollment)