For marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) Rituximab in combination with conventional chemotherapy is widely used for those patients who fail local therapy or do not qualify for such. Depending on the MZL subtype Rituximab/chemotherapy is able to induce in part long remissions, but do not prevent relapse later on. In addition, chemotherapy associated toxicity is often problematic in MZL patients, who are mostly of advanced age. Thus, chemotherapy - free approaches are highly attractive for this patient group. Rituximab single agent is a widely used chemotherapy - free approach in MZL, but was significantly inferior compared to Rituximab/chlorambucil in a large randomized prospective clinical trial in treatment naïve MZL with a CR rate of 56 % vs. 80%, respectively (P\<0.001). Thus, it is the major aim to develop chemotherapy - free approaches for MZL, which approach efficacy of Rituximab/chemotherapy combinations, but avoid chemotherapy associated toxicities. This in particular important in MZL as many physicians are reluctant to treat these often elderly patients with more intense treatments and prefer single agent therapies in these very often well and long responding lymphoma subtype. The PI3K inhibitor Copanlisib has shown high clinical activity in indolent B - cell lymphomas among them MZL. Based on these observations it is the aim of this study to test the toxicity and efficacy of Copanlisib in combination with the anti-CD20 antibody Rituximab in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MZL in need of treatment, who are not eligible or failed local therapy, following the assumption that this novel chemotherapy - free combination is significantly more effective than Rituximab single agent therapy and at least as efficient as Rituximab/chemotherapy, but avoids chemotherapy - related toxicity.
For marginal zone lymphoma (MZL) Rituximab in combination with conventional chemotherapy is widely used for those patients who fail local therapy or do not qualify for such. Depending on the MZL subtype Rituximab/chemotherapy is able to induce in part long remissions, but do not prevent relapse later on. In addition, chemotherapy associated toxicity is often problematic in MZL patients, who are mostly of advanced age. Thus, chemotherapy - free approaches are highly attractive for this patient group. Rituximab single agent is a widely used chemotherapy - free approach in MZL, but was significantly inferior compared to Rituximab/chlorambucil in a large randomized prospective clinical trial in treatment naïve MZL with a CR rate of 56 % vs. 80%, respectively (P\<0.001). Thus, it is the major aim to develop chemotherapy - free approaches for MZL, which approach efficacy of Rituximab/chemotherapy combinations, but avoid chemotherapy associated toxicities. This in particular important in MZL as many physicians are reluctant to treat these often elderly patients with more intense treatments and prefer single agent therapies in these very often well and long responding lymphoma subtype. The PI3K inhibitor Copanlisib has shown high clinical activity in indolent B - cell lymphomas among them MZL. Based on these observations it is the aim of this study to test the toxicity and efficacy of Copanlisib in combination with the anti-CD20 antibody Rituximab in patients with newly diagnosed or relapsed MZL in need of treatment, who are not eligible or failed local therapy, following the assumption that this novel chemotherapy - free combination is significantly more effective than Rituximab single agent therapy and at least as efficient as Rituximab/chemotherapy, but avoids chemotherapy - related toxicity. The objective of the trial is to test the efficacy and toxicity of the treatment of Copanlisib/Rituximab in patients with MZL in need of treatment, who have failed or are not eligible for local therapy or relapsed after local or systemic therapy. For efficacy the rate of complete remissions (according to the GELA criteria for gastric MALT or to the Cheson 2007 criteria for non-gastric extranodal, nodal and splenic MZL) after induction therapy will be primarily analysed. For toxicity treatment associated adverse events, quality of life and cumulative incidence of secondary malignancies will be documented.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
NA
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Enrollment
36
Solution for IV infusion
Solution for IV infusion
Med. Uni Wien AKH, Klinische Abteilung für Onkologie, Innere Medizin I
Vienna, Austria
St. Josef-Hospital, Medizinische Klinik I
Bochum, Germany
Johanniter GmbH, Johanniter-Krankenhaus
Bonn, Germany
ÜBAG MVZ Dr. Vehling-Kaiser GmbH Dingolfing
Dingolfing, Germany
Kath. Karl-Leisner-Klinikum gGmbH, Betriebsstätte Wilhelm-Anton-Hospital
Goch, Germany
MVZ Goslar, MVZ Onkologische Kooperation Harz
Goslar, Germany
Universitätsklinikum Halle, Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin
Halle, Germany
Rotes Kreuz Krankenhaus, Klinik für Interdisziplinäre Onkologie
Kassel, Germany
ÜBAG MVZ Dr. Vehling-Kaiser GmbH
Landshut, Germany
Gemeinschaftspraxis, Fachärzte für Innere Medizin
Mannheim, Germany
...and 8 more locations
Complete Response
Primary endpoint is the complete response (CR rate (CRR) determined 12 months after start of induction therapy). Patients who progress before 12 months after start of treatment will be treated as CR='NO' and will be included in the calculation of the primary endpoint. No primary endpoint will be determined for patients who withdraw.
Time frame: 12 months
Response rate
The response rates (complete response (CR), partial response (PR)) and overall response rate (CR or PR) are evaluated 4 weeks after the end of induction treatment and 12 months after start of treatment.
Time frame: 12 months
Best response
Best response is determined in the time interval from the start of induction therapy to end of follow-up.
Time frame: 8.5 years
Time to best response
Time to best response is defined as the time from the start of induction to best response the patient achieves (CR, PR).
Time frame: 8.5 years
Time to first response
Time to first response is defined as the time from the start of induction to first response (CR, PR).
Time frame: 12 months
Progressioin free survival (PFS)
Progression free survival (PFS) is defined as the time from registration to the first occurrence of progression or relapse as assessed by the investigator, or death from any cause. PFS for patients without disease progression, relapse, or death will be censored at the time of the last tumor assessment.
Time frame: 12 months
Time to Treatment failure (TTF)
Time to treatment failure (TTF) is defined as the time of registration to discontinuation of therapy for any reason including death from any cause, progression, toxicity or add-on of new anti-cancer therapy. Patients alive without treatment failure are censored at the latest tumor assessment date.
Time frame: 8.5 years
Duration of Response (DR)
Duration of response as defined as the period from the first response (at least PR) to treatment until evidence of disease progression, relapse or death of any cause. Patients alive without progression and relapse will be censored at the latest tumor assessment date or the stopping date.
Time frame: 8.5 years
Cause specific survival (CSS)
Cause specific survival is defined as the period from the induction registration to death from lymphoma or lymphoma related cause; death unrelated to MZL is considered as a competing event.
Time frame: 8.5 years
Overall survival (OS)
Overall survival is defined as the period from the induction registration to death from any cause. Patients who have not died until the time of the analysis will be censored at their last contact date.
Time frame: 8.5 years
Quality of life during induction and maintenance therapy
Quality of life will be measured by the FACTLym before start of treatment, during induction and maintenance.
Time frame: 8.5 years
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.