Catalogue Search | MBRL
Search Results Heading
Explore the vast range of titles available.
MBRLSearchResults
-
DisciplineDiscipline
-
Is Peer ReviewedIs Peer Reviewed
-
Item TypeItem Type
-
SubjectSubject
-
YearFrom:-To:
-
More FiltersMore FiltersSourceLanguage
Done
Filters
Reset
189
result(s) for
"Bendamustine Hydrochloride - administration "
Sort by:
First-Line Venetoclax Combinations in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
by
Bahlo, Jasmin
,
Wendtner, Clemens-Martin
,
Baumann, Michael
in
Antineoplastic Agents - administration & dosage
,
Antineoplastic Agents - adverse effects
,
Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological - administration & dosage
2023
Patients with CLL received chemoimmunotherapy, venetoclax–rituximab, venetoclax–obinutuzumab, or venetoclax–obinutuzumab–ibrutinib; the latter two groups had deeper responses and longer progression-free survival.
Journal Article
Venetoclax–Rituximab in Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
2018
In a trial involving patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax in combination with rituximab resulted in a higher 2-year rate of progression-free survival than bendamustine in combination with rituximab (85% vs. 36%).
Journal Article
Fixed-Duration Acalabrutinib Combinations in Untreated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
2025
Among previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 3-year progression-free survival was 76.5% with acalabrutinib–venetoclax, 83.1% with acalabrutinib–venetoclax–obinutuzumab, and 66.5% with chemoimmunotherapy.
Journal Article
First-line chemoimmunotherapy with bendamustine and rituximab versus fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab in patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL10): an international, open-label, randomised, phase 3, non-inferiority trial
2016
Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab is the standard therapy for physically fit patients with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. This international phase 3 study compared the efficacy and tolerance of the standard therapy with a potentially less toxic combination consisting of bendamustine and rituximab.
Treatment-naive fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (aged 33–81 years) without del(17p) were enrolled after undergoing a central screening process. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with a computer-generated randomisation list using randomly permuted blocks with a block size of eight and were stratified according to participating country and Binet stage. Patients were allocated to receive six cycles of intravenous fludarabine (25 mg/m2 per day) and cyclophosphamide (250 mg/m2 per day) for the first 3 days or to intravenous bendamustine (90 mg/m2 per day) for the first 2 days of each cycle. Rituximab 375 mg/m2 was given intravenously in both groups on day 0 of cycle 1 and subsequently was given at 500 mg/m2 during the next five cycles on day 1. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival with the objective to assess non-inferiority of bendamustine and rituximab to the standard therapy. We aimed to show that the 2-year progression-free survival with bendamustine and rituximab was not 67·5% or less with a corresponding non-inferiority margin of 1·388 for the hazard ratio (HR) based on the 90·4% CI. The final analysis was done by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT%2000769522.
688 patients were recruited between Oct 2, 2008, and July 11, 2011, of which 564 patients who met inclusion criteria were randomly assigned. 561 patients were included in the intention-to-treat population: 282 patients in the fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab group and 279 in the bendamustine and rituximab group. After a median observation time of 37·1 months (IQR 31·0–45·5) median progression-free survival was 41·7 months (95% CI 34·9–45·3) with bendamustine and rituximab and 55·2 months (95% CI not evaluable) with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (HR 1·643, 90·4% CI 1·308–2·064). As the upper limit of the 90·4% CI was greater than 1·388 the null hypothesis for the corresponding non-inferiority hypothesis was not rejected. Severe neutropenia and infections were more frequently observed with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (235 [84%] of 279 vs 164 [59%] of 278, and 109 [39%] vs 69 [25%], respectively) during the study. The increased frequency of infectious complications with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab was more pronounced in patients older than 65 years.
The combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab remains the standard front-line therapy in fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, but bendamustine and rituximab is associated with less toxic effects.
Roche Pharma AG, Mundipharma, German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.
Journal Article
Obinutuzumab plus bendamustine versus bendamustine monotherapy in patients with rituximab-refractory indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (GADOLIN): a randomised, controlled, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 trial
by
Trněný, Marek
,
Dueck, Gregg
,
Fingerle-Rowson, Günter
in
Aged
,
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized - administration & dosage
,
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - therapeutic use
2016
Patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma who fail to achieve adequate disease control with rituximab-based treatment have few treatment options and a poor prognosis. We aimed to assess a combination of obinutuzumab (GA101), a novel glyco-engineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, and bendamustine in this patient population.
In this open-label, randomised, phase 3 study (GADOLIN), patients aged 18 years or older with histologically documented, CD20-positive indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma refractory to rituximab were enrolled at 83 hospital and community sites in 14 countries in Europe, Asia, and North and Central America. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a hierarchical dynamic randomisation scheme stratified by indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma subtype, rituximab-refractory type, number of previous therapies, and geographical region, to receive induction treatment (six 28-day cycles) with obinutuzumab plus bendamustine or bendamustine monotherapy, both given intravenously. Obinutuzumab plus bendamustine dosing was obinutuzumab 1000 mg (days 1, 8, and 15, cycle 1; day 1, cycles 2–6) plus bendamustine 90 mg/m2 per day (days 1 and 2, cycles 1–6), and bendamustine monotherapy dosing was 120 mg/m2 per day (days 1 and 2, all cycles). Non-progressing patients in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group received obinutuzumab maintenance (1000 mg every 2 months) for up to 2 years. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in all randomised patients, as assessed by an independent review committee. Safety was assessed in all patients who received any amount of obinutuzumab or bendamustine. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01059630, and has stopped recruiting patients.
Between April 15, 2010, and Sept 1, 2014, when the study was stopped after a pre-planned interim analysis, 396 patients were randomly assigned (194 to obinutuzumab plus bendamustine and 202 to bendamustine monotherapy). After a median follow-up time of 21·9 months (IQR 12·1–31·0) in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group and 20·3 months (9·5–29·7) in the bendamustine monotherapy group, progression-free survival was significantly longer with obinutuzumab plus bendamustine (median not reached [95% CI 22·5 months–not estimable]) than with bendamustine monotherapy (14·9 months [12·8–16·6]; hazard ratio 0·55 [95% CI 0·40–0·74]; p=0·0001). Grade 3–5 adverse events occurred in 132 (68%) of 194 patients in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group and in 123 (62%) of 198 patients in the bendamustine monotherapy group. The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events were neutropenia (64 [33%] in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group vs 52 [26%] in the bendamustine monotherapy group), thrombocytopenia (21 [11%] vs 32 [16%]), anaemia (15 [8%] vs 20 [10%]) and infusion-related reactions (21 [11%] vs 11 [6%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 74 patients (38%) in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group and in 65 patients (33%) in the bendamustine monotherapy group, and deaths due to adverse events occurred in 12 patients (6%) and 12 patients (6%), respectively. Three (25%) of 12 adverse event-related deaths in the obinutuzumab plus bendamustine group and five (42%) of 12 in the bendamustine monotherapy group were treatment related.
Obinutuzumab plus bendamustine followed by obinutuzumab maintenance has improved efficacy over bendamustine monotherapy in rituximab-refractory patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, with manageable toxicity, and is a new treatment option for patients who have relapsed after or are no longer responding to rituximab-based therapy.
F Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.
Journal Article
Ibrutinib and rituximab versus immunochemotherapy in patients with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma (ENRICH): a randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 superiority trial
by
Miall, Fiona
,
Iyengar, Sunil
,
Micallef-Eynaud, Paul
in
Adenine - analogs & derivatives
,
Aged
,
Aged, 80 and over
2025
Ibrutinib, a Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, prolongs progression-free survival when added to immunochemotherapy as first line treatment. The ENRICH trial compared the chemotherapy-free combination of ibrutinib and the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab (ibrutinib–rituximab) with standard immunochemotherapy (R-CHOP [rituximab–cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone] or bendamustine–rituximab) in patients 60 years and older with untreated mantle-cell lymphoma.
This randomised, open-label, phase 2/3 superiority trial was performed at 66 sites in the UK, Sweden, Norway, Finland, and Denmark. Patients 60 years and older with untreated mantle-cell lymphoma (Ann–Arbor stage II–IV disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0–2) were randomly assigned to receive either rituximab plus immunochemotherapy or ibrutinib–rituximab in a 1:1 ratio, stratified by investigator choice of immunochemotherapy. Patients randomly allocated to the ibrutinib–rituximab (intervention) group received 560 mg oral ibrutinib daily in combination with six to eight cycles of 375 mg/m2 intravenous rituximab on day 1 of each cycle in the matched schedule of the pre-randomisation choice of immunochemotherapy (every 21 days for R-CHOP or every 28 days for rituximab–bendamustine). R-CHOP comprised 750 mg/m2 of cyclophosphamide, 50 mg/m2 of doxorubicin, and 1·4 mg/m2 vincristine on day 1 of each 21-day cycle, with 100 mg prednisolone on days 1–5 of each cycle. Rituximab–bendamustine comprised 90 mg/m2 of bendamustine on days 1 and 2 of each cycle, in combination with 375 mg/m2 rituximab on day 1 of each cycle. All responding patients in both groups at the end of induction received maintenance rituximab administered every 8 weeks for 2 years, and patients allocated to the intervention group continued ibrutinib until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome was investigator-assessed progression-free survival, stratified by immunochemotherapy choice and analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The trial was registered with EudraCT (2015–000832–13) and is closed for recruitment.
Between Feb 15, 2016, and June 30, 2021, 397 patients were randomly allocated to immunochemotherapy (control) or ibrutinib–rituximab (intervention). Of the 397, 107 (27%) were pre-allocated to the immunochemotherapy choice of R-CHOP and 290 (73%) were pre-allocated to rituximab–bendamustine. In total, 198 were allocated to the control group (53 to R-CHOP and 145 to bendamustine–rituximab) and 199 were allocated to intervention. The median age was 74 years (IQR 70–77) for the intervention group and 74 years (70–78) in the control group. 296 patients (75%) were male and 101 patients (25%) were female; ethnicity data were not collected. At a median follow-up of 47·9 months, the median progression-free survival of ibrutinib–rituximab was superior to immunochemotherapy, with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0·69 (95% CI 0·52–0·90); p=0·0034. For those with pre-randomisation choice R-CHOP, the HR was 0·37 (0·22–0·62), and with bendamustine–rituximab, the HR was 0·91 (0·66–1·25). Across induction and maintenance, 67% of patients assigned to ibrutinib–rituximab and 70% of patients receiving immunotherapy reported grade 3 or above adverse events.
To our knowledge, this is the first randomised trial in untreated mantle-cell lymphoma to demonstrate significant improvement in progression-free survival for ibrutinib–rituximab compared to immunochemotherapy. This study suggests that ibrutinib–rituximab should be considered a new standard of care option for first-line treatment of older patients with mantle-cell lymphoma.
Cancer Research UK (C7627/A17938) and Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceuticals.
Journal Article
Ibrutinib combined with bendamustine and rituximab compared with placebo, bendamustine, and rituximab for previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (HELIOS): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study
2016
Most patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma relapse after initial therapy. Bendamustine plus rituximab is often used in the relapsed or refractory setting. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adding ibrutinib, an oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), to bendamustine plus rituximab in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma.
The HELIOS trial was an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in adult patients (≥18 years of age) who had active chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma with measurable lymph node disease (>1·5 cm) by CT scan, and had relapsed or refractory disease following one or more previous lines of systemic therapy consisting of at least two cycles of a chemotherapy-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and kidney function. Patients with del(17p) were excluded because of known poor response to bendamustine plus rituximab. Patients who had received previous treatment with ibrutinib or other BTK inhibitors, refractory disease or relapse within 24 months with a previous bendamustine-containing regimen, or haemopoietic stem-cell transplant were also excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system to receive bendamustine plus rituximab given in cycles of 4 weeks' duration (bendamustine: 70 mg/m2 intravenously on days 2–3 in cycle 1, and days 1–2 in cycles 2–6; rituximab: 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1, and 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2–6 for a maximum of six cycles) with either ibrutinib (420 mg daily orally) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were stratified according to whether they were refractory to purine analogues and by number of previous lines of therapy. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival. Crossover to ibrutinib was permitted for patients in the placebo group with IRC-confirmed disease progression. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and is continuing for further long-term follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01611090.
Between Sept 19, 2012, and Jan 21, 2014, 578 eligible patients were randomly assigned to ibrutinib or placebo in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab (289 in each group). The primary endpoint was met at the preplanned interim analysis (March 10, 2015). At a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 13·7–20·7), progression-free survival was significantly improved in the ibrutinib group compared with the placebo group (not reached in the ibrutinib group (95% CI not evaluable) vs 13·3 months (11·3–13·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·203, 95% CI 0·150–0·276; p<0·0001). IRC-assessed progression-free survival at 18 months was 79% (95% CI 73–83) in the ibrutinib group and 24% (18–31) in the placebo group (HR 0·203, 95% CI 0·150–0·276; p<0·0001). The most frequent all-grade adverse events were neutropenia and nausea. 222 (77%) of 287 patients in the ibrutinib group and 212 (74%) of 287 patients in the placebo group reported grade 3–4 events; the most common grade 3–4 adverse events in both groups were neutropenia (154 [54%] in the ibrutinib group vs 145 [51%] in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (43 [15%] in each group). A safety profile similar to that previously reported with ibrutinib and bendamustine plus rituximab individually was noted.
In patients eligible for bendamustine plus rituximab, the addition of ibrutinib to this regimen results in significant improvements in outcome with no new safety signals identified from the combination and a manageable safety profile.
Janssen Research & Development.
Journal Article
Bendamustine plus rituximab versus fludarabine plus rituximab for patients with relapsed indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas: a multicentre, randomised, open-label, non-inferiority phase 3 trial
by
Welslau, Manfred
,
Kauff, Frank
,
Brugger, Wolfram
in
Aged
,
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - adverse effects
,
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols - therapeutic use
2016
Fludarabine-based chemoimmunotherapy with rituximab is frequently used in patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas who relapse after alkylating chemotherapy. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of rituximab with bendamustine or fludarabine in patients with relapsed, indolent, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and mantle-cell lymphoma.
For this randomised, non-inferiority, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients from 55 centres in Germany, who were subsequently randomised centrally according to prespecified randomisation lists with permuted blocks of randomly variable block size to rituximab (375 mg/m2, day 1) plus either bendamustine (90 mg/m2, days 1 and 2) or fludarabine (25 mg/m2, days 1–3) every 28 days for a maximum of six 28-day cycles. Patients were aged 18 years or older with a WHO performance status of 0–2 and had relapsed or refractory indolent or mantle-cell lymphoma; patients refractory to regimens that included rituximab, bendamustine, or purine analogue drugs were excluded. Patients were stratified by histological subtypes of lymphoma and by their latest previous therapies. Treatment allocation was not masked. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival and the final analysis was completed per protocol. Non-inferiority of bendamustine plus rituximab versus fludarabine plus rituximab was defined as a difference of less than 15% in 1-year progression-free survival. The protocol was amended in July, 2006, after approval of rituximab maintenance (375 mg/m2 every 3 months for up to 2 years), which was then given to patients achieving a response to either trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01456351 (closed to enrolment, follow-up is ongoing).
Between Oct 8, 2003, and Aug 5, 2010, we randomly assigned 230 patients to treatment groups (116 bendamustine plus rituximab, 114 fludarabine plus rituximab). 11 patients were excluded for protocol violations and were not followed up further (two in the bendamustine plus rituximab group and nine in the fludarabine plus rituximab group). Thus, 219 patients were included in the per-protocol analysis (114 bendamustine plus rituximab, 105 fludarabine plus rituximab). 1-year progression-free survival with bendamustine plus rituximab was 0·76 (95% CI 0·68–0·84) and 0·48 (0·39–0·58) with fludarabine plus rituximab (non-inferiority p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 96 months (IQR 73·2–112·9), median progression-free survival with bendamustine plus rituximab was 34·2 months (95% CI 23·5–52·7) and 11·7 months (8·0–16·1) with fludarabine plus rituximab (hazard ratio [HR] 0·54 [95% CI 0·38–0·72], log-rank test p<0·0001). Safety outcomes were similar in both groups, with 46 serious adverse events recorded (23 in the bendamustine plus rituximab group and 23 in the fludarabine plus rituximab group), most commonly myelosuppression and infections.
In combination with rituximab, bendamustine was more effective than fludarabine, suggesting that bendamustine plus rituximab may be the preferred treatment option for patients with relapsed indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas.
Roche Pharma AG, Ribosepharm GmbH, Mundipharma GmbH, Studiengruppe indolente Lymphome (StiL).
Journal Article
Idelalisib or placebo in combination with bendamustine and rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: interim results from a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
2017
Bendamustine plus rituximab is a standard of care for the management of patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. New therapies are needed to improve clinically relevant outcomes in these patients. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adding idelalisib, a first-in-class targeted phosphoinositide-3-kinase δ inhibitor, to bendamustine plus rituximab in this population.
For this international, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, adult patients (≥18 years) with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia requiring treatment who had measurable lymphadenopathy by CT or MRI and disease progression within 36 months since their last previous therapy were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a central interactive web response system to receive bendamustine plus rituximab for a maximum of six cycles (bendamustine: 70 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 2 for six 28-day cycles; rituximab: 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1, and 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2–6) in addition to either twice-daily oral idelalisib (150 mg) or placebo until disease progression or intolerable study drug-related toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by high-risk features (IGHV, del[17p], or TP53 mutation) and refractory versus relapsed disease. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01569295.
Between June 26, 2012, and Aug 21, 2014, 416 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to the idelalisib (n=207) and placebo (n=209) groups. At a median follow-up of 14 months (IQR 7–18), median progression-free survival was 20·8 months (95% CI 16·6–26·4) in the idelalisib group and 11·1 months (8·9–11·1) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·33, 95% CI 0·25–0·44; p<0·0001). The most frequent grade 3 or worse adverse events in the idelalisib group were neutropenia (124 [60%] of 207 patients) and febrile neutropenia (48 [23%]), whereas in the placebo group they were neutropenia (99 [47%] of 209) and thrombocytopenia (27 [13%]). An increased risk of infection was reported in the idelalisib group compared with the placebo group (grade ≥3 infections and infestations: 80 [39%] of 207 vs 52 [25%] of 209). Serious adverse events, including febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, and pyrexia, were more common in the idelalisib group (140 [68%] of 207 patients) than in the placebo group (92 [44%] of 209). Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death occurred in 23 (11%) patients in the idelalisib group and 15 (7%) in the placebo group, including six deaths from infections in the idelalisib group and three from infections in the placebo group.
Idelalisib in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab improved progression-free survival compared with bendamustine plus rituximab alone in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. However, careful attention needs to be paid to management of serious adverse events and infections associated with this regimen during treatment selection.
Gilead Sciences Inc.
Journal Article
Updated results from the phase 3 HELIOS study of ibrutinib, bendamustine, and rituximab in relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma
by
Silva, R. Santucci
,
Balasubramanian, S.
,
Rule, S.
in
631/67/1990/283/1895
,
692/699/67/1990/283/1895
,
692/700/565/1436/2185
2019
We report follow-up results from the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 HELIOS trial of ibrutinib+bendamustine and rituximab (BR) for previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) without deletion 17p. Overall, 578 patients were randomized 1:1 to either ibrutinib (420 mg daily) or placebo, in combination with 6 cycles of BR, followed by ibrutinib or placebo alone. Median follow-up was 34.8 months (range: 0.1–45.8). Investigator-assessed median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached for ibrutinib+BR, versus 14.3 months for placebo+BR (hazard ratio [HR] [95% CI], 0.206 [0.159–0.265];
P
< 0.0001); 36-month PFS rates were 68.0% versus 13.9%, respectively. The results are consistent with the primary analysis findings (HR = 0.203, as assessed by independent review committee, with 17-month median follow-up). Median overall survival was not reached in either arm; HR (95% CI) for ibrutinib+BR versus placebo: 0.652 (0.454–0.935;
P
= 0.019). Minimal residual disease (MRD)-negative response rates were 26.3% for ibrutinib+BR and 6.2% for placebo+BR (
P
< 0.0001). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (including grades 3–4) were generally consistent with the initial HELIOS report. These long-term data support improved survival outcomes and deepening responses with ibrutinib+BR compared with BR in relapsed CLL/SLL.
Journal Article