Early time-to-relapse as a predictor of survival in mature T-cell/NK-cell lymphomas: Results from the PETAL consortium

Abstract INTRODUCTION We and others have demonstrated that patients with refractory nodal mature T-Cell lymphomas (nMTCL) have worse overall survival (OS) versus relapsed disease.1–3 Among patients who relapse, responses and OS in (nMTCL) remain poor with little data to tailor decision-making based on disease kinetics.1–9 Time-to-relapse (TTR) is a significant predictor of survival and decision-making tool among many other lymphomas,10–18 however a majority of nMTCL patients will relapse prior to 24 months.14 We aimed to characterize how TTR may affect survival and explore differential second-line (2L) therapy effects based on TTR subgroups. METHODS This was a global retrospective cohort study using multiple international cohorts: PETAL (n=1414) and GELL (n=487).1,3,19–21 Two separate independent cohorts validated TTR12 as an OS predictor: an observational U.S. multicenter cohort (n=138) and the phase 3 randomized trial of romidepsin-CHOP versus CHOP.22 Patients with PTCL-NOS, AITL/TFHL, or ALCL with a CR to 1L were included. Patients without progression or 2L within the study period were included as not having TTR12 per landmark methods,11,23–25 and were removed for sensitivity analyses. The primary objective was OS among nMTCL who relapsed or started 2L26 within 12m from 1L (TTR12) versus without TTR12 because nearly half of patients in our cohort and previous studies of nMTCL relapsed within 12m.6,14 The secondary objective was to compare OS among 2L novel agents (NA) versus chemotherapy (CC) in those with and without TTR12. Kaplan-Meier and Cox PH methods were used adjusting for a priori covariates.1,3 The primary analysis was a modified-landmark analysis (m-LM) with OS measured from relapse or 2L start (TTR12 group) or from 12m from 1L start (without TTR12 group) to death. Sensitivity analyses used standard 12m landmark (s-LM; excluded patients who died or lost-to-follow <12m),11,25 and time-dependent Cox (td-Cox; OS 1L start to death). For 2L analyses, OS was measured from 2L start to death. RESULTS A total 452 were included in the final cohort and for td-Cox, 428 in m-LM, and 388 in s-LM. Of the 452 total, 165 (36.5%) had TTR12, 181 (40%) relapsed ≥12m, and 106 (23.5%) never relapsed (total without TTR12: 287 [63.5%]). The median (range) age was 58 (18-89) and 60 (15-92), PTCL-NOS included 47.3% and 43.2%, AITL/TFHL included 35.8% and 32.1%, and ALCL included 16.4% and 24.7% of patients with TTR12 and without TTR12 respectively. Patients received similar frontline regimens and HSCT utilization was comparable. Demographics in the validation cohorts largely mirrored the primary cohort. Using m-LM, TTR12 conferred worse OS (aHR 2.14, 95%CI: 1.58-2.90; p<0.001) overall, irrespective of 1L HSCT or PIT score, and across prespecified subgroups (PTCL-NOS: aHR 2.32, 95%CI: 1.51-3.55; p<0.001, AITL/TFHL: aHR 1.92, 95%CI: 1.15-3.21; p=0.013, ALCL: aHR 3.34, 95%CI: 1.18-9.50; p=0.023, no 2L HSCT: aHR 2.27, 95%CI: 1.63-3.15; p<0.001). TTR12 patients who received any 2L HSCT had similar OS than those without TTR12 (aHR 1.85, 95%CI: 0.73-4.65; p=0.194). When excluding patients that did not relapse, TTR12 still showed poorer OS (aHR 1.60, 95%CI: 1.18-2.18; p=0.003). In the observational validation cohort, TTR12 patients had worse OS across all analyses in both univariate (HR 3.72, 95%CI 1.85-7.46; p<0.001) and multivariate models adjusting for covariates (aHR 3.60, 95%CI 1.77-7.34; p<0.001). In the phase 3 validation cohort, TTR12 patients also had worse OS (aHR 3.71, 95%CI 2.17-6.32; p<0.001). All results were consistent across s-LM and td-Cox sensitivity analyses. TTR12 predicted worse OS in parallel to, and compounding with, PIT score, with patients who had TTR12 and PIT≥2 exhibiting the worst OS. Patients with PIT score of 4 were at a significantly higher odds of developing TTR12 (OR 3.64, 95%CI 1.07-12.38; p=0.038). In TTR12 patients, 2L NA significantly improved OS versus CC (aHR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.37-0.97; p=0.038). In those without TTR12 who received 2L, there were no significant differences in OS with NA versus CC (aHR 0.82, 95%CI 0.51-1.32; p=0.407 CONCLUSION TTR12 consistently exhibited worse OS in nMTCL and highlighted differential responses to 2L, defining a unique risk group after 1L. TTR12 may be a novel endpoint for clinical trials and may better inform treatment decisions upon progression. Prospective validation and correlation with molecular alterations has been initiated and is the focus of the PETAL consortium.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Blood
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2025-889
Primary Topic
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Early time-to-relapse as a predictor of survival in mature T-cell/NK-cell lymphomas: Results from the PETAL consortium

Mark N Sorial, Noriaki Yoshida, Erica Lee, Carlos Chiattone et al.
Blood
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
article

Early time-to-relapse as a predictor of survival in mature T-cell/NK-cell lymphomas: Results from the PETAL consortium

Mark N Sorial, Noriaki Yoshida, Erica Lee, Carlos Chiattone, Mubarak M. Al-Mansour, Kristiana Nasto, Ahmed Sawas, Marianna Gentilini, Athina Lymboussaki, Ijeoma Julie Eche, Josie Ford, Emily Buttermore, Philippe Gaulard, Govind Bhagat, Hasmukh Jain, Stefan Klaus Barta, Tinatin Muradashvili, Monica Civallero, Caroline MacVicar, Kenechukwu Aniagboso, Ramzi Hamouche, K. Kariya, Alfredo Quiroz, Jeffrey A. Barnes, Martina Manni, Devavrat Shah, Maya Krishnan, H. Miles Prince, Won-Seog Kim, Sridhar Epari, Catherine Thiéblemont, Kusha Chopra, Edith Julia, Matthew M. Lei, Germán Stemmelin, Luis Mario Villela Martínez, Helen Ma, Alexandra W Lenart, Alok Shetty, Makoto Iwasaki, Mwanasha H. Merrill, Eliana Miranda, Franck Morschhauser, Jessy Xinyi Han, Emmanuel Bachy, Jackielyn Cuenca Alturas, Brady Beltrán, Min Ji Koh, A. DiSciullo, Estelle Verburgh, Jack Malespini, Carrie van der Weyden, Changyu Shen, Yu Ri Kim, Laura Korin, Fabiola Valvert, Sang Eun Yoon, Vincent Camus, Beatrice Casadei, María José Fernández, Luis Malpica, Takeshi Okatani, Macarena Roa, Laurence de Leval, Omar Elghawy, Leora Boussi, María Elena Cabrera, Salvia Jain, Henry Idrobo Quintero, Min Jung Koh, Sean M. McCabe, Carolina Oliver, Girisha Panchoo, Marialejandra Torres Viera, Luke Peng, Robert N. Stuver, Tetiana Skrypets, Thomas Eipe, Shambhavi Singh, Francine M. Foss, Ellen K. Kendall, Zainab Mohamed, Pier Luigi Zinzani, Judith Gabler, Jin Seok Kim, Enrica Marchi, Massimo Federico, Eric Jacobsen, Jungwon Cho, Manju Sengar, Saswata Saha, Denisse Castro, Tanuja Shet, Emmanuel Nwodo, Forum Bhanushali, Dhruv Mistry, Cesar Augusto Samanez Figari, Owen O'Conner
article en

Abstract

Abstract INTRODUCTION We and others have demonstrated that patients with refractory nodal mature T-Cell lymphomas (nMTCL) have worse overall survival (OS) versus relapsed disease.1–3 Among patients who relapse, responses and OS in (nMTCL) remain poor with little data to tailor decision-making based on disease kinetics.1–9 Time-to-relapse (TTR) is a significant predictor of survival and decision-making tool among many other lymphomas,10–18 however a majority of nMTCL patients will relapse prior to 24 months.14 We aimed to characterize how TTR may affect survival and explore differential second-line (2L) therapy effects based on TTR subgroups. METHODS This was a global retrospective cohort study using multiple international cohorts: PETAL (n=1414) and GELL (n=487).1,3,19–21 Two separate independent cohorts validated TTR12 as an OS predictor: an observational U.S. multicenter cohort (n=138) and the phase 3 randomized trial of romidepsin-CHOP versus CHOP.22 Patients with PTCL-NOS, AITL/TFHL, or ALCL with a CR to 1L were included. Patients without progression or 2L within the study period were included as not having TTR12 per landmark methods,11,23–25 and were removed for sensitivity analyses. The primary objective was OS among nMTCL who relapsed or started 2L26 within 12m from 1L (TTR12) versus without TTR12 because nearly half of patients in our cohort and previous studies of nMTCL relapsed within 12m.6,14 The secondary objective was to compare OS among 2L novel agents (NA) versus chemotherapy (CC) in those with and without TTR12. Kaplan-Meier and Cox PH methods were used adjusting for a priori covariates.1,3 The primary analysis was a modified-landmark analysis (m-LM) with OS measured from relapse or 2L start (TTR12 group) or from 12m from 1L start (without TTR12 group) to death. Sensitivity analyses used standard 12m landmark (s-LM; excluded patients who died or lost-to-follow <12m),11,25 and time-dependent Cox (td-Cox; OS 1L start to death). For 2L analyses, OS was measured from 2L start to death. RESULTS A total 452 were included in the final cohort and for td-Cox, 428 in m-LM, and 388 in s-LM. Of the 452 total, 165 (36.5%) had TTR12, 181 (40%) relapsed ≥12m, and 106 (23.5%) never relapsed (total without TTR12: 287 [63.5%]). The median (range) age was 58 (18-89) and 60 (15-92), PTCL-NOS included 47.3% and 43.2%, AITL/TFHL included 35.8% and 32.1%, and ALCL included 16.4% and 24.7% of patients with TTR12 and without TTR12 respectively. Patients received similar frontline regimens and HSCT utilization was comparable. Demographics in the validation cohorts largely mirrored the primary cohort. Using m-LM, TTR12 conferred worse OS (aHR 2.14, 95%CI: 1.58-2.90; p<0.001) overall, irrespective of 1L HSCT or PIT score, and across prespecified subgroups (PTCL-NOS: aHR 2.32, 95%CI: 1.51-3.55; p<0.001, AITL/TFHL: aHR 1.92, 95%CI: 1.15-3.21; p=0.013, ALCL: aHR 3.34, 95%CI: 1.18-9.50; p=0.023, no 2L HSCT: aHR 2.27, 95%CI: 1.63-3.15; p<0.001). TTR12 patients who received any 2L HSCT had similar OS than those without TTR12 (aHR 1.85, 95%CI: 0.73-4.65; p=0.194). When excluding patients that did not relapse, TTR12 still showed poorer OS (aHR 1.60, 95%CI: 1.18-2.18; p=0.003). In the observational validation cohort, TTR12 patients had worse OS across all analyses in both univariate (HR 3.72, 95%CI 1.85-7.46; p<0.001) and multivariate models adjusting for covariates (aHR 3.60, 95%CI 1.77-7.34; p<0.001). In the phase 3 validation cohort, TTR12 patients also had worse OS (aHR 3.71, 95%CI 2.17-6.32; p<0.001). All results were consistent across s-LM and td-Cox sensitivity analyses. TTR12 predicted worse OS in parallel to, and compounding with, PIT score, with patients who had TTR12 and PIT≥2 exhibiting the worst OS. Patients with PIT score of 4 were at a significantly higher odds of developing TTR12 (OR 3.64, 95%CI 1.07-12.38; p=0.038). In TTR12 patients, 2L NA significantly improved OS versus CC (aHR 0.60, 95%CI: 0.37-0.97; p=0.038). In those without TTR12 who received 2L, there were no significant differences in OS with NA versus CC (aHR 0.82, 95%CI 0.51-1.32; p=0.407 CONCLUSION TTR12 consistently exhibited worse OS in nMTCL and highlighted differential responses to 2L, defining a unique risk group after 1L. TTR12 may be a novel endpoint for clinical trials and may better inform treatment decisions upon progression. Prospective validation and correlation with molecular alterations has been initiated and is the focus of the PETAL consortium.

BloodVol. 146(Supplement 1)
Boston University (US), University of Modena and Reggio Emilia (IT), Northeastern University (US), Biogen (United States) (US), Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US), International Potato Center (PE), Southeastern University (US), The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR), Technological University of Pereira (CO), Radiation Effects Research Foundation (JP), Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US), Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania (US), Tata Memorial Hospital (IN), Santa Casa Hospital (BR), Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (AU), Samsung Medical Center (KR), Groote Schuur Hospital (ZA), King Abdulaziz Medical City (SA), Yale Cancer Center (US), Kettering University (US), Massachusetts General Hospital (US), Universidad de Hermosillo (MX), Hospital Nacional Cayetano Heredia (PE), Hospital del Salvador (CL), Hiroshima Red Cross Hospital & Atomic-bomb Survivors Hospital (JP), Hôpital Lyon Sud (FR), Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US), Istituto di Ematologia di Bologna (IT), Liga Nacional Contra el Cáncer (GT), Instituto Nacional de Enfermedades Neoplásicas (PE), Instituto Alexander Fleming (AR), Hôpitaux Universitaires Henri-Mondor (FR), Istituto Tumori Bari (IT), Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel (FR), Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches Administratives, Politiques et Sociales (FR), Gangnam Severance Hospital (KR), Hôpital Saint-Louis (FR), Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires (AR), VA Long Beach Healthcare System (US), IPS Central (PY), Centre Henri Becquerel, University of Virginia (US), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), University of Pennsylvania (US), Sungkyunkwan University (KR), Universidad Santa María (VE), Philadelphia University (US), University of Lausanne (CH)
Openalex Percentile: Top 47%
Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment
DOISourceOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.