Extracellular tumor-related mRNA in plasma of lymphoma patients and survival implications.

BACKGROUND We studied anomalous extracellular mRNAs in plasma from patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and their survival implications. mRNAs studied have been reported in the literature as markers of poor (BCL2, CCND2, MYC) and favorable outcome (LMO2, BCL6, FN1) in tumors. These markers were also analyzed in lymphoma tissues to test possible associations with their presence in plasma. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS mRNA from 42 plasma samples and 12 tumors from patients with DLBCL was analyzed by real-time PCR. Samples post-treatment were studied. The immunohistochemistry of BCL2 and BCL6 was defined. Presence of circulating tumor cells was determined by analyzing the clonality of the immunoglobulin heavy-chain genes by PCR. In DLBCL, MYC mRNA was associated with short overall survival. mRNA targets with unfavorable outcome in tumors were associated with characteristics indicative of poor prognosis, with partial treatment response and with short progression-free survival in patients with complete response. In patients with low IPI score, unfavorable mRNA targets were related to shorter overall survival, partial response, high LDH levels and death. mRNA disappeared in post-treatment samples of patients with complete response, and persisted in those with partial response or death. No associations were found between circulating tumor cells and plasma mRNA. Absence of BCL6 protein in tumors was associated with presence of unfavorable plasma mRNA. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE Through a non-invasive procedure, tumor-derived mRNAs can be obtained in plasma. mRNA detected in plasma did not proceed from circulating tumor cells. In our study, unfavorable targets in plasma were associated with poor prognosis in B-cell lymphomas, mainly MYC mRNA. Moreover, the unfavorable targets in plasma could help us to classify patients with poor outcome within the good prognosis group according to IPI.

R-ESHAP as salvage therapy for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma: the influence of prior exposure to rituximab on outcome. A GEL/TAMO study.

BACKGROUND The role of re-treatment with rituximab in aggressive B-cell lymphomas still needs to be defined. This study evaluated the influence of prior exposure to rituximab on response rates and survival in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with rituximab plus etoposide, cytarabine, cisplatinum and methylprednisolone (R-ESHAP). DESIGN AND METHODS We retrospectively analyzed 163 patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who received R-ESHAP as salvage therapy with a curative purpose. Patients were divided into two groups according to whether rituximab had been administered (n=94, "R+" group) or not (n=69, "R-" group) prior to R-ESHAP. RESULTS Response rates were significantly higher in the R- group in the univariate but not in the multivariate analysis. In the analysis restricted to the R+ group, we observed very low complete remission and overall response rates in patients with primary refractory disease (8% and 33%, respectively), as compared to those in patients who were in first partial remission (41% and 86%) or who had relapsed disease (50% and 75%) (p<0.01 in both cases). Overall, 60% and 65% of patients in the R+ and R- groups, respectively, underwent stem-cell transplantation after the salvage therapy. With a median follow-up of 29 months (range, 6-84), patients in the R+ group had significantly worse progression-free survival (17% vs. 57% at 3 years, p<0.0001) and overall survival (38% v 67% at 3 years, p=0.0005) than patients in the R- group. Prior exposure to rituximab was also an independent adverse prognostic factor for both progression-free survival (RR: 2.0; 95% CI: 1.2-3.3, p=0.008) and overall survival (RR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.3-3.9, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS R-ESHAP was associated with a high response rate in patients who were not refractory to upfront rituximab-based chemotherapy. However, the survival outcome was poor for patients previously exposed to rituximab, as compared to in those who had not previously been treated with rituximab.