Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Editorial Policies
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

Routine Use of Bendamustine in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: An Observational Study

MARIJANA NINKOVIC, MICHAEL FIEGL, MICHAEL MIAN, PATRIZIA MONDELLO, FLORIAN KOCHER, CHRISTIAN WALDTHALER, IRMGARD VERDORFER, MICHAEL STEURER, GÜNTHER GASTL and ANDREAS PIRCHER
Anticancer Research September 2015, 35 (9) 5129-5139;
MARIJANA NINKOVIC
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: marijana.ninkovic@tirol-kliniken.at
MICHAEL FIEGL
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MICHAEL MIAN
2Department of Hematology and CBMT, Hospital of Bolzano, Bolzano, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
PATRIZIA MONDELLO
3Department of Human Pathology, University of Messina, Messina, Italy
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
FLORIAN KOCHER
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
CHRISTIAN WALDTHALER
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
IRMGARD VERDORFER
4Department of Medical Genetics, Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MICHAEL STEURER
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
GÜNTHER GASTL
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
ANDREAS PIRCHER
1Department of Internal Medicine V, Hematology and Oncology, Medical University of Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Bendamustine is an established treatment option in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and frequently used in Austria and Italy. Therefore, we analyzed 100 unselected, consecutive patients with CLL (treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory) receiving bendamustine in a real-life setting. Most patients were treated with bendamustine in combination with rituximab (BR). However, bendamustine monotherapy was additionally evaluated. Patients treated with BR had a significantly higher overall response rate of 76% (complete response=22%) when compared to those treated solely with bendamustine (overall response rate=50%; complete response=13%). Overall survival (OS) and progression -ree survival (PFS) were significantly lower in the bendamustine-treated group (OS=14.3 months; PFS=8.3 months) compared to the BR group (OS=42.7; PFS=22.5 months; both p<0.001). In multivariate analysis, patients with a good cytogenetic risk and those receiving BR had a significantly better OS. Grade 3/4 hematological complications were seen in 32% of the patients. Hence, bendamustine, especially in combination with rituximab, is an effective therapy with manageable toxicity for non-selected patients with CLL including those pre-treated with fludarabine and the elderly.

  • Bendamustine
  • rituximab
  • chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)
  • chemotherapy
  • immunotherapy

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is the most common type of adult leukemia in industrialized countries (1, 2). Despite the advent of new drugs (3, 4), it still remains an incurable disease, except for the few patients who are able to undergo allogeneic stem-cell transplantation (5-8). Only recently, bendamustine, first synthesized in the early 1960s, was to become an efficient treatment for hematological malignancies and it was approved for rituximab-refractory indolent lymphoma (9), CLL (10) and multiple myeloma (11).

Up until now, the use of bendamustine in CLL was mainly investigated in clinical trials in combination with rituximab (12). Current guidelines recommend a bendamustine-based therapy in patients with Binet stage C or Binet stage A and B with symptomatic disease and notably physically non-fit patients (11, 13, 14). Only a few real-life CLL populations, which were either treated with bendamustine monotherapy or in combination with rituximab, have been analyzed retrospectively (2, 13). Therefore, we herein present data on the toxicity and therapeutic efficacy in 100 unselected, consecutive patients with treatment-naïve or relapsed/refractory CLL treated with bendamustine-based therapy.

The objectives of the present study were to provide a descriptive analysis of a CLL population who received bendamustine-based therapy to evaluate patients' characteristics, including the spectrum of bendamustine-based therapy combinations used, and efficacy in terms of response and survival; as well as to determine toxicity in routine clinical use.

Patients and Methods

We retrospectively assessed 100 unselected, consecutive patients with CLL who received bendamustine either as monotherapy (n=24) or in combination with rituximab (n=76). The study was conducted according to the rules of the Medical University of Innsbruck Ethics Committee, as reported in other studies (15-17).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Progression-free survival according to treatment modality. a: The median PFS for patients treated with bendamustine and rituximab (BR) was 22.5 months (n=76) compared to 8.3 months for patients treated with bendamustine monotherapy (n=24; p<0.001). b: The median PFS for treatment-naïve patients on BR was 27.3 months (n=21) and for pre-treated patients was 17.7 months (n=55), while that of patients on bendamustine monotherapy was 8.3 months (n=24). When comparing all groups together the p-value was 0.001 (bendamustine vs. BR pre-treated [p=0.010], bendamustine vs. BR not pre-treated [p=0.001], BR pre-treated vs. BR not pre-treated [p=0.120]).

Data concerning the therapeutic regimen, efficacy, toxicity and follow-up were obtained directly from the clinical charts and from primary physicians. Data for 26 patients from a previous evaluation were updated and included in the study (18). The final data update was in September 2013. All analyses were performed using SPSS software version 20 (IBM Corp. Armonk, NY, USA).

Complete remission (CR), partial remission (PR), stable disease (SD) and progressive disease (PD) were classified according to the current International Work Group on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia guidelines for CLL (iWCLL) (7). Treatment-related adverse events were classified according to the Common Toxicity Criteria (CTC v.4) (19). Survival curves were plotted according to the Kaplan–Meier method. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from the initiation of bendamustine-based therapy until disease progression (PD) or death, whichever occurred first. Patients, who were lost to follow-up without any sign of progression, or were alive at the final data update, were censored at the time of last observation. Overall survival (OS) was measured from start of bendamustine-based therapy. Univariate survival comparisons between categorical variables were evaluated with the log-rank test. All parameters with a p-value of 0.05 or less in univariate analyses were included in a Cox proportional hazard model. The p-value of 0.05 or less was considered as significant in two-sided tests.

A subset of 41 patients' assessments of co-morbidity according to the cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) was available. The patient fitness groups according to CIRS were defined by the Alberta Health Services clinical practice guideline LYHE-007 (20).

Results

Patients' characteristics and mode of therapy. Forty-five patients (45%) were treated in Tyrol (Austria), and 31 (31%) and 24 (24%) in Bolzano and Messina (Italy), respectively. Bendamustine-based therapy was initiated between August 2007 and April 2013. Detailed patient characteristics are shown in Table I. The administered bendamustine dose ranged between 60 mg/m2 and 120 mg/m2 body surface area on day 1 and 2 every 4 weeks. Rituximab was usually administered on day one of each cycle, mostly at the recommended dose of 500 mg/m2. The median number of cycles administered was 5 in the BR group and 3.5 cycles in the bendamustine-treated group.

Bendamustine was administered as monotherapy (n=24, 24%) or in combination with rituximab (n=76, 76%). A total of 64 patients were male (64%). The median age was 73 years (range=41-88 years). The majority of the cases were treated in a higher therapy line (76%) and presented with Rai stages III and IV (27% and 40%, respectively), and were characterized by CIRS scores over 6 [n=32/41 evaluable patients (78%), median CIRS = 9].

Cytogenetic status, by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) was available in 81 patients. According to the algorithm of Döhner et al. (21), 44% of patients were high-risk, harboring 11q deletion (n=15) or 17p deletion (n=20), meaning that patients with these cytogenetic aberrations usually respond very poorly to conventional chemotherapy and have inferior survival. Most of the patients had a WHO performance status of 0-1 (87%) and presented without B-symptoms (61%) at the beginning of the treatment. Forty-three patients with CLL (43%) had previously received fludarabine, of whom seven (16%) had fludarabine-refractory disease according to the criteria proposed by Keating et al. (22). Bendamustine alone or in association with rituximab was administered in first, second and higher line of therapy in 24 (24%), 27 (27%) and 49 (49%) patients, with a median of one (range=0-7) previous therapy.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Overall survival (OS) according to treatment modality. a: The median OS in patients treated with bendamustine and rituximab (BR) was 42.7 months (n=76), compared to 14.3 months for those treated with bendamustine monotherapy (n=24; p<0.001). b: The median OS for treatment-naïve patients on BR was not reached (n=21) and for pre-treated patients on BR was 35.8 months (n=55), while that for patients on bendamustine monotherapy was 14.3 months (n=24). When comparing all groups together the p-value was lower than 0.001 (bendamustine vs. BR pre-treated [p=0.001], bendamustine vs. BR not pre-treated [p<0.001], BR pre-treated vs. BR not pre-treated [p=0.050]).

Response to therapy. Sufficient data for response assessment information were available for 87 patients. In 13 patients, response was not evaluable due to premature death (n=6), therapy switch (n=1), premature discontinuation due to toxicity (n=2), or due to loss to follow-up (n=4) (as shown in Table II). A response according to iWCLL criteria was achieved in 70 patients (ORR=70%) with CR in 20 (20%) and PR in 50 (50%). SD and PD, under therapy or within 2 months after the last dose of bendamustine, was observed in six (6%) and 11 (11%) cases, respectively. For response analysis, we divided the cohort into two subgroups, the group who received bendamustine in combination with rituximab and those who received solely bendamustine. Interestingly, patients receiving BR were characterized by significantly higher response, with ORR achieved in 58 patients (76%) (CR in 17 [22%]) than patients receiving solely bendamustine, with ORR in 12 (50%) patients, (CR in 3 [13%]) (p=0.014).

In the BR group, the most important factors determining ORR were cytogenetic risk category (p=0.004), the Rai staging (p=0.042) and the cumulative dose of bendamustine (p=0.005). Furthermore, patients over the age of 75 years, as well as the ones with a CIRS score greater than 6 and those with GFR less than 60 ml/min did not have any disadvantages in ORR compared to younger patients, those with a lower CIRS score and those with higher GFR. The bendamustine-treated cohort showed similar results, but some significant results concerning β2-microglobulin levels and CIRS score have to be regarded carefully, due to their one-sided distribution (shown in Table III).

Progression-free survival. The overall median PFS was 17.7 months. For the whole cohort, PFS was influenced by clinical characteristics and therapy-related factors, namely the FISH karyotype risk-group (p<0.001), type of bendamustine therapy (p<0.001), quality of response (p<0.001) and cumulative dose of applied bendamustine (p=0.005). The cohort treated with BR regimen reached a median PFS of 22.5 months, which is significantly longer than the median PFS of the cohort treated with bendamustine monotherapy (8.3 months; p<0.001; Figure 1a). When analyzing therapy line-related sub-groups, treatment-naïve patients (n=21) in the BR cohort had a tendency for a longer median PFS (27.3 months) than pre-treated patients in this cohort (n=55; PFS=17.7 months; p=0.120). Due to a relatively small cohort treated with first-line bendamustine monotherapy (n=3), this subgroup analysis was not included in the calculation (Figure 1b). The whole cohort PFS analyses are shown in Table IV. The statistically significant analyses for the whole cohort were also performed for the two treatment-associated subgroups and are shown in Table V.

Overall survival. For the whole CLL cohort, the median OS from the start of bendamustine-based therapy was 31.8 months. OS was influenced by several parameters and most importantly by the Rai stage (p=0.007), FISH karyotype risk-group (p<0.001), type of bendamustine therapy (p<0.001) and quality of response (p<0.001). In detail, the median OS was not reached for the cohort with 13q deletion only and the cohort with 17p deletion had the shortest median OS by far (8.3 months). As expected, the classification into patients with good risk (13q deletion, normal karyotype, trisomy 12) and poor risk (11q deletion and 17p deletion) cytogenetics proved to be of major prognostic importance (median OS not reached vs. 14.3 months, p<0.001). Patients who reached CR after a bendamustine-based therapy had the longest median OS (median not reached), when compared to the other categories. Those with PR and SD had similar outcomes (OS=35.8 and 31.8 months, respectively), whereas PD was associated with a significantly shorter median OS (9.2 months; p<0.001). In general, the BR cohort (n=76) was characterized by a superior median OS compared to the bendamustine-treated cohort (n=24; OS=42.7 months vs. 14.3 months; p<0.001; Figure 2a). The median OS of the subgroup of treatment-naïve patients (n=24; median OS not reached) was significantly superior to that of the pre-treated patients (n=76; OS=29.0 months; p=0.027). Furthermore, when analyzing solely the BR group, consisting of 76 patients, the treatment-naïve subgroup (n=21) had a significantly longer median OS compared to pre-treated patients (n=55) (not reached vs. 35.8 months; p=0.050; Figure 2b). The complete analysis is shown in Table IV and V.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Patient characteristics of all patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) divided into bendamustine-rituximab therapy cohort and bendamustine-monotherapy cohort.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Overall response rates (ORR) for all patients treated with bendamustine-monotherapy or bendamustine-rituximab therapy.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Overall response rates (ORR) for significant factors in the total cohort analysis, comparing bendamustine-rituximab therapy cohort to bendamustine-monotherapy cohort.

Multivariate analysis was performed for the whole cohort, and in the first model, only pre-treatment baseline characteristics that showed significance in the univariate analysis were included (n=81). Parameters independently influencing OS were lower Rai stage (p=0.030) and good-risk cytogenetics (p<0.001) (not shown in detail). The second model of multivariate analysis included pre-treatment baseline characteristics which were significant in the first multivariate analysis and treatment-related parameters that were significant in the univariate analysis (n=81) (shown in Table VI). The independent parameters associated with longer median OS were lower Rai stage (p=0.020); good-risk cytogenetics (p<0.001); administration of BR (p=0.009); and response to treatment (p=0.026).

Toxicity. All observed adverse events occurring from the beginning of bendamustine-based therapy until two months after the last administration were classified according to the CTC criteria version 4. Hematological and non-hematological adverse advents are detailed in Table VII. Briefly, grade 3/4 hematological adverse events were leukopenia in 26/91 patients (29%), neutropenia in 26/90 (29%), anemia in 14/94 (15%), and thrombocytopenia in 17/95 patients (18%). Febrile neutropenia was observed in 4/70 cases (6%). Among non-hematological toxicities, severe infections of grades 3/4 were reported in 21 out of 70 cases (30%), two of which were fatal. Nine patients died during bendamustine therapy or within 2 months after the last dose due to sepsis (n=2), rapid CLL progression (n=2), or unknown causes (n=5). Secondary malignancies, during or after therapy, occurred in five cases (peritoneal cancer of unknown primary; melanoma; gastric cancer; rectal cancer; myelodysplasia). Of note, interstitial pulmonary infiltrates considered potentially therapy-associated occurred only in patients receiving the BR combination treatment (n=4, 6%). We created sub-groups to check for adverse events (grade 3 or 4 leukocytopenia, neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and infection) by bendamustine-based therapy in different settings, defined by age, gender, prior treatment (none vs. any), prior fludarabine, fludarabine refractoriness, CIRS score (>6 vs. ≤6), GFR (≥70 vs. <70 ml/min), bulky disease and cytogenetic risk category. No significant results in these sub-group analyses (not shown in detail) were found. Furthermore, no significant difference in toxicity between the BR and bendamustine-treated cohorts was found in these subgroup analyses.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for all patients treated with bendamustine-monotherapy or bendamustine-rituximab therapy.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table V.

Progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for significant factors total cohort analysis, comparing bendamustine-rituximab therapy cohort to the bendamustine-monotherapy cohort.

Discussion

CLL is a lymphoproliferative disease occurring mostly in patients with advanced age and therefore the treatment decisions are essentially influenced by the comorbidities of the patients (4, 6, 23, 24). We aimed to study the use of bendamustine in a real-life CLL patient cohort in Austria and Italy. The patient cohort analyzed is well-balanced and reflects a real-world CLL cohort, with patients mostly in higher-therapy lines and with comorbidities (median CIRS score=9, median GFR=63 ml/min). In total, 76% of the patients were treated with bendamustine in combination with rituximab; 24% of the patients were treated with bendamustine monotherapy.

Another aim of this study was to evaluate patient response and survival, especially comparing patients who received BR and those who received bendamustine monotherapy. The ORR was in line with those of other studies, not only in the overall cohort, but also in the two sub-groups of patients which received BR or solely bendamustine. Of note, patients undergoing treatment with BR achieved significantly higher ORR (76%) and CR (22%) rates than those receiving single-agent bendamustine (ORR and CR of 50% and 13%, respectively). PFS and OS were also significantly lower in the single-agent bendamustine-treated group, with OS of 14.3 months and PFS of 8.3 months compared to the BR group with OS of 42.7 and PFS of 22.5 months (both p<0.001) (Figure 1 and 2). The results suggest that bendamustine should no longer be used as monotherapy in CLL, but that it has significant value as a chemotherapy backbone when combined with rituximab in older, less-fit patients with CLL, especially when considering that no significant differences in treatment-related toxicities were found. However, when comparing these sub-groups, we should bear in mind that the bendamustine monotherapy cohort included more high-risk patients in terms of cytogenetics, Rai stage and median number of previous therapies (shown in Table I).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VI.

Multivariate analysis of overall survival (OS) of the total cohort treated with bendamustine-monotherapy or bendamustine-rituximab therapy.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table VII.

Toxicities of all patients treated with bendamustine-monotherapy or bendamustine-rituximab therapy.

No prospective study comparing bendamustine monotherapy and the BR combination therapy has yet been conducted in CLL and probably never will be. However, recognizing the epidemiological imbalances mentioned above as well as the limitations of a retrospective study, the data presented here are in line with the improved outcomes observed in prospective first- (25, 26) and second-line trials (27). Hence, the addition of rituximab to bendamustine may have a similar positive impact on patient response in CLL as seen in other immunochemotherapy studies including purine analogs with/without cyclophosphamide as chemotherapy backbone. Other retrospective studies showed similar responses, whereas the prospective studies have a noticeable better response (ORR=98%, with CR=38%) (2, 13). Moreover, a relatively small sub-group of 21 patients received BR in the first-line setting and the treatment combination proved to be very effective in this setting (Figure 1b and 2b).

Interestingly, a CIRS score over 6, GFR less than 60 ml/min, and patient age greater than 75 years were not unfavorable in ORR, PFS, and OS. Although chemotherapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) is currently considered to be the most active therapeutic regimen in CLL (26), it is associated with considerable toxicity and is often too toxic for older patient populations. Therefore, we await the final results of the CLL-10 study comparing BR and FCR in fit patients with CLL (28).

The applied cumulative dose of bendamustine (>750 mg/m2) seems to be an important prognostic factor. In our study, dose application was no problem and in general bendamustine was well-tolerated (median number of applied cycles in the BR group was 5). The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities were hematological, with leukopenia (29%) and neutropenia (29%) being the most frequent. Anemia (15%) and thrombocytopenia (18%) were less common therapy-associated toxicities. Non-hematological toxicities were infections (30%) followed by skin toxicities (7%) and nausea (2%). The observed toxicities are common in bendamustine treatment and are in line with those already reported (2, 12, 29). Interestingly, toxicities did not occur more often in older patients, those with fludarabine-refractory disease, or those with a high CIRS score, or low GFR.

In conclusion, we describe an unselected population of patients with CLL (elderly patients, higher lines of therapy and mostly fludarabine pre-treated, with impaired renal function) in which bendamustine demonstrates a favorable efficacy and toxicity profile in routine clinical use.

Acknowledgements

This study was supported by the Verein für Tumorforschung, Innsbruck. We thank all centers participating and documenting patients for the study.

Footnotes

  • Conflicts of Interest

    MN, AP, MM, PM, FK, CW, and IV have no conflict of interest to disclose. MF received a grant for this observational study; MF, MS and GG received honoraria from Mundipharma Austria GmbH for lectures. MM received honoraria from Mundipharma for participation in an advisory board.

  • Received April 17, 2015.
  • Revision received May 19, 2015.
  • Accepted May 22, 2015.
  • Copyright© 2015 International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. John G. Delinassios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Knauf WU,
    2. Lissichkov T,
    3. Aldaoud A,
    4. Liberati A,
    5. Loscertales J,
    6. Herbrecht R,
    7. Juliusson G,
    8. Postner G,
    9. Gercheva L,
    10. Goranov S,
    11. Becker M,
    12. Fricke HJ,
    13. Huguet F,
    14. Del G, I,
    15. Klein P,
    16. Tremmel L,
    17. Merkle K,
    18. Montillo M
    : Phase III randomized study of bendamustine compared with chlorambucil in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 27: 4378-4384, 2009.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. ↵
    1. Kolibaba KS,
    2. Sterchele JA,
    3. Joshi AD,
    4. Forsyth M,
    5. Alwon E,
    6. Beygi H,
    7. Kennealey GT
    : Demographics, treatment patterns, safety, and real-world effectiveness in patients aged 70 years and over with chronic lymphocytic leukemia receiving bendamustine with or without rituximab: a retrospective study. Ther Adv Hematol 4: 157-171, 2013.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Byrd JC
    : Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: state of the art and beyond. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 12: 801-803, 2014.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  4. ↵
    1. Byrd JC,
    2. Jones JJ,
    3. Woyach JA,
    4. Johnson AJ,
    5. Flynn JM
    : Entering the era of targeted therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia: impact on the practicing clinician. J Clin Oncol 27: 3039-47, 2014.
    OpenUrl
  5. ↵
    1. Eichhorst B,
    2. Hallek M,
    3. Dreyling M
    : Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol 21 Suppl 5: v162-v164, 2010.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Hallek M
    : Chronic lymphocytic leukemia: 2013 update on diagnosis, risk stratification and treatment. Am J Hematol 88: 803-816, 2013.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Hallek M,
    2. Cheson BD,
    3. Catovsky D,
    4. Caligaris-Cappio F,
    5. Dighiero G,
    6. Dohner H,
    7. Hillmen P,
    8. Keating MJ,
    9. Montserrat E,
    10. Rai KR,
    11. Kipps TJ
    : Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a report from the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia updating the National Cancer Institute-Working Group 1996 guidelines. Blood 111: 5446-5456, 2008.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    1. Dreger P,
    2. Corradini P,
    3. Kimby E,
    4. Michallet M,
    5. Milligan D,
    6. Schetelig J,
    7. Wiktor-Jedrzejczak W,
    8. Niederwieser D,
    9. Hallek M,
    10. Montserrat E
    : Indications for allogeneic stem cell transplantation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: the EBMT transplant consensus. Leukemia 21: 12-17, 2007.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Rummel MJ,
    2. Niederle N,
    3. Maschmeyer G,
    4. Banat GA,
    5. von GU,
    6. Losem C,
    7. Kofahl-Krause D,
    8. Heil G,
    9. Welslau M,
    10. Balser C,
    11. Kaiser U,
    12. Weidmann E,
    13. Durk H,
    14. Ballo H,
    15. Stauch M,
    16. Roller F,
    17. Barth J,
    18. Hoelzer D,
    19. Hinke A,
    20. Brugger W
    : Bendamustine plus rituximab versus CHOP plus rituximab as first-line treatment for patients with indolent and mantle-cell lymphomas: an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase III non-inferiority trial. Lancet 381: 1203-1210, 2013.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Hallek M
    : State-of-the-art treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Hematology Am Soc Hematol Educ Program 440-449, 2009.
  11. ↵
    1. Cheson BD,
    2. Wendtner CM,
    3. Pieper A,
    4. Dreyling M,
    5. Friedberg J,
    6. Hoelzer D,
    7. Moreau P,
    8. Gribben J,
    9. Knop S,
    10. Montillo M,
    11. Rummel M
    : Optimal use of bendamustine in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphomas, and multiple myeloma: treatment recommendations from an international consensus panel. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 10: 21-27, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Fischer K,
    2. Cramer P,
    3. Busch R,
    4. Bottcher S,
    5. Bahlo J,
    6. Schubert J,
    7. Pfluger KH,
    8. Schott S,
    9. Goede V,
    10. Isfort S,
    11. von TJ,
    12. Fink AM,
    13. Buhler A,
    14. Winkler D,
    15. Kreuzer KA,
    16. Staib P,
    17. Ritgen M,
    18. Kneba M,
    19. Dohner H,
    20. Eichhorst BF,
    21. Hallek M,
    22. Stilgenbauer S,
    23. Wendtner CM
    : Bendamustine in combination with rituximab for previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter phase II trial of the German Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Study Group. J Clin Oncol 30: 3209-3216, 2012.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. ↵
    1. Knauf W,
    2. Abenhardt W,
    3. Dorfel S,
    4. Meyer D,
    5. Grugel R,
    6. Munz M,
    7. Hartmann H,
    8. Marschner N
    : Routine treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia by office-based haematologists in Germany-data from the Prospective Tumour Registry Lymphatic Neoplasms. Hematol Oncol 1:15-22, 2015.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    NCCN Guidelines CLL/SLL, last update 2014. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp
  15. ↵
    1. Fiegl M,
    2. Stauder R,
    3. Steurer M,
    4. Mian M,
    5. Hopfinger G,
    6. Brychtova Y,
    7. Skrabs C,
    8. Zabernigg A,
    9. Schmid F,
    10. Haslbaur F,
    11. Winder G,
    12. Walder A,
    13. Lang A,
    14. Voskova D,
    15. Greil R,
    16. Mayer J,
    17. Gastl G
    : Alemtuzumab in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: final results of a large observational multicenter study in mostly pretreated patients. Ann Hematol 93: 267-277, 2014.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Waldthaler C,
    2. Stauder R,
    3. Schnallinger M,
    4. Schreieck S,
    5. Hager J,
    6. Oexle H,
    7. Zangerl G,
    8. Verdorfer I,
    9. Zabernigg A,
    10. Gastl G,
    11. Fiegl M
    : Routine use of bendamustine and rituximab combination therapy in consecutive patients with lymphoproliferative diseases: a survey from Tyrolean hospitals. Wien Klin Wochenschr 123: 269-275, 2011.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Fiegl M,
    2. Erdel M,
    3. Tinhofer I,
    4. Brychtova Y,
    5. Panovska A,
    6. Doubek M,
    7. Eigenberger K,
    8. Fonatsch C,
    9. Hopfinger G,
    10. Muhlberger H,
    11. Zabernigg A,
    12. Falkner F,
    13. Gastl G,
    14. Mayer J,
    15. Greil R
    : Clinical outcome of pretreated B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia following alemtuzumab therapy: a retrospective study on various cytogenetic risk categories. Ann Oncol 21: 2410-2419, 2010.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  17. ↵
    1. Zaja F,
    2. Mian M,
    3. Volpetti S,
    4. Visco C,
    5. Sissa C,
    6. Nichele I,
    7. Castelli M,
    8. Ambrosetti A,
    9. Puglisi S,
    10. Fanin R,
    11. Cortelazzo S,
    12. Pizzolo G,
    13. Trentin L,
    14. Rodeghiero F,
    15. Paolini R,
    16. Vivaldi P,
    17. Sancetta R,
    18. Isola M,
    19. Semenzato G
    : Bendamustine in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: outcome according to different clinical and biological prognostic factors in the everyday clinical practice. Am J Hematol 88: 955-960, 2013.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  18. ↵
    1. US Department of Health,
    2. National Cancer Institut
    . Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 (CTCAE). NIH Publication No.09-5410. 1-5-2009.
  19. ↵
    1. Linn BS,
    2. Linn MW,
    3. Gurel L
    : Cumulative illness rating scale. J Am Geriatr Soc 16: 622-626, 1968.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Dohner H,
    2. Stilgenbauer S,
    3. Benner A,
    4. Leupolt E,
    5. Krober A,
    6. Bullinger L,
    7. Dohner K,
    8. Bentz M,
    9. Lichter P
    : Genomic aberrations and survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. N Engl J Med 343: 1910-1916, 2000.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. ↵
    1. Keating MJ,
    2. O'Brien S,
    3. Kontoyiannis D,
    4. Plunkett W,
    5. Koller C,
    6. Beran M,
    7. Lerner S,
    8. Kantarjian H
    : Results of first salvage therapy for patients refractory to a fludarabine regimen in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma 43: 1755-1762, 2002.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. ↵
    1. Hallek M,
    2. Pflug N
    : State of the art treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Blood Rev 25: 1-9, 2011.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Eichhorst B,
    2. Goede V,
    3. Hallek M
    : Treatment of elderly patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leuk Lymphoma 50: 171-178, 2009.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Byrd JC,
    2. Rai K,
    3. Peterson BL,
    4. Appelbaum FR,
    5. Morrison VA,
    6. Kolitz JE,
    7. Shepherd L,
    8. Hines JD,
    9. Schiffer CA,
    10. Larson RA
    : Addition of rituximab to fludarabine may prolong progression-free survival and overall survival in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia: an updated retrospective comparative analysis of CALGB 9712 and CALGB 9011. Blood 105: 49-53, 2005.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. ↵
    1. Hallek M,
    2. Fischer K,
    3. Fingerle-Rowson G,
    4. Fink AM,
    5. Busch R,
    6. Mayer J,
    7. Hensel M,
    8. Hopfinger G,
    9. Hess G,
    10. von GU,
    11. Bergmann M,
    12. Catalano J,
    13. Zinzani PL,
    14. Caligaris-Cappio F,
    15. Seymour JF,
    16. Berrebi A,
    17. Jager U,
    18. Cazin B,
    19. Trneny M,
    20. Westermann A,
    21. Wendtner CM,
    22. Eichhorst BF,
    23. Staib P,
    24. Buhler A,
    25. Winkler D,
    26. Zenz T,
    27. Bottcher S,
    28. Ritgen M,
    29. Mendila M,
    30. Kneba M,
    31. Dohner H,
    32. Stilgenbauer S
    : Addition of rituximab to fludarabine and cyclophosphamide in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 376: 1164-1174, 2010.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Robak T,
    2. Dmoszynska A,
    3. Solal-Celigny P,
    4. Warzocha K,
    5. Loscertales J,
    6. Catalano J,
    7. Afanasiev BV,
    8. Larratt L,
    9. Geisler CH,
    10. Montillo M,
    11. Zyuzgin I,
    12. Ganly PS,
    13. Dartigeas C,
    14. Rosta A,
    15. Maurer J,
    16. Mendila M,
    17. Saville MW,
    18. Valente N,
    19. Wenger MK,
    20. Moiseev SI
    : Rituximab plus fludarabine and cyclophosphamide prolongs progression-free survival compared with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide alone in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 28: 1756-1765, 2010.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. ↵
    1. Eichhorst B,
    2. Fink AM,
    3. Busch R,
    4. Lange E,
    5. Köppler H,
    6. Kiehl MG,
    7. Sökler M,
    8. Schlag R,
    9. Vehling-Kaiser U,
    10. Köchling G,
    11. Plöger C,
    12. Gregor M,
    13. Plesner T,
    14. Trneny M,
    15. Fischer K,
    16. Göhner H,
    17. Kneba M,
    18. Wendtner C,
    19. Klapper W,
    20. Kreuzer KA,
    21. Stilgenbauer S,
    22. Böttcher S,
    23. Hallek M
    : Chemoimmunotherapy with fludarabine (F), cyclophosphamide (C), and rituximab (R) (FCR) versus bendamustine and rituximab (BR) in previously untreated and physically fit patients (pts) with advanced chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL): Results of a planned interim analysis of the CLL10 trial. Blood Proc ASH: Abstract 526: 2013.
  28. ↵
    1. Fischer K,
    2. Cramer P,
    3. Busch R,
    4. Stilgenbauer S,
    5. Bahlo J,
    6. Schweighofer CD,
    7. Bottcher S,
    8. Staib P,
    9. Kiehl M,
    10. Eckart MJ,
    11. Kranz G,
    12. Goede V,
    13. Elter T,
    14. Buhler A,
    15. Winkler D,
    16. Kneba M,
    17. Dohner H,
    18. Eichhorst BF,
    19. Hallek M,
    20. Wendtner CM
    : Bendamustine combined with rituximab in patients with relapsed and/or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a multicenter phase II trial of the German Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Study Group. J Clin Oncol 29: 3559-3566, 2011.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 35 (9)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 35, Issue 9
September 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Anticancer Research.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Routine Use of Bendamustine in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: An Observational Study
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 5 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Routine Use of Bendamustine in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: An Observational Study
MARIJANA NINKOVIC, MICHAEL FIEGL, MICHAEL MIAN, PATRIZIA MONDELLO, FLORIAN KOCHER, CHRISTIAN WALDTHALER, IRMGARD VERDORFER, MICHAEL STEURER, GÜNTHER GASTL, ANDREAS PIRCHER
Anticancer Research Sep 2015, 35 (9) 5129-5139;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
Routine Use of Bendamustine in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: An Observational Study
MARIJANA NINKOVIC, MICHAEL FIEGL, MICHAEL MIAN, PATRIZIA MONDELLO, FLORIAN KOCHER, CHRISTIAN WALDTHALER, IRMGARD VERDORFER, MICHAEL STEURER, GÜNTHER GASTL, ANDREAS PIRCHER
Anticancer Research Sep 2015, 35 (9) 5129-5139;
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgements
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Does Multidisciplinary Therapy at a Sarcoma Center Improve the Prognosis of Patients With Soft Tissue Sarcoma? A Retrospective Case Study at a Single Institute
  • Clinicopathological Significance and Predictive Value of High Intratumoral Tumor Budding in Patients With Breast Carcinoma Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy
  • Successful Prevention of Tumour Lysis Syndrome in HER2-positive Breast Cancer: Case Report and Literature Review
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Bendamustine
  • rituximab
  • chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)
  • chemotherapy
  • Immunotherapy
Anticancer Research

© 2023 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire