Table 1.

Summary of IRC-assessed disease responses by MZL subtypes (efficacy analysis set)

Extranodal (MALT) (n = 25)Nodal (n = 25)Splenic (n = 12)Unknown (n = 4)Total (N = 66)
ORR, % (95% CI)  64.0 (42.5-82.0) 76.0 (54.9-90.6) 66.7 (34.9-90.1) 50.0 (6.8-93.2) 68.2 (55.6-79.1) 
Best overall response, n (%)      
CR 10 (40.0) 5 (20.0) 1 (8.3) 1 (25.0) 17 (25.8) 
PR 6 (24.0) 14 (56.0) 7 (58.3) 1 (25.0) 28 (42.4) 
Stable disease 4 (16.0) 5 (20.0) 3 (25.0) 1 (25.0) 13 (19.7) 
Progressive disease 3 (12.0) 1 (4.0) 1 (8.3) 1 (25.0) 6 (9.1) 
Nonprogressive disease§  1 (4.0) 1 (1.5) 
Discontinued study before first assessment 1 (4.0) 1 (1.5) 
Median time to response, mo (IQR) 2.8 (2.7-2.9) 2.8 (2.7-3.8) 3.6 (2.7-6.0) 2.7 (2.6-2.8) 2.8 (2.7-3.7) 
Extranodal (MALT) (n = 25)Nodal (n = 25)Splenic (n = 12)Unknown (n = 4)Total (N = 66)
ORR, % (95% CI)  64.0 (42.5-82.0) 76.0 (54.9-90.6) 66.7 (34.9-90.1) 50.0 (6.8-93.2) 68.2 (55.6-79.1) 
Best overall response, n (%)      
CR 10 (40.0) 5 (20.0) 1 (8.3) 1 (25.0) 17 (25.8) 
PR 6 (24.0) 14 (56.0) 7 (58.3) 1 (25.0) 28 (42.4) 
Stable disease 4 (16.0) 5 (20.0) 3 (25.0) 1 (25.0) 13 (19.7) 
Progressive disease 3 (12.0) 1 (4.0) 1 (8.3) 1 (25.0) 6 (9.1) 
Nonprogressive disease§  1 (4.0) 1 (1.5) 
Discontinued study before first assessment 1 (4.0) 1 (1.5) 
Median time to response, mo (IQR) 2.8 (2.7-2.9) 2.8 (2.7-3.8) 3.6 (2.7-6.0) 2.7 (2.6-2.8) 2.8 (2.7-3.7) 

MALT, mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue.

These patients presented with both nodal and extranodal lesions; therefore, the study sites were unable to classify the MZL subtype.

Two patients were excluded from the efficacy analysis set because central review determined their diagnosis as diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

95% CIs were calculated using 2-sided Clopper-Pearson methodology.

§

One patient was classified as having “nonprogressive disease” because of a missed PET scan at cycle 3 (CT scan showed stable disease).

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal