High-Dose Methotrexate as CNS Prophylaxis in Ultra High-Risk Large B-Cell Lymphoma: An International Multicenter Analysis

Read full text
Authors: Matthew R. Wilson, Katharine Louise Lewis, Amy Kirkwood, Kate Cwynarski, Chan Yoon Cheah, Tarec C. El-Galaly, Diego R. Villa, Kerry J. J. Savage, Paola Ghione, Sabela Bobillo, Karin Ekstrom Ekstroem Smedby, Sara Harrysson
+27 more Marek Trněný, Magdalena Klánová, Robert Puckrin, Christopher Paul Fox, Mark Bishton, Gita Thanarajasingam, Nicole Wong Doo, Greg Hapgood, Carole Soussain, Sylvain Choquet, Michael John Dickinson, Dipti Talaulikar, Sanjay De Mel, Gavin Preston, Matthew J. Ahearne, Eliza Anne Hawkes, Elisabeth Schorb, Aline Clavert, Matthew Ku, Anna Guidetti, Mayur Subhash Narkhede, Teresa Calimeri, Éric Durot, Jeffrey Smith, Loïc Renaud, Pam McKay, Toby Andrew Eyre
Cited by: 1
References: 37

Abstract

PURPOSE In large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL), use of high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) to prevent CNS relapse (so-called CNS prophylaxis) remains controversial. International guidelines continue to recommend HD-MTX in patients deemed ultra high risk (UHR) because of a lack of robust data specific to these subgroups. This study was designed to examine the impact of HD-MTX specifically in UHR patients. METHODS Data from two previous retrospective analyses were combined to produce a cohort of UHR patients (≥1 of the following criteria: CNS international prognostic index score 5-6; testicular, renal/adrenal, or breast involvement; ≥3 extranodal sites), treated with or without HD-MTX. The primary outcome was CNS relapse rate (isolated or concurrent with systemic relapse) measured from diagnosis with additional landmark analysis of all responding patients with no progression event at 6 months. RESULTS Analyses were performed on 1,923 patients meeting UHR criteria. No significant difference in 3-year CNS relapse rate was observed between no HD-MTX (n = 1,051) versus HD-MTX patients (n = 872), including in multivariable analyses adjusting for baseline characteristics (3-year rate, 9.3% v 8.1%; adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.13 [95% CI, 0.82 to 1.57]). Analyses restricted to isolated CNS relapse also confirmed no difference (5.9% v 5.7%; adjusted HR, 1.03 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.53]). In the landmark analysis (no HD-MTX n = 782, HD-MTX n = 773), no difference in 3-year CNS relapse was observed (6.7% v 6.6%, adjusted HR, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.62 to 1.44]). CONCLUSION To our knowledge, this is the largest international comparative data set of patients with LBCL with UHR features showing no significant reduction in CNS relapse with HD-MTX in all UHR or in any individual subgroup. Despite inherent limitations of retrospective analyses, the data strongly support previous studies in suggesting HD-MTX prophylaxis has no meaningful benefit for most patients.

Fields of Study & Subjects

CNS Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment Lymphoma Diagnosis and Treatment Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research

Publication details

Journal / source
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Volume
44
Issue
24
Pages
2290–2302
Publication date
11 June 2026
Language
EN