Circulating Tumor DNA Predicts Progression-Free Survival in Hodgkin Lymphoma

Refining Risk Stratification in Hodgkin Lymphoma

The primary objective in managing Hodgkin lymphoma has shifted from simply achieving a cure to balancing high efficacy with the reduction of long-term treatment-related toxicities [1]. While interim positron emission tomography remains the standard for assessing early treatment response, its sensitivity and specificity for predicting relapse are not absolute, necessitating more precise biomarkers [1, 2]. Minimal residual disease monitoring, a technique that detects trace amounts of cancer-derived genetic material in the blood, has already demonstrated utility in other B-cell malignancies by identifying patients at high risk of early progression [3, 4, 5]. In the context of aggressive lymphomas, the ability to quantify molecular response early in the treatment course could facilitate a more personalized approach to therapy [6]. A recent study evaluates how a validated circulating tumor DNA sequencing assay might enhance these prognostic efforts during frontline treatment, potentially allowing clinicians to adjust therapies based on individual molecular risk.

Standardizing Molecular Assessment in the HD21 Trial

Modern management of Hodgkin lymphoma focuses on several critical objectives beyond achieving a cure. These include tailoring therapy to a patient's individual risk for relapse to reduce both acute and late toxicities, identifying candidates who might benefit from the early incorporation of targeted agents, and ensuring that treatment remains affordable on a global level. To achieve these goals, clinicians have explored minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment, a technique that detects trace amounts of cancer-derived genetic material in the blood through circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) sequencing. However, previous investigations into ctDNA for Hodgkin lymphoma have been limited by a lack of consistency regarding sampling time points, the validation of specific assays, and the clinical definitions used for MRD negativity. To address these inconsistencies, researchers conducted an analysis using samples from the German Hodgkin Study Group (GHSG) HD21 trial. The study utilized LymphoVista, a validated ctDNA sequencing assay designed specifically for genotyping and MRD monitoring in lymphoma. Employing a case-cohort design (a statistical approach that evaluates a random subcohort alongside all individuals who experienced a specific event, such as relapse), the investigators focused on blood samples obtained after exactly two cycles of chemotherapy, a time point designated as MRD-2. By standardizing the assessment at this specific interval, the study sought to determine if early molecular responses could reliably predict long-term outcomes and guide clinical decision-making.

Quantifying the Risk of Disease Progression

The analysis of the HD21 cohort demonstrated that the presence of circulating tumor DNA after two cycles of chemotherapy serves as a potent indicator of long-term clinical outcomes. Patients with a positive MRD-2 result experienced a 4-year progression-free survival of 36.7%, whereas those with a negative MRD-2 result achieved a 4-year progression-free survival of 82.2%. This disparity represents a significant clinical risk, as the hazard ratio for relapse, progression, or death in MRD-2-positive versus MRD-2-negative patients was 5.3 (95% confidence interval, 2.0 to 13.8; P = .0008). These figures underscore the high prognostic value of early molecular non-response, identifying a subset of patients who are more than five times as likely to experience disease progression compared to those who achieve early molecular clearance. To provide a more accurate reflection of the full trial population, the researchers applied inverse probability weighting (a statistical method used to adjust for the oversampling of relapsed cases in the case-cohort design, ensuring the results represent the entire study group). Following this adjustment, the 4-year progression-free survival for MRD-2-positive patients was 72.2%, compared to 95.3% for MRD-2-negative patients. These weighted results confirm that the presence of detectable ctDNA after two cycles remains a critical marker for identifying patients at a substantially higher risk of treatment failure. For practicing oncologists, this means a simple blood draw early in the treatment course could flag patients who might need closer surveillance or altered therapeutic strategies before clinical relapse occurs.

Integrating Molecular and Radiographic Data

The clinical utility of minimal residual disease assessment after two cycles of treatment (MRD-2) was evaluated specifically within the context of the GHSG HD21 trial, where patients received either BrECADD (brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, and dexamethasone) or eBEACOPP (escalated bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone). By utilizing the LymphoVista assay to detect ctDNA, the researchers demonstrated that this molecular tool allows for early outcome prognostication in Hodgkin lymphoma. This method of monitoring provides a biological snapshot of treatment response that complements traditional imaging, offering a more granular view of the residual tumor burden than is possible through visual inspection of radiographic scans alone. The study found that combining MRD-2 results with positron emission tomography after two cycles of chemotherapy (PET-2) identifies patients at the extreme ends of the risk spectrum, distinguishing those at very low risk from those at very high risk of relapse, progression, or death. This dual-modality approach leverages the high sensitivity of ctDNA sequencing alongside the established metabolic data from PET-2. Consequently, MRD-2 assessment can be used for treatment guidance either as an independent prognostic marker or in conjunction with PET-2 imaging. For the practicing clinician, these findings provide a framework for more precise risk stratification, potentially allowing for the early identification of patients who require treatment intensification or those who are candidates for de-escalation strategies to mitigate long-term toxicities.

References

1. Heger J, Mattlener J, Kaul H, et al. MRD-2 in the GHSG HD21 trial assessed by a validated circulating tumor DNA sequencing assay.. Blood. 2026. doi:10.1182/blood.2025031089

2. Bachy E, Rufibach K, Parreira J, Launonen A, Nielsen T, Hackshaw A. Phase III Clinical Trials in First-Line Follicular Lymphoma: A Review of Their Design and Interpretation.. Advances in therapy. 2021. doi:10.1007/s12325-021-01738-2

3. Fenske T, Wang XV, Till B, et al. Lack of Benefit of Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (auto-HCT) in Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) Patients (pts) in First Complete Remission (CR) with Undetectable Minimal Residual Disease (uMRD): Initial Report from the ECOG-ACRIN EA4151 Phase 3 Randomized Trial. Blood. 2024. doi:10.1182/blood-2024-212973

4. Davids M, Burke JM, Woyach J, et al. BRAVE: A Phase 2 Trial Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Venetoclax in Combination with Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients with First-Line Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia. Blood. 2024. doi:10.1182/blood-2024-201555

5. Kim WS, Kim TM, Cho S, et al. Odronextamab monotherapy in patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma: primary efficacy and safety analysis in phase 2 ELM-2 trial.. Nature cancer. 2025. doi:10.1038/s43018-025-00921-6

6. Herold S, Schmidt C, Visco C, et al. The MCL elderly III trial protocol: an international, randomized, open-label phase II trial to investigate the combinations of venetoclax, ibrutinib and rituximab or bendamustine, ibrutinib and rituximab in patients with treatment naive mantle cell lymphoma not eligible for dose-intensive treatment.. BMC cancer. 2025. doi:10.1186/s12885-025-14803-8