Patient-friendly, non-technical summary of a year of research

Waldenström macroglobulinemia: 2026 so far

Last updated: October 10, 2026
Bottom line
From January 2026 to September 2026, the clearest treatment evidence focused on BTK inhibitors (a targeted drug class that blocks Bruton tyrosine kinase). Comparative studies and longer follow-up helped spell out differences in how quickly and how deeply people respond, and in specific safety risks. At the same time, newer BTK options and combinations showed signs of activity, but also raised notable toxicity concerns. Real-world cohorts also continued to show long-lasting disease control with rituximab-based chemoimmunotherapy (rituximab plus chemotherapy), and early relapse within 24 months repeatedly pointed to a higher-risk disease pattern.

What changed in 2026 so far

  • Longer follow-up head-to-head zanubrutinib vs ibrutinib response depth/speed and discontinuation differences
  • Longer-term acalabrutinib durability and clarified safety signals (including rare severe bleeding event)
  • Pirtobrutinib trial activity in relapsed/refractory WM with frequent serious adverse events reported
  • Fixed-duration ibrutinib plus venetoclax activity tempered by early stop for serious/fatal arrhythmias
  • Multiple real-world frontline comparisons emphasizing time-to-next-treatment differences more than overall survival
  • Growing set of WM monitoring studies where mutation levels and imaging can diverge from IgM during BTK therapy

Each section is tagged with our read of how settled the evidence is:

Strong evidence
randomized trials, or consistent findings across several studies
Moderate evidence
real-world or observational data; suggestive but not proven
Early evidence
small or preliminary results; the direction is still unclear
Uncertain
mixed results, or a key study did not show a benefit

BTK inhibitors: studies sharpened the trade-offs in response and side effects

Moderate evidence

Comparative and longer follow-up data clarified BTK trade-offs.

In the months covered, the biggest step forward was a clearer picture of how different BTK inhibitors compare, both in response and in side effects. With extended ASPEN phase III follow-up (phase III = a late-stage trial comparing treatments), rates of very good partial or complete response stayed numerically higher with zanubrutinib than with ibrutinib at each reported time point, the median time to reach a very deep response was shorter (6.7 vs 16.6 months), and fewer people stopped zanubrutinib because of side effects. The side-effect patterns also differed: atrial fibrillation/flutter (an irregular heart rhythm) was more common with ibrutinib, while neutropenia (low neutrophil white blood cells) was more common with zanubrutinib. Longer follow-up from a phase 2 acalabrutinib study (phase 2 = a mid-stage trial testing whether a treatment works and is safe) supported sustained disease control out to about 5 years, and it also reported cardiac events and one treatment-related grade 5 intracranial hematoma (bleeding inside the skull). Real-world analyses and cohorts supported that BTK inhibitors can work in routine care, while also showing that infections and other complications during therapy can be a meaningful part of the treatment experience.

Research covered in: February 2026, April 2026, May 2026, July 2026

First-treatment comparisons: time to next treatment stood out more than survival

Moderate evidence

Retrospective cohorts compared frontline regimens using response and durability.

From January 2026 to September 2026, several retrospective routine-care comparisons (looking back at real-world records) added detail on how common first treatments differ in response rates and how long control lasts. In one newly diagnosed cohort comparison, BTK inhibitor regimens had the highest major response rate and a longer time to next treatment. Overall survival was reported as similar across groups, and differences in WM-related death were not statistically certain. Another real-world cohort reported that rituximab-based combinations tended to have longer disease control, while some other regimens had quicker early responses but shorter control in that dataset. Taken together, these reports mainly highlight which outcomes differed most in routine care (depth/speed of response and time-to-next-treatment), rather than proving one best first regimen for everyone.

Research covered in: August 2026, September 2026

Beyond standard BTK therapy: activity signals came with clear safety cautions

Early evidence

Newer agents and non-BTK regimens showed activity with caveats.

In the months covered, several reports suggested WM can still respond after prior therapies, including after standard covalent BTK inhibitors (BTK drugs that bind permanently to their target). At the same time, safety signals and study-design limits were hard to ignore. In the BRUIN phase 1/2 study (phase 1/2 = early-stage testing of dosing, safety, and early effectiveness), pirtobrutinib led to responses in relapsed/refractory WM (disease that has returned or not responded), including in people previously treated with covalent BTK inhibitors. Serious (grade >=3) side effects were common, and a small number of treatment-emergent deaths were reported. A fixed-duration ibrutinib plus venetoclax study showed deep responses for some people, but it stopped early because of serious heart rhythm problems, including fatal events. Other non-BTK approaches also showed activity in small or single-arm reports (for example, bortezomib-based regimens after BTK inhibitors; obinutuzumab plus bendamustine in a group that included WM), with low blood counts and infections repeatedly showing up as important side effects to plan around.

Research covered in: March 2026, May 2026, June 2026

Complications in focus: infections and IgM-driven bleeding or hyperviscosity

Moderate evidence

Reports repeatedly highlighted infections and IgM-driven complications.

Across January 2026 to September 2026 reports, day-to-day complications were often about infections and IgM-related bleeding or hyperviscosity (blood that becomes too thick). Real-world and registry-based reports continued to list infections among major causes of death. A database analysis described invasive fungal infections (serious deep fungal infections) during BTK inhibitor therapy as uncommon, while several single-patient reports described severe fungal infections on BTK inhibitors. Case-based and small-collection evidence also highlighted acquired von Willebrand syndrome (a bleeding problem from low/poor von Willebrand factor) and hyperviscosity presentations. This included one acquired von Willebrand syndrome case in which bleeding worsened after zanubrutinib was added, and individual cases in which therapeutic plasma exchange (a procedure that removes proteins from blood plasma) improved hyperviscosity symptoms. In ICU-level illness, infections were a leading cause of death in a WM ICU cohort, showing how a severe infection episode can become a defining event when it happens.

Research covered in: January 2026, April 2026, July 2026, August 2026, September 2026

Tracking WM: mutation tests and imaging sometimes disagreed with IgM on BTK therapy

Early evidence

Mutation and imaging measures often diverged from IgM on BTK.

In the months covered, several studies looked beyond IgM alone for monitoring, especially to explain why test results can disagree during BTK inhibitor treatment. Exploratory analyses suggested MYD88/CXCR4 mutation levels (DNA changes in common WM genes) -- especially in bone marrow -- may reflect marrow disease burden more closely than IgM changes. Additional assay-development work reported mutation allele frequency patterns (the fraction of DNA carrying a mutation) that were higher in symptomatic WM and fell in samples from people described as responding to ibrutinib, with cell-free DNA (DNA fragments circulating in blood) sometimes very low. Imaging work using 68Ga-pentixafor PET/CT (a PET scan using a specific tracer) matched standard blood-based response categories after chemoimmunotherapy, but it was often inconsistent during BTK inhibitor therapy. This means that in research, and sometimes in complex clinical situations, more than one type of measurement may be needed to interpret response, particularly for people on BTK inhibitors.

Research covered in: January 2026, May 2026, June 2026

What to watch

Open questions researchers are actively pursuing:

  • HZ-A-018 (newer BTK inhibitor): early phase I dosing/safety reported in a mixed B-cell cancer group; WM-specific efficacy and comparative safety remain unclear (2026-7).
  • How best to manage therapy transitions off BTK inhibitors, including reports of IgM rebound during some switches (especially when venetoclax started without overlap in one dataset) (2026-3).
  • Whether pirtobrutinib’s high response rates in relapsed/refractory WM translate into durable control given frequent serious adverse events and reported treatment-emergent deaths (2026-5).
  • How to balance bleeding risk in acquired von Willebrand syndrome cases where BTK inhibitors were reported to worsen bleeding in some case reports/series (2026-4).
  • Which monitoring approach (IgM, marrow/blood mutation levels, PET/CT methods) best predicts patient-relevant outcomes during BTK inhibitor therapy, since measures can diverge (2026-1, 2026-5, 2026-6).

Important information

  • This document summarizes recent research from PubMed-indexed publications using automated methods.
  • It is intended for educational purposes and does not replace medical advice.
  • Links to the original studies are provided via PubMed, where readers can explore abstracts and, when available, access full-text articles.
  • Some studies may include additional details that were not accessible for this summary.
  • Readers seeking more complete detail or context may find it helpful to review the original studies directly.

This summary covers the year so far and will be updated as new monthly reports are published.

Last updated: October 10, 2026