Safety and Efficacy Data for Combined Checkpoint Inhibition with Ipilimumab (Ipi) and Nivolumab (Nivo) As Consolidation Following Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) for High-Risk Hematological Malignancies — CPIT-001 Trial

Abstract Rationale: ASCT remains a standard-of-care as consolidation or salvage for multiple myeloma (MM), post-salvage consolidation for Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) and upfront consolidation or salvage for Peripheral T-Cell Lymphomas (PTCL) Pts with high-risk disease still show poor outcome and frequent progression within the first 18 months. Maintenance strategies post ASCT, particularly in lymphomas, have failed to show benefit, underlining the need for novel approaches to help disease control following ASCT. We have previously reported on the preliminary safety and efficacy of checkpoint inhibitor consolidation with Ipi and Nivo following ASCT trying to take advantage of the immunological milieu during post-ASCT recovery (Skarbnik et al., ASH 2017). Here we present updated data from our Phase I CPIT-001 trial. Methods: Pts with high-risk DLBCL, PTCL or MM (as defined in Table 1, divided in cohorts) were eligible if they experienced at least stable disease after most recent salvage therapy (NHL, PTCL or relapsed MM) or after induction therapy for high-risk MM. Pts were enrolled prior to ASCT, starting in July 2016. All pts with DLBCL/PTCL received BEAM (carmustine 300 mg/m2 day -6, etoposide 200 mg/m2 and cytarabine 200 mg/m2 days -5 to -2, melphalan 140 mg/m2 day -1) as conditioning regimen for ASCT, all pts with MM received melphalan 200 mg/m2 on day -1 For pts who achieved appropriate hematologic recovery (ANC >800/mm3 and platelets > 20,000/mm3), Ipi/Nivo were started between days 14 and 28 post ASCT. The infusion schedule was: Ipi: 1 mg/kg; 6 doses Weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 16, 22Nivo: 3 mg/kg; 12 doses Weeks 1, 4, 7, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 Primary objectives were: Safety profile evaluation; PFS and OS at 18 months (PFS18 and OS18). Cox proportional hazards regression was utilized to determine predictors of outcome. Results: 31 pts received at least one dose of Ipi/Nivo following ASCT and were included in the intent-to-treat population. Median follow up for the whole cohort is 16 months. As of February 2018, the FDA has halted all studies including checkpoint inhibitors for pts with MM. At that time, only one pt with MM was actively receiving Ipi/Nivo, which was then discontinued. At 18 months post ASCT, estimated PFS for the entire cohort was 67% and OS was 84% (Figures 1 and 2). Disease-specific PFS18 and OS18 are described in Table 2. At study entry, 48% of pts were in CR (NHLs) or stringent CR (sCR, MMs). At most recent follow-up (range 2-25 months) 71% of pts were in CR (NHL) or sCR (MM). Disease status at study entry (i.e. CR vs <CR) didn't correlate with PFS nor OS. 65% of pts developed immune-related adverse events (irAEs) grade 2 or higher, requiring treatment with systemic steroids. Most common irAEs of any grade were: colitis (58%), rash (48%), thrombocytopenia (45%), anemia (45%) and transaminitis (32%). One pt (3%) died from complications of pneumonitis related to study drugs. All other irAEs resolved. Median time from 1st Ipi/Nivo to development of irAEs was 4 weeks. Median time to improvement to Grade 1 or baseline was 1 week after high-dose steroids were initiated. Treatment-related AEs of any grade that led to discontinuation of Ipi/Nivo occurred in 6 pts (19%). Development of irAEs, use of steroids or length of steroid-exposure did not correlate with PFS or OS. Conclusion: At 18 months post-ASCT, PFS for pts with high-risk hematological malignancies is 67%. This number underscores the potential for longer remissions by associating checkpoint inhibition with ASCT. For patients in the transplant-naïve MM with high-risk cytogenetics cohort, the 71% PFS18 (fig 3) is particularly striking, when compared to median PFS of 13-15 months in previous reports of ASCT alone in this patient population (Sonneveld et al, Blood 2016). In addition, the primary-refractory DLBCL population (43% of which were not in CR at time of ASCT) presented with a PFS18 of 83% (fig 4), while the reported PFS18 for this patient population with ASCT alone is 50% (Crump et al, Blood 2017). The cohort of pts with DLBCL relapsed within 1 year of induction had the poorest outcomes, possibly related to these pts being the most heavily pretreated in the whole cohort (median of 3 prior lines of therapy), with 57% of pts in this cohort refractory to most recent line of therapy. The manageable toxicity profile, coupled with the encouraging efficacy outcomes warrant further evaluation of this approach in a Phase II trial, which is currently planned. Disclosures Skarbnik: Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Munshi:Kite: Speakers Bureau. Siegel:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Feldman:Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; KITE: Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Biran:BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Research Funding. Atkins:BMS: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Overview of Primary and Secondary Myelofibrosis in Young Adults: Genomic Characteristics, Treatment Strategies and Outcomes

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123536 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4177-4177

Author(s):

Andrew T Kuykendall ◽

Chetasi Talati ◽

Kendra L. Sweet ◽

Eric Padron ◽

David A Sallman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Treatment Strategies ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Treatment History ◽

Secondary Myelofibrosis

Introduction: Primary and secondary myelofibrosis (MF) [i.e. occurring after a prior diagnosis of polycythemia vera [PV] or essential thrombocythemia (ET)] are myeloid malignancies often diagnosed in the 6th and 7th decade of life. In the rare occurrence that younger patients receive this diagnosis, prognostic recommendations are poorly extrapolated and optimal treatment strategies are unclear. Prior studies assessing young MF patients have suggested a more indolent course for this cohort. Here we aim to analyze our experience with young MF patients in terms of genetic makeup, treatment history, and outcomes. Methods: We assessed a database of primary and secondary MF patients who presented to our center between 1/2000 and 6/2019. We identified patients who were 50 years or younger at the time of MF diagnosis. Clinical and genetic features along with treatment history and outcomes were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier method was used for survival analysis. Patients surviving at 240 months after diagnosis were censored at that time. Results: Among 599 MF patients, 63 (11%) were ≤50 at the time of diagnosis. Median age at diagnosis was 43.6 years (yr). Median time from diagnosis to first presentation to our institution was 4.2 months (mo) (range 0-35 yr). Thirty-eight (60%) and 44 (70%) were seen within 1 and 5 years of diagnosis, respectively. Females accounted for 62% (n = 39) of patients. Forty-five (71%) patients had primary MF, 4 (6%) had post-PV MF and 13 (21%) post-ET MF. Median follow-up for the cohort was 94.9 mo. Among 62 patients in whom IPSS at diagnosis could be calculated, 20 (32%) were low, 27 (44%) intermediate-1, 12 (19%) intermediate-2, and 3 (5%) high-risk. JAK2 mutation was detected in 22/60 (37%), CALR in 21/44 (48%), MPL in 0/49 (0%). One patient was triple-negative. Extended targeted gene sequencing was performed in 42/63 patients during their clinical course. Sequencing occurred at a median time of 2.6 yr after diagnosis (range 0-35 yr). Genes most commonly mutated were ASXL1 (12%), TET2 (12%), EZH2 (10%), and DNMT3A (10%). No mutations involving SRSF2, U2AF1, ZRSR2, or SF3B1 were seen. Thirteen patients did not receive active treatment during follow-up. Among those receiving treatment, median time to first treatment was 9.4 mo (range 0-331 mo). The most common initial treatments were erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) (14%), hydroxyurea (28%), and ruxolitinib (22%). In total, 29 (46%) received ruxolitinib with median time to ruxolitinib treatment of 27.2 mo. Median duration of ruxolitinib treatment was 44.5 mo. Fourteen patients underwent allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHCT) at a median of 57.4 mo after diagnosis (range 6-123 mo). Transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) occurred in 5 patients at a median time of 99 mo (range 51-178 mo) after diagnosis. Median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Five and 10-year OS estimated at 93% and 77%, respectively. No difference was seen in OS for patients with primary and secondary MF (p = 0.40). Conclusions: Primary and secondary MF are rarely diagnosed in patients ≤ 50 years old. In this cohort, patients are often CALR mutant, have lower-risk disease, and lack splicing mutations. Initial treatment strategies are varied, but favor cytoreductive approaches. The prognosis in these patients is favorable, but high-risk mutations can occur and progression to AML occurs in a minority of patients. AHCT remains a curative option; however, optimal timing for transplant is not clear. Figure Disclosures Kuykendall: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Talati:Astellas: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria. Sweet:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy. Sallman:Celyad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lancet:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Other: fees for non-CME/CE services ; Agios, Biopath, Biosight, Boehringer Inglheim, Celator, Celgene, Janssen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Karyopharm, Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Komrokji:JAZZ: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; DSI: Consultancy; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Impact of Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease on Long-Term Outcomes of Reduced-Intensity Conditioning Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Adults with High-Risk Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in First Remission

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.3980.3980 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 3980-3980

Author(s):

Jae-Ho Yoon ◽

Sung-Soo Park ◽

Young-Woo Jeon ◽

Sung-Eun Lee ◽

Byung-Sik Cho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Research Funding ◽

Chronic Gvhd ◽

Unrelated Donor ◽

Advisory Committees

Abstract Background : The role of reduced-intensity conditioning allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (RIC-HCT) in adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) remains unclear because the interpretation of transplantation outcome is mainly limited by the small sample size, short follow-up duration, various regimens for conditioning and graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) prophylaxis, and the heterogeneity of the criteria used to select patients for RIC-HCT. Previously, we conducted a phase 2 trial of RIC-HCT in adults with high-risk ALL who were ineligible for myeloablative conditioning and showed the potential role of this strategy, especially in patients in first complete remission (CR1). Here, we report the long-term outcomes of RIC-HCT by analyzing 122 consecutive adults with high-risk ALL in CR1, particularly focusing on the prognostic relevance of chronic GVHD. Methods: During the period between 2000 and 2014, 122 patients in CR1 (median age, 52 years [range, 15-65 years]; 54 Ph-negative ALL and 68 Ph-positive ALL) were given an identical RIC regimen consisting of fludarabine (150 mg/m2 in total) and melphalan (140 mg/m2in total). The indications for RIC-HCT were advanced age (≥50 years; n=79; 64.8%) and comorbid conditions (n=43; 35.2%). Graft sources were peripheral blood stem cells (n=118; 66 matched sibling donor, 23 matched unrelated donor, 29 mismatched unrelated donor) and bone marrow (n=4; 1 matched sibling donor, 1 matched unrelated donor, 2 mismatched unrelated donor). The median time to transplantation was 155.5 days (range, 103-291 days). GVHD prophylaxis was attempted by administering calcineurin inhibitors (cyclosporine for sibling donor transplants, tacrolimus for unrelated donor transplants) plus methotrexate. Antithymocyte globulin was administered to the patients who received mismatched unrelated donor grafts. If residual leukemia was detected in the absence of GVHD at 3 months after transplantation, calcineurin inhibitors were rapidly discontinued. Results: The median time for neutrophil and platelet recovery was 12 days (range, 8-30 days) and 13 days (range, 5-60 days) after RIC-HCT. Sixty-two patients developed acute GVHD (53 grade II, 5 grade III, 4 grade IV). The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD at 1 year was 50.8% (42.6% for Ph-negative and 57.4% for Ph-positive, P=0.152). Except for 11 patients with early deaths within 100 days, 77 developed chronic GVHD (30 mild, 29 moderate, 18 severe), resulting in a 5-year cumulative incidence of 63.6% (69.1% for Ph-negative ALL and 58.8% for Ph-positive ALL, P=0.319). The median time to onset of chronic GVHD was 140 days (range, 37-843 days) after transplantation. Cytomegalovirus reactivation >10,000 copies/mL was observed in 40.2% (44.4% for Ph-negative ALL and 36.8% for Ph-positive ALL, P=0.447). After a median follow-up duration of 57.9 months (range, 17.7-206.8 months), the 5-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) and non-relapse mortality (NRM) were 27.5% (23.9% for Ph-negative ALL and 30.2% for Ph-positive ALL) and 19.0% (17.4% for Ph-negative ALL and 20.3% for Ph-positive ALL), respectively, and the 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 53.5% (58.4% for Ph-negative ALL and 49.7% for Ph-positive ALL) and 59.8% (60.2% for Ph-negative ALL and 59.3% for Ph-positive ALL). In multivariate analysis, the presence of chronic GVHD lowered CIR (HR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.10-0.48; P<0.001), but severe chronic GVHD increased NRM (HR, 8.76; 95% CI, 3.39-22.6; P<0.001). Thus, the presence of mild to moderate chronic GVHD was closely related to better outcomes in terms of DFS (HR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.32-0.64; P<0.001) and OS (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.30-0.64; P<0.001) in all patients as well as in both subgroups of patients. In Ph-positive ALL subgroup of patients, patients without achievement of major molecular response until the time of transplantation had also significantly higher CIR (HR, 7.42; 95% CI, 3.04-18.10; P<0.001) and poorer DFS (HR, 3.47; 95% CI, 1.48-8.14; P=0.004) and OS (HR, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.03-6.47; P=0.043). Conclusion: Our long-term follow-up data with a uniform treatment strategy suggest that RIC-HCT is a valid alternative choice for providing a long-term disease control for adult high-risk ALL patients in CR1. Minimal residual disease-based treatment strategies to reduce leukemia cell burden before HCT and to enhance the graft-versus-leukemia effect are needed in the future. Disclosures Kim: ILYANG: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Lee:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

A Pooled Overall Survival (OS) Analysis of 5-Year Data from the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II Trials of Ruxolitinib for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis (MF)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.3110.3110 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 3110-3110 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Srdan Verstovsek ◽

Vikas Gupta ◽

Jason R. Gotlib ◽

Ruben A. Mesa ◽

Alessandro M. Vannucchi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Background:The Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib has been evaluated for patients with MF in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. In both trials, ruxolitinib prolonged OS, reduced splenomegaly, and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life compared with controls. Here, we report the results of an exploratory pooled analysis of OS in the COMFORT studies at 5 years of follow-up. Methods: The double-blind COMFORT-I trial and the open-label COMFORT-II trial were randomized phase 3 studies that evaluated the safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate-2 (int-2) or high-risk primary MF (PMF), post-polycythemia vera MF (PPV-MF), or post-essential thrombocythemia MF (PET-MF). The comparator was placebo in COMFORT-I and best available therapy (BAT) in COMFORT-II. The ruxolitinib starting dose was 15 or 20 mg twice daily based on baseline platelet counts (100-200 and >200 × 109/L, respectively); dose modifications were permitted for safety and efficacy. Patients were allowed to cross over to ruxolitinib from the control arm for progressive splenomegaly, defined as a ≥25% increase in spleen volume from baseline (COMFORT-I) or study nadir (COMFORT-II), or select protocol-defined progression events; crossover was mandatory following treatment unblinding in COMFORT-I. OS was a secondary endpoint in both studies and was evaluated in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis using a Cox proportional hazard model that estimated the treatment effect stratified by clinical trial and International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk. The crossover-corrected treatment effect was estimated using a rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) method. Results: Overall, 528 patients were randomized: 301 to ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n=155; COMFORT-II, n=146) and 227 to placebo (n=154) or BAT (n=73). All ongoing patients in the control arms crossed over to ruxolitinib by the 3-year follow-up. Patient populations were similar between the two trials and their details were previously published. In the combined ruxolitinib group, 162 patients (53.8%) had high-risk MF and 139 (46.2%) had int-2 risk MF based on IPSS criteria. At the 5-year ITT analysis, 128 patients (42.5%) died in the ruxolitinib group compared with 117 (51.5%) in the control group. The risk of death was reduced by 30% with ruxolitinib compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 45.9 mo; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.91; P=0.0065; Figure A). After correcting for crossover using RPSFT, OS advantage was more pronounced for patients originally randomized to ruxolitinib (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 27 mo; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.23-0.59; Figure B). An analysis of OS censoring patients at the time of crossover also demonstrated that ruxolitinib prolonged survival compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 28.3 mo; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36−0.78; P=0.0013; Figure C). Among all patients treated with ruxolitinib, those with lower-risk disease had longer survival compared with those with high-risk disease (median OS: int-2, not reached [estimated, 102 mo]; high-risk, 50 mo; HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.95-4.20; P<0.0001; Figure D). In a subgroup analysis, OS favored ruxolitinib compared with placebo for patients with int-2 or high-risk MF (data not shown). At 5 years, median OS appeared to favor patients with int-2 (n=58) or high-risk (n=89) PMF who were originally randomized to ruxolitinib compared with historical (Cervantes et al; J Clin Oncol 30:2981-2987) controls (int-2 PMF, not reached [estimated, 70 mo] vs 48 mo; high-risk PMF, 34 vs 27 mo); OS was longer among patients with int-2 vs high-risk PMF (P=0.0003). Subgroup analyses showed that ruxolitinib provided an OS advantage regardless of age (>65 or ≤65 y), sex, disease type (PMF, PPV-MF, PET-MF), risk status (int-2 or high), JAK2V617F mutation status, baseline spleen volume (>10 or ≤10 cm), anemia, white blood cell count (>25 or ≤25 × 109L), or platelet count (>200 or ≤200 × 109/L). Conclusion: Long-term treatment with ruxolitinib up to 5 years prolonged survival in patients with MF compared with BAT or placebo. Corrections for patients who crossed over to ruxolitinib suggested that the separation between ruxolitinib and control OS curves was primarily caused by a delay in ruxolitinib treatment. The results suggest that earlier treatment with ruxolitinib may provide a greater survival advantage for patients with MF. Disclosures Gupta: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Cervantes:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dong:Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Conventional Immunochemotherapy (R-CHOEP) Vs High-Dose Immunochemotherapy (R-MegaCHOEP) in Younger Patients with High-Risk Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma: 10-Year Long-Term Follow-up of a German Lymphoma Alliance (GLA) Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123637 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1589-1589

Author(s):

Fabian Frontzek ◽

Marita Ziepert ◽

Maike Nickelsen ◽

Bettina Altmann ◽

Bertram Glass ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

Introduction: The R-MegaCHOEP trial showed that dose-escalation of conventional chemotherapy necessitating autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) does not confer a survival benefit for younger patients (pts) with high-risk aggressive B-cell lymphoma in the Rituximab era (Schmitz et al., Lancet Oncology 2012; 13, 1250-1259). To describe efficacy and toxicity over time and document the long-term risks of relapse and secondary malignancy we present the 10-year follow-up of this study. Methods: In the randomized, prospective phase 3 trial R-MegaCHOEP younger pts aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk (aaIPI 2-3) aggressive B-cell lymphoma were assigned to 8 cycles of CHOEP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubcine, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone) or 4 cycles of dose-escalated high-dose therapy (HDT) necessitating repetitive ASCT both combined with Rituximab. Both arms were stratified according to aaIPI, bulky disease, and center. Primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). All analyses were calculated for the intention-to-treat population. This follow-up report includes molecular data based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for MYC (IHC: 31/92 positive [40-100%], FISH: 14/103 positive), BCL2 (IHC: 65/89 positive [50-100%], FISH: 23/111 positive) and BCL6 (IHC: 52/86 positive [30-100%], FISH: 34/110 positive) and data on cell of origin (COO) classification according to the Lymph2CX assay (GCB: 53/88; ABC: 24/88; unclassified: 11/88). Results: 130 pts had been assigned to R-CHOEP and 132 to R-MegaCHOEP. DLBCL was the most common lymphoma subtype (~80%). 73% of pts scored an aaIPI of 2 and 27% an aaIPI of 3. 60% of pts had an initial lymphoma bulk and in 40% more than 1 extranodal site was involved. After a median observation time of 111 months, EFS at 10 years was 57% (95% CI 47-67%) in the R-CHOEP vs. 51% in the R-MegaCHOEP arm (42-61%) (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8, p=0.228), overall survival (OS) after 10 years was 72% (63-81%) vs. 66% (57-76%) respectively (p=0.249). With regard to molecular characterization, we were unable to detect a significant benefit for HDT/ASCT in any subgroup analyzed. In total, 16% of pts (30 pts) relapsed after having achieved a complete remission (CR). 23% of all relapses (7 pts) showed an indolent histology (follicular lymphoma grade 1-3a) and 6 of these pts survived long-term. In contrast, of 23 pts (77%) relapsing with aggressive DLBCL or unknown histology 18 pts died due to lymphoma or related therapy. The majority of relapses occurred during the first 3 years after randomization (median time: 22 months) while after 5 years we detected relapses only in 5 pts (3% of all 190 pts prior CR). 11% of pts were initially progressive (28 pts) among whom 71% (20 pts) died rapidly due to lymphoma. Interestingly, the remaining 29% (8 pts) showed a long-term survival after salvage therapy (+/- ASCT); only 1 pt received allogeneic transplantation. The frequency of secondary malignancies was very similar in both treatment arms (9% vs. 8%) despite the very high dose of etoposide (total 4g/m2)in the R-MegaCHOEP arm. We observed 2 cases of AML and 1 case of MDS per arm. In total 70 pts (28%) have died: 30 pts due to lymphoma (12%), 22 pts therapy-related (11 pts due to salvage therapy) (9%), 8 pts of secondary neoplasia (3%), 5 pts due to concomitant disease (2%) and 5 pts for unknown reasons. Conclusions: This 10-year long-term follow-up of the R-MegaCHOEP trial confirms the very encouraging outcome of young high-risk pts following conventional chemotherapy with R-CHOEP. High-dose therapy did not improve outcome in any subgroup analysis including molecular high-risk groups. Relapse rate was generally low. Pts with aggressive relapse showed a very poor long-term outcome while pts with indolent histology at relapse survived long-term. Secondary malignancies occurred; however, they were rare with no excess leukemias/MDS following treatment with very high doses of etoposide and other cytotoxic agents. Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Figure Disclosures Nickelsen: Roche Pharma AG: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grants; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: advisory board; Roche: Honoraria. Truemper:Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: scientific advisory board; Sandoz: Other: scientific advisory board; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Other: scientific advisory board. Viardot:Kite/Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenwald:MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lenz:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Employment, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy. Schmitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Routine Use of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin in 7+3-Based Inductions for All "Non-Adverse" Risk AML

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-142691 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 36-37

Author(s):

Gavin Hui ◽

Abdullah Ladha ◽

Edna Cheung ◽

Caroline Berube ◽

Steven Coutre ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin ◽

Intermediate Risk ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Myeloablative Conditioning ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Monosomy 7

Introduction: The addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to 7+3 chemotherapy for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been shown to significantly improve event-free survival (EFS) for cytogenetically favorable-risk AML, with marginal benefit for intermediate-risk AML, and no benefit for cytogenetically adverse-risk AML. Of note, with the exception of mutated FLT3-ITD, little is known about the impact of GO in ELN 2017-defined genotypically adverse-risk AML, and a recent randomized trial found no EFS benefit for 7+3+GO in patients (pts) with genotypically favorable-risk, NPM1-mutated AML. Since 2017, our institution incorporated GO into 7+3-based inductions for all "non-adverse" risk AML pts, as defined by wild-type FLT3 and no abnormalities on rapid FISH analysis for del(5q)/monosomy 5, del(7q)/monosomy 7, and del(20q). We report our experience treating all pts with "non-adverse" risk AML-as defined by this algorithm-with 7+3+GO. Methods: An institutional database was queried in order to identify all pts ≥18 years old who received 7+3-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed AML between 2017 and 2020; pts who received the FDA-approved fractionated dose of GO were included in the analysis. Data collection included demographic variables, karyotype/FISH, targeted PCR analyses, and multigene NGS panels for AML-related mutations including, but not limited to, mutations in FLT3, NPM1, CEBPA, TP53, RUNX1, and ASXL1. Outcome data included response to induction, relapse, and death, as well as hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) rates, conditioning regimens, and post-transplant complications. Results: Between January 2017 and July 2020, 96 pts received 7+3-based induction at our institution. Of these, 29 (30%) received 7+3 in combination with GO. Median age at diagnosis was 46 years (range 23-66), with 17 (59%) males. Sixteen (55%) pts had ELN favorable-risk AML (5 [31%] by cytogenetics and 11 [69%] by genotype), 6 (21%) pts had ELN intermediate-risk AML, and 7 (24%) pts had ELN adverse-risk AML (4 [57%] by cytogenetics and 3 [43%] by genotype). Median time from diagnosis to start of induction was 4 days (range 0-43). For cytogenetically adverse-risk pts, median time from diagnostic bone marrow biopsy to receipt of adverse karyotype results was 8 days (7-14). Median time from start of induction to receipt of multigene NGS results for all pts was 15 days (3-32). Overall, 22 (76%) pts achieved remission. All genotypically adverse-risk pts (1 with mutated TP53 and 2 with mutated RUNX1) were refractory to induction, while 3 of 4 (75%) cytogenetically adverse-risk pts (1 with t(6;9), 1 with monosomy 7, and 2 with 11q23 abnormalities) achieved remission. Eight of the 29 (28%) pts proceeded to HCT, including 4 adverse-risk pts. Of the adverse-risk pts, all received myeloablative conditioning prior to HCT and 3 (75%) developed veno-occlusive disease (VOD), with 2 (50%) requiring defibrotide therapy. In favorable/intermediate-risk pts, 4 (18%) proceeded to HCT (2 intermediate-risk pts in first remission and 2 favorable-risk pts in second remission). Of these, 2 (50%) received myeloablative conditioning and 1 (25%) developed VOD. At last follow-up, 23 of 29 pts (79%) remained alive, with a median overall survival not reached (range 1-29 months) and a median EFS of 20 months (9-31). The percentage of ELN favorable-, intermediate-, and adverse-risk pts who remained event-free at last follow-up was 75%, 33%, and 43%, respectively. Discussion: This single-center, retrospective cohort describes the outcomes of pts with "non-adverse" risk AML who received induction chemotherapy with 7+3+GO according to a pre-defined algorithm. Using this algorithm, 30% of all pts receiving 7+3-based inductions received GO. Of these, nearly 25% were ultimately found to have adverse-risk AML as defined by ELN 2017 criteria, largely driven by long turn-around times for karyotyping and NGS multigene panel results. No patient with genotypically adverse-risk AML by ELN criteria responded to induction chemotherapy, and 75% of cytogenetically adverse-risk pts who proceeded to HCT developed VOD. Routine use of 7+3+GO induction outside of the context of cytogenetically favorable-risk AML remains controversial, and further study is needed to define the role of GO, particularly for pts with ELN genotypically adverse-risk AML. Table Disclosures Gotlib: Blueprint Medicines Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Chair of the Response Adjudication Committee and Research Funding, Research Funding; Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: co-chair of the Study Steering Committee and Research Funding. Liedtke:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Muffly:Adaptive: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Research Funding. Mannis:AbbVie, Agios, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech: Consultancy; Glycomimetics, Forty Seven, Inc, Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

ABVD Versus Escalated Beacopp in Advanced Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Results from a Retrospective, Multicenter European Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-128198 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1565-1565 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Patrizia Mondello ◽

Irene Dogliotti ◽

Jan-Paul Bohn ◽

Federica Cavallo ◽

Simone Ferrero ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advanced Stage ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Risk Patients

Purpose: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is a highly curable disease even in advanced-stage, with >90% of long-term survivors. Currently, the standard of care is ABVD (doxorubicin, etoposide, vinblastine and dacarbazine), as it is less toxic and as effective as other more intensive chemotherapy regimens. Alternatively, BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone) has been proposed as front-line intensified regimen with a better initial disease control and prolonged time to relapse when compared to ABVD. However, this advantage is associated with higher rates of severe hematologic toxicity, treatment-related deaths, secondary neoplasms and infertility. To date, the debate regarding which regimen should be preferred as first line for advanced-stage HL is still ongoing. To shed some light on this open question we compared efficacy and safety of both regimens in clinical practice. Patients and Methods: From October 2009 to October 2018, patients with HL stage III-IV treated with either ABVD or BEACOPP escalated (BEACOPPesc) were retrospectively assessed in 7 European cancer centers. Results: A total of 372 consecutive patients were included in the study. One-hundred and ten patients were treated with BEACOPPesc and 262 with ABVD. The baseline characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, except for a higher rate of high-risk patients in the BEACOPPesc group in contrast to the ABVD one (47% vs 18%; p= 0.003). Complete response rate (CR) assessed by PET imaging at the end of the second cycle was 67% and 78% for the ABVD and BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.003), respectively. Thirteen patients of the ABVD group achieved stable disease (SD) and 6 had a progression disease (PD). On the other hand, 4 of the patients in the BEACOPPesc group progressed, another 2 interrupted therapy because life-threatening toxicity. At the end of the therapy, CR was 76% in the ABVD group and 85% in the BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.01). A total of 20% patients in the ABVD group and 14% patients in the BEACOPPesc group received consolidation radiotherapy on the mediastinal mass at the dose of 30Gy. After radiotherapy, the number of patients with CR increased to 79% and 87% in the two groups (p= 0.041), respectively. Thirty-nine patients (35%) in the BEACOPPesc group required dose reduction of chemotherapy due to toxicity compared to 12 patients (5%; p= <0.001) in the ABVD group. Overall, the rate of severe toxicities was higher in the BEACOPPesc group in comparison with the ABVD cohort. In particular, there was a significant increased frequency of acute grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (neutropenia 61% vs 24%; anemia 29% vs 4%; thrombocytopenia 29% vs 3%), febrile neutropenia (29% vs 3%), severe infections (18% vs 3%). Myeloid growth factors were administered to 85% and 59% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD group. Blood transfusions were required in 51% and 6% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD cohort. Progression during or shortly after treatment occurred in 5 patients in the BEACOPPesc group (4%) and in 16 patients in the ABVD group (6%; p= 0.62). Among the 96 patients who achieved a CR after BEACOPPesc and radiotherapy, 8 relapsed (8%), compared to 29 of 208 patients in the ABVD group (14%; p= 0.04). At a median follow-up period of 5 years, no statistical difference in progression free survival (PFS; p=0.11) and event-free survival (EFS; p=0.22) was observed between the BEACOPPesc and ABVD cohorts. Similarly, overall survival (OS) did not differ between the two groups (p=0.14). The baseline international prognostic score (IPS <3 vs ≥ 3) significantly influenced the EFS with an advantage for the high-risk group treated with BEACOPPesc (Figure 1A; p=0.03), but not the PFS (Figure 1B; p=0.06) and OS (Figure 1C; p=0.14). During the follow-up period, in the BEACOPPesc group one patient developed myelodysplasia and one acute leukemia. Second solid tumors developed in one patient in the ABVD group (lung cancer) and one in BEACOPPesc group (breast cancer). Conclusion: We confirm that the ABVD regimen is an effective and less toxic therapeutic option for advanced-stage HL. Although BEACOPP results in better initial tumor control especially in high-risk patients, the long-term outcome remains similar between the two regimens. Disclosures Ferrero: EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Martinelli:BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Willenbacher:European Commission: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myelom- und Lymphomselbsthilfe Österreich: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Science: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; IQVIA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; oncotyrol: Employment, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujimoto: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tirol Program: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Observational Prospective Registry for the Assessment of the Clinical Impact of Starting Anti-Myeloma Treatment at Biological Relapse

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.4765.4765 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 4765-4765

Author(s):

Adrian Alegre ◽

Merche Gironella ◽

Juan Miguel Bergua ◽

Esther Gonzalez ◽

Fernando Escalante ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Marrow Transplant ◽

Clinical Relapse ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival

Abstract Introduction: Despite the great medical advances associated with the introduction of thalidomide, bortezomib (BORT), and lenalidomide (LEN) for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), it remains an incurable disease. Most patients (pts) show disease progression, consistent with the clinical evolution of MM, and only a low percentage achieve long-term responses and extended progression-free survival (PFS). The heterogeneous nature of MM in both the clinical and biological setting is reflected in the heterogeneity of MM relapses. The International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel (Rajkumar, Blood 2011) states that treatment (Tx) shall begin either at clinical relapse with symptoms (clinR), or in the event of asymptomatic relapse with significant paraprotein relapse, biological relapse (BR). The purpose of this Spanish registry is to describe MM relapse patterns comparing the impact of Tx decisions in pts who meet the criteria for biological relapse (BR) according to IMWG criteria with those in whom Tx was delayed until clinical relapse (clinR). Here, the preliminary results of this study are presented. Methods: MM pts in (or previous to) first or second BR who have achieved ≥ PR since their last Tx are eligible for inclusion in this observational prospective registry at the time BR is detected. Evaluations performed at least bi-monthly are mandatory. A total of 41 Spanish sites participated in the registry following approval from their independent ethics committees, with 410 pts expected to be included, without physician’s decision of prescribing Tx affecting the inclusion. The main objective of the registry is to assess the time to progression (TTP) from the start of anti-MM Tx at the onset of asymptomatic BR vs. the start of Tx at the time of clinR. Secondary objectives are to describe demographics of BR; to assess the median time elapsing from BR to clinR; to assess overall response rate (ORR), event-free survival (EFS), PFS, overall survival (OS) at BR and at clinR (if appropriate); to asses safety and quality of life (QoL) using 2 validated questionnaires (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QLQ-C30 and QLQ-MY24); to document the tolerability profile of the Tx; and to describe the use of associated resources. Here, we summarize baseline characteristics and preliminary results from 83 pts (out of 126 registered pts) who had basal data in the registry at the time of this report. Results: Overall, 79% of pts presented with a BR and 21% were in a bi-monthly watchful waiting follow up. The mean age of pts was 67 years, 53% were female, 57% were in first relapse, 43% and 27% had an ECOG performance status (PS) of 0 and 1, respectively, while the ECOG PS was unknown in 30% of pts at the time of this report. In total, 30% of pts had ISS stage I, 26% had ISS stage II, and 22% had ISS stage III, while ISS stage data were not available or unknown for 12% and 10% of pts, respectively. MM types were IgG Κ (37% of pts), IgG λ (23%), IgA Κ (13%), IgA λ (9%), and type was unknown in 17% of pts. 28% of IgG/IgA MM types were Bence-Jones. Cytogenetic risk assessments were available in 66% of pts. Among those pts with a BR, 51% received active Tx without waiting for a ClinR. First-line Tx was BORT-based in 70% of pts. Overall, 55% of pts had undergone autologous stem cell transplantation, 15% had received consolidation Tx and 34% had received maintenance Tx. After first-line Tx, 17% of pts achieved a stringent complete response (sCR), 31% achieved a CR, 24% achieved a very good partial response (VGPR), and 10% achieved a PR. The median time to BR was 24.53 months. Most (63%) pts who registered after second relapse received LEN-based Tx. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first prospective study in MM to evaluate BR as well as the effects of Tx based on the decision to start Tx at BR vs. clinR. In this preliminary cohort, the physicians’ decision to start active Tx at BR, before the onset of clinR in 50% of cases, was noteworthy. Further follow-up is needed to identify the differences between these two strategies. Updated clinical results will be presented at the meeting. MM-BR Study, Spanish Myeloma Group-GEM/PETHEMA Bibliography Alegre A, et al. Haematologica. 2002;87:609-14. Brioli A, et al. Blood. 2014;123:3414-9. Fernández de Larrea C, et al. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2014;49:223-7. Lenhoff S, et al. Haematologica. 2006;91:1228-33. Rajkumar SV, et al. Blood. 2011;117:4691-5. Zamarin D, et al. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48:419-24. Disclosures Alegre: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jansen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lahuerta:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ruiz:Celgene: Celgene Stock options as part of the employee's compensation plan Other, Employment. Vilanova:Celgene: Contracted by Celgene Other.

Download Full-text

Car-Bird [Carfilzomib, Clarithromycin(Biaxin®), Lenalidomide/(Revlimid®), Dexamethasone) for Newly-Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.4761.4761 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 4761-4761 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Tomer M Mark ◽

Abbe Schickner ◽

John N. Allan ◽

Adriana C Rossi ◽

Roger Pearse ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Maximum Response ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cell Harvest ◽

Grade Iii

Abstract Background: Carfilzomib (Cfz), lenalidomide, and dexamethasone synergize to provide an impressive overall response rate (ORR) in upfront treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) (Jakubowiak et al 2012). The ORR to Cfz+dexamethasone (Cfz-Dex) as first-line therapy is unknown. We hypothesized that sequential treatment with Cfz-dex and BiRD would improve provide similar ORR and improve tolerability. A protocol of Cfz-Dex, consolidation with BiRd (Clarithromycin(Biaxin¨), Lenalidomide/(Revlimid¨), dexamethasone), and lenalidomide maintenance (Len) was conducted to evaluate ORR and safety as induction therapy for MM. Methods: Forty patients (pts) with symptomatic untreated MM were enrolled in a phase 2 study of Car-BiRd. Car-BiRd therapy is: Cfz IV over 30 min on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 of a 28-day cycle at a dose of 20mg/m2 on days 1, 2 of the 1st cycle only and 45mg/m2 for each dose thereafter and dex 40mg on D1, 8, 15, 22. After the first 26 pts were enrolled, the protocol was amended to increase the Cfz from 45 to 56mg/m2. Echocardiography and spirometry were performed prior to study entry and serum brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) was followed monthly to evaluate for heart or lung toxicity. Cfz-dex was continued until plateau in disease response, defined as unchanged M-protein for 2 cycles. Elective stem cell collection was then performed in transplant eligible pts and consolidation with BiRd initiated. Transplant ineligible pts proceeded directly to BiRd. BiRd is: Clarithromycin 500mg BID, lenalidomide 25mg daily on D1-21, and dex 40mg on D1, 8, 15, 22 of 28-day cycle. BiRd was continued until a 2nd response plateau after which lenalidomide maintenance (Len) at 10mg daily D1-21 of 28 day cycle was continued until disease progression or intolerability. Results: 36 pts completed at least 1 cycle and were evaluable for response. 58% of pts were ISS II/III. High-risk cytogenetics and unfavorable MyPRS score were found in 62% and 21% of pts, respectively. Median study follow-up was 66.2 weeks (range 3.7-114.7). Maximum response to the Cfz-dex, BiRd, and Len is shown in Table 1. Median time to PR was 1 cycle. Median time to maximum response with Cfz-dex, BiRD, and Len was 2, 2, and 4 cycles respectively. At last audit, 8 (22%) pts remain on Cfz-Dex; 21 (58%) reached plateau and received BiRd. Of the pts that received BiRd, 9 (43%) improved categorical response and 19 (90.5%) received Len. Two (11%) pts deepened response to CR while on Len. 97.5% of pts are alive and 82.5% without progression at last follow-up. One pt died after coming off study (withdrew consent) from sepsis during elective autologous stem cell transplant. Pts with high risk cytogenetics had a trend towards a shorter progression free survival (PFS), with median 71.7 weeks vs not reached (NR) (P = 0.058). Similar results were seen with unfavorable MyPRS score with a shorter median PFS at 71.7 weeks vs NR (P = 0.094). 17 pts had stem cell harvest following Cfz-dex. All collected stem cells to support at least two transplants, with median 14.5 x 10^6 (range 7.06-27) CD34/kg in a median of 1 (range 1-2) apheresis session. 18 pts (46.2%) have come off study, 6 (15%) for disease progression (2 during CfzDex , 1 during BiRD, 3 during Len) and 5 pts (12.5%) due to toxicity: 3 pts for renal failure [2 Grade 2, I grade 3, all with renal recovery after discontinuation, all attributable to Cfz]; 1 pt due to Grade III CHF [attributable to Cfz with recovery]; 1 pt with Grade III Thromboembolic [attributable Len]. There was no correlation between pre-study cardiac and lung function, or serial BNP, with toxicities. Seven (17.9%) pts came off study for noncompliance, lost to follow up, investigator discretion, or withdrew consent (Cfz-dex: 4, BiRD: 1, Len: 2). Discussion: This is the first prospective study evaluating induction response to Cfz/Dex in MM. Cfz/Dex is safe and active, with ORR of 91.7% and rate of >=VGPR of 55.6%, despite the majority with a high-risk cytogenetics. Cfz-dex did not hinder stem cell harvest. ORR improved with lenalidomide-based consolidation and maintenance, with CR rate > 50%. Baseline heart/lung function or serial BNP change did not predict emerging toxicities. Table 1: Maximum Response For Car-BiRD Phase: Response Category Car-Dex BiRD Lenalidomide N = 36 N = 21 N = 19 PD 0 1 (4.8) 0 SD 3 (8.3) 0 0 PR 13 (36.1) 1 (4.8) 1 (5.3) VGPR 17 (47.2) 12 (57.1) 8 (42.1) CR 1 (2.8) 0 0 SCR 1 (2.8) 5 (23.8) 8 (42.1) ICR 1 (2.8) 2 (9.5) 2 (10.5) >=PR 91.7 95.2 100 >=VGPR 55.6 90.4 94.7 >=CR 8.4 33.3 52.6 Disclosures Mark: Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib is not approved for first-line treatment of myeloma. . Rossi:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Pekle:Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Perry:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Coleman:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Niesvizky:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety in COMFORT-II, a Phase 3 Study Comparing Ruxolitinib with Best Available Therapy for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis: 5-Year Final Study Results

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.59.59 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 59-59 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Claire N. Harrison ◽

Alessandro M. Vannucchi ◽

Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽

Haifa Kathrin Al-Ali ◽

Heinz Gisslinger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Final Study ◽

Study Results

Abstract BACKGROUND: Ruxolitinib (RUX) is a potent JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor that has demonstrated rapid and durable improvements in splenomegaly and symptoms as well as improved survival in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies in patients (pts) with myelofibrosis (MF). In COMFORT-II, significantly more pts achieved the primary endpoint (a ≥ 35% decrease in spleen volume from baseline at wk 48) with RUX compared with best available therapy (BAT) (28% vs 0%; P ˂ .0001). The 3-year follow-up confirmed that spleen volume reductions were sustained and RUX treatment remained tolerable with long-term use. Here, we report final study results on longer-term safety and efficacy after 5 years of RUX treatment in COMFORT-II. METHODS: COMFORT-II is a randomized (2:1), open-label phase 3 study of RUX vs BAT in pts with intermediate-2- or high-risk primary MF, post-PV MF, or post-ET MF. Pts initially received RUX 15 or 20 mg bid based on their platelet counts at baseline (100-200 and > 200 x 109/L, respectively), and doses were individually titrated to maximize safety and efficacy. Pts were allowed to cross over from the BAT arm to receive RUX upon protocol-defined progression (primarily progressive splenomegaly, a ≥ 25% increase in spleen volume from on-study nadir). All pts randomized to BAT had crossed over or discontinued by Nov 2011. The date of final database lock for the study is 20 Apr 2015. RESULTS: Pts were randomized to RUX (n = 146) or BAT (n = 73). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms and have been described previously (Harrison, N Engl J Med, 2012); disease and hematologic characteristics were representative of a population of pts with advanced primary or secondary MF. At study completion (median follow-up, 4.3 years), 39 pts (26.7%) in the RUX arm and 11 of the 45 pts (24.4%) who crossed over from BAT completed 5 years of on-study treatment. Primary reasons for premature discontinuation before 5 years were adverse events (AEs; 24.0%) and disease progression (21.9%) in the RUX arm and withdrawal of consent and other in the BAT arm (12.3% each). Overall 78 pts (53.4%) in the RUX arm achieved a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume from baseline at any time during treatment; the median duration of maintenance of spleen volume reduction was 3.2 years. The K-M estimated probability of maintaining this reduction was 0.51 (95% CI, 0.38-0.62) at 3 years and 0.48 (95% CI, 0.35-0.60) at 5 years. Approximately one-third of evaluable JAK2 V617F-positive pts had a ˃ 20% reduction in allele burden at 3.2 years (38.3%) and 3.7 years (31.0%). With RUX treatment, 23 pts (15.8%) had improved fibrosis (including 4 who improved to grade 0 from baseline fibrosis grades of 1 [n = 1], 2 [n = 2], and 3 [n = 1]), 47 pts (32.2%) had stable fibrosis, and 27 (18.5%) had a worsening at their last assessment. There was no relevant increase in the incidence of AEs with longer exposure (median: RUX arm, 2.6 years; BAT arm, 0.87 years; RUX after crossover, 1.2 years) compared with previous reports. The most commonly reported AEs in pts who received RUX any time (randomized treatment, extension phase or after cross over from BAT) were thrombocytopenia (52.4%), anemia (49.2%), diarrhea (35.6%), and peripheral edema (33.0%); grade 3/4 AEs included anemia (22.5%), thrombocytopenia (15.2%), pneumonia (5.8%), general physical health deterioration (4.2%), and dyspnea (4.2%). 8 pts (5.5%) and 5 pts (6.8%) developed leukemia in the RUX and BAT arms, respectively. There were no new or unexpected AEs. Overall, 59 (40.4%) and 35 (47.9%) deaths were reported in the RUX and BAT arms, respectively. Median OS was not reached in the RUX arm and was 4.1 years in the BAT arm. There was a 33% reduction in risk of death with RUX compared with BAT (HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.44-1.02; P = .06). The K-M estimated probability of survival at 5 years was 56% with RUX and 44% with BAT. As expected, the confounding effect on OS of crossover from BAT to RUX became apparent in this extended follow up compared with previous analyses; an analysis of OS correcting for crossover will be presented. SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS: The immediate benefits of RUX treatment, such as improvements in spleen size, were maintained with long-term therapy. The previously reported OS benefit was maintained, although results are confounded by extensive crossover from the BAT arm following the primary analysis at wk 48, which becomes more apparent with longer follow-up. Long term safety and tolerability was consistent with previous findings. Disclosures Harrison: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Shire: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: Research Funding paid to institution (University of Florence), Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kiladjian:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Travel grant; Research Funding paid to institution (Hôpital Saint-Louis et Université Paris Diderot); Novartis: Consultancy. Al-Ali:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gisslinger:AOP ORPHAN: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Geron: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis: Consultancy. Knoops:Novartis: Consultancy. Cervantes:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CTI-Baxter: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy. Jones:Incyte Corporation: Employment. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment. Descamps:Novartis Pharma S.A.S: Employment. Stalbovskaya:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Barbui:Novartis: Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Safety and Efficacy of Ruxolitinib in an 1869-Patient Cohort of JUMP: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Single-Arm, Expanded-Access Study in Patients with Myelofibrosis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.2799.2799 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 2799-2799 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Renato Tavares ◽

Giuseppe A. Palumbo ◽

Philipp Le Coutre ◽

Francesca Palandri ◽

Haifa Kathrin Al-Ali ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Costal Margin ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Expanded Access ◽

Grade 3

Abstract BACKGROUND: Ruxolitinib (RUX) is a potent JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor that demonstrated improvements in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms, as well as improved survival, in patients (pts) with intermediate (Int)-2- or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF), and has proved superior to placebo and best available therapy in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. JUMP is an expanded-access phase 3b trial designed to assess the safety and efficacy of RUX in pts with MF and includes patients with no access to RUX outside a clinical trial. As of Dec 2014, final enrollment was 2233 pts in 26 countries. METHODS: Eligible pts had Int-2- or high-risk MF with or without splenomegaly, or Int-1-risk MF with a palpable spleen (≥ 5 cm from the costal margin). Pts received starting doses of RUX based on platelet counts at baseline (5 mg twice daily [bid; ≥ 50 to < 100 × 109/L], 15 mg bid [100 to 200 × 109/L], or 20 mg bid [> 200 × 109/L]). The primary endpoint was assessment of safety and tolerability of RUX. Additional analyses included changes in palpable spleen length and symptom scores as measured by the FACT-Lymphoma total score (FACT-Lym TS). The final analysis will be performed after all pts have completed 24 months of treatment or discontinued the study. RESULTS: This analysis includes 1869 pts (primary MF, 59.1%; n = 1105) who started treatment ≥ 1 year before the data cutoff date (01 Jan 2015). At baseline, median age was 67 y (range, 18-89 y); 54.1% were male; median palpable spleen length was 12 cm below the costal margin; 87 pts did not have splenomegaly. Median hemoglobin (Hb) was 106 g/L, and 38.9% of pts had Hb levels ˂ 100 g/L; median platelet count was 257 × 109/L; mean FACT-Lym TS and FACIT-Fatigue score were 113.7 and 33.2, respectively. At data cutoff, 37.0% of pts remained on treatment; 26.1% had completed treatment per protocol. Primary reasons for discontinuation included adverse events (AEs; 17.4%), disease progression (8.2%), and death (3.4%). Median exposure was 13.6 months; the median average daily dose was 36.7 mg for pts starting at 20 mg bid (n = 1168; 62.5%) and 23.2 mg for pts starting at 15 mg bid (n = 559; 29.9%). The majority of pts (66.0%) had dose modifications, and 26.2% had a dose interruption. Grade 3/4 hematologic AEs included anemia (34.0%), thrombocytopenia (14.9%), and neutropenia (3.9%), which led to discontinuation in 2.2%, 3.3%, and 0.2% of pts, respectively. The most common nonhematologic AEs (≥ 10%) were pyrexia (14.5%), asthenia (13.8%), diarrhea (12.4%), and fatigue (10.3%), and were primarily grade 1/2; grade 3/4 AEs were low overall (≤ 2%), except pneumonia (3.9%), which led to discontinuation in 9 pts (0.5%). Rates of infections were low; all-grade infections ≥ 5% included pneumonia (6.2%), urinary tract infection (5.7%), and nasopharyngitis (5.3%). Tuberculosis was reported in 5 pts (0.3%; grade 3/4, 0.1%); hepatitis B was reported in 1 pt (0.1%; grade 3/4, 0.1%). At wk 24 and 48, 57.2% (742/1297) and 62.0% (588/949) of pts with baseline splenomegaly achieved a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in palpable spleen length; 22.9% (297/1297) and 19.0% (180/949) had 25% to 50% reductions, respectively. Most pts (70.5%; 1208/1713) experienced a ≥ 50% reduction at any time; 23.3% (399/1713) had complete resolution of splenomegaly (Figure). At wk 24 and 48, 96.6% (57/59) and 91.5% (43/47) of evaluable pts without splenomegaly at baseline continued to have a nonpalpable spleen; 1.7% (1/59) and 4.3% (2/47) had a spleen that was 0-5 cm, and 1.7% (1/59) and 4.3% (2/47) had a spleen ≥ 5 cm. A large proportion of pts achieved a response (ie, a clinically significant improvement) on the FACT-Lym TS and FACIT-Fatigue at wk 24 (43.0% [525/1220]; 47.1% [593/1258]) and wk 48 (43.2% [368/852]; 45.7% [396/867]). Similar responses were seen in pts without a palpable spleen (FACT-Lym TS: wk 24, 44.0% [22/50]; wk 48, 36.1% [13/36]; FACIT-Fatigue: wk 24, 49.1% [27/55]; wk 48, 35.1% [13/37]). CONCLUSIONS: To date, JUMP includes the largest cohort of pts with MF treated with RUX. Consistent with previous findings, anemia and thrombocytopenia were the most common AEs but rarely led to discontinuation. As observed previously, most pts experienced reductions in splenomegaly and symptoms with RUX treatment. Clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms were also seen in pts with no palpable spleen, a pt group not included in the COMFORT studies. Overall, the safety and efficacy profile of RUX in JUMP is consistent with that in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. Disclosures Palumbo: Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria. Al-Ali:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ullrich:Novartis: Honoraria. Brittain:Astellas: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Foltz:Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Raanani:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Advisory Board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory Board. Gupta:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ghosh:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Tannir:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Perez Ronco:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Vannucchi:Novartis: Other: Research Funding paid to institution (University of Florence), Research Funding; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text