scholarly journals Real World Outcomes with VTD and Cybord Induction Treatment for Transplant Eligible Multiple Myeloma Patients in a Latin American Country. Retrospective Cohort Study from Gamm (Grupo Argentino de Mieloma Multiple)

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3301-3301
Author(s):  
Natalia Paola Schutz ◽  
Paola Ochoa ◽  
Patricio Duarte ◽  
Guillermina Remaggi ◽  
Sebastian Yantorno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Cohort Study ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Introduction: There are scarce data regarding treatment outcomes and toxicity in Latin American countries. Argentina is the second largest country in the region and the fourth most populated one. National Guidelines from the Argentinean Society of Hematology (SAH) recommends the use of bortezomib based triplets for induction treatment in transplant eligible newly diagnosed Multiple Myeloma patients. Objective: To compare response rates and adverse events after induction treatment with Cyclophosphamide Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (CyBorD) or Bortezomib Thalidomide and Dexamethasone (VTD) outside of clinical trials in a Latin American country. Methods: Retrospective multicentric cohort study. All centers participating in the Argentinean Multiple Myeloma Study Group (GAMM) were invited to participate in the study. Eligible patients were 75 years of age or younger, with a diagnosis of Multiple Myeloma according to the IMWG 2014 criteria, transplant eligible, treated with at least one cycle of CyBorD or VTD as induction therapy in the time period from December 2012 until December 2017. Main exclusion criteria were amyloidosis, plasma cell leukemia and previous neuropathy. Patients were identified from local registries at each center and included consecutively in the study database. Epidemiological and clinical data were obtained from medical records and collected in a standardized clinical report form. Patients were followed from diagnosis until death or lost to follow up. Response was evaluated according to IMWG Response Criteria 2016. Adverse events were graded by CTCAE 4.3. Comparisons of response rates were performed using a Chi2 test and differences in rates were expressed as proportions with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Crude odds ratios (OR) and OR adjusted by potential confounders were calculated using a logistic regression model. Kaplan Meier method was used to estimate progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Stata 13 software was used. Results: A total of 322 patients from 15 centers in Argentina were included in the study. The median age at diagnosis was 57 years (range 26-74), 52% (167) of the patients were male, 18% (58) had renal failure, 28% (85) ISS 3 , 7% (22) extramedullary disease, and 14% (46) high risk cytogenetics. Median time of follow up was 34 months (IQR 21-58). CyBorD was the most common treatment, indicated as induction therapy in 74% (238) of the cases. The characteristics of the patients were similar in both groups except age and LDH levels. The median number of cycles was 5 (range 1-12). Bortezomib was administered once per week in 85% (272) of the patients and subcutaneously in 86% (276) with no differences between both treatment arms. The median cumulative cyclophosphamide dose per month was 1.5 g (IQR 1.5-2.4) and thalidomide dose per day was 100 mg. In the VTD arm, 72,62% (61) of the patients achieved at least very good partial response (VGPR) vs 53.36% (127) with CyBorD [OR of 2.31 (CI 1.35 - 3.99) p=0.002]. The difference in VGPR was 19.26% (CI 15 - 24). Complete response rate (CR) was 35.92% in patients treated with VTD vs 22.55% with CyBorD [OR of 1.87 (CI 1.04 - 3.35) p=0.03). The difference in CR was 13,37% (CI 9.6 -17.53). There was no difference in overall response rate (ORR) with 94.05% vs 91.18% (p=0.406). Adverse events were more common with VTD (69.05% vs 55.46% p=0.030), especially neuropathy grade 3 - 4 (7.14% vs 1.26% p=0.005) and thrombosis (13.10 % vs 3.36 % p=0.001). Deep venous thrombosis prophylaxis was inadequate in 20.24% of the patients. Hematologic adverse events were more common with CyBorD, especially thrombocytopenia (5.95% vs 16.39% p=0.017). Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was performed in 78% (249) of patients. There was 5% (17) stem cell mobilization failure, all in the CyBorD arm. Response rates after ASCT with VTD and CyBorD induction treatment were: 76.19 vs 73.11% VGPR (p=0.580) and 48.53% vs 40% CR (p=0.20). Maintenance treatment was indicated in 67.86% (57) and 65.13% (155) patients respectively (p=0.650). The PFS at 24 months was 83% (CI 71-90) with VTD vs 72% (CI 66-78) [(HR 0.92 (CI 0.59 - 1.42) p 0.715] and OS 96% (CI 87-99) vs 91% (86-94) respectively [(HR 1.2 (CI 0.62 - 2.32) p 0.587]. Conclusions: VTD has better CR and VGPR compared to CyBorD. Nevertheless, CyBorD continues to be the preferred induction regimen in Argentina based on safety profile. The optimal number of induction treatment cycles remains to be determined. Disclosures Schutz: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Glaxo: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Varifarma: Honoraria. Shanley:Brystol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Fantl:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Varifarma/Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Tecnofarma: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Glaxo: Research Funding.

scholarly journals A Randomized Phase II, Open Label, Study of Daratumumab, Weekly Low-Dose Oral Dexamethasone and Cyclophosphamide with or without Pomalidomide in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 6-6
Author(s):  
Michael Sebag ◽  
Nizar J. Bahlis ◽  
Christopher P. Venner ◽  
Arleigh McCurdy ◽  
C. Tom Kouroukis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
First Line ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Line Of Therapy

Lenalidomide (Len) has become the standard first line therapeutic choices for Multiple Myeloma (MM), whether as first line for transplant ineligible patients or as maintenance post transplant. Therapies that are designed to overcome lenalidomide refractory disease are few and often give disappointing results. We previously reported the efficacy of daratumumab in combination with low dose weekly cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone with and without pomalidomide (Pom). In patients previously treated with both Proteosome Inhibitors (PIs) and Len the combination of Dara, Cyclophosphamide, Dex and pomalidomide (DCdP) produced impressive response rates. Although the same combination without the Pom had appreciably lower response rates and initial progression free survival (PFS), most patients were salvageable after the addition of Pom. Here we report an update on this trial. Patients/Methods In this phase II clinical trial, 120 patients with relapsed refractory MM, after at least one line of therapy, were randomized to receive either daratumumab (16mg/kg) weekly IV C1-2, every 2 weeks C3-6, monthly C7+, dexamethasone 40mg po weekly, cyclophosphamide 400mg po weekly and pomalidomide 4mg po days 1-21 of 28 day cycles (Arm A) or the same doses and dosing regimen of daratumumab, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone but with Pom added only after confirmed disease progression (Arm B). All patients were exposed to PIs and Len prior to study entry. The primary endpoint of this study was the comparison of the PFS of Arm A to that of Arm B after the addition Pom (PFS2) at 36 months while secondary endpoints included overall responses, duration of responses, survival and safety. Correlative laboratory studies will be reported separately. Results As of 1 June 2020 all 120 patients have been enrolled in 11 sites across Canada. The patient characteristics were: median age 65 (range 39-82); median 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-8); 70% had a previous ASCT; 95% Len exposed; 93% PI exposed; 90% Len and PI exposed; 25% carfilzomib exposed, Len was the last line of therapy in 65%. Median follow-up was 19 months (range 1-28), median number of cycles 16 (range 1-31). The overall response rates (ORR) were 88.6% for arm A compared with 50.8% for arm B, with 62.4% and 28.8% of patients achieving ≥VGPR in arm A and B respectively. 43 patients in Arm B have progressed by data cut-off and the ORR after adding pomalidomide was 55.8% with a median follow up time 6.6 months. The response rates for both Arm A and B (prior to Pom) did not vary much in patients in whom Len was the last line of therapy (94.5% vs 55.7%), compared to the ITT population. The response rate after the addition of Pom to Arm B patients after first progression was also similar in patients in whom Len was used last (58.3%). The median PFS of Arm A was an impressive 20.5 months (regardless of previous Len exposure) while it was considerably shorter for Arm B prior to addition of Pom at 11.5 months and 16.7 months overall after addition of Pom. Median OS has not yet been reached, however, time to subsequent therapies from randomization was similar in both groups at 18.1 (Arm A) and 20.2 months (Arm B). Rates of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included a high incidence of neutropenia, 85.2% in Arm A and 50.8% in Arm B overall; however, the rates of febrile neutropenia were low at 13.1% and 16.9% respectively. The most common infection was pneumonia, seen in 13% of Arm A and 6.8% of Arm B prior to Pom and 20.3% overall for Arm B. Conclusions The results of this randomized phase II trial demonstrate that in a highly pretreated MM population (2 lines of therapy but range 1-8) that the four-drug combination (DCdP) confers impressive ORR (88.6%) and a median PFS (20.5 months) that compares favourably to other studies with anti-CD38 antibodies combined with Pomalidomide (11.5 months for Isatuximab-Pom-Dex, albeit in patients with 3 median lines of prior therapy). In Len exposed patients, DCdP demonstrates an ORR of 93% and a PFS of 20.5 months which is similar to what has been reported recently in Len exposed patients with Dara-pom-dex but after only one previous line of therapy. Although the 3 combination (DCd) showed an inferior initial response rate, over half of patients recaptured a response after the addition of Pom. Finally, while the overall PFS is lower in Arm B, the times to subsequent therapies are so far similar in both arms of this study opening a sequential-based approach as a feasible and economic option for further study. Disclosures Sebag: Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene and Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Venner:Celgene, Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen, BMS/Celgene, Sanofi, Takeda, Amgen: Honoraria. McCurdy:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Shustik:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Kotb:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. White:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Stakiw:BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Lundbeck: Honoraria. Laferriere:Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Camacho:Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Bausch-Health: Consultancy. Reece:Otsuka: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Amgen, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Phase I-II Trial of Oral Cyclophosphamide, Prednisone and Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) (CPR) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1874-1874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
Esther Masih-Khan ◽  
Arooj Khan ◽  
Saima Dean ◽  
Peter Anglin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Oral Cyclophosphamide ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1874 Poster Board I-899 Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) and dexamethasone is an effective regimen in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts), with an overall response rate of 60.6% and median time to progression (TTP) of 13.4 months (Dimopoulos MA, et al, Leukemia 2009 Jul 23 [Epub ahead of print]). Oral cyclophosphamide and prednisone is an older regimen with excellent patient tolerance, and we sought to enhance the efficacy of lenalidomide by adding oral cyclophosphamide and prednisone in this phase I-II trial. The CPR regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide on days 1, 8 and 15; lenalidomide on days 1–21; and prednisone 100 mg every other day in a 28 day cycle. ASA 81 mg/day was given to all pts as DVT prophylaxis. Three dose levels were evaluated using a 3 by 3 dose escalation design. Between 11/2007–07/2009, 31 pts with relapsed/refractory MM who had not previously received lenalidomide were entered onto study. Median age was 61 (40–78) years and 61% were male. Immunoglobulin subtype was IgG in 19 pts (61%), IgA in 8 pts (26%) and light chain only in 4 pts (13%). Median number of prior regimens was 2 (1–5) and 28 pts had undergone previous ASCT, including double transplants in 6 pts. Prior therapy included thalidomide in 9 (29%) and bortezomib in 15 (48%). FISH cytogenetics were available in 13 pts; one had 13q deletion but none had t(4;14) or p53 deletion. At the time of protocol entry, median β 2-microglobulin level was 246 (92–767) nm/L, albumin 39 (34–48) g/L, creatinine 83 (50–126) μmol/L, platelet count 230 (75–337) × 109/L and ANC 2.5 (1.1–6.1) x 109/L. Protocol treatment is summarized in Table 1. Dose limiting toxicity was not observed during cycle 1 at any dose level. Grade 3–4 toxicities included thrombocytopenia in 5 pts (16%) and neutropenia in 9 pts (29%). These were managed with dose reduction and/or growth factor support. Four episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred. Other grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicities included abdominal pain/bacteremia in 1 pt in cohort 1; hypokalemia in 1 pt in cohort 2; and DVT in 2 pts, dizziness in 2 pts and fatigue in 1 pt in cohort 3. Using the International uniform response criteria (Durie BG, et al, Leukemia 2006; 20:1467–1473), the best response was documented at a median of 6 (1–5) cycles and included the following: dose level 1 (1 CR, 2 PR); dose level 2 (1 VGPR, 2 PR); dose level 3 (5 CR, 9 VGPR, 9 PR, 1 MR and 1 stable disease). At a median follow-up (F/U) of 12 (8–21) months, 20 pts remain on study, 2 have withdrawn and 9 pts have progressed at a median of 9 (4–13) months; only 1 one has died (due to MM). We conclude: 1) the combination of full doses of the agents in CPR can be given in a 28 day cycle with minimal toxicity; 2) the overall response rate (CR + VGPR + PR) in 31 pts to date is 93%; 3) at a median F/U of 1 year, only 9 pts (29%) have progressed; 4) longer follow-up is required to assess the TTP and survival of the CPR regimen. Disclosures: Reece: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide in combination with drugs other than dexamethasone. Anglin:Celgene: Honoraria. Chen:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria. Mikhael:Celgene: Honoraria. Trudel:Celgene: Honoraria.

scholarly journals A Multicenter, Open Label Phase I/II Study of Carfilzomib, Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1145-1145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Angelo Belotti ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Level 1

Abstract Background: Survival rates of multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts) has improved over the past few years, but patients inevitably relapse and become more resistant to subsequent treatments. Carfilzomib and Pomalidomide were both approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). Combinations including a proteasome inhibitor (PI) plus an immunomodulator (IMiD), such as Bortezomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (VRD) or Carfilzomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (CRD), showed a very high response rate with an acceptable toxicity. Moreover, in the CHAMPION1 study (Berenson et al Blood 2016), the weekly infusion of Carfilzomib showed to be as effective as the twice schedule. In this phase I/II study we assessed for the first time weekly Carfilzomib plus Pomalidomide and low dose Dexamethasone (wKPd) for the treatment of RRMM. Here we report preliminary results. Methods: the primary objective of the phase I part of the trial was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of wKPd combination. The primary objective of the phase II was to determine the rate of partial response (PR). Patients with RRMM, who received 1-3 prior lines of treatments and were refractory to Lenalidomide were eligible. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of oral Pomalidomide at fixed dose of 4 mg on days 1-21 (1 week off), oral or intravenous (iv) Dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15,22 and iv Carfilzomib at escalating doses on days 1,8,15. Escalation started at the dose of 36 mg/m2 (0 level) and used a standard 3+3 schema based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. Treatment was continued until relapse or intolerance. Results: A total of 57 patients were enrolled in 6 Italian centers. Fifty-two patients could be evaluated for this analysis (5 patients did not complete the first cycle yet). The median age was 62 years with a median time from diagnosis of 4 years. 17/39 (44%) of patients were considered high risk according to cytogenetic abnormalities [at least one among t (4;14) t (14;16) and deletion chromosome 17 (del17) detected by FISH]. In the phase I of the trial 15 patients were enrolled. The first 3 patients at the dose level 0 of Carfilzomib did not experience any DLT. In the next cohort with Carfilzomib 20/45 mg/m2 a G3 hypertension and a sudden death occurred. According to the protocol, 3 more patients were enrolled at dose level 0: 1 patient experienced G3 atrial fibrillation, 2 patients ≥ G3 hypertension. Considering the serious adverse events (SAEs) occurred, the trial was temporary stopped to evaluate the benefit of continuing the study. All the DLTs were cardiologic and occurred in patients with a prior history of cardiac disease. As per protocol, they were evaluated with ECG and echocardiogram before the enrolment and were considered eligible for the study. The safety committee established new procedures for the evaluation of cardiac function of potentially eligible patients, including 24 h continuing pressure monitoring before the enrolment and serial measurement of blood pressure during and after Carfilzomib infusions. Six more patients were enrolled at dose level -1 (Carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m2) and none experienced a DLT. The MTD was established at dose level -1 with Carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m2, Pomalidomide 4 mg and Dexamethasone 40 mg. In the phase II portion of the trial, 42 patients were enrolled. Considering both phase I and II portions of the study, the most frequent drug related, grade ≥ 3 AEs were hematologic (65% of neutropenia and 13% of thrombocytopenia) and cardiologic (17%, mainly hypertension). We recorded only 4% of infection and ≥ G3 peripheral neuropathy. The overall response rate (ORR) of phase I/II portions was 58% (30/52) including 25% (13/52) of ≥ very good partial remission (VGPR). The ORR of high risk patients was 44% (7/16) including 19% (3/16) of ≥ VGPR. With a median follow-up of 10 months, median progression free survival (PFS) was 9.5 months and the median overall survival was not reached. Conclusions: This is the first phase I/II trial that combined weekly Carfilzomib with Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone. This combination was highly effective in RRMM. After a median follow-up of 10 months, wKRd showed a double median PFS in comparison with Pomalidomide-low dose dexamethasone (Sanmiguel et al Lancet Oncology 2013): 9.5 vs 4 months respectively, confirming the efficacy of combining a PI with an IMiD. An updated analysis will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Bringhen: BMS: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Amgen: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; Mundipharma: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; Karyopharm: Other: ADVISORY BOARD. Larocca:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Gaidano:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Oliva:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Sonneveld:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Palumbo:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Takeda: Employment, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbivie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; SANOFI: Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals EARLY Results of TOTAL Therapy 7 (TT7): High Response Rates of NEWLY Diagnosed High Risk Myeloma to Daratumumab

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4569-4569 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frits van Rhee ◽  
Sharmilan Thanendrarajan ◽  
Carolina D. Schinke ◽  
Jeffery R. Sawyer ◽  
Adam Rosenthal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Early Results ◽  
Research Grant

Background. The TT approach has significantly improved the outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) by combining new drugs with a regimen that comprises induction, tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), consolidation and maintenance. However, a group of 15% of patients with high risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) have derived little benefit despite similar response rates to induction chemotherapy and ASCT when compared to low risk MM. The poor outcome of HRMM is explained by early relapse post ASCT resulting in a short progression free survival (PFS) with only 15-20% of patients surviving long-term. Daratumumab (Dara) is a human IgG1k anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody that has shown favorable results in early single-arm studies and more recently in phase III studies for relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed MM. In TT7, we introduced Dara during all phases of therapy, including immune consolidation early post ASCT, to improve responses rate and PFS in HRMM. Methods. Patients had newly diagnosed HRMM as defined by high risk cytogenetic abnormalities, presence of extramedullary disease, >3 focal lesions on CT-PET, elevated LDH due to MM, or ISS II/III with cytogenetic abnormality. Dara (16mg/kgx1) was added to induction with KTD-PACE (carfilzomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone; and four-day continuous infusions of cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide). Conditioning for tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was with fractionated melphalan (50mg/m2x4) (fMEL) based on prior observations that patients with adverse cytogenetics fare better with fMEL rather than single high dose MEL200mg/m2.In the inter tandem ASCT period immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/kg) alone for 2 doses was followed by Dara (16mg/kg) on day 1 combined with K (36mg/m2) and D (20mg) weekly for 2 cycles. DaraKD was administered to avoid treatment free periods allowing for myeloma regrowth. The 2nd ASCT was followed by further immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/k) for 2 doses, and maintenance therapy for 3 yrs with 3-months block of alternating Dara-KD (dara 16mg/kg day 1; K 36mg/m2 and dex 20mg weekly) and Dara-lenalidomide (R)D (dara 16mg/kg day 1; R 15mg day 1-21 q28 and D 20mg weekly). Results. TT7 enrolled 43 patients thus far. The median follow-up was 11 months (range: 1-22). The median age was 61 yrs (range 44-73). Sixteen patients were ≥65 yrs (37.2%). A mean of 29.4x106 CD34+ cells/kg (range: 4.6-86.4) were collected. 36 patients completed ASCT #1 (83.7%) and 18 (41.9%) ASCT #2, whilst 14 patients have proceeded to the maintenance phase. R-ISS II/III or metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities were present in 85.1 and 58.1% of patients, respectively. Elevated LDH or >3FL on CT-PET were noted in 30 and 41.8%. The 1-yr cumulative incidence estimates for reaching VGPR and PR were 87 and 83%, respectively. A CR or sCR was achieved in 68 and 46%. The 1-yr estimates of PFS and OS were 91.6 and 87.2%. 40 subjects are alive, whilst 5 progressed on study therapy and 3 subsequently died. 38 patients are progression free at the time of reporting. Dara was well-tolerated and no subjects discontinued therapy due to dara-related side effects. The CR and sCR rates compared favorably to the predecessor HRMM TT5 protocol where CR and sCR rates were 59 and 27%. Conclusion. The early results of TT7 point to increased response rates of HRMM to a dara-based TT regimen with especially higher rates of CR and sCR. Longer follow-up is required to determine if these early results translate into superior PFS and OS. Figure Disclosures van Rhee: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Adicet Bio: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Castleman Disease Collaborative Network: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy. Walker:Celgene: Research Funding. Morgan:Amgen, Roche, Abbvie, Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Other: research grant, Research Funding. Davies:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Consultant/Advisor; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research Grant, Research Funding.

Velcade, Intravenous Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (VCD) Induction for Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma (German DSMM XIa Trial).

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 131-131 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hermann Einsele ◽  
Peter Liebisch ◽  
Christian Langer ◽  
Martin Kropff ◽  
Hannes Wandt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Prognostic Impact ◽  
Short Period ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Abstract 131 Introduction. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) after cytoreductive induction is considered standard of care for younger patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM). The previous standard of induction, the Vincristin-Adriamycin-Dexamethasone (VAD) combination, achieves inferior results compared with induction regimens which combine the proteasome inhibitor Velcade (V = Bortezomib) with Dexamethasone (D)(=VD) and a cytostatic drug such as Doxorubicin (PAD = VD plus Doxorubicin). Velcade-based induction therapy was shown to translate into better myeloma control after high dose melphalan and to lead to prolonged progression-free survival. In order to find a more efficacious and safer drug combination for induction therapy in MM, we tested the combination of Velcade with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (VCD). Methods. This trial was designed as an open, prospective, multi-center, uncontrolled, combined phase II/III study. As previously reported (Kropff M et al., Ann Hematol 2009), in the first 30 pts the optimal dose of iv Cyclophosphamide in combination with V and D was defined as 900 mg/m2 on d1. Between 03/2006 and 03/2009 we enrolled an additional 370 pts up to 60 years of age with untreated MM to receive three 3-week cycles of induction treatment with V 1.3 mg/m2 iv d1,4,8,11; D 40 mg/d orally d1,2,4,5,8,9,11,12; and C 900mg/m2 iv d1 before scheduled high dose melphalan and ASCT. The primary endpoint of the study is response rate on day 63 after 3 cycles of VCD according to EBMT and IMWG criteria. Results. Final data from 400 pts from 39 German centers will be presented at the meeting. In the currently evaluable 300 pts (mean age 52.3 years; 1.7% stage I, 21.3% stage II, 77.0% stage III) molecular cytogenetic analysis showed a prevalence of 13q- in 38%, of t[4;14] in 13% and of 17p- in 12% of pts (no changes in 35%). All 300 pts (88.3% of whom completed three cycles) were included in the intent-to-treat analysis. Overall response rate (ORR = CR+PR) was 84%, with 10% CR and 74% PR, 5.7% MR, 7.3% NC and 2.3% PD. The negative prognostic impact of 13q- or t[4;14] was abrogated (ORR normal 87.3%, 13q- 83.7%, t[4;14] 90.0%), the unfavorable influence of p53 loss in the 17p- subgroup was still detectable (ORR 69.2%) but this did not reach statistical significance. VGPR rates will be reported at the meeting. Serious adverse events were documented in 78/300 (26.0%) patients. Death rate was remarkably low (1.3%, of which one was not related to the trial medication). 155/300 (52%) of pts experienced grade 3/4 non-serious AEs and of these leucopenia (93/300 pts= 31%), thrombocytopenia (7%), neutropenia (6%), anaemia (5%) were the most frequent events. 80 AEs grade 3 or 4 and 45 SAEs were of infectious origin and occurred in 47/300 pts. 80/130 SAEs (61.5%) were at least possibly related to Velcade. 101/300 pts (34%) developed episodes of peripheral neuropathy. PNP was grade 1 in 62/300 pt (20.7%), grade 2 in 31/300 pt (10.3%) and grade 3 in 7/300 pts (2.3%). Conclusion. This analysis demonstrates that proteasome inhibition by Velcade in combination with Dexamethasone and iv Cyclophosphamide (VCD) is an induction regimen for newly diagnosed MM which is highly effective in a short period of time, has a rather low toxicity profile and is feasible for administration in an outpatient setting. Based on these characteristics, VCD qualifies to become a new standard for MM induction therapy. Disclosures: Einsele: OrthioBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Bortezomib is licensed as monotherapy for use in relapsed/refractory MM and in combination with melphalan/Prednisone in the first-line treatment of MM pts ineligible for HD-MEL and ASCT. . Liebisch:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Langer:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy. Kropff:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kröger:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Ostermann:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Mügge:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Wolf:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Gramatzki:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Maschmeyer:OrthoBiotech: Travel Grant. Sezer:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Heidemann:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Jäger:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Dechow:Celgene: Research Funding. Simon:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria. Straka:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Fingerle-Rowson:orthoBiotech: Employment. Knop:OrthoBiotech: Honoraria.

Impact Of FISH Abnormalities On Response To Lenalidomide In Patients With Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 3210-3210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shivlal Pandey ◽  
S. Vincent Rajkumar ◽  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
Rhett P Ketterling ◽  
Martha Q Lacy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Molecular Subtype ◽  
Wide Spectrum ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Genetic Abnormality ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Lower Response Rate

Abstract Background Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease with variable responses to different therapeutic regimens and wide spectrum of survival. Much of the heterogeneity in the outcomes appear to be related to the underlying primary genetic abnormality, which in the majority of patients consist of either translocations involving the heavy chain region on chromosome 14 (IgH translocation) or trisomies of odd numbered chromosomes. We hypothesized that the response to lenalidomide (Len) therapy would vary significantly based on the underlying molecular subtype of myeloma. Methods We examined a cohort of 518 patients with available FISH results, who had been exposed to Len-based regimens. Medical records were reviewed and data regarding the best response and time to next therapy following treatment with Len-based regimen was obtained. Data from the first use of Len was collected. Len was given in combination with dexamethasone (Dex) with or without alkylators in combination. Patients who received a combination of IMiD and bortezomib as their first exposure to Len were excluded. Patients were grouped according to whether FISH showed a trisomy or an IgH translocation. Results The median age was 62 (28-91), and the median estimated follow up from diagnosis was 52 months (95% CI; 50, 54) with 359 (69%) alive at the time of analysis. An IgH translocation was seen in 129 (30%) of patients and a trisomy in 268 (62%) of patients. IgH translocations included t(11;14) in 92 (18%), t(4;14) in 45 (9%), t(14;16) in 21 (4%); 34 (8%) had both translocations and trisomies. For the current analysis, we included only patients with either a translocation or trisomy (n=397) excluding those with neither or both of the abnormalities. The median time to start of Len from diagnosis was 0 months (range, 0-64). A PR or better was seen in 80% of patients with trisomy compared with 63% of the patients with translocation (p<0.001); and the response rate was similar among the different translocation types. The median TTNT was 28 months among trisomy pts compared with 17 months for translocated patients (p<0.001, figure). The median TTNT was similar across the different types of translocations (Figure). Among this group, 134 patients proceeded to an autologous SCT after Len induction. Among these patients, no difference was seen in terms of TTNT (29 months for patients with translocation vs. 28 months for those with trisomy (p=0.8). Finally, the TTNT was no different if Len was used with Dex or as part of an alkylator combination. Conclusion The current data supports the hypothesis that the underlying primary genetic abnormality can affect the response to a particular therapy. In this study response to Len was significantly higher in myeloma with trisomy compared with IgH translocated myeloma. Although the routine use of combinations of a proteasome inhibitor plus Len in frontline therapy in all patients with myeloma may overcome the lower response rate in IgH translocated patients, in most countries such a regimen is not approved or economically feasible. Based on our study, newly diagnosed patients with evidence of trisomy on FISH could be considered for a Len-based regimen such as lenalidomide-low dose dexamethasone. Additional studies should examine if use of bortezomib in patients with IgH translocation will lead to better outcomes compared with Len based therapies. Disclosures: Lacy: Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Millenium, Jansenn, Pfizer: Research Funding. Kumar:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding.

Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase 1b Study of Daratumumab in Combination with Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients with at Least 2 Lines of Prior Therapy and Relapsed or Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 508-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajai Chari ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
Attaya Suvannasankha ◽  
Joseph W. Fay ◽  
Bertrand Arnulf ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Institutional Research ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Multicenter Phase ◽  
Phase 1B ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Introduction : Daratumumab (DARA) is a human anti-CD38 IgG1κ monoclonal antibody with remarkable safety and activity as monotherapy in heavily treated relapsed and refractory (RR) multiple myeloma (MM) (Lokhorst HM. J Clin Oncol 2014;32 Suppl:abstr 8513. Lonial S. J Clin Oncol 2015;33 Suppl:abstr LBA8512). DARA has demonstrated clinical activity in combination with lenalidomide (LEN) and dexamethasone (D) in relapsed or RR MM (Plesner T. Blood 2014;124(21):84). This ongoing 4-arm, multicenter, phase 1b study (NCT01998971) evaluated the safety and efficacy of DARA in combination with various backbone therapies and pomalidomide plus D (POM-D). Results in newly diagnosed patients treated with DARA and backbone therapies were previously reported (Mateos MV, et al. Haematologica 2015;100(s1):84). Methods : Patients in the DARA + POM-D arm had relapsed or RR MM with ≥2 prior lines of therapy including ≥2 consecutive cycles of LEN and bortezomib. During 28-day treatment cycles patients received DARA 16 mg/kg qw for 2 cycles, then q2w for 4 cycles, and q4w until disease progression (PD). Pomalidomide 4 mg was administered qd for 21 days with D 40 mg qw (20 mg for patients >75 years of age). The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of DARA in combination with POM-D. Overall response rate (ORR) was a secondary endpoint. Disease responses were evaluated by an independent data safety monitoring board. Results: A total of 77 patients were enrolled into the DARA + POM-D arm. The median (range) age was 64 (35-86) years and the median number of prior therapies was 3.5 (2-10). Sixty-five percent of the patients were refractory to bortezomib, 30% to carfilzomib, 88% to lenalidomide, and 65% to both a PI and IMiD. With a median (range) duration of follow-up of 72 (1-423) days, 28 (36%) patients have discontinued treatment due to PD (15 [20%]), adverse events (AEs; 6 [8%]), death or physician's decision (3 [4%] each), and one (1%) patient withdrawal. The median (range) duration of treatment was 69 days (1-416), and the median (range) number of infusions was 7.5 (1-25). Forty-nine (64%) patients continue on study treatment and enrollment is ongoing. There was little additional toxicity when DARA was added to POM-D other than DARA-specific infusion related reactions (IRRs; 47/77 patients). Most occurred on Cycle 1 Day 1 (45/47 patients), and the most common (>10%) IRRs were chills (13%), cough (13%), and dyspnea (11%). The most common (>10%) and grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) are presented in Table 1. Five patients died within 30 days of receiving study treatment due to AEs (4[5%]) or progressive disease (1 [1%]). In 53 patients with >1 post-baseline assessment, the ORR was 58.5%, with 3 stringent complete responses (sCR), 1 complete response (CR), 12 very good partial responses (VGPR), 15 partial responses (PR), 2 minimal responses, 18 stable disease, and 2 PD. Many responses deepened over time. Median (range) time to first response was 30 (28-92) days. After a median follow-up of 148 days, 4 out of 31 responders developed PD. Among the evaluable double refractory patients (n = 40), there was 1 sCR, 1 CR, 10 VGPRs, and 11 PRs with an ORR of 57.5%. Conclusions : The addition of DARA to POM-D was well tolerated and did not result in additional toxicities with the exception of DARA-related infusion reactions. Deep and durable responses were observed quickly, along with a high response rate. Study enrollment is ongoing and data will be updated at the meeting. Table 1. Most Common (>10%) Adverse Events (N = 77) Adverse Event, n (%) Any Grade Grade ≥3 Neutropenia 42 (54.5%) 39 (50.6%) Anemia 28 (36.4%) 16 (20.8%) Fatigue 28 (36.4%) 4 (5.2%) Cough 24 (31.2%) 0 Nausea 21 (27.3%) 0 Dyspnea 20 (26.0%) 5 (6.5%) Diarrhea 19 (24.7%) 1 (1.3%) Leukopenia 19 (24.7%) 12 (15.6%) Thrombocytopenia 17 (22.1%) 8 (10.4%) Pyrexia 16 (20.8%) 1 (1.3%) Dizziness 15 (19.5%) 0 Chills 14 (18.2%) 0 Nasal Congestion 14 (18.2%) 0 Upper Respiratory Tract Infection 14 (18.2%) 1 (1.3%) Back Pain 13 (16.9%) 2 (2.6%) Constipation 13 (16.9%) 0 Tremor 13 (16.9%) 2 (2.6%) Insomnia 12 (15.6%) 1 (1.3%) Lymphopenia 11 (14.3%) 7 (9.1%) Muscle Spasms 11 (14.3%) 0 Vomiting 11 (14.3%) 0 Arthralgia 9 (11.7%) 1 (1.3%) Pruritus 9 (11.7%) 0 Throat Irritation 9 (11.7%) 0 Anxiety 8 (10.4%) 0 Headache 8 (10.4%) 0 Hypertension 8 (10.4%) 4 (5.2%) Musculoskeletal Chest Pain 8 (10.4%) 2 (2.6%) Peripheral Edema 8 (10.4%) 1 (1.3%) Disclosures Chari: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Consultancy, Other: Institutional Research Funding, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biotest: Other: Institutional Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lonial:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Suvannasankha:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding. Arnulf:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Qin:Janssen: Employment. Masterson:Janssen: Employment. Nottage:Janssen: Employment. Schecter:Janssen: Employment. Ahmadi:Janssen: Employment. Weiss:Janssen and Millennium: Consultancy; Janssen and Onclave: Research Funding. Krishnan:Millenium: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Lentzsch:Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Axiom: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Ibrutinib and Obinutuzumab in CLL: Improved MRD Response Rates with Substantially Enhanced MRD Depletion for Patients with >1 Year Prior Ibrutinib Exposure

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 181-181 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Rawstron ◽  
Talha Munir ◽  
Kristian Brock ◽  
Nichola Webster ◽  
Samuel Munoz Vicente ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Extension Study ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Support Research

Abstract Background: Ibrutinib inhibits CLL cell proliferation and results in prolonged remission, but MRD responses are rare. Obinutuzumab is a second generation anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that is effective in CLL and can result in MRD responses. In the IcICLLe study (ISRCTN12695354), 40 participants with CLL requiring treatment (20 treatment-naïve, 20 with relapsed/refractory [R/R] disease) received ibrutinib until complete remission with <0.01% Minimal Residual Disease (MRD) in the bone marrow or disease progression. The IcICLLe Extension Study expanded IcICLLe to examine the efficacy and safety of the combination of obinutuzumab and ibrutinib in 40 patients with R/R CLL, of which 10/40 had received prior ibrutinib on the IcICLLe trial. Initial results after 1 month of combination treatment indicated that adding obinutuzumab to ibrutinib improved CLL depletion, and 18 month follow-up data is now available. Aim: to determine the MRD response rates for patients with R/R CLL treated with ibrutinib and obinutuzumab in ibrutinib-naïve trial participants compared to those treated with >1 year prior ibrutinib. Patients: The IcICLLe Extension Study recruited 40 participants with relapsed/refractory CLL requiring treatment. They received continuous ibrutinib (420mg OD) with 6 cycles of obinutuzumab given over 6 months (M). Ten participants had >1 year of prior ibrutinib monotherapy in IcICLLe and 30 were ibrutinib-naïve with obinutuzumab started 24 hours after first ibrutinib dose. Patient characteristics and Adverse Events (AEs, collected from registration until 30 days after treatment cessation and reported at 1, 3, and 6M, and 6-monthly thereafter using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0) are shown in Table 1. MRD assessment was performed according to ERIC guidelines with a maximum detection limit of 0.001%/10-5. Results: In the 20 R/R patients treated with ibrutinib monotherapy there were no IWCLL CR/CRi responses and no patients achieved <0.01% CLL in the PB or BM at the 6 month response assessment. PB MRD levels either remained stable or improved at subsequent timepoints, with 1/20 achieving <0.01% PB MRD at 18M. The addition of obinutuzumab did not have a discernible impact on safety but was associated with a higher response rates and greater depth of MRD depletion than observed in patients treated with ibrutinib monotherapy, particularly in patients who had received ibrutinib for >1 year prior to combination with obinutuzumab (see Table 1). Patients receiving obinutuzumab after >1 year prior ibrutinib monotherapy achieved a higher response rate compared to ibrutinib-naive patients (IWCLL CR/CRi 50% vs. 30%), with a higher proportion of patients achieving <0.01% BM MRD (50% vs. 6%) and a greater depth of disease depletion (3.1 vs. 1.5 log reduction). PB MRD levels continued to improve in ibrutinib-naïve patients after cessation of obinutuzumab with 30% (9/30 with 4/30 inevaluable) achieving PB MRD <0.01% rate at 12 months post-obinutuzumab, compared to 60% (6/10 with 2/10 inevaluable) of patients at the same timepoint (12 months post-obinutuzumab) who had received ibrutinib for >1 year prior to starting obinutuzumab. The difference in extent of disease depletion observed with obinutuzumab may be related to the pre-obinutuzumab disease bulk because the majority of patients (7/10) with >1 year prior ibrutinib treatment had already resolved any lymphadenopathy prior to receiving obinutuzumab. Conclusions: The results suggest that the addition of obinutuzumab to ibrutinib may result in a substantial improvement in the depletion of CLL cells from the PB and BM for ibrutinib-naïve patients. However, a greater impact in MRD response rate and depth of depletion was seen when obinutuzumab was introduced after >1 year of ibrutinib treatment and tumour bulk was low. For patients with persistent disease during/ following pathway inhibition treatments, the addition of anti-CD20 antibody therapy may be effective at improving MRD response rates. Disclosures Rawstron: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BD Bio-sciences: Research Funding; Beckman Coulter: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Munir:MorphoSys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alexion: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Brock:GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; Merck Sharp Dohme: Other: Reimbursement of conference fees; Roche: Other: Reimbursement of expenses; Lilly: Honoraria. Pettitt:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Chugai: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; GSK/Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Napp: Research Funding. Fox:Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Personal fees and non-financial support, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sunesis: Consultancy. Devereux:Janssen: Other: Personal fees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fegan:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Napp: Honoraria. Bloor:Janssen: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Hillmen:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Phase II Study of the Combination of Daratumumab, Ixazomib, Pomalidomide, and Dexamethasone As Salvage Therapy in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Results of a Safety Run-in Analysis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3117-3117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin L. Costello ◽  
Michelle Padilla ◽  
Edward D. Ball ◽  
Carolyn Mulroney
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Observation Period

Background: Triplet combination strategies have widely been accepted as the standard of care for the management of multiple myeloma due to improved outcomes as compared to doublets. The combination of daratumumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone (DPd) has previously demonstrated deep and durable responses, including high rates of MRD negativity, in a heavily pretreated patient population. Quadruplet regimens offer an opportunity to further improve upon these results. We report preliminary findings from an ongoing phase 2 multicenter trial of the addition of ixazomib to the combination of DPd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. The primary objective is to determine overall response rate and the safety and tolerability of this novel regimen. Key secondary endpoints include PFS, OS and MRD negativity rates. Methods: Eligible patients may have received ≥1 and ≤3 prior lines of therapy, have had no prior exposure to daratumumab or ixazomib, and may have not progressed on prior pomalidomide. Patients receive daratumumab 16mg/kg IV weekly x 8 doses, biweekly x 8 doses, then monthly, pomalidomide 4mg PO days 1-21/28, ixazomib 4mg PO days 1,8,15 every 28 days, and dexamethasone 40mg PO weekly. Patients continue on therapy until disease progression, intolerability or preference. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were defined as grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (AE) or any AE that required a dose modification of pomalidomide or ixazomib at the lowest dose levels on a dose de-escalation plan. An interim safety review was performed after the first 6 patients were enrolled and completed the DLT observation period, which is the first cycle (28 days) since the start of a new dose level of pomalidomide and/or ixazomib. Results: At the time of this analysis, six patients have been enrolled and treated, and completed the DLT observation period. Patients had a median age of 62 (range 52-65) and median number of 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-2). All patients were refractory to lenalidomide and pomalidomide-naïve. Common adverse events (AEs) included neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, GI upset, and upper respiratory infection. Grade 3-4 AEs were predominantly hematologic including neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, but also included grade 3 hypertension in 1 patient, and grade 3 hypophosphatemia, grade 4 hypokalemia, and grade 3 small bowel infection in 1 patient. No IRR > grade 2 occurred with daratumumab administration. No DLTs occurred in the first six patients in the safety run-in. The overall response rate of the cohort is 100% with 3 patients achieving a stringent complete response (CR), and 3 patients achieving a very good partial response (VGPR) after a median of 7 cycles of treatment. One patient discontinued therapy due to influenza A, the other five remain on therapy. Minimal residual disease assessments are being performed by EuroFlow for patients in VGPR or better due to concern for daratumumab interference. Pharmacodynamic changes in patients' tumor microenvironments were established by custom panel mass cytometry to include T-cell memory and activated subpopulations, B-cell content, NK-cell subpopulations as well as MDSCs, Tregs and T-exhaustive markers, monocytes and dendritic cells. Conclusion: The quadruplet regimen DIPd in patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma is a well-tolerated combination and has shown early safety in an initial safety run-in analysis. Enrollment continues in an expansion cohort to assess efficacy at multiple sites with the University of California Hematologic Malignancies Consortium. Figure Disclosures Costello: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document