Open-Label, Phase 2 Study of Blinatumomab after First-Line Rituximab-Chemotherapy in Adults with Newly Diagnosed, High-Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Background: Rituximab combined with chemotherapy (R-chemotherapy) is the standard of care first-line treatment for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Despite success with R-chemotherapy, 30% to 50% of patients with high-risk DLBCL will relapse, and outcomes are poor among patients who relapse within one year of diagnosis. Given the challenge of successful salvage, novel first-line therapies are needed. Blinatumomab, a bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE®) antibody construct that directs cytotoxic T cells to lyse CD19-expressing B cells, has shown efficacy as salvage therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL. This open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03023878) assessed the efficacy and safety of blinatumomab after first-line R-chemotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk DLBCL. Methods: Patients (≥18 y) had proven high-risk DLBCL (International Prognostic Index [IPI] 3−5 and double/triple hit or double MYC/BCL2 expressor) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology group performance status ≤2. To be eligible for blinatumomab, patients were required to achieve complete metabolic response (CMR), partial metabolic response (PMR), or stable metabolic response by PET/CT after a run-in period with 6 cycles of R-chemotherapy (R-CHOP, R-DA-EPOCH, or R-CHOEP). Blinatumomab was given by continuous intravenous infusion in a single 84-day cycle 1 (9 μg/day for 7 days, 28 μg/day for 7 days, and 112 μg/day for 42 days, followed by a 28-day treatment-free interval) and an optional 28-day cycle 2 (9 μg/day for 7 days, 28 μg/day for 7 days, and 112 μg/day for 14 days) for patients without progressive metabolic disease (PMD). The primary endpoint was the incidence and severity of adverse events (AEs). Additional endpoints were objective response rate (ORR [CMR + PMR]) per Lugano criteria, minimal residual disease (MRD) by plasma cell−free circulating tumor DNA, overall survival (OS), and pharmacokinetics (PK). Results: Of 47 patients enrolled, 17 (36%) discontinued R-chemotherapy run-in (protocol criteria, n=6; patient request, n=5; disease progression, n=3; ineligibility, n=1; AE, n=1; death, n=1) and 30 (64%) completed the run-in (2 did not proceed to blinatumomab). Of 28 patients who received blinatumomab, 26 (93%) had high or high-intermediate IPI; 8 (29%) were double/triple hit and 10 (36%) were double protein expressors (Table). In total, 26 (93%) patients completed cycle 1; ten of 11 (91%) patients completed optional cycle 2. Blinatumomab PK were consistent with those in previous studies. After the R-chemotherapy run-in before starting blinatumomab, 24 patients had objective metabolic responses and 4 had no metabolic response (NMR). After blinatumomab treatment, the ORR (within 12 weeks of starting blinatumomab) was 89% (25/28 patients; 95% CI, 72−98; Table). The 4 patients with NMR before blinatumomab had objective responses after blinatumomab treatment. Three patients with objective responses before blinatumomab relapsed after blinatumomab. Twenty-six (93%) patients were still alive with a median follow-up time of 8.6 months; 2 died (disease progression; n=1; infection not related to treatment, n=1). Nine of 13 (69%) patients during the R-chemotherapy run-in were MRD positive, all of whom converted to MRD negative after treatment with blinatumomab. After treatment with blinatumomab, 17 of 18 (94%) patients were MRD negative; the MRD positive patient had PMD. During blinatumomab treatment, 11 (39%) patients had grade ≥3 AEs, and 5 (18%) had grade ≥4 AEs. Two (7%) patients discontinued treatment due to AEs (grade 3 neurotoxicity; grade 4 neutropenia). Consistent with previous blinatumomab reports, neurologic events (NEs) were reported in 17 (61%) patients, including 3 (11%) with grade 3 NEs and 1 (4%) with NEs leading to treatment discontinuation. No patients had grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome. Other grade ≥3 events of interest included neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (n=4; 14%) and infection (n=3; 11%). Conclusions: In patients with newly diagnosed, high-risk DLBCL, blinatumomab monotherapy after first-line R-chemotherapy led to an 89% ORR, and safety was consistent with that in earlier studies in DLBCL. Thus, blinatumomab is a potential treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed disease. Disclosures Katz: Stemline: Speakers Bureau; Dova: Consultancy. Chu:Celgene: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Thieblemont:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Kyte: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Morley:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: speaker fees, conference support ; TAKEDA: Other: conference support ; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Other: speaker fees; ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference support; ABBVIE: Other: speaker fees. Chen:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kalabus:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morris:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Avilion:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. González-Barca:Takeda: Honoraria; Kiowa: Consultancy; Celtrion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Subcutaneous Epcoritamab in Combination with R-CHOP in Patients with Previously Untreated High-Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Preliminary Results from a Phase 1/2 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-146569 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1413-1413

Author(s):

David Belada ◽

Jacob Haaber Christensen ◽

Kristina Drott ◽

Sylvia Snauwaert ◽

Joshua Brody ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Metabolic Response ◽

Phase 1 ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: In patients (pts) with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) that is considered high risk (revised International Prognostic Index [R-IPI]: 3-5), standard treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is associated with a 4-year overall survival rate of 55% (Sehn et al, Blood 2007). Epcoritamab (DuoBody ®-CD3×CD20) is a subcutaneously administered bispecific antibody that simultaneously binds to CD3 on T cells and CD20 on malignant B cells to induce T-cell-mediated killing. Single-agent epcoritamab demonstrated a manageable safety profile and substantial antitumor activity in pts with heavily pretreated B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the first-in-human phase 1/2 trial (EPCORE NHL-1; NCT03625037). Among pts with relapsed/refractory DLBCL treated at the identified recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 48 mg (n=8), the overall response rate was 88% and the complete response rate was 38% (Hutchings, Lancet, in press). These encouraging data supported initiation of the EPCORE NHL-2 phase 1/2 trial (NCT04663347), which is evaluating epcoritamab in combination with various standard of care therapies in pts with B-cell NHL. We present data from arm 1 of this trial, in which epcoritamab in combination with R-CHOP is evaluated in pts with previously untreated high-risk DLBCL. Methods: Adults with previously untreated DLBCL and an R-IPI score ≥3 received flat-dose epcoritamab in combination with standard R-CHOP for 6 cycles followed by epcoritamab monotherapy. The study includes a dose-escalation cohort (epcoritamab doses: dose level 1 = 24 mg; dose level 2 = 48 mg). Step-up dosing of epcoritamab (ie, priming and intermediate doses before first full dose) and corticosteroid prophylaxis were used as previously described (Hutchings, Lancet, in press) to mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Tumor response was evaluated by positron emission tomography-computed tomography obtained once every 6 weeks for the first 24 weeks. Results: As of July 15, 2021, 9 pts have been treated with the combination of epcoritamab + R-CHOP (4 with epcoritamab 24 mg; 5 with 48 mg). Median age was 66 years (range, 56-78). All pts had stage III-IV disease. At data cutoff, all pts remained on treatment with a median follow-up of 12.2 weeks (range, 2.2-28.2). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were CRS (56%; all grade 1/2), anemia (56%; grade 1-3), neutropenia (44%; all grade 3/4), fatigue (33%; all grade 1/2), and peripheral neuropathy (33%; all grade 1/2). Notably, no grade ≥3 CRS events or cases of febrile neutropenia were reported. No dose-limiting toxicities have been observed. Four pts have had ≥1 response assessment, with 3 achieving complete metabolic response (CMR; all in the epcoritamab 24 mg dose-escalation cohort) and 1 pt achieving partial metabolic response (epcoritamab 48 mg cohort) by week 6; 2 of the 3 pts with CMR had response assessments at 6 months, and both remained in CMR at that time. Both dose cohorts have been cleared by the Dose Escalation Committee and Safety Committee, and the expansion part has been opened to enroll additional pts. Conclusions: These preliminary data from a small number of pts suggest that epcoritamab in combination with R-CHOP has a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals. Adverse events were similar to those previously reported for epcoritamab and R-CHOP individually. All evaluable pts achieved early responses, and all pts remain on treatment. Updated and additional data from pts treated in the expansion phase will be presented. These findings warrant further evaluation of epcoritamab for the treatment of high-risk, newly diagnosed DLBCL. Disclosures Belada: Genmab: Research Funding. Drott: Roche: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Respiratorius AB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Narkhede: TG Therapeautics: Research Funding; Genmab: Other: Medical writing support, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Elliot: Genmab: Current Employment, Patents & Royalties: P158-US-PSP3 . Liu: Genmab: Current Employment. Cota Stirner: AbbVie: Current Employment. Abbas: Genmab: Current Employment. Falchi: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding. Clausen: Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expences ASH 2019; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel expences 15th ICML ; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Nilotinib Shows Safety and Efficacy in Older Patients (≥ 65 years) with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase Comparable with That in Younger Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase: Results From ENESTnd,

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.3768.3768 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 3768-3768 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Richard A. Larson ◽

Udomsak Bunworasate ◽

Anna G. Turkina ◽

Stuart L. Goldberg ◽

Pedro Dorlhiac-Llacer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Chronic Phase ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3768 Background: Data from the phase 3, randomized multicenter ENESTnd trial have demonstrated the superiority of nilotinib over imatinib after 24 months (mo) of follow-up, with significantly higher rates of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR), and significantly lower rates of progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC). The current subanalysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (Nil300) and nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (Nil400) in older (≥ 65 years [yrs] at study entry) patients (pts) with newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase (CP) with a minimum follow-up of 24 mo. Methods: In ENESTnd, 846 pts stratified by Sokal risk score were randomized 1:1:1 to Nil300 (n = 282), Nil400 (n = 281), or imatinib 400 mg once daily (n = 283). Pts with impaired cardiac function or ECOG performance status > 2 were excluded. Rates of CCyR and MMR by 24 mo, progression to AP/BC on treatment, and safety were evaluated according to age group (< 65 vs ≥ 65 yrs) in the 2 nilotinib arms. Safety data are reported for any pt who received ≥ 1 dose of nilotinib (n = 279, Nil300; n = 277, Nil400). Results: 36 pts (13%) and 28 pts (10%) were ≥ 65 yrs old in the Nil300 and Nil400 arms, respectively. Of the pts aged ≥ 65 yrs, 51/64 (80%) had an ECOG performance status of 0 at baseline and 60/64 (94%) had intermediate or high Sokal risk scores. Of the older pts, 8 (22%) on Nil300 and 6 (21%) on Nil400 had type 2 diabetes at baseline. CCyR rates by 24 mo were 83% and 68% among older pts treated with Nil300 and Nil400, respectively, and 87% for pts aged < 65 yrs in each nilotinib arm. By 24 mo, MMR was achieved by 72% and 61% of older pts on Nil300 and Nil400, respectively; in pts aged < 65 yrs, the respective rates were 71% and 67%. All 5 pts who progressed to AP/BC on treatment (2 on Nil300 and 3 on Nil400) were aged < 65 yrs. The frequency of grade 3/4 hematologic adverse events (AEs) was low in older pts; no pts had grade 3/4 neutropenia and only 1 older pt reported grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia in each nilotinib arm (Table). Transient, asymptomatic lipase elevations were reported in 11% and 16% of older pts treated with Nil300 and Nil400, and 7% of younger pts in each arm. Hyperglycemia occurred in 23% and 16% of older pts on Nil300 and Nil400, respectively, and 4% of younger pts in each arm; regardless of age, no pt discontinued study due to hyperglycemia. Among the 12 older pts with grade 3/4 hyperglycemia (8 on Nil300; 4 on Nil400), 9 pts had type 2 diabetes at baseline. There were no QTcF increases of > 60 msec from baseline in older pts and 3 in nilotinib-treated pts < 65 yrs old (1 on Nil300; 2 on Nil400). QTcF prolongation of > 500 msec did not occur in any pt treated with nilotinib on study. Periodic echocardiograms were done, and there were no decreases of > 15% in left ventricular ejection fraction from baseline in any pt treated with nilotinib on study. There were 4 cases of ischemic heart disease reported in older pts (1/35 [3%] on Nil300; 3/25 [12%] on Nil400) and 7 cases in pts < 65 yrs of age (4/244 [2%] on Nil300; 3/252 [1%] on Nil400). No sudden deaths occurred on study. Discontinuation occurred in approximately 25% of older and younger pts with Nil300, of which, 6% and 9%, respectively, were due to AEs/lab abnormalities. Discontinuation from study with Nil400 was 46% in older pts and 19% in younger pts; of which, 36% and 10% were due to AEs/lab abnormalities. Conclusions: Older pts treated with nilotinib demonstrated high rates of cytogenetic and molecular responses and low rates of progression. Nilotinib was generally well tolerated by older pts. In older pts, Nil300 had numerically higher rates of CCyR and MMR and was generally better tolerated (as evidenced by fewer AEs and discontinuations) vs Nil400. These data support the use of Nil300 in older pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP. Disclosures: Larson: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bunworasate:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Research Funding. Turkina:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Goldberg:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding. Dorlhiac-Llacer:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Saglio:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis Pharmaceutical: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Hochhaus:Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceutical: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hoenekopp:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Employment, Equity Ownership. Blakesley:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Employment. Yu:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gallagher:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Clark:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Bosutinib Vs Imatinib for Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) in the BFORE Trial: 18 Month Follow-up

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.896.896 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽

pp. 896-896

Author(s):

Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini ◽

Michael W. Deininger ◽

Michael J. Mauro ◽

Charles Chuah ◽

Dong-Wook Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Primary Endpoint ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Research Funding ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: Bosutinib is a potent SRC/ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved for treatment of adults with CML resistant or intolerant to prior therapy. Here we compare the efficacy and safety of first-line bosutinib versus imatinib in patients with chronic phase (CP) CML enrolled in BFORE after ≥18 months of follow-up. Methods: BFORE (NCT02130557) is an ongoing, multinational, open label phase 3 study that randomized 536 patients 1:1 to 400 mg QD bosutinib (n=268) or 400 mg QD imatinib (n=268 [3 not treated]). The prespecified primary endpoint was major molecular response (MMR) rate at 12 months in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, defined as Philadelphia chromosome‒positive (Ph+) patients with e13a2/e14a2 transcripts, and excluding Ph- patients and those with unknown Ph status and/or BCR-ABL transcript type (mITT: BOS, n=246; IM, n=241). Efficacy results refer to the mITT population unless otherwise noted. Results: MMR rate was higher with bosutinib versus imatinib at 18 months (56.9% vs 47.7%; P=0.042). Among all randomized patients (ITT) 18-month MMR rates were higher for bosutinib (56.7% vs 46.6%; P <0.02). Earlier analyses (Table) showed complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) rate by 12 months (77.2% vs 66.4%; P=0.0075) was significantly higher with bosutinib versus imatinib. Rates of BCR-ABL1 transcript ratio ≤10% (International Scale) at 3 months (75.2% vs 57.3%), as well as MR4 at 12 months (20.7% vs 12.0%) and MR4.5 at 12 months (8.1% vs 3.3%), were all higher with bosutinib versus imatinib (all P <0.025). By comparison at 18 months, rates of MR4 (24.4% vs 18.3%) and MR4.5 (11.4% vs 7.1%) were consistent with this trend. Also after ≥18 months follow-up, time to MMR (hazard ratio=1.36, based on cumulative incidence; P=0.0079) and time to CCyR (hazard ratio=1.33; P=0.0049) were shorter for bosutinib (Figure). Cumulative incidence of transformation to accelerated/blast phase disease at 18 months was 2.0% and 2.9% for bosutinb and imatinib, respectively, of which 2 bosutinib and 4 imatinib patients discontinued treatment due to transformation. Additional treatment discontinuations due to suboptimal response/treatment failure occurred in 11 (4.1%) and 35 (13.2%) of bosutinib and imatinib patients, respectively. Dose increases happened in 20% of bosutinib-treated and 31% of imatinib-treated pts There were 2 deaths and 9 deaths in the bosutinib and imatinib arms, respectively. One patient taking bosutinib died within 28 days of last dose, while 4 patients taking imatinib died with that period from last dose. Overall survival at 18 months was 99.6% vs. 96.6% for bosutinib and imatinib groups, respectively. Grade ≥3 diarrhea (8.2% vs 0.8%) and increased alanine (20.9% vs 1.5%) and aspartate (10.1% vs 1.9%) aminotransferase levels were more frequent with bosutinib. Cardiovascular, peripheral vascular, and cerebrovascular events were infrequent in both arms (3.4%, 1.9%, and 0.4% bosutinib vs 0.0%, 1.1%, and 0.8% imatinib; grade ≥3: 1.5%, 0%, and 0.4% vs 0%, 0%, and 0.4%). There were no deaths in the bosutinib arm and 1 death in the imatinib arm due to treatment-emergent vascular events. Treatment discontinuations due to drug-related toxicity occurred in 15.3% and 9.4% of bosutinib and imatinib patients, respectively. Conclusion: After 18 months of follow-up,the MMR benefit seen with bosutinib over imatinib was sustained. These results are in line with observations at 12 months where patients taking bosutinib had significantly higher response rates (primary endpoint) and achieved responses sooner than those on imatinib. Safety data were consistent with the known safety profiles. These results suggest that bosutinib may be an important treatment option for patients with newly diagnosed CP CML. Disclosures Gambacorti-Passerini: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Deininger: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy; Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI BioPharma Corp, Gilead, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer, Celgene, Blue Print, Galena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy. Mauro: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Chuah: Avillion: Honoraria; Chiltern: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Travel; Novartis: Honoraria. Kim: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Il-Yang: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Milojkovic: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria. le Coutre: BMS: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; ARIAD: Honoraria. García Gutiérrez: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Crescenzo: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leip: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bardy-Bouxin: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hochhaus: Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Brümmendorf: Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cortes: Sun Pharma: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Oral Azacitidine (CC-486) Plus R-CHOP in Patients with High-Risk or Previously Untreated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma, Grade 3B Follicular Lymphoma, or Transformed Lymphoma (AFT-08)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-114438 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2964-2964 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Peter Martin ◽

Nancy L. Bartlett ◽

Julio C. Chavez ◽

John L. Reagan ◽

Sonali M. Smith ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Febrile Neutropenia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: For patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), resistance to standard R-CHOP immunochemotherapy remains an urgent and unmet clinical challenge. Aberrant DNA methylation likely contributes to chemoresistance and may represent a therapeutic target.In a phase I study of R-CHOP plus subcutaneous azacitidine, a DNA methyltransferase inhibitor, complete responses (CRs) were achieved in 10/11 high-risk DLBCL patients (Clozel et al. Cancer Discovery 2013), providing the rationale for this study of oral azacytidine (CC-486) plus R-CHOP. Previously reported data from the dose escalation phase of this study demonstrated promising response rates in patients with high-risk DLBCL (Martin et al. Blood 2017). Here, we present results from both the dose escalation and expansion phases after substantially longer follow-up. Methods: CC-486-DLBCL-001 (NCT02343536) is a phase I, open-label, multicenter study of CC-486 plus standard R-CHOP in patients with previously untreated DLBCL, grade 3B follicular lymphoma (FL), or transformed FL. Eligible patients were aged ≥18-80 years with no active viral hepatitis, had an International Prognostic Index (IPI) score ≥2 or DLBCL double-positive for BCL2 and c-MYC, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤2, and Ann Arbor stage II-IV disease. Patients in the dose escalation phase were enrolled sequentially into 4 dose cohorts of CC-486 (100, 150, 200, and 300 mg) using the time-to-event continual reassessment method. Additional patients were enrolled in the expansion phase to evaluate preliminary efficacy. Patients received up to six 21-day cycles. CC-486 was administered for 7 days before initiation of R-CHOP and on days 8-21 of cycles 1-5. Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor was mandated by protocol and anti-emetics were standard treatment. The primary objectives were to determine safety (per NCI CTCAE v4.03) and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of CC-486 in combination with standard R-CHOP. Secondary endpoints included pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy per the International Working Group criteria (Cheson et al.J Clin Oncol 2014). Results: Fifty-nine patients were enrolled as of May 31, 2018, including 40 treated at the RP2D of CC-486 300 mg. The median age in the overall population was 66 years (range, 25-80), 76% were aged >60 years, 59% were male, and 59% had an IPI score ≥3. Fifty-four patients (92%) completed all 6 planned cycles of study treatment. Thirteen patients (22%) had CC-486 dose reductions because of adverse events (AEs). Two patients discontinued CC-486 due to AEs: febrile neutropenia (n=1; 150 mg) and sepsis (n=1; 300 mg). The most common AEs were gastrointestinal, which were mainly grade 1/2; hematologic AEs were the most common grade 3/4 toxicity (Table 1). Grade 3/4 AEs related to CC-486 occurred in 36 (61%) patients, most commonly neutropenia (41%) and febrile neutropenia (20%). Febrile neutropenia was more common among older patients (9/15 patients with this AE were aged >70 years) and those with IPI scores ≥3 versus ≤2 (31% vs 17%) but was not correlated with CC-486 dose. One patient died during the study (acute respiratory failure possibly related to study treatment). All patients were evaluable for response. The overall response rate was 95%, with 52 patients (88%) achieving a CR; response rates were generally similar in patients with IPI scores ≥3 and ≤2 and in patients treated at the RP2D (Table 2). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached (median follow-up of 12 months); estimated 1-year PFS rates were similar in the overall population (86%) and in patients with IPI scores ≥3 (84%) and ≤2 (89%). Conclusions: Epigenetic priming with CC-486 before R-CHOP demonstrated promising clinical activity in patients with high-risk, previously untreated DLBCL, transformed FL, or grade 3B FL. AEs were generally consistent with the known safety profile of azacitidine and toxicities associated with R-CHOP. These results support further investigation of oral azacitidine (CC-486) in combination with R-CHOP, including patients with high-risk disease. Disclosures Martin: Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Bartlett:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; ImaginAB: Research Funding; Pfizer: 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; KITE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding. Chavez:Merck: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Humanigen: Consultancy. Reagan:Alexion: Honoraria; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Smith:Portola: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy. LaCasce:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Humanigen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Data safety and monitoring board; Research to Practice: Speakers Bureau. Jones:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Drew:Celgene Corp.: Employment. Wu:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cerchietti:Celgene: Research Funding; Weill Cornell Medicine: Employment. Leonard:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Biotest: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Sutro: Consultancy; United Therapeutics: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

CC-122 Dosing on a Novel Intermittent Schedule Mitigates Neutropenia and Maintains Clinical Activity in Subjects with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.1494.1494 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 1494-1494 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Cecilia Carpio ◽

Loïc Ysebaert ◽

Raúl Cordoba ◽

Armando Santoro ◽

José Antonio López-Martín ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cells ◽

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Clinical Activity ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: CC-122, a first in class PPM™ pleiotropic pathway modifier, has anti-tumor activity against B cell lymphomas. The molecular target of CC-122 is cereblon (CRBN) and CC-122 promotes ubiquitination of lymphoid transcription factor Aiolos in a CRBN-dependent manner, leading to its degradation in Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) tumor tissue and immune cells. CC-122 also depletes Ikaros, which is expressed in immature stages of myeloid differentiation and regulates early neutrophil differentiation (Blood 101:2219 2003). Following establishment of CC-122 3mg daily (QD) as the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) on a continuous schedule (Blood 122:2905 2013), subjects with advanced lymphoma, myeloma, and select solid tumors were enrolled in parallel expansion. In DLBCL subjects, CC-122 treatment demonstrated promising clinical efficacy, however, dose reductions due to neutropenia were frequent with the QD schedule (Blood 124:3500 2014). Therefore, a second cohort of DLBCL subjects was enrolled to evaluate the tolerability and clinical activity of intermittent schedules. Methods: Subjects with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were enrolled in parallel dose escalation of CC-122 given orally at 4mg or 5mg on two intermittent schedules. CC-122 given 21/28 days was tested based on lenalidomide experience. In order to model a second schedule, human bone marrow CD34+ cells were cultured for two weeks in SCF, Flt3L and G-CSF for expansion towards granulocytic lineage followed by 6 days with media plus G-CSF for neutrophil maturation.CC-122 0.5 uM was added continuously or on a 5 out of 7 day (5/7d) schedule. Myeloid maturation stages were measured 14 days later by CD34, CD33 and CD11b flow cytometry. Continuous exposure to CC-122 led to reversible myeloid maturation arrest and 90% decreased mature neutrophils compared to vehicle, whereas, CC-122 exposure for 5/7d resulted in only 50% decreased mature neutrophils. Based on this rationale, CC-122 given 5/7d was selected as the second intermittent schedule tested in DLBCL. Results: As of June 25, 2015, 22 subjects with relapsed/refractory DLBCL were enrolled in the 2nd cohort; all were evaluable for safety, 16 were efficacy evaluable (EE) as of the cutoff date. The median age was 60 years and 54% were male. The median time since diagnosis was 14 months and all subjects were ECOG 0-1. For subjects treated with CC-122 4mg 21/28 days (N=3), there were no dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) in cycle 1, however, all subjects required dose reduction due to neutropenia and therefore this dose level was considered a non-tolerated dose (NTD). For subjects treated with CC-122 on a 5/7 days schedule, the NTD was at 5mg due to 2 DLTs in 2 of 5 subjects (grade 3 febrile neutropenia and grade 3 pneumonitis). CC-122 4mg was the MTD on 5/7d and was selected for ongoing expansion in up to 50 subjects (N=14 as of cutoff date). There were no DLTs in 12 DLT-evaluable subjects. Median relative dose intensity achieved for 4mg 5/7d vs 3mg QD was 99% vs 79%. The most common (≥ 10%) related adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (36%), constipation (29%), asthenia (21%) and grade 3/4 related AEs were neutropenia (36%) and lipase elevation (14%). In addition, drug-related serious AEs included pneumonia, neck pain, and respiratory failure. AEs were an uncommon cause of discontinuation (7%, n=14). Response rates for the EE DLBCL subjects treated at 5mg 5/7d (N=3), 4mg 5/7d (N=10), and 3mg QD (N=22) was 67% (2 PR), 30% (1CR, 2 PR) and 23% (1CR, 4PR), respectively. Aiolos protein levels in peripheral T cells was measured by flow cytometry pre (baseline) and 5 hours post dosing on C1D1, C1D10 and C1D22. The median % change Aiolos levels at each of these visits were -47, -28 and -52%, respectively, indicating that Aiolos degradation occurs throughout the cycle. In addition, the median increase from baseline in cytotoxic memory T cells and helper memory T cells at cycle 1 day 22 in peripheral blood samples was 580% and 76%, respectively. Conclusion: In an in vitro myeloid differentiation assay, myeloid maturation arrest by CC-122, possibly due to Ikaros degradation, can be partially bypassed with a 2 day drug holiday. From a clinical standpoint, exploration of intermittent dosing confirmed that 5/7d schedule mitigates neutropenia-related dose reductions and improves CC-122 clinical activity in relapse/refractory DLBCL patients. Of note, the immunomodulatory effects of CC-122 are maintained on the 5/7d schedule. Disclosures Carpio: Celgene: Research Funding. Off Label Use: CC-122 is a first in class PPM(TM) pleiotropic pathway modifier with anti-tumor activity against B cell lymphomas.. Ysebaert:Celgene: Research Funding. Cordoba:Celgene: Research Funding. Santoro:Celgene: Research Funding. López-Martín:Celgene: Research Funding. Sancho:Celgene: Research Funding. Panizo:Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Gharibo:Celgene: Research Funding. Rasco:Asana BioSciences, LLC: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Stoppa:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Damian:Celgene: Research Funding. Wei:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagner:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Carrancio:Celgene: Research Funding. Gandhi:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pourdehnad:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ribrag:Esai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmamar: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Clustering of Transcriptomic Signatures in Newly Diagnosed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Identifies Two High-Risk Subgroups Which Increase in Prevalence at Relapse

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122756 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 923-923

Author(s):

Maria Ortiz ◽

Kerstin Wenzl ◽

Matthew Stokes ◽

C. Chris Huang ◽

Matthew J. Maurer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gene Expression ◽

High Risk ◽

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Genetics Research ◽

Equity Ownership

Background: DLBCL has traditionally been classified by cell of origin (COO) subcategories based on tumor gene expression profiles which include Activated B-Cell (ABC) and Germinal Center B-Cell (GCB). Recently, using tumor samples from patients treated with RCHOP, new classification models have focused on DNA alterations. However, a comprehensive integrative approach using a large transcriptomic data set across both newly diagnosed (nd) and relapsed/refractory (r/r) DLBCL is yet to be accomplished. A robust clustering of this type will allow for identification of biologically driven DLBCL patient subgroups and may predict patient outcome and inform treatment approaches. Methods: RNAseq was performed on a total of 882 DLBCL tumor FFPE biopsies from 2 ndDLBCL cohorts (cohort 1 and 2) and 2 r/r DLBCL cohorts (cohorts 3 and 4). Cohort 1 (N=267) was commercially sourced and served as the discovery cohort. Cohort 2 (N=340) was from the Mayo/Iowa Lymphoma SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and served as the replication cohort. Cohort 3 (N=189) was from the CC-122-ST-001 and CC-122-DLBCL-001 clinical trials (NCT01421524 and NCT02031419), and cohort 4 (N=86) was from r/r patients from the MER. Clustering input consisted of gene expression data, gene set variation analysis (GSVA) scores computed from the hallmark gene sets of MSigDB gene sets, as well as immune cell abundance estimates from a DLBCL-specific deconvolution method. An integrative clustering method iClusterPlus was applied to the input data to identify patient subgroups. A multinomial generalized linear model classifier was trained on the discovery dataset and applied to cohorts 2, 3, and 4 to assess patterns of gene expression and clinical features among the subgroups. Results: Integrative clustering identified 8 subgroups of ndDLBCL patients (DLBCL1-8; D1-D8) in cohort 1. Classifiers trained on cohort 1 were applied to cohort 2 and the same 8 clusters were identified. Among RCHOP treated patients in cohort 2, subgroups D4 (p<0.01) and D8 (p<0.0001) had significantly worse survival outcomes than the rest of the population. D4 comprised 21% of the MER ndDLBCL replication cohort (cohort 2) with a median event-free survival (mEFS) of 38.2 months and a median overall survival (mOS) of 80.3 months. D8 comprised 5% of the cohort with a mEFS of 7.5 months and a mOS of 12.1 months. The remaining 6 subgroups were standard risk, with mEFS ranging from 82.1 months to not reached, and none reaching mOS. The subgroups were not uniquely defined by previously known molecular classification methods such as COO or double hit signature (DHITsig), nor by clinical risk factors such as age or international prognostic index (IPI). Within D4, 92% of patients were ABC, representing a high risk subset of ABC patients. The mEFS in D4 ABCs was 38.2 months, while mEFS of non-D4 ABCs was not reached (p<0.005). Transcriptomic analysis revealed a lower abundance of immune infiltration. D4 was associated with high IPI, with 49% of D4 having IPI>2, compared to 33% of non-D4 with IPI>2 (p<0.05). D8 represented a high-risk subset which was 73% GCB. The mEFS of D8 GCBs was 5.4 months, while mEFS of non-D8 GCBs was not reached (p<0.0001). Transcriptomic analysis revealed low expression of immune response and cytokine signaling pathways, consistent with the low abundance of immune cells in D8. This subgroup consisted of 63% DHITsig positive patients. Although only 20% of all DHITsig positive patients were in D8, these D8 DHITsig patients showed significantly worse survival than non-D8 DHITsig patients (mEFS 11.3 months vs. not reached, p<0.0001). In the r/r DLBCL setting, D1-D8 were all present, with an increased prevalence of D4 and D8 in Cohort 3 (30% and 17%, respectively) and Cohort 4 (30% and 14%) compared to the newly diagnosed setting. Mutational data for these cohorts has been collected and is being interpreted in the context of the discovered subgroups. Conclusion: A novel integrative clustering of transformed gene expression data revealed 8 biologically homogeneous groups, two of which had inferior outcomes when treated with RCHOP therapy. Furthermore, these two subgroups were more prevalent in r/r DLBCL. This classification allows for the transcriptomic identification of high-risk patients underserved by RCHOP therapy. *Ortiz, Wenzl and Stokes contributed equally **Gandhi and Novak contributed equally Disclosures Ortiz: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stokes:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Maurer:Celgene: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Research Funding. Towfic:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagner:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Ratushny:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. McConnell:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Danziger:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stong:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lata:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kamalakaran:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mavrommatis:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trotter:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Mayo Clinic Rochester: Employment; Regeneron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Cerhan:NanoString: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Nowakowski:Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gandhi:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Novak:Celgene Coorperation: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Lyra: A Phase 2 Study of Daratumumab (Dara) Plus Cyclophosphamide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (Cybord) in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed Patients (Pts) with Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-152 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 152-152 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Habte Yimer ◽

Jason Melear ◽

Edward Faber ◽

William Bensinger ◽

John M Burke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Split Dose ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Line Of Therapy

Abstract Background: Dara, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, is approved in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) for the treatment of newly diagnosed (ND) MM. CyBorD is another commonly used immunomodulatory drug-sparing regimen for MM. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of dara-CyBorD and administered the first dara infusion as a split dose over 2 days in pts with NDMM or relapsed MM (RMM) after 1 prior line of therapy. Methods: This is an ongoing, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study conducted at US community oncology centers in pts aged ≥18 years with documented MM per IMWG criteria; measurable disease; ECOG performance score (PS) of 0-2; and ≤1 prior line of therapy. Pts received 4-8 cycles (C) of dara-CyBorD (oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22; subcutaneous bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15; and oral or IV dexamethasone 40 mg weekly) every 28 days. Dara was administered at 8 mg/kg IV in 500 ml on Days 1 and 2 of C1, 16 mg/kg weekly from C1D8 through C2, 16 mg/kg every 2 weeks (q2w) for C3-6, and 16 mg/kg q4w for C7-8. After induction, pts could undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). All pts receive 12 cycles of maintenance dara 16 mg/kg IV q4w. The primary endpoint was the proportion of pts achieving very good partial response or better (VGPR+) after 4 induction cycles using a computer algorithm based upon IMWG response criteria. Results: A total of 101 (87 ND, 14 RMM) pts were enrolled; 100 (86 ND, 14 RMM) pts received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Median age was 63 years (63 ND, 68 RMM); most pts were white (81%), male (64%), had ECOG PS 0-1 (94%), and had IgG (57%) or IgA (17%) MM; 35% of pts had high-risk cytogenetics defined as del(17p), t(4:14), or t(14;16). Eighty-two ND pts completed at least 4 induction cycles, 55 at least 6 cycles, and 26 the maximum of 8 cycles; 28 ND pts underwent ASCT by the data cutoff date. After 4 induction cycles, 44% of ND pts achieved VGPR+ (5% CR) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 79%. The VGPR+ rate (57%), CR rate (14%), and ORR (71%) were similar in RMM pts. At the end of induction (median 6 cycles), the VGPR+ rate, CR rate, and ORR in ND pts were 56%, 9%, and 81%, respectively. With a median follow up of 7.9 months, median PFS and OS were not reached; the 12-month PFS and OS rates were 87% and 99%, respectively, in ND pts. All 100 evaluable pts experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (AE). AEs with incidence ≥20% included fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, cough, insomnia, vomiting, constipation, upper respiratory tract infection, dyspnea, headache, and back pain. Grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 56% of pts; the most common (≥10%) was neutropenia. Serious AEs (SAEs) occurred in 21% of pts; the most common (≥2%) were atrial fibrillation, bacteremia, pulmonary embolism, and mental status changes. AEs led to permanent treatment discontinuation in 3% of pts. Infusion reactions (IRs) occurred in 54% of pts, including 49% at C1D1 and 4% at C1D2; 2 Grade 3 IRs (hypertension, anaphylactic reaction) occurred at C1D1; no Grade ≥4 IRs occurred. The most common (≥5%) IRs were chills, cough, dyspnea, nausea, pruritus, and flushing. Median infusion time was 4.5 hours for C1D1, 3.8 hours for C1D2, and 3.5 hours for subsequent doses. Conclusion: Dara-CyBorD was active and well tolerated in pts with ND and RMM, including pts with high-risk cytogenetics. ORR, VGPR+, and CR rates improved with cycles 5-8 of induction, indicating that longer therapy with dara results in deeper response. Preliminary PFS and OS data in ND pts in the first year are comparable to dara-VMP. The safety profile was consistent with that previously reported for dara, with no new safety signals observed. Split first daratumumab dosing was feasible, reduced Day 1 infusion time, and resulted in a similar IR rate as previously described for single-dose administration. These findings indicate that dara-CyBorD, using a split-dose first infusion, can be safely administered in the community setting and may be an effective treatment option for pts with MM. www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02951819 Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier estimate of progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Yimer: AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Puma Biotechnology: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Equity Ownership; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Melear:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Faber:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cardinal Health: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bensinger:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; amgen: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Burke:Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Tempus Labs: Consultancy. Narang:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Stevens:Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gunawardena:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lutska:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Qi:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ukropec:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Employment. Qi:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Lin:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Amgen: Consultancy; McKesson: Equity Ownership; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Phase I Study to Assess the Safety and Tolerability of AZD1152 In Combination with Low Dose Cytosine Arabinoside In Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.656.656 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 656-656 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽

Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽

Vincent Ribrag ◽

Philippe Rousselot ◽

Guillermo Garcia-Manero ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Febrile Neutropenia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Cytosine Arabinoside ◽

Research Funding ◽

Low Dose ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 656 Background: Aurora B kinase is a key mitosis regulator that is overexpressed in a range of malignancies, including AML. AZD1152 is a potent selective inhibitor of Aurora B kinase. This ascending dose cohort study was designed to assess the safety and tolerability of AZD1152 in combination with low dose cytosine arabinoside (LDAC), the only agent that has currently demonstrated a survival advantage over palliative care in older patients with AML. Methods: Patients aged ≥60 years with newly diagnosed AML unfit for intensive induction chemotherapy were included. Cohorts of 6 patients received escalating doses of a 7-day continuous iv infusion of AZD1152, at doses of 800 mg up to the monotherapy maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 1200 mg, in combination with LDAC 20 mg sc injection twice daily for 10 days. AZD1152 and LDAC were administered in 28-day cycles. If 1 or fewer dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in a cohort, AZD1152 dose was escalated. A DLT was an adverse event (AE) or laboratory abnormality considered related to AZD1152, which was a Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade ≥3 non-hematological toxicity (despite adequate supportive care). If 2 or more of 6 patients had a DLT, the dose was reduced or enrollment was stopped into that cohort. The MTD was defined as the dose at which 0 or 1 of 6 patients experienced a DLT. Following determination, the MTD cohort was expanded to 12 patients. Objective response was evaluated by the investigators using AML International Working Group clinical response criteria. AEs and serious AEs (SAEs) were evaluated according to CTCAE version 3. Blood samples were taken pre-dose and at selected times post dose for 3 cycles to determine levels of AZD1152, its active metabolite AZD1152 hQPA and LDAC. Results: At the data cut-off on 02/08/10 (data validation ongoing), 22 patients had been treated with the combination of LDAC plus AZD1152 (n=6 800 mg; n=13 1000 mg; n=3 1200 mg). Mean age (range) across the 3 cohorts was 71.1 (61–82) years, 14 (64%) were male, 21 were Caucasian and 1 was African American. The mean age of the 800 mg cohort was older (75.2 years) compared with the 1000 mg and 1200 mg cohorts (70.3 and 67.3 years, respectively). At baseline, 8 (36%) patients had de novo AML, and 7 (32%), 2 (9%) and 1 (5%) had AML secondary to myelodysplastic syndrome, myeloproliferative disorder and chemotherapy, respectively. All 22 patients had newly diagnosed AML. All patients received at least 1 cycle of treatment, 10 received ≥2 cycles and 1 received 5 cycles. One patient received an AZD1152 dose reduction (1000 mg to 800 mg) for their second cycle due to a high creatinine level, which was present at pre-dosing. Two patients in the 1200 mg group had DLT episodes of CTCAE grade 3 mucositis. The MTD of AZD1152 in combination with LDAC was defined as 1000 mg. All patients had at least 1 AE, the most common were myelosuppression (febrile neutropenia, anemia and thrombocytopenia in 50%, 36% and 27% of patients, respectively), stomatitis/mucosal inflammation, nausea, diarrhea and infection (each in 45% of patients). The most common grade 3/4 CTCAEs were febrile neutropenia, infection, thrombocytopenia and anemia. There were 3 (13.6%) deaths, 1 in each cohort; 2 were due to SAEs of febrile neutropenia (multiple-organ failure) and hypoxia (fungal pulmonary infection) and 1 was due to an unknown cause. Nine of 21 patients (43%) were reported by the investigators to have had a clinical response (CR + CRi) (Table). Conclusion: The MTD of AZD1152 in combination with LDAC in older patients with newly diagnosed AML was 1000 mg. AZD1152 at a dose of 1000 mg combined with LDAC had an acceptable tolerability profile. Two patients had DLTs of mucositis at the monotherapy MTD of 1200 mg. AEs of febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia were slightly higher than those in patients treated with either agent alone, although many patients experienced these AEs at study entry. The investigator-reported clinical response rate (CR + CRi) was 43%. The development of AZD1152 is continuing with a Phase II study in older patients with AML considered unfit for intensive chemotherapy. Disclosures: Kantarjian: AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Low-dose cytosine arabinoside is an approved agent for the treatment of patients with AML; this study evaluated low-dose cytosine arabinoside in combination with AZD1152, an investigational agent that inhibits Aurora Kinase B . Sekeres:Celgene Corp: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ribrag:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; LFB Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; LFB: Research Funding. Owen: AstraZeneca: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stockman:AstraZeneca: Employment, Equity Ownership. Oliver:AstraZeneca: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Ofatumumab Versus Rituximab Salvage Chemoimmunotherapy in Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: The Orcharrd Study (OMB110928)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.630.630 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 630-630 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Gustaaf W van Imhoff ◽

Andrew McMillan ◽

Matthew J. Matasar ◽

John Radford ◽

Kirit M Ardeshna ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Salvage Treatment ◽

High Dose ◽

First Line ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Anti Cd20

Abstract Background: Salvage chemoimmunotherapy, followed by high-dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for responding patients, is standard treatment for fit patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) failing first line rituximab-CHOP treatment. Response to salvage treatment is critical for a durable progression free survival (PFS) following ASCT. The 3-year event free survival (EFS) for patients treated with rituximab (R) in first-line regimens who received salvage chemotherapy in combination with R was only 21% (ref-1). The anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ofatumumab (O) has shown efficacy in R resistant lymphoma cell lines and in patients with relapsed or refractory intermediate grade lymphoma when combined with chemotherapy (ref-2). In this randomised phase III study we compared the efficacy of O versus R in combination with DHAP (cisplatin, cytarabine, dexamethasone), aiming to improve PFS following salvage treatment and ASCT (NCT01014208). Methods: CD20+ DLBCL patients, aged ≥18y, in first relapse or not responding (<CR) to first-line R-CHOP-like treatment, with FDG-PET positive measurable disease, were randomised 1:1 between 3 cycles of R-DHAP or O-DHAP. Randomisation was stratified for risk factors: relapse >1y vs ≤1y (including PR, SD or PD) and secondary age adjusted IPI (sAAIPI) 0-1 vs 2-3. Either O 1000 mg or R 375 mg/m2was administered for a total of 4 infusions on days 1 and 8 of cycle 1, and day 1 of cycles 2 and 3 of DHAP. DHAP was dosed as published (ref 1). Peripheral blood stem cells (PBSC) were harvested during cycle 2 or 3. Responding patients (PR+CR) after 2 cycles received the third cycle followed by high-dose therapy and ASCT. Response after 2 cycles was determined by CT scans, and response after 3 cycles and 3 months after ASCT was determined by combined CT+FDG-PET scans according to RRCML criteria by an independent review. Patients with SD after cycle 2 or progressive disease did not proceed to ASCT. The primary endpoint was PFS, defined as time from randomisation to SD after cycle 2, PD or death, whichever came first. EFS included new therapy as an event in addition to the definitions for PFS. Results: Between March 2010 and December 2013, 447 patients were randomised: 222 O-DHAP, 225 R-DHAP. Two patients in the R-DHAP arm were excluded from the ITT-population in accordance with the protocol because they did not receive any study treatment. The database cut-off date was Feb 28, 2014. Patient characteristics were evenly distributed between study arms: median age 57y (range, 18-83); 39% ≥60y; male 61%; Caucasian 72%; LDH >ULN 49%; ECOG PS >1 8%; stage III/IV 63%; sAAIPI 2-3 40%; and response to first line therapy: CR >1y 29%, CR ≤1y 11%, PR 36%, SD 8%, PD 16%. PFS, EFS and OS were not significantly different in the O-arm vs R-arm: PFS-2y 21% vs 26% (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.90-1.45, p=0.27); EFS-2y 14% vs 17% (HR 1.12, p=0.27); OS-2y 41% vs 36% (HR 0.86, p=0.25). sAAIPI and response duration after first-line treatment were risk factors significantly associated with PFS and OS. In all, 102 (46%) patients in the O-arm and 113 (51%) in the R-arm died, 79% due to disease progression. Response to salvage was not significantly different between the study arms; ORR: O-arm 38% (CR 15%) vs R-arm 42% (CR 22%). ASCT on protocol was completed by 74 (33%) patients in the O-arm and 81 (36%) in the R-arm. Off protocol SCT was completed by 37 (17%) patients in the O-arm and 26 (12%) in the R-arm. No major differences in clinically relevant toxicity were observed between the arms. Rash (22% vs 9%) and raised serum creatinine (24% vs 16%) were increased in the O-arm. Time to neutrophil (ANC >0.5x109/L and increasing) and platelet (PLT >10x109/L and increasing) recovery after each cycle of DHAP therapy, and PBSC harvest, did not differ between the arms. Time to engraftment (PLT ≥20x109/L and 3 consecutive days of ANC ≥0.5x109/L, prior to day 42) after ASCT was shorter in the R-arm vs the O-arm (HR 0.62, p=0.05). Conclusion: In this large international study no difference in efficacy was found between ofatumumab and rituximab in combination with DHAP as salvage treatment for refractory or relapsed DLBCL. Improved treatment for patients failing first line R-CHOP treatment is urgently needed. Ref 1: Gisselbrecht, J Clin Oncol; 2010:28:4184 Ref 2: Matasar, Blood; 2013 122: 499 Disclosures Off Label Use: Ofatumumab is an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody. Ofatumumab is not indicated in DLBCL. Matasar:Genentech, Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Radford:Millennium, Seattle Genetics, Cell Medica: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, Wife is a GSK/AZ Share Holder Other. Ardeshna:Roche, Gilead, Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kim:Novartis, Takeda, Celgene: Research Funding. Hong:Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center: Employment. Davies:Hoffman LaRoche, GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ogura:GlaxoSmithKline Jansen Pharma Takeda, Eisai, Symbio, Zenyakuu, Pfizer, Chugai, Celgene, Astra Zeneca, Mundi, Sorasia, GSK, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fennessy:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liao:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lisby:Genmab: Employment. Lin:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hagenbeek:Milennium, Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results from the Connect® MM Registry

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126205 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 3129-3129

Author(s):

Hans C. Lee ◽

Sikander Ailawadhi ◽

Cristina Gasparetto ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

Robert M. Rifkin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Causes Of Death ◽

Age Groups ◽

Treatment Patterns ◽

Age Group ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text