scholarly journals Efficacy of Bosutinib in Imatinib-Resistant Vs Dasatinib/Nilotinib-Resistant Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Results from the Phase 4 BYOND Study

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1650-1650 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Douglas Smith ◽  
Tim H Brümmendorf ◽  
Gail J. Roboz ◽  
Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini ◽  
Aude Charbonnier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistant ◽  
Equity Ownership

Introduction: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) bosutinib is approved for patients with Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) resistant/intolerant to prior therapy and newly diagnosed patients in chronic phase (CP). Methods: The ongoing phase 4 BYOND study (NCT02228382) is further evaluating the efficacy and safety of bosutinib for CML resistant/intolerant to prior TKIs. Patients were administered bosutinib at a starting dose of 500 mg once daily (QD). Primary results were previously reported. Here, we report the efficacy of bosutinib 500 mg QD in patients with Ph+ CP CML and resistance to imatinib (but not to nilotinib or dasatinib) vs patients with resistance to ≥1 second-generation TKI (dasatinib and/or nilotinib), as well as in patients with intolerance to all prior TKIs. Data are reported at ≥1 year after last enrolled patient; 85% of patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Results: Of 163 patients who received bosutinib, 156 had Ph+ CP CML: 52 had resistance only to imatinib, 31 had resistance to dasatinib/nilotinib, and 73 were intolerant to all prior TKIs. Corresponding median treatment duration (range) was 24.1 (0.2-42.2), 8.9 (0.9-41.6), and 25.3 (0.4-41.9) months, and median dose intensity (range) was 360 (125-500), 431 (195-561) and 292 (80-500) mg/day. In all, 69.2%, 41.9%, and 53.4% of imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, were still receiving treatment as of the data cutoff date. The main reason for discontinuation was adverse events (AEs), with 10 (19.2%), 8 (25.8%), and 21 (28.8%) imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, discontinuing due to AEs. Corresponding discontinuations due to insufficient response occurred in 2 (3.8%), 5 (16.1%), and 1 (1.4%) patients. No patient experienced on-treatment transformation to advanced phase CML or discontinued treatment due to disease progression. In the evaluable cytogenetic population, cumulative major cytogenetic response (MCyR) rates were 85.4%, 69.0%, and 88.1% in imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively (Table). The majority of patients, across all cohorts, achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCyR). In the evaluable molecular population, cumulative major molecular response (MMR) rates were 72.3%, 44.8%, and 82.2% in imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively; the 50th percentile of the cumulative incidence curve was 5.66 months, not reached and 3.22 months, respectively. Correspondingly, 59.6%, 24.1%, and 68.5% achieved molecular response (MR)4, and 48.9%, 17.2%, and 56.2% achieved MR4.5. In imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, Kaplan-Meier estimated overall survival rates (95% confidence interval) were 96.1% (85.2-99.0), 100% (100-100), and 98.6% (90.5-99.8) at 1 year, and 96.1% (85.2-99.0), 92.6% (73.4-98.1), and 97.2% (89.2-99.3) at 2 years with 4, 3, and 3 deaths occurring on study. Conclusions: Cytogenetic and molecular responses were seen in a high proportion of patients with Ph+ CP CML and TKI-resistance or TKI-intolerance. Response rates were similar between patients with resistance to imatinib and patients who were intolerant to all prior TKIs. Although to a lesser degree, responses were also seen in patients with resistance to second-generation TKIs, including patients achieving MR despite the shorter treatment duration. These results further support bosutinib use for patients with Ph+ CP CML and resistance/intolerance to prior TKIs. Disclosures Smith: Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy. Brümmendorf:Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; University Hospital of the RWTH Aachen: Employment; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roboz:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gambacorti-Passerini:Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Charbonnier:Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Viquiera:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leip:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Giles:Novartis: Consultancy; Epigene Therapeutics Inc: Consultancy, Other: leadership, stock/other ownership ; Actuate Therapeutics Inc: Employment. Ernst:Novartis: Research Funding. Hochhaus:Incyte: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Rosti:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Treatment-Free Remission in Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase According to Reasons for Switching from Imatinib to Nilotinib: Subgroup Analysis from ENESTop

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 792-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Carla Maria Boquimpani ◽  
Naoto Takahashi ◽  
Noam Benyamini ◽  
Nelma Cristina D Clementino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Loss Of Response ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Treatment Free Remission

Abstract Background: ENESTop, an ongoing, single-arm, phase 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01698905), is the first trial specifically evaluating treatment-free remission (TFR; ie, stopping tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI] treatment without a loss of response) in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) who achieved a sustained deep molecular response after switching from imatinib (IM) to nilotinib (NIL). Of 126 patients in ENESTop who were eligible to stop NIL, 57.9% (95% CI, 48.8%-66.7%) maintained TFR at 48 weeks. Here we present results from a subgroup analysis based on reasons for switching from IM to NIL, categorized as intolerance, resistance, and physician preference. Methods:Eligible patients were adults with CML-CP who received ≥ 3 years of total TKI therapy (> 4 weeks of IM, followed by ≥ 2 years of NIL) and achieved a sustained MR4.5 (BCR-ABL1 ≤ 0.0032% on the International Scale [BCR-ABL1IS]) on NIL therapy; patients with a documented MR4.5 at the time of switch from IM to NIL were not eligible. Enrolled patients continued NIL treatment in a 1-year consolidation phase, and those without confirmed loss of MR4.5 (ie, consecutive BCR-ABL1IS > 0.0032%) were eligible to stop NIL in the TFR phase. Patients with loss of major molecular response (MMR; ie, BCR-ABL1IS > 0.1%) or confirmed loss of MR4 (ie, consecutive BCR-ABL1IS > 0.01%) during the TFR phase reinitiated NIL treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who maintained TFR (ie, no loss of MMR, confirmed loss of MR4, or treatment reinitiation) at 48 weeks after stopping NIL. In this post hoc analysis, rates of TFR at 48 weeks after stopping NIL and a Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis of treatment-free survival (TFS; defined as the time from the start of TFR to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: loss of MMR, confirmed loss of MR4, reinitiation of NIL due to any cause, progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis, death due to any cause) were evaluated in subgroups of patients who switched from IM to NIL due to intolerance, resistance, or physician preference. These categories were determined by grouping the reasons for switching from IM to NIL, as reported by the investigators, based on relatedness to safety (intolerance), loss of response/treatment failure (resistance), and the physician's clinical judgment (physician preference); individual reasons included within each category are presented in the Figure. Results:A total of 125 patients who entered the TFR phase were included in this analysis; 1 patient who was found to have had atypical transcripts was excluded. Among these 125 patients, the reasons for switching to NIL were categorized as intolerance in 51 patients (40.8%), resistance in 30 patients (24.0%), and physician preference in 44 patients (35.2%). The proportion of patients who maintained TFR at 48 weeks after stopping NIL was generally similar across the 3 subgroups: 30 of 51 (58.8%; 95% CI, 44.2%-72.4%) in the intolerance subgroup, 16 of 30 (53.3%; 95% CI, 34.3%-71.7%) in the resistance subgroup, and 27 of 44 (61.4%; 95% CI, 45.5%-75.6%) in the physician preference subgroup. KM analysis of TFS showed that in all 3 subgroups, the majority of TFS events occurred within the first 24 weeks after stopping NIL (Figure). There were no notable differences in the kinetics of TFS events among subgroups. The KM-estimated median duration of TFS was not reached by the data cutoff date in all 3 subgroups. Conclusion: Primary analysis from ENESTop showed that among patients with CML-CP who achieved a sustained MR4.5after switching from IM to NIL, 57.9% of those who stopped NIL maintained TFR at 48 weeks. In the present analysis, TFR was maintained at 48 weeks after stopping NIL by > 50% of patients in the intolerance, resistance, and physician preference subgroups, with generally similar results across subgroups. These findings suggest that the rate of successful TFR following second-line NIL does not differ based on the reasons for switching from IM to NIL. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Hughes: Ariad: 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; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group (ALLG): Other: Chair of the CML/MPN Disease Group. Boquimpani:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Takahashi:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Shuvaev:Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis pharma: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Lipton:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Turkina:Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Moiraghi:BMS: Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Speakers Bureau. Nicolini:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ariad pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sacha:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Adamed: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kim:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ILYANG: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Fellague-Chebra:Novartis: Employment. Acharya:Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.: Employment. Krunic:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jin:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mahon:BMS: Honoraria; PFIZER: Honoraria; NOVARTIS PHARMA: Honoraria, Research Funding; ARIAD: Honoraria.

Response and Outcomes to Nilotinib at 24 Months in Imatinib-Resistant Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) and Accelerated Phase (CML-AP) with and without BCR-ABL Mutations.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1130-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald P. Radich ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Enrico Gottardi ◽  
Simona Soverini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistant

Abstract Abstract 1130 Poster Board I-152 Background Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL inhibitor, with in vitro activity against most BCR-ABL mutants (excluding T315I) indicated for the treatment of patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) CML in CPor AP resistant or -intolerant to prior therapy, including imatinib. In a previous analysis of nilotinib in patients with BCR-ABL mutations, mutations occurring at three specific amino acid residues (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V) were shown to be associated with less favorable response to nilotinib. The current analysis is based on mature data with a minimum follow-up of 24-months for all patients. Outcomes of patients at 24 months were analyzed by mutation type. Methods Imatinib-resistant CML-CP (n = 200) and CML-AP (n = 93) patients were subdivided into the following mutational subsets: no mutation, sensitive mutations (including mutations with unknown in vitro IC50). or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations at baseline. Patients with mutations of unknown in vitro sensitivity were classified as sensitive in this analysis based on a previous finding that patients with these mutations responded similarly to nilotinib as patients with sensitive mutation. Patients with baseline T315I mutations were excluded from this analysis. Patient groups were analyzed for kinetics and durability of cytogenetic and molecular response to nilotinib, as well as event-free survival (EFS), defined as loss of hematologic or cytogenetic response, progression to AP/BC, discontinuation due to disease progression, or death, and overall survival (OS). Results In CML-CP and -AP patients with no mutation, sensitive mutations, or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations, hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular responses are provided in the Table. Overall, patients with no mutations responded similarly to patients with sensitive mutations, whereas patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had less favorable responses. This correlation was observed in both CML-CP and CML-AP patients, respectively. Median time to CCyR was 3.3 months (range, 1.0–26.7) for CML-CP patients with no mutations, and 5.6 months (range, 0.9–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. At 24 months, CCyR was maintained in 74% of CML-CP patients with no mutation and in 84% of patients with sensitive mutations. One patient with CML-CP and an E255K mutation achieved CCyR at 25 months and maintained until last assessment at 30 months. Median time to MMR was similar at 5.6 months (range, 0.9–25.8) for CML-CP patients with no mutations and 5.6 months (range, 2.7–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. No patient with a less sensitive mutation achieved MMR. Median EFS and 24-month estimated OS rate are provided in the Table. Conclusions Imatinib-resistant CML-CP and CML-AP patients treated with nilotinib therapy with BCR-ABL mutations (excluding E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V) achieved rapid and durable cytogenetic responses, and estimated EFS and OS at 24 months similar to that of patients with no mutations, respectively. Patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had lower and less-durable responses and shorter EFS than patients with sensitive mutations. Alternative therapies may be considered for patients with these uncommon mutations (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V). Disclosures Radich: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Branford:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Woodman:Novartis: Employment. Kantarjian:Novartis: Research Funding. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Novartis: 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; Wyeth: Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Comparative Efficacy Among 3rd Line Post-Imatinib Chronic Phase-Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CP-CML) Patients after Failure of Dasatinib or Nilotinib Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 4551-4551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey H. Lipton ◽  
Dhvani Shah ◽  
Vanita Tongbram ◽  
Manpreet K Sidhu ◽  
Hui Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Comparative Efficacy ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract INTRODUCTION Patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CP-CML) failing 1st line imatinib are most commonly treated with the second-generation (2G) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) dasatinib and nilotinib. However, for patients who experience resistance or intolerance (R/I) to 2G-TKIs in 2nd line, there currently is no consensus on the optimal therapy sequence for 3rd line treatment. The comparative efficacy of using ponatinib in the 3rd line after 2G TKI failure was examined in a previous study (Lipton et al., ASH 2013). This study assesses the comparative efficacy of ponatinib versus sequential treatment of alternate 2G TKIs in 3rdline setting in two separate patient populations, post-imatinib and dasatinib patients and post-imatinib and nilotinib patients. METHODS A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Libraries (2002-2014), as well as 3 conferences (ASH (2008-2014), ASCO (2008-2014), and EHA (2008-2013)). Studies evaluating any TKI were included if they enrolled 10 or more post-imatinib adult patients with CP-CML who were also R/I to dasatinib or nilotinib. All study designs were considered and no restriction was applied with respect to therapy dose, due to incomplete reporting of doses in the available studies. Analyses was run on two groups of patients, those failing imatinib and dasatinib (Group Ima/Das) and those failing imatinib and nilotinib (Group Ima/Nil). Bayesian methods were used to synthesize major cytogenetic response (MCyR) and complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) from individual studies and estimate the overall response probability with 95% credible interval (CrI) for each treatment. Bayesian analysis also was used to estimate the likelihood that each treatment offers the highest probability of CCyR/MCyR based on available evidence. RESULTS Six studies evaluating bosutinib, nilotinib and ponatinib for Group Ima/Das (n= 419) and five studies evaluating bosutinib, dasatinib and ponatinib for Group Ima/Nil (n=83) were included in the analysis. All studies reported CCyR in both groups. Five studies evaluating bosutinib, nilotinib and ponatinib reported MCyR in Group Ima/Das and three studies evaluating bosutinib and ponatinib reported MCyR in Group Ima/Nil. Synthesized treatment-specific probabilities and 95% CrI for CCyR are presented in Figure 1. Synthesized treatment-specific probabilities of CCyR for Group Ima/Das were 27% for nilotinib, 20% for bosutinib and 54% (95% CrI 43%% to 66%) for ponatinib. Treatment-specific probabilities of MCyR for Group Ima/Das were 41% for nilotinib, 28% for bosutinib and 66% (95% CrI 55%% to 77%) for ponatinib. The probability of ponatinib providing superior response to all other included treatments for group Ima/Das was estimated to be >99% for both CCyR and MCyR. Synthesized treatment-specific probabilities of CCyR for Group Ima/Nil were 25% for dasatinib, 26% for bosutinib and 67% (95% CrI 51%% to 81%) for ponatinib. Treatment-specific probabilities of MCyR for Group Ima/Nil were 33% for bosutinib and 75% (95% CrI 60%% to 87%) for ponatinib. The probability of ponatinib providing superior response to all other included treatments for group Ima/Nil was estimated to be >99% for both CCyR and MCyR. CONCLUSIONS The post imatinib and dasatinib group included more studies with larger sample sizes compared with the post imatinib and nilotinib group. Overall, response rates appear higher for TKIs in the post imatinib and nilotinib group compared with the post imatinib and dasatinib group. For both groups, patients on ponatinib had higher CCyR and MCyR rates compared with the sequential 2G TKIs included in this analysis. Based on available data, ponatinib appears to provide a higher probability of treatment response for patients failing imatinib and dasatinib/ nilotinib compared with sequential 2G TKI therapy commonly used in this indication. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lipton: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Shah:Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Tongbram:Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Sidhu:Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding. Huang:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. McGarry:ARIAD Pharmaceutical, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lustgarten:ARIAD Pharmaceuticals Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hawkins:Ariad Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Research Funding.

An Ongoing Phase 3 Study of Bosutinib (SKI-606) Versus Imatinib In Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 208-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Tim H. Brummendorf ◽  
Irina Dyagil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 208 Bosutinib is an orally bioavailable dual Src/Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), with minimal inhibitory activity against PDGFR or c-kit. In a phase 2 study, bosutinib demonstrated activity in patients with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in the second- and third-line treatment settings (Cortes JE, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6502; Khoury JH, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6514), as well as in patients with advanced Ph+ leukemias (Gambacorti-Passerini C, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6509) following resistance or intolerance to imatinib and other TKIs. The current randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared the activity and safety of bosutinib with that of imatinib in newly diagnosed patients with CP CML. The study enrolled adults aged 318 years with cytogenetic diagnosis of Ph+ CP CML within 6 months, adequate hepatic and renal function, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomized to daily oral treatment with 500 mg bosutinib or 400 mg imatinib. Adverse events were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria, version 3.0. The primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) at 1 year; the rates of hematologic response, molecular response, and progression and transformation to accelerated or blast phase were also evaluated. The study randomized 502 patients: 56.6% male, median age of 48 years (range, 18–91 years), and median time since diagnosis of 0.7 months (range, -0.3-7.9 months; the range minimum is negative due to CML diagnosis during the study screening period, and the range maximum is >6 months because of 1 patient considered a major protocol violator). The median duration of treatment was 11.1 months (range, 0.03–24.8 months). At Week 48 (approximately 11 months), 71.5% and 74.8% of patients (both treatment arms combined) were in CCyR and complete hematologic response (CHR), respectively. During the study, 81.4% of patients achieved a CCyR at or before Week 48, with a median time to CCyR of 24 weeks; 82.6% of patients achieved a CHR, with a median time to CHR of 8 weeks; and 40.6% of patients achieved a major molecular response (MMR), with a median time to MMR of 49 to 61 weeks for the 2 treatment arms. For the combined treatment arms, common treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea (43.7%), nausea (32.3%), vomiting (22.0%), rash (16.8%), pyrexia (11.6%), and fatigue (11.0%). The only grade 33 treatment-emergent adverse event observed in 32% of patients was diarrhea (5.2%), which was usually limited to the first weeks of treatment. Grade 33 hematologic laboratory abnormalities included neutropenia (14.2%), thrombocytopenia (12.4%), and anemia (5.8%). Other grade 33 laboratory abnormalities (35% of patients) included alanine aminotransferase elevation (11.6%), phosphatemia (7.6%), and aspartate aminotransferase elevation (6.4%). Overall, 22.2% patients discontinued therapy; adverse events led to discontinuation or death in 12.8% of patients, and 4.2% of patients discontinued due to disease progression. The high combined percentage of patients achieving MMR, CCyR, and CHR and the relatively low incidence of generally manageable grade 33 events observed suggest good efficacy and an overall favorable safety profile. Data for individual treatment arms will be unblinded by the end of August 2010, and will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Gambacorti-Passerini: Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Kim:BMS, Novartis, Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS, Pfizer: Research Funding. Brummendorf:Pfizer Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Griskevicius:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Goh:Novartis and Janssen Ciliag: Research Funding. Wang:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gogat:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cortes:Pfizer Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding.

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 ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3768-3768 ◽  
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.

Nilotinib Demonstrates Superior Efficacy Compared with Imatinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase: Results From the International Randomized Phase III ENESTnd Trial

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. LBA-1-LBA-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Surapol Issaragrisil ◽  
Philipp D. le Coutre ◽  
Josy Reiffers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract LBA-1 Background: Nilotinib is a highly potent and the most selective inhibitor of BCR-ABL, the only proven molecular target for CML therapy. ENESTnd (Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials-Newly Diagnosed Patients) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study comparing the efficacy and safety of 300 or 400 mg bid nilotinib with 400 mg qd imatinib in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML in chronic phase (CML-CP). Methods: 846 pts with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP, diagnosed within 6 mos, and stratified by Sokal risk score, were randomized 1:1:1 to nilotinib 300 mg bid (n=282), nilotinib 400 mg bid (n=281), and imatinib 400 mg qd (n=283) arms. The primary endpoint was rate of major molecular response (MMR) at 12 months (mos). All pts had a minimum of 12 mos of treatment or discontinued early; median follow-up was 14 mos. MMR was defined as a value of ≤ 0.1% of BCR-ABL/ABL ratio on the International Scale. Molecular response was assessed by RQ-PCR at baseline, monthly for 3 mos and every 3 mos thereafter. Samples were analyzed at a central PCR laboratory. The major secondary endpoint was rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) by 12 mos based on bone marrow cytogenetics. Results: Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and Sokal scores were well balanced among the 3 arms; pts with high-risk Sokal scores were 28% in all arms. Median dose intensities of nilotinib delivered were 592 mg/day for 300 mg bid and 779 mg/day for 400 mg bid; imatinib dose intensity was 400 mg/day. Overall, 84%, 82%, and 79% of pts remained on the study for 300 mg bid nilotinib, 400 mg bid nilotinib, and 400 mg qd imatinib, respectively. Rates of MMR at 12 mos (Table) were superior for nilotinib 300 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (44% vs. 22%,P < .0001) and also for nilotinib 400 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (43% vs. 22%,P < .0001). Median time to MMR among pts who achieved MMR was faster for nilotinib 300 mg bid (5.7 mos) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (5.8 mos) compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (8.3 mos). Rates of CCyR by 12 mos were significantly higher for both nilotinib at either 300 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (80% vs. 65%,P < .0001) and for nilotinib 400 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (78% vs. 65%,P = .0005). Overall, progression to advanced disease was lower for nilotinib 300 mg bid (2 pts) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (1 pt) compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (11 pts). Overall, both drugs were well-tolerated. Rates of discontinuation due to adverse events or laboratory abnormalities were 7% for nilotinib 300 mg bid, 11% for nilotinib 400 mg bid, and 9% for imatinib 400 mg qd. Pts were monitored for QT prolongation and LVEF. No patients in any treatment arm showed a QTcF interval > 500 msec. There was no decrease from baseline in mean LVEF anytime during treatment in any arm. The study is ongoing. Conclusions: Nilotinib at both 300 mg bid and 400 mg bid induced significantly higher and faster rates of MMR and CCyR compared with imatinib 400 mg qd, the current standard of care in pts with newly diagnosed CML. Nilotinib was effective across all Sokal scores. After only one year of treatment, both nilotinib arms resulted in a meaningful clinical benefit compared to imatinib, with reduction of transformation to AP/BC. Nilotinib exhibited a favorable safety and tolerability profile. The superior efficacy and favorable tolerability profile of nilotinib compared with imatinib suggests that nilotinib may become the standard of care in newly diagnosed CML. Disclosures: Saglio: Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Nilotinib is not currently approved for first-line treatment of CML. The presentation will report the results from a randomized study of imatinib versus nilotinib in patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP. Kim:Novartis: 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; Wyeth: Research Funding. le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Reiffers:Novartis: Research Funding. Pasquini:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Schering: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Clark:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Gallagher:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoenekopp:Novartis: Employment. Dong:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Larson:Novartis:

scholarly journals Ponatinib in Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients: Final Report from a Phase 1 Trial

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3063-3063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Mauro ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Neil P. Shah ◽  
Dale L. Bixby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Phase 1 Trial ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: Ponatinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor with potent activity against native and mutant BCR-ABL1, is approved for patients with refractory chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) for whom no other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is indicated, or for patients with the T315I mutation. The efficacy and safety of ponatinib in patients with resistant/refractory hematologic malignancies were evaluated in a phase 1 trial (NCT00660920). Here, we report 4-year follow-up data from chronic-phase (CP)-CML patients; final data (approximately 5-year follow-up) will be presented. Methods: In this open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial, 81 patients with resistant/refractory hematologic malignancies (CP-CML, 43 patients; accelerated-phase CML, 9 patients; blast-phase CML, 8 patients; Ph+ ALL, 5 patients) were enrolled. Patients were treated with ponatinib at a starting dose of 2 mg/d - 60 mg/d; intra-patient dose escalation was permitted. In Oct 2013, dose reduction instructions were provided in response to an observed accumulation of arterial occlusive events (AOEs) with longer follow-up across the ponatinib clinical program. For data presented herein, the data cutoff date is 2 Feb 2015, with median follow-up of 53.1 months (range, 1.7 - 69.9 months) for CP-CML patients. Results: Among CP-CML patients, at baseline, median age was 55 years and median time since diagnosis was 6.6 years; BCR-ABL1 kinase domain mutations were reported in 63% of patients, with T315I confirmed at a central laboratory in 28% of patients. Patients were heavily pretreated, with 37% having received 2 prior TKIs and 60% having received ≥3 prior TKIs. Of 43 CP-CML patients, 22 (51%) remained on ponatinib treatment at data cutoff. Adverse events (AEs; 26%) and disease progression (9%) were the most common reasons for discontinuation of treatment. Cumulative response rates were: major cytogenetic response (MCyR), 72%; complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), 65%; major molecular response (MMR; assessed at a central laboratory), 56%; molecular response 4 (MR4), 42%; MR4.5, 28%. Responses were durable (Table), with median durations of response not reached for MCyR, CCyR, and MMR. Among patients who received ponatinib at starting doses of ≤30 mg/d (n = 15), MCyR was achieved by 67%, CCyR by 53%, and MMR by 47%; ponatinib dose was ≤30 mg/d in all but one of these patients at the time of response. Of 19 patients who were ongoing and in MCyR as of Oct 2013, 13 had their dose reduced; all 13 dose-reduced patients maintained MCyR at data cutoff. Of the 22 ongoing patients at the time of the present analysis, 18 (82%) had CCyR and 17 (77%) had MMR or better (MMR, 6 patients; MR4, 1 patient; MR4.5, 9 patients; MR5, 1 patient) as their response at the data cutoff; 14/22 (64%) ongoing patients were receiving 15 mg/d as their current dose as of the data cutoff. Rash (65%), fatigue (63%), abdominal pain (58%), headache (58%) and arthralgia (53%) were the most common treatment-emergent AEs. The incidence of AOEs (any/serious) was 40%/30% (by subcategory: cardiovascular, 30%/21%; cerebrovascular, 9%/7%; peripheral vascular, 14%/9%). Conclusions: With median follow-up of over 4 years in this phase 1 study, ponatinib continues to provide clinical benefit to heavily pre-treated CP-CML patients, approximately half of whom continue to receive ponatinib, with a majority in deep response that has been long-lasting; final study data will be presented. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with the AE profile across the clinical program. Potential for long-term benefit, demonstrated herein, versus risk should be considered when using ponatinib in this patient population. Study sponsor: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Disclosures Mauro: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cortes:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding. Kantarjian:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding; Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Shah:ARIAD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Plexxikon: Research Funding. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. Rivera:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lustgarten:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Santillana:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Heinrich:Novartis: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy; MolecularMD: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy. Druker:Agios: Honoraria; Ambit BioSciences: Consultancy; ARIAD: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Array: Patents & Royalties; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses ; BMS: Research Funding; CTI: Equity Ownership; Curis: Patents & Royalties; Cylene: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; D3 Oncology Solutions: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses ; Lorus: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; MolecularMD: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Research Funding; Oncotide Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Patents & Royalties; Roche: Consultancy. Deininger:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Talpaz:Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Other: Travel expense reimbursement, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Expense reimbursement, travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding.

scholarly journals EZH2 Mutations and Impact on Clinical Outcome Analyzed in 1604 Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1528-1528
Author(s):  
Sebastian Stasik ◽  
Jan Moritz Middeke ◽  
Michael Kramer ◽  
Christoph Rollig ◽  
Alwin Krämer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Acute Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Acute Myeloid

Abstract Purpose: The enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) is a histone methyltransferase and key epigenetic regulator involved in transcriptional repression and embryonic development. Loss of EZH2 activity by inactivating mutations is associated with poor prognosis in myeloid malignancies such as MDS. More recently, EZH2 inactivation was shown to induce chemoresistance in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (Göllner et al., 2017). Data on the frequency and prognostic role of EZH2-mutations in AML are rare and mostly confined to smaller cohorts. To investigate the prevalence and prognostic impact of this alteration in more detail, we analyzed a large cohort of AML patients (n = 1604) for EZH2 mutations. Patients and Methods: All patients analyzed had newly diagnosed AML, were registered in clinical protocols of the Study Alliance Leukemia (SAL) (AML96, AML2003 or AML60+, SORAML) and had available material at diagnosis. Screening for EZH2 mutations and associated alterations was done using Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) (TruSight Myeloid Sequencing Panel, Illumina) on an Illumina MiSeq-system using bone marrow or peripheral blood. Detection was conducted with a defined cut-off of 5% variant allele frequency (VAF). All samples below the predefined threshold were classified as EZH2 wild type (wt). Patient clinical characteristics and co-mutations were analyzed according to the mutational status. Furthermore, multivariate analysis was used to identify the impact of EZH2 mutations on outcome. Results: EZH2-mutations were found in 63 of 1604 (4%) patients, with a median VAF of 44% (range 6-97%; median coverage 3077x). Mutations were detected within several exons (2-6; 8-12; 14-20) with highest frequencies in exons 17 and 18 (29%). The majority of detected mutations (71% missense and 29% nonsense/frameshift) were single nucleotide variants (SNVs) (87%), followed by small indel mutations. Descriptive statistics of clinical parameters and associated co-mutations revealed significant differences between EZH2-mut and -wt patients. At diagnosis, patients with EZH2 mutations were significantly older (median age 59 yrs) than EZH2-wt patients (median 56 yrs; p=0.044). In addition, significantly fewer EZH2-mut patients (71%) were diagnosed with de novo AML compared to EZH2-wt patients (84%; p=0.036). Accordingly, EZH2-mut patients had a higher rate of secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) (21%), evolving from prior MDS or after prior chemotherapy (tAML) (8%; p=0.036). Also, bone marrow (and blood) blast counts differed between the two groups (EZH2-mut patients had significantly lower BM and PB blast counts; p=0.013). In contrast, no differences were observed for WBC counts, karyotype, ECOG performance status and ELN-2017 risk category compared to EZH2-wt patients. Based on cytogenetics according to the 2017 ELN criteria, 35% of EZH2-mut patients were categorized with favorable risk, 28% had intermediate and 37% adverse risk. No association was seen with -7/7q-. In the group of EZH2-mut AML patients, significantly higher rates of co-mutations were detected in RUNX1 (25%), ASXL1 (22%) and NRAS (25%) compared to EZH2-wt patients (with 10%; 8% and 15%, respectively). Vice versa, concomitant mutations in NPM1 were (non-significantly) more common in EZH2-wt patients (33%) vs EZH2-mut patients (21%). For other frequently mutated genes in AML there was no major difference between EZH2-mut and -wt patients, e.g. FLT3ITD (13%), FLT3TKD (10%) and CEBPA (24%), as well as genes encoding epigenetic modifiers, namely, DNMT3A (21%), IDH1/2 (11/14%), and TET2 (21%). The correlation of EZH2 mutational status with clinical outcomes showed no effect of EZH2 mutations on the rate of complete remission (CR), relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) (with a median OS of 18.4 and 17.1 months for EZH2-mut and -wt patients, respectively) in the univariate analyses. Likewise, the multivariate analysis with clinical variable such as age, cytogenetics and WBC using Cox proportional hazard regression, revealed that EZH2 mutations were not an independent risk factor for OS or RFS. Conclusion EZH mutations are recurrent alterations in patients with AML. The association with certain clinical factors and typical mutations such as RUNX1 and ASXL1 points to the fact that these mutations are associated with secondary AML. Our data do not indicate that EZH2 mutations represent an independent prognostic factor. Disclosures Middeke: 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; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rollig:Bayer: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Scholl:Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbivie: Other: Travel support; Alexion: Other: Travel support; MDS: Other: Travel support; Novartis: Other: Travel support; Deutsche Krebshilfe: Research Funding; Carreras Foundation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hochhaus:Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Brümmendorf:Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Burchert:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Krause:Novartis: Research Funding. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Platzbecker:Celgene: Research Funding. Mayer:Eisai: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Serve:Bayer: Research Funding. Ehninger:Cellex Gesellschaft fuer Zellgewinnung mbH: Employment, Equity Ownership; Bayer: Research Funding; GEMoaB Monoclonals GmbH: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thiede:AgenDix: Other: Ownership; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Maintaining Imatinib ≥600 Mg Daily in the First 12 Months of Chronic Phase CML Treatment Is Associated with Superior Event-Free Survival at 5 Years.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1125-1125 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael P Osborn ◽  
Susan Branford ◽  
Deborah L White ◽  
John F Seymour ◽  
Ruth Columbus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Blast Crisis ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Event Free Survival ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Event Rates

Abstract Abstract 1125 Poster Board I-147 The Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group conducted a trial (TIDEL I) in 103 patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase CML, using imatinib 600 mg/day with dose escalation to 800 mg/day for suboptimal response. This was defined as failure to achieve (1) complete haematological response (CHR) at 3 months, (2) major cytogenetic response (MCR) at 6 months, (3) complete cytogenetic response (CCR) or molecular equivalent at 9 months, or (4) less than 0.01% (IS) BCR-ABL by RQ-PCR at 12 months. Here we report the outcomes with all surviving patients having been treated for at least 60 months. We aimed to determine whether the patient outcome at 60 months was predicted by the molecular response within the first 18 months of imatinib therapy. The outcomes for patients maintaining a dose of imatinib of ≥600 mg/day in the first 12 months was compared to those who were on a reduced dose for at least part of this time. Event-free survival (EFS) was defined as death from any cause, accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC), and loss of CHR, MCR or CCR. The 103 patients included 66 males and 37 females with a median (±SD) age of 49 (±14) years. All patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-2 at enrolment. The 5-year EFS was 71%, transformation (AP/BC) free survival (TFS) was 95%, and overall survival was 87%. Of the 14 patients who died, 3 died in blast crisis, 2 from transplant-related complications, 8 from CML-unrelated causes, and the cause of death of 1 patient was unavailable. The annual rates of progression to AP/BC over 5 years were 3%, 1%, 0%, 1%, and 0%, while annual event rates were 13%, 8%, 8%, 1%, and 4%. CCR was achieved by 89% of patients by 60 months, while 72% achieved a major molecular response (MMR) by this time. In the first 12 months of treatment, 55% of patients maintained an imatinib dose of ≥600 mg/day (mean ±SD dose = 604 ±10 mg/day), while 45% were on <600 mg/day for at least part of this time (mean ±SD dose = 511 ±100 mg/day). EFS at 60 months was significantly higher in patients taking ≥600 mg/day compared with those who had been dose-reduced to <600 mg/day (89% vs 56%, P<0.001). Annual event rates for the ≥600 mg/day group were 6%, 2%, 2%, 0%, and 2%, while annual event rates for those on <600 mg/day were 14%, 16%, 16%, 8%, and 4%. By 60 months, 96% of patients who had been on ≥600 mg/day within the first 12 months had achieved CCR, while only 80% of those who had been on <600 mg/day had achieved this milestone (P<0.001). Log rank analysis of the achievement of MMR was also significant (P=0.03). Overall survival and TFS after 12 months were both similar between the dosing groups. There was no difference between the dosing groups' median age (50 vs 48 years, P=0.36) or Sokal score (1.04 vs 0.94, P=0.33) that may otherwise account for these results. The outcome was also determined for all patients dependent on the BCR-ABL levels at various assessment timepoints. Patients with a BCR-ABL level of <10% (IS) at 6 months (n=92) had an EFS of 78% at 60 months, while all of those with a level >10% (IS) (n=8) had an event (P<0.001). Patients with a level of ≤1% (IS) at 12 months (equivalent to CCR) (n=81) had an EFS of 75% compared with 25% (n=13) for those with levels >1% (IS) (P<0.001). At 18 months, a level ≤0.1% (IS) (n=58) conferred an EFS of 88%, while those who had failed to attain this depth of response (n=30) had an EFS of 60%. There was a significant difference in EFS between those who had achieved an MMR at 18 months and those who had achieved a CCR, but no MMR (88% vs 67%, P=0.03). In conclusion, our data suggest that patients maintaining a dose of ≥600mg in the first 12 months of imatinib therapy are more likely to achieve CCR and MMR, and superior EFS compared to those with a lower dose. This study also confirms that achieving an MMR by 18 months is associated with improved EFS. This emphasises the value of achieving a molecular response early in the treatment course, as well as adding weight to the evidence supporting the role of molecular monitoring in CML. Disclosures Branford: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. White:Novartis and Britol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Seymour:Bayer Schering: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Travel grants; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Travel Grants. Catalano:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel grants. Mills:Celgene Pty Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Efficacy and Safety of Nilotinib in Elderly Patients with Imatinib-Resistant or -;Intolerant Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) in Chronic Phase (CP): A Sub-Analysis of the ENACT (Expanding Nilotinib Access in Clinical Trials) Study.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3286-3286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp D. le Coutre ◽  
Anna Turkina ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Bernadeta Ceglarek ◽  
Giuliana Alimena ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistant ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3286 Poster Board III-1 Introduction: Nilotinib, a potent and highly selective BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogeneous leukemia (Ph+ CML) in chronic phase (CML-CP) and accelerated phase (CML-AP) who are resistant or intolerant to prior therapy including imatinib. The ENACT study is a Phase IIIb, open-label, multicenter study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of nilotinib in adult pts with imatinib-resistant or intolerant CML in a clinical practice setting outside of a registration program. It is the largest single source of efficacy and safety information of any available tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in CML, particularly among the elderly. Methods: The present is a sub-analysis of the ENACT study on the efficacy and safety of 400 mg twice daily nilotinib in elderly (aged =60 years) pts initiating treatment in CML-CP who were resistant and/or intolerant to imatinib. Results: Of the 1,422 CML-CP pts enrolled in the ENACT study between January 2006 and October 2008, 452 (32%) were elderly (=60 years) at study initiation and 165 (37%) of these pts were =70 years [10 (2%) were =80 years]. Countries that enrolled =20 elderly pts include France, Italy, USA, Germany, UK, Spain, Canada, and Brazil. At study initiation, elderly pts had longer median durations of CML (<60: 51.1 months; =60: 69.3; =70: 66.6) and higher proportions with CML duration >5 years (<60: 43%; =60: 56%; =70: 52%). Besides imatinib, prior CML treatments received by elderly pts included dasatinib (=60: 20%; =70: 19%), cytarabine (=60: 23%; =70: 19%), busulfan (=60: 10%; =70: 7%), and interferons (=60: 50%; =70: 42%). Elderly pts were previously treated with imatinib for longer median durations (<60: 27.4 months; =60: 32.7; =70: 29.9), with higher proportions treated for >5 years (<60: 12%; =60: 19%; =70: 18%). The proportion of imatinib-intolerant to resistant elderly pts was about 1:1, which was higher than the proportion among <60 pts at about 0.6:1, such that relatively few elderly pts had prior highest imatinib dose >800 mg (<60: 34%; =60: 26%; =70: 21%). While response rates to prior imatinib were similar, among pts who required therapy after failing imatinib, elderly pts had lower cytogenetic response rates (<60: 22%; =60: 17%; =70: 19%) to prior dasatinib. During ENACT, less than 50% of elderly pts experienced nilotinib dose interruptions (=60: 46%; =70: 41%) and reductions (=60: 7%; =70: 6%) lasting >5 days, which was consistent with the overall ENACT dataset. The median duration of dose interruptions and reductions was 15 (=70: also 15) and 41 (=70: 32) days, respectively. The main reason for dose interruptions and reductions was adverse events (AEs). The median duration of nilotinib exposure was 227 days (=70: 219) and the median dose intensity was 749 mg/day (=70: 775). Efficacy was similar among elderly pts, with 39% (=70: 35%) of pts achieving complete hematologic response (CHR), 41% (=70: 39%) achieving major cytogenetic response (MCyR) and 31% (=70: 33%) achieving complete cytogenetic response (CCyR). MCyR rate was also similar among elderly hematologic responders (=60: 64%; =70: 65%). Among elderly pts requiring nilotinib therapy after both imatinib and dasatinib, and therefore have more resistant CML, CHR rate was 39% (=70: 32%), MCyR rate was 28% (=70: 29%) and CCyR rate was 20% (=70: 16%). Safety was likewise similar among elderly pts, with grade 3/4 study drug-related AEs occurring in 56% of pts (=70: 53%). The most frequent of these AEs were thrombocytopenia (=60: 24%; =70: 21%) and neutropenia (=60: 14%; =70: 11%). The most common method of managing these AEs was brief dose interruptions and/or reductions [thrombocytopenia (=60:86/108 pts; =70: 30/35), neutropenia (=60: 42/62 pts; =70: 9/18)]. Among elderly pts with prior dasatinib, 53% (=70: 58%) experienced grade 3/4 study drug-related AEs, while 7 out of 8 pts with pleural effusion on dasatinib no longer had it on nilotinib. Conclusions: In ENACT, pts aged =60 years at study initiation appear to have longer durations of CML, be more heavily pre-treated and more intolerant to imatinib than the younger cohort. Nonetheless, nilotinib induced comparable clinical responses in CML-CP pts regardless of age. Importantly, the safety profile of nilotinib is maintained in elderly pts. Disclosures: le Coutre: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Turkina:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Kim: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; Wyeth: Research Funding. Ceglarek:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Shen:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Smith:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Rizzieri:Novartis Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Szczudlo:Novartis: Employment. Berton:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wang:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wang:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Nicolini:Novartis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chemgenex: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document