Characterization of the Severe Phenotype of Pyruvate Kinase Deficiency

Background: Pyruvate kinase deficiency (PKD) is the most common cause of chronic hereditary non-spherocytic hemolytic anemia. The spectrum of disease in PKD is broad, ranging from an incidentally discovered mild anemia to a severe transfusion-dependent anemia. Splenectomy partially ameliorates the anemia and reduces the transfusion burden in the majority of patients. Because hemoglobin poorly correlates with symptoms in PKD, transfusion requirements are typically used clinically to classify disease severity with those who are regularly transfused despite splenectomy recognized as the most severely affected subgroup. Aim: To compare demographics, complications, and laboratory results between the most severely-affected PKD patients (those that are splenectomized and regularly transfused) with non-regularly transfused splenectomized PKD patients. Methods: After ethics committee approval, patients were enrolled on the PKD Natural History Study, a prospective 30 site international study. All patients had molecularly confirmed PKD. Only splenectomized patients were included in the analysis. Transfusion frequency was observed over a 3-year period. Patients were divided into two groups based on transfusion frequency: the severe phenotype group was defined as those who receive regular transfusions (≥6 discrete red cell transfusion episodes per year) and the control group did not receive regular transfusions. Phenotype stability over the 3-year period was also assessed. Results: 154 splenectomized patients with PKD were included: 30 patients in the severe PKD phenotype group and 124 patients in the comparison PKD group. Results of the analysis comparing the two groups are described in the Table. Severely affected patients were more likely to be female (77% versus 51%, p=0.013), older at the time of splenectomy (median age: 5 versus 3.6, p=0.011), have iron overload (93% vs. 51%, p<0.0001), have received chelation therapy (90% vs. 42%, p<0.0001), and had more lifetime transfusions (median: 77 versus 15, p<0.0001). Rates of other PKD complications including pulmonary hypertension, extramedullary hematopoiesis, liver cirrhosis, endocrinopathy, and bone fracture appear similar between the two groups. Laboratory values, including hemoglobin, total bilirubin, normalized PK enzyme activity, and median absolute reticulocyte count appear similar between the two groups. The underlying genetic mutation patterns (missense mutations versus non-missense mutations) were also similar between the groups. Phenotype stability over time was highly variable: of the patients with a severe phenotype at enrollment, 62% had a severe phenotype during the first follow-up year and 39% had a severe phenotype at the second follow-up year. Conclusions: Patients with PKD who are regularly transfused despite splenectomy appeared to have similar rates of PKD-associated complications (except for iron overload) and similar relevant laboratory values and genotypes when compared to those who are not regularly transfused after splenectomy. The similarity observed between severe phenotype patients and comparison patients with PKD may result from a protective effect of transfusion (e.g. reduction of bone fractures and extramedullary hematopoiesis) or could suggest transfusion-dependence is an artificial signifier of disease severity, reflective of provider practices and patient symptoms rather than an actual distinct phenotype. Transfusion requirements in severe PKD appear to fluctuate significantly over time. Disclosures Al-Samkari: Dova: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Moderna: Consultancy. van Beers:RR Mechatronics: Research Funding; Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Barcellini:Agios: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board; Apellis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board; Bioverativ: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Eber:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy. Glader:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chonat:Alexion: Other: advisory board; Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: advisory board. Kuo:Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Bioverativ: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy. Despotovic:Dova: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Kwiatkowski:Celgene: Consultancy; Terumo: Research Funding; Apopharma: Research Funding; bluebird bio, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; Imara: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding. Thompson:Baxalta: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; bluebird bio, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ravindranath:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: I am site PI on several Agios-sponsored studies, Research Funding. Rothman:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding. Verhovsek:Sickle Cell Awareness Group of Ontario: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sickle Cell Disease Association of Canada: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Canadian Haemoglobinopathy Association: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vertex: Consultancy. Kunz:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sheth:CRSPR/Vertex: Other: Clinical Trial Steering committee; Apopharma: Other: Clinical trial DSMB; Celgene: Consultancy. London:United Therapeutics: Consultancy; ArQule, Inc: Consultancy. Grace:Novartis: Research Funding; Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

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

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123637 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1589-1589

Author(s):

Fabian Frontzek ◽

Marita Ziepert ◽

Maike Nickelsen ◽

Bettina Altmann ◽

Bertram Glass ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

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

Download Full-text

Long-Term Safety, Efficacy, and Survival Findings From Comfort-II, a Phase 3 Study Comparing Ruxolitinib with Best Available Therapy (BAT) for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis (MF)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.801.801 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 801-801 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Francisco Cervantes ◽

Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽

Dietger Niederwieser ◽

Andres Sirulnik ◽

Viktoriya Stalbovskaya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Extension Phase ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 801 Background: Ruxolitinib is a potent JAK1 & 2 inhibitor that has demonstrated superiority over traditional therapies for the treatment of MF. In the two phase 3 COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life. COMFORT-II is a randomized, open-label study evaluating ruxolitinib versus BAT in patients (pts) with MF. The primary and key secondary endpoints were both met: the proportion of pts achieving a response (defined as a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume) at wk 48 (ruxolitinib, 28.5%; BAT, 0%; P < .0001) and 24 (31.9% and 0%; P < .0001), respectively. The present analyses update the efficacy and safety findings of COMFORT-II (median follow-up, 112 wk). Methods: In COMFORT-II, 219 pts with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF and splenomegaly were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib (15 or 20 mg bid, based on baseline platelet count [100-200 × 109/L or > 200 × 109/L, respectively]) or BAT. Efficacy results are based on an intention-to-treat analysis; a loss of spleen response was defined as a > 25% increase in spleen volume over on-study nadir that is no longer a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median follow-up was 112 wk (ruxolitinib, 113; BAT, 108), and the median duration of exposure 83.3 wk (ruxolitinib, 111.4 [randomized and extension phases]; BAT, 45.1 [randomized treatment only]). Because the core study has completed, all pts have either entered the extension phase or discontinued from the study. The primary reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs; ruxolitinib, 11.6%; BAT, 6.8%), consent withdrawal (4.1% and 12.3%), and disease progression (2.7% and 5.5%). Overall, 72.6% of pts (106/146) in the ruxolitinib arm and 61.6% (45/73) in the BAT arm entered the extension phase to receive ruxolitinib, and 55.5% (81/146) of those originally randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment at the time of this analysis. The primary reasons for discontinuation from the extension phase were progressive disease (8.2%), AEs (2.1%), and other (4.1%). Overall, 70 pts (48.3%) treated with ruxolitinib achieved a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at any time during the study, and 97.1% of pts (132/136) with postbaseline assessments experienced a clinical benefit with some degree of reduction in spleen volume. Spleen reductions of ≥ 35% were sustained with continued ruxolitinib therapy (median duration not yet reached); the probabilities of maintaining the spleen response at wk 48 and 84 are 75% (95% CI, 61%-84%) and 58% (95% CI, 35%-76%), respectively (Figure). Since the last report (median 61.1 wk), an additional 9 and 12 deaths were reported in the ruxolitinib and BAT arms, respectively, resulting in a total of 20 (14%) and 16 (22%) deaths overall. Although there was no inferential statistical testing at this unplanned analysis, pts randomized to ruxolitinib showed longer survival than those randomized to BAT (HR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27–1.00). As expected, given the mechanism of action of ruxolitinib as a JAK1 & 2 inhibitor, the most common new or worsened grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities during randomized treatment were anemia (ruxolitinib, 40.4%; BAT, 23.3%), lymphopenia (22.6%; 31.5%), and thrombocytopenia (9.6%; 9.6%). In the ruxolitinib arm, mean hemoglobin levels decreased over the first 12 wk of treatment and then recovered to levels similar to BAT from wk 24 onward; there was no difference in the mean monthly red blood cell transfusion rate among the ruxolitinib and BAT groups (0.834 vs 0.956 units, respectively). Nonhematologic AEs were primarily grade 1/2. Including the extension phase, there were no new nonhematologic AEs in the ruxolitinib group that were not observed previously (in ≥ 10% of pts), and only 1 pt had a new grade 3/4 AE (epistaxis). Conclusion: In COMFORT-II, ruxolitinib provided rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly; this analysis demonstrates that these reductions are sustained over 2 years of treatment in the majority of pts. Ruxolitinib-treated pts showed longer survival than those receiving BAT, consistent with the survival advantage observed in previous (Verstovsek et al. NEJM. 2012) and current analyses of COMFORT-I, as well as with the comparison of pts of the phase 1/2 study with matched historical controls (Verstovsek et al. Blood. 2012). Disclosures: Cervantes: Sanofi-Aventis: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Pfizer: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: AdvisoryBoard Other, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Niederwieser:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stalbovskaya:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. McQuity:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hunter:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte: Employment, stock options Other. Passamonti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barbui:Novartis: Honoraria. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knoops:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Harrison:Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Five-Year Experience with Single-Agent Ibrutinib in Patients with Previously Untreated and Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Leukemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.233.233 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 233-233 ◽

Cited By ~ 53

Author(s):

Susan M. O'Brien ◽

Richard R. Furman ◽

Steven E. Coutre ◽

Ian W. Flinn ◽

Jan Burger ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Single Agent ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Over Time

Abstract Background: Ibrutinib (ibr), a first-in-class, once-daily Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is approved by the US FDA for treatment of patients (pts) with chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) including pts with del17p. The phase 1b/2 PCYC-1102 trial showed single-agent efficacy and tolerability in treatment-naïve (TN; O'Brien, Lancet Oncol 2014) and relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL (Byrd, N Engl J Med 2013). We report efficacy and safety results of the longest follow-up to date for ibr-treated pts. Methods: Pts received 420 or 840 mg ibr QD until disease progression (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. Overall response rate (ORR) including partial response (PR) with lymphocytosis (PR-L) was assessed using updated iwCLL criteria. Responses were assessed by risk groups: unmutated IGVH, complex karyotype (CK; ≥3 unrelated chromosomal abnormalities by stimulated cytogenetics assessed by a reference lab), and in hierarchical order for del17p, then del11q. In the long-term extension study PCYC-1103, grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and AEs requiring dose reduction or discontinuation were collected. Results: Median age of the 132 pts with CLL/SLL (31 TN, 101 R/R) was 68 y (range, 37-84) with 43% ≥70 y. Baseline CK was observed in 41/112 (37%) of pts. Among R/R pts, 34 (34%) had del17p, 35 (35%) del11q, and 79 (78%) unmutated IGVH. R/R pts had a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 1-12). Median time on study was 46 m (range, 0-67) for all-treated pts, 60 m (range, 0-67.4) for TN pts, and 39 m (range, 0-67) for R/R pts. The ORR (per investigator) was 86% (complete response [CR], 14%) for all-treated pts (TN: 84% [CR, 29%], R/R: 86% [CR, 10%]). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached (NR) for TN and 52 m for R/R pts with 60 m estimated PFS rates of 92% and 43%, respectively (Figure 1). In R/R pts, median PFS was 55 m (95% confidence intervals [CI], 31-not estimable [NE]) for pts with del11q, 26 m (95% CI,18-37) for pts with del17p, and NR (95% CI, 40-NE) for pts without del17p, del11q, trisomy 12, or del13q. Median PFS was 33 m (95% CI, 22-NE) and NR for pts with and without CK, and 43 m (95% CI, 32-NE) and 63 m (95% CI, 7-NE) for pts with unmutated and mutated IGVH, respectively(Figure 2). Among R/R pts, median PFS was 63 m (95% CI, 37-NE) for pts with 1-2 prior regimens (n=27, 3 pts with 1 prior therapy) and 59 m (95% CI, 22-NE) and 39 m (95% CI, 26-NE) for pts with 3 and ≥4 prior regimens, respectively. Median duration of response was NR for TN pts and 45 m for R/R pts. Pts estimated to be alive at 60 m were: TN, 92%; all R/R, 57%; R/R del17p, 32%; R/R del 11q, 61%; R/R unmutated IGVH, 55%. Among all treated pts, onset of grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs was highest in the first year and decreased during subsequent years. With about 5 years of follow-up, the most frequent grade ≥3 AEs were hypertension (26%), pneumonia (22%), neutropenia (17%), and atrial fibrillation (9%). Study treatment was discontinued due to AEs in 27 pts (20%) and disease progression in 34 pts (26%). Of all treated pts, 38% remain on ibr treatment on study including 65% of TN pts and 30% of R/R pts. Conclusions: Single-agent ibrutinib continues to show durable responses in pts with TN or R/R CLL/SLL including those with del17p, del11q, or unmutated IGVH. With extended treatment, CRs were observed in 29% of TN and 10% of R/R pts, having evolved over time. Ibrutinib provided better PFS outcomes if administered earlier in therapy than in the third-line or beyond. Those without CK experienced more favorable PFS and OS than those with CK. Ibrutinib was well tolerated with the onset of AEs decreasing over time, allowing for extended dosing for 65% of TN and 30% of R/R pts who continue treatment. Disclosures O'Brien: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Furman:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Coutre:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: 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. Burger:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Sharman:Gilead: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Wierda:Abbvie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Jones:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Luan:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. James:AbbVie: Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Chu:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment; AbbVie: Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

A Phase I/II Study of Lenalidomide Plus Obinutuzumab in Relapsed Indolent Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-131045 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 348-348 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Nathan H Fowler ◽

Loretta J. Nastoupil ◽

Collin Chin ◽

Paolo Strati ◽

Fredrick B. Hagemeister ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Marginal Zone ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Indolent Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Background: Patients with advanced indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL) can develop chemoresistance and most relapse following standard therapy. Although multiple treatment options exist, most are associated with short remission or intolerable side effects. Lenalidomide activates NK cells ± T cells and leads to in vivo expansion of immune effector cells in NHL models. The combination of rituximab and lenalidomide (R2) in relapsed iNHL is highly active and was recently approved. Obinutuzumab is a glycosylated type II anti-CD20 molecule with enhanced affinity for the FcγRIIIa receptors leading to improved ADCC. The primary objective of this phase I/II study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of lenalidomide and obinutuzumab in relapsed indolent lymphoma. Methods: Patients with relapsed small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), marginal zone, and follicular lymphoma (gr 1-3a) were eligible. Patients enrolled in three predefined dose cohorts of lenalidomide (10mg,15mg, 20mg) given on days 2-22 of a 28 day cycle. Obinutuzumab was given at a fixed dose (1000mg) IV on days 1,8,15 and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of subsequent cycles for 6 cycles. The combination was given for up to 12 cycles in responding pts. Antihistamines were given in pts who developed rash. Prophylactic growth factor was not allowed. In the absence of progression or toxicity, single agent obinutuzumab was continued every 2 months for maximum of 30 months on study. Traditional 3+3 dose escalation was used with dose limiting toxicities (DLT) assessed during cycle 1. Once the MTD was established, 60 additional patients were enrolled in the phase II portion of the study. Adverse events were graded using CTCAE version 4.03. Results: 66 pts were enrolled between May 2014 until March 2019, and all are eligible for safety and response assessment. No DLTs were observed in dose escalation, and 60 pts were enrolled in the phase II portion of the study at 20mg of lenalidomide daily. Histologies included follicular lymphoma (FL) n=57, marginal zone n=4, SLL n=5. The median age was 64 (36-81), with 2 (1-5) median prior lines of treatment. For 53% of pts, the combination represented the third or greater line of treatment. The overall response (OR) rate for all pts was 98% with 72% attaining a complete response (CR). Eighteen pts (27%) had a partial response, and stable disease was noted in 1 (2%). At a median follow up of 17 months, 14 pts have progressed, with an estimated 24mo progression-free survival (PFS) of 73% (57-83% 95% CI). The estimated 24 mo PFS for ≥ third line pts was 63%. Twenty five pts (38%) remain on treatment and 95% remain alive at last follow up. The most common grade ≥ 3 non-hematologic toxicities included fatigue (5 pts), rash (4 pts), and cough (3 pts). Grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 11 (17%) and 7 (11%) pts respectively. Two pts stopped treatment due to adverse events, including 1 transient bradycardia and 1 grade 3 fatigue. Conclusion: The combination of 20 mg of lenalidomide and 1000mg obinutuzumab is safe and effective in patients with relapsed indolent lymphoma. Adverse events appeared similar to our prior experience with lenalidomide and rituximab and were generally well tolerated. Overall response rates were high, with many pts achieving prolonged remission, including pts who had relapsed after 2 or more lines of prior therapy. Validation studies in the frontline and salvage setting are ongoing. Disclosures Fowler: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ABBVIE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nastoupil:TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Westin:Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Juno: Other: Advisory Board; Janssen: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Kite: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Unum: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Other: Advisory Board; Genentech: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Curis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; 47 Inc: Research Funding. Neelapu:Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Pediatric-Inspired Chemotherapy Incorporating Pegaspargase Is Safe and Results in High Rates of MRD Negativity in Adults Ages 18-60 with Philadelphia Chromosome-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia and Lymphoblastic Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-115486 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4013-4013 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Mark Blaine Geyer ◽

Ellen K. Ritchie ◽

Arati V. Rao ◽

M. Isabella Cazacu ◽

Shreya Vemuri ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽

Philadelphia Chromosome ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Lymphoblastic Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: Among adolescents and young adults with (w/) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or lymphoblastic lymphoma (LBL), treatment using a pediatric (vs. adult) regimen appears to achieve superior event-free (EFS) and overall survival (OS); this observation has driven increased interest in adapting pediatric regimens for middle-aged adults w/ ALL/LBL. However, greater risk of toxicities associated w/ asparaginase complicates administration of pediatric-inspired regimens in adults. We therefore designed a pediatric-inspired chemotherapy regimen w/ doses of pegaspargase (PEG) rationally synchronized to limit overlapping toxicities w/ other chemotherapeutic agents. Methods: We conducted a phase II multi-center trial in adults ages 18-60 w/ newly-diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-negative (Ph-) ALL/LBL (NCT01920737). Pts w/ Ph+ ALL or Burkitt-type ALL were ineligible. The treatment regimen consisted of 2-phase induction (I-1, I-2), followed by consolidation w/ 2 courses of alternating high-dose methotrexate-based intensification and reinduction, followed by 3 years of maintenance (Figure 1). PEG 2000 IU/m2 was administered in each of the 6 intensive courses of induction/consolidation at intervals of ≥4 weeks. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed in bone marrow (BM) by multiparameter flow cytometry (FACS) on day (d) 15 of I1 and following I-1 and I-2. Any detectable MRD (even <0.01% of BM WBCs) was considered positive. Toxicities were assessed by CTCAE v4.0. Results: 39 pts were enrolled (30M, 9F), w/ B-ALL (n=28), T-ALL (n=7), B-LBL (n=3), and T-LBL (n=5). Median age at start of treatment was 38.3 years (range 20.2-60.4), w/ 18 pts age 40-60. Grade 3-4 toxicities associated w/ PEG are summarized in Table 1. Grade 3-4 hyperbilirubinemia was observed post-PEG in I-1 in 9 pts, but only recurred thereafter in 1/8 pts resuming PEG. Pts completing consolidation on protocol (n=16) received median of 6 doses of PEG (range, 2-6). Four pts developed hypersensitivity to PEG and subsequently received Erwinia asparaginase. PEG was discontinued in 4 additional pts due to hepatotoxicity (n=2), pancreatitis (n=1), and physician preference (n=1). Of pts w/ available response assessments, 35/36 (97%) achieved morphologic complete response (CR) or CR w/ incomplete hematologic recovery (CRi) following I-1 (n=34) or I-2 (n=1). Both pts not achieving CR/CRi after I-I had early T-precursor ALL; one of these pts was withdrawn from study, and the other (w/ M2 marrow after I-1) achieved CR after I-2. Of the pts w/ ALL (excluding LBL) w/ available BM MRD assessments, 11/28 (39%) achieved undetectable MRD by FACS following I-1; 18/22 (82%) achieved undetectable MRD by FACS following I-2. Of the pts w/ LBL w/ available BM MRD assessments, 7/7 (100%) achieved or maintained undetectable MRD by FACS following I-1 and I-2. Ten pts underwent allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (alloHCT) in CR1. Seven pts experienced relapse at median 15.2 months from start of treatment (range, 5.4-30.4), of whom 6 subsequently underwent 1st (n=5) or 2nd (n=1) alloHCT. Of the 11 pts w/ ALL w/ undetectable MRD following I-1, only one has relapsed. Five patients have died, including 2 pts in CR1 (from sepsis and multi-organ system failure), and 3 pts in relapse. At median follow-up of 22.3 months among surviving pts (range, 1.0-48.1), median EFS and OS (Figure 2A&B) have not been reached (EFS not censored at alloHCT). 3-year EFS was 62.1% (95% CI: 38.4-78.9%) and 3-year OS was 80.0% (95% CI: 57.5-91.4%). Conclusions: PEG can be incorporated into pediatric-inspired chemotherapy regimens w/ manageable toxicity for appropriately selected adults up to age 60 w/ Ph- ALL/LBL. While PEG-related AEs are common, few pts require permanent discontinuation of asparaginase. Grade 3-4 hyperbilirubinemia was common, particularly post-I-1, but recurred infrequently when PEG was continued. Two induction courses resulted in a high rate of MRD negativity post-I-2 and translated to a low rate of relapse. Though further follow-up is required, 3-year EFS is encouraging. Data regarding asparaginase enzyme activity and silent inactivation w/ neutralizing anti-PEG antibody will be presented. Ongoing and future studies will additionally investigate whether incorporating novel therapies (e.g. blinatumomab, nelarabine) into frontline consolidation therapy may reduce risk of relapse among adults receiving PEG-containing regimens. Disclosures Geyer: Dava Oncology: Honoraria. Ritchie:Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD Pharmaceuticals: Speakers Bureau; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Rao:Kite, a Gilead Company: Employment. Tallman:Daiichi-Sankyo: Other: Advisory board; AROG: Research Funding; Cellerant: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; BioSight: Other: Advisory board; Orsenix: Other: Advisory board; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding. Douer:Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Pfizer: Honoraria; Spectrum: Consultancy. Park:Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Outcome of Patients with Myelofibrosis after Ruxolitinib Failure: Role of Disease Status and Treatment Strategies in 214 Patients

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-116289 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4277-4277 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Francesca Palandri ◽

Elena Maria Elli ◽

Nicola Polverelli ◽

Massimiliano Bonifacio ◽

Giulia Benevolo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Treatment Strategies ◽

Chronic Phase ◽

Disease Status ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Transfusion Dependency ◽

Investigational Agents

Abstract Introduction . Ruxolitinib (RUX) is the only targeted therapy available for the treatment of myelofibrosis (MF)-related splenomegaly and symptoms. Significant clinical responses may be achieved in around 50% of patients (pts). However, half of responding pts lose the response over time. Aims . To report the outcome of a large cohort of MF pts after RUX failure, in terms of disease status, treatment strategies and survival. Methods . A clinical database was created in 23 European Hematology Centers including retrospective data of 537 MF pts treated with RUX from Jan 2011 to July 2018. Updated information at the date of July 15th 2018 was available in 442 pts who were included in the present analysis. Spleen and symptoms response (SR & SyR) to RUX were evaluated according to the 2013 IWG-MRT criteria. RUX-related toxicity and infections were graded according to the WHO scale. Overall (OS) was estimated from the date of RUX discontinuation to the date of death or last contact, using the Kaplan-Meyer method (log-rank test). Results . After a median follow-up of 30.5 months (1.7-84.3), 214 out of 442 evaluable (48.4%) pts had discontinued RUX. 43 (20.1%) died while on therapy because of: MF progression (34.9%), infections (25.6%), heart disease (16.3%), second neoplasia (7%), hemorrhages (7%), other (9.2%). The median follow-up after RUX discontinuation for the remaining 171 pts was 11.3 months (0.5-66.7). Causes of RUX discontinuation were: drug-related toxicity (28.6%), loss/lack of response (23.4%), MF progression (12.3%), acute leukemia (AL) (13.4%), allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) (11.1%), second solid neoplasia (4.1%), other unrelated causes (i.e. pts decision; 7.1%). After stopping RUX, 68 pts received 1 line of therapy, 21 received 2 lines and 9 received >2 treatments; 73 pts did not receive any therapy. Treatments received after RUX discontinuation, alone or in combination, included hydroxyurea (HU) (n. 61, 62.2%), ASCT (n. 20, 20.4%), second-generation JAK2 inhibitors (momelotinib/fedratinib/pacritinib) (n. 11, 11.2%), splenectomy (n. 7, 7.1%), azacytidine/decitabine (n. 5, 5.1%), chemotherapy (n. 4, 4.1%), investigational agents (imetelstat/PRM151: n. 4), danazole (n. 4), erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESA) (n. 4). A total of 95 pts (55.6%) died after RUX discontinuation, because of: MF progression (30.5%), AL (25.4%), infections (14.7%), second neoplasia (9.5%), hemorrhages (4.2%), heart disease (4.2%), ASCT (4.2%), thrombosis (2.1%), other (5.2). Median survival time from RUX stop of the 171 evaluable pts was 22.6 mos (95% CI, 13.2-30.7). Among baseline features, survival after discontinuation was significantly influenced by the dynamic international prognostic score (DIPSS) category (p<0.001), transfusion dependency (p<0.001) and driver mutation status (with triple-negative pts having the worst survival compared to JAK2V617F and CALR-mutated pts, p=0.01). During therapy, 45 out of 153 (29.4%) and 123 out of 161 (76.4%) evaluable pts achieved a SR and a SyR at any time. Survival was not affected by the previous response to RUX at any time-point. Conversely, survival significantly differed according to the reason for stopping RUX, with pts discontinuing because of AL evolution/second solid neoplasia having the worst outcome (Figure 1a, p<0.001). In pts who discontinued RUX in chronic phase, the use of second generation TKIs and other investigational agents tended to prolong survival compared to the administration of conventional medical treatments (i.e. HU, danazole, ESA) (Figure 1b, p=0.07) Discussion . After RUX failure, very limited therapeutic options are available and the prognosis of MF pts is dismal, particularly for those pts starting RUX with advanced stage disease (i.e. high DIPSS category and transfusion dependency). Also, disease evolution into AL and occurrence of a second solid neoplasia significantly reduced life expectancy. In chronic phase pts, survival probability may be improved by the use of medical therapies that are still in the experimental phase. Novel investigational agents are needed. Disclosures Palandri: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Abruzzese:BMS: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Vitolo:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Aversa:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Basilea: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo:Gilead: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Foà:ROCHE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; AMGEN: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; JANSSEN: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; GILEAD: Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Speakers Bureau; CELTRION: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; ABBVIE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; INCYTE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; CELGENE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau. Di Raimondo:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cavo:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Breccia:Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Palumbo:Novartis: 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.

Download Full-text

Predictive Factors of Response and Survival of Lenalidomide and Rituximab As Initial Treatment of Follicular Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-129311 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1533-1533 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Paolo Strati ◽

Ralph J. Johnson ◽

Sheryl G Forbes ◽

Loretta J. Nastoupil ◽

Felipe Samaniego ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Initial Treatment ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advanced Stage ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Long Term Follow Up ◽

Baseline Characteristics

Introduction. The combination of rituximab and lenalidomide (R2) is active in patients with untreated indolent lymphoma. Recent randomized trials (RELEVANCE) have demonstrated similar efficacy when compared to standard chemo-immunotherapy backbones. Long term follow up of patients receiving R2 as well as predictors of long term remission and survival have yet to be published. Methods. We prospectively evaluated patients with low grade advanced stage FL who received R2 as initial treatment at our institution between 07/2008 and 10/2014. Lenalidomide was given at 20 mg (day 1-21, in a 28 day cycle) for 6 cycles with rituximab monthly. Lenalidomide starting dose was 10 mg if baseline creatinine clearance was < 60 mL/min. Patients with an objective response continued with 10-20 mg of lenalidomide with rituximab for up to 12 more cycles. Response was evaluated according to 2014 Lugano criteria. Results. One-hundred and one patients were included in the analysis, baseline characteristics are shown in the Table. Median number of provided cycles was 7 (range, 1-20). Median dose of lenalidomide was 20 mg (range, 5-20 mg), and 29 (29%) patients required a dose reduction. Fifty-six (55%) patients experienced grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicities, the most common (> 5%) being neutropenia (39%), skin rash (20%), myalgia (16%) and fatigue (16%). Seven (7%) patients discontinued treatment before completion, after a median time of 4 months (range, 1-10 months): 4 because of toxicity (arterial thrombosis in 2, respiratory failure in 1, and skin rash in 1), and 3 because of progression. Ninety-eight patients were evaluable for response, while 3 patients discontinued treatment because of toxicity before first response assessment. Overall response rate was 98%, CR rate 90% (both achieved after a median of 6 months [range, 3-22 months]), and CR rate at 30 months (CR30) was 80%. Only female sex associated with a higher CR rate (96% vs 83%, p=0.05), while no baseline characteristic associated with CR30 rate. After a median follow-up of 88 months (95% confidence interval, 84-92 months), 31 (31%) patients progressed and/or died, 7-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 63%, and 13% of patients had a PFS < 24 months (PFS24). Failure to achieve CR was the only factor associated with significantly decreased PFS (10 months vs not reached, p<0.001) and higher likelihood of PFS24 (46% vs 5%, p<0.001). No association was observed with baseline characteristics, including FLIPI and FLIPI-2 score. At most recent follow-up, transformation was reported in 3 (3%) patients, after 30, 32 and 42 months, respectively. Two (2%) patients have died, 1 of unrelated comorbid health conditions, 1 of progressive disease, and 7-year overall survival was 98%. Second cancers (excluding transformation) were diagnosed in 8 (8%) patients, after a median of 55 months (range, 3-105 months). These included: breast adenocarcinoma (2), melanoma (2), pancreatic adenocarcinoma (1), esophageal adenocarcinoma (1), and therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia. Discussion. Long-term follow-up show very favorable outcomes for patients with advanced stage FL receiving R2 as initial treatment, independent of traditional prognostic factors relevant to patients treated with chemoimmunotherapy, including FLIPI and FLIPI-2 score. Combination strategies, aimed at increasing depth of response to R2, may further improve outcomes observed with this regimen. Table. Disclosures Nastoupil: Bayer: Honoraria; Genentech, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Spectrum: Honoraria. Westin:Janssen: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Unum: Research Funding; Curis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; 47 Inc: Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Juno: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; MorphoSys: Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Kite: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding. Wang:AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; MoreHealth: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioInvent: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aviara: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; VelosBio: Research Funding; Loxo Oncology: Research Funding. Neelapu:Pfizer: Consultancy; Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Allogene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Karus: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Cell Medica: Consultancy; Unum Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Fowler:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ABBVIE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: lenalidomide and rituximab are not yet FDA-approved as frontline treatment for patients with FL

Download Full-text

Myeloablative Fractionated Busulfan Conditioning Regimen with Sorafenib in Patients with AML: Results of Phase I Clinical Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-152450 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 556-556

Author(s):

Uday R. Popat ◽

Roland Bassett ◽

Peter F. Thall ◽

Amin M. Alousi ◽

Gheath Alatrash ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Conditioning Regimen ◽

Advisory Board ◽

License Agreement ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

Abstract Background: Myeloablative conditioning can be given safely to older patients by administering busulfan over a longer period (fractionated busulfan regimen) than the standard four-day regimen. (Popat, et al Lancet Haematology 2018). This longer conditioning regimen duration allows the addition of oral targeted agents like sorafenib, which may be synergistic with conditioning chemotherapy and thus further improve disease control. Therefore, we added sorafenib to fludarabine and fractionated busulfan regimen (f-bu) in a phase 1 dose-finding trial studying 4 different doses of sorafenib with f-bu (NCT03247088). Here we report the results of this trial. Methods: Between 3/2018 and 6/2021, 24 patients with AML aged 18 to 70 years with adequate organ function and 8/8-HLA matched related or unrelated donors were enrolled prospectively. The dose of sorafenib was varied among the four values 200, 400, 600, and 800 mg administered from day -24 to -5. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3 or higher regimen-related non-hematologic, non-infectious, non-GVHD toxicity occurring between day -24 and day 3. The Bayesian Model Averaging Continual Reassessment Method (BMA-CRM) with target DLT probability 0.30 was used to choose doses for successive cohorts of 3 patients. The first cohort was treated at the lowest sorafenib dose 200, with all successive cohorts' doses chosen adaptively by the BMA-CRM. The doses and schedules of busulfan and fludarabine were fixed, with f-Bu dose targeting an area under the concentration vs time curve (AUC) of 20,000 ± 12% μmol.min given over 3 weeks. The first two doses of busulfan (80 mg/m2 IV each) were administered on days -20 and -13 on an outpatient basis. The last four Bu doses were calculated to give a total course AUC of 20,000 ± 12% μmol.min and were given as inpatient following each dose of Flu 40 mg/m2 on days -6 through -3. GVHD prophylaxis was post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) 50mg/kg on days 3 and 4 and tacrolimus. Recipients of unrelated donor grafts also received MMF. All patients were eligible to receive post-transplant maintenance sorafenib after engraftment. Results: The median age was 52 years (range, 30-70). Disease status was CR in 16 (66.6%) patients, CRi in 5 (20.8%), and advanced in 3 (12.5%). Adverse risk karyotype was present in 10 (41.7%) patients. MRD was present in 13 (54.2%). 9 (38%) had mutated flt3. The donor was unrelated in 14 (58%), and peripheral blood stem cells were the graft source in 21(87.5%). Due to the absence of DLTs, the BMA-CRM assigned 200mg, 400mg, 600mg, and 800mg of sorafenib, respectively, to the first 4 cohorts, and the next 4 cohorts were given 800mg. Only 2 dose-limiting skin toxicities were seen, one in cohort 3 with 600mg of sorafenib and the second in cohort 6 with 800mg of sorafenib. 800mg was the final recommended phase 2 dose. The median follow-up in 20 surviving patients was 7.6 months and 1-year progression free survival was 89% (95% CI 75-100%). Other outcomes are summarized in Table 1. Conclusion: Sorafenib can be safely added to the fractionated busulfan regimen. Early data on efficacy appear promising, with an 89% PFS at 1 year of follow up. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Popat: Bayer: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Hosing: Nkarta Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rezvani: Bayer: Other: Scientific Advisory Board ; AvengeBio: Other: Scientific Advisory Board ; Navan Technologies: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; GSK: Other: Scientific Advisory Board ; Virogin: Other: Scientific Advisory Board ; Affimed: Other: License agreement and research agreement; education grant, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Educational grant, Research Funding; Caribou: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; GemoAb: Other: Scientific Advisory Board ; Takeda: Other: License agreement and research agreement, Patents & Royalties. Qazilbash: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Advisory Board; Biolline: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Other: Advisory Board; NexImmune: Research Funding; Angiocrine: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Daver: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Trillium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Hanmi: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; FATE Therapeutics: Research Funding; Sevier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novimmune: Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Data Monitoring Committee member; Dava Oncology (Arog): Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Syndax: Consultancy; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; SOBI: Consultancy; STAR Therapeutics: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Newave: Research Funding. Ravandi: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Xencor: Honoraria, Research Funding; Taiho: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Prelude: Research Funding; Syros Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Shpall: Magenta: Consultancy; Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Magenta: Honoraria; Adaptimmune: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Navan: Consultancy; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Patents & Royalties; Affimed: Patents & Royalties; Axio: Consultancy. Mehta: CSLBehring: Research Funding; Kadmon: Research Funding; Syndax: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Reduced-Intensity Induction with Dasatinib Vs. Hypercvad + 2nd Generation TKIs with MRD-Guided Follow-up Therapy Leads to Comparable Rates of MRD-Negative Remission While Reducing Transfusions and Neutropenia in Ph+ ALL

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-141264 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 42-44

Author(s):

Jonathan Webster ◽

Hua-Ling Tsai ◽

Eric Gehrie ◽

Tania Jain ◽

Christopher S. Hourigan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Treatment Initiation ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

Allogeneic Bone ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

2Nd Generation ◽

Reduced Intensity

Background: Reduced-intensity induction (RII) with imatinib yields comparable outcomes to HyperCVAD with imatinib with fewer induction deaths and an improved CR rate in Ph+ ALL (Chalandon. Blood. 2015). Dasatinib with steroids also produces excellent responses with little toxicity (Foa. Blood. 2011). Allogeneic bone marrow transplant (AlloBMT) remains the goal of therapy in Ph+ ALL based on contemporary trials with TKIs demonstrating improved survival in patients transplanted in CR1, and we have shown that transplant following induction with dasatinib yields better outcomes than with imatinib. Thus we implemented RII with dasatinib for the treatment of Ph+ ALL and compared to patients who received HyperCVAD with a 2nd generation TKI. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL admitted to Johns Hopkins Hospital from September 2017-June 2020 underwent a 4-week RII with: vincristine 2 mg/d weekly, dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly on days 1 and 2, and dasatinib 100 mg PO daily. CNS prophylaxis with IT MTX was given on day 8. Dexamethasone and vincristine were reduced by 50% for patients over age 70. Filgrastim was started on day 15 for patients without ANC recovery. Patients who received HyperCVAD with dose adjustments for age (Rausch et al. Cancer. 2020) from July 2011-June 2020 were included for comparison. Dasatinib 100 mg PO daily or nilotinib 400 mg PO BID were given with HyperCVAD at the discretion of the treating physician. Rituximab 375 mg/m^2 on days 1 and 8 was given based on CD20 status. Subsequent therapy after induction was not specifically mandated. Results: 21 patients received RII and 24 received HyperCVAD. The cohorts were comparable in terms of gender (38.1% female vs. 50%, p=0.55), age (median 49.8 vs. 50.3, p=0.33), age >60 (33.3% vs. 29.2%, p>0.99), median WBC at diagnosis (19 vs. 23.5, p=0.56), and the presence of decompensated DIC (fibrinogen <150) prior to treatment initiation (4.8% vs. 8.3%, p>0.99). Among the patients treated with HyperCVAD, 15 received dasatinib (62.5%) and 9 received nilotinib (37.5%). Rituximab use was balanced between the cohorts (61.9% vs. 58.3%, p>0.99). Table 1 compares the time to ANC recovery >500, transfusion requirements within 30 days of chemotherapy initiation, rates of decompensated DIC following treatment initiation, and the duration of inpatient hospitalization for induction. While the rates of decompensated DIC were similar in each cohort, patients treated with RII required fewer platelet and pRBC transfusions. ANC recovery was faster following RII, and only 5 patients (23.8%) received growth factor support. All patients achieved a hematologic response. There was one induction death with HyperCVAD (4.2%). Most patients received a subsequent cycle of high-dose (HD) MTX and Ara-C with TKI (76.2% following RII and 91.7% following HyperCVAD). The remaining patients treated with RII subsequently received HD MTX (14.2%) or blinatumomab (9.5%) with TKI due to co-morbidities. Among those patients treated with HD MTX and Ara-C, blinatumomab was given with TKI to 6 patients (37.5%) who initially received RII and 1 patient (4.5%) after HyperCVAD (p=0.03) due to persistent MRD. As shown in Figure 1, the incidence of MRD-negativity by multi-color flow cytometry (MFC) with a sensitivity of 10-4 at day 120 after treatment initiation was similar for RII (85.4%, 95% CI 64.8-97.1) versus HyperCVAD (86.7%, 95% CI 69.8-96.6). Among patients subsequently treated with HD MTX and Ara-C, 62.5% proceeded to alloBMT after RII with an additional 12.5% currently undergoing transplant evaluation, while 86.4% proceeded to alloBMT after HyperCVAD. The 1-year RFS and OS following RII were 87.9% (95% CI 59.6-96.8) and 100% compared to 87.5% (95% CI 66.1-95.8) and 95.8% (95% CI 73.9-99.4) following HyperCVAD. Conclusion: RII with dasatinib results in fewer transfusions and less myelosuppression compared to HyperCVAD with a 2nd generation TKI. More patients treated with RII received blinatumomab following high-dose MTX and Ara-C, but the rates of MRD-negativity were comparable between the two regimens. Thus RII with dasatinib followed by MRD-guided follow-up therapy facilitates MRD negative remissions with less toxicity than HyperCVAD. The vast majority of fit patients were able to proceed to alloBMT following either regimen. Transplant outcomes following dasatinib with induction are presented in our concurrent abstract demonstrating a 5-year RFS of 83% (95% CI 59.8-93.5). Disclosures Webster: Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Jain:Bristol Myer Squibb: Other: for advisory board participation; CareDx: Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Dalton:AbbVie: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding. DeZern:Abbvie: Consultancy; Astex: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; MEI: Consultancy. Gojo:Genentech: Research Funding; Amphivena: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding. Bolanos-Meade:Incyte: Other: DSMB Fees. Luznik:WindMil Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties: Patent holder; AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding. Ali:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Borrello:Celgene: Research Funding; Aduro: Patents & Royalties; WindMIL Therapeutics: Other: Founder , Research Funding. Wagner-Johnston:ADC Therapeutics, Regeneron, CALIB-R, Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Smith:Jazz: 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; Celgene: 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; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Levis:Menarini: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria; FujiFilm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Detailed Safety Analysis of Venetoclax Combined with Rituximab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.2033.2033 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 2033-2033 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Danielle M. Brander ◽

Michael Y. Choi ◽

Andrew W. Roberts ◽

Shuo Ma ◽

L. Leanne Lash ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Peripheral Blood ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Over Time

Abstract Background: Venetoclax (VEN) is a selective, potent, orally bioavailable BCL-2 inhibitor FDA-approved for patients with del(17p) chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and who have received ≥1 prior therapy. Based on preclinical evidence of synergy, VEN plus rituximab is being assessed in an ongoing Phase 1b study. Methods: Patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL received daily VEN with stepwise ramp-up over 3-4 weeks to reach daily doses of 200-600mg. After 1 week at the target dose, monthly rituximab was added for 6 doses. Responses and progression were assessed by iwCLL criteria with CT scan and bone marrow biopsy. Bone marrow assessments were done at screening, completion of combination therapy (month 7), and 2 months after clinical/radiologic criteria of iwCLL response were met. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed in peripheral blood and marrow aspirates using ≥4 color flow cytometry (min sensitivity: 0.01%). Data cutoff was 04March2016, with analysis focusing on updated safety of cytopenias experienced on the course of treatment. Results: Forty-ninepatients enrolled (48 CLL/1 SLL). Patients had received a median of 2 prior therapies (range: 1-5) and disease in 25 (51%) was considered refractory to the most recent therapy. Median time on study was 28 (<1-42) months, with 31 patients active on study. Eighteen patients discontinued: 11 due to disease progression, 3 due to toxicity (peripheral neuropathy [1], MDS [1], and death due to TLS [1]), 3 withdrew consent, and 1 was lost to follow up. Across all doses, the most common AEs of any grade were diarrhea (57%), neutropenia (55%), upper respiratory tract infection (55%), and nausea (51%). Peripheral blood cytopenias were the most common Grade 3/4 AEs (neutropenia [53%], thrombocytopenia [16%], anemia [14%], febrile neutropenia [12%], and leukopenia [12%]). Twenty-seven (55%) patients had a history of neutropenia, of whom 6 were receiving G-CSF support prior to starting VEN. Overall, in the first month of therapy, 15 (31%) experienced an AE of neutropenia (any grade). Thereafter, the rate of new AEs of neutropenia decreased over time. While there was individual patient variability, mean ANC was stable over time. Overall, 26 (53%) patients had Grade 3/4 neutropenia. Neutropenia was generally well tolerated and managed by G-CSF support in 24 patients, in addition to ≥1 dose modification in 11 of the 24 patients. Of 8 (16%) patients who experienced grade 3 infections, 2 were while neutropenic. There were no grade 4 infections. Among the 11 (22%) patients who developed any-grade thrombocytopenia, none occurred within 2 weeks of a reported bleeding-related AE. One patient had thrombocytopenia overlapping with disease progression on therapy. Objective response rate for all patients was 86% (n=42), with 51% (n=25) who had complete response (CR/CRi; 12 achieved CR/CRi by month 7). At the completion of combination therapy (month 7), 39 patients had evaluable bone marrow assessments. Thirty (77%) had no histologic evidence of CLL in the bone marrow and 22 patients (56%) had attained bone marrow MRD-negativity. In longer follow up at any point during treatment for all 49 patients, 37 (75%) patients achieved complete marrow clearance and 28 (57%) achieved marrow MRD-negativity. Conclusions: Transient manageable neutropenia was the most common AE, with first onset usually seen within the first month of treatment and the onset of new neutropenia AEs decreased over time. No patients discontinued the study due to cytopenias. Patients were able to continue on study and high rates of response to treatment were observed. VEN given with rituximab achieved rapid and profound reductions in disease burden in peripheral blood and bone marrow. 77% of evaluable patients achieved morphologic clearance by month 7, and 57% were MRD-negative at any point on study. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Brander: TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria. Roberts:AbbVie: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Genentech: Patents & Royalties: Employee of Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research which receives milestone payments related to venetoclax. Ma:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Xeme: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding. Lash:AbbVie: Employment. Verdugo:AbbVie: Employment, Other: may own stock. Zhu:AbbVie Inc.: Employment, Other: may own stock. Kim:AbbVie: Employment. Seymour:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text