scholarly journals Rituximab and Specific Therapy for Patients with Burkitt's Leukemia and Lymphoma. Results of the BURKIMAB14 Trial from the Spanish Pethema and Geltamo Groups in 80 Patients

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2584-2584
Author(s):  
Josep-Maria Ribera ◽  
Olga García ◽  
Marta Cervera ◽  
Carlos Rguez ◽  
Maialen Sirvent ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Death Rate ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Lower Probability ◽  
Hiv Positive ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Bulky Mass ◽  
Lower Death Rate

Background and objective. Specific immunochemotherapy is the standard treatment of patients with Burkitt leukemia or lymphoma (BL/L). The BURKIMAB08 trial showed 3-yr overall survival (OS) probability of 72% (Ribera JM et al, Cancer. 2013; 119:1660-8). However, the toxicity was high, and 11% of patients died in complete response (CR). In the BURKIMAB14 trial, dose-intensity of chemotherapy blocks was reduced in patients ≤55 years who achieved CR, with the aim to decrease the death rate without impact on efficacy. We present the results of this trial in 80 patients with BL/L and compare them with those of the BURKIMAB08 trial. Patients and method. All patients received a pre-phase with cyclophosphamide, prednisone and rituximab. Patients in localized stages (I-II non-bulky) received 4 blocks of immunochemotherapy (A1, B1, C1, A2), with 33% reduction of doses of iphosphamide, methotrexate and ARA-C in patients ≤55 years in CR (assessed by PET-CT) after B1 cycle. Patients in stages III-IV and mature B-ALL received 6 immunochemotherapy blocks (A1, B1, C1, A2, B2, C2), with the same dose reduction in cycles C1, A2, B2, C2 in patients ≤55 years in CR after B1 cycle. Patients >55 years received reduced intensity chemotherapy (as in BURKIMAB08) in both induction and post-induction cycles. The CR rate, cumulated incidence of relapse (CIR) and OS were analyzed and compared with those from the BURKIMAB08 trial. Results. From 2014-2019, 80 patients with BL/L were enrolled. Median age (range): 48 (17-80) years, 57 (71%) ≤55 years, 61 males (76%), 15 (19%) patients in stages I-II non-bulky and 65 (81%) in stages III-IV, 25 of whom (38%) had mature B-ALL. 18 patients (23%) were HIV positive, 13 (17%) showed CNS involvement at diagnosis and 23 (31%) bulky mass (>10 cm). 45 patients (60%) had intermediate-high or high IPI. All patients in stages I-II non-bulky showed CR. 4/65 patients in stages III-IV or mature B-ALL are receiving induction therapy, 1/65 withdrew the trial, 7/60 (12%) died in induction, 2/60 (3%) were resistant and 51/60 (85%) achieved CR. Of them, 6 relapsed, 3 withdrew the trial and 3 died in CR (one in the group of localized stage). OS probability at 3 years was 74% (95%CI: 64%-84%) (localized stages 100% [NE], advanced stages 68% [56%-80%], p=0.047, without difference in patients in stages III-IV vs. mature B-ALL, Figure 1). Patients >55 years showed a significantly lower probability of OS (61% [41%-81%] vs. 80% [68%-92%], p=0.022, Figure 2). A lower but non-statistically significant OS probability was observed in HIV-infected vs. non-HIV-positive patients (61% [36%-86%] vs. 78% [67%-89%], p=0.310). The CIR for patients in advanced stage/mature B-ALL was 13% (3%-28%)A trend for lower death rate in CR was observed in BURKIMAB14 vs. BURKIMAB 08 trial (3/62 vs. 16/151, p=0.180), without differences in CIR (9% [3%-21%] vs. 12% [6%-20%]) or in OS (74% [64%-84%] vs. 72% [65%-79%], respectively). Conclusions. The results of the BURKIMAB14 trial are promising, especially for patients in localized stages and for those <55 years. The death rate in CR was lower compared with the BURKIMAB08 trial. The reduction of the dose-intensity of chemotherapy in CR patients did not have impact on the CIR. Supported in part with the grants PI14/01971 FIS, Instituto Carlos III, SGR 288 (GRC) y Fundación "La Caixa". Figure 1. OS according to stage (I-II, vs. III-IV vs. mature B ALL) Figure 2. OS according to age (≤55 y vs >55 y) Figure 1 Disclosures Abrisqueta: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau. Fernandez:Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: 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, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Terol:Roche: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Gimeno Vázquez:JANSSEN: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau. Sancho:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Kern Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squib: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals A Phase 2 Trial of Ibrutinib and Nivolumab in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Classical Hodgkin's Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 29-29
Author(s):  
Walter Hanel ◽  
Beth A. Christian ◽  
Kami J. Maddocks ◽  
Narendranath Epperla ◽  
Basem M. William ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Immune Escape ◽  
Chronic Gvhd ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Hodgkin's Lymphoma ◽  
Advisory Committees

Introduction: Classical Hodgkin's Lymphoma (cHL) is characterized by an extensive inflammatory infiltrate with abundant Th2 and Treg cells which facilitate immune escape of Reed Sternberg (RS) cells and provides a growth promoting microenvironment by cytokine secretion and CD40/CD40L engagement. Our group previously show that ibrutinib irreversibly inhibits both Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) and interleukin-2 inducible kinase (ITK), a kinase important in Th2 signaling (Dubovsky et al Blood 2013). We hypothesized that the addition of ibrutinib to nivolumab would lead to deeper and more durable responses in cHL by normalizing the Th1/Th2 balance thus reversing immune escape of RS cells. We present results of a planned interim analysis of the first 10 patients enrolled with a data cutoff of June of 2020. Methods: This is a single arm, phase II, single institutional clinical trial testing the clinical activity of nivolumab in combination with ibrutinib in patients ≥18 years of age with histologically confirmed cHL who have received at least one prior line of therapy and who were either not candidates for or had a prior autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Prior treatment with nivolumab was allowed. Ibrutinib was administered at 560 mg daily until progression in combination with nivolumab 3 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks for 16 cycles. The primary objective was complete response rate (CRR) prior to cycle 7 assessed per Lugano criteria. Adverse events (AEs) were reported using CTCAE Version 4.0. Results: Of the first 11 cHL patients enrolled, one patient withdrew consent prior to initiating therapy. Of the remaining 10 patients, the median age was 41 years (range 20-84) and 4 patients (40%) were male. The median number of prior lines of treatment was 4.5 (range 1-11), 5 patients (50%) had prior ASCT, 8 patients (80%) had prior brentuximab, and 5 patients (50%) had prior nivolumab. Four of the five patients with prior nivolumab had progressed while receiving therapy while the remaining patient had stable disease upon completing nivolumab with a median time from the last nivolumab treatment of 15.6 months (range 0.7-23.2). Of the 10 patients who received treatment, one patient came off study after two cycles due to persistent grade 2 transaminitis lasting for several weeks attributed to nivolumab requiring high dose oral steroids. One patient came off study after cycle 9 due to grade 3 hematuria attributed to ibrutinib and another came off study due to a pericardial effusion after 8 cycles of ibrutinib maintenance. In the remaining patients, treatment was generally well tolerated with most AEs being grade 1-2 (Table 1). The median number of total cycles received was 9 (range 2-22). Of the 9 patients evaluable for response, 6 patients responded (ORR = 66%), 4 of whom had a complete response (CRR = 44%) with a median time to response of 2 months (Table 2, Fig.1). In intention-to-treat analysis, the ORR was 60% and CRR was 40% meeting our prespecified interim efficacy endpoint of a 30% CRR for trial continuation. Notably, of the 5 patients with prior nivolumab, 3 responded to nivolumab + ibrutinib (ORR = 60%), with one having a CR (CRR = 20%). Overall, at a median follow up of 9.5 months, both the median PFS and duration of response have not yet been reached, with 3 patients remaining in CR at the time of data cutoff. Three of 4 patients discontinued trial treatment to undergo SCT [2 allogeneic; 1 autologous]. Of the 2 allogeneic SCT patients, the first one underwent SCT 3 weeks after the last nivolumab infusion and developed multi-organ acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) followed by severe chronic GVHD requiring extracorporeal photopheresis. The second patient underwent allogeneic SCT 2 months following the last nivolumab infusion and had no acute GVHD and experienced only mild chronic GVHD which was medically managed. Conclusions: Although the numbers are small and further recruitment is ongoing (target n=17), the combination of ibrutinib and nivolumab was generally well tolerated and with high response rate with more than half of responding patients achieving a CR. In addition, responses were seen in patients with prior nivolumab treatment. Our results suggest a possible novel role for BTK inhibition in reversing nivolumab resistance in cHL, at least in some cases. Correlative studies including peripheral blood and tumor immune subset analyses are ongoing and the latest results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Christian: Acerta: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; F Hoffman-La Roche: Research Funding; Triphase: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZenica: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Maddocks:Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics, AstraZeneca: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Epperla:Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria. William:Incyte: Research Funding; Dova: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy, Honoraria; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy. Jaglowski:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; CRISPR: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy. Bond:Seattle Genetics: Honoraria. Brammer:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Speakers Bureau. Baiocchi:viracta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prelude Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: This trial uses ibrutnib in cHL to augment the responses of concurrent nivolumab administration.

A Pilot Study of Acalabrutinib with Bendamustine/Rituximab Followed By Cytarabine/Rituximab (R-ABC) for Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 8-9
Author(s):  
Daniel Guy ◽  
Marcus Watkins ◽  
Fei Wan ◽  
Nancy L. Bartlett ◽  
Amanda F Cashen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Stem Cell Collection

Introduction The management of younger fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) varies widely with no consensus on an optimal induction therapy. To date, the treatments with the longest progression-free survival incorporate a chemotherapy backbone that includes high dose cytarabine, followed by consolidation with an autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) (Hermine et al. Lancet 2016, Eskelund et al. Br J Haematol 2016). Recent data showed that a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab achieved high complete response rates with high minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (Merryman RW et al. Blood Adv 2020). We hypothesized that adding the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib to the same chemotherapeutic backbone would be safe and increase complete response rates as well as minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity pre-transplant, and potentially improve clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a single arm, single institution pilot study registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03623373). Patients with untreated MCL, who were between ages 18-70 and were candidates for ASCT, were eligible. Patients received six 28-day cycles of treatment. Cycles 1-3 consisted of bendamustine 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2, rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 28. Cycles 4-6 consisted of rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, cytarabine 2 g/m2 (1.5 g/m2 if age&gt;60) q12 hours on days 1 and 2, and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 7 and 22 through 28. Restaging PET/CT and response assessment based on the Lugano classification were obtained following cycles 3 and 6. After cycle 6 patients underwent leukapheresis and stem-cell collection as preparation for ASCT. Blood for MRD status was collected after cycles 2, 4 and 6 and will be evaluated using the ClonoSeq assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). The primary objective was to determine the stem cell mobilization success rate. Secondary objectives included safety and tolerability, overall response rate (ORR), pre-transplant complete response rate (CR), and the MRD negativity rate during and after completion of therapy. Results The trial enrolled 14 patients from December 2018 to February 2020. One patient withdrew consent prior to start of treatment and another was found to have an undiagnosed adenocarcinoma shortly after starting MCL treatment. Both are excluded from the analysis. The median age was 57 years (range 52-66). 11 patients were males (92%), all patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1. 11 patients (92%) presented with stage IV disease. The mean MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score was 6.3 (25% high-risk, 42% intermediate-risk and 33% low-risk). Of the 12 patients who began treatment, 9 completed all 6 cycles. Three patients did not complete therapy due to: insurance issues (n = 1), and thrombocytopenia (n = 2) following cycle 5 and 4. The side effect profile showed expected hematologic toxicities with grade 3-4 cytopenias in all patients, mostly during cytarabine cycles. In total, 100% of patients developed grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and 83% of patients developed grade 3-4 neutropenia. Three episodes of febrile neutropenia were observed. One patient had a grade 3 transaminase increase, and one patient had grade 3 diarrhea. No bleeding events or treatment related deaths occurred. The remainder of the side effects were low grade and the treatment was generally well tolerated. Of the 12 evaluable patients, 10 responded (ORR 83%) with 9 achieving CR (75%). One patient achieved PR prior to being removed from the study due to thrombocytopenia and then achieved CR off study. Two patients experienced PD during induction. With a median follow up of 9 months, no responding patients have relapsed. The median CD34+ stem cell collection was 3.84x106 cells/kg (range 2.77 - 5.9). MRD results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions This is the first study attempting to combine BTK inhibition with a high dose cytarabine containing regimen. The addition of acalabrutinib to a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab appears to be safe. The R-ABC combination will be further tested in the recently activated intergroup trial EA4181. Disclosures Bartlett: Autolus: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Fehniger:ImmunityBio: Research Funding; HCW Biologics: Research Funding; Kiadis: Consultancy; Nkarta: Consultancy; Indapta: Consultancy; Wugen: Consultancy; Orca Biosystems: Consultancy; Compass Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ghobadi:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; WuGen: Consultancy. Mehta-Shah:Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Genetech/Roche: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Verastem: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Corvus: Research Funding. Kahl:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Nilotinib in Imatinib-Resistant or -Intolerant Patients (pts) with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP): 48-Month Follow-up Results of a Phase 2 Study,

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3770-3770 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp D. le Coutre ◽  
Francis J. Giles ◽  
Javier Pinilla-Ibarz ◽  
Richard A. Larson ◽  
Norbert Gattermann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lung Neoplasm ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistance ◽  
Imatinib Resistant ◽  
Significant Difference

Abstract Abstract 3770 Background: Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL TKI approved for the treatment of pts with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP, and for pts with CML-CP or CML-AP resistant to or intolerant of imatinib. Here, we present the 48-mo follow-up data from the 2101 trial for pts with imatinib resistance or intolerance. Methods: Pts were treated with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID). Key endpoints included PFS (defined as progression to AP/BC or discontinuation due to disease progression as assessed by investigator or death from any cause) and OS (includes deaths during treatment or follow-up after discontinuation). Results: 321 pts were enrolled (70% imatinib resistant; 30% imatinib intolerant with resistance). At baseline (BL), 36% of pts were in CHR. At the time of data cutoff, 224/321 pts (70%) discontinued nilotinib therapy (Table), and 31% of all pts had at least 48 mo of treatment. The median nilotinib dose intensity was 789 mg/day (range, 151–1110) and 62% of pts received ≥ 400 mg BID nilotinib as their last dose available. Pts with BL CHR had a significantly higher PFS rate at 48 mo vs pts without BL CHR (71% vs 49%, respectively; P =.001). Only 11 (3%) pts progressed to advanced disease (AP/BC) during study. Estimated 48-mo OS rate was 78% (95% CI 74%-83%). Among resistant pts, those without BL mutations (n = 92) had a significantly higher OS rate at 48 mo vs pts with sensitive mutations at BL (n = 78) (84% vs 74%, respectively, P =.029); however, there was no significant difference in OS among pts with sensitive and insensitive mutations (Y253H, E255K/V or F359C/V, n = 27) at BL (74% vs 71%, respectively, P =.804). No new safety signals were observed, and few additional AEs were reported since 24 mo follow-up (Table). Biochemical lab abnormalities were generally mild, transient, and easily managed; grade 3/4 lipase elevation (19%), hypophosphatemia (18%), and hyperglycemia (13%) were most common. Reports of any-grade pleural effusions remained low (1%), and no new cases were reported with longer follow-up. No new cases of QTcF >500 ms and 3 new cases of QTcF increases > 60 ms from BL were reported. Nine pts died during treatment or within 28 days of discontinuation: 8 deaths were previously reported and occurred in the first 24 mo of follow-up; 1 additional death due to lung neoplasm occurred between 24 and 48 mo (35 mo). Conclusions: With longer follow up, nilotinib continues to be effective and well tolerated in pts with Ph+ CML-CP resistant to or intolerant of imatinib therapy. Nilotinib prevented progression to AP/BC in the majority of pts on treatment and was associated with high OS rates. No cumulative toxicity was observed. Data demonstrating the higher rate of PFS in pts who entered the study with a BL CHR suggest that switching pts to nilotinib prior to hematologic failure on imatinib, and according to current treatment guidelines, may maximize the efficacy of nilotinib therapy. Disclosures: le Coutre: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria. Giles:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gattermann:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ottmann:Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Radich:BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Hughes: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; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinelli:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy. Kim:Novartis: Consultancy, 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; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Branford:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding. Müller:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Novick:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fan:Novartis: Employment. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Baccarani:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.

Clapd (Clarithromycin, Pomalidomide, Dexamethasone) Therapy In Relapsed Or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1955-1955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomer M Mark ◽  
Angelique Boyer ◽  
Adriana C Rossi ◽  
Dennis Kwon ◽  
Roger N Pearse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Response ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Response Analysis ◽  
Muscular Weakness ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Disease Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Pomalidomide is a distinct IMiD® immunomodulatory agent with activity in subjects with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM), including those with prior lenalidomide treatment. We have previously reported that the addition of clarithromycin enhances the anti-myeloma activity of pomalidomide+dexamethasone (Pom/Dex) in the treatment of RRMM (Mark et al, ASH 2012). We now report updated results with extended follow up from a phase 2 trial of large group of patients treated with ClaPd in RRMM. Methods One hundred nineteen patients with heavily pretreated RRMM were enrolled into a single-institution study to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of ClaPd. Eligible subjects had at least 3 prior lines of therapy, one line of which must have included lenalidomide. ClaPd is clarithromycin 500mg twice daily; pomalidomide 4mg for days 1-21, and dexamethasone 40mg on days 1,8,15,22 of a 28-day cycle. All subjects had thromboprophylaxis with 81mg aspirin daily. Disease response evaluation was performed monthly with immunoelectrophoresis and free light chain analysis; bone marrow biopsy with skeletal imaging was used to confirm MM progression or complete response (CR). Treatment was continued as tolerated by the patient until disease progression. Results One hundred fourteen patients had completed at least 1 cycle of ClaPd and were eligible for disease response analysis at data cut-off. All patients were included in the safety analysis. Patients had undergone a median of 5 (range 3-15) prior lines of therapy. The proportion of patients who were refractory to lenalidomide, refractory to bortezomib, and double (lenalidomide+bortezomib) refractory were 85%, 79%, and 68% respectively. The median number of ClaPd cycles received was 7 (range 1-34). Overall response rate (ORR, ≥PR, entire cohort/double-refractory subgroup) was 61.4/56.4% [stringent complete remission (sCR): 4.4/4%, complete response (CR): 0.9/1.3%, very good partial response (VGPR): 14.9/11.5%, partial response (PR): 41.2/38.5%, minimal response (MR): 7/9%, stable disease (SD): 21.9/21.8%, progressive disease (PD): 9.6/12.8%, ³VGPR rate of 20.2/16.7%]. Clinical benefit (³ MR) was achieved in 68.4/65.4%. Median time to PR and maximum response was 1 (range 1-7) and 2 (range 1-18) cycles, respectively. After a mean follow up time of 11.9 months, 40 patients (34%) remain free from progression, with a median progression free survival of 8.1 months (95% CI: 5.1, 9.8). Median duration of response (DOR) was 9.3 months (95% CI: 7.2,16.1). Median overall survival (OS) has not been reached with 68 patients (57%) alive at last follow-up. Median PFS, DOR, OS were not significantly different in the double-refractory subgroup at 6.3 (CI 4.7, 8.7; p = 0.21), 8.6 (CI 6.5, 16.1; p = 0.87), and 16.8 months (CI 12.4, 28.7; p = 0.11) respectively. The most common (³% grade 3 and 4 toxicities were: neutropenia (49%), thrombocytopenia (39%), anemia (27%), pneumonia (10%), fatigue 8%, and muscular weakness 7%. Febrile neutropenia was uncommon at 2%. There were 6 cases of lower extremity venous thrombosis (5%, 1 grade 1, 4 grade 2, 1 grade 3) and no instances of pulmonary embolism. Mild peripheral neuropathy was present in 32% (19% grade 1, 13% grade 2), 0% grade 3 or 4). Grade 2 congestive heart failure, due to dexamethasone, emerged in 1 subject (0.8%). Four patients (3.3%) withdrew due to treatment related toxicity (1 with Grade 3 muscular weakness, 2 due to Grade 3 fatigue, 1 grade 4 neutropenic sepsis). There was no treatment related mortality. Conclusions ClaPd is a highly effective and tolerable regimen for heavily treated RRMM that has progressed after prior treatments. Response to ClaPd is rapid and sustained at > 8 months in the majority of subjects. The presence of double refractory disease did not significantly impact clinical outcomes. The ORR and PFS compare favorably and toxicity profile is similar to other published reports of Pom/Dex. Disclosures: Mark: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rossi:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Zafar:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Pekle:Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Niesvizky:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Sequence Impact Of Pomalidomide and Carfilzomib On Treatment Response In Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1954-1954 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomer M Mark ◽  
John N. Allan ◽  
Angelique Boyer ◽  
Adriana C Rossi ◽  
Roger N Pearse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Partial Response ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Salvage Chemotherapy ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Effective Response ◽  
Disease Response ◽  
Prior Therapy

Abstract Background Pomalidomide and Carfilzomib (Cfz) are two recently approved agents for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) that has relapsed after prior therapy including an IMiD and bortezomib. The sequencing of these agents to achieve maximum tumor reduction is thus far not known. We have previously reported response data from the combination clarithromycin, pomalidomide, dexamethasone (ClaPD) for relapsed or refractory MM. (Mark et al, ASH 2012). We examined the subset of these patients that had received a Cfz-based regimen prior to ClaPD as well as the subset of patients that received a Cfz-based regimen after ClaPD to determine whether the sequence of agents had any impact on response. Methods One hundred nineteen patients with heavily pretreated RRMM were enrolled into a single-institution study to investigate the effectiveness and tolerability of ClaPD. Eligible subjects had at least 3 prior lines of therapy, one line of which must have included lenalidomide. ClaPD is clarithromycin 500mg twice daily; pomalidomide 4mg for days 1-21, and dexamethasone 40mg on days 1,8,15,22 of a 28-day cycle. Two subsets of patients were compared: 1) Subjects that had received treatment with a Cfz-based prior to ClaPD (CP) and 2) Subjects that had received a Cfz-based therapy after progression on ClaPD (PC). Disease response evaluation was performed monthly with immunoelectrophoresis and free light chain analysis; bone marrow biopsy with skeletal imaging was used to confirm MM progression or complete response (CR). Results Fourteen patients comprised CP and 20 in PC. Patients in the CP group were more heavily pre-treated with a median of 6 (range 3-15) lines of therapy, as compared to 5 lines (range 3-10) for PC. Responses are shown in Table 1. Median cycles of ClaPD and Cfz received in PC was 6.5 (range 2-16) and 5 (1-14), respectively. Median cycles of Cfz and ClaPD in the CP group was 8 (1-19) and 5 (1-23), respectively. CR complete response; VGPR: very good partial response; PR: partial response; SD: stable disease; PD: progressive disease; ORR: overall response rate Conclusions ClaPD and a Cfz-based regimen appear to have equally effective response regardless of sequence in salvage chemotherapy. Somewhat deeper responses are seen with ClaPD after Cfz as compared to Cfz after ClaPD, which is intriguing given that the CP group had more prior lines of treatment than PC. Longer follow-up to analyze duration of the response is needed prior to concluding which sequence (PC vs CP) is more effective. This data supports the use of pomalidomide after carfilzomib failure and vice-versa as potent salvage therapeutic options. Disclosures: Mark: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rossi:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Zafar:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Pekle:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Niesvizky:Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

ENESTxtnd: Impact Of Nilotinib Dose Re-Escalation In Patients (pts) With Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia In Chronic Phase (CML-CP)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 4009-4009
Author(s):  
Jeff H. Lipton ◽  
Luis Meillon ◽  
Vernon Louw ◽  
Carolina Pavlovsky ◽  
Lee-Yung Shih ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Study Dose ◽  
Dose Reductions

Abstract Background Frontline nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (BID) provides superior efficacy vs imatinib in pts with CML-CP, with good tolerability. Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials—Extending Molecular Reponses (ENESTxtnd) is evaluating the kinetics of molecular response to frontline nilotinib 300 mg BID in pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP, as assessed in national and local laboratories, and is also the first study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nilotinib dose optimization (including dose re-escalation in pts who require dose reductions due to adverse events [AEs] and dose increase in pts with less than optimal response). Here, we present results of a preplanned, interim analysis (IA) based on the first 20% of pts who completed 12 mo of treatment or discontinued early. Methods ENESTxtnd (NCT01254188) is an open-label, multicenter, phase 3b clinical trial of nilotinib 300 mg BID in adults with CML-CP newly diagnosed within 6 mo of study entry. The primary endpoint is rate of MMR by 12 mo. Molecular responses were monitored by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) at local laboratories at baseline, at 1, 2, and 3 mo, and every 3 mo thereafter. Bone marrow cytogenetic analyses were performed locally at baseline, 6 mo, and end of study. Dose reductions were allowed for grade ≥ 2 nonhematologic AEs and grade 3/4 hematologic AEs. Pts with dose reductions could attempt to re-escalate (successful re-escalation defined as ≥ 4 wk on nilotinib 300 mg BID with no dose adjustments for any AE) and remain on study. Dose increase to nilotinib 400 mg BID was allowed in cases of BCR-ABL > 10% on the International Scale (BCR-ABLIS) at 3 mo or later, no major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.1%) at 12 mo, loss of MMR, or treatment failure. Results This IA includes 85 pts treated in 12 countries (Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Lebanon, Mexico, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Taiwan, and South Africa). Median age was 49 y (range, 19-85 y), and 58% of pts were male. Median time since diagnosis was 35 days (range, 2-157 days). Prior to study entry, 64 pts (75%) received hydroxyurea, and 3 pts (4%) received imatinib (all for ≤ 2 wk). At the data cutoff, 68 pts (80%) had treatment ongoing, and the remaining 17 had discontinued due to AEs/laboratory abnormalities (n = 8; nonhematologic AEs [n = 5], biochemical abnormalities [n = 2], and hematologic abnormalities [n = 1]), loss to follow-up (n = 2), administrative problems (n = 2), intolerance to the protocol-proposed dose (n = 2), suboptimal response (n = 1), withdrawal of consent (n = 1), or protocol deviation (n = 1). Median time on treatment was 13.8 mo (range, 1 day-18 mo). Median actual dose intensity of nilotinib was 597 mg/day (range, 165-756 mg/day), and 85% of pts had an actual dose intensity of > 400 mg/day to ≤ 600 mg/day. Of 30 pts with dose reductions due to AEs, 19 (63%) successfully re-escalated to nilotinib 300 mg BID. Nine pts (11%) dose escalated to nilotinib 400 mg BID due to lack of efficacy. The primary endpoint of MMR by 12 mo was achieved by 57 pts (67%; 99.89% CI, 49%-82%). Complete cytogenetic response by 6 mo was achieved by 48 pts (56%). Median BCR-ABLIS decreased over time, with a median value of 0.05% (range, 0.00%-41.36%) at 12 mo (Figure). Most pts (91%) achieved early molecular response (BCR-ABLIS ≤ 10% at 3 mo). Of the 8 pts (9%) with BCR-ABLIS > 10% at 3 mo (4 of whom were then dose escalated), 3 achieved MMR by 12 mo (1 of whom had been dose escalated). By the data cutoff, no pt had progressed to accelerated phase/blast crisis (AP/BC), and there had been no deaths on study. Nilotinib was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that seen in other frontline studies. Drug-related nonhematologic AEs (≥ 10% of pts) were rash (31%), constipation (13%), and headache (13%). Newly occurring or worsening grade 3/4 hematologic or biochemical abnormalities (≥ 10% of pts) were neutropenia (17%), thrombocytopenia (17%), increased lipase (13%), and increased bilirubin (12%). Conclusions These results demonstrate that dose-optimized nilotinib affords high rates of molecular response in pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP. Further, they support the feasibility of nilotinib dose re-escalation in pts who require temporary dose reductions due to AEs, with 63% of dose-reduced pts able to successfully re-escalate to nilotinib 300 mg BID and safely continue therapy. Disclosures: Lipton: Novartis: 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, 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. Meillon:Bayer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Louw:Novartis: Congress attendance support Other, Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Congress attendance support, Congress attendance support Other, Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Pavlovsky:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Jin:Novartis: Employment. Acharya:Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.: Employment. Woodman:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hughes:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria; CSL: Research Funding. Turkina:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria.

The Ki67/CD138 Ratio Independently Predicts Overall Survival in the Upfront Treatment of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2016-2016
Author(s):  
Tomer M Mark ◽  
Peter Forsberg ◽  
Ihsane Ouansafi ◽  
Adriana C Rossi ◽  
Roger N Pearse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
First Line ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Line Therapy

Abstract Background: Assessment of malignant plasma cell cycling via plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) has been a validated prognostic tool in multiple myeloma (MM) but the test requires specialized technical expertise and is not widely available. Ki67 is a well-known protein marker of cellular proliferation on immunohistochemical (IHC) staining with prognostic utility in other malignancies. In an effort to develop a simpler system to provide analogous information to PCLI, we used a novel IHC co-staining technique for CD138 and Ki67 to quantify plasma cells in active cycling. We then performed a retrospective analysis of the ratio of Ki67/CD138 (Ki67%) in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma receiving 1st-line therapy to correlate with clinical outcomes. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients (pts) with treated symptomatic MM was performed by interrogation of the clinical database at the Weill Cornell Medical College / New York Presbyterian Hospital. For inclusion in the analysis, subjects must have started first-line treatment in the period of 2005-2010, and had available bone marrow biopsies. Double-staining with Ki67 and CD138 was performed by IHC. The Ki67% was calculated as the percent of plasma cells expressing CD138 that were also found to express Ki67. Treatment outcomes were stratified and compared based on %Ki67. Response was determined by monthly serum protein electrophoresis / immunofixation (IFX) with free light chain analysis according to International Multiple Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) guidelines. Pts who were IFX negative but had no subsequent bone marrow biopsy were classified as being in unconfirmed complete remission. Results: We identified 151 patients with newly diagnosed MM and available %Ki67 expression who received first-line therapy over the period of 2005-2010. Patient were subdivided into two groups based on %Ki67: Low: %ki67 <= 5%, n = 87; and High: %Ki67 >5, n=64, to allow for comparison of treatment response and survival analysis. Specific therapeutic agent exposure history did not differ significantly between patients. Both groups had similar depth of response rates (ORR) to front-line therapy, Table 1. Median progression-free survival for the high versus low %Ki67 groups approached statistical significance at 54 months (95% CI 30.8,67.4) versus 26.9 months (95% CI 21.6,40.2), respectively (P = 0.083). At data cut-off, there were 30 deaths in the low %Ki67 group (1-yr OS 93%, 5-yr OS 71%) and 36 deaths in the high %Ki67 group (1-yr OS 94%, 5-yr OS 62%). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached for Ki67% <= 5% (95% CI 97.3,NR) vs. 78.9 months (95% CI 55.9,93.1) for Ki67% > 5%, (P = 0.0434), Figure 1. Multivariate cox regression for factors with influence on OS showed that only high-risk cytogenetics (HR 2.05, 95% CI 1.17, 2.92, P = 0.027), ISS (HR 1.835, 95% CI 1.33, 3.60, P = 0.000), and %Ki67 group status had an independent effect on survival outcome. Low (<=5%) versus high (>5%) %Ki67 influenced overall survival with a hazard ratio of 1.76 (CI 1.07,2.92, P = 0.027). Survival after ASCT was significantly longer in the low %Ki67 group with median OS not reached (95%CI, 97.3, NR) versus 86.9 months (95% CI 43.9, NR) for high %Ki67 group (P = 0.04). Discussion: The ratio of IHC double positive Ki67 and CD138 of > 5% is an independent prognostic marker for overall survival in newly diagnosed MM undergoing 1st line therapy. The %Ki67 serves as a simpler and widely available analog to PCLI that can be presently performed in most hematopathology laboratories. Table 1: First Line Treatment and Best Response (modified IMWG Criteria) Ki67% <= 5(N = 87)n (%) Ki67% > 5(N = 64)n (%) P Treatment Exposure* Lenalidomide 59 (67.8) 48 (75) 0.34 Thalidomide 30 (34.5) 14 (21.9) 0.09 Bortezomib 25 (28.7) 14 (21.9) 0.34 Alkylating agent 11 (12.6) 4 (6.3) 0.19 ASCT 27 (31) 22 (34.4) 0.66 Best Response Overall Response (>= Partial response) 77 (88.4) 57 (89.1) 0.41 Complete response 15 (17.2) 22 (34.4) Unconfirmed complete response** 14 (16.1) 8 (12.5) Very good partial response 23 (26.4) 15 (23.4) Partial response 25 (28.7) 12 (18.8) Stable disease 9 (10.3) 5 (7.8) Progressive disease 1 (1.2) 2 (3.1) * Percentages do not add to 100% due to instances of concurrent therapy use ** Unconfirmed complete response: immunofixation negative, but no confirmatory bone marrow biopsy available Figure 1 Overall Survival by %Ki67 Figure 1. Overall Survival by %Ki67 Disclosures Mark: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rossi:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Pekle:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Perry:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Coleman:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria. Niesvizky:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Ibrutinib in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Leukemia with 17p Deletion: Results from the Phase II RESONATE™-17 Trial

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 327-327 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan O'Brien ◽  
Jeffrey A. Jones ◽  
Steven Coutre ◽  
Anthony R. Mato ◽  
Peter Hillmen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with deletion of the short arm of chromosome 17 (del 17p) follow an aggressive clinical course and demonstrate a median survival of less than 2 years in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Ibrutinib (ImbruvicaTM), a first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has been approved for previously treated patients with CLL and for patients with del 17p CLL. We report results from the primary analysis of the Phase II RESONATETM-17 (PCYC-1117-CA) study, designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-agent ibrutinib for treatment of patients with R/R del 17p CLL or small lymphocytic leukemia (SLL). Methods: Patients with del 17p CLL or SLL who failed at least one therapy were enrolled to receive 420 mg oral ibrutinib once daily until progression. All patients receiving at least one dose of ibrutinib were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per an independent review committee (IRC). Other endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of ibrutinib. Results: Among 144 treated patients (137 with CLL, 7 with SLL), the median age was 64 (48% 65 years or older) and all had del 17p. Baseline characteristics included 63% of patients with Rai Stage III or IV disease, 49% with bulky lymphadenopathy of at least 5 cm, and 10% with lymphadenopathy of least 10 cm. The median baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 32.9 x 109/L with 57% of patients with a baseline ALC at least 25.0 x 109/L. Baseline beta-2 microglobulin levels were at least 3.5 mg/L in 78% of patients (range 1.8-19.8 mg/L), and lactate dehydrogenase levels were at least 350 U/L in 24% of patients (range 127-1979 U/L). A median of 2 prior therapies (range 1-7) was reported. Investigator-assessed ORR was 82.6% including 17.4% partial response with lymphocytosis (PR-L). Complete response (CR)/complete response with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi) were reported in 3 patients. IRC-assessed ORR is pending. At a median follow up of 13.0 months (range 0.5-16.7 months), the median PFS (Figure 1) and DOR by investigator determination had not been reached. At 12 months, 79.3% were alive and progression-free, and 88.3% of responders were progression-free. Progressive disease was reported in 20 patients (13.9%). Richter transformation was reported in 11 of these patients (7.6%), 7 of the cases occurring within the first 24 weeks of treatment. Prolymphocytic leukemia was reported in 1 patient. The most frequently reported adverse events (AE) of any grade were diarrhea (36%; 2% Grade 3-4), fatigue (30%; 1% Grade 3-4), cough (24%; 1% Grade 3-4), and arthralgia (22%; 1% Grade 3-4). Atrial fibrillation of any grade was reported in 11 patients (7.6%; 3.5% Grade 3-4). Seven patients reported basal or squamous cell skin cancer and 1 patient had plasma cell myeloma. Most frequently reported Grade 3-4 AEs were neutropenia (14%), anemia (8%), pneumonia (8%), and hypertension (8%). Major hemorrhage was reported in 7 patients (4.9%, all Grade 2 or 3). Study treatment was discontinued in 16 patients (11.1%) due to AEs with 8 eventually having fatal events (pneumonia, sepsis, myocardial or renal infarction, health deterioration). At the time of data cut, the median treatment duration was 11.1 months, and 101 of 144 patients (70%) continued treatment with ibrutinib. Conclusions: In the largest prospective trial dedicated to the study of del 17p CLL/SLL, ibrutinib demonstrated marked efficacy in terms of ORR, DOR, and PFS, with a favorable risk-benefit profile. At a median follow up of 13 months, the median DOR had not yet been reached; 79.3% of patients remained progression-free at 12 months, consistent with efficacy observed in earlier studies (Byrd, NEJM 2013;369:32-42). The PFS in this previously treated population compares favorably to that of treatment-naïve del 17p CLL patients receiving fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) (Hallek, Lancet 2010;376:1164-74) or alemtuzumab (Hillmen, J Clin Oncol 2007;10:5616-23) with median PFS of 11 months. The AEs are consistent with those previously reported for ibrutinib (Byrd, NEJM 2014;371:213-23). These results support ibrutinib as an effective therapy for patients with del 17p CLL/SLL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures O'Brien: Amgen, Celgene, GSK: Consultancy; CLL Global Research Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Emergent, Genentech, Gilead, Infinity, Pharmacyclics, Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys, Acerta, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Jones:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Coutre:Janssen, Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mato:Pharamcyclics, Genentech, Celegene, Millennium : Speakers Bureau. Hillmen:Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Gilead, Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tam:Pharmacyclics and Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siddiqi:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Furman:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Brown:Sanofi, Onyx, Vertex, Novartis, Boehringer, GSK, Roche/Genentech, Emergent, Morphosys, Celgene, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Gilead: Consultancy. Stevens-Brogan:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Li:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Fardis:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Clow:Pharmacyclics: Employment. James:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Chu:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hallek:Janssen, Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Pharmacyclics, Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Machine Learning Prediction for Complete Response to Hypomethylating Agents with or without Additional Agents in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Myelodysplastic Syndrome

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1720-1720
Author(s):  
Koji Sasaki ◽  
Guillermo Montalban Bravo ◽  
Rashmi Kanagal-Shamanna ◽  
Elias Jabbour ◽  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Machine Learning ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Area Under The Curve ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Learning Model ◽  
Hypomethylating Agents ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Machine Learning Model

Background: Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a heterogeneous malignant myeloid neoplasm of hematopoietic stem cells due to cytogenetic alterations and somatic mutations in genes (DNA methylation, DNA repair, chromatin regulation, RNA splicing, transcription regulation, and signal transduction). Hypomethylating agents (HMA) are the standard of care for MDS, and 40-60% of patients achieved response to HMA. However, the prediction for response is difficult due to the nature of heterogeneity and the context of clinical conditions such as the degree of cytopenias and the dependency on transfusion. Machine learning outperforms conventional statistical models for prediction in statistical competitions. Prediction with machine learning models may predict response in patients with MDS. The aim of this study is to develop a machine learning model for the prediction of complete response (CR) to HMA with or without additional therapeutic agents in patients with newly diagnosed MDS. Methods: From November 2012 to August 2017, we analyzed 435 patients with newly diagnosed MDS who received frontline therapy as follows; azacitidine (AZA) (3-day, 5-day, or 7-day) ± vorinostat ± ipilimumab ± nivolumab; decitabine (DAC) (3-day or 5-day) ± vorinostat; 5-day guadecitabine. Clinical variables, cytogenetic abnormalities, and the presence of genetic mutations by next generation sequencing (NGS) were included for variable selection. The whole cohort was randomly divided into training/validation and test cohorts at an 8:2 ratio. The training/validation cohort was used for 4-fold cross validation. Hyperparameter optimization was performed with Stampede2, which was ranked as the 15th fastest supercomputer at Texas Advanced Computing Center in June 2018. A gradient boosting decision tree-based framework with the LightGBM Python module was used after hyperparameter tuning for the development of the machine learning model with training/validation cohorts. The performance of prediction was assessed with an independent test dataset with the area under the curve. Results: We identified 435 patients with newly diagnosed MDS who enrolled on clinical trials as follows: 33 patients, 5-day AZA; 23, 5-day AZA + vorinostat; 43, 3-day AZA; 20, 5-day AZA + ipilimumab; 19 patients, AZA + nivolumab; 7, AZA + ipilumumab + nivolumab; 114, 5-day DAC; 74, 3-day DAC; 4, DAC + vorinostat; 97, 5-day guadecitabine. In the whole cohort, the median age at diagnosis was 68 years (range, 13.0-90.3); 117 (27%) patients had a history of prior radiation or cytotoxic chemotherapy; the median white blood cell count was 2.9 (×109/L) (range, 0.5-102); median absolute neutrophil count, 1.1 (×109/L) (range, 0.0-55.1); median hemoglobin count, 9.5 (g/dL) (range, 4.7-15.4); median platelet count, 63 (×109/L) (range, 2-881); and median blasts in bone marrow, 8% (range, 0-20). Among 411 evaluable patients for the revised international prognostic scoring system, 15 (4%) had very low risk disease; 42 (10%), low risk; 68 (17%), intermediate risk; 124 (30%), high risk; and 162 (39%), very high risk. Overall, 153 patients (53%) achieved CR. Hyperparameter tuning identified the optimal hyperparameters with colsample by tree of 0.175, learning rate of 0.262, the maximal depth of 2, minimal data in leaf of 29, number of leaves of 11, alpha regularization of 0.010, lambda regularization of 2.085, and subsample of 0.639. On the test cohort with 87 patients, the machine learning model accurately predicted response in 65 patients (75%); 53 non-CR among 56 non-CR (95% accuracy); and 12 CR among 31 CR (39% accuracy). The trend of accuracy improvement by iteration (i.e., the number of decision trees) is shown in Figure 1. The area under the curve was 0.761521 in the test cohort. Conclusion: Our machine learning model with clinical, cytogenetic, and NGS data can predict CR to HMA in patients with newly diagnosed MDS. This approach can identify patients who may benefit from HMA therapy with and without additional agents for response, and can optimize the timing of allogeneic stem cell transplant. Disclosures Sasaki: Otsuka: Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy. Jabbour:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Adaptive: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cyclacel LTD: Research Funding. Ravandi:Cyclacel LTD: Research Funding; Selvita: Research Funding; Menarini Ricerche: Research Funding; Macrogenix: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Xencor: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kadia:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bioline RX: Research Funding; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Takahashi:Symbio Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. DiNardo:syros: Honoraria; jazz: Honoraria; agios: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; notable labs: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; medimmune: Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; daiichi sankyo: Honoraria. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immunogen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sun Pharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merus: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BiolineRx: Consultancy; Biopath Holdings: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian:AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Actinium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immunogen: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Garcia-Manero:Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Benchmark of Progression Free Survival for Multiple Lines of Therapy in Follicular Lymphoma Treated in the Rituximab Era

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2955-2955 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna Alperovich ◽  
Connie Batlevi ◽  
Katy Smith ◽  
Zhitao Ying ◽  
Jacob D Soumerai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Third Line Treatment

Abstract Introduction In their lifetime, patients with follicular lymphoma frequently require multiple treatments, which have improved their survival over the past few decades. The expected treatment outcome based on lines of treatment in the post-Rituximab era is currently unknown. We analyzed the progression free survival and event free survival by line of treatment to aid estimating clinical endpoints when designing future clinical trials for multiply relapsed patients. Patients and Methods Adults (≥18 years) with de novo follicular lymphoma (FL) treated at our center between 1998 and 2007 were eligible (N=1134). 236 patients with ≤2 visits, mixed histology at initial diagnosis, and active concurrent malignancy were excluded. Of the remaining 898 patients, 105 were observed and did not require treatment during the timeframe of this dataset, and 2 had incomplete data, therefore 791 patients were eligible for response, progression and event free survival (PFS and EFS) analysis (Figure 1). Response was documented by investigators based on clinical or radiographic assessment. Complete response was based on radiographic assessment. PFS was defined as start of treatment to progression of disease or death. Patients with inadequate response to treatment, change of treatment, or stable disease without subsequent documented relapse were censored in the PFS analysis. Events for EFS were defined as progression, change of treatment, and death. PFS and EFS of sequential lines of treatment were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier method and compared across lines using log-rank test with adjustment for within-patient correlation. PFS and EFS were compared by other clinical variables using regular log-rank tests. Results Median age of diagnosis was 57.3 years with 1:1 male to female ratio. Median overall survival was not reached with median follow up of 9 years (N=898, range 0.2 - 16.8 years, Figure 1A). Median time to first treatment for the entire group was 2.3 months (range 0 - 13.3 years). In first line treatment of the 791 patients, 51% (N=406) received Rituximab with chemotherapy (R-Chemo), 13% (N=101) received chemotherapy only (Chemo), 19% (N=150) received Rituximab monotherapy (R-Mono), and 17% (N=129) received other treatments including radiation and surgery. For second line treatment, 405 patients were treated with about 37% receiving R-Chemo and 34% receiving R-Mono. As line of treatment increased, the percentage of patients with radiographically assessed complete response diminished from 71% at first line treatment to 25% by fifth line treatment (Figure 1B). Median PFS for first, second and third line treatment are 4.8, 1.6, and 1 year, respectively (Figure 2A). Median EFS for first, second and third line treatment are 3.8, 1.1, 0.8 year, respectively (Figure 2B). For subsequent lines of treatment, both median PFS and EFS were <1 year. Conclusion Follicular lymphoma is an indolent disease often requiring multiple lines of treatment. However, PFS and EFS for multiple lines of treatment in FL has not been described in the post-Rituximab era. The work has benchmarked the median response by line of treatment. After third line treatment, the PFS was ≤1 year. This analysis serves to aide comparison of different therapies for future drug approval in relapsed FL. Disclosures Hamlin: Xencor: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Portola: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Molecular Templates: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Horwitz:Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Huya: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakka Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Moskowitz:Merck: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Moskowitz:Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Palomba:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Zelenetz:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document