Incidence of Vaso-Occlusive Crisis Does Not Increase with Achieving Higher Hemoglobin Levels on Voxelotor Treatment or after Discontinuation: Analyses of the HOPE Study

Background: Sickle cell disease (SCD) is an inherited disorder in which pathology is driven by hemoglobin (Hb) polymerization and red blood cell sickling, leading to chronic anemia and hemolysis as well as episodic vaso-occlusive crises (VOC). These manifestations of SCD contribute to the cumulative organ damage that leads to disability, reduced quality of life, and accelerated mortality. In particular, VOCs and their associated episodic pain are a hallmark symptom of SCD and frequently require emergency medical attention. Voxelotor is a first-in-class sickle hemoglobin-polymerization inhibitor in development for the treatment of SCD. It has demonstrated robust, rapid, and sustained improvements in patient Hb levels with numerically fewer VOCs compared with placebo, which suggests that viscosity was not increased with voxelotor treatment. The objective of this study was to further explore this observation by examining the association between absolute Hb achieved by voxelotor treatment and VOC incidence rate. In addition, to inform on the potential for symptom exacerbation after drug discontinuation, rates of VOCs after voxelotor discontinuation were analyzed. Methods: The HOPE trial is a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter study comparing the efficacy and safety of voxelotor (1500 mg and 900 mg daily) versus placebo for ≥24 weeks in patients with SCD aged 12 to 65 years. The primary endpoint is the percentage of patients with a Hb response at week 24, defined as a >1.0 g/dL increase in Hb. Secondary endpoints included the annualized incidence rate of VOC. This abstract reports a post hoc analysis of VOC incidence in the per-protocol population stratified by Hb level at 24 weeks of treatment. In addition, VOCs in patients who discontinued voxelotor and completed a 28-day follow-up are reported here (data cutoff October 31, 2018). Results: The proportion of patients with ≥1 VOC was 67.0% (59/88) in the voxelotor 1500 mg group, 66.3% (61/92) in the voxelotor 900 mg group, and 69.2% (63/91) in the placebo group. Overall, the annualized adjusted incidence rate of VOCs (the number of crises per person-year) was 2.77 in the voxelotor 1500 mg group, 2.76 in the voxelotor 900 mg group, and 3.19 in the placebo group. When stratified by Hb level after 24 weeks of treatment, the incidence of VOCs was generally lower in patients who achieved higher absolute Hb levels on voxelotor treatment compared with placebo (Figure 1). Patients who discontinued voxelotor were also observed for 28 days post-treatment. At the time of data cutoff, 55 patients (n=21, voxelotor 1500 mg; n=17, voxelotor 900 mg; n=17, placebo) had discontinued treatment and had post-treatment follow-up. During the 28-day period after treatment discontinuation, 5 patients in the voxelotor 1500 mg group reported 6 VOCs; 3 patients in the voxelotor 900 mg group reported 3 VOCs; and 5 patients in the placebo group reported 8 VOCs. The estimated incidence rates of post-treatment VOCs were 4.63, 4.30, and 7.01 in the voxelotor 1500 mg, voxelotor 900 mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Conclusions: Patients who achieved the greatest absolute Hb level after 24 weeks of treatment with voxelotor had numerically fewer VOCs, suggesting that increasing Hb levels resulting from voxelotor treatment did not lead to a viscosity-related increase in risk of vaso-occlusion. Following drug discontinuation, there was a numerically lower incidence of VOCs in the voxelotor arms compared with placebo. Altogether, these results suggest that voxelotor treatment safely raises Hb without causing a viscosity-related increased risk of VOC and that treatment discontinuation did not increase risk for VOC. Disclosures Vichinsky: GBT: Consultancy, Research Funding; bluebird bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Telfer:ApoPharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Speaker activities, clinical trial activities; Terumo: Honoraria, Other: Speaker activity; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Global Blood Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: clinical trial activity; Kyowa Kirin Limited: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: clinical trial activities; Napp Pharma: Other: clinical trial involvement; Celgene: Other: clinical trial involvement; Bluebird Bio: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Inati:Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novonordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tonda:Global Blood Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Tong:Global Blood Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Agodoa:Global Blood Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lehrer-Graiwer:Global Blood Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ataga:Modus Therapeutics: Honoraria; Emmaus Life Sciences: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Global Blood Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bioverativ: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Mobilization with Plerixafor (Mozobil ®)Plus G-CSF Results in Superior Day 1 Collection of CD34+ Cells Compared to Placebo Plus G-CSF: Results From Two Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials in Patients with Multiple Myeloma or Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3224.3224 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3224-3224 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Brian J. Bolwell ◽

Auayporn P. Nademanee ◽

Patrick Stiff ◽

Edward Stadtmauer ◽

Richard T. Maziarz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Placebo Group ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Yield ◽

P Value ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cell Dose ◽

Cd34 Cells ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 3224 Poster Board III-161 Background While most centers use 2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg as the minimal cell dose for autologous hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) transplantation (auto-HSCT), infusion of higher CD34+ cell dose is associated with better outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). Recent evidence suggests a correlation between CD34+ cell yield on Day 1 of collection and total CD34+ cell yield as well as post-transplant outcomes. This analysis was designed to: 1) compare Day 1 collection between patients with NHL or MM mobilized with plerixafor plus G-CSF or placebo plus G-CSF; and 2) determine whether Day 1 CD34+ cell yields correlated with the total mobilization yield and number of apheresis days. Methods Data were obtained from two prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trials that compared the safety and efficacy of plerixafor (0.24 mg/kg/day SQ) plus G-CSF (10 μg/kg/day) with placebo plus G-CSF for mobilization of HSC for auto-HSCT in patients with NHL (3101 Study) or MM (3102 Study). Pearson correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the association of day 1 CD34+ cell collection with total CD34+ cell yield and the number of days of apheresis. Results In the NHL trial, 150 patients were mobilized with plerixafor plus G-CSF and 148 patients underwent mobilization with placebo plus G-CSF. More than half the patients (55.3%) in the plerixafor group collected ≥2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg on Day 1 of apheresis (Figure 1A). In contrast, 19.6% patients in the placebo group collected ≥ 2 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg on Day 1 of apheresis (p< 0.001). In the MM study, 148 patients were mobilized with plerixafor plus G-CSF and 154 patients were mobilized with placebo plus G-CSF. More than half the patients (52.7%) in the plerixafor group collected ≥6 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg on the first day of collection compared to only 16.9% patients in the placebo group (p<0.001; Figure 1B). There was a strong positive correlation between day 1 collection and the total CD34+ cell yield in patients with NHL (r= 0.86, p-value= <0.0001) or MM (r= 0.87, p-value= <0.0001) in both the plerixafor and placebo groups. For NHL patients, the median Day 1 collection was higher in the plerixafor group compared to the placebo group: 2.66 × 106 vs. 0.77 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (p<0.001) and this translated into higher total CD34+ cell yields in the two groups respectively: 5.69 × 106 vs. 1.98 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (p<0.001). Similarly, for MM patients, the median CD34+ cells/kg collected on Day 1 was higher in the plerixafor group compared to the placebo group: 7.01 × 106 vs. 2.29 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (p<0.001) and this translated into better overall collection in the plerixafor vs. placebo groups: 10.96 × 106 vs. 6.18 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg (p<0.001). A negative correlation was observed between CD34+ cells collected on Day 1 and the number of days of apheresis performed in patients with NHL (r= -0.67, p-value=<0.0001) or MM (r= -0.50, p-value= <0.0001) in both the plerixafor and placebo groups. Consequently, better Day 1 collection in plerixafor-treated NHL or MM patients translated into significantly fewer apheresis days to achieve the target collection compared to placebo treated patients. Conclusions These data support previous reports demonstrating a strong correlation between day 1 CD34+ cell collection and total CD34+ cell yield and apheresis days. These data also demonstrate that addition of plerixafor to G-CSF allows significantly more patients to achieve the target cell collection within 1 day of apheresis compared to G-CSF alone. These findings support the observation that mobilization with plerixafor plus G-CSF reduces the number of apheresis days required to achieve the minimal or optimal cell dose to proceed to transplantation. Disclosures Bolwell: Genzyme Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nademanee:Genzyme Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Stiff:Genzyme Corp.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Stadtmauer:Genzyme Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Maziarz:Genzyme Corp.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Micallef:Genzyme Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Marulkar:Genzyme Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gandhi:Genzyme Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. DiPersio:Genzyme: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

A Phase 1/2 Study of the Second Generation Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export (SINE) Compound, KPT-8602, in Patients with Relapsed Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.4509.4509 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 4509-4509 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

R. Frank Cornell ◽

Adriana C Rossi ◽

Rachid Baz ◽

Craig C Hofmeister ◽

Chaim Shustik ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Nuclear Export ◽

Research Funding ◽

Low Dose ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Single Agent ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction - Inhibition of Exportin 1 (XPO1) is a novel treatment approach for multiple myeloma (MM). XPO1 mediates the nuclear export of cell-cycle regulators and tumor suppressor proteins leading to their functional inactivation. In addition, XPO1 promotes the export and translation of the mRNA of key oncoproteins (e.g. c-MYC, BCL-2, Cyclin D). XPO1 overexpression occurs in solid and hematological malignancies, including MM and is essential for MM cell survival. Selinexor, the first oral SINE compound, has shown promising anti-MM activity in phase 1 studies but has been associated with gastrointestinal and constitutional toxicities including nausea, anorexia and fatigue. KPT-8602 is a second generation oral SINE compound with similar in vitro potency to selinexor, however, has substantially reduced brain penetration compared with selinexor, and demonstrated markedly improved tolerability with minimal anorexia and weight loss in preclinical toxicology studies. In murine models of MM, KPT-8602 can be dosed daily (QDx5) with minimal anorexia and weight loss. We have therefore initiated a phase 1/2 first-in-human clinical trial. Methods - This phase 1/2 clinical trial was designed to evaluate KPT-8602 as a single agent and in combination with low dose dexamethasone (dex) in patients (pts) with relapsed / refractory MM (RRMM). KPT-8602 is dosed orally (QDx5) for a 28-day cycle with a starting dose of 5 mg. Low dose dex (20 mg, twice weekly) is allowed after cycle 1 if at least a minimal response (MR) is not observed. The primary objective is to evaluate the safety and tolerability including dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), and evidence for anti-MM activity for KPT-8602 single agent and in combination with dex. The pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PDn; XPO1 mRNA) profile of KPT-8602 will also be determined. PDn predictive biomarker analysis and ex vivo drug response assays are underway using tumor cells from bone marrow aspirates before treatment, during and at relapse. These analyses include cell death pathway assays by flow and nuclear/cytoplasmic localization of XPO1, NF-ƙB, IƙBα, IKKα, NRIF and p53 by imaging flow and IHC. Results - As of 01-Aug-2016, 6 pts 2 M/4 F, (median of 6 prior treatment regimens, median age of 71) with RRMM have been enrolled. Common related grade 1/2 adverse events (AEs) include thrombocytopenia (3 pts), nausea (2 pts) and diarrhea (2 pts). Grade 3 AEs include neutropenia (1 pt) and dehydration (1 pt). No grade 4 or 5 AEs have been reported. No DLTs have been observed and the MTD has not been reached. 5 pts were evaluable for responses (1 pt pending evaluation): 1 partial response, 1 minimal response, and 3 stable disease; no pts have progressed on therapy with the longest on for >5 months. The PK properties following oral administration showed that 5 mg of KPT-8602 was rapidly absorbed (mean tmax= 1 hr, mean Cmax= 30.6 ng/mL). The mean AUCinf was calculated to be 141 ng•hr/mL. After tmax, KPT-8602 declined at an estimated mean t½ of 4 hr. At the same dose level, XPO1 mRNA expression was the highest (~2.5 fold) at 8 hr post dose. Conclusions - Oral KPT-8602 is well tolerated in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM. Gastrointestinal and constitutional toxicities observed with twice weekly selinexor have not been observed with 5x/week KPT-8602, including in pts on study for >4 months. PK was predictable and in line with selinexor. These early results show encouraging disease control with pts remaining on therapy. Enrollment is on-going. Disclosures Rossi: Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Baz:Takeda/Millennium: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Signal Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Hofmeister:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding; Arno Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Signal Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Pharmaceutical Companies of Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Incyte, Corp: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company: Research Funding; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shustik:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richter:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau. Chen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Vogl:Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; GSK: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Baloglu:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Senapedis:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ellis:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Friedlander:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Choe-Juliak:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment. Sullivan:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

ACY-241, a Novel, HDAC6 Selective Inhibitor: Synergy with Immunomodulatory (IMiD®) Drugs in Multiple Myeloma (MM) Cells and Early Clinical Results (ACE-MM-200 Study)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.3040.3040 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 3040-3040 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Ruben Niesvizky ◽

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Nashat Y. Gabrail ◽

Sumit Madan ◽

Andrew J. Yee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Combination Therapy ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Selective Inhibitor ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Histone deacetylase (HDAC) enzymes are attractive therapeutic targets in oncology, but non-selective HDAC inhibitors have led to dose-limiting toxicities in patients, particularly in combination with other therapeutic agents. Ricolinostat (ACY-1215), a first-in-class orally available HDAC inhibitor that is 11-fold selective for HDAC6, synergizes in vitro and in vivo in models of MM and lymphoma with bortezomib (Santo, Blood, 2012; Amengual, Clin Cancer Res, 2015) or carfilzomib (Mishima, Br J Haematol, 2015; Dasmahapatra, Mol Cancer Ther, 2014). Furthermore, ricolinostat has demonstrated an excellent safety and tolerability profile in phase I trials as an oral liquid formulation (Raje, Haematologica, 2014, Suppl 1). We have now identified ACY-241 as a structurally related and orally available selective inhibitor of HDAC6 that is undergoing clinical evaluation in tablet form. In combination with ricolinostat, the immunomodulatory (IMiD®) class of drugs, including lenalidomide (Len) and pomalidomide (Pom), exhibit striking anti-myeloma properties in a variety of MM models (Quayle, AACR, 2014) and have demonstrated clinical activity in MM patients (Yee, ASH, 2014). In support of our ongoing development of ACY-241, we show here that combination with either Len or Pom leads to synergistic decrease in MM cell viability in vitro. Time course studies demonstrated cell cycle arrest followed by progressive induction of apoptosis after prolonged exposure to Len or Pom. Notably, the addition of ACY-241 to either Len or Pom resulted in synergistic increases in apoptosis of MM cells. At the molecular level, treatment with IMiDs reduced expression of the critical transcription factors MYC and IRF4, which was further reduced by combination treatment with ACY-241. Current studies are exploring the molecular mechanism underlying this effect, which may be a consequence of low level inhibition of HDAC1, 2, and 3 by ACY-241. Prolonged treatment with ACY-241 plus Pom was well tolerated in vivo with no evidence of toxicity, and the combination resulted in a significant extension of survival in a xenograft model of MM. Given the comparable tolerability profiles of ricolinostat and ACY-241 and the similar preclinical activity in combination with IMiDs, a clinical trial (NCT02400242) is currently evaluating ACY-241 in combination with Pom and low-dose dexamethasone in MM patients. Predicated upon the clinical experience with ricolinostat and the non-clinical pharmacokinetics of ACY-241, we designed an expedited first-in-human phase 1a/1b clinical trial of a single cycle of ACY-241 monotherapy followed by ACY-241 in combination with Pom and dexamethasone in MM patients. A merged monotherapy/combination trial design was chosen to grant patients access to combination therapy with an established regimen while enabling insight into the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of ACY-241 monotherapy. Patients with relapsed or relapsed-and-refractory MM previously treated with at least two cycles of Len and a proteasome inhibitor were eligible for this trial. The first patient was enrolled in June 2015. This patient tolerated monotherapy well and pharmacokinetics showed maximal plasma levels of ACY-241 in the micromolar range, consistent with predictions. An update on enrollment, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles as well as safety of monotherapy and combination therapy will be provided. Disclosures Niesvizky: Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gabrail:Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BI: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Madan:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Quayle:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Almeciga-Pinto:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment. Jones:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Houston:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment. Hayes:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment. Van Duzer:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment. Wheeler:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, INC: Employment. Trede:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment. Raje:Acetylon: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Preliminary Results of a Phase 1 Trial Evaluating MRG-106, a Synthetic microRNA Antagonist (LNA antimiR) of microRNA-155, in Patients with CTCL

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1829.1829 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1829-1829 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Christiane Querfeld ◽

Theresa Pacheco ◽

Francine M. Foss ◽

Ahmad S. Halwani ◽

Pierluigi Porcu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Mycosis Fungoides ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Human Study ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Preliminary Results ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction and Objectives: microRNAs are small, non-coding RNAs that regulate expression of multiple genes which impact physiological processes and cellular phenotypes. miR-155-5p is a well-described onco-miR with a strong mechanistic link to cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). A LNA-modified oligonucleotide inhibitor of miR-155-5p, MRG-106, was selected based on its ability to de-repress canonical miR-155-5p targets in multiple mycosis fungoides (MF) cell lines in vitro. In preclinical models, MRG-106 showed significant pharmacodynamic activity without requiring additional formulation. The objective of this first-in-human study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of MRG-106 in patients with mycosis fungoides (MF). Methodology: This Phase 1 trial employs a dose-escalation design to evaluate both intratumoral and subcutaneous administration of MRG-106 at doses of 75 mg and up to 900 mg per injection, respectively. Patients were required to be ≥ 18 years old, have a confirmed diagnosis of MF, be clinical stage I-III with plaques or tumors, be on a stable treatment regimen or without any concomitant therapy for MF, and have no other major illness. The first 6 patients were dosed with four or five 75 mg intratumoral injections of MRG-106 over 2 weeks. In addition, 4 patients received saline injections in a second lesion on the same schedule. Skin biopsies were taken from MRG-106 and saline treated lesions for molecular, bioanalytical, and histological analyses, before the first dose and after the last dose. Results: Six patients (5M/1F, median age 61 years, 5 Caucasian/ 1 African-American) were dosed intratumorally. All tolerated the administrations well with only minimal erythema at the site of injection noted in one patient. One patient was discontinued from the trial due to rapid progression of disease, which was considered not related to the study drug. There were no clinically significant adverse events or laboratory abnormalities. To date, the first cohort of 6 patients has either completed the dosing period (5 patients) or discontinued due to progressive disease (1 patient). All patients showed a reduction in the baseline Composite Assessment of Index Lesion Severity (CAILS) score in both MRG-106-treated and saline-treated lesions. The maximal reduction was on average 55% [range: 33% to 77%] in the MRG-106 treated lesion and 39% [range:13% to 75%] in the saline treated lesions). In all the subjects that completed dosing, the MRG-106 treated lesions had a CAILS score reduction of ≥ 50% which was maintained to the end of study; in contrast, a ≥ 50% reduction was observed in only one saline treated lesion. Most patients noted a marked decrease in systemic pruritus. Histological examination of pre-treatment and post-treatment biopsies of the same lesion injected with MRG-106 from five evaluable patients revealed that one patient had a complete loss of the neoplastic infiltrate, two patients had a reduction in neoplastic cell infiltrate density and depth, one patient had fewer CD30+ large atypical cells, and one patient demonstrated no change. After the first dose, MRG-106 had a mean t1/2 in plasma of 4.4 hours, and a mean Cmaxof 1.4 µg/mL. The drug was detectable 24 hours after the last dose in the MRG-106-injected lesions that were biopsied. Gene expression analysis of the pre- and post-treatment biopsies showed transcript changes consistent with the expected mechanism of action of MRG-106. Conclusions: These promising preliminary results in this first-in-human study in 6 MF patients show that intratumoral injection of MRG-106 was well-tolerated, and demonstrated encouraging therapeutic improvements in cutaneous lesions, based on CAILS scores and histological findings. In addition, reductions in CAILS scores in other lesions as well as decreases in systemic symptoms such as pruritus were observed. Preliminary biomarker analysis indicates that MRG-106 induces transcriptional changes consistent with on-target activity and molecular proof of concept. The trial is ongoing and additional results will be presented as available. Disclosures Querfeld: Actelion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Foss:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Halwani:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding. Porcu:miRagen: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial; celgene: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial; Innate Pharma: Other: Investigator in a clinical trial; Millenium: Other: investigator in a clinical trial. Seto:miRagen: Employment. Ruckman:miRagen Therapeutics, Inc: Employment. Landry:Accera, Inc: Consultancy; miRagen: Consultancy. Jackson:miRagen: Employment. Pestano:miRagen Therapeutics: Employment. Dickinson:miRagen Therapeutics: Employment. Sanseverino:miRagen Therapeutics: Employment. Rodman:Nivalis: Employment, Equity Ownership; miRagen Therapeutics: Consultancy. Gordon:GLPI: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; IGM: Consultancy; Globavir: Consultancy; Pre-cell: Consultancy; Industrial Laboratories: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Taiho: Consultancy; Flugen: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; miRagen Therapeutics: Consultancy; Clinipace: Consultancy; Caring for Colorado Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ruesch Center for the Cure of Gastrointestinal Cancer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Axion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TEQ laboratories: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Marshall:miRagen Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties: inventor on various patents; BiOptix: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Fluorofinder: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AmideBio: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Colorado BioScience Association: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Atlas Venture: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Renal Response in Carfilzomib (K)- Versus Bortezomib (V)-Treated Patients (Pts) with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) in the Real-World Practice Setting

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-113519 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3253-3253

Author(s):

Shaji K. Kumar ◽

Alan Fu ◽

Khalid Mezzi ◽

Megan Braunlin ◽

Christopher Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Function ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Post Treatment ◽

Rank Test ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Renal Response ◽

Log Rank Test ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction: Renal impairment (RI) is a classic clinicopathological feature of MM, is associated with poor prognosis and shorter survival (Eleutherakis-Papaiakovou Leuk Lymphoma 2007), and can complicate drug dosing and limit treatment options. In clinical trials, the proteasome inhibitors K and V have demonstrated efficacy in RRMM pts with RI, with superior efficacy observed in K-treated pts (Dimopoulos Blood 2017). K and V have also been observed to improve renal function in RRMM pts (Dimopoulos Clin Lymphoma Myeloma 2009; Dimopoulos Blood Advances 2017). However, few studies have investigated the real-world effectiveness of K- and V-based regimens in renal rescue. This study aimed to describe and compare renal response rates in RRMM pts treated with K + dexamethasone (Kd) and V + dexamethasone (Vd) in oncology clinics. Methods: The Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records (OSCER) database (Lau Clin Epidemiol 2011) contains electronic medical records (EMR) from community- and hospital-affiliated oncology clinics in the United States. MM pts aged ≥18 who entered an OSCER clinic Jan 2012‒Feb 2018; initiated Kd or Vd treatment as line 2 (2L), 3L, or 4L; and had baseline renal impairment (Modification of Diet in Renal Disease Study estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <50 mL/min from the most recent baseline serum creatinine measurement) were included. Index date was the date of Kd or Vd initiation. The baseline period was 60 d prior to index to 30 d post-index. Follow-up was 30 d after index date to 60 d after completion of the same line. Primary outcome was renal response during follow-up. Renal response was defined according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria (Dimopoulos J Clin Oncol 2016): complete response (RCR; baseline eGFR <50 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR ≥60 mL/min), partial response (baseline eGFR <15 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 30‒59 mL/min), minor response (baseline eGFR <15 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 15‒29 mL/min, or baseline eGFR 15‒29 mL/min and best post-treatment eGFR 30‒59 mL/min). Renal response rates in Kd- and Vd-treated pts were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for renal overall response (ROR) and RCR using multivariate Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for baseline covariates (demographics, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status, International Staging System stage, baseline renal function, V use in 1L, time from MM diagnosis to line initiation, use of intravenous bisphosphonates, and baseline serum calcium, serum free light chain ratio, lactate dehydrogenase, and whole blood hemoglobin measurements). Missing baseline values were estimated by multiple imputations. Results: 543 Kd-treated and 1005 Vd-treated pts were included. Baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts, with no difference in baseline eGFR stages. More Kd pts were <65 yrs of age at MM diagnosis. Median time from diagnosis to line initiation was longer in Kd pts (Kd: 17.1 mos; Vd 16.1 mos). V-based regimens were the most common therapies in 1L. Median (interquartile range) treatment duration was 4.4 (2.3-8.3) mos for Kd and 4.3 (2.1-8.3) mos for Vd. Pts treated with Kd at 2L were more likely than those treated with Vd to achieve both ROR (51.4% [178/346] vs 39.6% [327/825]; log-rank test p<0.0001) and RCR (26.6% [92/346] vs 22.2% [183/825]; log-rank test p=0.0229). This pattern persisted when 3L and 4L pts were included, (ROR: 48.4% [263/543] vs 39.8% [400/1005]; log-rank p<0.0001; RCR: 26% [141/543] vs 22.1% [222/1005]; log-rank p=0.0084) (Figures 1A and 1B). Following adjustment for potential baseline confounders, 2L Kd pts were 45% more likely to achieve ROR (IRR, 95% CI: 1.45, 1.18‒1.78) and 68% more likely to achieve RCR (1.68, 1.24‒2.28) vs 2L Vd pts (Figure 2). Kd pts in 2‒4L were 36% more likely to achieve ROR (1.36, 1.15‒1.62) and 52% more likely to achieve RCR (1.52, 1.19‒1.94). Conclusions: Using one of the most complete oncology EMR databases available, we found that RRMM pts with baseline RI treated with Kd had higher rates of overall and complete renal response, and were more likely to have a renal response, compared with pts treated with Vd. A limitation of the study is that we could not account for all concomitant medications or comorbidities that affect renal function, as some may not be captured in OSCER. Disclosures Kumar: AbbVie: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Fu:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mezzi:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Braunlin:Amgen: Employment. Kim:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Iskander:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Niesvizky:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. Jagannath:Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Boccia:Sandoz: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Raje:Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria; Medscape: Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Rapid and Robust Mobilization of CD34+ HSCs without G-CSF Following Administration of Mgta-145 Alone or in Combination with Plerixafor

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-127523 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1961-1961

Author(s):

John F. DiPersio ◽

Jonathan Hoggatt ◽

Steven Devine ◽

Lukasz Biernat ◽

Haley Howell ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Single Dose ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Preliminary Data ◽

Research Funding ◽

Fold Change ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Cd34 Cells ◽

Equity Ownership

Background Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is the standard of care for mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). G-CSF requires 4-7 days of injections and often multiple aphereses to acquire sufficient CD34+ cells for transplant. The number of CD34+ HSCs mobilized can be variable and patients who fail to mobilize enough CD34+ cells are treated with the combination of G-CSF plus plerixafor. G-CSF use is associated with bone pain, nausea, headaches, fatigue, rare episodes of splenic rupture, and is contraindicated for patients with autoimmune and sickle cell disease. MGTA-145 (GroβT) is a CXCR2 agonist. MGTA-145, in combination with plerixafor, a CXCR4 inhibitor, has the potential to rapidly and reliably mobilize robust numbers of HSCs with a single dose and same-day apheresis for transplant that is free from G-CSF. MGTA-145 plus plerixafor work synergistically to rapidly mobilize HSCs in both mice and non-human primates (Hoggatt, Cell 2018; Goncalves, Blood 2018). Based on these data, Magenta initiated a Phase 1 dose-escalating study to evaluate the safety, PK and PD of MGTA-145 as a single agent and in combination with plerixafor. Methods This study consists of four parts. In Part A, healthy volunteers were dosed with MGTA-145 (0.0075 - 0.3 mg/kg) or placebo. In Part B, MGTA-145 dose levels from Part A were selected for use in combination with a clinically approved dose of plerixafor. In Part C, a single dose MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered on day 1 and day 2. In Part D, MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered followed by apheresis. Results MGTA-145 monotherapy was well tolerated in all subjects dosed (Table 1) with no significant adverse events. Some subjects experienced mild (Grade 1) transient lower back pain that dissipated within minutes. In the ongoing study, the combination of MGTA-145 with plerixafor was well tolerated, with some donors experiencing Grade 1 and 2 gastrointestinal adverse events commonly observed with plerixafor alone. Pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure and maximum plasma concentrations increased dose proportionally and were not affected by plerixafor (Fig 1A). Monotherapy of MGTA-145 resulted in an immediate increase in neutrophils (Fig 1B) and release of plasma MMP-9 (Fig 1C). Neutrophil mobilization plateaued within 1-hour post MGTA-145 at doses greater than 0.03 mg/kg. This plateau was followed by a rebound of neutrophil mobilization which correlated with re-expression of CXCR2 and presence of MGTA-145 at pharmacologically active levels. Markers of neutrophil activation were relatively unchanged (<2-fold vs baseline). A rapid and statistically significant increase in CD34+ cells occurred @ 0.03 and 0.075 mg/kg of MGTA-145 (p < 0.01) relative to placebo with peak mobilization (Fig 1D) 30 minutes post MGTA-145 (7-fold above baseline @ 0.03 mg/kg). To date, the combination of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor mobilized >20/µl CD34s in 92% (11/12) subjects compared to 50% (2/4) subjects receiving plerixafor alone. Preliminary data show that there was a significant increase in fold change relative to baseline in CD34+ cells (27x vs 13x) and phenotypic CD34+CD90+CD45RA- HSCs (38x vs 22x) mobilized by MGTA-145 with plerixafor. Mobilized CD34+ cells were detectable at 15 minutes with peak mobilization shifted 2 - 4 hours earlier for the combination vs plerixafor alone (4 - 6h vs 8 - 12h). Detailed results of single dose administration of MGTA-145 and plerixafor given on one day as well as also on two sequential days will be presented along with fully characterized graft analysis post apheresis from subjects given MGTA-145 and plerixafor. Conclusions MGTA-145 is safe and well tolerated, as a monotherapy and in combination with plerixafor and induced rapid and robust mobilization of significant numbers of HSCs with a single dose in all subjects to date. Kinetics of CD34+ cell mobilization for the combination was immediate (4x increase vs no change for plerixafor alone @ 15 min) suggesting the mechanism of action of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor is different from plerixafor alone. Preliminary data demonstrate that MGTA-145 when combined with plerixafor results in a significant increase in CD34+ fold change relative to plerixafor alone. Magenta Therapeutics intends to develop MGTA-145 as a first line mobilization product for blood cancers, autoimmune and genetic diseases and plans a Phase 2 study in multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2020. Disclosures DiPersio: Magenta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; NeoImmune Tech: Research Funding; Cellworks Group, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; RiverVest Venture Partners Arch Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; WUGEN: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bioline Rx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Amphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hoggatt:Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Other: Protocol development (via institution); Bristol Myers: Other: Grant for monitoring support & travel support; Magenta Therapeutics: Other: Travel support for advisory board; My employer (National Marrow Donor Program) has equity interest in Magenta. Biernat:Medpace, Inc.: Employment. Howell:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schmelmer:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Neale:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boitano:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Cooke:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Goncalves:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Raffel:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Falahee:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Morrow:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Davis:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

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

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126205 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 3129-3129

Author(s):

Hans C. Lee ◽

Sikander Ailawadhi ◽

Cristina Gasparetto ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

Robert M. Rifkin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Causes Of Death ◽

Age Groups ◽

Treatment Patterns ◽

Age Group ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

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

Download Full-text

Impact of Modified Thalidomide Dosing in Bortezomib/Thalidomide/Dexamethasone for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Transplant-Eligible: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122775 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4739-4739

Author(s):

Pieter Sonneveld ◽

Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽

Adrián Alegre ◽

Thierry Facon ◽

Cyrille Hulin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Peripheral Neuropathy ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Indirect Comparison ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Post Induction ◽

Adjusted Indirect Comparison ◽

Equity Ownership

Introduction: For patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are transplant-eligible, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTd) is a standard of care (SoC) for induction and consolidation therapy. Clinical practice has evolved to use a modified VTd dose (VTd-mod; 100 mg thalidomide daily), which is reflected in recent treatment guidelines. As VTd-mod has become a real-world SoC, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the VTd-mod dose from recent clinical trials versus the dose included in the label (VTd-label; ramp up to 200 mg thalidomide daily) was performed to understand the effect on efficacy of modified VTd dosing for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. Methods: For each outcome (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], overall response rates [ORR] post-induction and post-transplant, and rate of peripheral neuropathy), a naïve comparison and a MAIC were performed. Data for VTd-label were obtained from the phase 3 PETHEMA/GEM study (Rosiñol L, et al. Blood. 2012;120[8]:1589-1596). Data for VTd-mod were pooled from the phase 3 CASSIOPEIA study (Moreau P, et al. Lancet. 2019;394[10192]:29-38) and the phase 2 NCT00531453 study (Ludwig H, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31[2]:247-255). Patient-level data for PETHEMA/GEM and CASSIOPEIA were used to generate outcomes of interest and were validated against their respective clinical study reports; aggregate data for NCT00531453 were extracted from the primary publication. Matched baseline characteristics were age, sex, ECOG performance status, myeloma type, International Staging System (ISS) stage, baseline creatinine clearance, hemoglobin level, and platelet count. Results: Patients received VTd-mod (n = 591) or VTd-label (n = 130). After matching, baseline characteristics were similar across groups. For OS, the naïve comparison and the MAIC showed that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC HR, 0.640 [95% CI: 0.363-1.129], P = 0.121; Figure 1A). VTd-mod significantly improved PFS versus VTd-label in the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC HR, 0.672 [95% CI: 0.467-0.966], P = 0.031; Figure 1B). Post-induction ORR was non-inferior for VTd-mod versus VTd-label (MAIC odds ratio, 1.781 [95% CI: 1.004-3.16], P = 0.065). Post-transplant, VTd-mod demonstrated superior ORR in both the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC odds ratio, 2.661 [95% CI: 1.579-4.484], P = 0.001). For rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy, the naïve comparison and MAIC both demonstrated that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC rate difference, 2.4 [⁻1.7-6.49], P = 0.409). Conclusions: As naïve, indirect comparisons are prone to bias due to patient heterogeneity between studies, a MAIC can provide useful insights for clinicians and reimbursement decision-makers regarding the relative efficacy and safety of different treatments. In this MAIC, non-inferiority of VTd-mod versus VTd-label was demonstrated for OS, post-induction ORR, and peripheral neuropathy. This analysis also showed that VTd-mod significantly improved PFS and ORR post-transplant compared with VTd-label for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. A limitation of this analysis is that unreported or unobserved confounding factors could not be adjusted for. Disclosures Sonneveld: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; SkylineDx: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mateos:Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, Adaptive: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Biotech Inc, Mundipharma EDO, PharmaMar, Roche Laboratories Inc, Takeda Oncology: Other: Advisory Committee; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, GSK, Abbvie, EDO, Pharmar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Takeda Oncology.: Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc: Other: Data and Monitoring Committee. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Facon:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 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, Speakers Bureau. Hulin:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen, AbbVie, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria. Hashim:Ingress-Health: Employment. Vincken:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kampfenkel:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cote:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Moreau:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Download Full-text

A Phase I Trial of Janus Kinase (JAK) Inhibition with INCB039110 in Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease (aGVHD)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.390.390 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 390-390 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Mark A. Schroeder ◽

H. Jean Khoury ◽

Madan Jagasia ◽

Haris Ali ◽

Gary J. Schiller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Janus Kinase ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Daily Dose ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Steroid Refractory

Abstract Background: Corticosteroids are considered standard first-line systemic therapy for patients with aGVHD, but this approach is effective in only approximately half of all cases. For patients who progress or do not respond to corticosteroids, no specific agent has been identified as standard, and regimens are typically selected based on investigator experience and patient co-morbidities. In preclinical models, JAK inhibition has been shown to impair production of cytokines as well as the differentiation and trafficking of T cells implicated in the pathogenesis of aGVHD. Retrospective studies have suggested that JAK1/JAK2 inhibition with ruxolitinib treatment provides clinical benefit in patients with steroid-refractory GVHD (Zeiser et al, Leukemia 2015;29:2062-2068). Herein, we report preliminary safety results from a prospective randomized, parallel-cohort, open-label phase 1 trial evaluating the potent and selective JAK 1 inhibitor INCB039110 in patients with aGVHD. Methods: Male or female patients 18 years or older who underwent their first allo-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) from any donor source and developed grades IIB-IVD aGVHD were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either a 200 or 300 mg oral daily dose of INCB039110 in combination with corticosteroids, and were stratified based on prior treatment status (treatment-naive [TN] versus steroid-refractory [SR]). The primary endpoint of the study was safety and tolerability; secondary endpoints included overall response rate at Days 14, 28, 56, and 100, non-relapse mortality, and pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluations. Patients were assessed through Day 28 for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and response. A Bayesian approach was used for continuous monitoring of DLTs from Days 1-28. Treatment continued until GVHD progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. Acute GVHD was graded according to MN-CIBMTR criteria; adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCICTCAE v 4.03. Results: Between January and June 2016, 31 patients (TN, n=14; SR, n= 17) were randomized. As of July 25, 2016, data were available from 30 patients who received an oral daily dose of 200 mg (n=14) or 300 mg (n=16) INCB039110 in combination with 2 mg/kg methylprednisolone (or equivalent dose of prednisone). The median durations of treatment were 60.8 days and 56.5 days for patients receiving a daily dose of 200 mg and 300 mg INCB039110, respectively. One DLT of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia was reported. The most frequently reported AEs included thrombocytopenia/platelet count decrease (26.7%), diarrhea (23.3%), peripheral edema (20%), fatigue (16.7%), and hyperglycemia (16.7%). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 77% of patients and with similar frequency across dose groups and included cytomegalovirus infections (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), and sepsis (n=3). Five patients had AEs leading to a fatal outcome, including multi-organ failure (n=2), sepsis (n=1), disease progression (n=1), and bibasilar atelectasis, cardiopulmonary arrest, and respiratory distress (n=1); none of the fatal events was attributed to INCB039110. Efficacy and PK evaluations are ongoing and will be updated at the time of presentation. Conclusion: The oral, selective JAK1 inhibitor INCB039110 can be given safely to steroid-naive or steroid-refractory aGVHD patients. The safety profile was generally consistent in both dose groups. Biomarker evaluation, PK, and cellular phenotyping studies are ongoing. The recommended phase 2 dose will be selected and reported based on PK studies and final safety data. Disclosures Schroeder: Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Khoury:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Arbushites:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delaite:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yan:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rhein:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Perales:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. DiPersio:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Role of Remission Status and Prior Transplant in Optimizing Survival Outcomes Following Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Transplantation (HSCT) in Patients Who Received Inotuzumab Ozogamicin (INO) for Relapsed / Refractory (R/R) Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.886.886 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽

pp. 886-886

Author(s):

Partow Kebriaei ◽

Matthias Stelljes ◽

Daniel J. DeAngelo ◽

Nicola Goekbuget ◽

Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Survival Probability ◽

Research Funding ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Inotuzumab Ozogamicin ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Allogeneic Hsct ◽

Post Transplant ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction: Attaining complete remission (CR) prior to HSCT is associated with better outcomes post-HSCT. Inotuzumab ozogamicin (INO), an anti-CD22 antibody conjugated to calicheamicin, has shown significantly higher remission rates (CR/CRi and MRD negativity) compared with standard chemotherapy (SC) in patients (pts) with R/R ALL (Kantarjian et al. N Engl J Med. 2016). Pts treated with INO were more likely to proceed to HSCT than SC, which allowed for a higher 2-yr probability of overall survival (OS) than patients receiving SC (39% vs 29%). We investigated the role of prior transplant and proceeding directly to HSCT after attaining remission from INO administration as potential factors in determining post-HSCT survival to inform when best to use INO in R/R ALL patients. Methods: The analysis population consisted of R/R ALL pts who were enrolled and treated with INO and proceeded to allogeneic HSCT as part of two clinical trials: Study 1010 is a Phase 1/2 trial (NCT01363297), while Study 1022 is the pivotal randomized Phase 3 (NCT01564784) trial. Full details of methods for both studies have been previously published (DeAngelo et al. Blood Adv. 2017). All reference to OS pertains to post-HSCT survival defined as time from HSCT to death from any cause. Results: As of March 2016, out of 236 pts administered INO in the two studies (Study 1010, n=72; Study 1022, n=164), 101 (43%) proceeded to allogeneic HSCT and were included in this analysis. Median age was 37 y (range 20-71) with 55% males. The majority of pts received INO as first salvage treatment (62%) and 85% had no prior SCT. Most pts received matched HSCTs (related = 25%; unrelated = 45%) with peripheral blood as the predominant cell source (62%). The conditioning regimens were mainly myeloablative regimens (60%) and predominantly TBI-based (62%). Dual alkylators were used in 13% of pts, while thiotepa was used in 8%. The Figure shows post-transplant survival in the different INO populations: The median OS post-HSCT for all pts (n=101) who received INO and proceeded to HSCT was 9.2 mos with a 2-yr survival probability of 41% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31-51%). In patients with first HSCT (n=86) the median OS post-HSCT was 11.8 mos with a 2-yr survival probability of 46% (95% CI 35-56%). Of note, some patients lost CR while waiting for HSCT and had to receive additional treatments before proceeding to HSCT (n=28). Those pts who went directly to first HSCT after attaining remission with no intervening additional treatment (n=73) fared best, with median OS post-HSCT not reached with a 2-yr survival probability of 51% (95% CI 39-62%). In the latter group, 59/73 (80%) attained MRD negativity, and 49/73 (67%) were in first salvage therapy. Of note, the post-HSCT 100-day survival probability was similar among the 3 groups, as shown in the Table. Multivariate analyses using Cox regression modelling confirmed that MRD negativity during INO treatment and no prior HSCT were associated with lower risk of mortality post-HSCT. Other prognostic factors associated with worse OS included older age, higher baseline LDH, higher last bilirubin measurement prior to HSCT, and use of thiotepa. Veno-occlusive disease post-transplant was noted in 19 of the 101 pts who received INO. Conclusion: Administration of INO in R/R ALL pts followed with allogeneic HSCT provided the best long-term survival benefit among those who went directly to HSCT after attaining remission and had no prior HSCT. Disclosures DeAngelo: Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc.: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria; Pfizer Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immunogen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian: Novartis: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding. Advani: Takeda/ Millenium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Merchant: Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stock: Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wang: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Loberiza: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vandendries: Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Marks: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text