High-Dose Chemotherapy (HDC) with Autologous Stem-Cell Transplant (ASCT) with Consolidative Radiation Therapy (RT) for Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) Primary Mediastinal B-Cell Lymphoma (PMBCL): 20-Year Experience at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC)

Background Most PMBCL pts are cured with frontline chemoimmunotherapy ± RT. Data are scant regarding the role of HDC/ASCT for R/R PMBCL, and the benefit of RT administered peri-HDC/ASCT. Our institutional approach has focused on developing potentially more active HDC regimens, and on consideration of post-ASCT consolidation RT, especially for pts who had not achieved a CR at the time of HDC. Methods We retrospectively analyzed all patients (pts) with R/R PMBCL treated with HDC/ASCT at MDACC between 01/01/2000-12/31/2019. All pts underwent similar standard pre-SCT evaluation and met eligibility criteria as per our institutional guidelines. Response assessment differed over time and included CT and gallium scan (N=9) and PET/CT (N=49). Cox proportional hazards regression models evaluated the associations of the specific HDC regimen and clinical covariates of interest with EFS and OS. Results 58 pts received HDC/ASCT with BEAM-rituximab (N=36) or rituximab/gemcitabine/busulfan/melphalan ± vorinostat (R-GemBuMel) (n=22) (Table 1). The R-GemBuMel group included more pts pretreated with >2 lines of therapy than the R-BEAM group (55% vs. 28%, p=0.025), had fewer pts in CR (41% vs. 69%, P=0.01) and more pts in PD/SD at ASCT (32% vs. 3%, P=0.01). Prior RT at a median 44 (36-48) Gy was administered to 29 pts (20 R-BEAM, 9 R-GemBuMel, P=0.27). Nineteen pts (89% not in CR at SCT) who had not previously received full doses of RT received post-SCT RT (6 after BEAM, 13 after R-GemBuMel, P<0.001) at median 40 Gy (36-48). There were 2 treatment-related deaths in the R-BEAM arm, none in the R-GemBuMel arm. At median follow-up of 69.1 months (interquartile range, 36.5-85.2), the EFS rates were 57.6% (overall), 67.6% (R-GemBuMel) and 52.7% (R-BEAM) (Figure 1a). Their respective OS rates were 69.3%, 81.1% and 63.9% (Figure 1b). On multivariable Cox regression analyses, R-GemBuMel (vs. R-BEAM) (HR=0.29, p=0.05), and 1 organ involved (vs. >1) (HR 0.28, p=0.009) were associated with improved EFS, whereas older age (HR= 1.08 per year above median, p=0.005), refractory disease (SD/PD) at SCT (vs. CR/PR) (HR 5.44, p=0.01) correlated with worse EFS. Likewise, R-GemBuMel (HR= 0.16, p=0.03) and 1 organ involved (HR=0.17, p=0.004) significantly resulted in improved OS, whereas older age (HR= 1.11, p=0.002), and refractory (SD/PD) disease at SCT (HR= 21.27, p=0.001) correlated with worse OS. Neither sex nor disease status (primary refractory vs. relapse) nor No. prior lines (2 vs. >2) nor pre-SCT RT nor post-SCT RT correlated significantly with EFS or OS. Conclusions HDC/ASCT for R/R PMBCL pts, with post-SCT RT for pts with active disease at SCT, results in favorable long-term results. R-GemBuMel ± vorinostat seems to improve EFS and OS compared to R-BEAM. Disclosures Alousi: Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Alexion: Honoraria. Hosing:NKARTA Inc.: Consultancy. Kebriaei:Amgen: Other: Research Support; Ziopharm: Other: Research Support; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board; Jazz: Consultancy; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board. Popat:Bayer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Qazilbash:Angiocrine: Research Funding; Bioline: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bioclinica: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding. Shpall:Zelluna: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptimmune: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Magenta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Other: Licensing Agreement. Champlin:Takeda: Patents & Royalties; Genzyme: Speakers Bureau; Cytonus: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy; DKMS America: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nieto:Affimed: Consultancy, Other: Grant Support; Novartis: Other: Grant Support; Astra Zeneca: Other: Grant Support; Secura Bio: Other: Grant Support.

Download Full-text

African-Americans Multiple-Myeloma Patients Undergoing Upfront Autologous Stem Cell Transplant Have Similar Survival Outcomes Compared to Whites: A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-134837 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 9-10

Author(s):

Neeraj Saini ◽

Junsheng Ma ◽

Qaiser Bashir ◽

Ruby Delgado ◽

Gabriela Rondon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Propensity Score ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Survival Outcomes ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Research Support ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Propensity Score Matching Analysis ◽

Grant Support

Background: Since the introduction of novel anti-myeloma agents, multiple studies have shown disparate survival outcomes among African American (AA) patients compared to whites with multiple myeloma (MM). Limited access to novel therapies and autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HCT) has been considered partly responsible for the lower survival outcomes in AA, but other disease-related features may also contribute to this disparity. We hypothesize that patients receiving ASCT would have equal healthcare access, which may nullify the impact of disparate access to novel drugs and healthcare facilities. To test this hypothesis, we compared survival outcomes of AA and whites with MM who underwent upfront ASCT at our center through propensity score matching analysis. Methods and patients: A total of 705 MM patients, including AA and whites, who underwent auto-HCT at our institution from 2007 to 2015. By using 1:1 propensity-matching, we identified 251 patients, 125 AA and 126 whites. Clinical response, relapse, and progression were defined by the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Results: Table 1 includes the baseline characteristics of the matched doublets. Patients in the two groups were well matched for age at auto-HCT, ISS stage, serum creatinine, induction, response to induction, consolidation, preparative regimen, and maintenance therapy. The median follow-up for the matched cohort was 71.5 (interquartile range: 51.6-90.3) months. The overall response rate (CR+VGPR+PR) after auto-HCT was 95.2% (119/125 patients)) and 98.4% (123/125 patients) in the AA and the white group, respectively (p = 0.289). Thirty-four (27.2%) patients achieved a CR in each group. Sixty (48.0%) and 62 (49.6%) patients achieved a VGPR in the AA and the white group, respectively. The median PFS for the AA and the white group was 44.6 (95%CI: 35.5 - 54.7) and 51.0 (95%CI: 38.3 - 63.9) months, respectively (p = 0.763, stratified log-rank test). The 4-year PFS in the AA and the white group was 48% (95%CI: 39.3 - 57.8) and 51.2% (95%CI: 43.0 - 61.0), respectively (Fig. 1). The 4-year OS in the AA and the white group was 78.5% (95%CI: 71.5 - 86.2) and 80.9% (95%CI: 74.1 - 88.2), respectively (Fig. 2). Conclusions: In this propensity score matching analysis of MM patients who underwent an auto-HCT at our institution, we showed that AA patients had similar response rates, PFS, and OS as white patients Disclosures Bashir: KITE: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding; StemLine: Research Funding; Takeda: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding. Popat:Bayer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Hosing:NKARTA Inc.: Consultancy. Nieto:Secura Bio: Other: Grant Support; Affimed: Consultancy, Other: Grant Support; Astra Zeneca: Other: Grant Support; Novartis: Other: Grant Support. Kebriaei:Amgen: Other: Research Support; Ziopharm: Other: Research Support; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board; Jazz: Consultancy; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board. Alousi:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Alexion: Honoraria. Mehta:Kadmon: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding. Khouri:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Thomas:Genentech: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Ascentage: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Advisory Boards; X4 Pharma: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding. Lee:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Regeneron: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Patel:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Nektar: Consultancy, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding. Orlowski:Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Founder of Asylia Therapeutics, Inc., with associated patents and an equity interest, though this technology does not bear on the current submission.: Current equity holder in private company, Patents & Royalties; Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, EcoR1 Capital LLC, Forma Therapeutics, Genzyme, GSK Biologicals, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Biotech, Juno Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Legend Biotech USA, Molecular Partners, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Laboratory research funding from BioTheryX, and clinical research funding from CARsgen Therapeutics, Celgene, Exelixis, Janssen Biotech, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; STATinMED Research: Consultancy. Champlin:Actinium: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy; Cytonus: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy; Genzyme: Speakers Bureau; DKMS America: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Patents & Royalties. Qazilbash:Bioclinica: Consultancy; Angiocrine: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Bioline: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Outcomes of Patients with Multiple Myeloma Who Received VRD Induction, Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation and Lenalidomide Maintenance

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-135865 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 14-15

Author(s):

Mahmoud R. Gaballa ◽

Taha Al-Juhaishi ◽

Qaiser Bashir ◽

Samer A. Srour ◽

Neeraj Saini ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Research Support ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grant Support ◽

Standard Risk ◽

Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation

Background: Recent clinical trials have shown a steady improvement in the outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), especially in those who have received induction with bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRD), followed by autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (Auto-HCT) and lenalidomide maintenance (Attal et al. 2017, Joseph et al. 2020). Here, we report our center's outcomes of MM patients who received VRD induction, followed by Auto-HCT and maintenance therapy incorporating lenalidomide. Methods: In this single-center retrospective analysis, eligible patients received an auto-HCT between June 2007 and November 2015. We excluded patients who received induction regimens other than VRD or did not receive lenalidomide-based maintenance therapy. Primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), which were estimated by using the Kaplan-Meier method. We performed multivariate Cox regression analysis to evaluate the impact of several important variables, including age, sex, race, immunoglobulin subtype, light chain, ISS, cytogenetic risk, conditioning regimen, post-transplant therapy, and best final response, on PFS and OS. Results: We identified 303 patients who fulfilled the eligibility criteria for this study. Table 1 and 2 summarize patient demographics, disease characteristics, therapies and responses. Sixty-two patients (20.5%) had high risk cytogenetics defined as del17p, t(4;14), t(14;16), and 1q21 gain. 132 (43.6%), 72 (23.8%), and 55 (18.2%) patients had ISS stages I, II, and III, respectively. Overall response rate (ORR) at time of Auto-HCT was 93.4% (sCR 7.6%, CR 4%, VGPR 41.3%, and PR 40.6 %). Importantly, ORR after auto-HCT and maintenance therapy was 99.7% (sCR 40.3%, CR 12.5%, VGPR 33.7%, and PR 13.2%). With a median follow up of 45 months (range: 11 - 113 months), the median PFS was 62 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 48- 76 months) and 4-year PFS was 58% (Fig 1). Median OS has not been reached and 4-year OS was 88% (Fig 1). Patients with high-risk cytogenetics had median PFS and OS of 31 months (95% CI 25- 37 months) and 76 months (95% CI 44-108 months), respectively. In contrast, in patients with standard-risk cytogenetics, the median PFS and OS were 73 months (95% CI 62- 84 months) and not reached, respectively (P<0.001; Fig 2). On multivariate analysis, standard-risk cytogenetics (P<0.001- HR 0.349, P=0.001- HR 0.278) and the final best response of >VGPR (P<0.001 - HR 0.439, P=0.001 - HR 0.306) were associated with significantly better PFS and OS, respectively. Conclusions: These results provide further evidence that VRD induction followed by Auto-HCT and lenalidomide-based maintenance is associated with excellent outcomes in MM, especially in patients with standard-risk cytogenetics. Disclosures Bashir: KITE: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Research Funding; StemLine: Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Purdue: Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding. Nieto:Novartis: Other: Grant Support; Astra Zeneca: Other: Grant Support; Affimed: Consultancy, Other: Grant Support; Secura Bio: Other: Grant Support. Lee:Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Patel:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Nektar: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Precision Biosciences: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Poseida: Research Funding. Kebriaei:Amgen: Other: Research Support; Kite: Other: Served on advisory board; Novartis: Other: Served on advisory board; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Other: Served on advisory board; Ziopharm: Other: Research Support. Thomas:Pharmacyclics: Other: Advisory Boards; X4 Pharma: Research Funding; Ascentage: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Orlowski:Sanofi-Aventis, Servier, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Founder of Asylia Therapeutics, Inc., with associated patents and an equity interest, though this technology does not bear on the current submission.: Current equity holder in private company, Patents & Royalties; STATinMED Research: Consultancy; Laboratory research funding from BioTheryX, and clinical research funding from CARsgen Therapeutics, Celgene, Exelixis, Janssen Biotech, Sanofi-Aventis, Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding; Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene, EcoR1 Capital LLC, Forma Therapeutics, Genzyme, GSK Biologicals, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Janssen Biotech, Juno Therapeutics, Kite Pharma, Legend Biotech USA, Molecular Partners, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Champlin:Takeda: Patents & Royalties; Genzyme: Speakers Bureau; DKMS America: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cytonus: Consultancy; Actinium: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy; Omeros: Consultancy. Qazilbash:Bioline: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Bioclinica: Consultancy; Angiocrine: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Fixed Dose, Reduced-Intensity Conditioning with Busulfan and Fludarabine to Reduced PK-Guided Busulfan AUC Conditioning in Patients Undergoing Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant for AML/MDS

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123657 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 5715-5715

Author(s):

Brendan Rasor ◽

Tyler Dickerson ◽

Qiuhong Zhao ◽

Jonathan E Brammer ◽

Karilyn Larkin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Research Funding ◽

Chronic Gvhd ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Hazard Ratio ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Research Support ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Significant Difference

Background: Consolidation therapy with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is recommended to prevent relapse and improve survival in patients with intermediate and poor risk acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Due to toxicity, older patients with comorbidities were historically not candidates for HSCT. The development of reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) regimens has allowed more patients to proceed to HSCT by reducing toxicities associated with myeloablative conditioning (MAC).The cornerstone of reducing conditioning regimen intensity is modification of busulfan exposure, expressed as an area under the curve (AUC). This can be achieved by the use of patient-specific pharmacokinetic targets. Previous studies (including BMT CTN 0901) have demonstrated RIC regimens were associated with less toxicity at the cost of potentially decreased survival relative to weight-based MAC regimens. At OSU, we have utilized an AUC target of 4,000 μmol-min/L per day x 4 days in a subset of patients to balance reduced toxicity with risk of relapse. Here we compare outcomes of AUC 4,000 to weight-based RIC Flu/Bu2. Methods: To compare the two regimens, a retrospective, IRB-approved cohort study was conducted. The inclusion criteria were as follows: age 18-89 years, HSCT for a diagnosis of AML or MDS, and fludarabine + busulfan conditioning regimen ± antithymocyte globulin. In the AUC 4,000 group, the target busulfan exposure was 16,000 μmol-min/L divided over 4 daily doses. In the RIC group, patents received busulfan 0.8 mg/kg/dose for 8 doses (Flu/Bu2). The primary outcome was relapse free survival (RFS). Secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS); time to neutrophil recovery; time to platelet recovery; incidence of acute and chronic graft vs host disease (GVHD); sinusoidal obstructive syndrome; febrile neutropenia; graft failure; and grade 3-5 mucositis, acute kidney injury, or hepatic dysfunction. The log-rank test was used to compare RFS and OS, and Cox proportional hazard regression model was used to estimate the hazard ratio. Gray's test was used for competing risks analysis of relapse, acute GVHD, and chronic GVHD. Fine and Gray regression models were used to estimate the hazard ratio. Results: Seventy-four patients who received conditioning from 2015-2018 with either AUC 4,000 or RIC were identified. Disease type was similar between groups with 61.8% AML in the AUC 4,000 group and 52.5% in the RIC group. There were no significant differences in disease risk status. In the AUC 4,000 group, 17.6% had either AML with myelodysplastic changes or therapy-related AML/MDS, compared to 17.5% in the RIC group. The percent of patients with HCT-Comorbidity Index score of ≥ 3 was 52.9% for AUC 4,000 and 77.5% for RIC. At 18 months, RFS was not significantly different, at 66.9% with AUC 4,000 compared to 57.5% with RIC (p=0.37) (A). Eighteen-month overall survival was also not significantly different with 66.9% alive in the AUC 4,000 group and 60% in the RIC group (p=0.63) (B). Cumulative incidence of acute and chronic GVHD were not significantly different (p=0.82, p=0.18, respectively) (C,D). There was, however, a statistically significant difference in the cumulative incidence of relapse over 18 months in favor of the AUC 4,000 regimen (hazard ratio 4.08, 95% confidence interval 1.15-14.5) (E). Grade 2-4 mucositis was more common in the AUC 4,000 group (85.3% vs 30%, p<0.01), but there were no significant differences in transaminitis, kidney injury, neutropenic fever, sinusoidal obstructive syndrome, or graft failure. Discussion: Though no significant difference existed in disease risk between the groups, choice of regimen was driven by physician judgement, perceived fitness, and ability to tolerate potential adverse effects. Thus, the results of this study indicate that with patient selection, there is no significant RFS or OS difference, or risk of acute or chronic GVHD between targeted AUC 4,000 and RIC. However, AUC 4,000 was associated with a significantly lower cumulative incidence of relapse. Adverse effects other than mucositis were not significantly different between groups. In order to definitively compare these two conditioning regimens, a prospective study is needed. Figure Disclosures Brammer: Verastem, Inc: Research Funding; Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Bioniz Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Jaglowski:Kite: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Other: advisory board; Unum Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding. Mims:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vasu:Boehringer Ingelheim: Other: Travel support; Seattle Genetics: Other: Clinical trial support. William:Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; Techspert: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin, Inc.: Consultancy; Defined Health: Consultancy. Saad:Actinium Pharma Inc: Consultancy; Amgen: Other: Research Support; Kadmon: Other: Research Support; OrcaBio: Other: Research Support.

Download Full-text

Ritumixab in Combination with Adapted-Dose of Ifosfamide and Etoposide As Salvage Treatment in Elderly Refractory/Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Patients Non-Candidate for High Dose Therapy: A Retrospective Study of Lyon Hospital University

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-116734 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4215-4215

Author(s):

Guillaume Aussedat ◽

Delphine Maucort-Boulch ◽

Philippe Rey ◽

Violaine Safar ◽

Lionel Karlin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Previously Treated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: standard treatment for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) but this strategy is not appropriate for elderly DLBCL patients (pts) related to a high risk of toxicities. Multiple chemotherapy regimens had been developed for heavily pretreated elderly DLBCL patients such as R-bendamustine, R-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GEMOX) and pixantrone; the median progression free survival (PFS) of these regimens were 2, 4 and 3.5 months, respectively in prospective phase II studies for patients previously treated with R (Sehn 2017, Mounier 2013, Pettengel 2016). Adapted dose of ifosfamide and etoposide was firstly developed as sequential consolidation regimen after high-dose CHOP (ACVBP regimen) in first line therapy of young DLBCL patients (Tilly 2003). This regimen with a safe toxicity profile was then used in combination with R in Lyon University Hospital in elderly R/R DLBCL ineligible to intensive strategy. Methods: we retrospectively reviewed the efficacy and the safety profile of this regimen performed in two Lyon University Hospitals (Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud and Leon Berard Cancer Center). Between June 2004 and March 2017, 75 pts with R/R DLBCL (63 de novo DLBCL, 12 transformed DLBCL) received R (375 mg/m2) in combination etoposide (300 mg/m2) and ifosfamide (1500 mg/m2) on day 1 (N=72, 96%) and on days 1-2 (N=3, 4%) at 2 (N=46, 61%) or 3-week (N=29, 39%) intervals. All medical records were reviewed for clinical and biological characteristics, modality of treatment and supportive care, toxicities, responses and outcome. Results: the median age was 79 years (range, 64-92) at the beginning of R-ifosfamide/VP16 treatment with 46% of the patients over 80 years. 13% of pts had a CIRS-G grade 3 or 4 >2 categories and 35% had a cumulative CIRS-G score more than 6. The performance status according to EORTC scale was 2-4 in 37% of the pts and 93% had III-IV Ann Arbor stages. Age-adjusted IPI were 0-1 in 20 pts (27%) and 2-3 in 55 pts (73%). All patients were previously treated in first-line therapy by R in combination with chemotherapy (CHOP, N=56, 75%, low-dose CHOP, N=14, 19%, other, N=5, 6%). The patients received a median number of 1 previous line (range, 1-8) and no patient was previously treated by ASCT. The median time between initial diagnosis and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 20 months (range 4-187). The median time between the last treatment and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 5 months (range 0-181). A refractory disease to first-line treatment was showed in 14 pts (19%). 31% of the patients had a refractory disease to the last regimen performed before R-ifosfamide/VP16. Patients received a median of 6 cycles (1-12). At the end of treatment, the overall response rate (ORR), defined by the rate of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) was 37%, with 18% of CR. Evaluations were assessed for 29% of the pts by TEP scanner. For toxicity, among the 387 cycles, 10 patients developed febrile neutropenia (2.6%); 15 (20%) a grade 3-4 neutropenia; 7 (9%) a grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia; 5 patients needed platelet units and 16 patients received packed red blood cell units. No grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity was observed and no toxic death occurred. With a median follow up of 31.3 months (range, 5.0-202.8), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.3 months with a 1-year PFS rate of 26.0% (95%CI, 17.7-38.3) (Figure 1A). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 months with a 1-year OS rate of 40.8% (95%CI, 30.9-54.0) (Figure 1B). The median duration of response was 4 months (range 1-97). The median PFS was adversely affected by response (refractory versus CR/PR) to the last treatment (3.0 months versus 5.5 months, P=0.001) (Figure 1C). Conclusions: in this retrospective study, R-Ifosfamide/VP16 regimen provided effective results in R/R DLBCL transplant-ineligible pts with 37% of ORR and a median of PFS of 4.3 months with a safe toxicity profile. This regimen could also be considered as a platform for combinations with novel targeted agents in these categories of patients. Disclosures Karlin: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sarkozy:ROCHE: Consultancy. Bachy:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria. Salles:Abbvie: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Acerta: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Merck: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Ghesquieres:Sanofi: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Safety and Antitumor Activity Study Evaluating Loncastuximab Tesirine and Rituximab Versus Immunochemotherapy in Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136614 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 9-10

Author(s):

Yuliya Linhares ◽

Mitul D Gandhi ◽

Michael Chung ◽

Jennifer Adeleye ◽

David Ungar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Single Agent ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Large B Cell

Introduction: Patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who fail immunochemotherapy (IC) and are unsuitable for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and those who relapse shortly after ASCT have extremely poor prognosis and need additional treatment options. Loncastuximab tesirine (Lonca) is an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) composed of a humanized anti-CD19 antibody conjugated to a pyrrolobenzodiazepine dimer toxin. In a Phase 2 study (NCT03589469), Lonca demonstrated single-agent antitumor activity with manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) DLBCL. Rituximab is a CD20-targeting monoclonal antibody used in front-line IC for DLBCL and in salvage regimens, such as rituximab/gemcitabine/oxaliplatin (R-GemOx). The addition of rituximab to a CD19-targeting pyrrolobenzodiazepine ADC appears to prolong tumor control in preclinical studies, providing the rationale for evaluating Lonca combined with rituximab (Lonca-R) as a treatment for R/R DLBCL. Study Design and Methods: This is a Phase 3, randomized, open-label, 2-part, 2-arm, multicenter study of Lonca-R versus standard IC in patients with R/R DLBCL (NCT04384484). Part 1 is a nonrandomized safety run-in with Lonca-R. The toxicity of Lonca-R will be compared with previous single-agent Lonca safety data after 20 patients have completed Cycle 1 in Part 1. Provided no significant increase in toxicity is observed, Part 2 will be initiated. Part 2 is a randomized study of Lonca-R versus R-GemOx (Figure 1). Key inclusion and exclusion criteria are reported in Table 1. The primary objective of Part 2 is to evaluate the efficacy of Lonca-R versus R-GemOx, using progression-free survival (PFS) as the primary endpoint. PFS will be defined as the time between randomization and first documentation of recurrence, disease progression or death (central review) and the primary analysis will compare PFS between treatment arms using stratified log-rank testing. Secondary objectives include evaluation of safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity of the combination, in addition to the impact of treatment on symptoms, patient-reported outcomes and patients' overall health. In Part 1 and in the Lonca-R arm of Part 2, patients will receive intravenous (iv) Lonca at 150 µg/kg on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for 2 cycles, then at 75 µg/kg on day 1 for up to 6 additional cycles. Rituximab 375 mg/m2 iv will be administered subsequent to Lonca infusion on day 1 of each cycle. Patients treated with Lonca-R will also be given dexamethasone 4 mg (oral, twice a day), where not contraindicated, on the day before, the day of, and the day after Lonca-R infusion. In the R-GemOx arm, patients will receive rituximab 375 mg/m2, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 iv on day 1 of each 14-day cycle up to a total of 8 cycles. Patients will receive premedication and supportive care according to the respective prescribing information for rituximab, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin. The trial is planned to open in Q3/Q4 2020, and target enrollment is 350 patients. Funding: This study is sponsored by ADC Therapeutics SA; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04384484. Disclosures Linhares: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics, Verastem Oncology, Bristol Myers-Squibb (Juno), AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Miami Cancer Institute, Baptist Health South Florida: Current Employment. Gandhi:TG Therapeutics (Advisory board), GlaxoSmithKline (Advisory board): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Adeleye:ADC Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ungar:ADC Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hamadani:ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Genzyme, AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Janssen R&D; Incyte Corporation; ADC Therapeutics; Celgene Corporation; Pharmacyclics, Omeros, AbGenomics, Verastem, TeneoBio: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Rituximab is licensed for treatment of NHL but is being used in combination with an unlicensed drug (loncastuximab tesirine) in this study

Download Full-text

Characterizing Specificities of Chronic Lymphoid Leukemia Harboring a BCL2 rearrangement

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-139210 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 29-30

Author(s):

Charles Herbaux ◽

Imelda Raczkiewicz ◽

Kamel Laribi ◽

Loic Ysebaert ◽

Agnes Daudignon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Protein Expression ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Limit Of Detection ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Ras Pathway ◽

Trisomy 12 ◽

A Cell

Introduction: Although survival dependence on Bcl2 is a well-known aspect of the pathophysiology of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the mechanisms of Bcl-2 dysregulation are incompletely understood. Recurrent translocations involving BCL2 and immunoglobulin genes, including t(14;18)(q32;q21) and variants such as t(2;18) or t(18;22), are classically observed in follicular lymphoma or germinal center diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (GC DLBCL), but are uncommon (<5%) in CLL and usually associated with an indolent clinical course. Here, we characterize the mutational landscape and the functional Bcl-2 family dependencies of BH3 proteins in BCL-2-rearranged (BCL2-R) CLL. We used a functional approach known as BH3 profiling which measures the proximity of a cell to the threshold of apoptosis ("priming") and identifies which anti-apoptotic proteins a cell depends on for survival. Methods: Clinically annotated primary samples from BCL2-R CLL patients identified by karyotype were obtained from the French Innovative Leukemia Organization network and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Primary samples from CLL without BCL2 rearrangement were used as a control (ctrl CLL). Next generation sequencing (NGS) was performed using a custom-designed panel of 29 genes, including among others: BIRC3, NOTCH1, FBXW7, MLL2, RAS pathway, SF3B1 and TP53. The mean coverage obtained was 2000X (limit of detection (LOD): 1%). Digital droplet PCR (ddPCR) was used to quantify NOTCH1 c.7544_7545delCT (LOD: 0.025%). Protein expression (Bcl2, Mcl1, Bim) was assessed by Western blot. Baseline BH3 profiling was performed as per Ryan et al., Bio Chem 2016. To mimic the lymph node microenvironment, viability assays were performed in co-culture with the stromal cell line NK.tert. Viability was assessed by AnnexinV/Hoechst staining. Ex vivo drug treatments included: BCL2i (inhibitor): venetoclax; MCL-1i: AZD5991, S63845 and BCLXLi: A133. Statistical analyses were by unpaired and paired t-test with a two-tailed nominal p ≤ 0.05 considered as significant. Results: In our cohort of 110 patients, the median age was 70 years old, and 79% were male. BCL2-R were t(14;18) in 77.2%, t(18;22) in 16.3% and t(2;18) in 6.3% of patients. The translocation involving BCL2 gene was isolated in 23.6% of cases, and was associated with trisomy 12 in 45.4% of patients. The most frequently mutated genes in this cohort were in the NOTCH pathway (NOTCH1 mutation: 43.6 %, mostly subclonal (mean of variant allelic frequency: 6.1%) and FBXW7: 4.5%)) and RAS pathway (KRAS, NRAS, BRAF: 9.1%). BCL2 mutations were observed in 22.8% of the 57 examined cases. No mutation previously described in venetoclax resistant CLL, such as F104L or G101V variant, were observed. Furthermore, MLL2 mutations were observed in 14.5% cases and were significantly associated with complex karyotype (p=0.01) and trisomy 12 (p=0.04). Others mutated genes were: BIRC3 (5.4%), TP53 (3.6%), SF3B1 (1%) and MYD88 L265P(1%). No mutations in EZH2, CREBBP or EP300 were found. In 15 CLL representative samples from each group (BCL2-R and ctrl), Bcl2 protein expression was significantly higher in BCL2-R CLL (ratio Bcl2/actin 0.94 vs 0.74, p=0.009) as was expression of the pro-apoptotic protein Bim (ratio Bim/actin: 2.059 vs 1.524, p=0.007). BH3 profiling demonstrated that BCL2-R CLL and ctrl CLL samples (n=23 in each group) had comparable overall priming (cyto-C release 66.1% vs 63.3%, ns) and Bcl-2 dependence (cyto-C release 75.4% vs 76.3%, ns). Both also had low dependence on Bcl-xL (cyto-C release 8.2% vs 8.8%, ns). In contrast, Mcl-1 dependence was found to be significantly lower in BCL2-R CLL (cyto-C release 15.6% vs 37.4%, p<0.0001). Consistent with our BH3 profiling results, the activity of venetoclax and the Bcl-xLi (A133) did not differ significantly between the 2 groups (n=15). In contrast, both Mcl-1i were less active in the BCL2-R group: average viabilities after 24h treatment with AZD5991 were 76.4% vs 56.3% (p=0.006) and with S63845 77.3% vs 62.9% (p=0.02) in the BCL2-R vs ctrl group, respectively. Conclusion: The genomic landscape of BCL2-R CLL is characterized by a high frequency of trisomy 12, subclonal NOTCH and RAS pathway mutations, as well as BCL2 and MLL2 mutations. Protein expression, BH3 profiling and viability assays data are consistent with nearly exclusive dependence on Bcl-2. Our data suggest that Bcl-2 inhibition should be favored over Mcl-1 inhibition in BCL2-R CLL. Disclosures Herbaux: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Laribi:abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; amgen: Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; takeda: Research Funding. Ysebaert:Roche: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Morel:Janssen: Honoraria. Guieze:abbvie: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel funds; janssen cilag: Honoraria, Other: advisory board, travel funds; roche: Other: travle funds; gilead: Honoraria, Other: travel funds; astrazanecka: Honoraria, Other: advisory board. Brown:Sun: Research Funding; Acerta: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other; Invectys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMC; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; Catapult: Consultancy; Dynamo Therapeutics: Consultancy; Eli Lilly and Company: Consultancy; Juno/Celgene: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Nextcea: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Octapharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Does Addition of Rituximab (R) to BEAM Conditioning Improve Outcomes of Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Undergoing Autologous Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation (auto-HCT)?

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-121347 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 785-785

Author(s):

Deepa Jagadeesh ◽

Navneet S. Majhail ◽

He Yizeng ◽

Kwang Woo Ahn ◽

Carlos Litovich ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Cumulative Incidence ◽

Research Funding ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Older Age ◽

Disease Stage ◽

Karnofsky Performance Score ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Significant Difference ◽

The Impact

Introduction: Rituximab-based high-dose therapy (HDT) is frequently prescribed to DLBCL patients (pts) undergoing auto-HCT. However data supporting the benefit of adding R to auto-HCT conditioning are not available. Herein, we report the impact of R-based conditioning on auto-HCT outcomes of DLBCL pts. Methods: Using the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research registry, 862 adult (≥18 years) DLBCL pts undergoing auto-HCT, between 2003-2017 were included. Analysis was limited to pts receiving BEAM (BCNU, etoposide, cytarabine, melphalan)-based HDT, as R was infrequently used with non-BEAM conditioning regimens. All pts received R-containing chemoimmunotherapy in the frontline setting and had chemosensitive disease prior to HCT. Early chemoimmunotherapy failure (ECitF) was defined as not achieving a complete remission (CR) after frontline chemoimmunotherapy or relapsing within 1 year of initial diagnosis. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included non-relapse mortality (NRM), relapse, progression-free survival (PFS) and infectious complications within 100 days post-HCT. Results: The study cohort was divided into 2 groups; BEAM (n=667) and R-BEAM (n=195). The baseline characteristics of the 2 cohorts were comparable including age at auto-HCT, disease stage, Karnofsky performance score, extranodal involvement, time from diagnosis to auto-HCT, number of prior therapies, remission status, and ECitF. However, significantly more R-BEAM cohort patients received R as part of last therapy line before auto-HCT (75% vs. 86%; P=0.001). Median follow-up of survivors was 48 (range 1-171) and 64 (range 3-142) months in the BEAM and R-BEAM cohorts, respectively. On univariate analysis, the 4 year cumulative incidence of relapse (41% vs 44%), NRM (11% vs 9%), PFS (48% vs 47%; Figure 1) and OS (58% vs 61%; Figure 2) were similar in the R-BEAM and BEAM groups, respectively (Table 1). On multivariate analysis, no significant difference was seen in OS (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.81-1.31; P=0.83) or PFS (HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.76-1.18; P=0.61) (Table 1) between the two cohorts. Addition of R had no impact on risk of relapse (HR 0.83; 95% CI 0.65-1.07; P=0.15) or NRM (HR 1.43; 95% CI 0.909-2.26; P=0.12). Variables independently associated with lower OS included older age (HR 3.05; 95% CI 1.81-5.13; P<0.001), not being in CR at auto-HCT (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.39-2.07; P<0.001) and presence of ECitF (HR 1.52, 95% CI 0.54-3.26; P<0.001). Older age (HR 2.26, 95% CI 1.48-3.45; P<0.0002) and not being in CR at auto-HCT (HR 1.78, CI 1.47-2.14; P<0.0001) were also associated with inferior PFS. There was no significant difference in the 100-day cumulative incidence of bacterial, viral or fungal infections between the two cohorts. Disease relapse was the main cause of death in both BEAM and R-BEAM cohorts (66% vs 55%). Conclusion: In this large registry analysis of DLBCL pts undergoing auto-HCT, adding R to BEAM conditioning had no impact on transplantation outcomes. Older age, absence of CR and ECitF were associated with inferior survival. Disclosures Majhail: Mallinckrodt: Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; Nkarta: Consultancy; Anthem, Inc.: Consultancy; Atara Bio: Consultancy. Sureda:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Support; Gilead: Honoraria; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kharfan-Dabaja:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Hamadani:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Medimmune: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Otsuka: Research Funding; Sanofi Genzyme: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Results of a Phase I Study of Obinutuzumab, Venetoclax, and Lenalidomide in Relapsed and Refractory B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126242 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4082-4082

Author(s):

Beth A. Christian ◽

Ying Huang ◽

Sabarish Ayyappan ◽

Robert A Baiocchi ◽

Jonathan E Brammer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Oral Agents ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Aggressive B Cell Lymphoma

Introduction: Venetoclax, a BCL2 inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy both as a single agent and in combination with rituximabin several subtypes of B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). The combination of obinutuzumab and lenalidomide has demonstrated safety and preliminary efficacy in follicular lymphoma (Fowler et al., JCO 2015; 35: 7531). We conducted a phase I study of obinutuzumab, venetoclax, and lenalidomide to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose, and preliminary efficacy of the combination. Methods: Patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell (DLBCL), transformed, high grade B-cell (HGBCL), marginal zone, and follicular (FL) lymphoma who have received ≥ 1 prior therapy were eligible. Prior autologous (ASCT) but not allogeneic stem cell transplant were permitted. Prior lenalidomide or BCL2 family inhibitors, CNS involvement, and active hepatitis or HIV infection were not permitted. ANC > 1000/mm3, platelets > 75,000/mm3, creatinine clearance ≥50 ml/min, ALT/AST ≤ 3 x ULN, bilirubin ≤ 1.5 x ULN, and ECOG PS 0-2 were required. Treatment consisted of obinutuzumab 1000 mg on days 1, 8 and 15 of cycle 1 and then on day 1 of cycles 2-6 with escalating doses of lenalidomide days 1-21 and venetoclax days 1-28 of a 28 day cycle (Table 1). A 3+3 dose escalation schema was followed. The DLT period was 1 cycle and patients had to receive 80% of the doses of the oral agents and all doses of obinutuzumab to be considered evaluable for DLT. DLTs included: treatment delays > 28 days; ANC < 500 / mm3 or platelets <25, 000 / mm3 persisting > 28 days; grade 4 febrile neutropenia or infection; grade 3 infection that fails to resolve within 7 days; and grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic toxicity. Patients without significant toxicity or progression could continue treatment up to 12 cycles. Response was assessed by CT or PET/CT every 3 months for 12 months and then every 6 months until disease progression. Results: 22 patients were treated. Median age was 61 years (range 31-78 years) with 16 males. Median prior therapies was 2 (range 1-10) and included 5 patients who had relapsed after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy and 2 patients relapsed after ASCT. Median baseline lactate dehydrogenase was 259.5 U/L (range 147-5133, ULN 190 U/L). 16 patients had aggressive B-cell lymphoma including DLBCL, HGBCL, primary mediastinal and transformed FL, 5 patients had FL and 1 patient had marginal zone lymphoma. At dose level (DL) 1, one patient experienced a DLT, grade 3 neutropenic fever lasting > 7 days. DL 1 was expanded and no additional DLTs occurred. No further DLTs occurred at DL 2-4. DL 4 was expanded and was determined to be the MTD. Four patients, 1 in each dose level, were not evaluable for DLT and were replaced including 3 who did not receiving 80% of the oral agents due to required dose reductions and 1 patient for disease progression. Related grade 3-4 toxicities were primarily hematologic including neutropenia (n=20, 90.9%), thrombocytopenia (n=5, 22.7%), and anemia (n=3, 13.6%). Grade 3-4 infections (n=6, 27%) included sepsis, febrile neutropenia, pneumonia and a urinary tract infection. Other grade 3-4 AEs occurring once each included dysgeusia, dyspnea, nausea, vomiting, and hyperhidrosis. No clinically significant tumor lysis has occurred. Patients have received a median of 3 cycles (range 1-12) of treatment. Three patients remain on therapy and 5 patients are on follow up. Dose reductions of lenalidomide occurred for 17 patients (77%) and of venetoclax for 11 patients (50%). Nine patients have achieved a response (41%), including 8 complete (CR) and 1 partial responses (PR). Responses have occurred at each DL and include 4 patients with FL (2 CR, 2 PR), 4 patients with aggressive lymphoma (4 CR) and 1 patient with MZL (CR). 14 patients are off of the study, 9 with progression, 2 for alternative therapy, and 1 each for DLT, physician preference, and a diagnosis of MDS in a patient with 3 prior lines of chemotherapy. Conclusions: Combined treatment with obinutuzumab, venetoclax, and lenalidomide administered up to 12 cycles is feasible with activity in multiple subtypes of relapsed NHL. Enrollment in expansion cohorts of FL and aggressive B-cell lymphoma is ongoing. Disclosures Christian: Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Research Funding; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Triphase: Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Baiocchi:Prelude: Consultancy. Brammer:Verastem, Inc: Research Funding; Viracta Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Bioniz Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Epperla:Verastem Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria. Jaglowski:Juno: Consultancy, Other: advisory board; Kite: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Unum Therapeutics Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: advisory board, Research Funding. William:Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin, Inc.: Consultancy; Defined Health: Consultancy; Techspert: Consultancy. Awan:Gilead: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Maddocks:BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Obinutuzumab - off label use in relapsed aggressive B-cell lymphoma and indolent B-cell lymphoma Venetoclax - off label use in relapsed B-cell lymphoma

Download Full-text

Updated Preliminary Results of a Phase 1b Dose Escalation and Dose Expansion Study of Tirabrutinib in Combination with Idelalisib in Patients with B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-113117 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 5345-5345

Author(s):

Franck Morschhauser ◽

John Radford ◽

Loic Ysebaert ◽

Stephen E Spurgeon ◽

Ebenezer A Kio ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Median Number ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 1B

Abstract Introduction: Tirabrutinib (TIRA; GS/ONO-4059) is a selective Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Idelalisib (IDELA), a first-in-class phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase delta (PI3Kδ) inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of CLL and follicular lymphoma (FL). Both have single agent activity in lymphoma and updated results from the combination of TIRA+IDELA from this ongoing phase 1b study (NCT02457598) are reported here. Methods: Patients with previously treated non-germinal-center B-cell type (non-GCB) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or two prior lines of therapy for FL, small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), or Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM) and no prior exposure to targeted inhibitors were eligible for enrollment. Patients were enrolled using a 3+3 dose escalation design with a fixed dose of IDELA at either 50 mg BID or 100mg QD and TIRA ranging from 20mg to 160mg QD. Cohorts were subsequently enrolled at multiple dose levels to evaluate disease-specific safety and efficacy. Results: As of March 5, 2018, 40 patients were enrolled on the combination. The median age was 65 (32-89) years and the disease subtypes were non-GCB DLBCL (n=17), FL (10), MZL (5), WM (5), SLL (2), and MCL (1). No maximum tolerated dose and no dose-response relationship was observed with daily dosing of both agents at the dose levels evaluated. For patients with non-GCB DLBCL (n=17), the median number of prior therapies is 3 (range 1-4). The median duration of treatment is 8 weeks (range 0.9, 44.1) with 2 patients still on treatment. 4/15 (27%) evaluable patients achieved a response; best overall response is shown in table 1. For the patients with indolent NHL (n=23), the median number of prior therapies is 3 (range 2-6). The median duration of treatment is 28 weeks (range 2.1, 120.0), with 5 patients still on treatment. 10/20 (50%) of the evaluable patients achieved a response with best overall response by indication shown in table 1. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) are listed in table 2. Of the 40 patients who received treatment on study, AEs led to treatment interruption or discontinuation of both study drugs in 22 and 3 patients, respectively. There have been 7 deaths on study, 6 due to disease progression and 1 from an unknown cause. Conclusion: Once-daily dosing of GS-4059 up to 160 mg in combination with idelalisib 50 mg BID or 100 mg QD was generally safe and well tolerated. Early results show activity across all indications studied. Disclosures Morschhauser: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Other: Scientific Lectures; Epizyme: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Radford:GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ysebaert:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Spurgeon:Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; MEI Pharma: Consultancy; Oncternal: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Salles:Merck: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Servier: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Morphosys: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Huang:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Mitra:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Rule:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dyer:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Updated Preliminary Results of a Phase 1b Dose Escalation and Dose Expansion Study of Tirabrutinib in Combination with Entospletinib in Patients with B-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-113115 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 5344-5344

Author(s):

Gilles Salles ◽

Martin J.S. Dyer ◽

Daniel James Hodson ◽

Krimo Bouabdallah ◽

Loic Ysebaert ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Median Number ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Duration Of Treatment ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 1B

Abstract Introduction: Tirabrutinib (TIRA; GS/ONO-4059) is a selective Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. Entospletinib is a selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase (SYK). Both have single agent activity in lymphoma and updated results from the combination of TIRA+ENTO from this ongoing phase 1b study (NCT02457598) are reported here. Methods: Patients with previously treated non-germinal-center B-cell type (non-GCB) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) or two prior lines of therapy for follicular lymphoma (FL), small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), or Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM) and no prior exposure to targeted inhibitors were eligible for enrollment. Patients were enrolled using a 3+3 dose escalation design with either ENTO 200mg or 400mg QD and doses of TIRA ranging from 20mg to 160mg QD. Cohorts were subsequently enrolled at multiple dose levels to evaluate disease-specific safety and efficacy. Results: As of March 5, 2018, 72 patients have enrolled on the combination. The median age was 67.5 years (range: 30-90) and the disease subtypes for patients enrolled were non-GCB DLBCL (n=32), FL (18), MZL (5), WM (7), SLL (2), MCL (8). No maximum tolerated dose and no dose-response relationship was observed with daily dosing of both agents at the dose levels evaluated. For patients with non-GCB DLBCL (n=32), the median number of prior therapies is 3 (range 1-7). The median duration of treatment is 8 weeks (range 2-98.1) with 6 patients still on treatment. 6/27 (22%) of the evaluable patients achieved a response; best overall response is shown in table 1. For patients with indolent NHL (n=40), the median number of prior therapies is 3 (range 1-6). The median duration of treatment is 36 weeks (range 0.1-116), with 29 patients still on treatment. 19/31 (61%) of the evaluable patients achieved a response with best overall response by indication shown in table 1. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) are listed in table 2. Of the 71 patients who have received treatment on study, AEs led to treatment interruption or discontinuation of both study drugs in 10 and 1 patients, respectively. There have been 4 deaths on study, all due to disease progression. Conclusion: Once-daily dosing of TIRA up to 160 mg in combination with ENTO up to 400 mg QD was safe and well tolerated. Early results show activity in combination across all indications treated. Disclosures Salles: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Morphosys: Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Servier: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Dyer:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hodson:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Research Funding. Ysebaert:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cartron:Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria. Davies:Acerta Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; ADC-Therapeutics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Karyopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Danilov:Aptose Biosciences: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy. Fegan:Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria; Napp: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Huang:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Mitra:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Rule:Roche: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Morschhauser:Janssen: Other: Scientific Lectures; Epizyme: Consultancy; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text