scholarly journals Safety Profile of Idelalisib in Patients with Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: Interim Analysis of a Noninterventional Study

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 48-50
Author(s):  
Gilles Salles ◽  
Ka Lung Wu ◽  
Sofya Kovalchuk ◽  
Santiago Mercadal ◽  
Annalisa Chiarenza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Stevens Johnson Syndrome ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Registration Trial ◽  
Grade 3

Introduction: Idelalisib, a selective oral inhibitor of PI3Kδ, was approved by the FDA and EMA as monotherapy for patients with advanced follicular lymphoma (FL) based on positive efficacy and safety results from the registration phase 2 trial in patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma (iNHL) refractory to 2 prior regimens (NCT01282424; 101-09). Phase 3 studies of idelalisib in earlier lines of treatment for iNHL were terminated prematurely due to an increased risk of death and higher incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) associated with idelalisib. Herein, we present the preplanned interim results as of June 8, 2020, of the safety of idelalisib monotherapy in patients with refractory FL treated in the EU from one of the largest noninterventional trials of idelalisib. Methods: This was a noninterventional, partially retrospective cohort study conducted in 10 European countries (EUPAS19618; NCT03568929). Eligible patients were adults aged ≥18 years treated with idelalisib for refractory FL, per the Summary of Product Characteristics and treatment guidelines, in routine clinical practice. Data was collected from patients' medical records and anonymized. Safety events were evaluated and included treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs), health outcomes of interest (HOIs) requested by the EMA (bowel perforations, Grade ≥3 diarrhea/colitis, progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy, pneumonitis, Grade ≥3 rash, infections, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, transaminase elevations, and hepatocellular injury), and deaths. TEAEs were defined as AEs that occurred between first dose and 30 days after last dose. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics. Rates per person-year were calculated as the number of patients experiencing an AE divided by the person-time at risk. Results: For the 158 patients included in this analysis, median age was 67 years and 84 (53%) were male. A summary of patient and disease characteristics at baseline are presented in Table 1. At treatment initiation, 47 (30%) patients had grade 2 FL and 105 (66%) had Ann Arbor stage III/IV disease, though these characteristics were not captured for 42% and 20% of patients, respectively; 149 (94%) had ≥2 prior therapies. The median duration of idelalisib exposure was 165 (range 11-1321) days, and patients were observed for a median of 323 (range 12-1676) days. In total, 144 (91%) patients experienced a TEAE, with a rate of 3.36 per person-year. The proportion of patients experiencing Grade 3/4, severe, common, and HOI TEAEs are presented in Table 2. Diarrhea of any grade was the most common TEAE, and infections were the most common treatment-emergent HOI. During the TEAE period, 19 (12%) patients died (Table 2). The proportion of common TEAEs reported in this analysis were lower compared with a subgroup analysis of patients with FL from the registration trial (Salles Haematologica 2017; DOI: 10.3324/haematol.2016.151738), including diarrhea 27% vs 51%, cough 9% vs 32%, fever/pyrexia 10% vs 29%, pneumonia 5% vs 11%; treatment-emergent Grade 3/4 diarrhea/colitis and transaminase elevations were also lower in this analysis: 8% vs 17% and 4% vs 14%. This comparison is limited due to differences in study populations, namely that patients in the registration trial had more advanced disease (stage III/IV, 66% vs 83%) and had a higher median number of prior therapies (3 vs 4). Conclusions: This interim analysis of the safety of idelalisib in patients with refractory FL in this large noninterventional safety study provides an estimate of potential final study findings. The AE profile from this study appears to corroborate the known safety profile of idelalisib. No new safety signals were detected. Disclosures Salles: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other; Genmab: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Participation in educational events; Epizyme: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Participation in educational events; Autolus: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Participation in educational events; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Participation in educational events; Debiopharm: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Participation in educational events; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. Pettengell:Celgene: Honoraria; MEI Pharma: Honoraria; Roche Ltd: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Vandenberghe:Celgene: Other: sponsorship to attend Lugano lymphoma meeting in 2019; Abbvie: Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Gilead: Other: travel grants, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: travel grants; Roche: Other: travel grants, Research Funding. Corradini:Kiowakirin: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; BMS: Other; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other. De Belder:Gilead Sciences Europe, Ltd.: Current Employment. Shah Gupta:Gilead Sciences, Ltd.: Current Employment. van Troostenburg:Gilead Sciences GmbH: Current Employment. Rajakumaraswamy:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Current Employment. Ramroth:Gilead Sciences, Ltd.: Current Employment.

Initial Treatment Vs Watch and Wait in Advanced-Stage Follicular Lymphoma in the Rituximab Era - an Analysis of the National Cancer Database (NCDB)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 44-44
Author(s):  
Ning Dong ◽  
Hayder Saeed ◽  
Leidy Isenalumhe ◽  
Franco Castillo Tokumori ◽  
Bijal Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
National Cancer Database ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Watch And Wait ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Randomized trials in the pre-rituximab era showed that watch and wait (WW) when compared to initial treatment (IT) for asymptomatic advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) did not impact overall survival (OS). In the rituximab era, a randomized trial showed patients with advanced-stage, asymptomatic, low-burden FL were less likely to need chemotherapy at 3 years when treated with rituximab only at diagnosis compared to WW, however with no difference in OS (Ardeshna et al., 2014). In another analysis, there was no impact of WW compared to IT on the time to next anti-lymphoma therapy (Solal-Celigny et al., 2012). However, the existing studies were limited by sample sizes and not powered by survival. In addition, few patients with grade 3a FL were included, thus it is not clear if pathological grades (other than grade 3b) should be taken into consideration when choosing WW vs IT. Here we studied the outcomes of WW vs IT for patients with advanced-stage (stage III/IV) FL using the National Cancer Database (NCDB) and compared the outcomes by FL pathological grades. Methods: Patients diagnosed between 2011-2016 were included. We only included patients diagnosed after 2011 (when rituximab was FDA approved for FL as maintenance) so our results reflect the current management of FL. To ensure accurate reporting of IT, only patients who were diagnosed and initially managed at the reporting facility were included. Demographic characteristics were compared using Chi-square test for categorical variables and ANOVA for continuous variables. Univariate comparison of OS was conducted using Logrank test. Multivariate survival analysis was conducted using Cox proportional hazard model with the following covariates: age, gender, race, Hispanic ethnicity, stage, grade, existence of previous malignancies, comorbidity score, facility type, facility lymphoma patient volume, urban/rural location, education, income and insurance status. Results: A total of 14417 patients with stage III/IV FL were included. Among them, 10755 received IT (74.6%) and 3662 (25.4%) were managed by WW at diagnosis. For those who received IT, the median time to treatment was 35 days (IQR 22-56 days). Preliminary analyses showed that patients with grade 1 FL and grade 2 FL were managed similarly and had similar OS, therefore we combined grade 1 and grade 2 into grade 1-2 FL as opposed to grade 3 FL. A total of 13050 patients had grade 1-2 FL and 4286 patients had grade 3 FL. Patients with grade 1-2 FL were more likely to be managed by WW than those with grade 3 FL (29.8% vs 12.5%, respectively; p<0.01). Patients on WW were older, more likely to be female, more likely to have previous malignancies, had higher education and income, and more likely to have private insurance or Medicare than Medicaid or no insurance (Table 1). Patients with grade 1-2 FL had similar OS when managed by WW compared to IT (5-year OS rate: 76.3% vs 76.2%, respectively; p=0.32; Figure 1). In contrast, patients with grade 3 FL had worse OS when managed by WW compared to IT (5-year OS rate: 65.3% vs 73.5%; p<0.001; Figure 2). In multivariate analysis, the interaction term between grade and management was significant (p=0.005), confirming that initial management affected OS in different ways for grade 1-2 FL and grade 3 FL after adjusting for the covariates. Consistent with the results of the univariate analysis, after adjusting for covariates, grade 1-2 FL had similar survival when managed by WW compared to IT (HR=0.93, 95% CI: 0.82-1.05; p=0.25) but grade 3 FL had worse survival when managed by WW (HR=1.43, 95% CI: 1.14-1.82; p=0.002). Other factors associated with OS are listed in Table 2. Conclusion: Our study confirms the findings of lack of OS benefits in patients with advanced stage, grade 1-2 FL when treated with WW versus IT. In contrast, patients with advanced stage, grade 3 FL had worse OS with WW approach. While the NCDB does not separate grade 3 FL into 3a and 3b, it is assumed that FL 3b is universally managed as DLBCL and receive IT given its more aggressive course. Under this assumption, all grade 3 FL patients on WW were likely grade 3a. Thus, our results suggest that grade 3a FL patients on WW had worse OS compared to grade 3 FL patients who received IT (see Figure 2 and its footnote for illustration). Although a definitive conclusion cannot be made regarding grade 3a FL, further studies to compare the outcome of WW vs IT with special focus on stage 3a FL are warranted. Disclosures Shah: NCCN: Vice-Chair, Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Working Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite/Gilead, Precision Biosciences, Novartis, AstraZeneca: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Kite/Gilead, Celgene/Juno/BMS, Novartis, Pfizer, Amgen, Spectrum/Acrotech, Precision Biosciences, Beigene, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics/Jansen, Adaptive: Honoraria; Moffitt Cancer Center: Current Employment; Kite/Gilead, Jazz, Incyte: Research Funding. Bello:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Sokol:EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kymera Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyowa/Kirin Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pinilla Ibarz:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Chavez:Karyopharm: Consultancy; BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Morphosys: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Genentech: Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Kite, a Gilead Company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Long Term Outcome of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (Rd) Vs Melphalan-Lenalidomide-Prednisone (MPR) Vs Cyclophosphamide-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (CPR) As Induction Followed By Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) Vs Lenalidomide (R) As Maintenance in a Community-Based Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Population: Updated Analysis of EMN01 Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 901-901
Author(s):  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Introduction : Rd and MPR showed to be effective combinations in elderly newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts). Cyclophosphamide is a less toxic alkylating alternative agent. EMN01 is the first trial to formally compare these three different Lenalidomide-based combinations. Maintenance with Lenalidomide has been recently approved in patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Few data are available about the best combination as maintenance in patients not eligible for ASCT. Methods : 662 pts with NDMM were randomized to receive 9 28-day cycles of Rd (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15 and 22 in pts 65-75 years old and 20 mg in those >75 years), MPR (lenalidomide 10 mg/day for 21 days; melphalan orally 0.18 mg/Kg for 4 days in pts 65-75 years old and 0.13 mg/Kg in >75 years pts; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days) or CPR (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in pts 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day in >75 years pts; prednisone 25 mg every other day). After induction, pts were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (R; 10 mg/day for 21 days) or with prednisone (RP; R, 10 mg/day for 21 days and P, 25 mg every other day), until disease progression. Results : Pts characteristics were well balanced in all groups; 217 pts in Rd, 217 in MPR and 220 in CPR arms could be evaluated. After a median follow-up of 63.7 months, median PFS was 23.2 months in MPR, 18.9 months in CPR and 18.6 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.02; MPR vs Rd p=0.08). Median overall survival (OS) was 79.9 months in MPR, 69.4 months in CPR and 68.1 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.98; MPR vs Rd p=0.64). The most common grade ≥3 adverse event (AEs) was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR and 25% in Rd pts (p<0.0001). Grade ≥3 non hematologic AEs were similar among arms. At the end of induction, 402 pts were eligible for maintenance, 198 in the RP and 204 in the R groups. PFS from start of maintenance was 22.2 months in the RP group and 17.6 in the R group, with 20% reduced the risk of death/progression for pts receiving RP maintenance (HR 0.81, p=0.07; Figure 1). A subgroup analysis was performed to determine the consistency of RP vs R treatment effect in different subgroups using interaction terms between treatment and cytogenetic abnormalities, ISS, age, sex, induction treatment and response before maintenance (Figure 1). No difference in OS was observed (HR 1.02, p=0.93) but the OS analysis was limited by the low number of events. Median duration of maintenance was 23.0 months in RP pts and 20.5 months in R pts, 14% and 13% of pts discontinued due to AEs, in RP and R groups, respectively. Conclusion : This phase III trial compared 2 different Lenalidomide-containing induction regimens and 2 different Lenalidomide-containing maintenance regimens in an elderly community-based NDMM population. MPR prolonged PFS by approximately 5 months, yet the higher incidence of hematologic toxicity should be carefully considered. The addition of low-dose prednisone to standard lenalidomide maintenance reduced the risk of death/progression by 20%, with a good safety profile. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Bringhen: Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Karyipharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Offidani: celgene: 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. Musto: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Gaidano: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. De Sabbata: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hájek: Amgen, Takeda, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Phase 3 Study of Pomalidomide with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone Versus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Asian Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma (RRMM) - Interim Analysis of a Trial By the Asian Myeloma Network (AMN)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Wee-Joo Chng ◽  
Xinhua Li ◽  
Cindy Lin ◽  
Jin Seok Kim ◽  
Hiroshi Handa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Prior Exposure ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Phase 2 Study ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Experienced Grade

Background Pomalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug that has been approved for the treatment of relapse refractory myeloma. A previous small randomized phase 2 study in the United States showed that combination of Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induce a greater response rate than pomalidomide and dexamethasone1. In our prior study, AMN0012, we should that in patients with sub-optimal response to pomalidomide and dexamethasone, the addition of cyclophosphamide can increase response resulting in improvement of progression free survival. In the current study, we seek to randomize Asian patients with RRMM between PCD and PD to confirm the benefit of PCD. Method We conducted a prospective randomized trial of pomalidomide (4mg daily for 21 days followed by 7 days rest) plus dexamethasone 40mg once weekly for 4 weeks with or without cyclophosphamide (400mg once a week) in patients with relapse and refractory myeloma that has to be refractory to lenalidomide and has prior exposure to proteasome inhibitors. Each cycle is 4 weeks. Patients from Singapore, Japan and Korea (NCT03143049) were included in this Asian Myeloma Network trial. The trial was started in Sep 2017 and is still ongoing. To date, 53 patients have been recruited so far. This interim report presents data available up till the data cut-off date of 24 June 2020. Results Forty-six patients have available base line information and safety data and is included in this interim analysis. 50% of patients are male and median age of the cohort is 68 years old. 39% and 28% of patients are International Stage System (ISS) stage 2 and 3 respectively. 20% of patients have abnormal creatinine clearance. Median prior line of treatment is 3. All patients are refractory to lenalidomide and 96% have prior exposure to bortezomib. In addition, 12 patients (26%) and 5 (11%) have been treated with Carfilzomib and Ixazomib respectively. 15 (33%) patients had prior high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant. 20 (44%) patients required dose reduction of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide or dexamethasone. 89% of patients experience adverse events (AEs) of any grade. Of the 297 episodes of AEs, 43% are grade 3 or higher, with 50% of these episodes related to the study drugs. 57% of patients experienced serious AEs (SAEs) of any grade. Of the 74 episodes of SAE, 89% are grade 3 or higher, with 49% of these episodes related to the study drugs. Almost all of these events are related to cytopenias and infections. 20 (44%) of the patients develop grade 3 neutropenic fever and 9 (20%) patients have grade 3 or higher pneumonia. Only 1 patient experienced grade 3 peripheral neuropathy, 1 patient develop grade 3 pulmonary embolism, 1 patient developed grade 3 venous thromboembolism, and 1 patient experienced grade 3 renal impairment. At a median follow-up of 10.9 months, 9 of the 46 patients have died, and 21 have progressed. Three patients withdrew due to toxicity. While the overall response of the study population is not part of this interim analysis, we assessed the response of patients from the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore which has the highest number of patients recruited to get an idea of the therapeutic efficacy. Of the 14 patients recruited at NCIS, 1 patient achieved CR, 3 VGPR, 7 PR, producing a response rate of 79%. Conclusion In this interim analysis of a prospective randomized study of pomalidomide and dexamethasone with or without cyclophosphamide in Asian patients, we demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of this combination. Longer follow-up and final analysis of the study will be needed to ascertain the therapeutic advantage of PCD over PD in relapse and refractory myeloma that is refractory to lenalidomide. References 1. Baz RC, Martin TG 3rd, Lin HY, Zhao X, Shain KH, Cho HJ, Wolf JL, Mahindra A, Chari A, Sullivan DM, Nardelli LA, Lau K, Alsina M, Jagannath S. Randomized multicenter phase 2 study of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone in relapsed refractory myeloma. Blood. 2016 May 26;127(21):2561-8. 2. Soekojo CY, Kim K, Huang SY, Chim CS, Takezako N, Asaoku H, Kimura H, Kosugi H, Sakamoto J, Gopalakrishnan SK, Nagarajan C, Wei Y, Moorakonda R, Lee SL, Lee JJ, Yoon SS, Kim JS, Min CK, Lee JH, Durie B,Chng WJ. 3. Pomalidomide and dexamethasone combination with additional cyclophosphamide in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (AMN001)-a trial by the Asian Myeloma Network. Blood Cancer J. 2019 Oct 8;9(10):83. Disclosures Chng: Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy.

CTIM-32. IMMUNE CHECKPOINT INHIBITOR NIVOLUMAB IN PEOPLE WITH RECURRENT SELECT RARE CNS CANCERS: RESULTS OF INTERIM ANALYSIS IN A HEAVILY PRETREATED COHORT

2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi57-vi58
Author(s):  
Marta Penas-Prado ◽  
Ying Yuan ◽  
Kathleen Wall ◽  
Elizabeth Vera ◽  
Ukeme Ikiddeh-Barnes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Cns Tumors ◽  
Myxopapillary Ependymoma ◽  
Investigational Drugs ◽  
Heavily Pretreated ◽  
Pretreated Patients ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Total Accrual ◽  
Immune Profiling

Abstract INTRODUCTION Standard and experimental therapies for patients with rare CNS tumors are scarce. Nivolumab (PD-1 inhibitor) is approved for several non-CNS cancers. This ongoing Phase II trial (NCT03173950) will determine the efficacy of nivolumab in adults with recurrence/progression of one of 11 selected rare primary CNS tumors. Efficacy is measured by Disease Control Rate (DCR; confirmed CR/PR or durable SD for ≥ 6 months) in 2 cohorts: heavily and non-heavily pretreated patients (heavily pretreated: ≥ 3 prior therapies; non-heavily pretreated: ≤ 2). We report efficacy and safety results of a preplanned interim analysis in the heavily pretreated cohort. METHODS Eligibility includes recurrence/progression of an eligible tumor; age ≥ 18 years; tumor tissue available for histopathology, molecular and immune profiling; KPS ≥ 70; and no steroids at study entry. A total of 150 evaluable patients will be enrolled (75 to each cohort). Prior therapies include radiation and/or standard or investigational drugs. Nivolumab treatment is 240 mg IV every 2 weeks (4 doses); then 480 mg every 4 weeks (14 additional doses). Interim analysis was planned when sample size reached 32 in each cohort. RESULTS As of March 10, 2021, DCR exceeded the minimum required for interim analysis in the heavily pretreated cohort. Among 30 patients, 4 achieved SD > 6 months (medulloblastoma, anaplastic ependymoma, myxopapillary ependymoma, metastatic atypical meningioma). Safety profile (related AEs): grade 3 = 7; grade 4 = 1. Most frequent grade 3-5 AEs regardless of attribution: tumor progression (6); anemia, hydrocephalus, lymphopenia (3 each); cerebral edema, headache (2 each). CONCLUSION DCR exceeded the “go” boundary (i.e., > 2) in the heavily pretreated cohort. Nivolumab showed safety profile consistent with other studies. This cohort will continue to stage 2 and complete total accrual of 75 patients. The trial is currently being expanded to 10 additional sites across the BTTC/NCI-CONNECT consortium.

Obinutuzumab plus lenalidomide (GALEN) in advanced, previously untreated follicular lymphoma in need of systemic therapy

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emmanuel Bachy ◽  
Roch Houot ◽  
Pierre Feugier ◽  
Krimo Bouabdallah ◽  
Reda Bouabdallah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Metabolic Response ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
High Tumor Burden ◽  
Grade 3

Obinutuzumab and lenalidomide (GALEN) is an active immunomodulatory combination with a manageable safety profile in multiple types of lymphoma. We report efficacy and safety results for the phase 2 GALEN study in previously-untreated patients with advanced follicular lymphoma (FL). Eligible patients aged ≥ 18 years had ECOG PS ≤ 2, high-tumor burden, grade 1-3a FL. Induction treatment was obinutuzumab (1000 mg IV, days 8/15/22, cycle 1; day 1, cycles 2-6) plus lenalidomide (20 mg/day, days 1-21, cycle 1; days 2-22, cycles 2-6) for 6 cycles. Maintenance included obinutuzumab (1000 mg every 2 cycles) plus lenalidomide (10 mg, days 2-22) for ≤ 12 cycles (year 1) followed by obinutuzumab (1000 mg every 56 days) for 6 cycles (year 2). The primary endpoint was complete response rate (CRR) after induction per IWG 1999 criteria. From October 2015 to February 2017, 100 patients were enrolled. CRR after induction was 47% and overall response rate (ORR) 92%. Post-hoc analyses per 2014 Lugano classification including patients with missing bone marrow assessments identified an additional 13 patients fulfilling CRR criteria, resulting in a complete metabolic response of 80% and ORR of 94%. At a median follow-up of 3.7 years, 3-year progression-free and overall survival were 82% and 94%, respectively. The most common adverse event was neutropenia (48% any-grade; 47% grade ≥ 3) but only 2% of patients presented febrile neutropenia; others were mainly grade ≤ 2. No other specific grade ≥3 toxicity occurred at a frequency higher than 3%. Overall, these results demonstrated promising clinical efficacy for the chemo-free backbone obinutuzumab and lenalidomide in previously untreated, high tumor burden FL patients. Except for neutropenia, the safety profile of the combination is remarkable. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01582776

Efficacy Outcomes of Treatments for Double Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma (R/R FL): A Systematic Literature Review

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 42-43
Author(s):  
Brad S. Kahl ◽  
Anik R. Patel ◽  
Omer Zaidi ◽  
Sonya J. Snedecor ◽  
Anna G. Purdum
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Clinical Data ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Advisory Committees

ABSTRACT Introduction: Patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphomas (iNHL), including follicular lymphoma (FL), have high response to first-line treatment. However, retreatment is often required when relapses occur, and those with multiple relapses represent a patient population with an unmet need for effective treatment. Clinical data for several treatment options exist for the general relapsed and refractory (R/R) population; however, there are relatively fewer data specific to FL patients with ≥2 lines of prior treatment. This work systematically identified the available efficacy data in the double R/R FL population. Methods: The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched through February 10, 2020. Studies were limited to interventional clinical trials of R/R FL patients (or mixed histologies with a predominance of FL) and articles published in English. Studies also must have reported one or more efficacy measures, such as overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), duration of response (DoR), time to next treatment (TTNT), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Potential interventions of interest were lenalidomide ± rituximab (R), duvelisib, ibrutinib, venetoclax, polatuzumab vedotin + R, obinutuzumab, copanlisib, umbralisib, idelalisib, and tazemetostat. Results: Of 35 publications examining treatment outcomes in R/R FL patients, only 14 (representing 5 unique clinical trials) were specific to the ≥ 2-line population. These trials were: CHRONOS Part B (copanlisib), DAWN (ibrutinib), DELTA (idelalisib), DYNAMO (duvelisib), and Morschhauser et al. 2019 (tazemetostat) and included a total of 605 participants. All studies used similar inclusion criteria, and patients included were similar in age (median 62-65), disease stage (III/IV), and ECOG score (0-2). Patients in the CHRONOS study had a median number of prior treatments of 2, whereas those in the DELTA study had 5. ORR ranged from 21% (ibrutinib) to 59% (copanlisib) (Table). The DoR ranged from 8.3 months in tazemetostat patients with EZH2 gene mutation to 19.4 months for ibrutinib. PFS ranged from 5.7 months in tazemetostat patients with wild-type EZH2 to 11.2 months for copanlisib. Median TTNT was only reported in the DAWN study (16 months). Conclusions: Very few clinical data exist reporting efficacy outcomes specific to the double R/R FL population. The limited data indicate that current treatments do not produce durable responses for most double R/R FL patients, demonstrating an unmet need. Further research is needed to fully understand the efficacy and safety of other potential interventions for this population. Disclosures Kahl: Genentech:Consultancy;Pharmacyclics LLC:Consultancy;AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;ADC Therapeutics:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Celgene Corporation:Consultancy;AbbVie:Consultancy;Roche Laboratories Inc:Consultancy;BeiGene:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Janssen:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Acerta:Consultancy, Research Funding.Patel:Kite, a Gilead Company:Current Employment.Zaidi:BMS:Consultancy.Snedecor:Pharmerit - an OPEN Health Company:Other: Employment at consultancy paid by Kite Pharma to conduct this work.Purdum:Kite, a Gilead Company:Current Employment.

Tolerability and Efficacy of Bortezomib Added to CVP-R for Previously Untreated Advanced Stage Follicular Lymphoma: Interim Analysis of a Phase II Study by the NCIC Clinical Trials Group.

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 1576-1576 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie H Sehn ◽  
David A Macdonald ◽  
Sheldon H. Rubin ◽  
Morel Rubinger ◽  
Kevin R Imrie ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Acceptable Level ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Despite recent improvements in therapy, follicular lymphoma (FL) remains incurable with standard treatment, warranting investigation of new approaches. Bortezomib, the first-in-class proteasome inhibitor has demonstrated promising efficacy as a single agent in heavily pretreated patients (pts) with FL. This is the first study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the addition of bortezomib to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone and rituximab (CVP-R). Methods: This is a phase II multi-center open-label trial adding bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 day 1&8) to standard dose C(750 mg/m2) V(1.4 mg/m2, capped at 2 mg) P(40 mg/m2 × 5) –R(375 mg/m2) for up to 8 cycles in pts with newly diagnosed stage III/IV FL requiring therapy. Planned accrual is 90 patients. A two-stage design was employed with a planned interim analysis of the first 28 patients to ensure an acceptable level of neurotoxicity (defined as less than 5/28 patients with grade 3/4 neurotoxicity after the first 4 cycles) and meaningful response rate (more than 12/28 patients with a complete response following 8 cycles), prior to enrolling remaining patients. Results: Median age of the first 28 patients was 55 years (range, 30–73). Fifty percent were male and 79% had stage IV disease. FLIPI score at study entry: low 14%, intermediate 43%, high 43%. Overall, the combination of bortezomib and CVP-R was extremely well tolerated. To date, no pts have developed grade 4 neurotoxicity and only 1/28 (4%) has developed grade 3 neurotoxicity within the first 4 cycles (neuropathic pain which resolved without need for treatment modification). The incidence of grade 1 and 2 neurotoxicity was 54% and 25% respectively. Only 3 pts discontinued therapy prematurely (2 pt refusal, 1 progressive disease). Ninety-four percent of planned bortezomib treatments in the first four cycles and 93% of vincristine doses were administered without dose reduction. Hematologic toxicity was mild, with no pts experiencing grade 3/4 anemia or thrombocytopenia. Only 2 episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred and no grade 3/4 infections were noted. Although it is too early to report on efficacy in this ongoing trial, response objectives for stage I have been met, and enrollment to stage 2 is underway. Conclusions: The addition of bortezomib to standard dose CVP-R is very well tolerated, with an acceptable level of neurotoxicity, without compromising the delivery of bortezomib or vincristine. This ongoing study will provide toxicity and efficacy data to facilitate the development of a planned phase III trial.

Bortezomib Added to CVP-R Is Safe and Effective for Previously Untreated Advanced Stage Follicular Lymphoma: A Phase II Study by the NCIC Clinical Trials Group.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 407-407
Author(s):  
Laurie H. Sehn ◽  
David A Macdonald ◽  
Sheldon H. Rubin ◽  
Guy Cantin ◽  
Morel Rubinger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Risk Population ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Experienced Grade

Abstract Abstract 407 Background: Bortezomib, the first-in-class proteasome inhibitor has demonstrated promising efficacy as a single agent in heavily pretreated patients (pts) with follicular lymphoma (FL). This is the first study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the addition of bortezomib to cyclophosphamide, vincristine, prednisone and rituximab (CVP-R), one of the most commonly used regimens in untreated patients. Methods: This is a phase II multi-centre open-label trial adding bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 day 1&8) to standard dose cyclophosphamide (750 mg/m2), vincristine (1.4 mg/m2, capped at 2 mg), prednisone (40 mg/m2 × 5) and rituximab (375 mg/m2) for up to 8 cycles in pts with newly diagnosed stage III/IV FL requiring therapy. Response was assessed following 4 and 8 cycles. The two co-primary endpoints were complete response rate (CR/CRu) and incidence of grade 3/4 neurotoxicity. Following the final response assessment, patients were permitted to receive maintenance rituximab at the discretion of the treating physician according to local practice. Results: Between March 2007 and February 2009, 95 patients were enrolled. Median age was 56.6 years (range 29.5 – 83.6 years). 48% percent were male and 63% had stage IV disease. FLIPI score at study entry: low 11%, intermediate 43%, high 46%. Safety data was availabel on all patients. Overall, the combination of bortezomib and CVP-R was extremely well tolerated. No pts have developed grade 4 neurotoxicity and only 6/95 (6.3%) have developed grade 3 neurotoxicity (five sensory neuropathy and one neuropathic pain). The incidence of grade I and II neuropathy was 65.3% and 36.8% respectively. Neurotoxicity was largely reversible. Five pts discontinued therapy prematurely (three refused further treatment, one pt was found to have Hodgkin lymphoma as well as FL and one pt was removed from study for non-compliance). 84% of planned bortezomib treatments and 85% of vincristine treatments were administered without dose reduction. Five pts experienced grade 3/4 anemia and 3 pts experienced grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia. Only 4 episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred and 2 grade 3 infections were noted. No grade 4 infections were reported. No serious adverse events were reported. One patient died due to progressive disease. At present, 78/95 patients are evaluable for response. 37/78 (47%) achieved a CR/CRu (95% CI 36.4, 58.5), and 29/78 (37%) achieved a PR with an ORR of 84.6% (95% CI 76.6, 96.6). An additional 5/78 pts had stable disease, while 7/78 progressed on therapy. Complete efficacy data as well as information on quality of life will be availabel within the next few months. Forty-one of 70 pts (58.6%) with availabel follow-up information went on to receive maintenance rituximab. Conclusions: The addition of bortezomib to standard dose CVP-R is feasible and well tolerated with minimal associated toxicity. Neurotoxicity is primarily low grade and reversible and does not limit delivery of either bortezomib or vincristine. The complete remission rate in this high risk population compares favorably to historical results of patients receiving CVP-R. Based on these encouraging results, a phase III trial of CVP-R with or without bortezomib is currently being planned. Disclosures: Sehn: Johnson and Johnson Ortho Biotec: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Velcade for is not yet approved for follicular lymphoma. Chen:Johnson and Johnson Ortho Biotec: Research Funding. Djurfeldt:Johnson and Johnson Ortho Biotec: Research Funding. Shepherd:Johnson and Johnson Ortho Biotec: Research Funding. Crump:Johnson and Johnson Ortho Biotec: Honoraria.

Disease Characteristics and Patterns of Care In Elderly Patients (80+ years) with Follicular Lymphoma (FL) In the United States (US); Are Older Patients Treated Differently? Report From the National LymphoCare Study (NLCS)

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 4152-4152
Author(s):  
Chadi Nabhan ◽  
Michelle Byrtek ◽  
Michael Taylor ◽  
Jill Tydell ◽  
Jamie H. Hirata ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Younger Patients ◽  
Disease Characteristics ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 4152 Background: While FL is the most common low-grade lymphoma in the US, median age was less than 60 in patients enrolled on pivotal studies that led to our understanding of disease biology and optimal therapy. It remains unclear whether similar disease characteristics, presentation, prognostic factors, treatment patterns, and outcomes pertain to older patients with FL. No clear guidelines exist on how older patients should be treated and data is lacking as to whether current practice patterns affect their survival and progression. Previous reports on FL in the elderly have been retrospective and single center-based. Methods: The NLCS is a prospective, longitudinal multicenter, observational study that enrolled consecutive newly diagnosed FL patients from 3/2004 through 3/2007 collecting data on disease and patients' characteristics, treatment patterns, and outcome. Using the NLCS data we analyzed information on disease stage, grade, FL International Prognostic Index (FLIPI), B symptoms, and treatment choice for patients <60 years, 60–69 years, 70–79 years, and 80+ years. Either Chi-square or Fisher's exact comparison was used to assess the correlations depending on the sample size of the test. Results: A total of 2,736 pts were enrolled, of which 1,215 (44%) were < 60, 708 (25%) were between 60–69, 549 (20%) were between 70–79, and 264 (9%) were >80. There was a significant difference in grade distribution across the different age groups (p < 0.0001), with 22% of pts 80+ having grade 3 FL vs 17% pts <60. No significant differences across age groups in B symptoms, extra nodal sites, or LDH values were observed. A significant difference in FLIPI score was seen across the age groups (p < 0.0001) where high-score FLIPI was present in 48% of pts 80+ as opposed to 16% of pts <60, although calculating FLIPI might be confounded by the fact that older patients were more likely to not have received a bone marrow (BM) exam with 66% of pts 80+ not having BM exam vs. only 40% of those <60 (p < 0.0001). The difference in FLIPI was mainly due to lower Hgb values as older patients were more likely to have had Hgb < 12 g/dL than younger patients (31% of pts 80+ vs. 15% of pts <60) and to age being a component of the FLIPI index. The difference in FLIPI score across age groups was also observed in patients with grade 3 FL where 53% of pts 80+ had poor FLIPI vs. 15% of pts <60 (p < 0.0001). A statistically significant difference in treatment patterns was found across age groups (p <0.0001). When treatment was implemented, older patients were more likely to have received rituximab (R) monotherapy (37% of 80+ vs. 12% of <60) and less likely to have received R+Chemotherapy (40% of pts 80+ vs. 64% of pts<60). In addition, more pts 80+ were observed compared to those <60 (23% vs. 16%). These differences persisted even in those with advanced stage (III/IV), grade 3 disease, region of diagnosis, and in poor-risk FLIPI. When chemotherapy was used, older patients were less likely than younger patients to receive anthracyclines (p < 0.0001) (31% of pts 80+ vs. 69% of pts<60). Anthracycline use remained significantly different regardless of disease stage, grade, or FLIPI score. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the largest prospective data collection available for FL pts 80+ years of age. We demonstrate that these pts have higher FLIPI score and grade 3 disease. When treatment is initiated, these patients receive R monotherapy more often than their younger counterpart. Anthracycline use in this population is also less common regardless of disease stage, grade, or risk profile. Whether these baseline differences translate into different outcomes remains to be seen. Disclosures: Nabhan: genentech: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Byrtek:Genentech: Employment. Taylor:Genentech: Employment. Hirata:Genentech: Employment. Flowers:Genentech/Biogen-Idec (unpaid): Consultancy; Celgene, Intellikine: Consultancy; Millennium: Research Funding.

Final Results of a Randomized Phase 2 Multicenter Study of Two Bortezomib Schedules In Patients with Recurrent or Refractory Follicular Lymphoma. Groupe d'Etude Des Lymphomes De l'Adulte (GELA) Study FL-05

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 768-768 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Ribrag ◽  
Herve Tilly ◽  
Olivier Casasnovas ◽  
Andre Bosly ◽  
Reda Bouabdallah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Study ◽  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Optimal Schedule ◽  
Dose Schedule ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Qualitative Comparison ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Indolent Lymphomas

Abstract Abstract 768 Background: Bortezomib has previously demonstrated activity in indolent lymphomas including follicular lymphoma (FL). However, the optimal schedule, dose and precise activity of bortezomib in FL remain to be investigated. Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of bortezomib in the treatment of advanced FL, but also using a qualitative comparison of two different dose schedules, based on safety, efficacy and dosing convenience to recommend a dose schedule for further clinical studies. Methods: This prospective, randomized, sequential, international, multicenter, 2-arm, non-comparative, open-label, clinical study was conducted from 08–2005 to 09–2008. The eligible subjects (follicular lymphoma grade 1–3, no CNS involvement, in relapse or refractory to previous therapy, ECOG 0–2, Absolute neutrophil count > 1000 cells/mL; Platelets > 50,000 cells/mL, Aspartate transaminase < 3 × ULN; Alanine transaminase < 3 × ULN; Total bilirubin < 2 × ULN; Creatinin level < 150 μmol/L, without known previous HIV serology) were randomized to receive either treatment in a 1:1 ratio. Treatment arm A patients (pts) received 1.5 mg/m2 bortezomib administered biweekly on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle for 8 cycles. Treatment arm B pts received 1.6 mg/m2 bortezomib administered weekly on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 35-day cycle for 6 cycles. Treatment allocation was stratified according to number of prior therapies (1 or 2 versus > 2) and time to progression (TPP) for the last given anti-lymphoma therapy (≤ 12 months versus > 12 months). Responses were assessed using 1999 IWG criteria. An interim analysis was planned after 15 evaluable pts randomized in each treatment arm; if only 5 subjects or fewer respond, the treatment arm was concluded to be ineffective and the treatment arm closed to inclusion; otherwise this treatment arm proceeded to include 50 pts. Results: 87 pts (51 [59%] men and 36 [41%] women) with median age of 65 years (range:40 to 77) were treated with bortezomib. Prior therapies were >2 in 62% and progression <12 months from last therapy in 49%. 30% previously received HDT with ASCT, and all of them were previously treated with immunotherapy. Arm B was closed to inclusion after interim analysis. After this interim analysis, the 6 patients still on therapy in this arm completed therapy according to arm A. 15/50 pts (32%) in arm A (bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2) and 8/37 pts (23%) in arm B (bortezomib 1.6 mg/m2) achieved a complete, unconfirmed complete or partial response at the end of treatment. Median duration of response was 16 (range 1–45) and 15 (1-39) months and PFS was 6 and 7.5 months for arms A and B, respectively. Most drug-related AEs (all grades, all cycles) were mild. AEs > grade 3 observed in more than 5% of pts were lymphopenia (25% both arms), thrombocytopenia (19% and 25% in arms A and B, respectively) and neutropenia (8% both arms). One pt died of possibly drug-related cardiac failure associated with hyponatremia. Conclusions: This study demonstrates tolerability and durable clinical benefit of bortezomib when given at 1.5 mg/m2 biweekly on a 21 days cycle in pts with recurrent or refractory FL. These results suggest recommending this dose schedule for further clinical study. Disclosures: Ribrag: LFB: Honoraria, Research Funding; servier: Research Funding; celgene: Research Funding; pfizer: Honoraria; novartis: Honoraria. Tilly:Amgen: Honoraria. Feugier:roche: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document