scholarly journals Gastrointestinal Events and Management Strategies for Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) in First Remission Receiving CC-486 in the Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase III QUAZAR AML-001 Maintenance Trial

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 22-23
Author(s):  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
Christopher Pocock ◽  
Dominik Selleslag ◽  
Pau Montesinos ◽  
Hamid Sayar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
First Remission ◽  
Over Time

INTRODUCTION: About 50% of older patients with AML attain remission with intensive induction chemotherapy (IC) but the majority will eventually relapse. Effective, well tolerated maintenance treatments are needed to reduce the risk of relapse and prolong survival for older patients with AML in remission, who are less likely than younger patients to be candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). CC-486 is an oral hypomethylating agent that allows for extended dosing schedules to sustain therapeutic activity. In the randomized, phase III QUAZAR AML-001 Maintenance Trial, CC-486 significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) vs. placebo in patients aged ≥55 years with AML in first remission after IC ± consolidation. Gastrointestinal (GI) events were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported in patients who received CC-486. Here we assess the rates of GI TEAEs and associated management strategies over time with CC-486 treatment in QUAZAR AML-001. METHODS: Eligible patients were aged ≥55 years and had AML with intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) scores ≤3. Patients had achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) after IC ± consolidation and were not candidates for HSCT. Within 4 months of achieving CR/CRi, patients were randomized 1:1 to CC-486 300 mg or placebo, administered once-daily on days 1-14 of repeated 28-day treatment cycles. Safety was assessed among patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug, from the date of first dose through 28 days after the last dose. Prophylaxis and treatment of GI TEAEs were allowed but not mandatory. RESULTS: In all, 236 patients received CC-486 and were evaluated for safety. The median age at study entry was 68 years (range 55-86), 202 patients (85.6%) had intermediate-risk cytogenetics at diagnosis, 185 (78.4%) had achieved CR after induction, and 184 (78.0%) received ≥1 course of consolidation before randomization. Overall, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea (any grade) were reported in 65%, 60%, and 50%, respectively, of patients treated with CC-486. Few patients experienced grade 3 TEAEs (nausea, 3%; vomiting, 3%; diarrhea, 5%) or serious events (0.4%, 0.8%, and 1.3%, respectively), and only 1 grade 4 event (diarrhea) was reported at any time on-study. Rates of GI TEAEs were highest during initial treatment and decreased thereafter. In cycles 1-2, 3-4, and 5-6, respectively, nausea was reported in 53%, 17%, and 15% of patients; vomiting in 49%, 15%, and 10% of patients; and diarrhea in 29%, 16%, and 11% of patients (Figure). The most commonly used concomitant GI medications were 5-HT3 antagonists, metoclopramide, lactulose, and loperamide; use of these agents was also highest during the first 2 treatment cycles and decreased over time (Figure). GI events required CC-486 treatment interruptions for 13% of patients, dose-reductions for 6% of patients, and treatment discontinuation for 5% of patients. DISCUSSION: Most GI-related TEAEs reported by patients treated with CC-486 were low-grade, and events decreased in frequency after initial treatment cycles, indicating these events were well managed. Use of GI medications decreased concurrently, suggesting progressive GI tolerance to CC-486 with continued therapy. Few patients discontinued CC-486 due to GI TEAEs. Prophylaxis and symptomatic intervention of GI events during early CC-486 therapy may facilitate treatment adherence to promote better outcomes. Disclosures Ravandi: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Orsenix: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Xencor: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Selleslag:Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Belgian College: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Sayar:Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Safah:Amgen: Honoraria; Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Hiwase:Novartis Australia: Research Funding. La Torre:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Skikne:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Kumar:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Dong:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Beach:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Dombret:Otsuka: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Nova: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Menarini: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Cellectis: Consultancy; Shire-Baxalta: Consultancy; Immunogen: Consultancy.

Analysis of Outcomes of Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia Treated in Randomized Clinical Trials

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4000-4000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raffi Tchekmedyian ◽  
Paul Elson ◽  
Aaron T. Gerds ◽  
Navneet Majhail ◽  
Hetty E. Carraway ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
The Past ◽  
American Society ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Introduction The major reasons for failure to achieve cure in the majority of AML patients (pts) are primary refractoriness of disease to initial chemotherapy or failure to maintain complete remission (CR) that has been achieved (relapse). There is no uniformly accepted standard treatment for relapsed or refractory (RR) AML, with most available therapies regarded as palliative or as a bridge to allogeneic transplantation. While the past two decades have witnessed trials of several investigational therapies in RR AML, data regarding the effectiveness of these interventions remains unclear. We studied the impact of experimental drugs in RR AML pts by undertaking a comprehensive analysis of all phase 2 and 3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) reported in the past 3 decades. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register electronic databases, ClinicalTrials.gov and conference abstracts from the American Society of Hematology (ASH), American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and European Hematology Association (EHA) websites covering a period from 1988 to 2015. Key words used during this search included "refractory" or "relapsed" or "AML" or "phase II" or "phase III" or "randomized". Only double-arm, phase II with a sample size of at least 50 pts and phase III RCTs conducted in RR AML pts were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data on study methods, participants, therapies, and outcomes from all eligible trials: differences in how to classify agents in RCTs were resolved by discussion. The primary outcomes examined in the experimental arms (EAs) and standard arms (SAs) included CR rates, disease-free survival (DFS), refractory disease rates, treatment-related mortality (TRM) rates and overall survival (OS). Odds ratios (OR) were used to summarize differences between EAs and SAs. The DerSimonian and Laird random-effects model was used to compare them and to assess the overall impact of time. Results Of 5500 included pts, 40.5% were treated on 21 double-arm, phase II trials, 51% on 10 phase III trials and 6.6% analyzed through 4 retrospective studies. There was no change in CR rates in either EAs (p=.21) or SAs (p=.15) over time (Figure 1). The CR rates in EAs tended to be higher than in SAs [OR=1.24; 95% CI, 1.02-1.50, p=.03). Rates of disease refractoriness to salvage regimens in both EAs (p=.70) and CAs (p=.31) did not change over time and these rates were not significantly different between treatment arms [OR=0.82; 95% CI, 0.62-1.08, p=.16]. TRM rates tended to decrease over time but the change was not significant in either group [p=.24 for SAs and p=.33 for EAs]. TRM rates were higher in SAs compared to CAs but did not reach statistical significance [OR=1.21; 95% CI, 0.97-1.50, p=.09]. Over time, there was no significant change inDFS in either group (p=.32 for CAs and p=.58 for EAs). DFS rates did not differ between EAs and SAs [OR=1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.19, p=.89] (Figure 2). OS tended to remain stable over time in both groups [p=.85 for SAs and p=.66 for EAs]. While OS tended to be higher in SAs, it did not reach statistical significance [OR=0.93; 95% CI, 0.83-1.05, p=.27]. Conclusions: These findings indicate a lack of significant or clinically meaningful improvement in disease outcomes, including OS, in RR AML pts treated within RCTs over the past 3 decades. Greater efforts need to be directed towards designing RCTs using novel statistical approaches and directed agents based on recent discoveries of targetable mutations. Disclosures Carraway: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Advani:Pfizer Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Blinatumomab: Research Funding. Sekeres:Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mukherjee:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

CC-486 Reduces Hospitalization and Associated Estimated Costs in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) in First Remission after Intensive Chemotherapy: Results from the QUAZAR AML-001 Maintenance Trial

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 14-15
Author(s):  
Esther Natalie Oliva ◽  
Suman Kambhampati ◽  
Albert Oriol ◽  
Ignazia La Torre ◽  
Barry Skikne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cumulative Cost ◽  
Hospitalization Costs ◽  
First Remission ◽  
The Mean

BACKGROUND: AML is an aggressive malignancy primarily affecting older individuals. Although 40%-60% of patients (pts) aged >60 years attain complete remission (CR) with IC, 80%-90% of them eventually relapse. In the continuum of AML care, the greatest expenditures are associated with relapsed/refractory disease, and hospitalization is the largest component (~70%) of direct AML healthcare costs (Pandya, 2020). In the randomized, phase III QUAZAR AML-001 Maintenance Trial, CC-486, an oral hypomethylating agent, significantly prolonged overall (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) vs. placebo (PBO) in pts with newly diagnosed (ND) AML in first remission following IC. OBJECTIVE: Determine rates of hospitalization and days in hospital with CC-486 and PBO in QUAZAR AML-001, and quantify associated costs of hospitalization using unit costs estimated from a US claims database. METHODS: In QUAZAR AML-001, eligible pts were age ≥55 years, with de novo or secondary AML, intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics, and ECOG PS ≤3; achieved first CR or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) after IC ± consolidation; and were not candidates for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Within 4 months of CR/CRi, pts were randomized 1:1 to CC-486 300 mg or PBO, administered once-daily on days 1-14 of repeated 28-day cycles. Pts who received ≥1 dose of study drug were followed for hospitalizations and durations of stay from date of informed consent through 28 days after last dose. The mean number of days hospitalized per month (30 days) in each treatment arm was computed by dividing the aggregate number of hospitalized days by the number of ongoing pts at each time-point. Rates of hospitalization and days in hospital were also adjusted for duration of CC-486 and PBO exposure. 95% confidence intervals (CI) for relative risk (RR) estimates and associated P values are based on asymptotic methods. Patients with a primary diagnosis of AML, preceded by ≥6 months (baseline) without a claim for AML were identified in the IBM MarketScan Commercial & Medicare database from April 2013 to July 2019. A stepwise procedure was then used to include pts aged ≥55 years at diagnosis, without a diagnosis of another primary cancer or HSCT, and with insurance coverage during the entire 6-month baseline period. Unit cost of hospitalization was derived as the average total AML-related hospitalization costs incurred per day of stay, adjusted for inflation to 2019 US dollars. RESULTS: In all, 469 pts were enrolled in QUAZAR AML-001 and received CC-486 (N=236) or PBO (N=233). Total exposure to CC-486 was 363.8 pt-years (PY) and to PBO was 234.9 PY. In all, 108 pts (45.8%) in the CC-486 arm and 118 (50.6%) in the PBO arm were hospitalized. The total numbers of hospitalizations were 173 in the CC-486 arm and 151 in the PBO arm; however, the exposure-adjusted rate of hospitalization was significantly lower in the CC-486 arm: 0.48/PY vs. 0.64/PY, respectively (RR 0.740 [95%CI 0.595, 0.920]; P = 0.0068) (Table). The total number of days hospitalized was 2872 in the CC-486 arm and 3139 in the PBO arm, and the exposure-adjusted days-in-hospital rate was significantly lower in the CC-486 arm (7.89/PY vs. 13.36/PY in the PBO arm; RR 0.591 [95%CI 0.562, 0.621]; P < 0.0001) (Table). Of the ND-AML cohort identified in the MarketScan database, 3058 pts had ≥ 1 noncapitated hospitalization and provided the basis for estimated hospitalization-related costs. Median age and sex distribution of these pts were generally consistent with those of pts in QUAZAR AML-001. The mean AML-related hospitalization cost incurred in the database was $7,126/day (2019 USD). Thus, based on exposure-adjusted days-in-hospital rates in the CC-486 and PBO arms (7.89/PY and 13.36/PY, respectively), the estimated mean costs of hospitalization in QUAZAR AML-001 were $56,224/PY in the CC-486 arm and $95,201/PY in the PBO arm. Cumulative cost savings in the CC-486 arm compared with PBO ranged from $2,837 in month 2 to $40,909 by month 24 (Figure). CONCLUSION: CC-486 was associated with significantly reduced exposure-adjusted risk of hospitalization and days in hospital compared with PBO, which are estimated to result in substantial cumulative cost savings. Significantly prolonged RFS with CC-486 vs. PBO in this study (10.2 vs. 4.8 months; P = 0.0001) may translate into substantial economic benefits, with lower hospitalization-related costs due to reduced rates of hospitalization and days in hospital. Disclosures Oliva: Alexion: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Speakers Bureau. Oriol:Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. La Torre:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Skikne:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Beach:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Kumar:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Dong:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Chen:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ranjan:SmartAnalyst India Pvt. Ltd.: Current Employment. Kiendrebeogo:SmartAnalyst, Inc.: Current Employment. Braun:Servier: Research Funding; Daiichy-Sankyo: Honoraria.

The Use of Chemoimmunotherapy Improves the Outcome of Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia (CLL) – a Metaanalysis of Five Trials of the German CLL Study Group (GCLLSG)

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3936-3936
Author(s):  
Paula Cramer ◽  
Susanne Isfort ◽  
Jasmin Bahlo ◽  
Raymonde Busch ◽  
Petra Langerbeins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Initial Treatment ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Cytotoxic Agents ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Travel Grant

Abstract Abstract 3936 Introduction: A substantial improvement of treatment outcomes in patients with CLL was achieved during the last decades, but almost all patients (pts) eventually relapse. According to ESMO-guidelines, a repetition of 1st-line therapy is a reasonable approach in case of a relapse >24 months after initial treatment [Eichhorst et al., Ann Oncol., 2011]. This recommendation has not yet been confirmed by clinical trials and little is known which therapy should be chosen in case of an earlier relapse. Methods: 1558 pts treated in five prospective trials of the GCLLSG were included in the analysis. Three randomised phase-III-trials for 1st-line treatment evaluated fludarabine (F) vs. F + cyclophosphamide (FC) [CLL4], chlorambucile (Clb) vs. F [CLL5] and FC without or with rituximab (FCR) [CLL8]. Two trials were designed for both 1st-line and relapse treatment and tested FC + alemtuzumab (FCC) [CLL2L] as well as bendamustine + rituximab (BR) [CLL2M]. For statistical analyses Kaplan-Meier estimators and curves, as well as log-rank tests were used. Results: Most common 1st-line therapies were those tested in the above mentioned five GCLLSG-trials: 588 pts received FC (38%), 402 pts FCR (26%), 299 pts F (19%), 134 pts Clb with/without steroids (9%) and 116 pts BR (7%). Treatment-free (TFS) and overall survival (OS) were shorter in pts treated with Clb, F or FC in comparison to patients treated with FCR or BR chemoimmunotherapy (see figure 1). So far, 704 of 1558 pts received 2nd-line treatment for progressive CLL. These 2nd-line therapies were quite heterogeneous, most common regimen were: FC (79 pts, 11%), BR (75 pts, 11%), F (65 pts, 9%), B with/without steroids (63 pts, 9%), CHOP-R (56 pts, 8%), Clb with/without steroids (55pts, 8%), FCR (54 pts, 8%), as well as alemtuzumab with/without steroids (43 pts, 6%) and FCC (32 pts, 5%). Patients treated with antibody-based regimen had a significantly longer OS than patients never treated with antibodies (OS after 60 months: 76% vs 64%, p<0,001). However, the timepoint of administration of the antibody (1st-line vs. ≥2nd-line treatment) appeared to be less important. 315 pts requiring a 2nd-line therapy within 24 months after initial treatment were identified. Treatment regimen were heterogeneous, most common therapies were the combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicine, vincristine, and prednisolone either with rituximab (R-CHOP, n=32) or without (CHOP, n=24) and alemtuzumab (n=27). Treatment regimens were summarized to 3 different groups: therapies containing an antibody with/without <3 cytotoxic agents, single-agent chemotherapies, and therapies containing anthracyclines and/or ≥3 cytotoxic agents. TFS for all three groups was 24.5, 18.7 and 16.4 months (p=0.009) and OS was 78.3, 58.2, and 42.0 months (p=0.012). Aside from a higher median age in the single-agent chemotherapy group no differences in other baseline-characteristics were found. Conclusion: This metaanalysis confirms that the use of monoclonal antibodies in 1st-line and relapse therapy leads to a prolongation of TFS and OS. In patients with a relapse ≤24 months, the use of standard-chemoimmunotherapies or single-agent alemtuzumab seems to be more efficient compared to therapies that contain ≥3 cytotoxic agents and/or anthracyclines (e.g. R-CHOP, CHOP or FCM). In addition, the poor outcome of early relapsing patients underscores the need for alternative treatment approaches with either allogeneic stem cell transplantation or use of novel drugs in order to further improve the survival of these pts. Disclosures: Cramer: Roche: Travel grant Other; Mundipharma: Travel grant, Travel grant Other. Bahlo:Roche: Honoraria. Fink:Roche: Travel grant Other. Goede:Roche: Honoraria, Travel grant Other. Elter:Roche: Honoraria, Travel grant Other. Stilgenbauer:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Wendtner:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Fischer:Roche: Honoraria, travel grants Other; Mundipharma: Honoraria. Hallek:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Eichhorst:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Mortality of Patients with Multiple Myeloma after the Introduction of Novel Therapies in the United States

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 72-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
Moritz Binder ◽  
Bharat Nandakumar ◽  
Morie A Gertz ◽  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Martha Q. Lacy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Excess Mortality ◽  
Early Mortality ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Bottom Left ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Age And Sex

Introduction: Advances in the understanding of disease biology, the introduction of new drugs, and better supportive care have improved outcomes in multiple myeloma (MM). Most improvements have been observed in clinical trial and tertiary referral center populations but questions remain about the generalizability of these findings to patients treated in the community. Methods: We studied all patients diagnosed with MM between 01/01/2001 and 12/31/2015 who had complete demographic and overall survival (OS) data available and were seen at Mayo Clinic (MAYO) or followed in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER, 18 registry data 2000 - 2016, 11/2018 submission). We retrieved age at diagnosis, sex, date of diagnosis, date of last follow-up, and OS for all patients. OS was defined as the time from diagnosis to death from any cause. Patients who were alive at the end of follow-up (12/31/ 2016) were censored. OS estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Age- and sex-adjusted Cox models were used to assess the association between the 5-year interval of diagnosis and OS. Expected OS estimates were calculated based on United States general population rate tables (Human Mortality Database) using a conditional approach. Standardized mortality ratios (SMR) were calculated by dividing the number of observed deaths by the number of expected deaths in age- and sex-matched general United States population controls. Linear regression models were fit to test for linear trends in early mortality and SMR over time (per 5-year interval). P-values below 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Results: The median age at diagnosis was 3 years lower in patients at MAYO (64 years, 15% ≥ 75 years, 60% male, n = 3293) compared to SEER (67 years, 29% ≥ 75 years, 55% male, n = 61779). After a median follow-up of 2.8 years the median OS was longer in MAYO compared to SEER (5.4 versus 4.0 years, HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.78 - 0.86, p &lt; 0.001) and remained statistically significant after adjusting for age and sex (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86 - 0.95, p &lt; 0.001). Early mortality (1-year mortality) decreased between 2001-2005 and 2011-2015: From 20% to 11% at MAYO and from 26% to 19% in SEER. When grouping OS by year of diagnosis (in 5-year-intervals) improvements were seen in both populations (A) and remained statistically significant after adjusting for age and sex. The relative improvements were similar comparing the 5-year period after the introduction of the novel therapies (2006 - 2010) to 2001 - 2005 and more pronounced in MAYO for the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015, A). This trend was reflected in a steady temporal improvement in 5-year OS estimates in MAYO including the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015, B bottom left). In SEER there was a comparable increase between the first two 5-year intervals but a lesser improvement in more recently (2011 - 2015, B bottom left). A diagnosis of MM remained associated with significant excess mortality in all age groups over time in both populations (B top). There was a decrease in excess mortality over time at MAYO (SMR decline per 5-year interval 1.3, 95% CI 0.9 - 1.8, p &lt; 0.001) while there was little change in SEER (SMR decline 0.0, 95% CI -0.3 - 0.3, p = 0.917, B bottom right). Further stratifying by age at diagnosis, the decrease in excess mortality was observed mostly in patients &lt; 75 years at MAYO (SMR decline per 5-year interval 1.7, 95% CI 1.5 - 2.0, p &lt; 0.001, C bottom left) and to a lesser extent in older patients (SMR decline 0.4, 95% CI 0.2 - 0.6, p &lt; 0.001, C bottom right). No such trends towards improvement were observed in either age group in SEER (C bottom). In older patients, early mortality remained approximately 30% in both populations despite continued improvements, while the 5-year OS estimates for the most recent 5-year interval (2011 - 2015) were 37% at MAYO and 26% in SEER (C top). Conclusions: Both early mortality and long-term survival have improved over time. Reductions in excess mortality were largely confined to younger patients with access to specialized care. Patients ≥ 75 years represent more than a quarter of all patients in the community, a third of them died within one year of the diagnosis, and only one in four was alive five years later. Older patients with MM remain a vulnerable population and have derived only limited benefit from recent advances in the field. Safe and effective therapies for older patients with MM remain an unmet need. Figure Disclosures Gertz: Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Appellis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Alnylam: Research Funding; Akcea: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Maurer:Nanostring: Research Funding; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Leung:Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Trial in Progress: The Phase III, Randomized, Open-Label, Multicenter COMMODORE 2 Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Crovalimab Versus Eculizumab in Adult and Adolescent Patients with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria Not Previously Treated with Complement Inhibitors

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 34-34
Author(s):  
Austin Kulasekararaj ◽  
Guangsheng He ◽  
Talha Munir ◽  
Jeffrey Pu ◽  
Antonio Risitano ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Medical Writing ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Complement Inhibitors ◽  
Previously Treated

Background Crovalimab is a novel anti-human complement component 5 (C5) antibody engineered to significantly extend half-life and enable subcutaneous (SC) administration once every 4 weeks in C5-mediated diseases. Based on the promising results of the Phase I/II COMPOSER trial (NCT03157635; Röth et al. Blood. 2020), crovalimab is currently under investigation as a potential therapy for paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), a life-threatening disorder characterized by hemolytic anemia and thrombosis. Eculizumab and ravulizumab are C5 inhibitors currently approved for the treatment of patients with PNH, yet treatment limitations include breakthrough hemolysis due to unsustained C5 inhibition, lack of efficacy in patients with C5 mutational variants, and the treatment burden of regular intravenous (IV) infusions. Study Design and Methods The Phase III, randomized, open-label, active-controlled, multicenter COMMODORE 2 study (NCT04434092) is evaluating the efficacy and safety of crovalimab compared with eculizumab in patients aged ≥ 12 years with PNH not previously treated with complement inhibitors. Patients are randomized 2:1 to receive crovalimab or eculizumab (Figure 1). Two hundred patients in the crovalimab arm will receive a loading series of crovalimab (IV dose on Day 1, followed by weekly SC doses for 4 weeks starting on Day 2). This is followed by SC maintenance dosing every 4 weeks starting at Week 5. Patients in the eculizumab arm receive a weekly IV loading dose of eculizumab for the first 4 weeks, followed by IV maintenance dosing starting at Week 5 and then once every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. After 24 weeks of treatment, patients can continue crovalimab or switch from eculizumab to crovalimab if their physician determines this is in their best interest. The primary efficacy objective of COMMODORE 2 is to evaluate the noninferiority of crovalimab compared with eculizumab based on the co-primary endpoints of (1) the proportion of patients who achieve transfusion avoidance and (2) the proportion of patients with hemolysis control. Secondary efficacy objectives are to evaluate the noninferiority of crovalimab compared with eculizumab in regard to the (1) proportion of patients who experience breakthrough hemolysis, (2) proportion of patients who achieve stabilization of hemoglobin, and (3) mean change in fatigue, as assessed by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue questionnaire. The safety objective is to evaluate the safety and tolerability of crovalimab compared with eculizumab based on the incidence and severity of adverse events, including infections (meningococcal meningitis and other infections), injection-site reactions, infusion-related reactions, hypersensitivity, and adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation. Pharmacokinetic, immunogenicity, biomarker, and health status utility objectives will also be assessed. Disclosures Kulasekararaj: Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. He:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; LongBio Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Munir:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland; Alexion: Honoraria. Pu:SUNY Upstate Medical University: Current Employment; Pennsylvania State University: Patents & Royalties; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. Risitano:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biocryst: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amyndas: Consultancy; Samsung: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Achillion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Apellis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; RA pharma: Research Funding. Röth:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Apellis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Biocryst: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sima:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. Appius:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. Sostelly:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Other: All authors received support for third-party writing assistance, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.. Sreckovic:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Other: All authors received support for third-party writing assistance, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.. Vignal:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. Nishimura:Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Medical writing support, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, of Health Interactions, was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland.

scholarly journals Recil 2017 Criteria Demonstrated Similar Prognostic Value and Detected a Comparable Treatment Difference between Obinutuzumab- and Rituximab-Chemotherapy Compared with Cheson 2007 and Lugano 2014 Criteria in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced-Stage Follicular Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 25-26
Author(s):  
Lale Kostakoglu ◽  
Andrew Davies ◽  
Michael Herold ◽  
Wolfgang Hiddemann ◽  
Robert Marcus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
High Concordance ◽  
Dimensional Assessment

Introduction: Lugano 2014 criteria are the current standard for response assessment in lymphoma and incorporate 18F fludeoxyglucose (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography (CT) into standard staging of FDG-avid lymphomas (Cheson, et al. J Clin Oncol 2014); bi-dimensional tumor measurements of up to six CT target lesions are used for non-FDG avid lymphomas, and when PET is unavailable. The Response Evaluation Criteria in Lymphoma (RECIL), developed more recently, showed that uni-dimensional measurements of up to three target lesions could provide response assessment at a similar accuracy to the Lugano criteria (Younes, et al. Annals Oncol 2017). In the Phase III GOYA trial (NCT01287741), complete response (CR) status by RECIL criteria showed high concordance with Lugano criteria and was highly prognostic for survival outcome in previously untreated patients (pts) with CD20-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma treated with obinutuzumab (G) plus chemotherapy (G-chemo) or rituximab (R)-chemo. Here, we compared the prognostic and predictive performance of the Lugano and RECIL criteria in pts from the Phase III GALLIUM trial (NCT01332968). Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive G or R plus CHOP, CVP, or bendamustine (stratification factors: chemotherapy regimen, Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index and geographic region). FDG-PET scans were mandatory in the first 170 pts where a PET scanner was available, and optional thereafter, and were performed at screening and end of induction (EOI). Response was assessed by the investigator (INV) and an independent review committee (IRC) using Cheson 2007 criteria, the IRC also assessed EOI response using Lugano 2014 criteria. Response and progression-free survival (PFS) by RECIL 2017 criteria were retrospectively evaluated via a programming algorithm based on IRC-assessed 5PS scores and the individual lesion measurements from INV assessment. Response categories at EOI by RECIL criteria were cross-tabulated against those by Lugano criteria. Estimates of the treatment effect for PFS were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using stratified log-rank tests. Landmark analyses of PFS and overall survival (OS) from EOI, by EOI CR/non-CR status were performed. The impact of covariates on the prognostic value for PFS and OS were analyzed using multivariable Cox models. Results: In GALLIUM, 1202 pts with follicular lymphoma (FL) were enrolled (601 per treatment arm), of which 595 had PET evaluable data (R-chemo, n=298; G-chemo, n=297). High concordance between Lugano and RECIL criteria for EOI CR was observed regardless of antibody received, with 416 pts classified as CR by RECIL among the 450 pts achieving complete metabolic response (CMR) by Lugano (416/450 [92.4%]; R-chemo, 199/216 [92.1%]; G-chemo, 217/234 [92.7%]) (Table). However, poor concordance was seen for progressive disease (PD), with 18/21 (85.7%) pts with progressive metabolic disease by Lugano classified as partial/minimal responders by RECIL. A strong correlation was observed between Cheson 2007 and RECIL PFS definitions, with a kappa estimate of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.58-0.69). EOI CR status by RECIL showed prognostic value by Cox multivariable regression analysis adjusted for stratification factors for PFS and OS; this prognostic value was similar with Lugano criteria (Figure). PFS rate by treatment arm for pts with a CR/CMR was higher by RECIL versus Lugano for both R-chemo and G-chemo (PFS rate at 3 years from EOI: RECIL: 86.0% and 89.7%; Lugano: 76.4% and 85.0%, respectively); similar results were seen with OS. G-chemo was associated with improved RECIL-PFS (from randomization) compared with R-chemo (HR, 0.72; 95% CI: 0.57-0.91; p=0.0069), similar to the GALLIUM 5-year updated analysis results by Cheson 2007 (HR, 0.76; 95% CI: 0.62-0.92; p=0.0043) (Townsend, et al. ASCO 2020). Conclusions: RECIL 2017 criteria showed high concordance with Lugano 2014 criteria with EOI CR strongly prognostic for improved outcomes versus non-CR; however, a discordance was observed for PD. A similar treatment difference between arms for PFS was detected with RECIL and Cheson 2007 criteria. RECIL criteria (uni-dimensional assessment of up to three target lesions) may be a suitable alternative to Lugano criteria (bi-dimensional assessment of up to six target lesions) in pts with previously untreated advanced-stage FL. Disclosures Kostakoglu: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy. Davies:Roche, Celgene, Kite Pharma, Acerta, Karyopharma, Regeneron, Incyte: Consultancy; Roche, Acerta Pharma, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Gilead, ADC Therapeutics, Gilead: Research Funding; Celegene, Roche, Kite Pharma, Celegene: Honoraria; Roche: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES. Herold:Helios Klinikum Erfurt: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding. Hiddemann:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Marcus:Gilead: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Trotman:Celgene: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; PCYC: Research Funding. Knapp:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment. Mattiello:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment. Nielsen:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sahin:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ward:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Younes:AstraZeneca: Current Employment; MSKCC: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Janssen, Curis, Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Syndax Pharmaceuticals, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Curis (Inst), Johnson & Johnson (Inst), Novartis (Inst): Research Funding; Janssen, AbbVie, Merck, Curis, Epizyme, F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Takeda, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Celgene, Incyte, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Takeda Millennium: Honoraria; BioPath, Xynomic, Epizyme, and F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Frontline Brentuximab Vedotin As Monotherapy or in Combination for Older Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 18-19
Author(s):  
Christopher A. Yasenchak ◽  
Rodolfo Bordoni ◽  
Dipti Patel-Donnelly ◽  
Timothy Larson ◽  
Jerome Goldschmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Brentuximab Vedotin ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Part C

Introduction: Older patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) have poor outcomes relative to younger patients, often due to comorbidities and toxicities related to standard first-line (1L) chemotherapy (5-yr PFS: 30%-45% vs 75%-80%) (Evens 2008; Proctor 2009). Brentuximab vedotin (BV), a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate, has robust activity in patients refractory to several lines of chemotherapy. Methods: This phase 2, open-label study, SGN35-015 (NCT01716806), evaluated efficacy and tolerability of BV alone or combined with single-agents in treatment-naive cHL patients ≥60 yr. The full-analysis set (FAS) includes all patients who received BV (1.8 mg/kg IV). Patients in Part A received BV monotherapy on Day 1 of every 3-week cycle (n=26); Part B: BV+dacarbazine (DTIC; 375 mg/m2; n=19); Part C: BV+bendamustine (benda; 70 mg/m2; n=20); and Part D: BV+nivolumab (nivo; 3 mg/kg; n=20). The efficacy evaluable (EE) set includes FAS who had at least 1 post-baseline response assessment (n=25, 19, 17, 19). Results: Demographic characteristics were generally similar: median age 78, 69, 75, and 72 yr in Parts A, B, C, and D, respectively, and 62% of patients (range 45%-70%) reported impaired physical functioning at baseline. Most patients had disease stage III/IV (62%, 68%, 75%, 80%), were ECOG 0/1 (77%, 74%, 80%, 95%), and male (54%, 68%, 50%, 75%). Median time from diagnosis was 1.2 to 1.5 mo (FAS; 10 Jan 2020 data cutoff). ORR were high (92% [95% CI: 74%, 99%], 100% [95% CI: 82.4%, 100%], 100% [95% CI: 80.5%, 100%], 95% [95% CI: 74%, 99.9%]) at a median follow-up of 59.4, 58.6, 51.3, and 19.4 mo in the EE data set. Median PFS in the EE set was 10.5 mo (95% CI: 5.6, 77.5) with monotherapy and 46.8 mo (95% CI: 11.0, 68.7), 40.3 mo (95% CI: 4.8, NR), and not reached (95% CI: 9.4, NR) in the combination parts. Median OS in the FAS set was 77.5 mo (95% CI: 40.1, NR) with monotherapy; 64.0 (95% CI: 53.4, NR), 46.9 (95% CI: 6.8, NR), and not reached (95% CI: NR, NR) in the combination parts. Treatment-related adverse event (AE) ≥ Grade 3 occurred in 50%, 37%, 70%, and 60% of patients; peripheral neuropathy (PN) was most common (35%, 26%, 20%, 35%). Treatment-related serious AEs occurred in 12%, 11%, 40%, and 5% of patients. Part C enrollment (BV+benda) closed early due to multiple acute toxicities. There were no treatment-related deaths in any part of the study. The median treatment cycles per patient were 8.0, 12.0, 5.0, and 14.5. Treatment discontinuation due to related AEs occurred in 42%, 42%, 40%, and 30% of patients, most commonly due to PN (38%, 37%, 30%, 20%). Conclusions: Older patients with cHL and multiple comorbidities have very high response rates and a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS with BV as monotherapy or combined with other single agents and improved tolerability versus combination chemotherapy. Median overall survival exceeded 6 yrs with BV monotherapy. BV+nivo or BV+DTIC appeared to be the most reasonable combination treatment options in this study. Disclosures Yasenchak: BeiGene: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria. Bordoni:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Guardant Health: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expenses, Patents & Royalties; Northside Hospital Cancer Institute: Other: Uncompensated relationship; Practice Point Communications: Other: Uncompensated relationship; Foundation Medicine: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; G1 Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Patel-Donnelly:Gilead: Research Funding; Boston Biomedical: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding. Goldschmidt:Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Blue Ridge Cancer Care: Current Employment. Boccia:Rigel: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cline:Pfizer: Honoraria; Reflexion Medical: Consultancy, Other: Travel expenses; Texas Oncology: Current Employment. Sacchi:Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Current Employment. Forero-Torres:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sims:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: Travel expenses. Liu:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Friedberg:Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Portola Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma - A member of the AstraZeneca Group, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.: Other; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Use of Endpoints in Phase III Randomized Controlled Trials for Acute Myeloid Leukemia over the Last 15 Years: A Systematic Review

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4389-4389
Author(s):  
Moazzam Shahzad ◽  
Muhammad Arslan ◽  
Sibgha Gull Chaudhary ◽  
Raheel S Siddiqui ◽  
Ezza Tariq ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

Abstract Background: The use of objective endpoints is critical for the generalization and clinical implications of a study. Overall survival (OS) has traditionally been used as the gold standard for demonstrating the true clinical benefit of therapy or intervention. We systematically evaluated the proportion of different primary and secondary endpoints used in phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and their trends over time. Methods: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines, a comprehensive literature search was conducted on three databases (PubMed, Cochrane, and Clinical trials.gov) using MeSH terms and keywords for "Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute" AND "Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic" from January 2006 to March 2021. We screened 3290 articles. After excluding duplicates, reviews, and irrelevant articles, 241 articles reporting only phase III RCTs with primary and secondary endpoints on AML or its subtypes were included for our systematic review. Primary and secondary endpoints data were extracted from the included studies, and the frequency of various endpoints as well as their yearly frequencies were calculated. Disease-free survival (DFS) was used to represent similar outcomes including event-free survival (EFS), progression-free survival (PFS), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and relapse-free survival (RFS). Results: Our study included 241 phase III RCTs on AML. OS was the primary endpoint in 114 (47%) studies, while DFS and complete remission (CR) were reported as primary endpoints in 67 (28%) and 41 (17%) studies, respectively. Safety/adverse events, relapse rate (RR), graft versus host disease (GvHD) free survival, hematological improvement (HI), minimal residual disease (MRD), and non-relapse mortality (NRM) were used as primary endpoints in 10 (4%), 8 (3%), 5 (2%), 4 (2%), 3 (1%), and 2 (1%) studies respectively. Incidence of hospitalization, fungal disease, lung infiltrates, chronic GvHD, and allogeneic stem cell transplant each were used as primary endpoints in 1 (0.4%) study. (Table 1) Secondary endpoints followed a similar pattern as detailed in Table 2. OS (n=74, 31%), DFS (n=77, 32%) and CR (n=73, 30%) were commonly reported secondary endpoints. Safety/adverse effects, RR, mortality, quality of life (QoL), HI, MRD, incidence/length of hospitalization, and acute/chronic GvHD were used as secondary endpoints in 35 (14.5%), 15 (6%), 13 (5%), 9 (4%), 9 (4%), 7 (3%), 7 (3%), 5 (2%), and 4 (2%) studies, respectively. After 2013, increase in the use of OS (31% to 52%) and CR (15% to 17%) as a primary endpoint was noted, while the use of DFS as a primary endpoint decreased from 52% to 21%. (Table 1) For secondary endpoints, a higher trend in the use of DFS (19% to 35%) and OS (31% to 45%) and a lower trend in the use of CR (35% to 29%) was observed after 2013. (Table 2) Conclusion: Overall survival and disease-free survival were the most used primary and secondary endpoints in phase III randomized controlled trials for AML. There has been an increase in the use of clinically meaningful and objective endpoint of OS over the past 15 years in AML phase III RCTs. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Yacoub: Cara: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Dynavex: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; ACCELERON PHARMA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ardelyx: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Hylapharm: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lin: AbbVie, Aptevo Therapeutics, Astellas Pharma, Bio-Path Holdings, Celgene, Celyad, Genentech-Roche, Gilead Sciences, Incyte, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Prescient Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Tolero, Trovagene: Research Funding. McGuirk: Pluristem Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Allovir: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; EcoR1 Capital: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite/ Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expense, Kite a Gilead company, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Astelllas Pharma: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Two Currently Recruiting Randomized Phase III Trials: COMMODORE 1 and 2 Evaluating Crovalimab Vs Eculizumab in Patients with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria with or without Current Anti-Complement Therapy

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4313-4313
Author(s):  
Austin G. Kulasekararaj ◽  
Antonio Risitano ◽  
Alexander Roeth ◽  
Guangsheng He ◽  
Jeffrey Pu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Primary Efficacy ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Efficacy Analysis ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Primary Efficacy Analysis

Abstract Background Crovalimab is a novel anti-complement C5 antibody currently being studied as a treatment for paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), a life-threatening disease associated with hemolytic anemia and thrombosis. Treatment with approved C5 inhibitors eculizumab or ravulizumab is effective, but can be limited by breakthrough hemolysis due to unsustained C5 inhibition, inadequate efficacy in patients with C5 mutational variants, and the requirement of regular intravenous infusions. Crovalimab is unique in that its properties allow for subcutaneous injections once every 4 weeks (Q4W) that can be self-administered. Additionally, crovalimab binds to C5 mutational variants. Promising results were obtained in the Phase I/II COMPOSER trial (NCT03157635; Röth et al, Blood. 2020) conducted in patients with PNH, with or without prior anti-C5 treatment. The efficacy and safety of crovalimab vs eculizumab will be evaluated in two Phase III, randomized, open-label trials in patients with PNH, with or without current complement C5 inhibition. Study Design and Methods COMMODORE 1 (NCT04432584) will enroll patients who are currently receiving complement C5 inhibitor therapy. This trial is divided into two parts (Figure). Patients aged ≥ 18 years will be randomized 1:1 to receive either crovalimab (Arm A) or eculizumab (Arm B) and will contribute to the primary efficacy analysis. Patients aged &lt; 18 years can be enrolled in an exploratory descriptive arm (Arm C). Arm A and C patients will receive crovalimab loading and subsequent subcutaneous Q4W maintenance dosing from Week 5. Arm B patients will receive eculizumab intravenous maintenance dosing from Day 1, Q2W for a total of 24 weeks. Patients in Arm A and Arm C can continue to receive crovalimab, and patients in Arm B can switch to crovalimab after 24 weeks of treatment, as determined by the treating physician. The primary efficacy objective is to determine the non-inferiority of crovalimab vs eculizumab based on percentage change in lactate dehydrogenase levels from baseline, averaged over weeks 21, 23, and 25. Secondary efficacy objectives are to determine the proportion of patients who experience breakthrough hemolysis, achieve transfusion avoidance or hemoglobin stabilization, as well as determine mean change in fatigue according to the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Fatigue questionnaire from baseline to Week 25. Safety and tolerability of crovalimab vs eculizumab will also be evaluated along with pharmacokinetic, immunogenicity, biomarker, and health status utility objectives. COMMODORE 2 (NCT04434092) will enroll patients not currently treated with C5 complement inhibitors. This trial is also divided into two parts (Figure). Patients aged ≥ 18 years will be randomized 2:1 to receive either crovalimab (Arm A) or eculizumab (Arm B) and will contribute to the primary efficacy analysis. Patients aged &lt; 18 years will be enrolled in an exploratory descriptive arm (Arm C). Arm A and C patients will receive crovalimab loading and subsequent subcutaneous Q4W maintenance dosing from Week 5. Arm B patients will receive induction doses of eculizumab intravenously QW for 4 weeks followed by maintenance dosing Q2W up to 24 weeks. Patients in Arm A and Arm C can continue to receive crovalimab, and patients in Arm B can switch to crovalimab, after 24 weeks of treatment, as determined by the treating physician. The primary efficacy objective is to determine the non-inferiority of crovalimab vs eculizumab, based on the proportion of patients who 1) achieve transfusion avoidance from baseline to Week 25 and 2) with hemolysis control from Week 5-25 (co-primary efficacy endpoints). Safety and tolerability of crovalimab vs eculizumab will also be evaluated along with pharmacokinetic, immunogenicity, biomarker, and health status utility objectives. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kulasekararaj: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Apellis: Consultancy; Akari: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Biocryst: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Achilleon: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ra Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion, AstraZeneca Rare Disease Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Risitano: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lecture fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alnylam: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lecture fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Samsung: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amyndas: Consultancy; RA Pharma: Research Funding; Biocryst: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Achillion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lecture fees; Jazz: Other: Lecture fees, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Other: Lecture fees, Speakers Bureau; Apellis Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lecture fees, Speakers Bureau. Roeth: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bioverativ, a Sanofi company: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Apellis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kira: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. He: LongBio Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy. Pu: University of Arizona: Current Employment; Pennsylvania State University: Patents & Royalties; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wright: Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Appius: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Sostelly: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment. Sreckovic: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Current Employment. Stanzel: F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Munir: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Alexion: Honoraria. Nishimura: Apellis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Chugai: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Biocryst: Consultancy.

Tolerance and Response to Initial Systemic Therapy In Older Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM): Observations From 276 Unselected Recent Cases In the Practices of US-Based Medical Oncologists (MOs)

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1516-1516
Author(s):  
Neil Love ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
Kenneth C. Anderson ◽  
Rafael Fonseca ◽  
Melanie Elder ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Older Patients ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Treatment Selection ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Selection Of

Abstract Abstract 1516 Background: MM is generally considered incurable, but the rapid integration of IMiDs.. and proteasome inhibitors into systemic anticancer treatment (SAT) has resulted in clinically important improvements in response rates, disease control and overall survival. A number of factors — including age and comorbidities — influence selection of an initial SAT and whether autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is planned. A paucity of information exists on selection of specific SATs for patients in different age groups and resultant outcomes. We attempted to address this issue by aggregating and examining clinical information on individual patients receiving initial treatment for MM. Methods: US community-based MOs were recruited from a database of past participants in our CME activities to provide anonymous information on the presenting symptoms, diagnostic workup, treatment selection, side effects and clinical antitumor response for all patients in their practices with a new diagnosis of MM since January 1, 2008. Modest, per-patient honoraria were provided to each MO for this work. Results: From April 14 to July 9, 2010, 43 MOs entered a total of 276 cases of MM into a web-based data bank (minimum 1 case, maximum 14, median 6). 54% of the patients were men. The median age was 68, with 34% under age 65, 36% from 65 to 74 and 30% age 75 or older. 88% of patients had their tumors evaluated by FISH and/or metaphase cytogenetics. 73% of the evaluated specimens were considered to be “standard risk” and 27% were determined to be “poor risk.” 67% of patients were considered very or moderately symptomatic from the disease at the time treatment was initiated (Table 1), and similar fractions of patients presented with various levels of symptomology across the three age groups. 128 patients (46%) were deemed eligible for ASCT (maximum age 78), and 59 of these patients had already received ASCT after induction treatment. The median age of patients eligible for ASCT was 62, and the most common induction SATs for these patients were Rd or RD (29%), RVD (26%) and VD (23%). The median age of patients considered ineligible for transplant was 76.5, and the most common induction SATs were VD (22%) Rd or RD (21%) MPT (17%) and MPV (17%). Overall, these treatments resulted in CR and PR rates of 22% and 64% respectively, and “things went very well with expected or fewer toxicities” in 38% and minor or moderate toxicity in 44%. These outcomes are similar to what has been reported in published trial data from randomized Phase III studies of these regimens. No major differences were observed in reported levels of efficacy and side effects among the three age groups (Table 1). Conclusions: This unselected case series produced, in a rapid manner, useful information addressing a variety of clinical issues in newly diagnosed MM, including the impact of age and transplant status on treatment selection and outcomes. These data suggest that MOs are able to individualize SATs for older patients and match the short-term outcomes of the therapies they select for younger patients. This risk-benefit differential is of particular palliative importance as these data demonstrate that at diagnosis most patients present with tumor-related symptoms. Additional work of this kind is needed to better understand how physicians adjust doses and schedules of SATs to prevent and ameliorate toxicity, particularly in older patients. Disclosures: Lonial: Bristo-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millenium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Anderson:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onxy Pharmaceuticals Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fonseca:Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genzyme Corporation: Consultancy; Medtronic Inc: Consultancy; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co Ltd: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document