scholarly journals Real-World Clinical Management of Patients with Congenital Hemophilia and Inhibitors: Interim Analysis of the FEIBA Global Outcome Study (FEIBA GO)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 23-24
Author(s):  
Cedric Hermans ◽  
Claude Négrier ◽  
Pål A Holme ◽  
Carmen Escuriola ◽  
Ana R Cid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Outcome Study ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
On Demand ◽  
The Past

Introduction and Objective: Development of inhibitory antibodies is a major complication of factor replacement therapy in patients with congenital hemophilia A or B. The FEIBA Global Outcome study (FEIBA GO) assessed the long-term safety and real-world effectiveness of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC; Baxalta US Inc, a Takeda company, Lexington, MA, USA) as prophylaxis or on-demand treatment in patients with congenital hemophilia A or B with inhibitors (PwHI) across different clinical settings. Methods: FEIBA GO (EUPAS6691) is a post-authorization, prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study. Male PwHI diagnosed before study entry and prescribed treatment with aPCC as part of routine clinical practice were followed over 4 years; treatment regimens were prescribed at the physician's discretion. Ethics approval and patient consent were obtained. These data report on an interim analysis (data cutoff, May 16, 2019) on the annualized bleeding rate (ABR) calculated per patient-year of follow-up and aPCC consumption in patients receiving aPCC prophylaxis. Results: Enrollment was started on September 3, 2014 and completed on December 31, 2017. Fifty-one enrolled PwHI have received aPCC prophylaxis (n=37) or on-demand (n=14) treatment from 26 sites in 11 countries (hemophilia A: n=50, hemophilia B: n=1; median [range] age at baseline: 17 [2-71] years). As of May 2019, mean±SD (median, range) ABR was 7.2±8.2 (5.7, 0-30) per patient-year for the 14 patients with ≥2 to <4 years' study follow-up (mean±SD: 3.0±0.6 years). In the 3 patients with ≥4 years of study follow-up (mean±SD: 4.0±0.03 years), mean±SD (median, range) ABR was 14.7±25.3 (0.2, 0-44) per patient-year. Patients received a variety of prophylaxis regimens; data on dosages per infusion and number of weekly infusions administered are provided in the Table. Conclusions: This interim analysis describes the real-world use and effectiveness of aPCC prophylaxis and supports previous data on the prevention of bleeding events in PwHI. The data also highlight the variety of dosing regimens reflecting the real-world use of aPCC prophylaxis in clinical practice. Although patient numbers were small, these data suggest that increased weekly doses are used in patients with more severe bleeding phenotypes. Figure 1 Disclosures Hermans: Kedrion:Speakers Bureau;Octapharma:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;Roche:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;Pfizer:Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Novo Nordisk:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;LFB:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;Shire, a Takeda company:Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Sobi:Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;Bayer:Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau;EAHAD:Other;WFH:Other;CSL Behring:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;CAF-DCF:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau;Biogen:Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.Négrier:CSL Behring, Octapharma, Shire/Takeda, Sobi:Research Funding;CSL, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Sobi:Other: Travel support;Bayer, Biomarin, CSL Behring, Freeline, LFB, Novo Nordisk, Octapharma, Pfizer, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Sanofi, Shire/Takeda, Sobi, Spark:Consultancy.Holme:Sobi:Honoraria, Research Funding;Bayer:Honoraria, Research Funding;CSL Behring:Honoraria;Novo Nordisk:Honoraria;Octapharma:Research Funding;Pfizer:Honoraria, Research Funding;Shire, a Takeda company:Honoraria, Research Funding.Escuriola:Grifols:Honoraria;CSL Behring:Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Biotest:Honoraria, Research Funding;Biomarin:Honoraria;Bayer:Honoraria;Kedrion:Honoraria;Shire, a Takeda company:Honoraria;Octapharma:Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding;Novo Nordisk:Consultancy, Honoraria;Roche:Honoraria;Sobi:Honoraria, Research Funding.Cid:Roche:Consultancy, Honoraria;Sobi:Consultancy, Honoraria;Novo Nordisk:Honoraria;Shire, a Takeda company:Honoraria.Kemenyash:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG:Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.Botha:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG:Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.Cano-Garcia:Sanofi Genzyme:Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company;Shire, a Takeda company:Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months, Ended employment in the past 24 months.Windyga:Sanofi:Honoraria, Research Funding;Alexion:Honoraria, Research Funding;Alnylam:Honoraria, Research Funding;Baxalta/Shire, a Takeda company:Honoraria, Research Funding;Bayer:Honoraria, Research Funding;Siemens:Honoraria, Research Funding;Sobi:Honoraria, Research Funding;Werfen:Honoraria, Research Funding;CSL Behring:Honoraria, Research Funding;Ferring Pharmaceuticals:Honoraria, Research Funding;Novo Nordisk:Honoraria, Research Funding;Octapharma:Honoraria, Research Funding;Rigel Pharmaceuticals:Honoraria, Research Funding;Roche:Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Effectiveness and Safety Outcomes in Patients with Hemophilia a Receiving Antihemophilic Factor (Recombinant) for at Least 5 Years in a Real-World Setting: 6-Year Interim Analysis of the Ahead International and German Studies

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Dimitrios A. Tsakiris ◽  
Johannes Oldenburg ◽  
Robert Klamroth ◽  
Benoît Guillet ◽  
Kate Khair ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Real World Setting ◽  
Antihemophilic Factor

Introduction: Long-term effectiveness and safety data in patients treated in routine clinical practice settings can be captured from real-world studies. The international (INT) and German (GER) Antihemophilic factor (recombinant; rAHF) Hemophilia A (HA) outcome Database (AHEAD) studies assess long-term effectiveness and safety outcomes in patients with moderate HA (factor VIII level 1-5%) or severe HA (factor VIII <1%) receiving rAHF (ADVATE®; Baxalta US Inc., a Takeda company, Lexington, MA, USA) in routine clinical practice. Methods: These are non-interventional, prospective, long-term, multicenter studies (INT: NCT02078427; GER: DRKS 00000556). Key outcomes include Gilbert scores (primary endpoint; pain scored 0-3; bleeding scored 0-3, and physical exam scored 0-12), annualized bleeding rates (ABRs) by disease severity, and adverse events (AEs). Findings reported here are from the 6-year interim analysis (data cut-off: July 15, 2019), and focus on patients who have received rAHF prophylaxis or on-demand (OD) treatment for ≥5 years in the studies. All data are reported for the safety analysis set (SAS), which comprised patients who passed screening and were assigned to a treatment group or regimen in the INT study, or were enrolled and have received ≥1 dose of rAHF since study enrollment in the GER study. Results: At the time of analysis, the INT study SAS comprised 707 patients, 156 of whom had received ≥5 years of rAHF treatment during the study. The GER study SAS comprised 382 patients, 231 of whom had received ≥5 years of rAHF treatment. Average Gilbert scores (all joints) were consistently low (years 1-6: median 0-1.0; mean 0-1.3) for both children aged 2 to <12 years and adolescents aged 12 to <18 years receiving rAHF prophylaxis within both studies. In the INT study, average Gilbert scores were lower with prophylaxis than with OD therapy in adults (aged ≥18 years) throughout the observation period (years 1-6: median: 0.9-1.4 [n=8-25] vs 1.4-6.3 [n=2-8], respectively; mean: 1.4-2.2 vs 2.1-6.3; respectively); significant differences (P<0.05) between mean values were observed for years 3, 4, and 6. In the GER study, average Gilbert scores were slightly higher with prophylaxis than with OD in adults (years 1-6: median: 0.7-2.2 [n=12-37] vs 0.3-1.4 [n=2-15], respectively; mean: 1.0-2.7 vs 0.5-2.2, respectively; P-values not available). In the INT study, ABRs were consistently lower in patients receiving rAHF prophylaxis than in those receiving rAHF OD, irrespective of disease severity (Table). A similar trend was observed in the GER study in patients with severe HA, whereas ABRs were similar for both treatment regimens in patients with moderate HA. In both studies, greater proportions of patients with moderate or severe HA receiving rAHF prophylaxis had 0 bleeds than those receiving rAHF OD (Table). In the INT study, 842 AEs were reported in 116/156 (74.4%) patients, including 2 treatment-related serious AEs in 2 (1.3%) patients. In the GER study, 1321 AEs were reported in 197/231 (85.3%) patients, including 29 treatment-related serious AEs in 14 (6.1%) patients. Conclusions: These findings in patients receiving rAHF for ≥5 years in a real-world setting corroborate previous data on the long-term efficacy and tolerability of rAHF in patients with moderate or severe HA. rAHF demonstrated effectiveness in maintaining joint health (as measured by Gilbert scores) in adult patients. Table Disclosures Tsakiris: Roche: Research Funding; Shire, a Takeda company: Research Funding; Sobi: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding. Oldenburg:Sobi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biogen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Grifols: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Klamroth:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Speakers Bureau; Grifols: Speakers Bureau; Takeda/Shire: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biomarin: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Guillet:CSL Behring: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Octapharma: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche-Chugai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Khair:Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta/Shire, Takeda companies: Research Funding. Huth-Kühne:Bayer: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy; Sobi: Consultancy. Kurnik:Sobi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Biotest: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Regensburger:Takeda Pharma Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Botha:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fernandez:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Tang:Takeda Pharmaceutical International AG: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ozelo:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shire/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bioverativ/Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioMarin: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Real-World Efficacy of Venetoclax-Based Regimens in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia in Israel: A Multicenter Prospective Study

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3727-3727
Author(s):  
Yair Herishanu ◽  
Neta Goldschmidt ◽  
Gilad Itchaki ◽  
Itai Levi ◽  
Ariel Aviv ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Phase Iii Clinical Trials ◽  
Medical Centers ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: The BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (rituximab or obinutuzumab) has demonstrated superior outcomes and manageable safety as compared to chemo-immunotherapy in phase III clinical trials for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Moreover, venetoclax-based regimens induced high rates of undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD). Prospective data on the effectiveness of venetoclax-based regimens specifically with regard to achieving uMRD in a real-world setting are still lacking. Here we report the first interim analysis for efficacy and safety of an ongoing nationwide real-world study of venetoclax based therapy for CLL/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Method: A prospective observational nationwide multicenter study. Treatment-naïve (TN) and relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL/SLL patients were enrolled in 13 medical centers in Israel. The primary endpoint was clinical response, per physician assessment 12-months after the initiation of venetoclax treatment. Key secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and uMRD as assessed at a central laboratory by 8-color flow-cytometry. Results: Between February 10, 2019, and Jun 17, 2021 (data cut), 199 CLL/SLL patients were enrolled from 13 medical centers in Israel to receive venetoclax based therapy. The study included 83 TN and 116 R/R evaluable CLL/SLL patients with a median age of 69 years (range, 34-85) and 70.5 years (range, 25-91), respectively (Table 1). R/R patients had received a median of one prior therapy with a range up to 8, of these patients 60 (51.7%) were previously treated with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi) including ibrutinib in 52 (44.8%) and idelalisib in combination with rituximab in 6 (5.2%). TN patients had been treated with venetoclax in combination with obinutuzumab (92.8%) or rituximab (4.8%) and R/R patients received either venetoclax with rituximab (60.3%) or obinutuzumab (9.5%), venetoclax monotherapy (25.8%) or triple therapy with venetoclax, rituximab and ibrutinib in 5 (4.3%). Dose escalation of venetoclax to the recommended dose of 400 mg daily was achieved in 80.7% (n=67) of TN and 81% (n=94) of R/R patients. The median duration of ramp-up was 38 and 42 days in TN and R\R patients, respectively. Prior to therapy, tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk was considered high in 12% and 29.3% of TN and R/R patients, respectively (Table 1). Laboratory TLS occurred in one TN patient and 4 R/R patients, whereas 3 of the R/R patients experienced clinical TLS. Nineteen TN and 75 R/R patients had a follow-up of at least 12 months or discontinued study prematurely. The 12-month overall response rate (ORR) for TN and R/R patients was 89.5% [complete response (CR) 13 (68.4%), partial response (PR) 4 (21.1%)] and 73.3% [CR 37 (49.3%), PR 18 (24%)], respectively. In the R/R cohort, the 12-month ORR among assessed patients was 67.6% (25/37) in BCRi-exposed versus 85.7% (30/35) in BCRi-naïve patients. At 12 months, peripheral blood uMRD (<0.01%) was achieved in 12 out of 14 (85.7%) TN and 26 out of 38 (68.4%) R/R evaluated patients. At a median follow-up of 5.1 months (range, 0.5-15.6) for TN and 10.1 months (range, 0-25.7) for R/R patients, the median PFS and OS, for both cohorts have not been reached. The estimated 12-month PFS was 90.9% for TN and 81.1% for R/R patients. For R/R patients with prior exposure to BCRi, the estimated 12-month PFS was 69.6% versus 94.8% in BCRi-naïve patients (figure 1). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 34.9% of TN patients and 43.9% R/R patients. The most frequent grade ≥3 AEs documented were neutropenia (TN: 19.2% and R/R 17.2%), infections (TN: 4.8% and R/R: 21.5%) and febrile neutropenia (TN: 2.4% and in R/R: 2.6%). COVID-19 occurred in 7 patients including one death. At the time of data cut, 10 deaths occurred, one TN and 9 R/R patients. Causes for death included infections (5 patients), disease progression (2 patients), acute myeloid leukemia/ myelodysplastic syndrome (2 patients) and a soft-tissue sarcoma (1 patient). Conclusions: This first interim analysis of our ongoing prospective real-world study of venetoclax-based treatment for TN and R/R CLL/SLL, demonstrates high efficacy together with a high proportion of undetectable MRD levels and a favorable toxicity profile. These efficacy results are comparable to those reported in previous Phase III clinical trials for CLL, with no new safety signals. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Herishanu: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria. Goldschmidt: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Itchaki: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Levi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Aviv: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fineman: AbbVie: Research Funding. Dally: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ruchlemer: AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Abadi: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shvidel: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Braester: AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cohen: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Frankel: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofek: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Berelovich: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Grunspan: AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: May hold equity. Benjamini: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Unmet Medical Need Among Elderly Patients with Previously Untreated DLBCL Characterized Using Real-World Data in the United States

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 6-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashwini Shewade ◽  
Adam J Olszewski ◽  
Nelson Pace ◽  
Andy Surinach ◽  
Gila Sellam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Real World Data ◽  
World Data ◽  
Reduced Dose ◽  
The Past ◽  
Medical Need

Introduction: Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a significant source of cancer morbidity and mortality. More than half of all newly diagnosed patients are older than 65 years, among whom the 5-year relative survival rate is 54% (SEER 2020). Prior research has shown that not all elderly patients (≥80 years old) receive R-CHOP or mini-R-CHOP regimens as the first line of therapy (LoT); those who do not may have suboptimal outcomes (Williams, et al. Cancer 2015; Hamlin, et al. Oncologist 2014; Juul, et al. Eur J Cancer 2018). This study leverages two real-world data (RWD) sources, Flatiron Health (FH) electronic health record-derived de-identified database and SEER-Medicare (SEER-M) to characterize elderly patients with DLBCL (including observed treatment patterns), summarize overall survival (OS) outcomes, and identify unmet medical needs in this population. Methods: RWD from FH included patients with a DLBCL diagnosis on or after January 1, 2011, with follow-up until May 31, 2020. The SEER-M database is a linkage of two population-based RWD sources: the SEER Cancer Registry and Medicare claims database. RWD from SEER-M for this study included patients with a DLBCL diagnosis between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2015, with follow-up until December 31, 2016. All fee-for-service Medicare enrollees in SEER-M had to have complete claims. RWD for basic demographics, treatments and outcomes were analyzed from both datasets; FH's database included data on certain clinical characteristics including granularity for dosing data when available, in comparison to SEER-M. This descriptive analysis included patients who were aged ≥80 years at diagnosis. Among patients in the FH database who received R-CHOP as first LoT and had available dosing data, those who received <80% of standard full doses for cyclophosphamide (750mg/m2) and doxorubicin (50mg/m2) at first administration were classified as "reduced-dose" R-CHOP. OS data were summarized using an unadjusted Kaplan-Meier survival function and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Results: The study included 725 patients from the FH database and 2613 patients from the SEER-M database; patient characteristics and outcomes were generally consistent between the two datasets. In total, 16% and 35% of the elderly patients had no record of systemic treatment in FH and SEER-M respectively (Table). More than half of the treated patients received R-CHOP in the first LoT (63% and 53% in FH and SEER-M, respectively); other patients received attenuated regimens, including rituximab plus bendamustine (R-Benda), rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisolone (R-CVP), and rituximab (R) monotherapy. Patients who received R-CHOP in the first LoT had numerically longer median OS (Flatiron: 55.0 months [95% CI: 41.8-NA]; SEER-M: 50.7 months [95% CI: 45.9-62.9]) compared with those who received other regimens (Figure A, B). Untreated patients had a median survival of 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.3-5.2) in the Flatiron dataset and 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.8-2.2) in the SEER-M dataset. Among those who received R-CHOP and with available dosing data, 51% received reduced-dose R-CHOP in the first LoT and OS appeared shorter than for patients who received full-dose R-CHOP (Figure C). Conclusions: Despite differences between the databases, RWD in FH and SEER-M both demonstrate considerable variation in the regimens received by elderly DLBCL patients, with 16-35% receiving no treatment and >50% receiving attenuated regimens including reduced-dose R-CHOP. Patients receiving regimens other than R-CHOP had a numerically lower survival probability compared with the standard of care (SoC) R-CHOP/reduced-dose R-CHOP. These data show a high unmet medical need among elderly patients with DLBCL who may not be able to tolerate immunochemotherapy regimens that have been evaluated in trials for a carefully selected patient population. Further research will aim to assess prognostic factors at the time of treatment initiation, as well as gather information on comorbidities and other factors that may prevent elderly patients from receiving SoC R-CHOP; these patients may be candidates for better-tolerated novel approaches. Disclosures Shewade: Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Olszewski:TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Pace:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment; Exponent: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Prior employer was a consulting firm. No expert testimony given. No relevant consulting work done.: Consultancy. Surinach:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Sellam:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment. Mueller:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment, Ended employment in the past 24 months; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Hear:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

scholarly journals Real-World Clinical Management of Patients with Hemophilia and Inhibitors: Effectiveness and Safety of aPCC in Patients with >18 Months' Follow-up in the FEIBA Global Outcome Study (FEIBA GO)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2418-2418
Author(s):  
Jerzy Windyga ◽  
Pal A Holme ◽  
C. Hermans ◽  
Ana R Cid ◽  
Nirjhar Chatterjee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Outcome Study ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Bleeding Rate ◽  
Patient Consent ◽  
Equity Ownership

Introduction: The primary objective of the FEIBA Global Outcome study (FEIBA GO) is to describe the long-term, real-world effectiveness and safety of activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC; Feiba®, Baxalta Inc, a Takeda company, Lexington, MA, USA) for preventing and managing bleeding in patients with congenital hemophilia A or B with inhibitors (PwHI) across different clinical settings. This interim >18-month analysis corresponds to the report of May 2019. Methods: FEIBA GO (EUPAS6691) is an ongoing post-authorization, prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study. Male PwHI diagnosed before study entry and prescribed treatment with aPCC will be followed over 4 years; treatment regimens are prescribed at the physician's discretion. Ethics approval and patient consent were obtained. Results: Enrollment was completed on December 31, 2017, with 53 PwHI from 27 sites in 11 countries (hemophilia A: n=52, hemophilia B: n=1; median [range] age at baseline: 18 [2-71] years). Total annualized bleeding rate (ABR) and annualized joint bleeding rate (AJBR) for all bleeds are shown in Table 1 for the 21 patients who received prophylaxis or on-demand aPCC and had >18 months of follow-up data. Of 15 patients who received aPCC prophylaxis, 4 (26.7%) and 7 (46.7%) reported ABRs of ≤3 and AJBRs of ≤3, respectively. All 53 enrolled patients were included in the safety analysis. During the >18 month analysis period, a total of 139 non-serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported in 29 of 53 patients (including 9 events in 3 patients probably related to treatment and 2 events in 1 patient possibly related), and 40 serious TEAEs were reported in 17 patients. One possibly related serious TEAE of acute myocardial posterior wall infarction with embolic right coronary artery occlusion was reported in a patient with a catheter port; outcome: recovered/resolved. No thrombotic microangiopathies were reported. Conclusions: This interim analysis of real-world data at >18 months' follow-up is consistent with experience and continues to validate the safety and effectiveness of aPCC. Long-term follow-up data over 4 years from FEIBA GO will provide further information on the real-world effectiveness and safety of aPCC as monotherapy. Disclosures Windyga: Rigel Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Werfen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Baxalta/Shire (a Takeda company): Honoraria, Research Funding; Ferring Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alexion: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Octapharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Siemens: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sobi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Holme:Sobi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire, a Takeda company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Octapharma: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria. Hermans:Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy. Cid:Novo Nordisk: Honoraria; Shire, a Takeda company: Honoraria. Chatterjee:Baxalta US Inc., a Takeda company: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jiang:Baxalta US Inc., a Takeda company: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cano-Garcia:Shire, a Takeda company: Employment, Equity Ownership. Escuriola:Octapharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sobi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kedrion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Grifols: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Biotest: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Shire, a Takeda company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Real-World Effectiveness of First-Line (1L) Dasatinib Versus 1L Imatinib in Newly Diagnosed Patients with Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CP-CML)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Andrew J Klink ◽  
Scott Justin Keating ◽  
John Brokars ◽  
Arianna Kee ◽  
Ronda Copher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Advisory Role

Introduction: The safety and efficacy of 1L dasatinib and 1L imatinib was established in the pivotal DASISION and IRIS trials; however, limited real-world evidence exists for the comparative effectiveness of these agents among US patients with CP-CML treated in routine clinical practice. As such, real-world data are needed to assess the outcomes of imatinib- and dasatinib-treated patients in a pragmatic setting. Additionally, recent data suggest that second generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), including dasatinib, may be beneficial in certain CP-CML populations, which may be underrepresented in clinical trials (e.g., high risk, elderly, or high body mass index [BMI]). This study examined the real-world clinical response rates and time to response associated with 1L dasatinib or 1L imatinib among patients with CP-CML, as well as in subgroups defined by Sokal risk, age, and BMI. Methods: A retrospective, observational, US multi-site cohort study was conducted among adults with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive CP-CML treated with 1L dasatinib or 1L imatinib between January 2014 and September 2018. Patients had at least 1 year of follow-up after 1L initiation and did not have another malignancy or treatment as part of any clinical trial for CML. Oncologists collected data from eligible patient charts, including patient characteristics, treatment details, response to dasatinib or imatinib, and survival. Response was classified as major molecular response (MMR) and deep molecular response (DMR: 4.5-log reduction in BCR-ABL1 transcript levels) by physician report. Patient characteristics and outcomes were summarized using descriptive statistics for dasatinib and imatinib; results were reported in aggregate and stratified by Sokal risk (low and intermediate/high), age (< 65 and ≥ 65 years old), and BMI (low/normal [< 25 kg/m2] and high [≥ 25 kg/m2]). Comparisons were made by chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables, t-test or Wilcoxon test for continuous variables, log-rank test for overall survival (OS), and Cox proportional hazard models using Fine and Gray's method to account for competing risks in estimating differences in time to response across groups. Results: Among the patients treated with 1L dasatinib (n = 309) and 1L imatinib (n = 304), median follow-up time was 27.4 and 28.9 months, respectively. Most patients initiated dasatinib at 100 mg (82%) or imatinib at 400 mg (95%). Dose reductions were more common among dasatinib patients vs imatinib (15% vs 7%, P < 0.01), though fewer dasatinib-treated patients discontinued for any reason (15% vs 28%, P < 0.01). Higher rates of MMR were seen in dasatinib vs imatinib patients (79% vs 65%, P < 0.01) and median time to MMR was shorter with dasatinib vs imatinib (11.9 vs 14.7 months, P < 0.01). Similarly, higher rates of DMR were seen among dasatinib vs imatinib patients (44% vs 25%, P < 0.01) along with a shorter median time to DMR with dasatinib vs imatinib (30.3 vs 66.1 months, P < 0.01). Among patients with intermediate/high Sokal risk, as well as those < 65 years old, rates of MMR and DMR were higher and achieved earlier with dasatinib vs imatinib (all P < 0.01) (Table). Low-risk patients treated with dasatinib had higher rates of DMR vs imatinib (60% vs 32%, P = 0.01). Among patients ≥ 65 years old, rates of MMR and DMR were numerically higher with dasatinib vs imatinib, though differences were not significant at α = 0.05. Across both BMI strata, rates of MMR and DMR were higher with 1L dasatinib vs 1L imatinib (all P < 0.05). In the overall population, dasatinib patients had superior OS compared to those treated with imatinib (98% vs 89%, P < 0.01). Conclusions: In real-world clinical practice, a greater proportion of patients with CP-CML treated with 1L dasatinib achieved MMR and DMR and also achieved these responses earlier vs 1L imatinib. These clinically meaningful improvements were also observed across patient subgroups stratified by Sokal risk, age, and BMI. These findings from real-world US data were consistent with DASISION, demonstrating that dasatinib yields better outcomes among patients with CP-CML, with the novel findings of improved OS and improved outcomes in certain subgroups, including a higher rate of DMR among low-risk patients. Disclosures Klink: Cardinal Health: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Keating:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Brokars:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Kee:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Copher:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment. Stwalley:Bristol Myers Squibb: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Feinberg:Cardinal Health: Current Employment. Jabbour:Takeda: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; Genentech: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; Amgen: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; Pfizer: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding; BMS: Other: Advisory role, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Real World Use of Extended Half-Life Products and the Impact on Bleeding Events and Joint Health in the United States

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1195-1195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynn M. Malec ◽  
Char M Witmer ◽  
Julie Jaffray ◽  
Peter A. Kouides ◽  
Kristina M. Haley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Hemophilia B ◽  
Severe Hemophilia ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
On Demand ◽  
Joint Health

Abstract Background : The hemophilia treatment landscape has evolved substantially in the last several years with the approval of extended half-life (EHL) products which reduce the burden of prophylaxis. Data reported from the American Thrombosis and Hemostasis Network (ATHN) as of June 2017 indicate that 21% of patients with moderate or severe hemophilia A, and 42% of patients with moderate or severe hemophilia B, receive prophylaxis utilizing an EHL. As new treatments become available and are adopted into practice, it is important to recognize the need for evaluation of efficacy, safety, and economic impact of their use outside of the clinical trial setting. We aimed to characterize the real world impact of EHL products by collecting detailed information on bleeding rates, joint health and quality of life amongst patients cared for at ATHN-affiliated Hemophilia Treatment Centers. We hypothesized that use of EHL products were utilized in at least 30% of patients and would lead to decreased ABRs and improved joint health. To date 67 of a planned 135 subjects have been enrolled, constituting this interim analysis. Methods:Subjects were recruited from seven U.S. Hemophilia Treatment Centers. Subjects with severe hemophilia A or B ≤ 30 years of age on prophylaxis or demand therapy were eligible for enrollment. Subjects excluded from study were those with a recent joint bleed (within the last 2 weeks) or those unwilling to complete all elements of the study. Data were collected during a one-time encounter concurrent with an appointment for clinical evaluation, including demographic information, treatment regimen, product type, frequency, location and severity of all bleeds, Hemophilia Joint Health Scores (HJHS), and Quality of life (QoL). Bleeding rates in subjects receiving prophylaxis were compared with those receiving on demand therapy by type treatment, EHL vs standard half-life (SHL), and by hemophilia type. Severity of bleeding events (mild, moderate, or severe) and HJHS were compared by prophylaxis groups. Results: A total of 67 patients were enrolled and eligible for analysis. This included 58 subjects with severe hemophilia A, and 9 subjects with severe hemophilia B. The mean age of the cohort was 15 years (median 12 years, IQR 8 - 21 years). For these patients whose race information was known, 89.1% were Caucasian, 3.3% African-American, 3.3% Asian, and 4.7% were of mixed or 'other' race. Eleven out of 61 (18.0%) subjects with known ethnicity were Hispanic. Among 59 patients whose treatment type were available, the majority were on prophylaxis (n=53; 89.8%) as compared to on demand therapy (n=6; 10.2%). The average annualized bleeding rate (ABR) was 2.8 amongst all individuals. As expected, the ABR was substantially lower in those receiving prophylaxis (ABR=1.0) as compared to on demand therapy (ABR=18.6) (p<0.001). Additionally, HJHS in those receiving prophylaxis was lower (mean HJHS= 3.9), meaning less evidence of joint damage, than in those receiving demand therapy (mean HJHS= 8.8) (p=0.162). For patients with severe hemophilia A, the ABR was lower in those individuals receiving EHL (ABR= 0.5) versus SHL (ABR= 1.5), although this did not reach statistical significance (p=0.136). All subjects with severe hemophilia B enrolled to date receive EHL products (n=9) therefore no comparison of ABR could be made between EHL and SHL products; the ABR in this group was 0.9. In patients with severe hemophilia A, there was a higher HJHS for those receiving EHL (mean HJHS= 7.0) versus those receiving SHL (mean HJHS = 2.1) (p=0.053). For patients with severe hemophilia B, all of whom received EHL, the mean HJHS was lower than in the hemophilia A cohort (mean HJHS=1.2). Conclusions: We report real-world bleeding events and joint health in patients with severe hemophilia A and B utilizing EHL and SHL products across a wide U.S. geographic distribution. As anticipated, there is substantial bleed reduction with prophylaxis versus on demand therapy. In our severe hemophilia A cohort, the ABR for patients receiving EHL products was similar to ABRs reported in clinical trials, suggesting clinical trial data may be reflective of real world use. Patients with severe hemophilia A receiving EHL for prophylaxis had a lower ABR than those receiving SHL, although the early impact is not reflected in the HJHS score. Longer follow-up will be necessary to determine the impact of EHL on HJHS. Disclosures Malec: Bioverativ: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Bioverativ: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy. Jaffray:Octapharma: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kouides:UniQure: Other: DSMB; Octapharma: Research Funding. Sidonio:Octapharma: Other: Advisory Board; Genentech: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Other: Advisory Board; Shire: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Other: Advisory Board; Kedrion: Research Funding; Biomarin: Other: Advisory Board; Grifols: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Bioverativ: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Uniqure: Other: Advisory Board. Abshire:CSL: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Other: DSMB. White:Asklepios: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy; Shire: Other: Physician Leadership Group; Bayer: Other: GRAC; Bioverativ: Other: DSMB; Biomarin: Other: DSMB; Invitrox: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Pfizer: Equity Ownership. Ragni:CSL Behring: Research Funding; Biomarin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; SPARK: Consultancy, Research Funding; Shire: Research Funding; Bioverativ: Consultancy, Research Funding; Alnylam: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Sangamo: Research Funding; MOGAM: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Real-World Treatment Patterns Among a Contemporary Cohort of Commercially Insured Mantle Cell Lymphoma Patients in the United States

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4845-4845
Author(s):  
Lindsey E. Roeker ◽  
Shaum Kabadi ◽  
Chakkarin Burudpakdee ◽  
Aimee Near ◽  
Keiko Wada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Index Date ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Oral Medications ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Insured Patients

Abstract Introduction Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a rare, aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma associated with a poor prognosis. The approval of ibrutinib in November 2013 has changed the treatment paradigm for patients with relapsed or refractory MCL. There remains a lack of information on the current treatment patterns used in clinical practice in a contemporary cohort of commercially insured patients. We aimed to identify the treatment patterns for MCL overall and by line of therapy (LOT) and to describe patient demographics and clinical characteristics in a large cohort of commercially insured MCL patients. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted with the IQVIA Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims-US database. Adult patients (≥18 years old) with ≥1 claim for a NCCN-recommended MCL treatment between November 1, 2013 and December 31, 2017 were identified. Index date was the first treatment claim. Patients were also required to have ≥1 diagnosis of MCL during the study period (November 1, 2012 to January 31, 2018), ≥12 months of continuous enrollment prior to index date (pre-index period) and ≥30 days after index date (follow-up period). Patients were excluded if they were ≥65 years at index and not enrolled in Medicare Risk or Medicare Cost, enrolled in a clinical trial during the study period, had evidence of MCL treatment in the pre-index period (except for patients indexed on ibrutinib as it is indicated for MCL patients with ≥1 prior treatment), or had evidence of stem cell transplant (SCT) before index date. The most commonly observed MCL treatment regimens were identified, and demographic and clinical characteristics of patients and treatment durations by regimen were described. Treatment regimen was defined as the combination of all agents observed in the 35-day period after the first MCL treatment claim; treatment duration was defined as the start of treatment until a gap of ≥90 days between end date and next date of treatment or treatment modification. Treatment end date occurred 90 days after the end of the supply for oral medications or 30 days after the last administration for non-oral medications. Results There were 1,785 patients treated with the most commonly observed MCL treatment regimens. The most common regimens, irrespective of LOT, were rituximab monotherapy (including maintenance therapy; n=773, 43.3%), R-CHOP (n=723, 40.5%), B-R (n=436, 24.4%), and ibrutinib monotherapy (n=199, 11.1%). Overall, patients had a median (IQR) age of 57 (52-62) years, and 59.4% were male. Most patients were commercially or self- insured (57.5% and 33.6%, respectively). Patients had a median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) of 0 (IQR 0-1; mean [SD] 0.9 [1.4]), with the most common CCI components being diabetes (15.7%), chronic pulmonary disease (12.8%), and congestive heart failure (9.5%). During the follow-up period (median [IQR] 22.5 [10.5-35.3] months), in addition to the MCL regimen(s), patients received radiation therapy (17.4%), SCT (10.0%), and/or immunotherapy (0.2%). The use of targeted therapies (i.e. lenalidomide, bortezomib) other than ibrutinib was infrequent. When considering treatment lines, R-CHOP was the most commonly observed first regimen, followed by rituximab, B-R, and ibrutinib; for the second and third observed regimens, rituximab was the most common, followed by ibrutinib (Figure 1). The median (IQR) duration for the first observed regimen was 8.1 (3.9-18.0) months for ibrutinib, 5.0 (3.3-5.6) months for B-R, 4.0 (2.5-4.4) months for R-CHOP, and 1.9 (1.7-4.4) months for rituximab; ibrutinib also had the longest duration in the second and third line (median [IQR] 5.5 [2.4-13.5] months and 8.3 [3.9-12.4] months, respectively). Conclusion This is the largest study of MCL patients describing treatment patterns in current clinical practice among commercially insured patients. MCL patients were most commonly treated with chemoimmunotherapy for all treatment lines while ibrutinib was the second most common LOT2 and LOT3 regimen. As the treatment landscape and clinical practice continues to change with the use of novel agents, future studies are warranted to further study toxicities and outcomes in the real-world setting. Disclosures Kabadi: AstraZeneca: Employment. Burudpakdee:IQVIA received funds from AstraZeneca to conduct the analysis, interpret data, and coauthor the publication.: Consultancy. Near:IQVIA received funds from AstraZeneca to conduct the analysis, interpret data, and coauthor the publication.: Consultancy. Wada:IQVIA received funds from AstraZeneca to conduct the analysis, interpret data, and coauthor the publication.: Consultancy. Mato:TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Prime Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy.

scholarly journals An Insight into the Impact of Hemophilia a on Daily Life According to Disease Severity: A Preliminary Analysis of the CHESS II Study

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Declan Noone ◽  
Francis Nissen ◽  
Tao Xu ◽  
Tom Burke ◽  
Sohaib Asghar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Disease Severity ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hemophilia A ◽  
Daily Life ◽  
Social Activity ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
On Demand ◽  
The Impact

Introduction: Hemophilia A (HA) is a congenital bleeding disorder caused by a deficiency in clotting factor VIII (FVIII). There are currently limited data on the impact of HA on daily life. Here we examine the impact of HA on the daily life of adult persons with HA (PwHA) without current FVIII inhibitors according to disease severity. Methods: The Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey II (CHESS II) is a retrospective, burden-of-illness study in adults with mild, moderate, and severe HA or hemophilia B (defined by endogenous FVIII/IX [IU/dL] relative to normal; mild, 5-&lt;40%; moderate, 1-5%; severe, &lt;1%); this analysis includes only PwHA. Male participants (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with HA (without FVIII inhibitors) at least 12 months prior to clinical consultation were enrolled from Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Romania, Spain, and the UK. Data on clinical outcomes and healthcare resource utilization were captured via electronic case report forms disseminated to hemophilia specialists. PwHA completed a paper-based questionnaire utilizing 5-point Likert scales to assess the disease burden on their daily life. Overall, 12 months' retrospective data were examined. Informed consent was obtained and the study was approved by the University of Chester ethical committee. Results: Of 258 PwHA completing questionnaires, 15.9% (n=41), 27.9% (n=72), and 56.2% (n=145) had mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively. Of those with severe HA, 60.0% were currently receiving FVIII prophylaxis (standard of care for severe HA); in comparison, 4.9% and 6.9% of those with mild and moderate HA were receiving prophylaxis (Table 1). Treatment adaptation in anticipation of physical or social activity was reported by 19.5%, 23.6%, and 38.6% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively. Over a third of participants with mild (36.6%) and moderate (44.4%) HA, and 64.8% of those with severe HA (58.6% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 69.0% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that HA had reduced their physical activity (Figure 1). Overall, 38.9% of those with moderate HA and 58.6% of those with severe HA (63.8% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 55.2% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that their HA had reduced their social activity; this was less pronounced in mild HA (9.8%). Additionally, 31.7%, 36.1%, and 64.1% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA (62.1% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 65.5% receiving prophylaxis) agreed or strongly agreed that their HA had caused them to miss opportunities. Correspondingly, frustration due to HA was felt by 19.5%, 34.7% and 57.9% (56.9% with severe HA receiving on-demand treatment and 58.6% receiving prophylaxis) of people, respectively. When asked whether they believed their daily life was compromised due to their hemophilia, 24.4%, 37.5%, and 63.4% of those with mild, moderate, and severe HA, respectively, agreed. Pain, as reported by the physician, was noted in 36.6% of people with mild HA (100% was reported as 'mild'); in people with moderate HA, pain was reported as 'mild', 'moderate', and 'severe' in 44.4%, 20.8%, and 1.4% of PwHA, respectively. In people with severe HA, pain was reported as 'mild', 'moderate', and 'severe' in 39.7%, 27.6%, and 8.6% for those receiving on-demand treatment, and 37.9%, 32.2%, and 8.0% for those receiving prophylaxis, respectively. Conclusions: In all disease severity groups, there was a notable group of PwHA that felt that they have had to reduce their physical and social activity, have had fewer opportunities and are frustrated due to their disease. While the impact on daily life is most pronounced in people with severe HA (including those receiving on-demand treatment and those receiving prophylaxis), it is also apparent in mild and moderate HA, indicating that there may be an unmet medical need in these groups. Disclosures Noone: Healthcare Decision Consultants: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research Investigator PROBE: Research Funding; European Haemophilia Consortium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nissen:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment; Actelion: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding. Xu: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.. Burke:University of Chester: Current Employment; HCD Economics: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Asghar:HCD Economics: Current Employment. Dhillon:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: All authors received editorial support for this abstract, furnished by Scott Battle, funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland. ; HCD Economics: Current Employment. Aizenas:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Meier:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Hara:HCD Economics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Khair:Biomarin: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medikhair: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sobi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Haemnet: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) Treated with Hypomethylating Agents (HMA) in the United States (US)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 14-16
Author(s):  
Timothy S. Pardee ◽  
Jessica Oschwald ◽  
Esprit Ma ◽  
Tao Xu ◽  
Melissa Montez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Community Setting ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Survival Outcomes ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
The Past ◽  
The Us

Introduction: AML is an aggressive disease with poor prognosis that predominantly affects older adults. Due to advanced age and associated comorbidities, many patients are not fit for intensive induction chemotherapy. Monotherapy with HMAs such as azacitidine (AZA) or decitabine (DEC) is often still considered as standard of care for these patients, despite mixed evidence from studies regarding the benefit of HMAs alone (Duchmann & Itzykson. Int J Hematol 2019). The aim of the current study is to evaluate patient characteristics, treatment patterns and outcomes of patients with AML treated with HMA monotherapy as first line (1L) in clinical practice in the US. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study of the Flatiron Health database; a nationwide, longitudinal, demographically and geographically diverse database representing more than 2.4 million patients with cancer in the US. The database contains de-identified data derived from electronic health records from over 280 cancer clinics, which are predominantly community oncology practices. Patients ≥18 years, diagnosed with AML between 1/1/2014 and 3/30/2020 (excluding acute promyelocytic leukemia and clinical trial enrollment), and who received HMAs as 1L treatment ≤30 days from AML diagnosis were evaluated. Descriptive analyses were conducted on patient characteristics and treatment patterns. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to estimate time to last administration (TTLA; from initiation to last observed administration before death, end of follow-up or a gap of 60 days) and median overall survival (OS). Results: A total of 2589 patients with an AML diagnosis were included for analysis, where 574 (22%) were treated with 1L HMAs (AZA: n=341 [59%]; DEC: n=233 [41%]). The median age of 1L HMA patients was 79 years with 63% male. Most patients were treated in the community setting (n=511 [89%]; median age: 79 years); those treated in academic centers were slightly younger (n=63 [11%]; median age: 77 years). Characteristics for non-antecedent hematological disorder (AHD)-AML (n=327) and AHD-AML (n=247) patients are presented in Table 1. Median TTLA with 1L HMA was 77 days with a median of 3 cycles of both AZA and DEC. Of the 168 patients who received second-line (2L) therapy, 82% (n=138) received another low-intensity therapy or combination (of which only 14 received targeted therapies) (Figure 1). Overall, 44% of 1L HMA patients (n=254) had evidence of molecular testing before 1L treatment initiation (this was more common in later years). Of the 228 patients tested for FLT3, 30 (13%) were FLT3 positive; 7 (23%) FLT3-positive patients were treated with 2L or third-line (3L) FLT3-targeted therapies (gilteritinib, midostaurin or sorafenib). Of the 152 patients tested for IDH1/2, 35 (23%) were IDH1/2 positive; 5 (14%) IDH1/2-positive patients were treated with 2L or 3L targeted agents (enasidenib or ivosidenib). A median OS of 6.3 months (95% CI: 5.5-7.5) was observed in the overall 1L HMA cohort. Median OS in 1L HMA patients did not differ with respect to different types of AML (non-AHD-AML: 6.6 [95% CI: 5.5-7.9] months; AHD-AML: 6.0 [95% CI: 4.8-7.5] months, p=0.34) or practice setting (community: 6.0 [95% CI: 5.3-7.0] months; academic: 8.3 [95% CI: 6.9-13.3] months, p=0.14). One-year OS was 31.4% and 30.1% for non-AHD-AML and AHD-AML patients, respectively. Patients treated in the community setting had numerically lower 1-year OS (29.7% [95% CI: 25.8-34.3]) than those treated in the academic setting (39.5% [95% CI: 28.6-54.6]), which reflects the higher rates of 2L treatment in academic practice, though this analysis is unadjusted. Conclusions: This new database enabled a detailed analysis of 1L HMA-treated patients with newly diagnosed AML in routine clinical practice predominantly in the community setting. 1L HMA patients have poor survival outcomes (median OS 6.3 months) which are comparable to other real-world data from SEER-Medicare (Zeidan et al. Blood Adv 2020; median OS 7-8 months; median age: 77 years); but shorter than the median OS of 9-10 months observed in 1L HMA-treated AML patients in clinical trials (DiNardo et al. EHA 2020). Limitations of the study included limited conduct of bone marrow biopsies for response and lack of transfusion data. The observed survival outcomes highlight the importance of further treatment advances to address the unmet need in older patients with AML ineligible for intensive induction chemotherapy. Disclosures Pardee: Rafael: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Oschwald:Roche Products Limited: Current Employment. Ma:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Xu: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.. Montez:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment. Ramsingh:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment; NEKTAR: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Exelixis: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months, Ended employment in the past 24 months; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hong:Genentech, Inc.: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Choi:AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Flahavan:Roche Products Ltd.: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. OffLabel Disclosure: Discussion will include the use of decitabine for the treatment of AML.

Real-World Characteristics of Patients with Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma Receiving Frontline Brentuximab Vedotin with Chemotherapy: A Retrospective Analysis with Propensity Score Matching

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 18-19
Author(s):  
John M. Burke ◽  
Nicholas Liu ◽  
Kristina Yu-Isenberg ◽  
Michelle A. Fanale ◽  
Andy Surinach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Primary Prophylaxis ◽  
Brentuximab Vedotin ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
Genetics Research ◽  
T Cell Lymphomas

Introduction: In the phase 3 ECHELON-2 study (NCT01777152), treatment with brentuximab vedotin (BV) + cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (A+CHP) demonstrated significantly longer progression-free and overall survival compared with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) in the frontline (FL) treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL) or other CD30-expressing peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL). This study supported the November 2018 US FDA approval of A+CHP as FL therapy for adults with sALCL or other CD30-expressing PTCL. The current analysis describes patient characteristics, PTCL subtypes, and supportive care use of FL A+CHP and CHOP outside of the clinical trial setting in the US. Methods: Using medical and pharmacy claims data in the Symphony Health Solutions database, a retrospective cohort analysis of patients with PTCL treated with FL A+CHP or CHOP was conducted to compare treatment and utilization characteristics. Patients ≥18 years with 1 inpatient or 2 outpatient ICD-9/10 PTCL diagnosis codes, newly initiated on A+CHP or CHOP (index date) between November 2018 and January 2020, and with ≥6 months continuous activity before and ≥3 months after the index date were included. To adjust for confounding factors, a 1:1 propensity score matching analysis was performed based on age, gender, baseline comorbidities, geographic region and length of follow-up. Results: A total of 755 patients met inclusion criteria (335 A+CHP; 420 CHOP) with a median follow-up period of 10.1 and 10.6 months, respectively. In the unmatched cohorts, 61% were male, and median age at index was 62 and 69 years for A+CHP and CHOP, respectively. The prevalence of comorbidities based on the Charlson Comorbidity Index was similar between the cohorts; prevalent conditions included diabetes, chronic pulmonary disease, congestive heart failure, and liver disease (Table 1). PTCL subtypes treated with A+CHP included sALCL (54%), PTCL-not otherwise specified (NOS; 27%), and angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL; 13%); subtypes treated with CHOP included PTCL-NOS (35%), adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATLL; 35%), and AITL (11%) (Table 2). After matching, the proportion of patients who received granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF; A+CHP: 91%, CHOP: 86%, p=0.1) and the incidence rate of neutropenia (A+CHP: 45%, CHOP: 42%, p=0.4) during FL treatment for both study cohorts was similar. Of patients who received G-CSF, the majority received it as primary prophylaxis given within the first 5 days of FL treatment initiation (A+CHP: 89%, CHOP: 85%, p=0.2). The rate of subsequent therapy (ie, therapy change after FL), was similar between A+CHP and CHOP (18% vs 21%; p=0.3) and for the sALCL subtype (16% vs 26%, p=0.2). Of the A+CHP patients who received subsequent therapy, 32% were retreated with a BV-containing regimen and 19% of CHOP patients received a BV-containing regimen. Conclusions: In this real-world analysis, US patients with PTCL newly initiated on A+CHP or CHOP were older (67 vs 58 years) than those in ECHELON-2. There was a high comorbidity burden; over half of the patients in both cohorts had 1+ comorbidities, a potential reflection of the older population. As would be expected due to a high rate of CD30-positivity in the disease, A+CHP was more commonly used than CHOP in sALCL. In PTCL subtypes in which CD30 is more variably expressed, A+CHP and CHOP were used with similar frequencies. Although clinical trials in ATLL have demonstrated improved outcomes with more complex and intensive regimens than CHOP, CHOP remains commonly used in ATLL. A+CHP was also used in PTCL subtypes not included in ECHELON-2, such as NK/T cell lymphomas. G-CSF was used as primary prophylaxis in the large majority of patients in both cohorts. The use of a BV-containing regimen as subsequent therapy was more common in A+CHP vs CHOP, probably because the tumors of A+CHP patients were more likely to have expressed CD30. Confounding by unmeasured characteristics cannot be ruled out due to inherent limitations in claims data (eg, lack of disease stage, CD30 testing and response outcomes). Characteristics and management of this real-world population with PTCL differed from those in the ECHELON-2 trial, demonstrating the importance of retrospective studies to assess the impact of new regimens on clinical practice and to identify areas for further education of practitioners. Disclosures Burke: Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Morphosys: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. Liu:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu-Isenberg:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Fanale:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Surinach:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Flores:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Lisano:Seattle Genetics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Phillips:Beigene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Lymphoma Connect: Other; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cardinal Health: Consultancy; University of Michigan: Current Employment; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document