scholarly journals Remission and Survival after Single Versus Double Induction with 7+3 for Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results from the Planned Interim Analysis of Randomized Controlled SAL-Daunodouble Trial

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Christoph Röllig ◽  
Björn Steffen ◽  
Nael Alakel ◽  
Regina Herbst ◽  
Richard Noppeney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Early Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Npm1 Mutation ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Induction Cycle ◽  
Single Versus

Background Double induction using two subsequent 7+3 regimens of cytarabine plus anthracycline is commonly performed in AML patients with an adequate performance status in order to maximize dose intensity upfront. However, for patients with a good early response at day 15 of first induction, there is no prospective randomized evidence on the necessity or value of a second induction cycle. Aims In order to answer the question if good responders of the first 7+3 induction could be spared a second induction cycle, we set up randomized-controlled SAL DaunoDouble trial. The study prospectively assesses the outcome of patients with a good early response with respect to the number of induction cycles (single versus double). We assumed non-inferiority of single induction in terms of complete remission (CR/CRi) rate, based on a margin of 7.5%. Here, we present the results of the planned interim analysis. Methods Patients (pts) 18-65 years with newly diagnosed AML, normal cardiac and organ function received a first induction cycle with seven days of cytarabine plus three days of daunorubicin ("7+3"). Response assessment in bone marrow was done on day 15 after the initiation of chemotherapy and confirmed by central review. A blast count <5% was defined as good response. Pts with good response were randomized to receive a second induction cycle (arm D) or no second induction cycle (arm S). Primary endpoint was CR/CRi after completion of induction, secondary endpoints were RFS, and OS. Results Between 2014 and 2020, 624 evaluable pts were enrolled and received the first induction cycle with 7+3. A marrow blast clearance below 5% on day 15 was achieved in 298 pts (48%), providing eligibility for randomization. Of these patients, 150 were randomized into arm S and 148 into arm D, respectively. Median age was 52 years, 92% had de novo AML, NPM1 mutation was present in 53%, FLT3-ITD in 25% of pts. Favorable, intermediate and adverse risk (ELN 2017) were present in 56%, 34% and 10% of pts, respectively. CR/CRi rates at the end of induction were 86% after single induction and 85% after double induction. The CR/CRi rates in 224 pre-defined per-protocol pts were 88% versus 91%, resulting in a CR difference of 3% (95%-CI -0.047-0.111; p for non-inferiority test 0.145). After a median follow-up time of 24 months, RFS was slightly but not significantly lower after single induction with a 3-year RFS of 53% versus 64% (HR 1.4, p=0.125), whereas no differences were seen in 3-year OS, with a of rate of 74% versus 75% (HR 1.1, p=0.645) after single versus double induction. Conclusion The interim analysis results show that in good responders, the difference between CR rates after single versus double induction was even smaller than the predefined 7.5% margin, suggesting a trend for non-inferiority of single induction, although statistical significance was not reached. The trial continued recruitment. These findings suggest that in good responders, it may be safe to omit a second induction cycle if a second cycle poses a high risk. Figure. CR + CRi, RFS and OS after randomization to single versus double induction. Disclosures Alakel: Pfizer: Consultancy. Jost:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; JAZZ: Other: travel support; Celgene: Other: travel support. Novak:Roche: Consultancy; Janssen: Other: Travel expenses; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Travel expenses; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Krause:Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel Support; MSD: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Siemens: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel Support. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Acrotech: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Platzbecker:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Geron: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Thiede:AgenDix GmbH: Other: Co-owner and CEO. Müller-Tidow:Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BiolineRx: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag GmbH: Speakers Bureau.

A Phase II Study of Modified Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (RVD lite) for Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3454-3454 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth O'Donnell ◽  
Jacob P. Laubach ◽  
Andrew J Yee ◽  
Carol Ann Huff ◽  
Frank Basile ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Pharmacokinetic Analysis ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is primarily a disease of older adults with a median age at diagnosis of 66 years. Despite significant improvements in patient outcomes, there is a lag in survival in older transplant-ineligible patients compared to their younger counterparts. Traditionally, melphalan and prednisone-based regimens were the most widely accepted treatment options in this older, transplant-ineligible population. More recently, the FIRST trial has explored the use of lenalidomide and dexamethasone in these patients. Here, we sought to incorporate optimal novel agent-containing regimens in transplant-ineligible, older patients that balance efficacy with toxicity. Building on our prior experience with RVD in predominantly younger patients, our study evaluated a 3-drug regimen of modified RVD in the transplant-ineligible population. Methods: Modified RVD (“RVD-lite”) was administered over a 35-day cycle. Lenalidomide was given as a single daily oral dose of 15 mg days 1-21; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 once weekly subcutaneously on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; and dexamethasone 20 mg on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22 and 23 for patients ≤75 yrs and days 1, 8, 15, 22 for patients older than 75 yrs. Intravenous bortezomib was used only in cycle 1 for the first 10 patients for pharmacokinetic analysis. Eligibility requirements included ECOG performance status ≤ 2 and acceptable hepatic, renal and hematologic function. The primary objective was to evaluate the objective response rate (ORR) of modified RVD in transplant-ineligible patients. Secondary objectives included evaluation of the safety profile of modified RVD, progression free survival, overall survival, time to response, response duration, the response rate with respect to cytogenetics, and the pharmacokinetic profile of intravenous and subcutaneous bortezomib. Exploratory analysis will determine minimal residual disease (MRD) status by genotyping and correlate with outcomes in patients who achieve a VGPR or better. Results: Forty-one eligible patients have enrolled between 4/17/13 and 7/18/14, and of those 38 received at least one dose of therapy. Median age at study entry was 73 years (range 65-91) with 22 women and 16 men. ECOG performance status of patients enrolled was 0 in 19 (46.3%), 1 in 15 (36.6%), and 2 in 6 (14.6%) patients. The ISS stage was I in 15 (36.6%), II in 9 (22.0%), and III in 10 (24.4%) patients. Treatment-related toxicities were reported for 34 subjects. Fatigue was the most commonly reported toxicity occurring in 17/34 (50.0%), and of those 16/17 were grade 1 or 2 and manageable. Peripheral neuropathy of any grade was reported in 14/34 (41.2%) of patients including Grade 1 -7 (20.6%), 2 – 6 (17.6%), and 3 – 1 (2.9%). 12/34 (35.3%) reported edema of which 11/12 (91.7%) were grade 1. Grade 3 or greater toxicities included hypophosphatemia - 11 (32.3%), Rash - 4 (11.8%), and mood changes - 2 (5.9%). Pharmacokinetic data comparing intravenous and subcutaneous dosing of bortezomib has been completed and analysis is in process. At a planned interim analysis after 4 cycles that included 33 patients, the investigator-reported ORR of PR or better was 81.8% (CR -5, VGPR – 11, PR - 11, SD 3). Three patients withdrew from the study after less than 1 cycle. Of those, one withdrew for worsening adrenal insufficiency, one for rash attributed to lenalidomide, and one for an unrelated toxicity prompting withdrawal at the Investigator’s discretion. Five additional patients have enrolled but have not completed 4 cycles. Of those, responses thus far include 1 CR, 2 PRs, 1 SD, and 1 patient who has not completed one cycle at the time of this analysis. Exploratory data on bone marrow samples on patients achieving VGPR or better have been collected and analysis for MRD is in process. Conclusions: ModifiedRVD appears to be a well-tolerated and highly effective regimen in the transplant-ineligible population. The ORR rate after up to 4 cycles suggests that this combination at the modified doses and on a weekly schedule is very active. The side effect profile proved manageable and well-tolerated in an older population despite the variance of performance statuses at study entrance. Interim analysis of 38 patients suggests that alternative dosing and schedule of RVD may both improve tolerability and enhance clinical benefit in newly diagnosed, transplant-ineligible MM patients. Disclosures Laubach: Onyx, Novartis, Millenium, Celgene: Research Funding. Huff:Celgene, Millenium: Consultancy. Basile:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Ghobrial:Millennium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schlossman:Millennium: Consultancy. Munshi:Celgene, Onyx, Janssen, Sanofi-Aventi, Oncopep: Consultancy; Oncopep: Equity Ownership; Oncopep: Oncopep Patents & Royalties. Richardson:Celgene, Millenium, Johnson&Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Raje:Amgen, Novartis, Onyx, Celgene, Millenium: Consultancy; Eli Lilly, Acetylon: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Ixazomib or Lenalidomide Maintenance Following Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation and Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRD) Consolidation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results from a Large Multi-Center Randomized Phase II Trial

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 602-602 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Vij ◽  
Thomas G. Martin ◽  
Nitya Nathwani ◽  
Mark A. Fiala ◽  
Feng Gao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3

Background: Maintenance therapy with lenalidomide post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has shown to improve progression-free survival (PFS) in multiple myeloma (MM), and has largely become the standard of care. However, toxicity leads to early discontinuation in nearly one-third of patients and additional options are needed (McCarthy, et al, JCO, 2017). Ixazomib is another maintenance option that has been shown to improve PFS; however, studies comparing lenalidomide and ixazomib are lacking. In this randomized phase 2 study, we analyzed the safety and efficacy of using lenalidomide and ixazomib as part of consolidation and maintenance therapies after ASCT (NCT02253316). Methods: Eligible patients, age 18-70 with newly diagnosed MM undergoing ASCT during first-line treatment, were consented prior to ASCT. Approximately 4 months following ASCT, patients received 4 cycles of consolidation therapy with IRd [ixazomib 4 mg on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, lenalidomide 15 mg on days 1 through 21, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8 and 15]. Primary data on IRd consolidation were presented at ASH 2018 (Abstract 109920). One month after the last consolidation cycle, patients were randomized (1:1) to maintenance therapy with single-agent ixazomib (4 mg on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle) or lenalidomide (10 mg daily months 1-3 followed by 15 mg for months 4+). The arms were stratified based on MRD-status post-consolidation. In total, 237 patients were enrolled from 10 US centers. This abstract coincides with planned interim analysis 3 which is the first comparison of ixazomib and lenalidomide maintenance. While the study was not powered to compare PFS between the two arms, the sample will provide a reasonable power to estimate non-inferiority. There is a planned stopping rule for non-inferiority set at a hazard ratio of >1.3 in favor of lenalidomide. Secondary end-points include MRD-negativity following 12 cycles and toxicity. Results: At time of abstract submission, 215 patients had completed IRd consolidation and 191 had begun maintenance. 90 were randomized to ixazomib and 94 to lenalidomide. 7 patients were not randomized due to toxicity during consolidation; data from these patients are not included in the analyses. The characteristics of the two arms are summarized in Table 1. Hematologic toxicity has been infrequent with ixazomib with neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurring in 11% and 23% of patients. In comparison, neutropenia and thrombocytopenia occurred in 45% and 35% of patients on lenalidomide. The most common non-hematologic toxicities in both arms have been GI-related and infections, both expected events. 16% of patients on ixazomib have experienced Grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicity compared to 34% on lenalidomide. No grade 3 or higher peripheral neuropathy has been reported in either arm. 11% of patients on ixazomib have discontinued due to toxicity and another 9% have required a dose reduction to 3mg. Lenalidomide toxicity has led to discontinuation in 15% of patients and another 12% were dose reduced to 5mg. Only 45% of patients receiving 4+ cycles of lenalidomide were able to titrate to the 15mg dose. After a median follow-up of 11.2 months from randomization (19.7 months post-ASCT), 30% of patients on ixazomib have discontinued treatment due to disease progression. After a median follow-up of 12.3 months from randomization (20.2 months post-ASCT), 18% patients on lenalidomide have discontinued treatment due to disease progression. Conclusion: Ixazomib and lenalidomide maintenance have been well tolerated to date. A comparison of PFS is currently being conducted as part of interim analysis 3 and final results will be presented, representing the first report directly comparing lenalidomide and ixazomib maintenance. Table 1: Disclosures Vij: Genentech: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria. Martin:Amgen, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Roche and Juno: Consultancy. Fiala:Incyte: Research Funding. Deol:Novartis: Other: Advisory board; Kite: Other: Advisory board; Agios: Other: Advisory board. Kaufman:Celgene: Consultancy; Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University: Employment; Amgen: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Hofmeister:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Nektar: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Imbrium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gregory:Poseida: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Berdeja:AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals Inc, Bluebird Bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, Constellation Pharma, Curis Inc, Genentech, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Biotech Inc, Kesios Therapeutics, Lilly, Novartis, Poseida: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Amgen Inc, BioClinica, Celgene Corporation, CRISPR Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma Inc, Prothena, Servier, Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Chari:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosko:Vyxeos: Other: Travel support.

scholarly journals A Phase II Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide, Subcutaneous Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (RVD) Combination Therapy for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Promising Activity and Manageable Toxicity, Including in High Risk Disease

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1981-1981
Author(s):  
Jacob Laubach ◽  
Andrew J Yee ◽  
Jacalyn Rosenblatt ◽  
Jeffrey V Matous ◽  
Charles M. Farber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Induction Cycle

Abstract Introduction: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) are commonly treated with the standard of care combination of lenalidomide (Len), bortezomib (Bz), and dexamethasone (Dex), also known as RVD. A recent randomized phase 3 study found that the addition of Bz to Len and Dex significantly increased median overall and progression free survival as well as response rate (Durie et al. Lancet 2017). Mild to moderate peripheral neuropathy (PN) is commonly reported with Bz use, although lower rates of PN have been reported with subcutaneous (SC) administration of single agent Bz compared with IV Bz (Moreau et al. Lancet Oncol 2011). Here we present preliminary results of a multi-center, open-label, single arm phase II trial of Len, SC Bz, and Dex in pts with newly diagnosed MM. Maintenance was risk-stratified, with high risk patients (defined as those with high risk cytogenetics (del17p, t(4:14), t(14;16)) or ISS stage II or III) receiving Bz in addition to Len. Primary endpoints included 1) overall response rate (ORR) after 4 induction cycles, 2) best response to induction therapy, and 3) rate and severity of PN during induction therapy. Methods: Patients enrolled in this study were newly diagnosed with active MM as defined by the revised IMWG criteria (Rajkumar et al. Lancet Oncol 2014). Protocol specified induction treatment consisted of 21-day cycles with Len 25 mg on days 1-14, SQ Bz 1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, and 11, and Dex 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. Stem cell mobilization followed induction cycle 4 and patients subsequently proceeded to either high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or 4 additional cycles of induction therapy based on patient preference with provider input. Following ASCT or completion of the 8th induction cycle pts proceeded to risk-stratified maintenance therapy. Maintenance consisted of 28-day cycles of therapy with Len on days 1-21 for all patients, while those pts defined as high-risk also received SC bortezomib Bz on days 1 and 15. Patients remained on maintenance therapy until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from protocol-directed treatment. Response was based on the IMWG uniform criteria (Rajkumar et al. Lancet Oncol 2011) and toxicities were graded based on the NCI-CTCAE V4. Correlative samples of blood and bone marrow for genomics and proteomics were collected from baseline and then throughout the study, and are currently being analyzed. Results: Forty-five pts were enrolled across 8 US sites between December 2015 and June 2017. Median age at enrollment was 61 years (range: 43 to 79) and 60% of the patients were male, 40% female. FISH cytogenetics found del 17p in 8% of pts tested, t(14;16) in 9%, and t(4;14) in 14%. At baseline, 60% of pts were ISS II/III. High risk pts comprised 62% of the study population overall. 80% of pts (36/45) collected stem cells and 31% of pts (14/45) continued to ASCT. The median number of CD34+ stem cells collected was 9.67 x 10^6. The median number of induction cycles completed was 8 (1 to 8 cycles) and 43 of 45 pts were evaluable for the primary endpoint of response after 4 induction cycles, with preliminary results indicating an ORR of 91% (39/43). Three pts did not reach the end of cycle 4 and 1 patient had stable disease. ORR at any point up to the beginning of maintenance was 98% (42/43). Any grade PN was reported by 80% of patients, including 38% with grade 1 and 36% with grade 2 PN. There were two cases of Grade 3 PN and one case of Grade 4 PN. Among the three patients with Grade ≥ 3 PN, symptoms improved to Grade ≤ 2 with dose reduction, modification of treatment schedule, or discontinuation of Bz. Importantly, given the higher than expected rate of all and high-grade PN, hydration with IV normal saline 500-1000 ccs prior to Bz administration as part of supportive care in selected patients was instituted and a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of this intervention on PN is in process. Conclusions: The combination of RVD with SC Bz is a highly effective treatment regimen for patients with newly diagnosed MM, including high risk pts. However, rates of all- and high-grade PN were greater than expected despite the use of SC Bz. Prompt dose reduction and/or change in schedule of Bz administration to weekly administration is recommended, with careful attention to supportive care in order to further improve tolerability. Disclosures Rosenblatt: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Matous:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Farber:Charles M. Farber, MD, PhD, LLC-Medical legal consulting: Consultancy; Gilead: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; ummit Medical Group-MD Anderson Cancer Center: Employment; BeiGene: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding. Ghobrial:Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Richardson:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

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

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3129-3129
Author(s):  
Hans C. Lee ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Robert M. Rifkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Causes Of Death ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

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

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

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

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

scholarly journals VTE Rates and Safety Analysis of Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Receiving Carfilzomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (KRD) with or without Rivaroxaban Prophylaxis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1835-1835 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina M Piedra ◽  
Hani Hassoun ◽  
Larry W. Buie ◽  
Sean M. Devlin ◽  
Jessica Flynn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cancer Trial ◽  
Oncology Research ◽  
Increased Risk

Introduction Immunomodulatory agents (IMiD's) are associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE), particularly when combined with high dose steroids. Studies evaluating the use of lenalidomide-bortezomib-dexamethasone (RVD) and carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (KRD) in the frontline setting for multiple myeloma (MM) have reported a 6% and 24% incidence of thrombosis, respectively, despite primary thrombotic prophylaxis with aspirin (ASA) (Richardson, et al. Blood. 2010; Korde, et al. JAMA Oncol 2015). Recent data, including the Hokusai VTE Cancer Trial, have suggested that safety and efficacy of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are preserved in the setting of treatment of solid malignancy-associated thrombosis (Raskob, et al. N Engl J Med. 2018; Mantha, et al. J Thromb Thrombolysis. 2017). Despite this data, there is limited experience and use of DOACs in prevention of thromboses in the setting of hematologic malignancies, specifically MM. After careful review of literature, since early 2018, we changed our clinical practice and routinely placed newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients receiving KRD at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) on concomitant rivaroxaban 10 mg once daily, regardless of VTE risk stratification. In the following abstract, we present VTE rates and safety data for newly diagnosed MM patients receiving RVD with ASA vs. KRD with ASA vs. KRD with rivaroxaban prophylaxis. Methods This was an IRB-approved, single-center, retrospective chart review study. All untreated patients with newly diagnosed MM, receiving at least one cycle of RVD or KRD between January 2015 and October 2018 were included. The period of observation included the time between the first day of therapy until 90 days after completion of induction therapy. Patients were identified by querying the pharmacy database for carfilzomib or bortezomib administration and outpatient medication review of thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban or ASA. VTE diagnoses were confirmed by ICD-10 codes and appropriate imaging studies (computed tomography and ultrasound). Descriptive statistics were performed. Results During the observation period, 241 patients were identified to have received RVD or KRD in the frontline (99 RVD with ASA; 97 KRD with ASA; 45 KRD with rivaroxaban). Baseline characteristics were well distributed among the three arms, with a median age of 60 (30-94) in the RVD ASA arm, 62 (33-77) in the KRD ASA arm, and 60 (24-79) in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Patients had International Staging System (ISS) stage 3 disease in 13% (N=13), 9.3% (N=9), and 11% (N=5) of the RVD ASA, KRD ASA, and KRD rivaroxaban arms, respectively. Median weekly doses of dexamethasone were higher in both KRD arms, 40 mg (20-40) vs. 20 mg (10-40) in the RVD ASA arm. The average initial doses of lenalidomide were 22 mg in the RVD ASA arm compared to 25 mg in both the KRD ASA and KRD rivaroxaban arms. After querying the pharmacy database, no patients were identified to have a history or concomitant use of erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA) use. Treatment-related VTE's occurred in 4 patients (4.0%) in the RVD ASA arm, 16 patients (16.5%) in the KRD ASA arm, and in 1 patient (2.2%) in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Average time to VTE was 6.15 months (Range 5.42, 9.73) after treatment initiation in the RVD ASA group, while it was 2.61 months (Range 0.43, 5.06) in the KRD ASA group and 1.35 months in the KRD rivaroxaban group. Minor, grade 1 bleeding events per the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) were identified in 1 (1.1%) patient in the RVD ASA arm, 5 (5.2%) patients in the KRD ASA arm, and 1 (2.2%) patient in the KRD rivaroxaban arm. Conclusion More efficacious MM combination therapies have been found to increase the risk of VTE when using ASA prophylaxis, indicating better thromboprophylaxis is needed. We found patients receiving ASA prophylaxis with KRD were more likely to experience a VTE and these events occurred earlier compared to patients receiving ASA prophylaxis with RVD. Importantly, the rate of VTE was reduced to the same level as ASA prophylaxis with RVD when low-dose rivaroxaban 10 mg daily was used with KRD, and without necessarily increasing bleeding risk. Our retrospective data support the development of prospective clinical trials further investigating DOAC use in thromboprophylaxis for NDMM patients receiving carfilzomib-based treatments. Figure Disclosures Hassoun: Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Lesokhin:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; GenMab: Consultancy, Honoraria; Serametrix Inc.: Patents & Royalties; Genentech: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mailankody:Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; CME activity by Physician Education Resource: Honoraria. Smith:Celgene: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Fate Therapeutics and Precision Biosciences: Consultancy. Landgren:Theradex: Other: IDMC; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: IDMC; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Off-label use of rivaroxaban for outpatient prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) will be explicitly disclosed to the audience.

scholarly journals Routine Use of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin in 7+3-Based Inductions for All "Non-Adverse" Risk AML

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 36-37
Author(s):  
Gavin Hui ◽  
Abdullah Ladha ◽  
Edna Cheung ◽  
Caroline Berube ◽  
Steven Coutre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin ◽  
Intermediate Risk ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Myeloablative Conditioning ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Monosomy 7

Introduction: The addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to 7+3 chemotherapy for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been shown to significantly improve event-free survival (EFS) for cytogenetically favorable-risk AML, with marginal benefit for intermediate-risk AML, and no benefit for cytogenetically adverse-risk AML. Of note, with the exception of mutated FLT3-ITD, little is known about the impact of GO in ELN 2017-defined genotypically adverse-risk AML, and a recent randomized trial found no EFS benefit for 7+3+GO in patients (pts) with genotypically favorable-risk, NPM1-mutated AML. Since 2017, our institution incorporated GO into 7+3-based inductions for all "non-adverse" risk AML pts, as defined by wild-type FLT3 and no abnormalities on rapid FISH analysis for del(5q)/monosomy 5, del(7q)/monosomy 7, and del(20q). We report our experience treating all pts with "non-adverse" risk AML-as defined by this algorithm-with 7+3+GO. Methods: An institutional database was queried in order to identify all pts ≥18 years old who received 7+3-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed AML between 2017 and 2020; pts who received the FDA-approved fractionated dose of GO were included in the analysis. Data collection included demographic variables, karyotype/FISH, targeted PCR analyses, and multigene NGS panels for AML-related mutations including, but not limited to, mutations in FLT3, NPM1, CEBPA, TP53, RUNX1, and ASXL1. Outcome data included response to induction, relapse, and death, as well as hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) rates, conditioning regimens, and post-transplant complications. Results: Between January 2017 and July 2020, 96 pts received 7+3-based induction at our institution. Of these, 29 (30%) received 7+3 in combination with GO. Median age at diagnosis was 46 years (range 23-66), with 17 (59%) males. Sixteen (55%) pts had ELN favorable-risk AML (5 [31%] by cytogenetics and 11 [69%] by genotype), 6 (21%) pts had ELN intermediate-risk AML, and 7 (24%) pts had ELN adverse-risk AML (4 [57%] by cytogenetics and 3 [43%] by genotype). Median time from diagnosis to start of induction was 4 days (range 0-43). For cytogenetically adverse-risk pts, median time from diagnostic bone marrow biopsy to receipt of adverse karyotype results was 8 days (7-14). Median time from start of induction to receipt of multigene NGS results for all pts was 15 days (3-32). Overall, 22 (76%) pts achieved remission. All genotypically adverse-risk pts (1 with mutated TP53 and 2 with mutated RUNX1) were refractory to induction, while 3 of 4 (75%) cytogenetically adverse-risk pts (1 with t(6;9), 1 with monosomy 7, and 2 with 11q23 abnormalities) achieved remission. Eight of the 29 (28%) pts proceeded to HCT, including 4 adverse-risk pts. Of the adverse-risk pts, all received myeloablative conditioning prior to HCT and 3 (75%) developed veno-occlusive disease (VOD), with 2 (50%) requiring defibrotide therapy. In favorable/intermediate-risk pts, 4 (18%) proceeded to HCT (2 intermediate-risk pts in first remission and 2 favorable-risk pts in second remission). Of these, 2 (50%) received myeloablative conditioning and 1 (25%) developed VOD. At last follow-up, 23 of 29 pts (79%) remained alive, with a median overall survival not reached (range 1-29 months) and a median EFS of 20 months (9-31). The percentage of ELN favorable-, intermediate-, and adverse-risk pts who remained event-free at last follow-up was 75%, 33%, and 43%, respectively. Discussion: This single-center, retrospective cohort describes the outcomes of pts with "non-adverse" risk AML who received induction chemotherapy with 7+3+GO according to a pre-defined algorithm. Using this algorithm, 30% of all pts receiving 7+3-based inductions received GO. Of these, nearly 25% were ultimately found to have adverse-risk AML as defined by ELN 2017 criteria, largely driven by long turn-around times for karyotyping and NGS multigene panel results. No patient with genotypically adverse-risk AML by ELN criteria responded to induction chemotherapy, and 75% of cytogenetically adverse-risk pts who proceeded to HCT developed VOD. Routine use of 7+3+GO induction outside of the context of cytogenetically favorable-risk AML remains controversial, and further study is needed to define the role of GO, particularly for pts with ELN genotypically adverse-risk AML. Table Disclosures Gotlib: Blueprint Medicines Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Chair of the Response Adjudication Committee and Research Funding, Research Funding; Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: co-chair of the Study Steering Committee and Research Funding. Liedtke:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Muffly:Adaptive: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Research Funding. Mannis:AbbVie, Agios, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech: Consultancy; Glycomimetics, Forty Seven, Inc, Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Pegaspargase Can Safely be Administered in Adults Age 40 and Older with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3816-3816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan J. Daley ◽  
Sridevi Rajeeve ◽  
Charlene C. Kabel ◽  
Jeremy J. Pappacena ◽  
Sarah E. Stump ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Hypersensitivity Reactions ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Hematopoietic Stem ◽  
Frontline Treatment

Introduction: Asparaginase (ASP) has demonstrated a survival benefit in pediatric patients (pts) with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and is now part of standard-of-care frontline treatment. As a result, asparaginase preparations have been incorporated into the treatment of adult ALL to improve outcomes. Pegaspargase (PEG-ASP), a modified version of asparaginase with prolonged asparagine depletion, appears to be safe in adults up to age 40 (Stock, et al., Blood, 2019), but is associated with a unique spectrum of toxicities, the risks of which appear to increase with age. Therefore, the safety of PEG-ASP remains a significant concern in older adults w/ ALL. Methods: We conducted a single center retrospective chart review of pts age ≥40 years who received PEG-ASP as part of frontline induction/consolidation or reinduction, between March 2008 and June 2018 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. The primary objective was to evaluate the tolerability and toxicity of PEG-ASP based on the incidence and severity of ASP-related toxicities (hypersensitivity reactions, hypertriglyceridemia, hyperbilirubinemia, transaminitis, pancreatitis, hypofibrinogenemia, etc) according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03. Laboratory values recorded were either the peak or the nadir, the more appropriate for toxicity assessment, within a 4-week period following PEG-ASP administration. Secondary objectives were to determine the total number of doses of PEG-ASP administered in comparison to the number of doses intended, and to characterize the rationale for PEG-ASP discontinuation when applicable. Fisher's exact test was used to compare the incidence of PEG-ASP toxicities with respect to pt and treatment characteristics (regimen, age, BMI, gender, Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) vs. Ph-, presence of extramedullary disease, PEG-ASP dose). P values were not adjusted for multiple comparisons. Results: We identified 60 pts with ALL (40 B-ALL and 20 T-ALL) who received at least one dose of PEG-ASP. Nine pts were Ph+. The median pt age at initiation of the treatment was 53, (range, 40 to 80), and 19 pts had a BMI ≥30 kg/m2. Forty-four pts received treatment for newly diagnosed ALL, and 16 pts for relapsed disease. Table 1 lists pt baseline characteristics. Among the 44 pts with newly diagnosed ALL, 27 pts received PEG-ASP as part of pediatric or pediatric-inspired regimens at doses of 2000 - 2500 units/m2, and 1 pt received a modified dose of 1000 units/m2 due to age. The remaining 16 pts received PEG-ASP at doses of 1000 - 2000 units/m2 for consolidation, per established adult regimens (ALL-2 and L-20; Lamanna, et al., Cancer, 2013). Grade 3/4 ASP-related toxicities with a >10% incidence included: hyperbilirubinemia, transaminitis, hypoalbuminemia, hyperglycemia, hypofibrinogenemia, and hypertriglyceridemia. Frontline treatment regimens in which PEG-ASP was used in consolidation cycles only (ALL-2, L-20) were associated w/ a lower incidence of hyperbilirubinemia (p=0.009) and hypertriglyceridemia (p<0.001) compared to those regimens that included PEG-ASP during induction (pediatric/pediatric-inspired regimens) (Table 2). Younger age (40-59 vs. ≥60 years) was associated with a greater risk of hypertriglyceridemia (p<0.001) and higher PEG-ASP dose (≥2000 vs. <2000 units/m2) was associated with a greater risk of hypertriglyceridemia and hypofibrinogenemia (p=0.002 and p=0.025, respectively). Thirty-eight pts (63%) received all intended doses of PEG-ASP. Six pts stopped PEG-ASP to proceed to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (5 in CR1, 1 in CR2), and 7 pts stopped for hypersensitivity reactions. Hepatotoxicity was the only ASP-related toxicity that led to PEG-ASP discontinuation occurring in 5 pts (hyperbilirubinemia, N=4; transaminitis, N=1). The total number of intended doses of PEG-ASP based on regimens used was 186, and 112 were administered. Conclusion: PEG-ASP was incorporated into the treatment of 60 adult ALL pts age ≥40, with manageable toxicity. Seven pts discontinued PEG-ASP due to hypersensitivity reactions and 5 discontinued due to hepatotoxicity, but other reported toxicities did not lead to PEG-ASP discontinuation and the majority of the pts completed all intended doses of PEG-ASP. This study suggests that with careful monitoring, PEG-ASP can safely be administered in adults ≥40 years of age. Disclosures Rajeeve: ASH-HONORS Grant: Research Funding. Tallman:UpToDate: Patents & Royalties; Oncolyze: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Delta Fly Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellerant: Research Funding; Tetraphase: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nohla: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioLineRx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KAHR: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Geyer:Dava Oncology: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Park:Takeda: Consultancy; Allogene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Autolus: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Metaphase Cytogenetics for Risk Stratification in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4396-4396
Author(s):  
Patrick Mellors ◽  
Moritz Binder ◽  
Rhett P. Ketterling ◽  
Patricia Griepp ◽  
Linda B Baughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Risk Modeling ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cytogenetic Abnormalities ◽  
Improve Risk Stratification

Introduction: Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics are associated with inferior survival in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). These abnormalities are only detected in one third of cases due to the low proliferative rate of plasma cells. It is unknown if metaphase cytogenetics improve risk stratification when using contemporary prognostic models such as the revised international staging system (R-ISS), which incorporates interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Aims: The aims of this study were to 1) characterize the association between abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics and overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed MM treated with novel agents and 2) evaluate whether the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to R-ISS, age, and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) improves model discrimination with respect to OS. Methods: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 483 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulators (IMID) who had metaphase cytogenetics performed prior to initiation of therapy. Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics were defined as MM specific abnormalities, while normal metaphase cytogenetics included constitutional cytogenetic variants, age-related Y chromosome loss, and normal metaphase karyotypes. Multivariable adjusted proportional hazards regression models were fit for the association between known prognostic factors and OS. Covariates associated with inferior OS on multivariable analysis included R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, PCLI ≥ 2, and abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. We devised a risk scoring system weighted by their respective hazard ratios (R-ISS II +1, R-ISS III + 2, age ≥ 70 +2, PCLI ≥ 2 +1, metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities + 1). Low (LR), intermediate (IR), and high risk (HR) groups were established based on risk scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-5 in modeling without metaphase cytogenetics, and scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-6 in modeling incorporating metaphase cytogenetics, respectively. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival analysis was stratified by LR, IR, and HR groups in models 1) excluding metaphase cytogenetics 2) including metaphase cytogenetics and 3) including metaphase cytogenetics, with IR stratified by presence and absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities. Survival estimates were compared between groups using the log-rank test. Harrell's C was used to compare the predictive power of risk modeling with and without metaphase cytogenetics. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 66 (31-95), 281 patients (58%) were men, median follow up was 5.5 years (0.04-14.4), and median OS was 6.4 years (95% CI 5.7-6.8). Ninety-seven patients (20%) were R-ISS stage I, 318 (66%) stage II, and 68 (14%) stage III. One-hundred and fourteen patients (24%) had high-risk abnormalities by FISH, and 115 (24%) had abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. Three-hundred and thirteen patients (65%) received an IMID, 119 (25%) a PI, 51 (10%) received IMID and PI, and 137 (28%) underwent upfront autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). On multivariable analysis, R-ISS (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.29-1.97, p < 0.001), age ≥ 70 (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.83-2.93, p < 0.001), PCLI ≥ 2, (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.16-2.00, p=0.002) and abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.75, p=0.019) were associated with inferior OS. IR and HR groups experienced significantly worse survival compared to LR groups in models excluding (Figure 1A) and including (Figure 1B) the effect of metaphase cytogenetics (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, the inclusion of metaphase cytogenetics did not improve discrimination. Likewise, subgroup analysis of IR patients by the presence or absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities did not improve risk stratification (Figure 1C) (p < 0.001). The addition of metaphase cytogenetics to risk modeling with R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, and PCLI ≥ 2 did not improve prognostic performance when evaluated by Harrell's C (c=0.636 without cytogenetics, c=0.642 with cytogenetics, absolute difference 0.005, 95% CI 0.002-0.012, p=0.142). Conclusions: Abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics at diagnosis are associated with inferior OS in MM when accounting for the effects of R-ISS, age, and PCLI. However, the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to prognostic modeling incorporating these covariates did not significantly improve risk stratification. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

PreVent-ACaLL Short-term combined acalabrutinib and venetoclax treatment of newly diagnosed patients with CLL at high risk of infection and/or early treatment, who do not fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria for treatment. A randomized study with extensive immune phenotyping

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4304-4304
Author(s):  
Caspar Da Cunha-Bang ◽  
Rudy Agius ◽  
Arnon P. Kater ◽  
Mark-David Levin ◽  
Anders Österborg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Severe Infection ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Educational Grant ◽  
Travel Grant ◽  
Grade 3

Background Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) have an increased risk of infections both prior to and upon treatment. Infections are the major cause of death for these patients, the 5-year incidence of severe infection prior to treatment is approximately 32 % with a 30-day mortality of 10 % (Andersen et al., Haematologica, 2018). Chemoimmunotherapy is still 1st line standard of treatment for patients without del17p or TP53 mutation despite association with neutropenia, immunesuppression and infections. The combination of BTK inhibitors and the bcl-2 inhibitor venetoclax has demonstrated synergy in vitro and in vivo, while translational data indicate that the CLL-related immune dysfunction can be improved on treatment with reduced risk of infections. Employing the Machine-Learning based CLL treatment infection model (CLL-TIM) that we have developed, patients with a high (>65%) risk of infection and/or need of CLL treatment within 2 years of diagnosis can be identified (CLL-TIM.org). The significant morbidity and mortality due to infections in treatment-naïve CLL warrants trials that challenge the dogma of only treating symptomatic CLL. Thus, we initiated the randomized phase 2 PreVent-ACall trial of 12 weeks acalabrutinib + venetoclax to reduce risk of infections. Methods Design and statistics A phase 2, randomized, open label, multi-center clinical trial for newly diagnosed patients with CLL. Based on the CLL-TIM algorithm, patients with high risk of severe infection and/or treatment within 2 years from diagnosis can be identified. Approximately 20% of newly diagnosed CLL patients will fall into this high-risk group. First patient in trial planned for September 2019, primary outcome expected in 2021. Only patients identified as at high risk, who do not currently fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria are eligible. Patients will be randomized between observation in terms of watch&wait according to IWCLL guidelines or treatment. Primary endpoint Grade ≥3-Infection-free survival in the treatment arm compared to the observation arm after 24 weeks (12 weeks after end of treatment). Study treatment Acalabrutinib 100 mg BID from cycle 1 day 1 for 12 weeks. Venetoclax, ramp up during the first five weeks starting cycle 1 day 1, thereafter 400 mg once daily for a total of 12 weeks counted from cycle 1 day 1. Patients A sample size of 25 patients in each arm, 50 patients in total. Major inclusion criteria CLL according to IWCLL criteria ≤1 year prior to randomizationHigh risk of infection and/or progressive treatment within 2 years according to CLL-TIM algorithmIWCLL treatment indication not fulfilledAdequate bone marrow functionCreatinine clearance above 30 mL/min.ECOG performance status 0-2. Major exclusion criteria Prior CLL treatmentRichter's transformationPrevious autoimmune disease treated with immune suppressionMalignancies other than CLL requiring systemic therapies or considered to impact survivalRequirement of therapy with strong CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 inhibitors/inducers or anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonistsHistory of bleeding disorders, current platelet inhibitors / anticoagulant therapyHistory of stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months Trial registry number EUDRACT NUMBER: 2019-000270-29 Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT03868722 Perspectives: As infections is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with CLL prior to any treatment, we aim at changing the natural history of immune dysfunction in CLL. The PreVent-ACaLL trial includes an optional extension into a phase 3 part with the primary outcome of grade ≥3 infection-free, CLL treatment-free survival two years after enrollment to address the unmet need of improved immune function in CLL for the first time. Figure Disclosures Da Cunha-Bang: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Grant; Roche: Other: Travel Grant. Levin:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant ; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant . Österborg:BeiGene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Kancera AB: Research Funding. Niemann:Novo Nordisk Foundation: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel grant; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel grant; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: acalabrutinib and venetoclax in combination for CLL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document