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 ◽  
...  

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.

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 14-16
Author(s):  
Timothy S. Pardee ◽  
Jessica Oschwald ◽  
Esprit Ma ◽  
Tao Xu ◽  
Melissa Montez ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 23-24
Author(s):  
Cedric Hermans ◽  
Claude Négrier ◽  
Pål A Holme ◽  
Carmen Escuriola ◽  
Ana R Cid ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 207-207 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Saengsuree Jootar ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 207 Background: Results from the phase 3, international, randomized ENESTnd trial have demonstrated the superior efficacy of nilotinib over imatinib with significantly higher rates of major molecular response (MMR), complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), and with significantly lower rates of progression to AP/BC on treatment. Here, we present data with a median follow-up of 18 months. Methods: 846 CML-CP patients were randomized to nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (bid) (n=282), nilotinib 400 mg bid (n=281), and imatinib 400 mg once daily (n=283). Primary endpoint was MMR (≤ 0.1% BCR-ABLIS) rate “at” 12 months, as previously presented. Key secondary endpoint was durable MMR at 24 months. Other endpoints assessed at 24 months include progression to AP/BC (with and without clonal evolution), event-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival (OS). Results: With a median follow-up of 18 months, the overall best MMR rate was superior for nilotinib 300 mg bid (66%, P < .0001) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (62%, P < .0001) compared with imatinib (40%). Superior rates of MMR were observed in both nilotinib arms compared with the imatinib arm across all Sokal risk groups (Table). The overall best rate of BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.0032% (equivalent to complete molecular response, CMR) was superior for nilotinib 300 mg bid (21%, P < .0001) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (17%, P < .0001) compared with imatinib (6%). The overall best CCyR rate was superior for nilotinib 300 mg bid (85%, P < .001) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (82%, P=.017) compared with imatinib (74%). The superior efficacy of nilotinib was further demonstrated using the 2009 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 12-month milestone in which fewer patients had suboptimal response or treatment failure on nilotinib 300 mg bid (2%, 3%) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (2%, 2%) vs imatinib (11%, 8%). Rates of progression to AP/BC on treatment were significantly lower for nilotinib 300 mg bid (0.7%, P=.006) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (0.4%, P=.003) compared with imatinib (4.2%). The rate of progression on treatment was also significantly lower for nilotinib when including clonal evolution as a criteria for progression (Table). There were fewer CML-related deaths on nilotinib 300 mg bid (n=2), and 400 mg bid (n=1) vs imatinib (n=8). Estimated OS rate (including data from follow-up after discontinuation) at 18 months was higher for nilotinib 300 mg bid (98.5%, P=.28) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (99.3%, P=.03) vs imatinib (96.9%). Both drugs were well-tolerated. Discontinuations due to adverse events or laboratory abnormalities were lowest for nilotinib 300 mg bid (7%) compared with nilotinib 400 mg bid (12%) and imatinib (9%). With longer follow up there has been minimal change in the occurrence of AEs. Minimum 24-month follow-up data for all patients will be presented. Conclusions: With longer follow-up, nilotinib was associated with a significantly lower rate of progression to AP/BC on treatment and lower rates of suboptimal response or treatment failure vs imatinib. Nilotinib resulted in fewer CML-related deaths and a higher OS rate vs imatinib. Nilotinib induced superior rates of MMR, CMR, and CCyR vs imatinib in patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP. Taken together, these data support nilotinib as a new standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed CML. Disclosures: Hughes: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria. Hochhaus:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kim:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. le Coutre:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Reiffers:Novartis: Research Funding. Pasquini:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Clark:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genzyme: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gallagher:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoenekopp:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 2282-2282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimmo Porkka ◽  
Michele Baccarani ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Hagop Kantarjian ◽  
Satu Mustjoki ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 2282 Background: The Phase 3 DASISION trial comparing dasatinib 100 mg once daily with imatinib 400 mg once daily as initial treatment in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed CML-CP has demonstrated superior efficacy and favorable safety of dasatinib after a minimum of 12 months of follow-up (Kantarjian, H, et al. N Engl J Med 2010;362:2260). While fluid retention was more frequent with imatinib than with dasatinib, pleural effusion was seen only with dasatinib. Here, we provide a detailed analysis of pts experiencing pleural effusion, a clinically relevant adverse drug reaction. Methods: 519 pts with newly diagnosed, treatment-naive CML-CP (median disease duration of 1 month) were randomly assigned to either dasatinib 100 mg once daily (259 pts) or imatinib 400 mg one daily (260 pts). Key endpoints included complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), major molecular response (MMR) and safety. All pts were assessed by chest x-ray at baseline and at 6 months after randomization, or more frequently, if indicated clinically. Pts with pleural effusion at baseline were excluded. Pleural effusion was graded according to CTCAE version 3 (grade 1, asymptomatic; grade 2, symptomatic, up to 2 therapeutic thoracenteses; grade 3, symptomatic requiring supplemental oxygen, < 2 therapeutic thoracenteses; grade 4, life-threatening, hemodynamic instability). Results: After a minimum follow-up of 12 months with median treatment duration of 14.3 months (range, 0.3–25.8), 26 (10%, median age, 60 years) of the 258 dasatinib-treated pts (median age, 46 years) experienced pleural effusion. Of the pts with pleural effusion, 6 (23%) had low, 17 (65%) had intermediate and 3 (12%) had high Hasford risk scores. There were no grade 3 or 4 pleural effusion events. All events were grade 1(2%) or grade 2 (8%). Most events (n = 22, 85%) occurred more than 8 weeks after the start of study drug. In pts who had a pleural effusion, the median time to the event was 28 weeks (range, 4–88). Lymphocytosis (defined as peripheral blood lymphocyte count > 3.6 × 109/L) was noted in 11 (42%) of the 26 pts with pleural effusion, as compared to 46 (20%) of 232 pts with no pleural effusion. Pleural effusion was managed by dose modification and/or medical intervention. Therapy was interrupted in 19 pts, and the dose of dasatinib was reduced in 8 pts (4 pts, to 80 mg; 1 pt, to 70 mg; 3 pts, to 50 mg). Twelve pts received diuretics, 7 received corticosteroids, and only 1 pt underwent therapeutic thoracentesis. Only 3 pts (1.2%) discontinued therapy due to pleural effusion (grade 2). Eleven pts who continued dasatinib had resolution of their pleural effusion. Five pts had recurrent effusions. Of the 26 pts with pleural effusion, 24 (92%) achieved a CCyR and 17 (65%) achieved a MMR by 12 months of treatment; the corresponding CCyR and MMR rates in the total pt population were 83% and 46%, respectively Seven of the 8 pts with pleural effusion who reduced their dose achieved CCyR and MMR. Conclusion: In pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP treated with dasatinib as initial therapy, pleural effusion was mild to moderate in severity, and was manageable with dose interruption and/reduction and/or a short course of diuretics and/or corticosteroids. The occurrence of pleural effusion and management interventions did not negatively affect the achievement of CCyR or MMR. These findings are in line with data reported previously for second-line dasatinib in CML pts resistant or intolerant to imatinib (Porkka, K, et al. Cancer 2010;116:377). Furthermore, pleural effusion and peripheral lymphocytosis may be indicative of immune-mediated antitumor activity of dasatinib. Disclosures: Porkka: BMS, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Baccarani: Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hochhaus: Brostol-Myers Squibb, Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian: BMS, Pfizer and Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Mustjoki: BMS, Novartis: Honoraria. Bradley-Garelik: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhu: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Cortes: Brostol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Wyeth: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4845-4845
Author(s):  
Lindsey E. Roeker ◽  
Shaum Kabadi ◽  
Chakkarin Burudpakdee ◽  
Aimee Near ◽  
Keiko Wada ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
Naveen Pemmaraju ◽  
Aaron T. Gerds ◽  
Shreekant Parasuraman ◽  
Jingbo Yu ◽  
Anne Shah ◽  
...  

Background Polycythemia vera (PV) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) associated with an increased risk of thrombotic events (TEs), a major cause of morbidity and mortality. Patients aged ≥60 years and/or with a history of thrombosis are considered to have high-risk PV. There is limited contemporary, real-world evidence exploring the effect of TEs on mortality in patients with PV. The aim of this analysis was to compare the risk of mortality in patients newly diagnosed with high-risk PV who experienced a TE vs those who did not experience a TE. Study Design and Methods All data from the Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims database (Parts A/B/D) from January 2010-December 2017 were used to identify patients with a PV diagnosis (all high risk based on cohort being ≥65 years of age) with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 outpatient claims. The index date was the date of the first qualifying PV claim. Patients with a PV diagnosis or use of cytoreductive therapy within 12 months before the index date (pre-index period) were excluded; ≥12-months continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment pre-index dates was required. The study sample was categorized into TE and non-TE groups based on the occurrence of any of the following events during follow-up: deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, ischemic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, transient ischemic attack, peripheral arterial thrombosis, or superficial thrombophlebitis. TEs were evaluated from the index date to the end of follow-up. Cox regression analyses with time-varying effects were used to assess mortality risk among patients with PV, with post-index TE as a time-dependent variable, stratified by pre-index TE, and adjusting for patient demographic characteristics and comorbid conditions. Results A total of 56,176 Medicare FFS beneficiaries with PV diagnoses met inclusion criteria. The median age was 73 years, 51.9% were men, and 90.7% were white; 10,110 patients (18.0%) had a history of TE before diagnosis (ie, pre-index). In the follow-up period, 20,105 patients (35.8%) had a TE and 36,071 patients (64.2%) did not have a TE. In the comparison between the TE vs non-TE groups, the median (range) age (75.0 [65-104] vs 73.0 [65-106] years, respectively), mean (SD) Charlson comorbidity index score (3.1 [2.6] vs 2.2 [2.3]), and percentage of patients with a history of cardiovascular events (34.1% vs 23.8%), bleeding (13.3% vs 10.4%), or anemia (28.6% vs 23.4%) were higher (Table 1). Among all patients with PV, the median time from diagnosis to first post-index TE was 7.5 months. Among those with pre-index TE (n=10,093), median time from index to first post-index TE was 0.6 months, whereas patients without pre-index TE (n=46,083) had a median time to first post-index TE of 14.2 months. Among all patients with TE during follow-up, the most common TEs were ischemic stroke (47.5%), transient ischemic attack (30.9%), and acute myocardial infarction (30.5%). The risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a TE compared with those who did not (hazard ratio [HR; 95% CI], 9.3 [8.4-10.2]; P&lt;0.0001). For patients who experienced a pre-index TE, the risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a subsequent TE during follow-up compared with patients who did not (HR [95% CI], 6.7 [5.8-7.8]; P&lt;0.0001). Likewise, for patients who did not experience a pre-index TE, the risk of mortality was increased for patients who experienced a TE during follow-up compared with patients who did not (HR [95% CI], 13.1 [11.4-15.0]; P&lt;0.0001). Conclusions In this real-world study, approximately one-third of patients with newly diagnosed high-risk PV experienced a TE during follow-up and had a 9-fold increased risk of mortality vs those who did not experience a TE. TE risk mitigation remains an important management goal in patients with PV, particularly in those with prior TE. Disclosures Pemmaraju: Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; SagerStrong Foundation: Other: Grant Support; Affymetrix: Other: Grant Support, Research Funding; MustangBio: Honoraria; Blueprint Medicines: Honoraria; LFB Biotechnologies: Honoraria; Plexxikon: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pacylex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria; Roche Diagnostics: Honoraria; Cellectis: Research Funding; DAVA Oncology: Honoraria. Gerds:Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; AstraZeneca/MedImmune: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Avalere Health: Current Employment. Xi:Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation; Avalere Health: Current Employment. Kumar:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Scherber:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3727-3727
Author(s):  
Yair Herishanu ◽  
Neta Goldschmidt ◽  
Gilad Itchaki ◽  
Itai Levi ◽  
Ariel Aviv ◽  
...  

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 (&lt;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.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 44-45
Author(s):  
Geoffrey L Uy ◽  
Laura F. Newell ◽  
Tara Lin ◽  
Stuart L. Goldberg ◽  
Matthew J. Wieduwilt ◽  
...  

Background: CPX-351 is a liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin and cytarabine in a 1:5 molar ratio. In a randomized phase 3 study (CPX-351-301) conducted in older adults (60 to 75 years old) with newly diagnosed, high-risk and/or secondary AML, CPX-351 induction therapy was superior to standard 7+3 with improved rates of complete remission (CR) and overall survival (OS). In both older adults and high-risk AML, allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is frequently the preferred post-remission strategy owing to the high rates of relapse and poor overall survival with conventional chemotherapy approaches. After a median follow-up of 20.7 months, the primary pre-planned analysis found that more patients randomized to CPX-351 underwent HCT and an exploratory landmark survival analysis from the time of HCT favored CPX-351 (HR = 0.46 [95% CI: 0.24, 0.89]; one-sided P = 0.009). However, the initial protocol did not collect data related to HCT and the basis for improved HCT outcomes with CPX-351 was previously unknown. Here we present a detailed analysis of HCT outcomes in patients enrolled in the CPX-351-301 study with 5-years of follow-up. Methods: Patients age 60 to 75 years with high-risk and/or secondary AML were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to receive CPX-351 or 7+3 as induction and consolidation chemotherapy (Lancet J et al, JCO 2018). The protocol was amended to collect additional HCT-specific information, including donor and HCT characteristics and post-HCT outcomes, including rates of relapse and GVHD. Post-HCT outcomes including relapse, GVHD, and death were analyzed as competing events. Results: Of 309 randomized patients in the CPX-351-301 study, more patients achieved CR/CRi with CPX-351 vs 7+3 (48% vs 33%) allowing more patients to proceed to HCT (35% vs 25%) and more patients to proceed to HCT in remission (CPX-351: 41/73 [56%]; 7+3: 24/52 [46%]). The median age was 66 years with CPX-351 vs 65 years with standard induction among the transplanted cohorts; 16 patients in the CPX-351 transplanted arm were over the age of 70 compared to only 6 in the 7+3 arm. Other pre-HCT patient characteristics were balanced between the CPX-351 and 7+3 groups, including ECOG performance status (8% vs 5% with ECOG PS of 2), HCT-CI (median 4 vs 3), donor type (matched unrelated donor 49% vs 49%), and conditioning regimen intensity (myeloablative [17% vs 13%] vs reduced-intensity conditioning [43% vs 46%]). The Kaplan-Meier-estimated 3-year survival rate among transplanted patients was 56% with CPX-351 vs 23% with 7+3 (Figure 1A). The differences in survival consistently favored CPX-351 across patient age, AML subtype, disease status, donor type, and conditioning intensity (Figure 1B). Differences in OS were driven by a large reduction in non-relapse mortality (HR = 0.42 [95% CI: 0.21, 0.86]; Figure 1D). The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD with death as a competing event at 6 months from HCT date was 0.49 (95% CI: 0.35, 0.62) in the CPX-351 arm and 0.38 (95% CI: 0.23, 0.53) in the 7+3 arm. Conclusions: Analysis of HCT outcomes in patients enrolled in the CPX-351-301 study demonstrated that treatment with CPX-351 in older adults with high-risk and/or secondary AML resulted in more patients bridged to HCT and more patients transplanted in CR/CRi compared to 7+3, with improved OS in transplanted patients. The pattern of HCT outcomes suggests improved disease control with CPX-351 induction allowing higher HCT rates, but more importantly improved tolerability with less non-relapse mortality; this data supports the development of CPX-351 in other high-risk AML populations in which allogeneic HCT is the preferred post-remission strategy. Figure Disclosures Uy: Genentech: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Lin:Abbvie: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Trovagene: Research Funding; Prescient Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Genetech-Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding; Mateon Therapeutics: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celyad: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bio-Path Holdings: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding. Wieduwilt:Reata Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Leadiant: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Macrogeneics: Research Funding. Ryan:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Faderl:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Lancet:Abbvie: Consultancy; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; ElevateBio Management: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 18-19
Author(s):  
John M. Burke ◽  
Nicholas Liu ◽  
Kristina Yu-Isenberg ◽  
Michelle A. Fanale ◽  
Andy Surinach ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Ariel Han ◽  
Karin Chun Hayes ◽  
Tracy Woody ◽  
Frank Valone ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND Polycythemia Vera (PV) is a rare myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with an increased production of red blood cells, white blood cells, and platelets. Most frequent treatment includes phlebotomy, hydroxyurea, interferon, and ruxolitinib. Current NCCN guideline recommends managing HCT levels to below 45%. The objective of this study was to determine real-world standards of care and patient characteristics, and to observe how treatment decisions vary by HCT level and thrombosis risk. METHODOLOGY We conducted a retrospective study using Symphony Health's longitudinal transactional healthcare claims database that includes prescription, medical and hospital claims across &gt; 4,900 US payers representing 86% of US lives. Eligible patients had at least one ICD-10 diagnosis code for PV and at least one of the treatments including phlebotomy, hydroxyurea, busulfan, interferon, and ruxolitinib between Jan 1, 2018 and Dec 31, 2019 (index period). For eligible patients, all prior treatment history initiated as far back as January 2010 was used to report therapy changes. Patients were also required to have at least one PV diagnosis within a year of treatment initiation and at least 2 HCT lab results during the index period. PV treatment changes and characteristics were studied. RESULTS Out of 28,306 patients with PV, 4,264 patients had HCT lab data for 2 years (index period). Median duration of follow-up was 854 days (range 98-3,373days). Patient therapy duration was from 1 to 9 years. Median patient age was 65 (range 11-94), with 1,451 (34%) patients aged less than 60, 2,813 (66%) 60 years or older, and a substantial male predominance (62% vs 38%). 1,247 (29%) patients were classified as Low Risk (age&lt; 60 with no TE history) and 3,017 (71%) patients as High Risk. Within the High-Risk group, 2,224 (52%) were age&gt;60 without prior TE, 204 (5%) were age&lt;60 with prior TE and 589 (14%) were age&gt;60 with prior TE. For Low Risk patients' initial treatment was phlebotomy alone (85%) and a total of 73% of all Low Risk patients remained on phlebotomy alone. For High Risk patients' initial treatment was phlebotomy alone (60%) and 43% all of High-Risk patients remained on phlebotomy alone (Figure 1). The median HCT prior to treatment initiation was 52.9% and 48% during treatment. 936 (22%) patients achieved NCCN treatment guidelines with HCT levels always remaining under 45%, and 1,226 (29%) patients had HCT levels controlled between 45% and 50%. However, 2,102 (49%) patients had some or all HCT levels&gt; 50% (Figure 2). With the most recent lab test, 2,180 (51%) of patients still had HCTs above 45% and 804 (19%) were still above 50%. In a sub-cohort of 653 High Risk patients with a prior TE and up to 5 years of follow up, 236 (36%) had at least one other TE; for the 1,774 High Risk patients who did not have the history of thrombosis, 161(9%) had at least one TE (Table 2). The most common TE since treatment began in patients with prior TE were deep vein thrombosis (n= 92 patients, 14%) and stroke (n= 95 patients, 15%). Among High Risk patients (n=397) who had another thrombotic event, 180 (45%) were treated by phlebotomy only and never switched to any other therapies. CONCLUSIONS Despite currently available treatments in US, patients' HCT level after treatment were higher than recommended as per guidelines. Failure to maintain HCT less than 45% increases the risk of future thrombotic events as shown by 36% of patients with prior TE experiencing another TE within the next 5 years. Disclosures Verstovsek: Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding. Han:Protagonist Therapeutics: Consultancy. Chun Hayes:Protagonist: Consultancy. Woody:Protagonist: Current Employment. Valone:Protagonist: Current Employment. Gupta:Protagonist: Current Employment.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document