Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma Involvement of the Central Nervous System: Impact of Novel Therapeutics on Clinical Outcomes

Abstract Primary Central Nervous System (CNS) involvement of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) is a rare phenomenon, with a reported incidence ranging from 2% to 16.7%. Similarly, secondary CNS lymphoma with PTCL phenotype is rare, with an approximately 2-6% incidence. Both clinical situations lead to dismal outcomes. Given the rarity of CNS involvement with PTCL, our understanding of this clinical manifestation is limited to retrospective studies, which have identified risk factors for CNS involvement such as extranodal involvement, stage III-IV disease, bone marrow involvement as well as ATLL subtype. Herein, we characterize CNS involvement of PTCL over a 26-year time period at a single institution, identify if there are any factors that have a positive impact on survival, and extrapolate risk factors for CNS involvement from this dataset. From the years 1996-2020, 222 patients were diagnosed with PTCL, of those, 25 patients developed CNS involvement. All patients had secondary CNS involvement. Baseline characteristics including first-line therapy are noted in Table 1. Four patients received intrathecal methotrexate for CNS prophylaxis, all of which were patients with an ATLL diagnosis. The median time from initial diagnosis to CNS involvement was 4.77 months (0-64 months). Upon CNS diagnosis, the median time to death was 1.13 months. With a median of 2 lines of treatment (range 1-5), 12 patients were exposed to novel therapeutic agents (HDAC inhibitors [HDACis], brentuximab vedotin, pralatrexate) and/or clinical trials investigating epigenetic combinations. Of these patients, 10 patients were exposed to novel therapeutics and/or epigenetic based clinical trials in the 2 nd line setting. There was a trend towards improved overall survival with exposure to novel therapeutics and/or treatment on epigenetic based clinical trials (p=0.1) (Figure 1). With the majority of patients surviving <6 months from CNS diagnosis, there were three excellent responders that survived >12 months, all of which were exposed to novel therapeutics. Two of the three excellent responders were diagnosed with CNS involvement upon initial diagnosis, while 1 patient relapsed in the fourth-line setting with CNS involvement. All three of the excellent responders were exposed to novel therapeutics, particularly pralatrexate as a commonality in the second line setting. Using logistic regression, an ATLL diagnosis, extranodal involvement, and a high ECOG score were associated with a higher risk of CNS involvement. Unlike other studies, a high IPI score was not associated with a predilection for CNS involvement. In conclusion, we describe one of the largest single-center collection of CNS PTCL involvement. CNS involvement of PTCL is rare, with a reported cumulative incidence in this cohort of 11.3% over a 26-year time period. Risk factors that were identified include an ATLL diagnosis, extranodal involvement, and poor performance status. Exposure to novel therapeutics leads to a trend towards improved outcomes possibly secondary to improved disease control, but overall, the majority of patients had dismal outcomes. Notably, of the novel therapeutics interrogated, romidepsin and pralatrexate have low penetrance into the CNS, while there is no current evidence to suggest brentuximab vedotin is able to cross the blood-brain barrier. The possibility of a disturbed blood-brain barrier to permit improved penetrance of these drugs is plausible, but further studies are warranted to support this. Although a small percentage of patients will suffer from CNS PTCL, there is a dire need to improve therapy for this patient population and to establish universal metrics to identify patients that are at risk of CNS involvement. Moreover, given the rarity of CNS PTCL involvement, a future endeavor would be to validate these findings in larger, multicenter initiative. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Lue: AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Kymera Therapeutics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy. Marchi: Astex: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Myeloid Therapeutics: Honoraria; Kymera Therapeutics: Other: Scientific Advisor. O'Connor: Myeloid Therapeutics: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Servier: Research Funding; Kymera: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Download Full-text

Central Nervous System Involvement By Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-148447 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2426-2426

Author(s):

Nicole McLaughlin ◽

Jonas Paludo ◽

Yucai Wang ◽

David J. Inwards ◽

Nora Bennani ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Data Monitoring Committee ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Control Group ◽

Cns Involvement ◽

Extranodal Involvement ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

Abstract Background: While extranodal involvement by mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is relatively common, involvement of the central nervous system (CNS) is rare (<5% of cases), with limited treatment options. We report the outcomes of 36 patients (pts) with CNS involvement compared to 72 matched control MCL pts without CNS involvement. Methods: MCL pts with CNS involvement seen at Mayo Clinic between 1/1995-9/2020 were identified using the Mayo Data Explorer tool. CNS involvement was defined by tissue biopsy confirmed CNS MCL, CSF analysis demonstrating lymphoma cells, and/or neuroimaging findings compatible with CNS involvement. A 2:1 control group of MCL pts without CNS involvement, matched by age (+/- 2 years) and year of diagnosis (+/- 1 year), was selected among all MCL cases. Medical records were reviewed for baseline characteristics, treatment modalities, and outcomes. Kaplan-Meier method was used for time to event analysis. Wilcoxon test was used to compare continuous variables and Chi square test was used for categorical variables. Results: Out of 1,753 pts with MCL, 36 (2%) had evidence of CNS involvement, including 4 pts with CNS involvement at initial MCL diagnosis. Baseline characteristics of pts with CNS involvement (CNS MCL group) and those without CNS involvement (control group) are shown in Table 1. At MCL diagnosis, non-CNS extranodal involvement was seen in 30 (83%) pts in the CNS MCL group (24 pts with 1 site and 6 pts with ≥ 2 sites), with bone marrow being the most common extranodal site of involvement (n=24, 67%). For the control group, 54 (75%) pts had extranodal involvement (44 pts with 1 site and 10 pts with ≥ 2 sites), and bone marrow was also the most common extranodal site of involvement (n=50, 69%). Notably, advanced stage disease (stage 3-4) was more commonly seen in the CNS MCL group (n=32, 97%) than in the control group (n=59, 83%) (p=0.04) at MCL diagnosis. Blastoid variant was present in a higher proportion of pts in the CNS MCL group (n=11, 31%) compared to the control group (n=8, 11%) (p=0.02). The CNS MCL group also presented with a higher median serum LDH at diagnosis (239 U/L [range 153-1901] vs. 187 U/L [range 124-588], p=0.02), and higher Ki-67 (40% [range 15-100] vs. 30% [range 10-90], p=0.04) compared to the control group. The most common frontline treatment regimen was anthracycline-based therapies (i.e. R-CHOP, Nordic regimen, R-hyperCVAD) for both groups (58% in CNS MCL group and 56% in control group). 14 (39%) pts in the CNS MCL group underwent autologous stem cell transplant in CR1 vs. 31 pts (43%) in the control group. Similar use of rituximab maintenance was seen in both groups (31% in CNS MCL group and 25% in control group). Median total lines of therapy from initial MCL diagnosis was 3 (range 1-9) in CNS MCL group and 2 (range 1-9) in the control group. The median follow-up from MCL diagnosis was 134 months (95% CI:119-163) for the entire cohort. Median OS from MCL diagnosis was 50.3 months (95% CI: 20.9-71.1) for the CNS MCL group compared to 97.1 months (95% CI: 82.6-192.7; p=<0.001) for the control group (Figure 1). Median time from MCL diagnosis to CNS involvement was 25 months (range 0-167). Median OS from CNS involvement was 4.7 months (95% CI: 2.3-6.7). At last follow up, 31 (86%) pts were deceased from the CNS MCL group, compared to 38 (52%) pts in the control group. For the CNS MCL group, the causes of death were CNS lymphoma in 10 (32%) pts, systemic lymphoma in 9 (29%) pts, treatment-related complication in 7 (23%) pts, and other/unknown in 5 (16%) pts. For the control group, the causes of death were systemic lymphoma in 15 (39%) pts, treatment-related in 2 (5%) pts, and other/unknown in 21 (55%) pts. Conclusion: In pts with MCL, CNS involvement is associated with worse outcomes as evident by a shorter median OS from initial MCL diagnosis (50 months vs. 97 months). Involvement of the CNS by lymphoma is an important contributor for the shorter OS as suggested by the median OS of only 5 months from CNS involvement. Advanced stage, blastoid variant, elevated LDH, and elevated Ki67 at MCL diagnosis were features more commonly seen in the CNS MCL cohort. Validation of risk factors at initial MCL diagnosis associated with CNS involvement and exploring the role of CNS prophylaxis are important topics for further investigation. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Paludo: Karyopharm: Research Funding. Wang: Novartis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MorphoSys: Research Funding; InnoCare: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; LOXO Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Bennani: Purdue Pharma: Other: Advisory Board; Daichii Sankyo Inc: Other: Advisory Board; Kyowa Kirin: Other: Advisory Board; Vividion: Other: Advisory Board; Kymera: Other: Advisory Board; Verastem: Other: Advisory Board. Nowakowski: Celgene, MorphoSys, Genentech, Selvita, Debiopharm Group, Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, NanoString Technologies, MorphoSys: Research Funding. Witzig: Karyopharm Therapeutics, Celgene/BMS, Incyte, Epizyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene/BMS, Acerta Pharma, Kura Oncology, Acrotech Biopharma, Karyopharm Therapeutics: Research Funding. Habermann: Seagen: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Tess Therapeutics: Other: Data Monitoring Committee; Incyte: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Morphosys: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Loxo Oncology: Other: Scientific Advisory Board; Eli Lilly & Co.,: Other: Scientific Advisor. Ansell: Bristol Myers Squibb, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Regeneron, Affimed, AI Therapeutics, Pfizer, Trillium and Takeda: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Peripheral Arterial Occlusive Disease (PAOD) In Patients (Pts) Receiving Dasatinib: Experience Across Multiple Clinical Trials

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.1489.1489 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 1489-1489 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Philipp D. le Coutre ◽

Timothy P. Hughes ◽

Francois-Xavier Mahon ◽

Dong-Wook Kim ◽

Juan Luis Steegmann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Second Line ◽

Related Event ◽

First Line ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Dasatinib Treatment

Abstract Background The introduction of BCR-ABL inhibitors revolutionized the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) which is now a manageable, chronic disease. As BCR-ABL inhibitors are used more widely and for longer, some distinctly different or late occurring adverse events (AEs) have become apparent from clinical studies and literature reports (e.g. pulmonary arterial hypertension, PAOD). PAOD has been described in a varying percentage of pts receiving nilotinib across the ENESTnd phase 3 trial of nilotinib versus imatinib (1.2%) and the literature (0.5%–12.5%). Arterial thrombotic events have also been reported in pts receiving ponatinib (11%). To assess whether PAOD may be a class effect, a pooled database of over 2700 pts in clinical trials of dasatinib was assessed. Methods Bristol-Myers Squibb clinical trial safety databases were examined using specific search-terms to identify cases of PAOD or PAOD-related events based on the mapped MedDRA preferred terms. In total, 11 clinical trials of first-line (n=2) and second-line (n=9) single-agent dasatinib in pts with CML (any phase) or Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia were evaluated. Dasatinib 100 mg once daily (QD) was received in first-line trials while doses received in second-line trials varied: 15–240 mg QD or twice daily (BID), 20 mg BID, 50 mg BID, 70 mg BID, 100 mg QD, 140 mg QD. Results Across 11 clinical trials, 2705 pts received dasatinib with a cumulative 5890 pt years exposure. 6 pts (0.2%) were identified with either PAOD (n=1) or a PAOD-related event (n=5). See Table for details. In the dasatinib and imatinib arms of the phase 3 DASISION study (the only study with an imatinib control arm using the standard 400 mg QD dose) no cases of PAOD or related events were identified. For the 6 pts receiving dasatinib with PAOD or a related event the median age was 67.5 years (range: 54.0–80.0). All pts received dasatinib following imatinib resistance (n=4) or intolerance (n=2) after 20.0 months median duration of prior imatinib therapy (range: 2.4 – 53.1). Pts received dasatinib treatment for a median of 39.1 months (range: 9.9 – 74.4); 5/6 received a starting dose of 70 mg BID. All of the 6 PAOD or related events were grade 3 or lower in severity; no grade 4 or serious AEs were reported. None of the 6 pts discontinued dasatinib due to PAOD or a related event. Dose interruptions occurred in 2/6 pts; the remaining pts continued to receive dasatinib. All pts had risk factors for PAOD including cardiovascular events (n=3) such as coronary/ischemic heart disease, tricuspid regurgitation, hypertension, and heart failure; endocrine/metabolic events (n=2) such as obesity and diabetes mellitus; or other events such as hyperlipidemia (n=1). 3/6 pts were or had been smokers. PAOD or related events were newly diagnosed in 5/6 pts; 1 pt with femoral artery occlusion had a prior history of right leg angioplasty indicating a preexisting condition (pt 5 in the Table). Common concomitant medications included acetylsalicylic acid (n=3) and erythropoietin (n=3). Conclusion The incidence of PAOD in pts receiving dasatinib is low and as expected for the target population. In the dasatinib clinical trials assessed here, PAOD occurred in pts who had received prior imatinib treatment and had significant predisposing risk factors for PAOD. These results suggest that PAOD is most likely not an effect of dasatinib treatment. In conclusion, confronting possible vascular AEs, pt baseline risk factors, AE profiles, and off-target profiles of therapeutic alternatives should be considered individually when choosing the most appropriate BCR-ABL inhibitor. Disclosures: le Coutre: Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Hughes:Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mahon:Ariad: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kim:Ilyang: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, 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, Speakers Bureau, Support for travel to meetings Other. Steegmann:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Shah:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Wallis:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Cortes:Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Tragara: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ambit: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Idelalisib Plus Anti-CD20 Used Second Line Shows Improved PFS and Comparable Safety Compared to Later Line Therapy of Relapsed CLL

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-110853 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 5564-5564

Author(s):

Jennifer R. Brown ◽

Rebecca J Chan ◽

Wei Ye ◽

Guan Xing ◽

Caroline Roudet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Research Funding ◽

Second Line ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Anti Cd20 ◽

Line Setting

Abstract Introduction: Idelalisib (IDELA) is a first-in-class PI3Kδ inhibitor that is approved for use in combination with rituximab for patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphoid leukemia (R/R CLL) in the United States and in combination with rituximab or ofatumumab for the same indication in the European Union. Clinical trials evaluating IDELA in the first line setting for CLL were prematurely terminated due to an increased incidence of serious adverse events (AEs) and mortality; therefore, IDELA is not indicated as a first line therapy for CLL. The safety signal observed in the treatment naïve setting has produced a prevailing view that early line use of IDELA may also lead to inferior clinical outcomes. To address this question, we evaluated the clinical benefit:risk balance for IDELA in early vs. later lines of use in the relapsed setting. Objective: To investigate clinical outcomes across sub-populations of IDELA + anti-CD20-treated patients with R/R CLL based on number of prior chemo-immunotherapy treatment regimens. Methods: Using clinical outcomes data collected in Gilead-sponsored clinical trials of patients with R/R CLL treated with IDELA + anti-CD20 (312-0116/0117, N=110, Furman et al., N. Engl. J. Med. 2014; 370:997-1007, and 312-0119, N=173, Jones et al., Lancet Haematol. 2017; 4:e114-e126), we retrospectively compared the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and AE profile for patients previously treated with 1 prior regimen (IDELA given in the second line setting, 2L), 2 prior regimens (3L), or ≥3 prior regimens (≥4L). PFS and OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and groups were compared using a log-rank test. The incidence of AEs was compared using the Kruskal Wallis test. Results: Among 283 patients treated with IDELA + anti-CD20, 49 (17.3%) received IDELA 2L, 69 (24.4%) received it 3L, and 165 (58.3%) received it ≥4L. Patient characteristics were similar except that patients in the ≥4L group presented with Rai stage III/IV disease more frequently compared to the 2L and 3L groups (70.3% vs. 61.3% and 57.9%, respectively, Table 1). ORR was similar irrespective of the number of prior regimens (85.7% for the 2L group, 73.9% for the 3L group, and 80% for the ≥4L group, p=0.2866); however, PFS and OS were longer in the 2L group compared to the 3L and ≥4L groups (median PFS= 31.5 months, 16.6 months, and 17.3 months, respectively, [Figure 1] and median OS=47.4 months, not reached (NR), and 34.6 months, respectively). No statistically significant difference was observed across treatment setting groups in the incidence of grade 3/4 key treatment-emergent AEs, including cough, diarrhea, infection, transaminitis, and colitis (Figure 2). Conclusion: These analyses indicate that patients with R/R CLL experience comparable or improved efficacy and have a similar safety profile when IDELA + anti-CD20 regimens are used 2nd line as compared to later line, after chemo-immunotherapeutic regimens. The longer PFS and OS times for patients treated with IDELA in the 2L may reflect shorter time since diagnosis, lower stage disease, or less disease resistance in this group, but also suggest that the efficacy benefit of IDELA + anti-CD20 is greater and may therefore better offset the potential toxicity in this patient sub-group. These findings support the use of IDELA + anti-CD20 in the 2L+ setting for patients with R/R CLL following chemo-immunotherapy. Disclosures Brown: Abbvie: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Boehringer: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Loxo: Consultancy; Sun Pharmaceutical Industries: Research Funding; Invectys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta / Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy; Morphosys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy. Ye:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Xing:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Roudet:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. Ruzicka:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Employment. O'Brien:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences Inc.: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Vaniam Group LLC: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

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

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136583 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 18-19

Author(s):

Christopher A. Yasenchak ◽

Rodolfo Bordoni ◽

Dipti Patel-Donnelly ◽

Timothy Larson ◽

Jerome Goldschmidt ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Brentuximab Vedotin ◽

Disease Stage ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Meaningful Improvement ◽

Part C

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

Download Full-text

Using Current Clinical Markers to Define High Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma: Agree to Disagree

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126952 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1794-1794

Author(s):

Elizabeth Hill ◽

Neha Korde ◽

Sham Mailankody ◽

Candis Morrison ◽

Alexander Dew ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Bone Marrow ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Mayo Clinic ◽

Research Funding ◽

M Protein ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Rate Of Progression

Introduction Defining high risk (HR) smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is becoming increasingly important as multiple clinical trials are actively investigating the role of early treatment. On average, patients with SMM progress to multiple myeloma (MM) at a rate of 10% per year for the first 5 years (Kyle 2007). Several classification systems have been developed to identify patients with a higher rate of progression, including two commonly used models: the 2008 Mayo Clinic model and the PETHEMA (Programa de Estudio y Tratamiento de las Hemopatias Malignas) model. The 2008 Mayo Clinic model incorporates M-protein (>3 g/dL), bone marrow plasma cell percentage (BMPC%) >10%, and a ratio of involved to uninvolved serum free light chains (sFLCr) >8. Patients with all three characteristics had a 76% risk of progression to MM in 5 years (Dispenzieri 2008). The PETHEMA model uses the proportion of BMPCs with aberrant plasma cell phenotype on flow cytometry (>95%) and reduction in uninvolved immunoglobulins (immunoparesis) to identify HR patients. Patients with both risk factors had a 5-year rate of progression to MM of 72% (Perez-Persona 2007). The 2008 Mayo Clinic model was validated prior to the International Myeloma Working Group reclassification of MM in 2014. Therefore, in 2018, Mayo Clinic proposed a new model to define HR SMM referred to as "2/20/20": M-protein >2 g/dL, BMPC% >20%, and sFLCr >20 (Lakshman 2018). The median time to progression for the HR group (2-3 risk factors) was 29 months, compared to 110 months in the low risk (LR) group (0 risk factors). Previously, a high discordance rate among the 2008 Mayo model and the PETHEMA model was reported (Cherry 2013). In this study, we aim to define the concordance among patients defined as HR SMM by the aforementioned models in an independent sequential patient cohort. Methods The medical records of patients sequentially assigned a diagnosis of SMM by the myeloma program at the NIH Clinical Center between April 2010 to July 2019 were reviewed. Patients with myeloma defining events were excluded (i.e. MM). Each patient was assigned a risk score based on the 2008 Mayo Clinic model, the 2018 Mayo Clinic model, and the PETHEMA model. The distribution of patients in the LR, intermediate (IR), and HR groups were compared between the models. Concordance ratios were calculated between the three models. Results A total of 236 patient records were reviewed and per the 2014 IMWG criteria, 138 patients were identified as having SMM. Two patients did not have bone marrow flow cytometry samples and thus could not be classified by the PETHEMA model. Therefore, 136 patients were stratified by risk based on all three models (Table 1,2). The rate of concordance between the 2008 Mayo Model and the PETHEMA model was 31.6% (95% CI: 24.4-39.8%), similar to previously published results. The concordance between the 2018 Mayo Model and the PETHEMA model was slightly higher at 44.8% (95% CI: 36.7-53.2%; P=0.0337). There was significant discordance between the models in classifying patients as HR versus non-HR (Table 3). However, the 2018 Mayo Clinic model had a higher concordance with the PETHEMA model (27.2%; 95% CI: 20.4-35.3%) than the 2008 Mayo Clinic model (4.4%; 95% CI:1.8-9.5%). Conclusions The accurate identification of SMM patients at highest risk of developing MM remains elusive and no one model has been found to be superior than the other. As this study indicates, a significant number of patients may be classified as "HR" according to the PETHEMA model while simultaneously be defined as "LR" based on the Mayo Clinic models. While the 2018 Mayo Clinic model has a higher concordance rate to the PETHEMA model, it remains significantly discordant. These results indicate that the current clinical variables used to determine risk are not reliable. This is likely due to the fact that they are markers of disease burden rather than biology and risk is subject to increase over time (Landgren 2019). It is time for genomic signatures which signify varying biology to be incorporated into risk models. The treatment of HR SMM is currently being investigated in multiple clinical trials. As the results from these trials are published, the data will need to be scrutinized as to how patients were defined as "HR" in order to compare results. At this time, it remains unclear which patients warrant early intervention and it is imperative that patients with SMM be exclusively treated on clinical trials. Disclosures Mailankody: Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; CME activity by Physician Education Resource: Honoraria. Landgren:Merck: Other: IDMC; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: 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; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Theradex: Other: IDMC; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Evolving Unmet Need in Patients Refractory to Lenalidomide: Overview of the Clinical Trials in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-142642 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 22-23

Author(s):

Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽

Rohan Medhekar ◽

Istvan Majer ◽

Mehmet Turgut

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Literature Review ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Unmet Need ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Line Of Therapy

Introduction: The majority of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients are currently treated with lenalidomide-based regimens as their first line of therapy. This trend is likely to continue in the coming years. Typically, lenalidomide is administered until disease progression and has significantly contributed to better outcomes in these patients. However, most patients relapse, and prognosis worsens with each relapse. The choice of optimal treatment for patients who relapse while receiving lenalidomide as first line of therapy is unclear. Moreau et al (Blood Cancer J. 9, 38 [2019]) concluded that there is limited data on approved combinations for treating these patients and are restricted by the low number of lenalidomide-refractory patients enrolled in the pivotal trials. Results from the ongoing clinical trials of the combination of carfilzomib and anti-CD38 antibodies were not available at the time of the Moreau et al publication. The aim of this targeted literature review was to include this new data and to summarize currently available evidence on progression-free survival (PFS) for the treatment of RRMM patients who progressed on lenalidomide-based regimens. Methods: A targeted literature review was conducted to identify registrational clinical trials in patients with RRMM reporting PFS outcomes. PubMed, congress proceedings, and product labels were searched between Jan 2014 to July 2020. In addition to PFS, demographic, disease characteristics and treatment history were extracted for the trial populations to contextualize potential variations in study outcomes. The regimens studied in these trials were classified as lenalidomide-based, proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based and pomalidomide-based. Number of prior lines of therapy, prior exposure and refractoriness to lenalidomide and bortezomib were reported. Results: Twelve registrational trials were identified based on the search criteria (Table 1). Most pivotal trials assessing lenalidomide-based regimens (POLLUX, ELOQUENT-II, TOURMALINE-MM1) except the ASPIRE trial excluded patients who were refractory to lenalidomide. Trials evaluating PI-based regimens (e.g., CANDOR) or pomalidomide-based regimens (e.g., OPTIMISMM) included these patients, with more recent studies enrolling a larger proportion. Percentage of lenalidomide-exposed (and lenalidomide refractory) ranged from 40% (32%) in CANDOR to 98% (90%) in ELOQUENT III. These studies also enrolled a larger proportion of patients who were bortezomib-exposed, although most of these patients were at first relapse, with the exception of ELOQUENT III and ICARIA where most patients were at third relapse. Among lenalidomide-refractory patients, the median-PFS (mPFS) observed for the pomalidomide-based regimens ranged from 9.5 to 10.1 months and that observed for PI-based regimens ranged from 4.9 to 25.7 months. PFS in the lenalidomide-refractory subgroup was considerably shorter than in the ITT population. The mPFS for patients receiving carfilzomib/daratumumab/dexamethasone (KDd; CANDOR) and isatuximab/carfilzomib/dexamethasone (IsaKd; IKEMA) was not reached at median follow-up of 16.9 and 20.7 months respectively. While the mPFS for (KDd) for lenalidomide-refractory patients in CANDOR trial was not yet reached at median follow up of 16.9 months; the mPFS of 25.7 months for KDd in the MMY-1001 trial appears to be the longest among the assessed regimens. Conclusion: Patients refractory to lenalidomide have shorter PFS and represent a population with high unmet need. This targeted literature review suggests that the PI-based KDd regimen provides longer PFS compared to other lenalidomide-sparing regimens in lenalidomide-refractory populations. Heterogeneity across trial populations may limit the comparability of these treatments. Disclosures Mateos: Regeneron: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaMar-Zeltia: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Medhekar:Amgen Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Majer:Amgen (Europe) GmbH: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Download Full-text

Risk Factors Associated with the Development of Infusion-Related Reactions in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukaemia Treated with Anti-CD20 Monoclonal Antibodies: Analysis of the CLL11 Study Dataset

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.3339.3339 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 3339-3339 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Ciara Louise Freeman ◽

Mark Dixon ◽

Richard Houghton ◽

Kathryn Humphrey ◽

Gunter Fingerle-Rowson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Monoclonal Antibodies ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lymphocytic Leukaemia ◽

Signs And Symptoms ◽

Leukemic Cells ◽

Tumour Burden ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Anti Cd20

Abstract Background: The administration of anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies (mAb) in patients with B-cell lympho-proliferative disorders is frequently accompanied by a constellation of signs and symptoms that have been labelled as infusion-related reactions (IRR). The pathophysiology of IRR remains poorly understood as do predictors of risk, which may relate to the mechanism of action of the anti-CD20, disease-related factors such as tumour burden or host factors such as polymorphisms of Fc gamma receptor 3A (FcγRIIIA). In the CLL11 trial (NCT01010061), patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and comorbidities were randomised to receive either rituximab (type I anti-CD20 mAb) or obinutuzumab (type II and glycoengineered anti-CD20 mAb) in combination with chlorambucil for six cycles. Obinutuzumab led to faster depletion of B cells and achieved an improvement in outcome parameters such as response and progression-free survival compared with the rituximab arm, but was also associated with a higher rate and increased severity of IRR. To better understand the profile of risk for IRR in patients with CLL, we performed an exploratory analysis on data obtained from patients treated with either one of the two antibodies given in combination with chlorambucil. Methods: Patients from the prospective, randomized Phase III CLL11 study who received a first infusion of obinutuzumab (N=331) or rituximab (N=326) were included. Baseline pre-treatment risk factors thought to play a possible role in the development of IRR were identified a priori and included patient demographics, concurrent conditions and premedications, parameters of disease burden, prognostic factors, laboratory variables and FcγR genotype. Baseline values for mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of CD20, gated on the circulating CLL clone, and MFI of CD16, gated on the natural killer (NK) cell population (CD56+16+) in peripheral blood were also available for N=510 patients. The primary outcome, development of an IRR with the first infusion, was defined as the occurrence of related signs and symptoms during or within 24 hours of administration of antibody. Due to the short-term nature of the initial IRR a multivariate logistical regression analysis was performed rather than a time to event analysis. Internal validation of this model, derived from a single dataset, was conducted using the established resampling technique of bootstrapping. This assessed the proportion of times each variable retained significance at α=0.10 when the model was fitted to bootstrapped samples of the dataset. Results: Patients that appeared to be at greater risk of developing any grade of IRR with the first infusion of rituximab or obinutuzumab were those treated with obinutuzumab, those with higher surface expression CD20 on CLL cells (MFI CD20) and greater FcγRIIIA (MFI CD16) on NK cells in peripheral blood, those with higher affinity FcγRIIIA genotype (VV), more pronounced neutropenia and splenomegaly at baseline (Table 1). Higher baseline absolute lymphocyte count and the presence of respiratory comorbidity also appeared to increase risk. All variables significant for inclusion in the model are shown in Table 1. Looking at those patients treated with obinutuzumab only, the most important determinant of risk was MFI CD20 (OR 3.6 95% CI 1.6-7.9). The impact of glucocorticoid premedication in reducing risk in obinutuzumab treated patients was not sufficient to reach significance, however, patients were not randomised to this intervention. Conclusion: This work identifies novel disease- and patient-specific biological variables that appear to play a role in the development of IRR in patients with CLL treated with anti-CD20 mAb, although the treatment received (obinutuzumab >rituximab) confers greatest risk. In addition to parameters of tumour burden, target antigen expression and gene polymorphisms of FcγR also appear to contribute to the risk of developing an IRR. Our results support the hypothesis that higher rates of IRR seen with the administration of obinutuzumab may result from stronger activation upon binding to CD20 on leukemic cells and subsequent enhanced cross-linking between CD20 expressing leukemic cells and FcγRIIIA bearing effector cells. Further studies involving obinutuzumab in this patient population will be needed to externally validate the results of this exploratory analysis. Disclosures Freeman: Roche Pharmaceuticals: clinical research fellowship supported by Roche Pharmaceuticals (secondment from Bart's) Other. Dixon:Roche Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Houghton:Roche Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Humphrey:Roche: Employment. Fingerle-Rowson:Roche Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Kreuzer:Roche Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Engelke:Roche: Travel grants Other. Hallek:Roche Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Goede:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Travel grants Other.

Download Full-text

Clinical and Biomarker Predictors for Avascular Necrosis in Sickle Cell Disease

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-147829 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3091-3091

Author(s):

Michael Rabaza ◽

Maria Armila Ruiz ◽

Liana Posch ◽

Faiz Ahmed Hussain ◽

Franklin Njoku ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Factors ◽

Sickle Cell Disease ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Avascular Necrosis ◽

Sickle Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Medical Attention ◽

Cell Disease ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Early Management

Abstract Introduction Sickle cell disease (SCD) affects 1 in 365 African Americans and approximately 25 million people world-wide. A common skeletal system complication is avascular necrosis (AVN), which can cause substantial pain and a reduced quality of life. While early management of AVN is focused on increasing range of motion with physical therapy and pain relief, there are no clear predictors for who is more likely to develop AVN and earlier institution of these preventive measure could help decrease disease progression. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a biomarker of endothelial injury and may indicate reduced vascular supply to the femoral or humeral head. Here we describe potential risk factors and biologic pathways for AVN in SCD, as understanding these may lead to improvements in future monitoring, early detection, and early intervention practices. Methods We investigated clinical and laboratory risk factors associated with AVN in a cohort of 435 SCD patients from our center. Blood samples, clinical, and laboratory data were collected at the time of enrollment during a clinic visit. Genotyping for alpha thalassemia was performed by PCR and the serum concentration of VEGF was measured by ELISA. AVN status was confirmed by review of the medical record and available imaging. We conducted a cross-sectional analysis comparing categorical and linear variables by AVN status using the chi-square and Kruskal-Wallis test, respectively. The independent association of the clinical and laboratory variables with AVN status was determined by logistic regression analysis. The initial model included variables with a P-value < 0.1 on univariate analysis and the final model was ascertained by stepwise forward and backward selection. Median values and interquartile range (IQR) are provided. Results The median age of the cohort was 32 (IQR, 24 - 43) years, 57% (250/435) were female, and 46% (198/435) were on hydroxyurea. AVN was observed in 34% (149/435) of SCD patients. SCD patients with AVN were older, had more frequent vaso-occlusive crises requiring medical attention, and had a higher body mass index (Table I) (P ≤ 0.002). We measured VEGF in 241 of the SCD patients with serum samples available at the time of enrolment. Serum VEGF concentrations trended higher in SCD patients with versus without AVN (420 vs. 359 pg/mL, respectively; P = 0.078). In the multivariate analysis model, AVN was independently associated with increased number of vaso-occlusive crises (OR 1.1, 95% CI: 1.0 - 1.14; P = 0.02), AST concentration (natural log OR 0.5, 95% CI: 0.2 - 0.9; P = 0.03), VEGF concentration (natural log OR 1.4, 95% CI: 1.0 - 1.9; P = 0.047), and tobacco use (OR 1.9, 95% CI: 0.9 - 3.7; P = 0.078). Discussion In conclusion, we demonstrate a high prevalence of AVN in an adult cohort of SCD patients. The presence of AVN was independently associated with a greater frequency of vaso-occlusive pain episodes, which may demonstrate a shared pathophysiology between AVN and vaso-occlusion that merits further investigation. We demonstrate that serum VEGF concentrations are higher in SCD patients with AVN and may be a clinical tool to identify those at high-risk and for earlier intervention for this complication. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Gordeuk: Modus Therapeutics: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Emmaus: Consultancy, Research Funding; Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; CSL Behring: Consultancy. Saraf: Pfizer: Research Funding; Global Blood Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Effect of Moderate and Severe Hemophilia a on Daily Life in Children and Their Caregivers: A CHESS Paediatrics Study Analysis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-134658 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 43-45

Author(s):

Kate Khair ◽

Francis Nissen ◽

Mariabeth Silkey ◽

Tom Burke ◽

Aijing Shang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Disease Burden ◽

Hemophilia A ◽

Daily Life ◽

Social Activity ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Lost Work ◽

Hours Of Work

Introduction: Hemophilia A (HA) is a congenital bleeding disorder, caused by a deficiency in clotting factor VIII (FVIII) and characterized by uncontrolled bleeding and progressive joint damage. This analysis assesses the impact of disease burden on the daily life of children with hemophilia A (CwHA) and their caregivers, addressing a deficit of current research on this topic. Methods: The Cost of Haemophilia in Europe: a Socioeconomic Survey in a Paediatric Population (CHESS Paediatrics) is a retrospective, burden-of-illness study in children with moderate and severe HA (defined by endogenous FVIII [IU/dL] relative to normal; moderate, 1-5%; severe, <1%) across France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the UK. CwHA were recruited and stratified by both age group (0-5 years:6-11 years:12-17 years=1:1:1) and disease severity (severe:moderate=approximately 2:1, prioritizing children with severe HA [CwSHA]). Data for this analysis were captured from physicians, children, and their caregivers. Physicians completed online case report forms for treated children, and the child and/or their caregivers completed a paper-based questionnaire utilizing 5-point Likert scales. For CwHA aged 0-7, the questionnaire was completed by the caregiver, while for CwHA aged 8-17, children and caregivers completed different sections. Hours of care provided by the caregiver and work lost by the caregiver were reported as median values due to non-normal data distribution. Informed consent was obtained for all participants. Upon review, the study was approved by the University of Chester ethical committee. Results: Data from child/caregiver questionnaires were available for 196 CwHA (moderate, 25.5%; severe, 74.5%); the majority of these children, as expected, were receiving prophylaxis (72.4%), and did not have FVIII inhibitors (89.8%; Table 1). There was a direct impact of disease burden on CwHA, particularly with regard to physical and social activities (Figure 1). Overall, it was agreed or strongly agreed by the child or caregiver that 48.0% and 57.5% of children with moderate HA (CwMHA) and CwSHA respectively, have reduced physical activity due to HA, and 46.0% and 57.5%, respectively, have reduced social activity due to HA. A total of 36.0% and 61.0% of CwMHA and CwSHA, respectively, had adapted their treatment in anticipation of physical or social activity (Table 1). Furthermore, 34.0% of CwMHA and 55.4% of CwSHA were frustrated due to their disease, and many (CwMHA, 36.0%; CwSHA, 50.7%) felt that they had missed opportunities (Figure 1). For 66.0% of CwMHA and 76.0% of CwSHA, it was reported that their daily life was compromised due to their HA. Caregivers provided a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 19.0 (10.0-59.5) and 12.0 (5.0-20.0) hours a week of care for the hemophilia-related needs of their CwMHA (n=30) or CwSHA (n=105), respectively. Of those who responded, 17.4% (n=4/23) and 25.0% (n=20/80) of caregivers to CwMHA or CwSHA, respectively, stated they have lost work due to their caregiving duty. This was more than twice as common for caregivers in families with multiple CwHA (42.9%, n=9/21 responses) compared with those in families with one CwHA (18.5%, n=15/81 responses). Median (IQR) hours of work per week estimated to be lost were 20.0 (17.0-22.0) for caregivers of CwMHA (n=4) and 12.5 (4.50-20.0) for caregivers of CwSHA (n=20). Conclusions: In conclusion, both children and caregivers make sacrifices in their daily lives due to HA; many CwHA reported reduced physical and social activities, fewer opportunities and feelings of frustration due to their HA. Caregivers reported spending a significant number of hours caring for their child and some reported losing work due to their caring responsibilities. However, some outcomes may be limited by the small number of respondents and narrow response options, particularly those regarding the caregiver burden. Responses on the hours of work lost may be subject to selection bias, as caregivers who have lost work may be more likely to respond to this question. Additionally, as this question is targeted at caregivers in employment, it is unknown if some caregivers have left employment due to their caregiving responsibilities. According to this analysis, children/caregivers are frequently required to adapt the child's treatment before the child engages in activities. Overall, the burden of disease was similar in children with moderate and severe HA. Disclosures Khair: Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Biomarin: Consultancy; HCD Economics: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medikhair: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sobi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Research Funding; Haemnet: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nissen:GSK: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Actelion: Consultancy; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment. Silkey:Aerotek AG: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Burke:HCD Economics: Current Employment; University of Chester: Current Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Shang:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Other: All authors received support for third party writing assistance, furnished by Scott Battle, PhD, provided by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Basel, Switzerland.. Aizenas:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Meier:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. O'Hara:HCD Economics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy. Noone:Research Investigator PROBE: Research Funding; Healthcare Decision Consultants: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; European Haemophilia Consortium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Autologous Stem Cell Transplant Outcome in Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma Patients in the Era of Post-Transplant Brentuximab Vedotin Consolidation

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-154492 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3935-3935

Author(s):

Shanee Chung ◽

Jennifer White ◽

Cynthia L. Toze ◽

Heather J. Sutherland ◽

David Sanford ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Median Number ◽

Salvage Chemotherapy ◽

Brentuximab Vedotin ◽

Relapse Free Survival ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Classic Hodgkin Lymphoma

Abstract Introduction: Patients newly diagnosed with classic Hodgkin lymphoma (CHL) have over 80% chance of remission with first-line chemotherapy, such as ABVD (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine) regime. However, 10-40% of patients relapse eventually and require salvage therapy. High-dose therapy with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) remains the standard of care for patients with relapsed or refractory CHL, offering a cure rate of around 50%. This may be further improved to around 60% with post-transplant consolidation with brentuximab vedotin (BV). Post-SCT BV consolidation has been offered to all patients, regardless of the risk group, in British Columbia since late 2015. We set out to review the ASCT outcome in CHL patients in the recent decade at our institution. Methods: All adult patients who received ASCT for relapsed or refractory CHL between July 2011 and June 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. Information pertaining to their demographics, disease characteristics, treatment history, transplant details, clinical outcomes and post-relapse therapy was obtained by review of electronic data. The data cut-off date was June 28, 2021. Survival outcomes were censored at the last known clinic visit for patients without relapse or death during follow up. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier survival function and log-rank test. Pearson's chi-square test and ANOVA were used for comparison between cohorts. The statistical program used was Stata® version 16.1 (Texas, USA). Results: 114 patients underwent ASCT for relapsed/refractory CHL. Bulky disease and extranodal involvement were seen in 11% and 40% respectively at relapse. Looking at the 'high risk criteria' as defined in the AETHERA trial: 45/114 (40%) patients had primary refractory CHL, 21/114 (18%) had relapsed within 12 months of completing the front-line chemotherapy and 15/114 (13%) had relapsed beyond one year of completing initial treatment but with an extranodal disease. The most commonly used salvage chemotherapy regime was GDP (gemcitabine, dexamethasone, cisplatin; 111/114; 97%). 10/114 (9%) patients received BV after failing salvage chemotherapy pre-SCT. The median number of lines of therapy pre-SCT was two (range 2-5). 94/108 (98%) had a chemosensitive disease with 35/108 (32%) achieving complete remission. 6/108 (6%) patients had a progressive disease at the time of SCT. For the transplant, all patients had a peripheral blood stem cell source and the conditioning regime was either Carmustine/Etoposide/Cytarabine/Melphalan (76%) or Etoposide/Melphalan (24%). After median follow up of 62.2 months, 50/114 (44%) patients relapsed with median relapse-free survival of 20.2 months (range 0.9 - 113.5) and 16/114 (14%) died. The direct cause of death was lymphoma progression in all but three patients (PJP pneumonia, pulmonary fibrosis, traumatic subdural hematoma). Whereas only 4/51 (8%) patients (2 without relapse) received post-SCT BV consolidation via a compassionate access program between July 2011 and October 2015 (cohort 1), 45/63 (71%) patients (33 in remission) received routine BV consolidation between November 2015 and June 2020 (cohort 2). In cohort 2, 44% had primary refractory CHL compared to 33% in cohort 1 but the number of 'low risk' patients was similar at 29% (Table 1). The most common reason for no post-SCT BV consolidation in cohort 2 was patient refusal (7/18; 40%). Other causes included BV pre-SCT, early disease progression and patient comorbidities. Only 9/42 (21%) patients with available data in cohort 2 completed the planned 16 cycles of BV consolidation. The median number of cycles was 10.5 (range 1-16). The most common reasons for early termination of BV consolidation were peripheral neuropathy (22/33; 67%) and disease progression (9/33; 27%). There was no statistically significant difference in PFS or OS demonstrated between the two cohorts (Graphs 1, 2). Conclusion: After median follow up of 5 years, 86% of patients remain alive and 56% are alive in remission. In British Columbia, post-SCT BV consolidation has been widely adopted with over 70% of patients receiving at least one cycle since late 2015. Successful completion of post-SCT BV consolidation is, however, limited by a high rate of treatment-limiting peripheral neuropathy. Relapse-free survival benefit of routine post-SCT BV consolidation is not demonstrated in this single-centre cohort. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures White: Novartis: Honoraria. Sutherland: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Sanford: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Stellar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abou Mourad: Amgen: Consultancy; Paladin: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Song: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Kite, a Gilead Company: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

Download Full-text