scholarly journals A Phase II Study of Lenalidomide, Ixazomib, Dexamethasone, and Daratumumab in Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (AFT-41)

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4776-4776
Author(s):  
Elizabeth K. O'Donnell ◽  
Vera Jean Suman ◽  
Susan M. Geyer ◽  
Omar Nadeem ◽  
Shira Dinner ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Clinical data support the combination of an immunomodulatory drug, a proteasome inhibitor, and a glucocorticoid for the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). The combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and low-dose dexamethasone is a very active, well-tolerated standard of care in the transplant-ineligible NDMM population. Ixazomib, an oral proteasome inhibitor is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed MM. Given that ixazomib has improved binding kinetics and pharmacologic profile compared with bortezomib, it is expected that these differences will translate into similar, if not improved, efficacy and safety profiles in the upfront setting. A phase l/ll study of lenalidomide, ixazomib, and dexamethasone in previously untreated patients with MM demonstrated that this combination was well-tolerated and active (NCT01217957). More recently, the GRIFFIN study evaluated the addition of the anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, daratumumab to lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in transplant-eligible NDMM and demonstrated the ability of daratumumab to improve efficacy of the three-drug combination with an acceptable safety profile. Building upon these data, our study evaluates the addition of daratumumab to the all-oral regimen of lenalidomide, ixazomib, and dexamethasone in transplant-ineligible NDMM. The combination proposed in this study has been evaluated in NDMM irrespective of transplant eligibility and has demonstrated excellent efficacy and tolerability. Responses were rapid with 88% achieving a partial response (PR) or better after 2 cycles (33% very good partial response (VGPR) and 52% VGPR for 29 patients who had completed 4 cycles) with an overall response rate of 95%. 1 In our study, transplant-ineligible NDMM patients will be randomized to receive 12 cycles of induction with lenalidomide, ixazomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab followed by lenalidomide alone versus lenalidomide, ixazomib, and daratumumab. Study Design and Methods: A randomized, phase II clinical trial (NCT04009109) is being conducted to assess the impact on progression-free survival (PFS) of the addition of ixazomib and daratumumab to lenalidomide as maintenance treatment following induction with lenalidomide, ixazomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab. In this ongoing trial, eligible patients are randomized 1:1 to Arm A (12 cycles of lenalidomide, ixazomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab followed by lenalidomide until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or a maximum of 2 years of maintenance therapy) vs. Arm B (12 cycles of lenalidomide, ixazomib, dexamethasone, and daratumumab, followed by lenalidomide, ixazomib, and daratumumab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or a maximum of 2 years maintenance therapy). Eligible patients have NDMM requiring treatment, are ≥18 years, have ECOG PS of 0-2, and must have been deemed ineligible for stem cell transplantation. The primary endpoint is PFS. With a sample size of 188 patients (94 patients per arm) enrolled over a 36-month period and followed for a minimum of 24 months after the close of enrollment, a one-sided alpha=0.10 log rank test will have an 85% chance of detecting an increase in median PFS time from 30 months to 48 months (a hazard ratio of 0.625) with the addition of ixazomib and daratumumab to lenalidomide as a maintenance treatment following induction with ixazomib, lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and daratumumab. Secondary outcomes of interest include minimal residual disease, overall survival, changes in body composition, quality of life, psychosocial measures of functional status including social activity and support, psychological state, and nutrition using a geriatric assessment tool, and the association of these psychosocial measures with therapy-associated toxicities. 1Kapoor et al. Blood (2019) 134 (Supplement_1): 864. Support: Alliance Foundation Trials; Janssen, Takeda, Celgene; https://acknowledgments.alliancefound.org Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures O'Donnell: Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Oncopeptide: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Nadeem: GSK: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Bristol Myer Squibb: Consultancy. Dinner: Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Yee: Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy. Mo: Karyopharm: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eli Lilly: Consultancy. Tuchman: Karyopharm: Research Funding; Shattuck Labs: Consultancy; Sanofi / Genzyme: Consultancy, Research Funding; Caelum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Raje: Caribou: Other; Janssen: Other; bluebird bio: Other; Amgen: Other; Celgene: Other; BMS: Other. Richardson: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Secura Bio: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Protocol Intelligence: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1940-1940 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Patrizia Falco ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Angelo Michele Carella ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1940 The combination of Melphalan-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (MPR) has shown promising results in elderly newly diagnosed myeloma patients. In the transplant setting, low-dose chemotherapy (induction) precedes high-dose chemotherapy (autologous transplantation consolidation). This approach reduces tumor mass, with few side effects, before achieving the maximum cyto-reduction with autologous transplantation. The same approach has been designed for the elderly patients. Accordingly induction with lenalidomide plus corticosteroids precedes consolidation with MPR. A two-stage phase II clinical trial was planned to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) as induction, followed by Melphalan-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (MPR) as consolidation and Lenalidomide as maintenance in elderly myeloma patients. Unfit patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma older than 65 years were enrolled. No exclusion criteria were included in the protocol, to avoid the selection of fit elderly subjects only. Patients with low blood count, abnormal performance status, hepatic, renal, cardiac or pulmonary functions were enrolled. Patients received 4 RP courses (Lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks, plus Prednisone 50 mg three times/week for 4 weeks) followed by 6 MPR cycles (Melphalan 2 mg and Prednisone 50 mg three times/week, for 4 weeks plus Lenalidomide 10–15 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks) and maintenance with Lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks). Two different dose-levels of Lenalidomide were tested in combination with MP: 15 mg (dose-level 1) and 10 mg (dose-level 2). Each cohort included 12 patients, with additional 22 patients enrolled at dose-level 2. Patients were evaluated for efficacy and toxicity after completion of at least 2 MPR cycles. Forty-six patients (median age 75, range 65–88) were enrolled. Thirty-six patients were evaluable after a median of 7 cycles and a median follow-up of 8.5 months. During RP induction, the most frequent grade 3–4 hematological adverse events were neutropenia (19%), anemia (11 %), thrombocytopenia (6%). During MPR consolidation, grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (45%), and thrombocytopenia (3%). Neutropenia was increased by the addition of melphalan, but both thrombocytopenia and anemia were reduced. Non-hematological toxicities were more frequent during RP cycles and reduced during MPR cycles (cutaneous rash and infections). After RP induction, at least partial response (PR) rate was 67%, at least very good partial response (VGPR) was 17%. After 2 MPR cycles, PR rate increase to 72%, including 22% of patients who achieved at least a VGPR. Conclusions. Induction with RP followed by consolidation with MPR showed a manageable safety profile and reduced the risk of anemia, thrombocytopenia and non-hematological toxicity in unfit elderly myeloma patients. These data will be updated at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Celgene Srl: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janseen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide in combination with melphalan for multiple myeloma patients at diagnosis. Guglielmelli:Celgene: Honoraria; Janseen-Cilag: Honoraria. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janseen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 631-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽  
Dominik Dytfeld ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David H. Vesole ◽  
Tara B. Anderson ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 631 Introduction: In relapsed and/or refractory MM, the combination of carfilzomib (CFZ) with lenalidomide (Len), and low-dose dexamethasone (Dex) (CRd) has shown very promising efficacy (78% ≥partial response [PR], 40% ≥very good partial response [VGPR], and 24% CR/nCR) and good tolerability including a low rate of peripheral neuropathy (Wang et al, ASCO, 2011). In a Phase I/II study of newly diagnosed MM, the regimen was well tolerated in the Phase I portion of the study up to a maximum dose of CFZ 36 mg/m2, Len 25 mg, and Dex 40 mg, and very active with 96% ≥PR, 70% ≥VGPR, and 55% CR/nCR (Jakubowiak et al, ASH 2010). The lack of overlapping toxicities has allowed these agents to be used at full doses and for extended periods. Here we report the results for all patients (pts) enrolled in both phases of this first prospective trial of CFZ combination in new MM. Methods: In the initial eight 28-day cycles, pts were treated with CFZ at 20 mg/m2, 27 mg/m2 (Phase I), and 36 mg/m2 (Phase I and II), given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16, Len at 25 mg PO (days 1–21), and Dex at 40/20 mg PO weekly (cycles 1–4/5–8). Pts achieving ≥PR could proceed to stem cell collection (SCC) using growth factors alone (protocol recommendation) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after 4 cycles. Per protocol, ASCT candidates were offered the option to continue CRd treatment after SCC. After 8 cycles, pts received 28-day maintenance cycles of CFZ (days 1, 2, 15, 16), Len days 1–21, and Dex weekly at the doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. Responses were assessed by IMWG criteria with the addition of nCR. Results: Enrollment was completed (53 pts): 4 pts at CFZ 20 mg/m2, 13 at CFZ 27 mg/m2 and 36 at CFZ 36 mg/m2 (18 in Phase I and 18 in Phase II). Median age was 59 years (range 35–81; 23 pts ≥65), 60% had ISS stage II/III, and 33% (of 49 with available data) had unfavorable cytogenetics: del 13 or hypodiploidy by metaphase, or t(4;14), t (14;16), del 17p by FISH. As of June 30, 2011, toxicity data (cycles 1–8) were available for 51 pts. Hematologic toxicities were reversible and included Grade (G) 3/4: anemia (18%), neutropenia (12%), and thrombocytopenia (10%). The most common non-hematologic toxicities (all G) were hyperglycemia (76%), hypophosphatemia (61%), and infection (53%). G3/4 non-hematologic AEs included hyperglycemia (24%), DVT/PE while on ASA prophylaxis (10%), infection (6%), and mood alteration (2%). PN was limited to G1/2 sensory (24%). Forty-five pts continue treatment with 22 pts in the maintenance phase. Six pts discontinued treatment: 2 proceeded to ASCT, 1 due to toxicity, and 3 due to events unrelated to treatment or per pt wish. The majority of pts did not require dose modifications, either in the initial (31%) or in the maintenance (25%) phase. After a median of 8 cycles (range 1–20), the best responses per IMWG criteria for 49 response-evaluable pts (all pts who completed 1+ cycle) are shown in the Table. Responses were rapid with 46/49 pts achieving at least PR after 1 cycle, and improved with the duration of treatment reaching 100% ≥PR after 4 cycles and 100% ≥VGPR, 79% CR/nCR after 12 cycles. Responses were deep even at the 2 lower dose levels with the majority of pts at 36 mg/m2 still early in treatment. Responses in pts with unfavorable cytogenetics were similar to response rates in all remaining pts and included a 100% ≥PR in 6 pts with del 17p. Twenty-four pts proceeded to SCC after a median of 5 cycles of CRd (range 4–9); using growth factors only in 23 pts and cyclophosphamide and growth factors in 1 pt, with a median 6.55 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg collected (range 3.75–9.6); all resumed CRd treatment. After a median of 9.5 months of follow-up, only 1 pt has progressed, and all are alive Conclusions: CRd is highly active and well-tolerated allowing the use of full doses for an extended time in newly-diagnosed MM pts with limited need for dose modification. Responses are rapid and improve over time reaching 100% ≥VGPR and early time-to-event data are very encouraging. These results compare favorably to the best frontline regimens in MM. Disclosures: Jakubowiak: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent carfilzomib, proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; OrthoBiotec.Imedex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medicom World Wide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Optum Health Education: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Hussein:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Leveque:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Vij:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 3216-3216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomer M Mark ◽  
John N. Allan ◽  
Geoffrey Marano ◽  
Adriana C Rossi ◽  
Roger N Pearse ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Carfilzomib (Cfz) synergizes with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Len-dex) to provide impressive response rates as upfront treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) (Jakubowiak et al 2012). The addition of clarithromycin to Len-dex has shown superior time to progression compared to Len-dex alone (Gay et al 2010). We hypothesized that sequential treatment with Cfz-dex and BiRD would lead to enhanced efficacy, response duration, and tolerability. We thus tested a sequential approach of upfront carfilzomib / dexamethasone, consolidation with BiRd, and lenalidomide maintenance to evaluate overall response and safety as first line therapy for MM. Methods Twenty-four patients (pts) with symptomatic untreated MM were enrolled in a single institution study to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Car-BiRd. Car-BiRd therapy is: Cfz IV over 30 minutes on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 of a 28-day cycle at a dose of 20mg/m2 on days 1, 2 of the 1st cycle only and 45mg/m2 for each successive dose thereafter and dex 40mg on D1, 8, 15, 22. Cfz-dex was continued until plateau in disease response defined as unchanged M-protein for 2 cycles. Elective autologous stem cell collection was then performed per physician and patient discretion and consolidation with BiRd initiated. Transplant ineligible pts proceeded directly to BiRd. BiRd is: Clarithromycin 500mg BID, lenalidomide 25mg daily on D1-21, and dex 40mg daily D1, 8, 15, 22 of 28-day cycle. Therapy was continued until a 2nd plateau in disease response after which lenalidomide maintenance at a dose of 10mg daily D1-21 of 28 day cycle was continued until disease progression or intolerability. Results 24 pts have currently been enrolled; 23 have completed at least 1 cycle of therapy and were evaluable for response. Sixteen pts (67%) harbored high-risk cytogenetics, as defined by the presence of one or more of the following on iFISH: del 17p, gain 1q, del 1p, t(4;14), t(14;16), or complex karyotypic abnormalities. Median study follow-up was 30.8 weeks (range 4.5-62.2). Response to the Car-BiRD regimen was: overall response rate (ORR) 87%, stringent complete response (sCR) 13%, very good partial response (VGPR) 48%, partial response (PR) 26%, stable disease (SD) 13%. Maximum response to the Cfz-dex induction was: ORR 87%, sCR 9%, VGPR 39%, PR 35%, SD 13%. Median time to PR and maximum response with Cfz-dex was 2 cycles (range 1-2) and 4 cycles (range 1-5) respectively. Median M-spike percentage decrease with Cfz-dex was 92% (range 13-100%). Twelve pts thereafter received BiRD consolidation with 5 pts (41%) further decreasing the M-spike by a median of 8% (range 1-45%). A median of 3 cycles (range 2-7) of BiRD was given until a 2nd response plateau was achieved. Seven pts subsequently received lenalidomide and all have maintained their response after a median of 5 cycles (range 1-8) of follow-up. Seven pts (30%) have come off study, 2 (8%) secondary to disease progression (1 during Car-Dex and 1 during BiRD) and 5 pts (22%) due to toxicity (2 pts due to Grade III renal failure, both attributable to Cfz, and 2 pts due to Grade III CHF during Cfz-Dex, 1 attributable to Cfz; 1 pt with Grade III Thromboembolic event during BiRD, attributable to Len-dex). Discussion This is the first prospective study evaluating the response to induction Cfz/Dex in treatment-naïve MM. Cfz/Dex therapy appears safe and effective in newly diagnosed myeloma patients. Responses deepen with subsequent IMiD(R)-based consolidation and maintenance. Toxicities due to each component of the regimen were manageable. The ORR of 87% and rate of VGPR or better of 61% in group with a high percentage of unfavorable cytogenetics compares favorably to similar studies using 1st generation proteasome inhibitor combinations, and may continue to improve with longer study follow-up. Disclosures: Mark: Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib is not approved for front line use in myeloma. Rossi:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Zafar:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Pekle:Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Niesvizky:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: The Takeda Oncology Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4615-4615
Author(s):  
Ashley Paquin ◽  
Morie A. Gertz ◽  
Hafsa Chaudhry ◽  
Shaji K. Kumar ◽  
Francis K. Buadi ◽  
...  

Abstract Aims: Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is an important component in the treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). However, relapse following ASCT is considered almost inevitable, with a median time to progression (TTP) of approximately 23-26 months (without maintenance) and 40-46 months (with maintenance)(Attal MA et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1782-1791; McCarthy PM et al. N Engl J Med 2012; 366:1770-1781). However, some patients can experience a prolonged period of remission with ASCT. The purpose of this study was to identify and characterize patients who have an exceptional response to upfront ASCT without maintenance therapy, and to determine the frequency of relapse in such patients. Methods: We searched the Mayo Clinic Multiple Myeloma bone marrow transplant database for patients who were diagnosed with MM between Aug 1, 1988 to Jan 3, 2006, and underwent ASCT within 12 months of initial diagnosis. For the purposes of this study, we defined exceptional responders as patients who were free of progression for 96 months or more, which is 2-3 fold more than the median TTP expected in this population. Since maintenance therapy was not standard of care at the time, only a small minority (6) of patients with prolonged TTP had received maintenance therapy; these patients were excluded since the study was focused on exceptional response with ASCT alone. One patient who had a tandem autologous transplant was excluded. Results: 509 patients underwent transplant during the study period. Of those, 46 (9%) met criteria for exceptional response. Twenty seven (59%) were female, 19 (41%) were male. Median age was 57.28 years, range, 31.9-73.0. Of 45 patients with response data available, the best response status was complete response or better in 32 patients (73.3%), VGPR in 4 patients (8.9%), and PR in 8 patients (17.7%). FISH data were available during the disease course for 41 patients. Of these, the majority, 28 patients (68.3%), had no abnormalities detected by the probes used; 3 patients (7.3%) had high risk cytogenetics (t(4;14) in 2 patients and t(14;16) in one patient) , 4 (9.8%) had trisomies; 6 patients had other isolated abnormalities. At last follow up, 23 patients have progressed (50%); 14 (30.4%) have died, including one who died without progression to MM. The median overall survival from time of diagnosis of the exceptional responders was 18.5 years, range 9.2-22 years. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median TTP was 6.2 years, range, 0.4-10.6 years (Figure 1); No plateau was seen in the TTP curve. From the landmark time of 96 months, the median OS was 10.5 years, range, 0.4-14 years. Conclusions: We conclude that approximately 10% of patients with newly diagnosed myeloma have an exceptional response to a single ASCT without maintenance therapy. These patients have a remarkable overall survival, both from diagnosis and from the landmark time point where they are classified as having achieved an exceptional response. Although TTP from the landmark time point is excellent, with median TTP of 6.2 years, there appears to be no plateau in the curve indicating ongoing risk of relapse despite a prolonged period of disease stability. Exceptional responders tended to have normal FISH studies (likely an indicator of responsive, low-tumor burden disease), and nearly 20% achieved this state despite not attaining a complete response. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Gertz: Research to Practice: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy. Kumar:KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Dingli:Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Russell:Vyriad: Equity Ownership. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 595-595 ◽  
Author(s):  
Enrique M. Ocio ◽  
Paula Rodriguez Otero ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Stefania Oliva ◽  
Axel Nogai ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Isatuximab (ISA) is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody with multiple modes of action for killing tumor cells via direct tumor targeting and immune cell engagement. ISA, combined with bortezomib, has demonstrated strong potentiation in a multiple myeloma (MM) xenograft model (Clin Cancer Res 2014:20:4754). This supported evaluation of ISA with bortezomib combinations in pts with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) ineligible for transplant. In the initial cohort, ISA combined with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone (dex) was well tolerated with 73% of pts achieving very good partial response (VGPR) or better and 40% with complete response (CR) (Blood 2017; 130: 3160). The combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dex (VRd) is also effective in NDMM (Lancet 2017:389:519-27). Here, we report initial data from a Phase Ib study of ISA plus VRd in pts with NDMM (NCT02513186). Methods: Pts with NDMM ineligible for transplantation were treated in 2 phases: induction and maintenance. Induction phase (four 6-week cycles [C]): ISA (10 mg/kg) on Day (D) 1, 8, 15, 22, 29 (C1), followed by D1, 15, 29 (C2-4); bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) on D1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32 (C1-4); lenalidomide (25 mg/day): D1-14 and D22-35 (C1-4); dex (20 mg/day): D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 22, 23, 25, 26, 29, 30, 32, 33. Maintenance phase (4-week cycles): ISA (10 mg/kg) on D1, 15 (all cycles); lenalidomide (25 mg/day): D1-21 (all cycles); dex (40 mg): D1, 8, 15, 22 (all cycles), unless the pt was >75 years of age, then the dose was 20 mg. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and preliminary efficacy (overall response rate [ORR] and CR rate, [IMWG criteria]) of ISA plus VRd. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was evaluated using next generation sequencing (NGS) and flow cytometry (NGF) at a sensitivity of 10-6 in pts achieving VGPR or above. Here, we report results from a protocol-planned interim analysis. Results: All 22 pts were included in the safety analysis (pts who received ≥1 dose of ISA) and 14 were eligible for preliminary efficacy analyses (first 14 pts who completed the 4 induction cycles). Median age was 71 (range 63-77) years. At study entry, 6, 12, and 1 pt were International Staging System Stage I, II, and III, respectively. One pt had extramedullary plasmacytoma at baseline. At data cut-off (Mar 22, 2018), the median number of cycles was 5.5 (1-9). Three pts discontinued treatment (2 VGPR, 1 not efficacy-evaluable): 2 pts due to adverse event (AE); Grade (Gr) 3 infusion reaction (IR) (ISA-related; Gr 3 dyspnea, Gr 2 glottic edema, Gr 2 nasal edema, and Gr 2 generalized rash), and Gr 5 bacteremia (lenalidomide- and dex-related); and 1 pt withdrew consent; 19 (86%) pts are continuing treatment. Dose reduction of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dex was required in 6 (29%), 4 (16%), and 5 (28%) pts, respectively. TEAEs occurred in 19 (86%) pts. Most frequent TEAEs (any Gr; excluding laboratory abnormalities) were constipation (10 pts [46%]), IRs and peripheral edema (9 pts [41%] each), asthenia, diarrhea, and peripheral sensory neuropathy (8 pts [36%] each), hypotension (7 pts [32%]), fatigue and respiratory tract infection (6 pts [27%] each), cough and dyspnea (5 pts [23%] each). Gr ≥3 AEs were reported in 10 (46%) and serious AEs (SAEs) in 4 (18%) pts. Treatment-related SAEs occurred in 2 (9%) pts (IR and pancreatitis). IRs were Gr 1/2 in all but 1 (5%) pt (Gr 3). Gr 3/4 laboratory hematologic abnormalities: lymphopenia (8/22), neutropenia (4/22), thrombocytopenia (4/22)VGPR, 1 partial response (PR) and 1 pt with stable diseaseMedian time to first response was 1.4 months (end of C1) and, with a median follow-up of 7.49 months (at cut-off date), no pt has progressed, with all except 3 pts continuing on therapy. Five (38.5%) of 13 pts achieved MRD-negative status (by NGF and NGS, or NGS only). Conclusion: These data suggest that ISA plus VRd followed by ISA plus Rd is well tolerated with a high ORR of 93%. All responders had VGPR or CR except 1 pt with PR. Quality of CR may have been underestimated due to ISA interference which could be resolved with an interference assay. Funding: Sanofi Disclosures Ocio: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Rodriguez Otero:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Clínica Universidad de Navarra: Employment; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Bringhen:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Consultancy. Oliva:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Attal:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janseen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kanagavel:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fitzmaurice:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Sanofi: Employment, Equity Ownership. Martinez Lopez:Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 864-864 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
Morie A. Gertz ◽  
Betsy Laplant ◽  
Gabriella C Malave ◽  
Eric Wolfe ◽  
...  

Background: The current commonly used regimens in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) utilize steroids (dexamethasone or prednisone) in various combinations: bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd), bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone (VTd), daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) and daratumumab, bortezomib, melphalan and prednisone (DVMP). However, steroid therapy may be associated with various adverse effects, including, but not limited to mood changes, insomnia, hypertension, hyperglycemia, osteoporosis, adrenal suppression, muscle weakness, and increased risk of opportunistic infections. A recent trial demonstrated improved tolerability of a regimen (Rd-R) involving an abbreviated course of dexamethasone, without compromising the efficacy in patients with intermediate-fit NDMM (Lorocca A., et al., ASH 2018). We designed a phase 2 clinical trial to examine the safety and efficacy of daratumumab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody in combination with an all-oral regimen of ixazomib, a proteasome inhibitor, lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug, and modified dose dexamethasone (IRd). Patients and Methods: NDMM patients with measurable disease and adequate organ function were enrolled, irrespective of their transplant eligibility. The primary objective was to determine the rate of complete response (CR) to daratumumab-IRd. Treatment consisted of daratumumab, 16 mg/kg, weekly for two cycles, every other week during cycles 3-6 and then every 4 weeks, ixazomib, 4 mg days 1, 8, 15, lenalidomide, 25 mg days 1-21, and dexamethasone upto 40 mg intravenously weekly for no more than two cycles, followed by use only as a prophylactic premedication for daratumumab-associated infusion reactions. Myeloma risk stratification was assessed by cytoplasmic immunoglobulin fluorescence in-situ hybridization (cIg FISH) analysis. Results: Overall, 40 patients were accrued, with data available on all patients for analysis at the cutoff date of July 19, 2019. The median age at enrollment was 64.5 (33-81) years; 37.5% were female. Eight (20%) patients were high risk by FISH. The median number of cycles was 6 (2-11) and the median follow up was 6.1 (2-11.7) months. Among 40 patients who had received at least 2 cycles of therapy, responses were attained rapidly; at the end of cycle 2, 88% patients achieved at least a partial response and 33% at least a very good partial response (VGPR) that improved to 52% at the end of 4 cycles among 29 patients who had completed at least 4 cycles. The overall best confirmed response rate among all 40 patients (Figure 1) was 95%, including 10% stringent CR, 5% CR and 23% near CR (13% VGPR excluding nCR). Stem cell collection was completed in 17 patients so far, all of whom required filgrastim and plerixafor. The median CD34+ cell count was 7.7 (range 2.9-11.6) million/kg . All patients were alive and 39 (97.5%) patients were progression-free at last follow up. Four (10%) patients proceeded to autologous stem cell transplantation off study, per patient and/or investigator discretion (1 in CR, 2 in PR, 1 with progressive disease). Overall, 224 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose reduction/ hold required in a subset of patients; ixazomib (10%), lenalidomide (20%), daratumumab (0%) and dexamethasone (13%); the most frequent reasons for dose adjustment were skin rash and hematologic toxicities. A grade 3 or higher adverse event, at least possibly attributed to the study drugs, was observed in 40% of patients; hematologic in 30% (lymphopenia 25%, neutropenia 15%, thrombocytopenia 5% and anemia 2.5%) and non-hematologic in 18% of patients (hyperglycemia 8%, diarrhea 5%, infections 5%, ileus 2.5%, maculopapular rash 2.5%, and fatigue 2.5%). Updated results with additional 6 months of follow up and minimal residual disease assessment related data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: Our early results suggest that the combination of daratumumab, ixazomib, lenalidomide and modified dose dexamethasone is well-tolerated, with excellent activity, and does not adversely impact stem-cell mobilization in patients with NDMM. Disclosures Kapoor: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Gertz:Spectrum: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Prothena: Honoraria; Alnylam: Honoraria; Ionis: Honoraria. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Leung:Takeda: Research Funding; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Omeros: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Pfizer: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Akcea: Consultancy; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Daratumumab in combination with Ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the management of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2089-2089 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Tommaso Caravita ◽  
Maide Cavalli ◽  
Arnon Nagler ◽  
...  

Abstract Background High-dose chemotherapy (HDT) with autologous stem cell transplant improves outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) patients in comparison to conventional chemotherapy. The incorporation of new drugs into induction, consolidation and maintenance therapy is changing the treatment paradigm and is questioning the role of HDT in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) patients <65 years. Previous finding have been presented (Boccadoro, ASCO 2013) and this analysis provides a longer follow-up. Aims To compare in a prospective randomized trial melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) with tandem melphalan (200 mg/m2) (MEL200) both followed by maintenance with lenalidomide or no maintenance in NDMM patients. Methods A 2x2 factorial randomized trial was designed. The induction treatment consisted of four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide (25 mg d 1-21) and low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg d 1,8,15,22) (Rd). As consolidation, patients were randomized to MPR (N=202) [six 28-day cycles of melphalan (0.18 mg/k g d 1-4), prednisone (2 mg/kg d 1-4) and lenalidomide (10 mg d 1-21)] or MEL200 (N=200)[tandem melphalan 200 mg/m2 with stem-cell support]. Patients were further randomized, within each group, to receive lenalidomide maintenance (10 mg, days 1-21, N=198) or no maintenance (N=204). Primary study endpoint was progression free survival (PFS). The secondary study endpoints included response rates, safety and overall survival (OS). Data were analyzed in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results From November 2007 to July 2009, 402 patients with NDMM <65 years of age were enrolled. All patients were stratified according to International Staging System (ISS) and age. Patient characteristics were well balanced in all groups. In the MPR group, the Very Good Partial Response (VGPR) rate was 50% with 13% of Complete Response (CR) while the VGPR rate was 52% including 19% of CR in the MEL200 group. In the MPR group the CR rate improved from 13% after consolidation to 17% after maintenance. In the MEL200 group the CR rate improved from 19% after consolidation to 25% after maintenance. After a median follow-up of 48 months, the median PFS was 24.2 months in MPR group and 38.6 months in MEL200 group ( P< 0.0001). A multivariate analysis confirms the PFS benefit associated with MEL200 across all subgroups of patients defined by stratification factors and baseline characteristics. The 5-year OS rate was similar between MPR (62%) and MEL200 (71%; P= 0.27). In a landmark analysis, lenalidomide maintenance significantly extended PFS from the start of maintenance (median 42,7 months) compared with no maintenance (median 17.5 months; P<.0001). The 4-year OS rate from the start of maintenance was higher in patients who received lenalidomide maintenance (80%) compared with patients who did not (62%; P= 0,01). No significant interaction was detected between MPR/MEL200 (P=0.704) and maintenance/observation (P=0.984) effects. During consolidation, the incidence of grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs) between MPR and MEL200 were as follow: neutropenia (50% vs. 90%), thrombocytopenia (8% vs. 89%), infections (1% vs. 15%) and gastrointestinal (0% vs. 18%), with complications being higher with MEL200. During the maintenance phase, grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were reported in 17% of patients receiving lenalidomide (16% neutropenia). For individual group comparisons during maintenance, grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were observed in 20% of patients receiving MPR plus lenalidomide maintenance compared with 15% receiving MEL200 plus lenalidomide maintenance. Second primary malignancies were observed in 11 patients (3%), and were mainly solid tumors. Four solid tumors were observed in the MEL200 group and one in the MPR group in the maintenance arm, while three solid tumors were observed in the MEL200 group and three in the MPR group in no maintenance arm. Conclusion The administration of MPR was significantly inferior to MEL200 in terms of PFS. Toxicities were significantly higher in MEL200 group, but manageable. OS is similar between MPR and MEL200. Lenalidomide maintenance significantly reduced the risk of progression and of death independently from the previous treatment. Disclosures: Gay: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Palumbo:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3198-3198
Author(s):  
Chutima Kunacheewa ◽  
Lei Feng ◽  
Elisabet E. Manasanch ◽  
Qaiser Bashir ◽  
Krina K. Patel ◽  
...  

INTRODUCTION Several phase 3 randomized studies have validated the use of novel 3-drug regimens with lenalidomide (LEN) and dexamethasone (Rd) in combination with carfilzomib (ASPIRE), elotuzumab (ELOQUENT-2), ixazomib (TOURMALINE-MM1), and daratumumab (POLLUX) in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) with ≥ 1 line of prior therapy. However, these studies notably excluded patients (pts) who were LEN-refractory since the control arm in these studies received Rd. In practice though, many MM pts at first relapse for which these LEN-based triplets are often utilized are progressing on low-dose LEN maintenance therapy, and their outcomes have not been well characterized in the context of these pivotal trials that excluded such pts. In this single-center retrospective analysis, we report the outcomes of LEN-retreatment with a novel LEN-based triplet in pts progressing on LEN-based maintenance therapy, and compare to a smaller, similar cohort of pts treated with a pomalidomide (POM)-based regimen. METHODS MM pts progressing on LEN-based maintenance therapy between 1/1/2015 and 6/30/2018 at MD Anderson Cancer Center after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) who were then treated with a LEN-based triplet or POM-based therapy were eligible for this study. Post-maintenance LEN-based triplet regimens included Rd in combination with bortezomib (VRd), carfilzomib (KRd), elotuzumab (ERd), ixazomib (IRd), and daratumumab (DRd). Disease response and progression were assessed by International Myeloma Working Group response criteria. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), and cohorts were compared by log-rank test. Pts who had not progressed were censored at the time of last disease evaluation prior to any change in therapy or data cut-off of 6/23/2019. RESULTS A total of 88 pts with a median of 1 prior line of therapy were eligible for the study. Baseline characteristics and prior treatment history are summarized in the Table. 66 pts received a LEN-based triplet, and 22 pts received a POM-based regimen after disease progression on LEN-based maintenance. A similar proportion of pts had high-risk cytogenetics (del 17p, t(4;14), and/or t(14;16)) in the LEN-based (21%) and POM-based (18%) post-maintenance treatment groups. The most common LEN-based maintenance regimens included LEN monotherapy (66%), ixazomib and LEN (14%), and elotuzumab and LEN (10%). Median PFS after ASCT on LEN-based maintenance was 26.0 months, and similar between the LEN-based (25.7 months) and POM-based (29.1 months) post-maintenance treatment groups, suggesting enrichment of pts with early progression on LEN-based maintenance in this analysis. In pts retreated with LEN-based therapy, the median LEN dose increased from 10 mg during maintenance therapy to 25 mg in the post-maintenance regimen. The overall response rate (ORR, ≥ PR) to LEN-based retreatment was 56% (≥ VGPR 33%) and median duration of response (DOR) was 11.7 months (95% CI 9.23 - NA). In comparison, the ORR and DOR with POM-based treatment were 73% (≥ VGPR 41%) and 19 months (95% CI 7.88 - NA), respectively. At a median follow-up time of 20.5 months, median PFS and OS were 13.6 and 40 months, respectively, with LEN-based retreatment versus 21.4 months (P 0.7) and not reached (P 0.6) with POM-based therapy. There was no significant difference in PFS or OS between LEN-based triplet regimens (VRd, KRd, ERd, IRd, and DRd). In the LEN-based retreatment group, high-risk cytogenetics did not significantly impact PFS (10.1 vs. 13.6 months, P 0.9), although OS was worse (22.5 vs. 42.8 months, P 0.003). However, pts who progressed on LEN-based maintenance ≥3 years after ASCT had a significantly better median PFS with LEN-based retreatment compared to pts who progressed <3 years after ASCT (median not reached vs. 9.9 months, P 0.001, Figure). CONCLUSION In pts progressing on LEN-based maintenance therapy, retreatment with a LEN-based novel triplet to maximize LEN dose intensity and synergy with other novel agents can lead to deep and durable responses in select pts, particularly in those with a more indolent disease course and longer (≥3 years) PFS after ASCT. However, ORR and PFS may favor switching to a POM-based regimen over LEN-based retreatment in this patient population, and warrants further investigation in studies evaluating optimal sequencing strategies in relapsed and/or refractory MM. Disclosures Manasanch: Sanofi: Research Funding; Quest Diagnostics: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Skyline Diagnostics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Bashir:Imbrium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; StemLine: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Patel:Poseida Therapeutics, Cellectis, Abbvie: Research Funding; Oncopeptides, Nektar, Precision Biosciences, BMS: Consultancy; Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kaufman:Janssen: Other: travel/lodging, Research Funding. Iyer:Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Thomas:Xencor: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Orlowski:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Qazilbash:Bioclinical: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board; Autolus: Consultancy; Genzyme: Other: Speaker. Lee:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1835-1835 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katrina M Piedra ◽  
Hani Hassoun ◽  
Larry W. Buie ◽  
Sean M. Devlin ◽  
Jessica Flynn ◽  
...  

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


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4451-4451
Author(s):  
Sarah A. Holstein ◽  
Sarah Cooley ◽  
Parameswaran Hari ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Catherine R Balint ◽  
...  

Background: PNK-007 is an allogeneic, off the shelf cell therapy product enriched for CD56+/CD3- NK cells expanded from placental CD34+ cells. PNK-007 cells exhibit cytotoxicity against various cancer cell types, including multiple myeloma (MM), and secrete cytokines during co-culture with cancer cells. This is a Phase I study of single infusion PNK-007 after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) in MM. Methods: Placental CD34+ cells were cultivated in the presence of cytokines for 35 days to generate PNK-007 under cGMP standards followed by release testing. HLA matching and KIR mismatching were not used. Four treatment arms were evaluated on patients (pts) following ASCT: 10 million (M) cells/kg Day (D) 14 with or without recombinant human IL-2 (rhIL-2), 30M cells/kg D14 with rhIL-2, or 30M cells/kg D7 with rhIL-2. rhIL-2 was administered subcutaneously at 6M units every other day for up to 6 doses to facilitate PNK-007 expansion. Pts received variable pre-ASCT induction therapy. Maintenance therapy was permitted after the Day 90-100 visit (D90). Subjects were followed for up to 1-year. Results: 15 pts who received PNK-007 (12 of whom received rhIL-2) were followed on this study. Pts aged 44-69 yrs included 12 newly diagnosed (ND)MM and 3 relapsed/refractory (RR)MM. The 3 RRMM pts had received 1, 2 or 5 prior lines of therapy, with 2 pts having previous ASCT. All pts had been exposed to immunomodulatory drug (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs). No serious adverse events (AEs) were attributable to PNK-007 and no dose-limiting toxicity, GvHD, graft failure or graft rejection were observed. 12/15 pts started maintenance therapy following the transplant while participating in this study, at the physician's discretion. Based on physician assessed responses by International Myeloma Working Group pre-ASCT, of the NDMM pts 10/12 achieved VGPR or better (1 CR and 9 VGPR), 1/12 achieved PR and 1/12 was not assessed during pre-ASCT induction. By D90 10/12 pts achieved VGPR or better (5 CR or sCR and 5 VGPR), 1/12 maintained PR and 1/12 stable disease. At 1-year 9/11 achieved VGPR or better (4 CR or sCR and 5 VGPR), 2/11 were not assessed and 1 was removed from the study prior to 1 year due to failure to respond to ASCT. Of the RRMM pts 2/3 achieved PR and 1/3 was not assessed during pre-ASCT induction, by D90 2/3 achieved VGPR and the pt that had not been assessed pre-ASCT achieved PR. At 1-year, 1 pt maintained VGPR, 1 pt was not assessed and 1 pt did not continue to the 1-year visit. Using a validated Euro-flow minimal residual disease (MRD) assay of bone marrow aspirate (BMA) samples, of the NDMM pts 4/12 were MRD negative (MRD-) pre-ASCT; by D90 9/12 were MRD-. At 1-year 6/12 were MRD-, 2/12 had insufficient BMA to perform testing, 2/12 refused BMA procedure, 1/12 did not convert to MRD-, and 1 was removed from the study prior to 1-year due to failure to respond to ASCT. Of the RRMM pts 0/3 were MRD- pre-ASCT with 1/3 having insufficient BMA to perform testing; by D90 1/3 were MRD-. At 1-year 1/3 was MRD-, 1/3 did not convert to MRD- and 1 pt did not continue to the 1-year visit. PNK-007 infusion did not interfere with immune reconstitution kinetics. Platelet, neutrophil, and absolute lymphocyte counts recovered by day 28 post-ASCT in 12/15 patients. All pts' sera tested negative for the presence of anti-HLA antibodies at all timepoints indicating the absence of humoral immunity and alloantibodies to PNK-007. Conclusion: PNK-007 is the first fully allogeneic, off the shelf CD34+ derived NK cell product in MM clinical trials. A single infusion of PNK-007 up to 30M cells/kg with and without rhIL-2 was well tolerated in the post-ASCT setting. We established the feasibility of infusing PNK-007 as early as 7 days post-ASCT without negative impact on blood count recovery or successful engraftment. BMA MRD- status was observed in 7/9 MRD evaluable pts at 1-year post ASCT. These clinical data are encouraging and warrant further evaluation. Disclosures Holstein: Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sorrento: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cooley:Fate Therapeutics, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hari:Cell Vault: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jagannath:BMS: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Medicom: Speakers Bureau; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Speakers Bureau. Balint:Celgene: Equity Ownership; Celularity, Inc: Employment. Van Der Touw:Celularity, Inc: Employment. Zhang:Celularity Inc: Employment. Hariri:Celularity Inc: Employment. Vij:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document