Treatment of Ropeginterferon Alpha-2b Achieves Hematologic Remission and Molecular Response in Patients with Hydroxyurea- and/or Anagrelide-Resistant/Intolerant Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Abstract Background: Ropeginterferon alpha-2b (Ropeg) is a novel pegylated interferon-alpha approved for the treatment of polycythemia vera (PV) in Europe and Taiwan. Prior to its approval in Taiwan, the major options for patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) included hydroxyurea (HU) and/or anagrelide. Patients who are HU/anagrelide resistant/intolerant have limited options, as ruxolitinib is not subsidized by the national health insurance in Taiwan for PV. In 2017, the manufacturer provided a compassionate use program (CUP) for patients who were HU and/or anagrelide resistant/intolerant. Herein, we assessed the efficacy and safety of Ropeg in 20 MPN patients. Methods: To be eligible, patients must be resistant or intolerant to currently available therapies for MPN in Taiwan, mainly HU and anagrelide. Patients with autoimmune disorders, psychiatric illness, and acute/chronic infections were excluded. An accelerated dosing regimen was used, starting from 250 µg, and increased by 100 µg every two weeks until it reached the target dose of 500 µg, if no self-reported discomforts or abnormalities in biochemical or hematological profiles were observed. Efficacy assessments included hematologic parameters, phlebotomy need, and JAK2V617F allele burden. Hematologic remission was defined as platelets ≤400 x 10^9/L and white blood cells <9.5 x 10^9/L for essential thrombocythemia (ET), and platelets ≤400 x 10^9/L, white blood cells <10 x 10^9/L, and hematocrit <45% with no phlebotomy in the past 3 months for PV. Molecular response was defined as a reduction in JAK2V617F allele burden of at least 50% from baseline if baseline value was less than 50%, and a reduction of at least 25% from baseline if the baseline level was at least 50%. Each case was independently reviewed and approved for the use of Ropeg by both Institutional Review Board and the Ministry of Health and Welfare in Taiwan. Results: A total of 20 patients received treatment, which included 14 PV, 4 ET, 1 post-ET myelofibrosis (MF), and 1 pre-fibrotic primary MF (Table 1). There were 12 female and 8 male patients with a median age of 56.1 years old. Of these 20 patients, 18 had JAK2V617F mutation and 5 had a history of thrombosis. Of the 18 ET and PV patients, 13 achieved hematologic remission. The ET patients seemed to achieve hematologic remission faster than PV patients (19.3 vs. 33.2 weeks). Of the 18 patients with JAK2V617F mutation, 7 PV patients and 1 post-ET MF patient achieved molecular response, which took a median of 46 weeks after Ropeg treatment. Reduction in JAK2V617F allele burden was observed in 12 patients. One MF patient discontinued treatment due to disease progression. Another PV patient discontinued treatment due to acute myeloid leukemia transformation, although after treatment, the patient returned to PV state and continued Ropeg treatment. Overall, the drug was well tolerated, as most of the treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were mild to moderate. The AE profile was consistent with those from the phase 3 PROUD/CONTI-PV study. There were no unbearable side effects that led to treatment discontinuation. Conclusion: Our study provided evidence in the efficacy and safety of Ropeg for the treatment of HU-/anagrelide-resistant/intolerant MPNs. Hematologic remission was observed in ET and PV patients, whereas molecular response was observed in only PV patients, possibly due to the small sample size of ET patients. Our experience with Ropeg suggests it to be a promising option for the treatment of MPNs with drug-resistance/intolerance. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Chen: PharmaEssentia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Celgene, Novartis, and Panco Healthcare: Honoraria. Shih: PharmaEssentia Co: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Ltd: Research Funding; Ltd: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ropeginterferon alfa-2b is a novel interferon alpha indicated for the treatment of polycythemia vera in Europe and in Taiwan. This abstract describes the use of this agent for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasm patients with hydroxyurea/anagrelide resistance/intolerance.

Download Full-text

Polycythemia Vera Patients Respond Better to Ropeginterferon Alfa-2b Than HU/BAT Irrespective of Pretreatment or Mutational Status; Results from 5 Years' Treatment in a Randomized, Controlled Setting in the PROUD-PV/Continuation-PV Trials

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-152328 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3660-3660

Author(s):

Heinz Gisslinger ◽

Christoph Klade ◽

Pencho Georgiev ◽

Dorota Krochmalczyk ◽

Liana Gercheva-Kyuchukova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Chromosomal Aberrations ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rates ◽

Driver Mutations ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Allele Burden ◽

Mutational Status ◽

Jak2v617f Allele Burden

Abstract Introduction: Ropeginterferon alfa-2b (BESREMi®), a novel pegylated interferon with an extended half-life, was approved in Europe for treatment of patients with PV based on results from the phase 3 PROUD-PV and CONTINUATION-PV trials. Ropeginterferon alfa-2b treatment is recommended in hydroxyurea (HU) naïve patients as well as in those who have previously received HU. Therefore, treatment response was analyzed by prior HU treatment status, and the influence of baseline JAK2V617F allele burden and additional mutations - which may increase over time during non-disease modifying treatment - was explored. Methods: In PROUD-PV, patients aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with PV according to WHO 2008 criteria, and either cytoreduction-naïve or HU-pre-treated (for <3 years, without intolerance or resistance) were randomized 1:1 to receive ropeg or HU at individualized doses. After 12 months' treatment, patients could roll over into CONTINUATION-PV and patients in the HU arm were permitted to switch to best available treatment (BAT). After 5 years' treatment, complete hematologic response (CHR) and molecular response defined by modified ELN criteria were assessed in patients enrolled in the extension study CONTINUATION-PV (N=171). Sub-group analyses were performed by prior HU treatment, JAK2V617F allele burden category (≤50% or>50%), and in patients with available data (N=159), by the presence of non-driver mutations (TruSight™ Myeloid Panel, Illumina) or chromosomal aberrations (Affymetrix SNP6.0 array) at baseline. Results: After 5 years of treatment with ropeginterferon alfa-2b, high rates of CHR were sustained in both HU-naïve and HU pre-treated patients (53.1% and 61.3%, respectively), whereas in the control arm, the CHR rate was lower among HU pre-treated patients (36.0% compared to 48.0% for HU-naïve patients). Molecular response rates at 5 years in HU naïve and pre-treated patients were 71.4% and 64.5% respectively in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 26.0% versus 12.5% respectively in the control arm. Rates of adverse events (AEs), treatment-related AEs, serious AEs, and AEs leading to discontinuation were similar between the subgroups regardless of HU pre-treatment. Similar CHR rates were observed at 5 years irrespective of baseline JAK2V617F allele burden category (ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm: 57.1% versus 53.1% for allele burden ≤50% or >50%, respectively; control: 46.9% versus 38.5%, respectively). The molecular response rate in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm was higher among patients with baseline allele burden >50% (84.4% versus 61.3% for allele burden ≤50%); in the control arm there was no difference in molecular response rates between the allele burden subgroups (23.1% versus 20.8%, respectively). Of interest, the presence of non-driver mutations or chromosomal aberrations at baseline had no apparent influence on molecular response rates to ropeginterferon alfa-2b (64.5% compared with 70.7% in patients without these genetic abnormalities). Conclusion: High hematologic and molecular response rates in both HU-pretreated and HU-naïve patients and in those with more advanced JAK2V617F burden suggest that ropeginterferon alfa-2b is also a suitable treatment option in patients switching from HU. Disclosures Gisslinger: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Personal fees, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Other: Personal fees; MyeloPro Diagnostics and Research: Other: Personal fees; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Personal fees; Roche: Other: Personal fees; Celgene: Other: Personal fees. Klade: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Current Employment. Pylypenko: Communal nonprofit enterprise "Cherkasy regional oncology dispensary of Cherkasy oblast council: Current Employment. Mayer: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Research Funding. Krejcy: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Current Employment. Empson: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Current Employment. Hasselbalch: Novartis, AOP Orphan: Consultancy, Other: Advisory Board. Kralovics: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals GmbH: Other: Personal fees; PharmaEssentia: Other: Personal fees; Qiagen: Other: Personal fees; Novartis: Other: Personal fees; MyeloPro Diagnostics and Research: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Kiladjian: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaEssentia: Other: Personal fees; Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase II Trial of SGI-110 (Guadecitabine) in Philadelphia Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-127663 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1666-1666

Author(s):

Pinkal Desai ◽

Niamh Savage ◽

Spencer Krichevsky ◽

Tania Curcio ◽

Sangmin Lee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Myeloid Leukemia ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progressive Disease ◽

Myeloproliferative Neoplasms ◽

Philadelphia Chromosome ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees

Introduction: Philadelphia negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (Ph- MPN) are hematopoietic stem cell malignancies associated with poor median survival of 12.4 months. They are often excluded from clinical trials because there are no accepted standards for treatment or assessment of disease response. SGI-110 (guadecitabine) is a second-generation DNA hypomethylating agent (HMA) that is currently in clinical trials for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia. Guadecitabine was designed to resist degradation by protein aminases and prolong the exposure of tumor cells to the active metabolite decitabine. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy and safety of SGI-110 in Philadelphia chromosome negative MPNs (Ph- MPN) and to also test the clinical applicability of the International IWG MDS/MPN response criteria in a prospective trial1. Methods: This is an interim analysis of an open label single-arm, single-institution study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SGI-110 in Philadelphia chromosome negative (Ph-) myeloproliferative Neoplasms as classified by WHO, including chronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL), atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML), chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm unclassifiable, accelerated phase myelofibrosis and MPN unclassifiable (defined as peripheral and or bone marrow blasts of 10-19%). PV, ET and primary/secondary myelofibrosis were excluded. Patients were required to complete at least 3 cycles of guadecitabine to be considered evaluable for efficacy. Safety analyses were done on all patients who received any treatment with guadecitabine. Guadecitabine was administered subcutaneously at a dose of 60mg/m2 on days 1-5 repeated every 28 days. The IWG MDS/MPN response classification was used to assess treatment response. Results: Baseline characteristics of the study participants are presented in Table 1. Among the 20 treated patients, 2 (10.0%) were treated with previous HMAs, 3 had progressive disease, 1 transferred care, 7 were not yet evaluable for response, and 1 died after receiving only 2 cycles of treatment. Of the 13 evaluable, protocol specific response was seen in 8 (61.5%) patients: 2 (15.4%) achieved complete remission (CR), 3 (23.1%) with optimal marrow response (OMR), 3 (23.1%) with hematological response/clinical benefit (CB). Stable disease was seen in 4 patients (30.8%). Of the 7 patients that were inevaluable: 3 had progressive disease before completing 3 cycles, 2 received <3 cycles of therapy, 1 discontinued treatment due to personal choice, and 1 patient died from infection after receiving 2 cycles of treatment. The median overall survival (OS) for all evaluable patients was 27.4 months with 25.8 months for responders. Median OS for patients who achieved CR was 27.4 months and 25.0 months for OMR. For patients with CB, mean survival was 21.0 months. There was 1 patient with stable disease with prolonged survival (21 cycles), which elevated the mean survival to 26.0 months for the SD category. The median number of cycles to achieve a response was 3. The median times to first and best response were 3.6 and 3.8 months, respectively. The combination of ASXL1 and EZH2 mutations was associated with rapid progression. The most common AEs and SAEs related to guadecitabine are listed in Tables 2 and 3 respectively. Conclusion: SGI-110 was safe and well tolerated in patients with Ph negative MPN, with encouraging efficacy in this difficult-to-treat patient population. Further investigation of this agent in MDS/MPN overlap syndromes is warranted, and the present trial is ongoing. 1. Savona MR, Malcovati L, Komrokji R, et al. An international consortium proposal of uniform response criteria for myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPN) in adults. Blood. Mar 19 2015;125(12):1857-1865. Disclosures Desai: Cellerant: Consultancy; Astex: Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Lee:Helsinn: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy; Roche Molecular Systems: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Ai Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ritchie:Celgene, Incyte, Novartis, Pfizer: Consultancy; Ariad, Celgene, Incyte, Novartis: Speakers Bureau; AStella, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, NS Pharma, Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene, Novartis: Other: travel support; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene: Other: Advisory board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory board, travel support; agios: Other: Advisory board; Tolero: Other: Advisory board; Genentech: Other: Advisory board. Roboz:Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Ropeginterferon Alfa-2b in Patients with Polycythemia Vera — Final Phase I/II Peginvera Study Results

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-118584 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3030-3030 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Heinz Gisslinger ◽

Veronika Buxhofer-Ausch ◽

Josef Thaler ◽

Ernst Forjan ◽

Ella Willenbacher ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

First Year ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Dosing Regimen ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Hematological Response

Abstract Background: Ropeginterferon alfa-2b (Ropeg) is a novel long-acting monopegylated IFN-alpha-2b. Due to reduced dosing frequencies, better tolerability and improved compliance, Ropeg may be a favorable treatment option for long-term therapy in patients with polycythemia vera (PV). Study design: PEGINVERA phase I/II (NCT: 2010-018768-18), a prospective, open-label, multicenter study, investigated the efficacy and safety of Ropeg for long-term treatment in 51 patients aged ≥18 years with a confirmed diagnosis of PV, regardless of prior cytoreductive therapy. Following ≥1 year of 2-weekly treatment, patients who responded well to Ropeg were permitted to switch to a 4-weekly dosing regimen. Results: Baseline characteristics of the study cohort and interim safety and efficacy data were presented previously (Gisslinger et al., Blood, 2015). Fifty-one patients were treated: Median exposure to Ropeg was approximately 5.1 years (61 months; range: 0 to 87 months). Patients were treated for a median of approximately 2 years (98.9 weeks; (Q1-Q3: 69.0 - 117.4 weeks) on the 2-weekly regimen and 4 years (207.1 weeks; Q1-Q3: 158.6 - 242.0 weeks) on the 4-weekly regimen. The best observed individual hematological response for patients in the efficacy analysis set (FAS) was a complete hematological response for 27/42 (64.3%) and a partial response for 14/42 (33.3%) patients. Patients required a median of 34 weeks (Q1-Q3: 10-96 weeks) treatment to achieve a complete hematological response, and 10 weeks (Q1-Q3: 10-20 weeks) to achieve any hematological response. Switch from 2 to 4-week dosing regimen had no apparent effect on maintenance of response. With respect to JAK-2 allele burden, the best observed individual molecular response was a complete response for 12/42 (28.6%) patients and a partial response for 19/42 (45.2%) patients. Lowest JAK-2 values relative to baseline are presented by patient in Figure 1. Patients required a median of 82 weeks (Q1-Q3: 44-115 weeks) treatment to achieve a complete molecular response and 34 weeks (Q1-Q3: 18-55 weeks) treatment to achieve any molecular response. Irrespective of dosing regimen, molecular responses tended to increase over time. Most patients reported at least one adverse reaction (AR) to treatment (409 ARs in 48/51 [94.1%]); however, the majority (296 in 44 [86.3%] patients) were mild; 102 (in 34 [66.7%] patients) were moderate and 11 (in 10 [19.6%] patients) were severe. The most frequently reported ARs (frequency >20%) were arthralgia, influenza-like illness and fatigue. Twelve serious treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) reported by 8/51 patients (15.7%) were considered to be treatment related: 2 events of depression, 2 of positive anti-thyroid antibodies, and one each of acute stress disorder, increased antinuclear antibodies, arthralgia, atrial fibrillation, fatigue, influenza-like illness, pyrexia, and increased transaminases. 25 patients completed the trial. The majority of discontinuation due to TEAE (13/21 patients) occurred in the first year, when the recommended slow up-titration of Ropeg could not be applied because of the maximum-tolerated-dose design. After the first year, only 8 additional patients discontinued because of TEAE. Conclusions: The final results of this phase I/II study of Ropeg in patients with PV support the findings of the pivotal phase III clinical trial (Gisslinger et al., Blood 2015) with respect to safety and efficacy as determined by hematological, clinical and molecular parameters. In addition, these data provide evidence that treatment with Ropeginterferon alfa-2b for up to 7 years is efficacious, well-tolerated and disease-modifying at both the 2 week and 4 week maintenance treatment regimens. Disclosures Gisslinger: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Shire: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kralovics:MyeloPro Diagnostics and Research GmbH: Equity Ownership. Krauth:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Greil:MSD: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sandoz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Research Funding; Janssen: Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zoerer:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Empson:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Grohmann-Izay:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Employment. Klade:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Employment.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Nilotinib 300 Mg Twice Daily (BD) in Patients with CML in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) Who Are Intolerant to Prior BCR-ABL Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs): Results from the Randomized, Phase IIIb E.N.E.S.Tswift Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.5447.5447 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 5447-5447

Author(s):

Devendra K Hiwase ◽

Peter Tan ◽

James D'Rozario ◽

John Taper ◽

Anthony Richard Powell ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Philadelphia Chromosome ◽

Chronic Phase ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Myeloproliferative Disease ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Log Reduction ◽

Treatment Interruptions

Abstract Background: Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML is a myeloproliferative disease characterized by the presence of the abnormal Ph+ in hematopoietic cells. Imatinib, dasatinib and nilotinib are BCR-ABL TKIs commonly used in the treatment of CML-CP. Many patients on BCR-ABL TKI therapy will experience adverse events (AEs). Some of the more common AEs associated with first- and second-generation BCR-ABL TKIs include fluid retention, diarrhea, rash, musculoskeletal pain, nausea, vomiting, muscle cramps, and headache. Some patients will be unable to tolerate these AEs and will discontinue therapy. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of nilotinib in patients with CML-CP who are responsive to but intolerant of treatment with imatinib or dasatinib. Although the study was stopped early due to low recruitment, here we present results on cross-intolerance and molecular response in the patients who were switched from imatinib or dasatinib to nilotinib. Methods: Eligible adult patients had: Ph+ CML-CP associated with BCR-ABL quantifiable by real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR); received ≥3 months imatinib or dasatinib or both; were <1% (IS) BCR-ABL level in the blood during imatinib or dasatinib treatment; and were experiencing any non-hematological AEs (any grade) that persisted for ≥1 month or recurred at least once despite supportive care. After a washout period of ≥3 days, patients were switched to nilotinib 300 mg BD and treated for up to 24 months. The dose could be reduced to 450 mg QD for safety reasons. Treatment interruptions, dose reductions and dose re-escalation to 300 mg BD were allowed for management of AEs. The primary outcome was achievement of MR4.5 (BCR-ABL ≤0.0032%) by 24 months. Major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL ≤0.1%) and MR4.0 (BCR-ABL ≤0.01%) were also assessed in an exploratory capacity at each visit (month 1, 2, 3, then every 3 months to month 24). Secondary endpoints included the kinetics of molecular response. Preliminary results are summarized descriptively. Planned enrolment was 130 patients. Results: The study was stopped early due to low recruitment; 20 patients were enrolled (mean age 53.9 years [range 31-77]; 14 female). 16 patients had received prior imatinib therapy, 4 patients prior dasatinib. Median nilotinib treatment duration was 494 days (mean 480, SD 167.6 days). At screening, 30% of patients were not in MMR, 45% had MMR and 25% had MR4.0. By month 3 and 24 of nilotinib treatment, 55% (11/20) and 65% (13/20) of patients, respectively, achieved at least a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL levels. 35% (7/20) of patients achieved MR4.5 between baseline and month 3 of nilotinib treatment, and 50% (10/20) achieved MR4.5 at any time up to month 24. The proportion of patients with a molecular response at each visit up to month 15 is shown in the Figure. AEs during prior treatment with imatinib and dasatinib included gastrointestinal events (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea), superficial edema, myalgia, fatigue, rash, and headache, among others. 68% of AEs had resolved by month 3 of nilotinib treatment. Among the 13 evaluable patients on prior imatinib, 7 (54%) had resolution of all AEs during treatment with nilotinib; of 3 evaluable patients on prior dasatinib, 3 (100%) had AE resolution on nilotinib. Grade 3/4 AEs during nilotinib therapy occurred in 3 patients: diabetes mellitus, fatigue, neutropenia, pneumonia, osteoarthritis, and hyperuricemia. Conclusions: Although early termination of the study has not allowed for a robust analysis, these results suggest that nilotinib is effective and well tolerated in most patients intolerant of imatinib or dasatinib. During the first 3 months of switching to nilotinib, 55% of patients had achieved at least a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL levels, and 35% of patients had achieved MR4.5. The cumulative rate of MR4.5 by 24 months was 50%. Achievement of this endpoint has been linked to favorable long-term outcomes, such as treatment-free remission. Furthermore, the majority of the AEs had resolved by month 3 of nilotinib therapy. This improved tolerance to nilotinib may result in improved treatment adherence. As such, although further study in a larger population is needed for confirmation, these results provide further evidence that nilotinib is a favorable option to establish a molecular response in patients intolerant of imatinib or dasatinib. Disclosures D'Rozario: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Branford:Qiagen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cepheid: Consultancy. Yeung:Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Anderson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Gervasio:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Use of Ropeginterferon Alpha-2b in Polycythemia Vera: 5-Year Results from a Randomized Controlled Study and Its Extension

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-136973 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 33-33

Author(s):

Heinz Gisslinger ◽

Christoph Klade ◽

Pencho Georgiev ◽

Dorota Krochmalczyk ◽

Liana Gercheva-Kyuchukova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Extension Study ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Thromboembolic Events ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Allele Burden ◽

Long Term Treatment

Introduction: Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) require life-long treatment to prevent thromboembolic events and minimize the risk of progression. Ropeginterferon alpha-2b (BESREMi®; hereafter ropeg) may ultimately modify the natural history of PV by selectively targeting the malignant clone. In the PROUD-PV/CONTINUATION-PV studies, long-term treatment with ropeg was compared with standard cytoreductive therapy regarding thromboembolic and other adverse events as well as evolution of hematologic and molecular parameters over five years. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years and diagnosed with PV according to WHO 2008 criteria who were either cytoreduction-naïve or hydroxyurea (HU)-pre-treated for < 3 years were enrolled. A total of 257 patients were randomized 1:1 (stratified by age > 60 years, prior thromboembolic events, and HU pre-treatment) to receive ropeg or HU at individualized doses for 12 months in the initial study (PROUD-PV). In the extension study (CONTINUATION-PV), patients in the HU arm were permitted to switch to best available treatment. Efficacy assessments included hematologic parameters, phlebotomy need, JAK2V617F allele burden, and molecular response defined by modified ELN criteria. An interim analysis was conducted once all patients reached 5 years of treatment; efficacy data for patients enrolled in the extension study and all available safety data were analyzed. Results: Ninety-five patients in the ropeg arm and 76 in the control arm entered the extension study. Most patients in the control arm continued to receive HU (88% at month 60). At the time of this 5-year analysis, 70 patients in the ropeg arm and 57 in the control arm remained on study; discontinuation rates were balanced between the treatment arms (ropeg: 26.3%; control: 25.0%). Hematocrit <45% was maintained without the need for phlebotomy in 81.8% patients in the ropeg arm in the fifth year of treatment, which was significantly higher than the rate of 63.2% observed in the control group (p=0.01). Very few patients experienced a major thromboembolic adverse event (4.2% [1.2%-patient year] of patients in the ropeg arm and 6.6% [1.2%-patient-year] of patients in the control arm during the entire treatment period). With respect to the causative JAK2V617F mutation, the median allele burden declined from 37.3% at baseline to 7.3% over 5 years of treatment in the ropeg arm, whereas in the control arm the median allele burden increased from 38.1% to 42.6% in the same period (p<0.0001). The rate of molecular response at 5 years was also significantly higher among ropeg-treated patients than in the control arm (69.1% versus 21.6%; RR: 3.2 [95% CI: 2.1 to 4.9; p<0.0001]). The sustained molecular response observed in ropeg-treated patients was accompanied by a low risk of disease progression; only 1 case of progression to myelofibrosis (0.20%-patient year) was reported during the entire study period and no leukemic transformation occurred. In contrast, 2 cases of progression to myelofibrosis and 2 cases of transformation to acute leukemia (1.0%-patient year in total) were reported in the control arm. A further analysis of combined hematologic and molecular parameters was performed, these being known to influence the risk of thrombosis and of progression in PV. At the 5 year visit, 58.5% of patients receiving ropeg had well-controlled hematocrit (<45%) without requiring phlebotomy, as well as achieving a molecular response, compared to 17.3% on standard treatment (RR: 3.52 [2.13 to 5.81]; p<0.0001). Regarding safety and tolerability, no new signals were detected in the fifth year. Treatment related adverse events were reported in 25.6% and 24.2% of patients in the ropeg and control arms, respectively, and one patient in each arm withdrew due to drug-related toxicity. Three patients (3.8%) in the ropeg arm reported grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events in the fifth year; over the entire treatment period, the rate of grade ≥3 drug-related adverse events was the same in each study arm (16.5%). Conclusions: In a randomized controlled setting, ropeg treatment effectively controlled hematocrit and minimized the occurrence of thromboembolic events in patients with PV. Disease progression was very rare during long-term treatment with ropeg and this possible change in the disease natural history appears to be related to deep and durable molecular responses selectively achieved with ropeg. Disclosures Gisslinger: AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Honoraria; MyeloPro Diagnostics and Research: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Klade:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Current Employment. Illés:Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Novartis Pharma SAS, Pfizer Pharmaceuticals Israel, Roche;: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda, Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Novartis, Janssen, Pfizer, Roche;: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Celgene, Janssen, Novartis,Roche, Takeda: Consultancy. Mayer:Celgene: Research Funding. Krejcy:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Current Employment. Empson:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Current Employment. Hasselbalch:Novartis: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Honoraria. Kralovics:AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG: Honoraria; Qiagen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; MyeloPro Diagnostics and Research: Current equity holder in private company; PharmaEssentia: Honoraria. Kiladjian:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Effects of Tamoxifen on the Mutant Allele Burden and Disease Course in Patients with Myeloproliferative Neoplasms - Results of the Tamarin Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-134764 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 33-35

Author(s):

Claire Harrison ◽

Joanna Baxter ◽

Rebecca H. Boucher ◽

Thomas McKerrell ◽

Aimee Jackson ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Breast Cancer ◽

Estrogen Receptor ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Mutant Allele ◽

Primary Outcome ◽

Myeloproliferative Neoplasms ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Educational Support ◽

Allele Burden

Background Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) commonly result from mutations in genes encoding the kinase JAK2 or the multi-functional protein CALR. In preclinical studies, estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) modulation restores normal apoptosis in JAK2V617F hematopoietic progenitors (HSPCs). Use of selective ER modulators (SERM) such as tamoxifen may permit the molecular reduction of MPNs. Methods TAMARIN is a Trials Acceleration Programme, Phase II, multicentre, single arm A'herns design clinical trial assessing tamoxifen's safety and activity in reducing molecular markers of disease burden in MPN male patients aged ≥60 years and post-menopausal female patients with stable blood counts, no history of thrombosis and ≥20% mutated JAK2V617F, CALR 5bp insertion or CALR 52bp deletion. Based on tamoxifen's safety profile in ER+ breast cancer, an oral dose of 20 mg once daily was initially given and progressively escalated to 40 mg, in addition to standard cytoreductive therapy (excluding treatments known to lower allele burden eg interferon). Mutant allele burden was measured after 12 and 24 weeks (w) of treatment. The A'herns success criteria required the primary outcome (>50% reduction in allele burden at 24w) be observed in ≥3 patients (Barosi Leuk. 2015). Patient blood (baseline, 12 and 24w) samples were collected and CD34+ HSPCs were isolated in a subset for RNA-Seq, which was also performed on HEL and UKE-1 JAK2V617F-mutated human cell lines treated with tamoxifen/vehicle. Apoptosis and oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) were measured in SERM-treated cell lines for confirmation. Results and Discussion 38 patients (37% essential thrombocythaemia (ET), 29% polycythaemia vera (PV), 16% primary myelofibrosis (PMF), 13% post-PV MF and 5% post-ET MF) were recruited over 112w. 33 patients completed ≥24w of tamoxifen treatment, 1 was untreated, 1 discontinued following an unprovoked thrombotic event and 3 discontinued due to toxicity. 4 patients achieved the primary outcome and 6 additional patients met the secondary outcome (≥25% reduction)(A-B). Responders included 4 JAK2V617F PV males, a JAK2V617F PMF female and ET patients of both genders carrying JAK2V617F, CALRdel52 or CALRins5 mutations. 4 patients remain on trial treatment beyond 48w as they are considered to be deriving clinical benefit. Two grade 3 adverse events unrelated to tamoxifen, as well as 1 superficial thrombophlebitis and 1 deep vein thrombosis (grade 2) occurred on study. HSPC transcriptome seggregates responders and non-responders perfectly at baseline (C), suggesting a potential predictive signature of response. Pathway analysis of differentially-expressed genes shows enrichment of myeloid differentiation and hormone-dependent transcriptional complex assembly in responders at baseline. In contrast, chromosome segregation, DNA replication, and chromosome condensation pathways are enriched in non-responders. Gene-set enrichment analysis (GSEA) reveals increased apoptosis and oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) signatures in responders at baseline (D). Upregulated genes in responders are associated with H3K4me1 modification whilst genes upregulated in non-responders are associated with H3K9me3, suggesting the possibility that chromatin modifications account for tamoxifen sensitivity. 24w after treatment, OXPHOS and ROS pathways are downregulated in responder HSPCs (E) but upregulated in non-responders (F), suggesting striking differences in the metabolism of HSPCs in both groups and/or the eradication of sensitive HSPCs in responders. Reduced OXPHOS pathways and deregulated expression of unfolded protein response (UPR) genes were confirmed in HEL and UKE-1 cells. In fact, tamoxifen induces dose-dependent apoptosis in HEL and UKE-1 cells, where serum deprivation or UPR inducers sensitize resistant cells to tamoxifen-induced apoptosis, which is associated with decreased OXPHOS and energy (ATP) production. Conclusions These results demonstrate the safety and activity of tamoxifen in reducing mutant allele burden in a subset of MPN patients who could be prospectively identified based on their transcriptomic signature at baseline. Tamoxifen can induce apoptosis of human JAK2V617F or CALR mutated HSPCs through metabolic and transcriptional effects. These results advocate for future studies to test the effects of SERMs in MPN with careful consideration of thrombotic risk. Disclosures Harrison: Roche: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Mead:CTI: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene/BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy. Knapper:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ewing:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. McMullin:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Narayanan:Novartis: Other: Educational support to attend conferences; MSD: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: Educational support to attend conferences; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: Educational support to attend conferences. Milojkovic:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Drummond:Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Blueprint Medicine Corporation: Research Funding; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Tamoxifen is a selective estrogen receptor modulator frequently used in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Download Full-text

Second Imatinib Discontinuation Outcomes in Patients Regaining Durable Deep Molecular Response in the Korean Imatinib Discontinuation Study; KID Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-139253 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 51-52

Author(s):

Sung-Eun Lee ◽

Joon Seong Park ◽

Young Rok Do ◽

Sung-Hyun Kim ◽

Dae Young Zang ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prospective Study ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Duration ◽

Research Funding ◽

Kinase Inhibitor ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Close Monitoring ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Deep Molecular Response ◽

Multicenter Prospective Study

Backgroud: Although multiple trials have shown that stopping tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment can be employed in CP CML patients with sustained deep molecular response (DMR) after enough TKI therapy, they emphasized the need for close monitoring because about 50-70% of patients experienced molecular relapse. However, most patients with molecular recurrence regain their initial molecular level after restarting TKI therapy. Aims: In this study, we analyzed second imatinib (IM) discontinuation outcomes in patients regaining durable DMR in the Korean multicenter prospective study (Korean Imatinib Discontinuation Study; KID Study) Methods: CP CML patients who were treated with IM for more than 3 years and maintained DMR for at least 2 years were eligible for the Korean multicenter prospective study and in cases of MMR loss on 2 consecutive assessments, IM treatment was re-introduced. After IM resumption, the molecular response was evaluated every month until re-achievement of MMR and every 3 months thereafter. The second stop was permitted in the patients who were in second DMR for at least 2 years. Results: Among the patients who maintained a second DMR for at least 2 years after IM resumption, 23 patients entered into a second IM stop. Prior to first discontinuation, the median duration of IM therapy was 73.2 months (range, 38.4-133.2 months) and the duration of sustained UMRD was 38.4 months (range, 24-102 months). After first attempt of IM discontinuation, they relapsed after a median duration of 3.7 months (range, 1.8-20.8 months) and re-achieved UMRD at a median of 5.8 months (range, 1.7-12.1 months) after IM resumption. After sustaining a second DMR for a median of 26.3 months, IM therapy discontinued for a second time. With a median follow-up of 29.5 months (range, 9-63 months) since second IM stop, 15/23 patients (65%) lost MMR after a median 2.9 months (range, 1.8-30.7 months), which was similar to those of the first IM discontinuation [median 3.7 (range, 1.8-20.8 months)]. The patients who lost MMR were retreated with IM for a median of 24.5 months (range, 1.2-49.7 months); 14 patients re-achieved MMR and one patient was in therapy for 1.2 months. Conclusion: Our data demonstrated that a second attempt might be possible and the median time to MMR loss after second discontinuation was similar to those of the first discontinuation. Further studies on the predictors to select patients for a trial of second TFR and novel strategies will be warranted. Disclosures Kim: Takeda: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ILYANG: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sun Pharma.: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Aspacytarabine (BST-236) Is Safe and Efficacious As a Single-Agent, First-Line Therapy for Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Unfit for Standard Chemotherapy. Integrated Results from a Phase 1/2a and an Ongoing Phase 2b

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-124330 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 179-179

Author(s):

Jessica K. Altman ◽

Tsila Zuckerman ◽

Olga Frankfurt ◽

Selina M. Luger ◽

Dale L. Bixby ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Standard Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Single Agent ◽

Prior Exposure ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Ongoing Phase

Introduction: Aspacytarabine (BST-236) is a prodrug of cytarabine, a backbone of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) therapy. Due to its unique pharmacokinetics and metabolism, treatment with aspacytarabine evades peak exposure to free cytarabine, which reduces non-hematological toxicity and enables delivery of high-dose cytarabine also to patients unfit for standard therapy. Data from a completed phase 1/2a and an ongoing phase 2b studies in AML patients unfit for standard therapy, including patients with AML secondary to therapy and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with prior exposure to hypomethylating agents (HMA), demonstrate promising single-agent efficacy and safety of aspacytarabine as a potential first-line AML treatment for this challenging population. Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspacytarabine in AML patients unfit for standard induction therapy. Methods: A completed phase 1/2a study and an ongoing phase 2b study evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspacytarabine as a single-agent therapeutic for AML. The phase 1/2a, dose-escalation study enrolled newly-diagnosed patients unfit for standard therapy and patients with relapsed/refractory AML. Patients were treated with 0.3-6 g/m2/d aspacytarabine in 6 dose-escalating cohorts. The ongoing multi-center phase 2b study expands the subgroup of newly-diagnosed AML patients unfit for standard therapy, to evaluate the efficacy and safety of aspacytarabine as a first-line therapy for this population. Secondary AML patients, treated with HMA, chemotherapy, or radiotherapy for a prior condition, are allowed. Patients in the phase 2b study are treated with the selected aspacytarabine dose of 4.5 g/m2/d, containing approximately 3 g/m2/d of cytarabine. Each aspacytarabine treatment course (induction and consolidation) consists of 6 1-hour daily intravenous infusions. Results: To date, 34 AML patients, median age 76 years, received at least 1 dose of aspacytarabine, including 30 patients unfit for standard induction therapy due to age or comorbidities. Overall, 25 patients completed 1 course of aspacytarabine, 4 patients completed 2 courses, 1 patient completed 3 courses, and 1 patient completed 4 courses of aspacytarabine. Three patients (in the phase 1/2a study) did not complete the first course. Aspacytarabine was safe and well-tolerated in repeated-course administration, including in older and unfit patients. Adverse events included mainly hematological "on-target" events with no drug-related mucositis or cerebellar toxicity. Twenty-one patients were newly-diagnosed with AML, either de novo or secondary to MDS or therapy. The patient population was characterized by older age (median 76 years, range 67-88 years), and the majority (67%) of patients had secondary AML, including 10 patients (48%) who were previously treated with HMA (median of 10 courses) or radiotherapy. The median baseline bone marrow blast percentage of this population was 75, and 43% and 48% had intermediate or adverse European LeukemiaNet (ELN) cytogenetic score, respectively. Despite these poor-prognostic characteristics, the 30-day mortality rate in the group of patients receiving ≥4.5 g/m2/d aspacytarabine was 7%. The combined complete remission (CR) rate of all doses was 33%, including 1 patient reaching a CR with partial platelet recovery (CRp). The CR rate in patients treated with at least 4.5 g/m2/d aspacytarabine is 36%, with median time for complete hematological recovery of 27 days (range 21-30) following induction and consolidation. Notably, among the 7 patients who reached a CR/CRp (median age 77), 3 secondary AML patients reached a CR, including 2 patients with prior exposure to HMA (5 and 10 courses) and 1 with prior exposure to radiotherapy (Table 1). Duration of response and overall survival follow up is ongoing and will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: The accumulating clinical data suggest that aspacytarabine is safe and efficacious for the treatment of AML patients who are unfit for standard induction therapy, including patients with prior exposure to HMA, which may establish aspacytarabine as a new therapeutic backbone for AML, either as a single agent or in combination with targeted therapy. Disclosures Altman: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Other: US Lead; Novartis: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; France Foundation: Speakers Bureau; prIME Oncology: Speakers Bureau; PeerView: Speakers Bureau; Theradex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Luger:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Onconova: Research Funding; Kura: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Genetech: Research Funding; Daichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cyslacel: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Biosight: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria. Kota:Takeda: Honoraria; Xcenda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Flaishon:BioSight Ltd.: Employment. Tessler:BioSight Ltd.: Employment. Gengrinovitch:BioSight Ltd.: Employment. Ben Yakar:BioSight Ltd.: Employment. Rowe:BioSight: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Ravulizumab in Older Patients Aged >65 Years with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria in the 301 and 302 Phase 3 Extension Studies

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-140777 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 42-43

Author(s):

Regis Peffault De Latour ◽

Jeffrey Szer ◽

Austin Kulasekararaj ◽

Jin Seok Kim ◽

Caroline I. Piatek ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria ◽

Complement Inhibitor ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Treatment Naïve ◽

Secondary Endpoints

Background: In the two largest phase 3 studies in patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), ravulizumab given every 8 weeks was noninferior to eculizumab given every 2 weeks across all efficacy endpoints. Data on efficacy and safety of ravulizumab in patients aged >65 years with PNH are limited. Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of ravulizumab in patients with PNH aged >65 years with those aged ≤65 years. Methods: The population included patients from two phase 3 studies that assessed ravulizumab vs eculizumab in complement-inhibitor-naïve (301; NCT02946463) and -experienced (302; NCT03056040) adults with PNH. In study 301, patients were aged ≥18 years with a confirmed PNH diagnosis by flow cytometry and had a lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level ≥1.5x upper limit of normal (ULN; 246U/L). In study 302, patients were aged ≥18 years with a confirmed PNH diagnosis by flow cytometry, were clinically stable on eculizumab having received ≥6 months of treatment and had a LDH level ≤1.5x ULN. Patients were randomized to either ravulizumab or eculizumab for 26 weeks after which all received ravulizumab up to 52 weeks. This prespecified analysis stratified patients by age: ≤65 or >65 years. Primary endpoints included percentage change in LDH from baseline to weeks 26 and 52, percentage of patients achieving LDH-normalization (LDH-N; LDH levels: ≤1x ULN) at weeks 26 and 52 and transfusion avoidance (TA) from baseline to weeks 26 and 52. Breakthrough hemolysis (BTH), hemoglobin (Hgb) stabilization and FACIT-fatigue score were secondary endpoints. Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed as an indicator of safety. Results: A total of 58 patients aged >65 years and 383 patients aged ≤65 years were included. Disposition and medical history were similar among subgroups at baseline (Table 1). Results for primary and secondary endpoints for the two subgroups were comparable across studies and efficacy was maintained through 52 weeks. A higher proportion of treatment-experienced patients (>65 years) achieved all endpoints vs -naïve patients (Table 2). The percentage change in LDH levels from baseline to 26 and 52 weeks was similar between subgroups in study 301 (-66.5 to -80.0%) whereas in study 302, LDH levels remained stable in all subgroups up to 52 weeks (-3.7 to 22%). The percentage of patients achieving LDH-N in both studies at 26 and 52 weeks differed; 43.8-63.9% of patients aged ≤65 years achieved LDH-N compared with 21.4-77.8% of patients aged >65 years. A higher proportion of older treatment-experienced patients (57.1‒77.8%) achieved LDH-N compared with older treatment-naive patients (21.4‒50.0%) at 26 and 52 weeks. In patients aged ≤65 years in both studies, 63.7‒89.4% achieved TA. In the >65 years subgroup, 14.3‒50.0% of treatment-naive patients achieved TA whereas in study 302, 54.5‒72.7% of patients achieved TA. The number of BTH events was low, with no events reported in older patients to date. Hgb stabilization was consistent in the ≤65 year subgroup between the studies; a higher proportion of older patients in study 302 (45.5‒71.4%) achieved stabilized Hgb compared with older patients in study 301 (14.3‒35.3%). A clinically significant 3-point change was seen in FACIT-fatigue scores (indicating improvements in fatigue), with higher scores observed for ravulizumab in both subgroups (Figure 1). One patient discontinued the extension of study 301 due to lung cancer onset during the 26-week period and died following discontinuation. Headache was the most frequent TEAE. The incidence of TEAEs reported during ravulizumab treatment up to 52 weeks did not increase vs the 26-week period, with few events (Table 3) and no difference between subgroups. Conclusions: We present clinical outcomes in the largest cohort of patients with PNH (>65 years) on ravulizumab in a clinical trial setting to date. Ravulizumab was associated with similar efficacy and safety in both age subgroups and showed consistent and durable efficacy through 52 weeks of treatment. A higher proportion of patients in study 302 achieved all efficacy endpoints than in study 301, which can be due to patients' prior complement inhibitor experience. This observation was more evident in older patients. There were no BTH events in the older patients to date, and the number of infections in both subgroups was low. Ravulizumab was well tolerated in older patients with no additional safety concerns compared to younger patients. Disclosures Peffault De Latour: Apellis: 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, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Szer:Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Apellis: Consultancy; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Prevail Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kulasekararaj:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kim:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Piatek:Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kulagin:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hill:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Wang:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Yu:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Ogawa:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Schrezenmeier:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lee:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Ponatinib and Chemotherapy in Young Adults with De Novo Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia. Results of Ponalfil Clinical Trial after Completion of Recruitment

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-137489 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 29-30

Author(s):

Josep-Maria Ribera ◽

Olga García ◽

Pau Montesinos ◽

Pilar Martinez ◽

Jordi Esteve ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽

Philadelphia Chromosome ◽

Molecular Response ◽

Event Free Survival ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Allogeneic Hsct ◽

Central Artery

Background and objective. The combination of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) and chemotherapy (intensive, attenuated or minimal) has improved the prognosis of patients (pts) with Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ALL). The combination of HyperCVAD and ponatinib has improved the molecular response and survival compared with other combinations of chemotherapy with first or second generation TKI (Jabbour E, et al, Lancet Haematol. 2018; 5:e618-e627). The Spanish PETHEMA group conducted the phase 2 PONALFIL trial, which incorporates ponatinib to the same induction and consolidation schedule of the ALL Ph08 trial (Ribera JM et al. Cancer 2019;125:2810-2817) The results of this trial after completed recruitment are herein reported. Patients and method. The PONALFIL trial (NCT02776605) combined ponatinib (30 mg/d) and induction chemotherapy (vincristine, daunorubicin and prednisone) followed by consolidation (high-dose methotrexate, ARA-C, mercaptopurine, etoposide) and allogeneic HSCT. TKI use as maintenance was only scheduled for pts with persistence or reappearance of MRD. By July 2020 the 30 scheduled pts were recruited. The response to therapy (complete morphological [CR], molecular [complete, CMR or major, MMR] after induction and before allogeneic HSCT) (assessed by centralized BCR-ABL/ABL ratio),event-free survival (EFS), overall survival [OS]) and toxicity are herein analyzed. Results. Median age was 50 (20-59) years and 14/30 pts were female. One pt showed CNS involvement at diagnosis. ECOG score at diagnosis was <2 in 86% of pts. Median of WBC count was 6.4 (0.6-359.3) x109/L, Hb 90 (63-145) g/L, platelets 38 (11-206) x109/L. The immunologic phenotype was common in 26 cases, with molecular isoform p190 in 20 patients (67%), p210 in 9 (30%) and p230 in 1 (3%). CR was attained 26/26 patients (100%) (4 are still on induction therapy), with CMR in 11/26 cases (42%), MMR in 6/26 (23%) and no molecular response in 9/26 (35%)).Two patients withdrew the trial (thrombosis of the central retina artery and severe intestinal infection, one case each). Consolidation was given to 24 patients, 2/24 are receiving consolidation and 22 patients received allogeneic HSCT (14 in CMR, 6 in MMR, 2 without molecular response). No relapses before HSCT were detected. No transplant-related mortality was observed to date, but 1 patient withdrew the trial by severe GVHD. Ponatinib was given after HSCT in 4 pts due to loss of molecular response. Three pts relapsed after HSCT, one of them after documented loss of molecular response. All pts are alive (median follow-up of 4.5 months, range 0.5-26.2.2). The EFS probability at 30 months was 91% (79%, 100%) (Figure 1). One hundred and two adverse events (AE) have been registered in 20 patients, 25 of whom were severe (SAE) and occurred in 14 patients, prompting to withdrawn of the trial in 3 (thrombosis of the central artery of the retina, severe bowel infection, grade IV aGVHD, one case each). The most frequent AE were hematologic (26%), gastrointestinal (15%), infections (10%), hepatic (8%) and cutaneous (5%). Cardiovascular events occurred in 2 patients (angor pectoris and thrombosis of central artery of the retina, one case each). Conclusions. The preliminary results of the PONALFIL trial after recruitment completed show a high short-term antileukemic efficacy with acceptable toxicity profile. Supported in part by grant 2017 SGR288 (GRC) Generalitat de Catalunya and "La Caixa" Foundation. Figure 1. Event free survival (EFS) of the whole series. Figure 1 Disclosures Ribera: Pfizer, Amgen, Ariad, Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer, Amgen: Research Funding. Martinez-Lopez:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen-cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Garcia-Sanz:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text