A Phase 2 Study of Futibatinib (TAS-120) in Patients with Myeloid or Lymphoid Neoplasms Harboring Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor (FGFR) 1 Rearrangements

Abstract Background: Myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms (MLNs) with FGFR1 rearrangements are very rare but aggressive myeloproliferative malignancies, characterized by eosinophilia, lymphoid aggregates, and often myelofibrosis, and are recognized as a distinct disease group by the World Health Organization (WHO). In these neoplasms, FGFR1 rearrangements drive oncogenesis via dysregulation of downstream FGFR signaling. Allogenic hematological stem cell transplant (HSCT) is the recommended treatment for patients with FGFR1-rearranged MLNs, as these malignancies are often refractory to chemotherapy and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Currently, no effective molecularly targeted treatments are available for these patients. Futibatinib is an oral, highly selective, irreversible inhibitor of FGFR1-4 that has shown antitumor activity against FGFR-deregulated tumors in preclinical experiments and in phase 1 studies. Recent results from a phase 2 study demonstrated the efficacy (42% objective response rate) and manageable safety of futibatinib in patients with FGFR2 fusion/rearrangement-positive intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In addition to cholangiocarcinoma, futibatinib treatment resulted in objective responses across tumor types harboring various FGFR aberrations in the phase 1 study. In a separate report, a patient with an FGFR1-driven myeloid neoplasm treated with futibatinib achieved complete hematologic and cytogenetic remission. Based on these data, a multicohort phase 2 study (NCT04189445) was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of futibatinib in patients with tumors harboring specific FGFR aberrations. Here, we describe the cohort of patients with MLNs harboring FGFR1 rearrangements. Study Design and Methods: In this global, open-label, multicohort phase 2 study, patients (≥18 years, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1 and adequate organ function) will be enrolled into 1 of 3 cohorts by type of tumor and/or FGFR aberration. The cohort of patients with MLNs harboring FGFR1 rearrangements (as defined by WHO criteria) will include patients who are not candidates for HSCT or other therapies or who have disease progression following HSCT. Patients with clinically significant alterations in calcium-phosphorus homeostasis, ectopic mineralization/calcification, clinically significant retinal/corneal disorder, untreated or clinically/radiologically unstable brain metastases, or prior FGFR inhibitor treatment will be excluded. Approximately 20 patients will be enrolled in this cohort (sample size considerations based on differentiating a ≤10% historical control complete response [CR] rate with a 50% target CR rate with 95% power). Patients will receive futibatinib 20 mg once daily in a continuous 28-day cycle until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other discontinuation criterion is met. The primary endpoint is CR rate. Secondary endpoints include objective response rate, CR with incomplete hematological recovery (CRi) rate, complete or partial cytogenetic response rate, and safety. Additional secondary endpoints are duration of CR, CR+CRi, and response; as well as event-free (leukemia presentation only), progression-free, relapse-free, and overall survival. The study was initiated in August 2020, and patient enrollment is ongoing. Disclosures Kiladjian: AOP Orphan: 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; Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaEssentia: Other: Personal fees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shitara: Lilly, Ono Pharmaceutical, Dainippon Sumitomo Pharma, MSD, Daiichi Sankyo, Taiho Pharmaceutical, Chugai Pharm, Astellas Pharm, Medi Science, Eisai, Taiho Oncology: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma, Lilly, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Pfizer, Ono Pharmaceutical, Taiho, MSD, Novartis, Abbvie, GlaxoSmithKline, Daiichi Sankyo, Amgen, Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Novartis, Abbvie, Yakult: Other: Speaker fee. Rosen: Taiho Oncology: Research Funding. Rha: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding. He: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding. Oh: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding; AstraZeneca, Novartis, Array, Eli Lilly, Servier, BeiGene, MSD, Handok: Other: Grants or contracts from any entity; AstraZeneca, Novartis, Genentech/Roche, Merck Serono, Bayer, Taiho, ASLAN, Halozyme, Zymeworks, BMS/Celgene, BeiGene, Basilea, Turning Point: Other: Participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board. Melisi: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding. Iwasa: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Jiang: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Research Funding. Liu: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Current Employment. Takahashi: Taiho Oncology, Inc.: Current Employment. Ribrag: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Research Funding; PharmaMar: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nanostring: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argen-X: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Elotuzumab In Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone In Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: Interim Results of a Phase 2 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.986.986 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 986-986 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Philippe Moreau ◽

Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽

Thierry Facon ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Phase 1 Study ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Infusion Reactions

Abstract Abstract 986 Introduction: Elotuzumab is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody directed against CS1, an antigen highly and uniformly expressed on multiple myeloma (MM) cells but with restricted expression on normal cells. Elotuzumab exhibits significant antimyeloma activity in vitro and against MM xenografts, and its antitumor activity is enhanced independently by both lenalidomide and dexamethasone. In a dose-escalation phase 1 study that evaluated the combination of elotuzumab (5, 10, and 20 mg/kg), lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and the combination showed encouraging clinical activity (82% response rate) in patients with advanced MM. The most frequent infusion-related adverse events (AEs) were headache (21%), nausea (21%), and dizziness (11%), with 7% (2/28) of patients experiencing 3 serious infusion-related AEs during cycle 1 (1 with a grade 4 hypersensitivity reaction and 1 with 2 grade 3 stridor events). Key objectives of this dose randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study in patients with relapsed MM were to select the optimum dose of elotuzumab and to evaluate an enhanced premedication regimen to minimize the occurrence of infusion reactions. Methods: Patients with confirmed relapsed and/or refractory MM who had received 1–3 prior therapies were enrolled; prior lenalidomide therapy was excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive elotuzumab either 10 or 20 mg/kg (IV infusion on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle in the first 2 cycles and then days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles), along with lenalidomide 25 mg PO daily on days 1 to 21 and dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly. Patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, if earlier. To control potential infusion reactions, patients received methylprednisolone (50 mg IV), diphenhydramine (25–50 mg PO or IV) or equivalent, ranitidine (50 mg IV) or equivalent, and acetaminophen (650–1000 mg PO) 30 to 60 minutes prior to each elotuzumab infusion. Objective responses (OR) were assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Results: As of July 8, 2010, a total of 59 patients were randomized (intent to treat population); 47 patients received at least 1 dose of study medication (safety population); and 26 patients completed or progressed prior to completing 2 cycles of treatment (efficacy population). Median age was 64 years; 36 (61%) had received ≥2 prior therapies; 28 (48%) and 31 (53%) had received bortezomib or thalidomide, respectively, and 40 (68%) had undergone transplantation. Among efficacy evaluable patients, 22/26 (85%) had a confirmed or an unconfirmed response (≥ PR) including 31% VGPR/CR. The remaining 4/26 (15%) had stable disease (Table). Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 36/47 patients (77%); the most common events were fatigue (26%) and nausea (21%). Serious treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 22% of patients; 2 events, nausea and febrile neutropenia with thrombocytopenia, were considered to be related to elotuzumab and lenalidomide. The most common infusion-related AEs within 24 hours of elotuzumab infusion were dizziness (15%), nausea (15%), and headache (9%). These decreased in frequency after the first treatment cycle. There were no severe AEs associated with infusion reactions. Conclusion: The combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone resulted in a high response rate in patients with advanced MM and was generally well tolerated. These results are consistent with the results previously reported from the phase 1 study. The revised premedication regimen appeared to be more effective in controlling infusion reactions, which were generally mild to moderate with no severe infusion reactions reported to date. Updated response and safety data on all patients by dose level will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Richardson: Millennium, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide. Moreau:Celgene, Facet, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:Millennium, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson Ortho-Centocor: Honoraria; Millennium, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium, Celgene, Centocor-Ortho Biotech: Speakers Bureau. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Millennium, Takeda Pharm, Janssen: Honoraria. Vij:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Reece:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rossi:Sanofi-Aventis, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tsao:Facet Biotech: Employment. Fry:Facet Biotech: Employment. Berman:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Singhal:Facet Biotech: Employment. Lonial:Millennium, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Onyx: Advisory Board, Consultancy; Millennium, Celgene, Novartis, Onyx, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Preliminary Results of a Phase 2 Study of PD 0332991 in Combination with Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.2940.2940 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 2940-2940

Author(s):

Ruben Niesvizky ◽

Luciano J Costa ◽

Nisreen A. Haideri ◽

Georg Hess ◽

Seema Singhal ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Cell Cycle ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Oncology Research ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

D 20 ◽

Ecog Ps

Abstract Abstract 2940 Background: PD 0332991 is an orally bioavailable selective inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4/6. Inhibition of CDK4/6 phosphorylation of retinoblastoma (Rb) induces prolonged early G1 cell cycle arrest (pG1) and synchronous progression to S phase (pG1-S) upon withdrawal, which sensitizes human multiple myeloma (MM) cells to killing by bortezomib (B) or dexamethasone (D) in vitro and in animal models. Based on these observations, a phase 1/2 study in combination with B plus D in patients (pts) with relapsed and/or refractory MM was initiated. The phase 1 part of the study (completed) determined the recommended phase 2 dose and schedule to be PD 0332991 100 mg QD 12 days on followed by 9 days off treatment in a 21-day cycle with intravenous B 1.0 mg/m2 plus oral D 20 mg administered on Days 8 and 11 in pG1 and 15 and 18 in pG1-S (Niesvizky et al. ASH 2010). We present preliminary data from the phase 2 part of the study. Methods: Pts with Rb protein-positive, measurable (as defined by International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG]) progressive, relapsed or refractory MM after ≥1 prior treatment were eligible. Prior B was allowed only if there was a response and disease progression occurred off therapy. Pts received oral PD 0332991 once daily on Days 1–12 in a 21-day cycle in combination with intravenous B 1.0 mg/m2 plus oral D 20 mg administered on Days 8, 11, 15, and 18. The primary endpoint is overall response rate (ORR); secondary endpoints include time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival, duration of response, and safety. PD 0332991-mediated inhibition of CDK4/6-specific phosphorylation of Rb (pSRb) and Ki67 in bone marrow MM cells were also assessed. The phase 2 part of the study is a Simon Two-Stage Minimax design; 25 response evaluable patients were to be enrolled into the first stage. Results: 39 pts have been tested for Rb and 36 pts (92%) were positive. Of the 36 pts, 30 pts have been enrolled to date including 2 pts who did not receive the study treatment, and 23 pts are considered response evaluable as of the data cut-off. 56% of pts had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 1 and 8% had ECOG PS of 2. At baseline, median β2 microglobulin was 3.1 (range 1.6–26.2), median hemoglobin was 11.2 (7.2–13.6), median calcium was 9.4 (8.7–11.9). The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1–8); 55% had received prior B. Sixteen pts have discontinued (9 due to progressive disease, 3 due to AE, 2 consent withdrawal, and 2 not treated). The most common treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (44%), nausea (20%), anemia, constipation, fatigue, and neutropenia (all 16%); 32% of pts reported grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia. IHC data showed on-treatment reduction in pSRb and Ki67 in MM cells from bone marrow of 3/3 patients with available samples. To date, 1 pt achieved a complete response (CR), 1 achieved a very good partial response (VGPR), 1 partial response (PR), 1 minor response (MR), and 5 stable disease (SD); 6 pts are too early for assessment. Conclusions: To date, the combination of PD 0332991 and B plus D has shown response in 4 pts with relapsed/refractory MM. The most commonly reported AEs were cytopenias, consistent with the known safety profiles of PD 0332991 and B. PD 0332991 inhibited phosphorylation of Rb and cell cycle progression in MM cells. The accrual to stage 1 is ongoing. Updated efficacy and safety data will be presented. Disclosures: Niesvizky: Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hess:Pfizer Oncology: Consultancy; Pfizer Oncology: Research Funding; Pfizer Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spicka:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jakubczak:Pfizer Oncology: Employment; Pfizer Oncology: Equity Ownership. Kim:Pfizer Oncology: Equity Ownership; Pfizer Oncology: Employment. Randolph:Pfizer Oncology: Employment; Pfizer Oncology: Equity Ownership. Chen-Kiang:Pfizer Oncology: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Multicenter Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Lenalidomide in Patients with Relapsed Adult T-Cell Leukemia-Lymphoma (ATL) or Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma (PTCL).

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.2737.2737 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 2737-2737 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Naokuni Uike ◽

Michinora Ogura ◽

Yoshitaka Imaizumi ◽

Norio Asou ◽

Atae Utsunomiya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trials ◽

T Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 2737 Introduction: ATL is prevalent in Japan and has the worst prognosis among T-cell malignancies. PTCL also has a poor prognosis with currently available chemotherapeutic regimens, and both would benefit from better treatment modality. Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory agent with direct tumoricidal and antiproliferative activity, and is approved for multiple myeloma (MM) in combination with dexamethasone after at least 1 prior therapy and for transfusion-dependent anemia due to low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes associated with 5q deletion. We conducted a phase 1 study of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed ATL or PTCL to establish the recommended dose and schedule for a subsequent phase 2 study. Patients and Methods: This multicenter, phase 1, dose-escalation study assessed the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in patients with relapsed advanced ATL or PTCL. Dose-escalation was conducted according to the standard 3+3 design. Up to one PTCL patient was allowed to be included in each cohort of 3 patients. Patients in Cohort 1 received oral lenalidomide 25 mg daily on Days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. Patients in Cohorts 2 and 3 received 25 and 35 mg/day, respectively, on each day of the 28-day cycle. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as febrile neutropenia lasting 5 or more days; thrombocytopenia (platelets <10,000/uL or bleeding requiring platelet transfusion); ALT/AST elevation of Grade 4 or that of Grade 3 lasting 7 or more days; and/or clinically unacceptable Grade 3 or higher other non-hematological adverse events (AEs). Treatment was continued until the development of unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease (PD). Response was assessed by internationally accepted standard criteria for ATL and PTCL. Results: From July 2010–June 2012, 13 Japanese patients (9 ATL and 4 PTCL; age 32–74 years [median, 64]; 1–11 prior therapies [median, 1]) were enrolled: 3 in Cohort 1, 6 in Cohort 2, and 4 in Cohort 3. The 3 patients in Cohort 1 received lenalidomide for 21, 103, and 637 days, respectively, until PD with no instances of DLT. In Cohort 2, 1 patient experienced DLT (thrombocytopenia, platelets <10,000/uL) and 4 patients received lenalidomide for 37, 56, 138, and 387 days, respectively, until PD in 3 patients and unrelated death in one. The sixth patient is still receiving lenalidomide for 28+ days without a DLT. In Cohort 3, 2 patients had DLTs (thrombocytopenia, platelets <10,000/uL in one patient and Grade 3 prolongation of QTc interval in one patient on concomitant fluconazole with preexisting cardiac disease and grade 1 QTc prolongation at baseline), 1 patient received lenalidomide for 71 days before withdrawal of consent, and 1 patient is still receiving lenalidomide for 323+ days without a DLT. Based on these results, 25 mg daily per 28-day cycle was regarded as the MTD. Other Grade 3/4 non-DLT AEs occurring in 2 or more patients included neutropenia (n=8), lymphocytopenia (n=7), thrombocytopenia (n=3), skin rash (n=3), hyperbilirubinemia (n=2), and increased ALT/AST (n=2). Among the 9 ATL patients, 3 achieved partial responses (PR) with hematological complete response in 2 patients, including the disappearance of skin lesions in 1 patient. These responses occurred between 54 and 57 days, and lasted for 92, 279+ and 505 days. Among the 4 PTCL patients, 1 achieved a PR at day 106 with >75% reduction in lymph nodes, which lasted for 282 days. PK profiles of patients in the study were generally consistent with that observed in Japanese MM patients. Plasma exposure of lenalidomide increased with increasing dose with a mean Cmax on Day 1 for 25 mg and 35 mg of 493 ng/mL and 628 ng/mL, respectively, and a mean AUC24 of 2774 ng/mL and 3062 ng/mL, respectively. There was no evidence of accumulation following multiple dosing for 8 days. Conclusions: This phase 1 study identified lenalidomide 25 mg daily per 28-day cycle as the dose and schedule for a subsequent phase 2 study in patients with ATL or PTCL. Based on the preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in ATL and PTCL patients, a phase 2 study in patients with relapsed ATL in Japan is planned. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Lenalidomide (CC-5013) is an investigational agent in Japan; this abstract assesses its use in adult ATL patients. Tobinai:Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Zenyaku: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Symbio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biomedics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Solasia Pharma: Clinical trials, Clinical trials Other, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Chugai/Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Clinical trials, Clinical trials Other, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Updated Results of a Phase 2 Study of Bendamustine in Combination with Dexamethasone (Ben/Dex) in Patients with Previously-Treated Systemic Light-Chain (AL) Amyloidosis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.3041.3041 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 3041-3041 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Suzanne Lentzsch ◽

Raymond L. Comenzo ◽

Jeffrey A Zonder ◽

Keren Osman ◽

Miao Susanna ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Nyha Class ◽

Al Amyloidosis ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Cardiac Events ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Hematologic Response ◽

Phase 2 Study

Abstract Background: Melphalan in combination with dexamethasone is an active and the standard regimen in AL amyloidosis. Unfortunately very often patients relapse and other drugs are needed. Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent approved for the treatment of CLL, NHL, and MM in Europe and the US. But its safety and efficacy in AL amyloidosis is not known. In an effort to investigate the activity of Ben/Dex and improve the outcome of patients with relapsed AL we conduct a multi-center, Phase 2 study of Ben/Dex in AL (NCT01222260) and report data of an updated unplanned interim analysis. First data were reported at ASH 2014 (Abstr.3480). Methods: All patients had relapsed AL after a median of 2 prior therapies (range 1-4). Patients with very advanced cardiac involvement (NYHA Class IIIB/IV) were excluded. Patients with NYHA Class IIIA, NT-proBNP ≥ 1800 ng/L or BNP ≥ 400 ng/L, abnormal cTnT or cTnI could be included after evaluation by cardiology to determine the risk associated with the treatment. Patients with a CrCl ³ 15 mL/min were considered for the trial if they were not in active renal failure. This Phase IIa clinical trial uses a two-stage optimal Simon design enrolling 13 patients in the first stage. Since at least three patients experienced hematologic PR or better, the trial proceeded to the second stage treating an additional 16 patients. If 9 or more patients out of the total of 29 patients evaluable for response experience a hematologic PR or better, the treatment will be considered worthy of further development. The primary objective is to determine the partial hematologic response rate (PR). Secondary objectives included overall hematologic response (OHR) rate, organ response rate (OrRR) (Palladini et al., JCO 2012), time to failure (TTF), toxicities (adverse events at least possibly related to treatment), overall survival (OS) and the assessment of expression of genes associated with ER stress. Patients were assigned to bendamustine according to CrCl: CrCl ≥ 60 mL/min: 100 mg/m2 IV on day 1 and 2 of each cycle, CrCl 59-15 mL/min: 90 mg/m2 IV on day 1 and 2 of each cycle. The option to dose escalate was available to qualifying subjects including escalating to dose level (+)1: 120 mg/m2 (if CrCl ≥ 60 mL/min at the time of inclusion into the study) and 100 mg/m2 (if CrCl 59 - 15 mL/min at the time of inclusion into the study). Dexamethasone was started at 20-40mg weekly according to the performance status of the patient. The duration of each cycle was 28 days. Results: As of 7/15/15, 26 patients have received treatment and 28 patients have been enrolled. Median age of enrolled patients was 66 (range 44-77). Enrolled patients received a median of 1.5 prior regimens (range 1-4). Twelve of the enrolled patients received prior autologous stem cell transplant. Median number of cycles for treated patients is 3.5 (range is 1-12), with 4 patients still receiving treatment. Of note, only 2 patients discontinued treatment due to disease progression. Only 9 patients discontinued treatment due to AE. Most common drug-related AEs (all grades, >25%) included fatigue (39%), nausea (35%) and Anemia (27%),. No grade ≥3 drug-related AE occured in >20% of patients. Of note, no cardiac events were observed, including any increase in NT-proBNP.Of 24 patients eligible for response evaluation, 11 (46%) have responded hematologically, including (≥PR 42%, CR 4%). The median time to best response of treatment (partial response or better) was 1.57 months (range 0.97 to 15.1 months). The CR occurred in a patient after 5 cycles suggesting that this heavily pretreated patient population needs longer treatment to achieve response. Better responses were especially observed in less heavily treated patients. With a median follow-up of 13.4 months (range 1.5 to 30.3 months) the median OS has not been reached yet (Figure 1). The median PFS is 11.5 months (95% CI,1.5-29.1months) (Figure 2). Conclusions: In our updated unplanned interim analysis we found that Bendamustine in combination with dexamethasone is feasible and effective in pretreated AL amyloidosis with impaired organ function (NYHA IIIB and creatinine clearance of 30-15 mL/min were allowed). Cardiac events related to Bendamustine were not observed. Preliminary hematologic response rates are promising in this pretreated patient population, and organ assessments are ongoing. Further study of this approach is warranted. Figure 1. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Lentzsch: Axiom: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Will discuss the use of Bendamustine and Dexamethasone under clinical trial NCT01222260. Comenzo:Takeda Millennium: Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Takeda Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Zonder:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: research support; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Osman:Millennium / Takeda: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Ixazomib and Daratumumab without Dexamethasone (I-Dara) in Elderly Frail RRMM Patients. a Multicenter Phase 2 Study (IFM 2018-02) of the Intergroupe Francophone Du Myélome (IFM)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-148152 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 83-83

Author(s):

Magaret Macro ◽

Cyrille Touzeau ◽

Clara Mariette ◽

Salomon Manier ◽

Sabine Brechignac ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progressive Disease ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Frail Patients ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Frailty Score

Abstract Purpose: Frail patients with multiple myeloma have an inferior outcome, especially in the relapse setting. This adverse prognosis is mainly related to a high discontinuation rate due to treatment related adverse events. The aim of this phase 2 study is to evaluate efficacy and tolerability of Ixazomib-Daratumumab (I-Dara) without Dexamethasone in elderly frail patients with relapsed myeloma (NCT03757221). Methods: Fifty Ixa-Dara naïve RRMM patients (1-2 prior therapy) were planned to receive oral Ixa (4 mg: days 1, 8, 15), IV Dara (16 mg/kg; days 1, 8, 15, 22, cycles 1-2; days 1, 15, cycles 3-6; days 1, cycles 7+) and IV Methylprednisolone before Dara (100 mg at day 1, 8, cycle 1 and then 60 mg). They were enrolled if frailty score was ≥2 by IMWG score and FIRST proxy score (Facon T et al, Leukemia, 2020). The primary endpoint was ≥very good partial response rate at one year. Secondary endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS & toxicity according to NCI-CTCAE version 5.0. Results: Among 52 patients screened during this ongoing trial, 44 were included between 03/2018 and 05/2021. Patient were at first (n=28) or second relapse (n=16). Thirty -eight patients (86%) were previously exposed to bortezomib and 8 (18%) were previously refractory to lenalidomide. Median age was 82 (80-84). All patients had a frailty score ≥2. In 22 patients ISS was stage I (n=5), II (n=10) or III (n=7). Eleven (32%) patients harbored high-risk cytogenetic, including t(4;14) (n=3) or del17p (n=8). The median duration of Tx among 23 pts with ongoing Tx was 6 months [0-27] at data cutoff (July 19)]. The median duration of Tx among 21 pts who stopped Tx was 7 months [0-21]: 13 had progressive disease. Six patients died during the study: Daratumumab-related bronchospasm (D1C1); Ixazomib-related overdose (C2); progressive disease (C2 & C4), sepsis (C1 & C2). Regarding toxicity, 28 ≥grade 3 AE occurred amongst 24 pts (54%). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (n=5), other cytopenias (n=4), infection (n=4) and gastrointestinal disorders (n=2). Fourteen out of 28 were SAE including 1 bronchospasm, 1 acute respiratory failure and 2 ixazomib overdoses. Overall response rate, including minimal response, was 86 % in pts with ongoing treatment and 71% in pts who stopped Tx; ≥VGPR rate was 33% and 6% respectively. Conclusions: These preliminary results show a favorable safety profile of ixazomib and daratumumab combination, without dexamethasone, in this specific population of very elderly frail patients with RRMM and high risk cytogenetic for almost one third of them. Efficacy results will be analyzed when the 50 patients will be enrolled in the study and evaluable for the primary endpoint. Disclosures Macro: GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgen/BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding. Manier: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Regeneron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene - Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Vincent: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Decaux: Amgen BMS Celgene Janssen Sanofi Takeda: Honoraria. Leleu: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Carsgen Therapeutics Ltd: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Non-financial support. OffLabel Disclosure: Ixazomib and Daratumumab association is not approved in NDMM or in RRMM

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Study of Carfilzomib (CFZ) with or without Filanesib (FIL) in Patients with Advanced Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.728.728 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 728-728 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Jeffrey A Zonder ◽

Saad Usmani ◽

Emma C. Scott ◽

Craig C. Hofmeister ◽

Nikoletta Lendvai ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Partial Response ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Single Agent ◽

Objective Response ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Heavily Pretreated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: FIL (ARRY-520), a specific kinesin spindle protein (KSP) inhibitor, represents a novel class of agent under investigation for the treatment of patients (pts) with MM. Prognosis of pts refractory to immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) is poor. These pts have a median survival of 9 months underscoring the importance of novel therapeutic strategies incorporating new mechanisms of action. FIL has shown interesting preliminary activity as a single agent as well as in Phase 1 studies in combination with bortezomib (BTZ) and with CFZ, all with a manageable safety profile. Methods: This trial is an ongoing, randomized, multicenter, open-label Phase 2 study for pts with relapsed and refractory MM who received at least 2 prior regimens, including BTZ and an IMiD, and with disease refractory to the last regimen as per IMWG criteria. No prior treatment with CFZ is allowed. Approximately 75 pts will be randomized 2:1 to receive CFZ (20/27 mg/m2 intravenous [IV] on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16) plus FIL (1.25 mg/m2 IV on Days 1, 2, 15 and 16) or single-agent CFZ, at the same dose as in the combination, in a 28-day cycle. Prophylactic filgrastim is administered in the CFZ + FIL arm. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS). Patients with progressive disease (PD) on CFZ are allowed cross-over to the CFZ + FIL arm if they continue to meet eligibility criteria. Results: As of 15 June 2015, 72 pts have been randomized (23 CFZ, 49 CFZ + FIL) with a median age of 65 years. Pts who could have potentially received ≥ 2 cycles of treatment (20 CFZ, 30 CFZ + FIL) were evaluable for efficacy. These pts were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 and 5 prior regimens in the CFZ and CFZ + FIL arm, respectively. A total of 25% and 30 % of pts, respectively, received prior pomalidomide. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10% in the CFZ arm and 30% in the CFZ + FIL arm. In the CFZ arm, 2 pts achieved a partial response (PR) and 2 pts (10%) achieved an MR. In the CFZ + FIL arm, 3 pts achieved a very good partial response and 6 pts achieved a PR, with 2 additional pts (7%) achieving an MR. In the population of pts who were refractory to both prior BTZ and prior IMiDs, the ORR was 14% and 35%, respectively. Grade 3-4 hematological laboratory abnormalities (≥ 5% of pts) were leukopenia (9% CFZ vs. 21% CFZ + FIL), neutropenia (14% vs. 24%), thrombocytopenia (14% vs. 24%), and anemia (9% vs. 26%). Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were reversible. No adverse events (AEs) of febrile neutropenia were reported. The only Grade 3-4 non-hematological AE occurring in ≥ 5% of pts was dyspnea (5% vs.11%). The most common reason for treatment discontinuation was confirmed PD (39% vs. 28%) or Investigator discretion in case of unconfirmed PD or clinical PD (17% vs. 12%). Conclusions: The combination of FIL and CFZ was well-tolerated and noticeably increased the ORR compared to CFZ alone in heavily pretreated pts with advanced MM. The preliminary efficacy in pts who are double refractory to IMiDs and BTZ who were randomized to CFZ + FIL appears higher than in pts treated with CFZ alone (in the CFZ arm of this trial and in previously published reports involving such pts). Updated safety and efficacy data, including PFS, will be presented at the meeting. Table. Efficacy evaluable pts (potential to have received ≥ 2 cycles of treatment) CFZ (N = 20) CFZ + FIL (N = 30) Prior regimens, median (range) 4 (2,11) 5 (2,11) N cycles on study, median (range) 4 (1 - 16) 4 (1 - 15+) % ORR (≥ PR) 10 30 % CBR (≥ MR) 20 37 N (%) IMiD & BTZ Refractory 14 (70) 20 (67) % ORR (≥ PR) 14 35 % CBR (≥ MR) 21 40 CBR = clinical benefit rate Disclosures Zonder: Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: research support. Off Label Use: carfilzomib; treatment of myeloma, but not in combination with filanesib. Usmani:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Berdeja:Onyx: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding. Anderson:Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Hari:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Singhal:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Valent:Takeda/Millennium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Faber:Celgene: Consultancy. Schiller:Sunesis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Schreiber:Array BioPharma: Employment. Oliver:Array BioPharma: Employment. Rush:Array BioPharma: Employment. Tunquist:Array BioPharma: Employment. Ptaszynski:Array BioPharma: Employment. Raje:Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Ivosidenib Monotherapy Is Effective in Patients with IDH1 Mutated Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS): The Idiome Phase 2 Study By the GFM Group

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-146932 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 62-62

Author(s):

Marie Sebert ◽

Thomas Cluzeau ◽

Odile Beyne Rauzy ◽

Aspasia Stamatoulas Bastard ◽

Sophie Dimicoli-Salazar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Idh1 Mutation ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Loss Of Response ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Duration Of Response ◽

Idh1 Mutations

Abstract Background: Ivosidenib (IVO) is an oral, targeted, small-molecule inhibitor of mutant IDH1 approved in the US for adult patients with unfit or relapse/refractory AML with IDH1 mutation. Little is known on its efficacy in patients with IDH1 mutated MDS. Here we report interim results of a Phase 2 study evaluating safety and efficacy of IVO in three different cohorts of MDS patients: Higher risk MDS having failed azacytidine (AZA) (cohort A, n=29), untreated higher risk MDS without life threatening cytopenias (ie ANC < 500/mm3 or any recent severe infections and/or platelets below 30,000/mm3 and any bleeding symptom,) as a first line treatment (cohort B, with the addition of AZA in non-Responders after 3 cycles, n=29) and lower risk MDS having failed EPO (cohort C, n=10). (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03503409). Methods: Subjects enrolled in cohort A, B or C received continuous 28-day cycles of IVO - 500 mg orally QD. In cohort B, AZA (75 mg/m2/d x 7 days, SC) was added to IVO after 3 cycles, only in the absence of IWG 2006 response (absence of CR, PR or HI). The primary endpoint was overall hematological response rate (ORR) at 3 and 6 months (including CR, PR, stable disease with HI according to IWG 2006). All responders allowed to continue treatment until loss of response. Secondary endpoints included safety, duration of response, EFS, overall survival and translational project evaluating the role of biomarkers on response. We report the preliminary results on the first 26 pts enrolled. Results: At data cut off (6/15/2021), 32 patients had been enrolled, including 26 who were evaluable for the primary endpoint. 13, 11 and 2 were enrolled in cohort A, B and C respectively. Median age was 76 years and 50% were female. WHO was MDS-MLD, MDS-EB1, MDS-EB2, CMML and low blast count AML in 2, 2, 12, 1 and 9 patients respectively. IPSS-R was low, intermediate, high and very high in 2, 6, 5 and 13 resp. IDH1 mutation was p.R132C in 15 patients, p.R132H in 7, p.R132G/S in 3 and not specified in 1. The ORR was 69% (18 patients) including 12 CR (46%), 1 PR and 5 HI. Most patients achieved response after 3 cycles (17/18). Response was achieved in 7 (54%), 10 (91%) and 1 (50%) in cohort A, B and C respectively. Moreover, CR was achieved in 3, 8 and 1 in cohort A, B and C respectively. In cohort B, AZA was added to IVO in one patient after 3 cycles, without additional response. With a median follow up of 9.1 months, the median duration of response of the 18 responders was 7.4 months, 9 of them lost their response, and two had died without loss of response (from bleeding and after HSCT, respectively). IPSS-R was the only prognostic factor of response after 6 cycles. At data cut off, 12 patients had progressed (9 in cohort A, 2 in cohort B and 1 in cohort C) and 11 (42%, 10 in cohort A and 1 in cohort C) patients had died, mostly of relapse/progression (n=5/11), infection in 1, suicide in 1, hemorrhage in 1 and other unrelated causes in 3. Median overall survival was 14 months in the whole cohort, 7.7 and not reached in cohort A and B resp. The most common treatment-related serious adverse event (SAE) was differentiation syndrome (4/5), one died and three resolved without sequelae. One patient had febrile neutropenia related to IVO, resolved without sequelae. Conclusion: IVO was well tolerated in MDS patients with significant responses in all the cohorts. With a response rate of 91%, IVO was particularly effective in treatment naïve higher risk MDS patients with IDH1 mutations (cohort B). These encouraging preliminary results have to be confirm in more patients. The IDIOME study is still ongoing, and molecular monitoring results of IDH1 mutations will be presented. Disclosures Sebert: BMS: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Cluzeau: Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Honoraria; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses. Stamatoulas Bastard: Pfizer: Other: Travel Support; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fenaux: Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; JAZZ: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Syros Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Ades: Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; JAZZ: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Time To Event Analyses in PANORAMA 2: A Phase 2 Study Of Panobinostat, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone In Patients With Relapsed and Bortezomib-Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.1970.1970 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 1970-1970 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Robert L. Schlossman ◽

Melissa Alsina ◽

Donna M. Weber ◽

Steven E. Coutre ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Interim Analysis ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Heavily Pretreated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background Multiple myeloma (MM) remains an incurable disease, with a high unmet need for patients (pts) in the relapsed and refractory setting. The prognosis is especially worse for pts with MM refractory to both bortezomib (BTZ) and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), who have a median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) of 5 and 9 months, respectively (Kumar, Leukemia 2012). Panobinostat is an oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that has low nanomolar activity against histone deacetylase enzymes that are implicated as potential targets in MM. In preclinical studies, panobinostat and BTZ synergistically inhibit both the aggresome and proteasome pathways. In an interim analysis of PANORAMA 2, panobinostat, in combination with BTZ and dexamethasone (Dex), demonstrated the ability to recapture responses in pts with relapsed and BTZ-refractory MM. At the time of the interim analysis, multiple pts were still receiving treatment, and median OS had not been reached. Here, we present an updated analysis of PANORAMA 2, including an evaluation of PFS and OS. Methods This multicenter, single-arm, phase 2 study enrolled pts with relapsed and BTZ-refractory MM (who had received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, including an IMiD, and had progressed on or within 60 days of the last BTZ-based therapy). Pts received oral panobinostat, intravenous BTZ, and oral Dex. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (defined as ≥ partial response [PR]) as defined by the modified European Group of Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria. Secondary objectives included evaluation of minimal response (MR), time to response, duration of response, PFS, OS, and safety and tolerability of the combination. Results The median age of the 55 enrolled pts was 61 years (range, 41-88), and pts were heavily pretreated with a median of 4 prior regimens (range, 2-11) including a median of 2 prior BTZ-containing regimens (range, 1-6). All pts had received at least 1 IMiD, all were BTZ refractory, and nearly half (n = 27) had BTZ in their most recent prior line of therapy. Most pts (75%) were International Staging System stage 1 or 2, and 14 pts presented with high-risk cytogenetics (del[17p], t[4;14], or t[14;16]). All but 2 pts had discontinued from the study as of the December 4, 2012, data cutoff due to disease progression (n = 36), adverse events (n = 10), or withdrawal of consent (n = 5); 1 pt had died, and 1 pt started new therapy. One pt (2%) had a near complete response and 18 pts (33%) had a PR for an overall response rate of 35%, which met the study's primary objective of response rate > 10% (95% CI, 22-47; P < .0001). An additional 10 pts (18%) had an MR, for a clinical benefit rate of 53% (95% CI, 39-66). The median exposure was 4.6 months (range, < 1-24.1). The median PFS was 5.4 months (95% CI, 3.5-6.7). The median OS was 17.5 months (95% CI, 10.8-25.2). In a post hoc analysis, the 19 pts who achieved ≥ PR had a median PFS of 7.6 months (95% CI, 5.8-9.7) and a median OS of 25.2 months (95% CI, 17.5-25.2), while the 36 pts with < PR had a median PFS of 2.6 months (95% CI, 2.1-4.9) and a median OS of 9.9 months (95% CI, 5.4-17.4). Similarly, the 29 pts with ≥ MR had a median PFS of 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.9-8.6) and a median OS of 22.2 months (95% CI, 17.5-25.2), and the 26 pts with < MR had a median PFS of 2.1 months (95% CI, 1.4-3.0) and a median OS of 7.9 months (95% CI, 4.1-12.2). No new safety signals were observed. Common grade 3/4 adverse events regardless of study drug relationship included thrombocytopenia (64%), diarrhea (20%), fatigue (20%), anemia (15%), neutropenia (15%), and pneumonia (15%). Peripheral neuropathy was observed in 27% of pts overall, with only 1 (2%) grade 3/4 event. Conclusions The combination of panobinostat, BTZ, and Dex in heavily pretreated relapsed and BTZ-refractory pts demonstrated a median PFS of 5.4 months and a median OS of 17.5 months, which relates favorably to historical controls and other active combinations in this setting (eg, pomalidomide/Dex and carfilzomib/Dex). As expected, pts who achieved ≥ PR or ≥ MR appeared to have a longer median PFS and OS than pts who did not, which is supportive of a clinical benefit for this combination in this vulnerable population with otherwise limited treatment options. The large, randomized, phase 3 study, PANORAMA 1, will further define the role of panobinostat combined with BTZ and Dex in pts with relapsed and relapsed/refractory MM. Disclosures: Richardson: Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schlossman:Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy. Alsina:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Weber:Novartis: Research Funding. Coutre:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gasparetto:Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Mukhopadhyay:Novartis: Employment. Ondovik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Khan:Novartis: Employment. Paley:Novartis: Employment, Stock options Other. Lonial:Sanofi: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

High Major Response Rate, Including Very Good Partial Responses (VGPR), in Patients (pts) with Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) Treated with the Highly Specific BTK Inhibitor Bgb-3111: Expansion Phase Results from an Ongoing Phase I Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1216.1216 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1216-1216 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Constantine S. Tam ◽

Judith Trotman ◽

Stephen Opat ◽

Paula Marlton ◽

Gavin Cull ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Medical Research ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Major Response ◽

Btk Inhibitor ◽

Eliza Hall Institute ◽

Hall Institute

Abstract Introduction: The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib (IB) is highly active in WM, achieving major responses (CR+VGPR+PR) in approximately 70% of pts. However, VGPR is infrequent, with rates ≤15% in reported series (Treon NEJM 2015, Dimopoulos EHA 2016). BGB-3111 is a potent, highly-specific and irreversible BTK inhibitor, with greater selectivity than IB for BTK vs. other TEC- and HER-family kinases, and superior bioavailability. We previously reported that the recommended phase 2 dose of BGB-3111 is 320mg daily (in single or split dose) in pts with advanced B cell malignancies. This achieves plasma levels equivalent to 6-10 fold that of IB, and >90% continuous inhibition of BTK in lymph node biopsies. We specifically investigated the safety and efficacy of BGB-3111 in pts with WM in an expansion cohort of the initial Phase 1 trial. Reported here are updated results of this study, including data from WM specific expansion cohorts. Aims: To define the safety profile, and clinical activity of BGB-3111 in pts with WM. Methods: These results are from a pre-specified a component of a Phase 1 study (Part 1: dose escalation [DEsc] in pts with R/R B cell malignancies, Part 2: disease-specific dose expansion cohorts [EC] at the recommended Phase 2 dose that included patients with relapsed / refractory or previously untreated WM). Adverse events (AEs) were reported per CTCAE v4.03. Responses were determined according to the modified Sixth International Workshop on WM (IWWM) criteria. The data cut-off is 10 June 2016. Results: As of 10 June 2016, 31 pts with WM have been enrolled; 6 pts in DEsc (40mg [n=2], 80mg [n=2], 160mg QD [n=1], and 320mg QD [n=1]), and 25 in the WM EC (160mg BID [n=18], 320mg QD [n=7]). Three pts in DEsc were increased to 160mg QD after analysis of DEsc data, as allowed by protocol. Twenty-four pts are included in this analysis; 5 pts were excluded because of short (<60 day) follow-up for safety and efficacy, and 2 pts accrued at a single site were excluded because of insufficient documentation at baseline. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, and prior treatment history are summarized in Table 1. BGB-3111 was well tolerated with 71% reporting no drug related AE >Gr 1 severity within the first 12 weeks of therapy. The most frequent AEs (>20%) of any attribution (all Gr 1/2) were upper respiratory infection (25%), diarrhea (25%), and nausea (21%). There were 2 SAEs assessed as possibly related to BGB-3111 (Gr 2 atrial fibrillation, Gr 3 cryptococcal meningitis); in both cases, BGB-3111 was temporarily held but safely resumed. In total, 2 pts developed AF (one Gr 1, one Gr 2). No serious hemorrhage (≥Gr 3 or CNS hemorrhage of any grade) was reported. After a median follow-up of 7.6 months (2-21 months), the response rate was 92% (22/24). The major response rate was 83% (20/24), with VGPR (>90% reduction in IgM and reduction in extramedullary disease) in 33% (8/24) and PR (50-90% reduction in IgM and reduction in extramedullary disease) in 50% (12/24) pts. Pts with WM refractory to their last therapy were equally responsive: major response 77% [10/13], VGPR 31% [4/13], PR 46% [6/13]. Median time to initial response and major response were 29 days and 34 days, respectively. IgM decreased from a median of 29.9g/l at baseline to 3.0g/l; hemoglobin increased from a median of 10.1 g/dl at baseline to 13.5g/l. Two of 3 pts who had a dose increase after reaching a stable IgM plateau had further falls in IgM levels after dose escalation. Kinetics of IgM and hemoglobin response are presented in Figure 1. Lymphadenopathy was present in 8 pts at baseline; serial CT demonstrated reduction or resolution in all 8 pts (27%-100% reduction in SPD). Only one patient discontinued BGB-3111, due to exacerbation of pre-existing bronchiectasis while in VGPR. There have been no cases of disease progression. Analysis of response by genomic characteristics (including MYD88 and CXCR4 mutational status) is ongoing. Conclusions: BGB-3111 is well-tolerated and highly active in WM. The depth and quality of responses, as reflected by the VGPR rate of 33%, warrant a randomized comparison against ibrutinib in pts with WM. Table 1. Table 1. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Tam: Roche: 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; janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Opat:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Provision of subsidised drugs, Research Funding. Simpson:Amgen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene, Roche, Janssen: Honoraria. Anderson:Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research: Other: Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research receives milestone payments for the development of venetoclax. Kirschbaum:Beigene: Employment. Wang:Beigene: Employment. Xue:Beigene: Employment. Yang:BeiGene: Employment. Hedrick:Beigene: Employment. Seymour:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: 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, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roberts:AbbVie: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Genentech: Patents & Royalties: Employee of Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research which receives milestone payments related to venetoclax.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Retreatment with Bortezomib in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Interim Results From RETRIEVE, a Prospective International Phase 2 Study.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3866.3866 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3866-3866 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽

Igor W. Blau ◽

Paolo Corradini ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Johannes Drach ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Bortezomib Treatment ◽

Best Response ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3866 Poster Board III-802 Bortezomib (Velcade®) retreatment has been shown to be active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) in a number of retrospective studies and a small prospective phase 4 study (EVEREST). This large, prospective, international, multi-center, open-label phase 2 study was conducted to confirm the efficacy and safety of retreatment with bortezomib in MM patients who had previously responded (at least partial response [PR]) to bortezomib-based therapy as their most recent prior treatment. Patients had to have previously tolerated bortezomib 1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2 alone or in combination and have had a treatment-free interval (TFI; time from last dose of initial bortezomib treatment to first dose of bortezomib retreatment) of ≥6 months. Additional eligibility criteria included progressive disease or relapse from complete response (CR) by EBMT criteria, no MM therapy (except maintenance with dexamethasone, thalidomide, or interferon) since the last dose of initial bortezomib treatment, KPS ≥60, and adequate renal, hepatic, and hematologic function; patients with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy or neuropathic pain (as defined by NCI CTCAE v3.0) were excluded. Patients received bortezomib at the last tolerated dose (1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2) during initial treatment on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to eight 21-day cycles, either alone or in combination with dexamethasone at the investigator's discretion. Response was assessed by EBMT criteria every 6 weeks during treatment and then every 2 months until disease progression. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCI CTCAE v3.0. A total of 130 patients received at least 1 dose of bortezomib retreatment and were included in the safety population. Patients had a median age of 67 years, 57% were male, and 16% had KPS '70%. Median time from diagnosis of MM was 4.5 years (range 0–14 years); median number of prior therapies was 2; 15, 80, 23, and 12 patients had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib therapy). Best response by EBMT criteria to initial bortezomib treatment was CR in 26% and PR in 74% of patients; median time to progression and TFI after initial bortezomib treatment were 17.9 months and 14.3 months, respectively. Last tolerated dose of previous bortezomib therapy was 1.3 mg/m2 and 1.0 mg/m2 for 62% and 29% of patients, respectively; 9% received another dose. Patients received a median 7.0 (range 1–8) cycles of bortezomib retreatment (23% of patients completed all 8 cycles); 72% of patients received concomitant dexamethasone. A total of 126 patients were evaluable for response. In the 126 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR; CR+PR) by best confirmed response (EBMT criteria) was 40%; in addition, 18% of patients achieved minimal response (MR), to give a CR+PR+MR rate of 58%. After a planned secondary efficacy analysis, the ORR (CR+PR) by single best response was 55% (75% ≥MR). Median time to best confirmed response (≥MR) was 2.9 months; time to first response was 1.5 months. Analysis of ORR by patient subgroups showed comparable results in patients who did versus did not receive concomitant dexamethasone (42% vs 32%), in those who received ≤1.0 mg/m2 vs 1.3 mg/m2 bortezomib (35% vs 41%), and in those aged ≤65 years vs >65 years (45% vs 36%). ORR was 67%, 39%, 33%, and 25% in patients who had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib), respectively. Analysis of best confirmed responses according to response to initial bortezomib showed that 63% and 52% of patients who achieved a CR or PR, respectively, to initial bortezomib treatment responded to retreatment. Most (98%) patients experienced a treatment-emergent AE; 60% experienced a grade 3/4 AE, and 32% experienced a serious AE; there were 8 deaths, 2 of which (due to sepsis and stroke) were possibly treatment-related. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (35%), neutropenia (7%), diarrhea (7%), and pneumonia (5%). AEs leading to dose reductions or discontinuations were reported for 22% and 12% of patients, respectively. The incidence of neuropathy was 39%, including 9% grade 3; 4% of patients discontinued treatment due to PN; 61% of neuropathy events resolved or improved within a median 1.3 months. These results confirm that bortezomib retreatment is a well-tolerated, feasible, and active therapeutic option for heavily pretreated MM patients without evidence of cumulative toxicity. Disclosures: Petrucci: Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria. Drach:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Blade:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text