Utilization of External Control Arm to Contextualize Clinical Efficacy of Tisagenlecleucel Treated Among Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma from the Single-Arm Elara Trial

Abstract Introduction: While randomized clinical trials (RCT) remain the gold standard for evaluating the safety and efficacy of treatments, interest in the use of external control arm (ECA) has grown when randomization is either infeasible or unethical (Friends of Cancer Research 2019). ECAs can provide contextual evidence to support regulatory approval in such situations. Single arm trials in patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) is one example due to the rarity of the disease and lack of standardized treatment in this patient population. The target trial framework (Hernán and Robins 2016) can be used to emulate a hypothetical RCT that ideally would have been performed to estimate the relative efficacy of treatment of interest when non-interventional studies were used to supplement single arm trials. We present an ECA in order to contextualize the efficacy of tisagenlecleucel in the single arm Phase 2 ELARA trial with evidence on standard of care (SOC) derived from the Flatiron Health Research Database (FHRD). Methods: Key components of the target trial include objective, population, treatment assignment, endpoints, start of follow-up period, performed comparison and causal effect of interest. These components were specified collaboratively with clinical and statistical input. The ECA was constructed by applying key eligibility criteria from the ELARA trial to FHRD. Key endpoints including real-world progression and real-world response of the target trial were identified and curated for ECA for comparison with ELARA by reviewing clinically relevant aspects for the population/disease of interest, understanding routine documentation practices of oncology healthcare professionals at both the system level (e.g., across various hematologic and oncologic diseases) as well as at the disease specific level (e.g., NHL), and extracting from the electronic health record (EHR) specific measurements of interest. A performance assessment was conducted to confirm the comparability of real-world and trial endpoints. Methods utilizing propensity scores were used to select a single line of therapy for patients from FHRD, ameliorate the impact of measured confounding and facilitate accurate estimation of the primary causal estimand. Feedback on the proposed indirect comparison was sought a priori from the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Upon feedback from EMA, the ECA was constructed and the causal estimand of interest was assessed. Results: The target trial is defined in Table 1. Feasible eligibility criteria from ELARA were applied to FHRD. Briefly, the ECA included patients diagnosed with FL who had at least two prior lines of therapy, including an anti-CD20 and alkylating agent and had not received a clinical study drug, anti-CD19, gene therapy or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Patients were aged at least 18 years at time of treatment and had at least 3 months of follow up. Some criteria from the trial could not be implemented. Endpoints included real-world response (rwR) and real-world progression (rwP). rwR was defined as the treating clinician's assessment of radiological response based on the assessment of the burden of FL disease over the course of treatment with a given regimen. rwP was defined as an evaluation by the treating clinician of progression in FL disease after systemic treatment. The performance assessment confirmed that the rwR/rwP data can be reliably captured and that the scan frequency for rwR is similar to ELARA. EMA acknowledged the limitations associated with the use of this ECA for indirect comparison including limited sample size, inability to match on certain inclusion/exclusion criteria, impact of missing data, potential misalignment on endpoint definition and unmeasured confounders. However, EMA recognized the usefulness of the ECA in contextualizing the efficacy of tisagenlecleucel in the current therapeutic landscape provided statistical analyses were used to address the limitations as far as possible. Detail results of this indirect comparison are included in a separate ASH abstract. Conclusion: Noting the limitations, an ECA constructed using EHR was considered useful to supplement and contextualize the clinical efficacy of tisagenlecleucel vs SOC from a single arm clinical trial using propensity score based methodologies to account for confounders. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Hao: Novartis: Current Employment. Hsu: Novartis: Consultancy. Parzynski: Novartis: Consultancy. Lobetti Bodoni: Novartis: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Gilead: Other: Travel sponsorship in June 2019; Spouse: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Spouse: NHS: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Spouse: Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spouse: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Spouse: Harlcok Healthcare: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Spouse: Celgene: Honoraria; Spouse: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Spouse: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hampson: Novartis: Current Employment. Masood: Novartis: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Rhodes: Novartis: Consultancy. Wu: Novartis: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) an autologous CD19- directed CAR-T-cell therapy, has been approved for children and young adults with relapsed/refractory (r/r) acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, adults with r/r diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Download Full-text

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes Among Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma Treated with Tisagenlecleucel in the Elara Trial Versus a Real-World External Control Arm of Patients Treated with Standard of Care

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-147781 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2419-2419

Author(s):

Yanni Hao ◽

Wei-Chun Hsu ◽

Craig S Parzynski ◽

C Lobetti Bodoni ◽

Evgeny Degtyarev ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Indirect Comparison ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Sensitivity Analyses ◽

External Control ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Individual Patient Level

Abstract Introduction: In the single-arm phase 2 ELARA trial (NCT03568461), tisagenlecleucel demonstrated efficacy and favorable safety profile in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) after ≥ 2 lines of prior therapy, including in high-risk sub-populations (Schuster, et al. ASCO 2021). To contextualize these results, we performed a retrospective non-interventional study to compare the efficacy of tisagenlecleucel seen in the single-arm ELARA trial with the standard-of-care (SoC) using individual patient-level data from the US Flatiron Health Research Database (FHRD). FHRD is a database derived from electronic health records from over 280 cancer clinics. The objective was to assess the effect of prescribing tisagenlecleucel vs SoC in patients who participated in ELARA. Methods: Individual patient-level data from FHRD were used to create an external control arm to carry out an indirect comparison with the ELARA trial. Eligible inclusion and exclusion criteria from ELARA were applied to the external control arm. A single eligible line was selected using propensity scores when patients were qualified at multiple lines. Key prognostic factors including age, race, gender, number of prior treatment lines, group stage at initial FL diagnosis, number of months between initial FL diagnosis and indication of index treatment, double refractoriness, and disease progression within 24 months were included in a propensity score model to reduce confounding due to systematic differences in ELARA patients from FHRD patients at baseline for the selected line. Weighting by odds of receiving tisagenlecleucel was used to estimate the average treatment effect on progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), overall response rate (ORR), and complete response rate (CRR). The rates and difference in rates were calculated for CRR and ORR. Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis and Cox proportional hazards model were used to analyze all time-to-event endpoints. 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using bootstrapping. Data from the first 24 months after enrollment in ELARA or after treatment in FHRD were used for the follow-up period in the time to event endpoints, as few patients in ELARA trial had > 24 month data (Figure). Results were reported based on the post-weighting sample by incorporating a weight factor in the above analyses. A series of sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the robustness of the primary analysis. Results: As of Mar 29, 2021, 98 patients were enrolled in the ELARA trial, of which 97 were included in this indirect comparison (median follow-up, 15 months). In the FHRD cohort (data cut-off, Jun 30, 2020), 98 patients with ≥ 3 treatment lines who met the ELARA eligibility were included (median follow-up, 14 months in the post-weighted sample) (Table 1). In the ELARA vs FHRD cohorts, after applying weighting by odds, the ORR was 85.6% vs 58.1%, and the CRR was 69.1% vs 17.7%. The difference in CRR (51.4%; 95% CI: 21.2, 68.8) was clinically meaningful (Table 2). The median TTNT or death was not reached in the ELARA cohort and was 19.0 months in the FHRD cohort after weighting (HR = 0.34 [95% CI: 0.15, 0.78]) (Table 2). The median OS was not reached for both ELARA and FHRD cohorts in the first 24-month period. KM estimate of OS at 12 months was 96.6% in the ELARA cohort and 84.5% in the FHRD cohort, post weighting. The estimated 59% risk reduction was in favor of tisagenlecleucel over SoC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.41 [95% CI: 0.11, 1.47]) (Table 2). The median PFS was not reached in the ELARA cohort and was 9.9 months in the FHRD cohort, after weighting. In the ELARA vs FHRD cohorts, the 12-month PFS was 73.2% vs 41.8%, with a HR of 0.45 indicating a 55% reduction in the risk of progression and death with tisagenlecleucel vs SoC. The median PFS considering new anti-cancer therapy as an event was not reached for ELARA and was 9.9 months for FHRD; the estimated probability of being progression-free at 12 months was 70.5% in the ELARA cohort and 39.4% in the FHRD cohort (Table 2). Sensitivity analyses results were consistent with that of primary analysis. Conclusion: In the weighted analyses with adjustment for baseline prognostic factors, there was a consistent trend towards greater CRR, TTNT, OS and PFS in favor of tisagenlecleucel vs SoC in patients with r/r FL. These results support the clinically meaningful treatment benefit of tisagenlecleucel observed in the ELARA trial. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Hao: Novartis: Current Employment. Hsu: Novartis: Consultancy. Parzynski: Novartis: Consultancy. Lobetti Bodoni: Spouse: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Spouse: Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Spouse: Celgene: Honoraria; Spouse: Harlcok Healthcare: Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company; Spouse: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Spouse: NHS: Ended employment in the past 24 months; Spouse: Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spouse: F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Gilead: Other: Travel sponsorship in June 2019; Novartis: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Degtyarev: Novartis: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Hampson: Novartis: Current Employment. Masood: Novartis: Current Employment, Current holder of stock options in a privately-held company. Wu: Novartis: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) an autologous CD19-directed CAR-T-cell therapy, has been approved for children and young adults with relapsed/refractory (r/r) acute lymphoblastic leukemia and, adults with r/r diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Download Full-text

Real-World Effectiveness of Voxelotor for Treating Sickle Cell Disease in the US

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-140525 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 25-25

Author(s):

Ahmar Urooj Zaidi ◽

Thokozeni Lipato ◽

Ofelia A. Alvarez ◽

Alexander Lonshteyn ◽

Derek Weycker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Health Claims ◽

Transfusion Rate ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

The Us

Background: Until late 2019, few treatments had been approved by the FDA for treating sickle cell disease (SCD). Voxelotor (Oxbryta®) is a sickle hemoglobin-polymerization inhibitor approved by the FDA in November 2019 for treatment of SCD in adults and adolescents aged ≥12 years under an accelerated approval based on results of the pivotal HOPE study. In HOPE, voxelotor increased average hemoglobin (Hb) by 1.1 g/dL from baseline in patients with 1-10 vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs) in the previous year and a Hb level between 5.5 and 10.5 g/dL who were not transfusion dependent. Of the participants on voxelotor 1500 mg, 51% had a Hb response >1.0 g/dL at week 24 (Vichinsky et al, NEJM 2019). This study sought to assess the real-world effectiveness of voxelotor based on data during the first 6 months post FDA approval. Methods: Data on medical and pharmacy claims for patients who were aged ≥12 years and receiving voxelotor from December 2019 to May 2020 were obtained from the Symphony Health claims dataset. For each patient, the date of the first voxelotor claim was defined as the "index date." Patients with at least 1 year's data prior to the index date were included in the analyses. Patients' demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized descriptively. Standardized annualized rates of transfusions and VOCs per patient per year (PPPY) prior to and after voxelotor initiation were compared. A subset of patients in the Symphony Health claims dataset had Hb lab data available. Patients with at least 1 Hb result within 30 days prior to the index date and at least 1 Hb result after the index date were included for Hb analyses. For these patients, change in Hb and the percentage of patients achieving a >1 g/dL increase in Hb were summarized. Confidence intervals and P values for changes in outcomes were based on bootstrapping. Results: As of May 31, 2020, 1275 patients from the Symphony Health claims datasets were identified who received voxelotor (40% male, mean age 35.7 years). In the year prior to voxelotor initiation, 715 (56.1%) of these patients received hydroxyurea, 121 (9.5%) received L-glutamine, 166 (13.0%) received at least 1 transfusion, 17 (1.3%) were on chronic transfusion (≥8 transfusions per year), and 681 (53.4%) had 1 or more VOCs. Mean (SD) follow-up was 64.9 (40.7) days. Among 1275 patients, 175 and 52 patients had at least 1 Hb level measurement during the 1 year prior to and after voxelotor initiation, respectively. Among the subset of patients with their Hb level tested within 30 days prior to the index date and at least 1 Hb level after index date (n=22), the baseline average Hb level was 8.0 g/dL (SD 1.4, median 7.9 g/dL, range 5.0-11.8 g/dL). Mean increase in Hb from baseline was 1.1-1.3 g/dL (Table 1) depending on the approach used to calculate Hb levels after voxelotor initiation; 55% (95% CI 32%-77%) of patients achieved a Hb increase >1 g/dL after voxelotor initiation. Among all 1275 patients, mean (SD) overall transfusion rates declined from 0.45 (1.67) PPPY pre-index to 0.31 (1.88) post-index, a change of -0.14 PPPY (P=0.005). Among 169 patients who received at least 1 transfusion in the year prior to initiation of voxelotor, the transfusion rate dropped from 3.39 (3.34) to 1.75 (4.30) PPPY, a change of -1.64 PPPY (P<0.001). Among 17 patients receiving chronic transfusions, the transfusion rate dropped from 11.29 (3.12) to 6.74 (7.37) PPPY, a change of -4.56 PPPY (P=0.013) (Table 2). After voxelotor initiation, the annualized rates of VOC were numerically reduced from 3.86 (6.69) to 3.64 (8.54) (P=0.248). To address the potential bias from the relatively short follow-up duration, similar results of transfusion and VOC rates were observed among patients with at least 30 days of follow-up or when only events within 3 months prior to index date were considered. Conclusions: Based on the first 6 months' data after the approval of voxelotor in the US, in real-world practice, voxelotor increases Hb by at least 1 g/dL, consistent with the HOPE randomized controlled trial results. Evidence suggests that transfusion rates decreased after voxelotor initiation. A favorable downward trend in VOC rates was also observed. This real-world evidence provides additional support for the use of this novel therapy in the treatment of hemolytic anemia and its associated complications in the SCD population. Further evaluation with a larger sample size and longer follow-up will help to confirm these findings. Disclosures Zaidi: Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Cyclerion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Imara: Consultancy, Honoraria; bluebird bio: Consultancy, Honoraria; Emmaus Life Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria. Alvarez:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forma Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonshteyn:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Weycker:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Research Funding; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding. Pham:Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment; Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Delea:Global Blood Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Policy Analysis Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Agodoa:Global Blood Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Cong:Global Blood Therapeutics: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Global Blood Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Real World Prospective Observational Multicenter Trial of Venetoclax-Based Therapy for Patients with AML Reveals Unique Patterns of Patient Selection and Treatment Utilization - Revive Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-147245 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1246-1246

Author(s):

Ofir Wolach ◽

Itai Levi ◽

David Lavie ◽

Jonathan Canaani ◽

Sigal Tavor ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Patient Selection ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Early Death ◽

Treatment Patterns ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Related Factors

Abstract Background: Venetoclax-based combinations were recently approved to treat patients (pts) with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible for intensive chemotherapy. Limited prospective 'real-world' data is available on treatment patterns of venetoclax-based therapy in routine clinical practice. We investigated patterns of patient selection, efficacy, toxicity, patient related outcome and post-remission management in a nationwide multicenter prospective observational trial. Methods: Newly diagnosed pts with AML were enrolled at the time of venetoclax-based therapy initiation from 10 medical centers in Israel. Demographic, clinical and patient-related baseline characteristics were documented. Treatment patterns, safety and efficacy outcomes are reported. Results: Between August 12, 2019, and June 17, 2021(data cut) ,127 AML pts were enrolled to receive venetoclax based therapy. Baseline patient and disease characteristics are reported in Table 1. The main reasons for physician's choice of venetoclax-based therapy were age ≥75, comorbidities and ECOG ≥2 (patient related factors) in 76% of cases and adverse disease biology predicting poor response to intensive chemotherapy (disease related factors) in 24% of cases. Most pts started therapy in an inpatient setting, 82 (64.6%) with a median hospitalization duration of 14 days, while 44 pts (34.6%) started therapy as out pts. Pts received a median of 3.8 cycles of therapy (range 1-21). Most pts (97%) received venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents. The full dose of 400mg QD after a median ramp-up duration of 3 days was achieved in 88% of the pts. Dose interruptions and dose modifications during follow-up occurred in 59 (46%) and 30 (24%) of pts, respectively. To allow for adequate follow up for response assessment, efficacy analysis was limited to pts enrolled prior to December 31, 2020, and included 108 pts with a median follow-up of 8 months (range 1-20). As of data cut, 93 pts completed cycle 1 of therapy, 66 pts completed cycle 3 and 39 pts completed cycle 6. 29 pts (27%) are still active on treatment. Best composite complete remission [CCR = complete remission (CR) plus CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi)] was achieved in 62 (57%) pts. CCR rates were assessed in different pre-defined subgroups. Best CCR in pts selected for therapy based on disease-related and patient-related factors were 70% and 54% respectively. Best CCR in pts with AML arising from MPN and pts with other AML were 45% and 58% respectively. Estimated median overall survival (OS) of all pts was 9.6 months (range 7.4-10.6) (Figure 1). Achieving CCR was associated with a superior probability for survival. Estimated median OS was 13.6 months (range 10.6 - not reached) in pts achieving CCR and 4.2 months (range 1.2-10.3) in non-CCR (p<.0001). Of responding pts (CR/CRi, partial remission (PR), morphologic leukemia free state (MLFS), 27 (37%) progressed. Estimated median time to progression was 9.2 months (6.7-NR). Allogeneic transplantation following venetoclax based treatment was offered to 16 (26%) pts with a median age of 71 years (range 43-77). Last documented response prior to transplant was CR in 5 (32%) pts, CRi 9 (56%), MLFS 1 (6%) and PR in 1 (6%) patient. Among grade ≥3 AEs were febrile neutropenia in 28% and infections in 21% of pts. Clinical and laboratory tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was documented in 2 and 4 pts, respectively. Antifungal prophylaxis was administered in 20% of pts and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (GCSF) support was used in 17% of pts in response. Early death rate at 30 and 60 days were 7% and 13%, respectively. Conclusion: This prospective real-world analysis reveals unique patterns of patient selection and venetoclax treatment utilization in a medical system with wide access for this indication. Venetoclax-based therapies are effective and associated with manageable toxicity, including in AML patient populations that were excluded from previous registration trials with comparable CCR and early death rates. Factors associated with patient selection in the 'real-world' setting and immature follow up data most probably led to a shorter estimated median OS in this analysis as compared to controlled trials. The REVIVE study continues to expand and is expected to provide additional insights on treatment patterns, management as well as clinical and patient related outcomes. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wolach: Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Neopharm: Consultancy. Levi: AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lavie: AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Fees for lectures; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: Fees for lectures; Roche: Other: Fees for lectures; Novartis: Other: Fees for lectures. Tavor: AbbVie: Consultancy. Hellmann: AbbVie: Consultancy. Tadmor: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Zuckerman: Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Cellect Biotechnology: Honoraria; BioSight Ltd: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Orgenesis Inc.: Honoraria. Stemer: AbbVie: Consultancy. Berelovich: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Ofek: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Frankel: AbbVie: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Grunspan: AbbVie: Current Employment, Other: May hold equity. Ofran: Medison Israel: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Moshe: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lectures; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lectures; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Lectures.

Download Full-text

Disease Burden Impacts Outcomes in Pediatric and Young Adult B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia after Commercial Tisagenlecleucel: Results from the Pediatric Real World CAR Consortium (PRWCC)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-134472 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 14-15

Author(s):

Liora M. Schultz ◽

Christina Baggott ◽

Snehit Prabhu ◽

Holly Pacenta ◽

Christine L Phillips ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cell ◽

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Disease Burden ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Car T

Introduction: Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) T cell therapy targeting CD19 has shifted our treatment approach for relapsed and refractory (r/r) pediatric B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). The landmark ELIANA pediatric trial studying tisagenlecleucel, CD19-specific CAR T cells, demonstrated a complete response (CR) rate of 81% in 75 infused patients and 12 month overall survival (OS) and event-free survival (EFS) rates of 76% and 50% respectively. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity rates of 77% and 40% were respectively reported. In August 2017, the FDA approved tisagenlecleucel for B-cell ALL that is refractory or in second or greater relapse in patients up to age 25. With CAR commercialization, institutions deliver tisagenlecleucel without the regulation of a clinical study and practices relating to CAR delivery and reporting remain heterogeneous. Here, we report real world clinical outcomes using commercially available tisagenlecleucel for pediatric r/r B-ALL. Methods and Results: Retrospective data were collected from PRWCC member institutions (n=15) and included 200 patients. This includes 15 (7.5%) patients not infused due to manufacturing failure (n=6), death from disease progression and/or toxicity (n=7), or physician discretion following disease remission from prior therapy(n=2). The remaining 185 patients (92.5%) were infused with tisagenlecleucel, including 87% (161) receiving standard-of-care CAR T cell products meeting manufacturing release criteria and 13% (24) receiving CD19-CAR T cells manufactured by Novartis and provided on the managed access program (NCT03601442; n=14) or with single-patient IND approval (n=10). At time of CAR T cell infusion, median age was 12 years (range 0-26) with 40% females and 60% males. Median duration of follow-up at time of analysis was 11.2 months (range 0.2-28.8). The CR rate at 1 month follow up was 79% (156/198) on an intent-to-treat basis and 85% (156/184) among evaluable infused patients. Of infused patients achieving morphologic CR with available testing, 97% (148/153) were negative for MRD by flow cytometry. Duration of remission at 6 and 12 months among patients who achieved CR was 75% and 63% respectively, with 35% (55/156) of responders experiencing relapse. At time of relapse, 41% (21/51) of evaluable patients had relapse with CD19- disease and 59% (30/51) had continued CD19 expression. OS and EFS rates were 85% and 64% at 6 months and 72% and 51% at 12 months, respectively. CRS and neurotoxicity of any grade were seen in 60% (111/184) and 22% (39/181) of evaluable patients with ≥ grade 3 CRS and neurotoxicity rates of 19% (35/184) and 7% (12/181) respectively. One grade 5 CRS and 1 grade 5 neurotoxicity (intracranial hemorrhage) were reported. Post infusion toxicity management included tocilizumab in 26% (47/184) and systemic steroids in 14% (25/184) of patients. Among 181 infused patients with documented disease burden, 51% (95) had high burden (HB) disease , as defined by >5% bone marrow lymphoblasts, peripheral blood lymphoblasts, CNS3 status or non-CNS extramedullary (EM) site of disease; 22% (40) had low burden (LB) disease, defined by detectable disease not meeting the HB criteria; and 25% (46) had no detectable disease (NDD) at time of last evaluation prior to CAR infusion. The morphologic CR rate was lower at day 28 in HB vs. LB and NDD (74% vs. 98% and 96%) and the OS and EFS were lower among patients with HB at 6 mo [OS; 75% (HB), 94%(LB), 98% (NDD), EFS; 50% (HB), 86% (LB), 75%(NDD), p<0.0001] and 12 mo [OS; 58% (HB), 85% (LB), 95% (NDD), EFS; 34% (HB), 69%(LB), 72%(NDD), p<0.0001]. Multivariate analysis will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: This retrospective, multi-institutional analysis describes real world outcomes using tisagenlecleucel to treat pediatric r/r B-ALL. Early responses at 1 month and OS and EFS at 6 and 12 months are comparable to reported ELIANA trial outcomes. Safety is demonstrated in this cohort with lower rates or CRS and neurotoxicity, likely related to a lower disease burden cohort. Continued relapse and decrease in OS without evident plateau is seen following 6 months post-infusion warranting expanded follow up. Comparative analysis of outcomes in patient cohorts with varying disease burden demonstrate decreased CR, EFS and OS in patients with high disease burden as compared to patients with lower disease burden or no detectable disease at last evaluation prior to CAR infusion. Disclosures Phillips: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stefanski:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Margossian:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Verneris:Fate Therapeutics: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bmogen: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Uptodate: Consultancy. Myers:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: ELIANA trial Steering Committee, Speakers Bureau. Brown:Jazz: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Qayed:Novartis: Consultancy; Mesoblast: Consultancy. Hermiston:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sobi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Satwani:Takeda: Consultancy; Mesoblast: Consultancy. Curran:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mesoblast: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding. Mackall:Lyell Immunopharma: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company; Nektar Therapeutics: Consultancy; NeoImmune Tech: Consultancy; Apricity Health: Consultancy, Current equity holder in private company; BMS: Consultancy; Allogene: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Laetsch:Cellectis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

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

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-142642 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 22-23

Author(s):

Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽

Rohan Medhekar ◽

Istvan Majer ◽

Mehmet Turgut

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Clinical Trials ◽

Literature Review ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Unmet Need ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Line Of Therapy

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

Download Full-text

Impact of Treatment on Overall Survival (OS) in Higher-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS): A Report from the Erasme Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.5240.5240 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 5240-5240

Author(s):

Montserrat Arnan ◽

Rosa Coll ◽

Mar Tormo ◽

José María Bastida ◽

María Calbacho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Prospective Study ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Who Classification ◽

Refractory Anemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Prior Therapy ◽

Real World Setting ◽

Very High

Abstract Introduction: Treatment of MDS has undergone a dramatic change in recent years with the emergence of demethylating agents; however, there are limited data on the impact of these agents on OS in the "real-world" setting. The aim of this study is to evaluate the use and outcomes of different therapies in patients (pts) with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS)-defined Intermediate-2- and High-risk (higher-risk) MDS. Methods: The ERASME study (CEL-SMD-2012-01) is an observational, prospective study of pts with either MDS or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML); pts were defined using the 2008 World Health Organization (WHO) classification system. Initial pt management strategy was classified into 3 groups: active therapy (AT), such as chemotherapy or treatment with azacitidine (AZA), lenalidomide (LEN), etc.; allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), which included those pts receiving other therapies before transplantation; and observation and support (OB&SP), which included red blood cell and platelet transfusions, and growth factors. OS rates of higher-risk pts are presented using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: A total of 160 pts with higher-risk MDS were recruited between Jan 2013 and Feb 2015. Median follow-up was 8.6 months (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0-11.8). Pt characteristics are described in the Table. AT was the first therapeutic decision in 83 (52%) pts, HCT in 43 (27%), and OB&SP in 34 (21%). Within the AT group, 75 (90%) pts received AZA alone, 5 (6%) AZA plus chemotherapy, and 3 (4%) received other options; most pts (n = 78; 94%) were treated with a 7-day regimen. Among the 43 potential HCT candidates, 40 (93%) had received prior therapy: 25 (58%) with AZA alone, 8 (19%) with chemotherapy, 6 (14%) with AZA plus chemotherapy, and 1 (2%) with LEN; 3 (7%) had not received prior therapy. Of the potential HCT candidates, 20 had undergone transplantation within a median of 8 months (IQR 4.1-13.3); 7 (16%) pts died before transplantation and 16 (37%) are still awaiting transplantation. The main reasons for OB&SP being the initial pt strategy were disease risk (100%), age (95%), comorbidities (60%), and symptomatology (44%). At last follow-up, 70 of 160 pts (44%) had died after a median of 6 months (IQR 2.9-11.8): 34 (41%), 14 (32%), and 22 (65%) pts undergoing AT, HCT, and OB&SP, respectively (log-rank 6.9; P = 0.032). Median OS in pts who received AT, HCT, and OB&SP was 18.60 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 13.1-21.8), 14.92 months (95% CI 11.6-not reached), and 8.44 months (95% CI 4.3-13.4), respectively. Median OS was significantly longer in the AT group compared with the OB&SP group (hazard ratio [HR] 1.9; 95% CI 1.1-3.3; P = 0.0197). No statistically significant difference was observed in OS between pts treated with AT and those considered potential HCT candidates (HR 0.9; 95% CI 0.5-17.7; P = 0.8). Conclusions: The preliminary data from this observational, prospective study indicate that AT significantly prolongs OS compared with OB&SP when treating pts with higher-risk MDS in a real-world setting. AZA was the most common treatment in the AT group. Abstract presented on behalf of the ERASME Study Investigators Group. Table. Baseline characteristics of the MDS population (N = 160) Characteristic Age, median (IQR), years 73 (64.5-79.0) Male, n (%) 86 (53.8) Bone marrow blast count, median (IQR), % 12 (7.5-16.3) Hemoglobin level, median (IQR), g/dL 9.55 (8.0-10.6) Platelet count, median (IQR), × 109/L 64.75 (41.0-121.0) ANC, median (IQR), × 109/L 1 (0.47-2.20) Cytogenetic risk (by IPSS-R), n (%) Low 64 (40.0) Intermediate 9 (5.6) High 27 (16.9) Very High 39 (24.4) Missing data 21 (13.1) WHO classification, n (%) RCMD 17 (10.6) RAEB type 1 28 (17.5) RAEB type 2 94 (58.8) Unclassified 2 (1.3) Missing 1 (0.6) AML 20-30% blasts 18 (11.3) IPSS risk classification, n (%) Intermediate-2 86 (53.8) High 71 (44.4) Missing 3 (1.9) IPSS-R risk classification, n (%) Very Low 4 (2.5) Low 28 (17.5) Intermediate 20 (12.5) High 40 (25.0) Very High 46 (28.8) Missing 22 (13.8) AML, acute myeloid leukemia; ANC, absolute neutrophil count; FAB, French-American-British; IPSS-R, Revised-IPSS; RAEB, refractory anemia with excess blasts; RCMD, refractory anemia with multilineage dysplasia. Disclosures Off Label Use: Azacitidine was used to treat patients who are potential hematopoietic stem cell transplant candidates. Ramos:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rafel:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Valcárcel:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Real-World Outcomes for Standard-of-Care Treatments in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-146250 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4075-4075

Author(s):

Michel Delforge ◽

Marie-Christiane Vekemans ◽

Sébastien Anguille ◽

Julien Depaus ◽

Nathalie Meuleman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Retrospective Chart Review ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Real World Data ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Treatment Regimens

Abstract Background: With the advent of immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs), proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and, more recently, anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), prognosis of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) has improved considerably. Unfortunately, even with these 3 major MM drug classes, most patients ultimately relapse and require further therapy. There remains an incomplete understanding of how patients who have received extensive therapy and with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) are treated in routine clinical practice, as no standard-of-care exists for these patients, and what the outcomes are in this real-world setting. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the outcomes of patients with triple-class (IMiD, PI and anti-CD38 mAb) and triple-line exposed RRMM using real-world data from patients in Belgium. Methods: A multicenter, observational study, involving 7 non-academic and academic Belgian centers, was conducted based on a retrospective chart review of adult RRMM patients who started subsequent treatment from March 2017 through May 2021 after having received ≥3 lines of therapy including at least an IMiD, a PI, and anti-CD38-directed therapy (tri-exposed). Data were captured in an electronic case report form (Castor EDC). Patients with an ECOG performance status of ≥2, who received prior CAR-T treatment or prior BCMA-targeted therapy, or with a known active or prior history of CNS involvement (or with clinical signs thereof), were excluded. All treatment lines initiated after becoming eligible were used in the analysis. Specifically, all treatment lines for patients meeting the eligibility criteria more than once in their entire follow-up were included as separate observations, with date of treatment initiation as specific baseline for each treatment line. Cox proportional hazards models were fitted to explore the prognostic value with Overall Survival (OS), Progression Free Survival (PFS), and Time to Next Therapy (TTNT). Results: A total of 112 patients with 237 eligible treatment lines were included in the analysis; median follow-up was 16.6 months. In 45% of the initiated treatment lines, patients were refractory to 4 or 5 therapies, 62% had received ≥5 prior lines, 22% had extramedullary disease and in 48% of observations the time to progression in prior line was shorter than 4 months. After patients became tri-exposed, more than 50 unique treatment regimens were initiated, with the following being the most common: carfilzomib + dexamethasone (14%), pomalidomide + dexamethasone + chemotherapy (8%), and ixazomib + lenalidomide + dexamethasone (6%). Additionally, 4% of included observations were exposed to anti-BCMA agents. Overall, the following treatment classes were the most frequently started: PI only (19%), PI + IMiD combinations (17%), and regimens including anti-CD38 antibodies (15%). Median OS was 9.79 months [95% CI: 7.79; 12.22], median PFS was 3.42 months [95% CI: 2.79; 4.27], median TTNT was 3.61 months [95% CI: 3.09; 4.57]. Higher refractory status (p<0.001), being male (p=0.001), older age (p<0.001), shorter duration of prior lines (p<0.001), shorter time to progression in prior line (p=0.025), and higher LDH levels (p<0.002) were prognostic for worse outcomes for both OS (Figure 1) and PFS. Conclusions: This retrospective chart review of patients with tri-exposed RRMM in Belgium shows that real-world outcomes in terms of OS, PFS and TTNT are poor for these patients, with a median OS of <10 months. A wide variety of treatment regimens used in clinical practice confirm the absence of a clear standard-of-care in this patient population. The literature also confirms that these poor outcomes observed in Belgium, for this subset of MM patients, are similar in other countries. These real-world data highlight the high unmet medical need in this patient population and critical need for new and effective treatment options. MD and MCV contributed equally to this work. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Delforge: Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding. Vekemans: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS-Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceutica: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Depaus: Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Meuleman: iTeos Therapeutics: Consultancy. Strens: Realidad bvba: Consultancy. Van Hoorenbeeck: Janssen: Current Employment. Moorkens: Janssen-Cilag: Current Employment. Diels: Janssen: Current Employment. Ghilotti: Janssen-Cilag SpA, Cologno Monzese, Italy: Current Employment. Dalhuisen: Janssen: Current Employment. Vandervennet: Janssen: Current Employment.

Download Full-text

Real-World Outcomes for Pediatric and Young Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory (R/R) B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) Treated with Tisagenlecleucel: Update from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) Registry

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-146393 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 428-428

Author(s):

Samuel John ◽

Michael A. Pulsipher ◽

Amy Moskop ◽

Zhen-Huan Hu ◽

Christine L. Phillips ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

T Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Research Funding ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

Age Groups ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Advisory Boards

Abstract Background: Tisagenlecleucel is an autologous CD19-directed T-cell immunotherapy indicated in the USA for treatment of patients up to 25 years (y) of age with B-cell ALL that is refractory or in second or later relapse. Overall response rate was 82% with 24 months' (mo) follow-up in the registrational ELIANA trial [Grupp et al. Blood 2018]; pooled data from ELIANA and ENSIGN revealed similar outcomes upon stratification by age (<18y and ≥18y) [Rives et al. HemaSphere 2018]. Early real-world data for tisagenlecleucel from the CIBMTR registry reported similar efficacy to ELIANA with no new safety signals [Pasquini et al. Blood Adv 2020]. Outcomes are reported here for patients who received tisagenlecleucel in the real-world setting, stratified by age (<18y and ≥18y). Methods: This noninterventional prospective study used data from the CIBMTR registry and included patients aged ≤25y with R/R ALL. Eligible patients received commercial tisagenlecleucel after August 30, 2017, in the USA or Canada. Age-specific analyses were conducted in patients aged <18y and ≥18y at the time of infusion. Efficacy was assessed in patients with ≥12mo follow-up at each reporting center and included best overall response (BOR) of complete remission (CR), duration of response (DOR), event-free survival (EFS), relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS). Safety was evaluated in all patients who completed the first (100-day) assessment. Adverse events (AEs) of interest - including cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity - were monitored throughout the reporting period. CRS and neurotoxicity were graded using the ASTCT criteria. Results: As of October 30, 2020, data from 451 patients were collected, all of whom received tisagenlecleucel. The median time from receipt of leukapheresis product at the manufacturing site to shipment was 27 days (interquartile range: 25-34). Patients aged ≥18y appeared to have greater disease burden at baseline than those aged <18y, indicated by lower rates of morphologic CR and minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity prior to infusion. Older patients were also more heavily pre-treated before infusion. All other patient characteristics at baseline were comparable between the two groups (Table 1). In the efficacy set (median follow-up 21.5mo; range 11.9-37.2; N=322), BOR of CR was 87.3% (95% CI 83.1-90.7); MRD status was available for 150 patients, of whom 98.7% were MRD negative. Median DOR was 23.9mo (95% CI 12.3-not estimable [NE]), median EFS was 14.0mo (9.8-24.8) and median RFS was 23.9mo (13.0-NE); 12mo EFS and RFS were 54.3% and 62.3%, respectively. For OS, the median was not reached. Efficacy outcomes were generally similar across age groups (Table 1). In the safety set (median follow-up 20.0mo; range 2.6-37.2; N=400), most AEs of interest occurred within 100 days of infusion. Any-grade CRS was observed in 58.0% of patients; Grade ≥3 in 17.8%. Treatment for CRS included tocilizumab (n=113; 28.3% of all patients) and corticosteroids (n=31; 7.8%). Neurotoxicity was observed in 27.3% of patients; Grade ≥3 in 10.0%. Treatment for neurotoxicity included tocilizumab (n=17; 4.3% of all patients) and corticosteroids (n=28; 7.0%). During the reporting period, 82 (20.5%) patients died; the most common cause of death was recurrence/persistence/progression of primary disease. CRS and chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell-related encephalopathy syndrome were the primary cause of death in 2 patients and 1 patient, respectively. Overall, safety data were similar across age groups, although more patients aged ≥18y experienced any-grade CRS or neurotoxicity and were subsequently treated (Table 1). Conclusions: Updated registry data for pediatric and young adult patients with R/R ALL treated with tisagenlecleucel revealed that patients aged ≥18y had a greater disease burden and were more heavily pre-treated at baseline than patients aged <18y. The overall efficacy and safety profiles of commercial tisagenlecleucel reflected those observed in the clinical trial setting [Grupp et al. Blood 2018; Rives et al. HemaSphere 2018] and were broadly consistent across age groups. Some important differences between the <18y and ≥18y groups were identified, which may point to challenges in timely identification and/or referral of older patients for CAR-T cell therapy. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Pulsipher: Equillium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Research Funding; Jasper Therapeutics: Honoraria. Hu: Kite/Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Phillips: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Margossian: Cue Biopharma, Inc.: Current Employment; Novartis: Other: Ad hoc Advisory Boards. Nikiforow: Kite/Gilead: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; Novartis: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; Iovance: Other: Ad hoc advisory boards; GlaxoSmithKline (GSK): Other: Ad hoc advisory boards. Martin: Novartis: Other: Local PI for clinical trial; Bluebird Bio: Other: Local PI for clinical trial. Rouce: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tessa Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Tiwari: Novartis Healthcare private limited: Current Employment. Redondo: Novartis: Current Employment. Willert: Novartis: Current Employment. Agarwal: Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Current Employment, Current holder of individual stocks in a privately-held company. Pasquini: Kite Pharma: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Grupp: Novartis, Roche, GSK, Humanigen, CBMG, Eureka, and Janssen/JnJ: Consultancy; Novartis, Kite, Vertex, and Servier: Research Funding; Novartis, Adaptimmune, TCR2, Cellectis, Juno, Vertex, Allogene and Cabaletta: Other: Study steering committees or scientific advisory boards; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Other: Steering committee, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Ruxolitinib in the Treatment of Elderly Patients with Policythemia Vera Resistant/Intolerant to Hydroxyurea

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-149612 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2581-2581

Author(s):

Roberto Latagliata ◽

Daniela Bartoletti ◽

Alessandro Andriani ◽

Massimo Breccia ◽

Elena Rossi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Real World ◽

Age Groups ◽

Second Line ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Second Line Therapy ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Dose Reductions

Abstract Introduction: Ruxolitinib (Rux) has been recently approved as second-line therapy in patients (pts) with Polycythemia Vera (PV) resistant/intolerant to hydroxyurea (HU). Median age of PV pts enrolled in the pivotal Response trials was around 60 yrs; at present, no data is reported on the use of Rux in elderly pts. Aims: In a real-world cohort of PV pts treated with Rux, we investigated whether the efficacy and safety of Rux were comparable in pts who initiated therapy when aged ≥75 years compared with younger pts. Methods: After IRB approval, clinical/laboratory data of 934 WHO2016-defined PV pts followed in 29 Hematology Centers were retrospectively collected. Of them, 168 (17.9%) were considered resistant/intolerant to HU at any time during follow-up by responsible physician and shifted to Rux as second-line therapy. Results: Among the 168 pts treated with Rux, 42 (25%, median age 78.2 years) were aged ≥75 yrs at Rux start, 74 (44%, median age 67.7) were aged 60-74 and 52 (31%, median age 53) were <60 at Rux start. No significant differences were observed between the 3 groups, apart from a lower need for phlebotomies in pts aged ≥75 yrs and lower presence of palpable spleen in older pts (age ≥60), that more frequently switched to Rux due to HU intolerance (Table 1). Median duration of HU treatment was 41.0 months (IQR 14.6 - 85.8), with a trend for a longer median treatment duration in pts aged ≥75 [61.0 months (IQR 21.5 - 89.6) vs 35.9 months (IQR 13.4 - 79.6), p=0.04]. Rux starting dose was similar across age groups; however, more elderly pts underwent Rux dose reductions during follow-up (45.2% in pts aged ≥75 vs 28.6% in younger pts, p=0.04). Responses during Rux therapy are reported in Table 2, with no significant differences between the 3 groups at any time. In the overall cohort, response on PV-related symptoms at 6 and 12 months was significantly higher in pts who switched to Rux because of HU intolerance; however, this difference was not observed in pts aged ≥75 yrs. As to the most common hematologic Rux-related toxicities, grade 3-4 anemia and thrombocytopenia were observed in only 2 (1.2%) and 5 (3%) pts, with no difference across age groups (p=0.45 and p=0.18). However, any grade anemia and thrombocytopenia during Rux were more frequently observed in pts aged ≥75 (68.3% vs 51.7% of anemia, p=0.06 and 12.2% vs 3.5% of thrombocytopenia in younger pts, p=0.04). Nineteen and 4 pts experienced infectious and thrombotic complications during Rux with incidence rates of 0.59 and 0.12 per 100 patient-months, respectively, comparably in younger and older (≥75) pts (p=0.75 and p=0.29, respectively). Notably, 6 infections were herpes simplex/zoster virus, comparably distributed between the 3 groups (p=0.60). Permanent Rux discontinuation was needed in 14 pts (8.3%) after a median Rux exposure of 7.8 months (IQR 4.6 - 17.6) (incidence: 0.41 per 100 pts/months). Discontinuation was comparable between age groups, with Rux stop in 4 pts aged ≥75 yrs and 10 younger pts (2.4% vs 5.2% at 8 months, log-rank p=0.75). At last follow-up, 2 pts had died (1 from 2 nd neoplasia after 19.1 months from Rux start and 1 from acute leukemia after 3.3 years), both pts aged 60-74 yrs. Conclusions. In this real-world analysis, use of Rux in HU resistant/intolerant elderly PV pts was effective and safe despite the more frequent need for dose reductions. Older age should not discourage Rux therapy, but stricter hematological monitoring may be suggested. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Latagliata: BMS Cellgene: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Breccia: Pfizer: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Bonifacio: Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Cavo: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Accommodations, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: TRAVEL, ACCOMMODATIONS, EXPENSES, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Palandri: AOP: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sierra Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Surveillance Program of Romiplostim Use Connected to Pregnancy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-150314 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 585-585

Author(s):

James B Bussel ◽

Nichola Cooper ◽

Tatiana Lawrence ◽

Marc Michel ◽

Emilie Vander Haar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Platelet Count ◽

Ectopic Pregnancy ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Birth Outcomes ◽

Pregnancy Outcomes ◽

Surveillance Program ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Elective Termination

Abstract Introduction Immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), defined as an isolated low platelet count (<100 × 10 9/L), occurs in approximately 1 in 1000 to 10,000 pregnancies in the United States and is the most common cause of severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50 × 10 9/L) detected in the first and second trimesters. Treatment for ITP during pregnancy is limited by the lack of safety evidence for the fetus/infant. The Pregnancy Surveillance Program (PSP) was conducted to collect safety information on pregnancy and fetal outcomes of women exposed to the thrombopoietin receptor agonist romiplostim before conception, during pregnancy, or immediately postpartum. Here, we report pregnancy and birth outcomes as well as adverse events (AEs) for mother and fetus/infant. Methods Pregnancy outcomes data from women of 25 different countries were collected from August 1, 2017-March 15, 2020. Authorization to obtain pregnancy and infant health information as well as follow up with healthcare professionals was obtained from the mothers. One follow-up attempt was made if the mother was unresponsive, and two follow-up attempts were made 6-8 weeks after the mother's estimated date of delivery. Additional follow-ups were conducted when the infant was 6 and 12 months of age. Romiplostim pregnancy exposure cases reported during the data-collection period were entered into the PSP database and reported to global health authorities per local rules and regulations. Abnormal pregnancies were defined as those with at least one serious AE. Birth outcomes included live birth, premature birth, spontaneous abortion, elective termination, and stillbirth. Results Overall, 200 pregnancies were reported, including 11 pregnancies from clinical study sources, and 189 pregnancies from non-trial sources; 188 women were exposed to romiplostim. Two pregnancies were ongoing at the time of data cutoff (March 15, 2020). The median (Q1, Q3) overall duration of romiplostim exposure was 156 (44, 522) days (data available for 56 women), and 28 (7, 60) days during pregnancy (data available for 53 women). Median (Q1, Q3) age for the pregnant women was 30 (27, 33) years. Concomitant medications for ITP were used by 61 (32%) women and included corticosteroids (n=37), immunoglobulins (n=29), and rituximab (n=8). Overall, 43 (23%) women received treatment with romiplostim in the third trimester with median (Q1, Q3) exposure of 21 (7, 63) days. Of the 86 known pregnancy outcomes by trimester exposure (Figure 1), 40 (46.5%) were normal pregnancies with 15% abnormal birth outcomes, and 46 (53.5%) were abnormal pregnancies with 65.2% abnormal birth outcomes; 26 (56.5%) of the abnormal pregnancies were low platelet counts. Three cases of ectopic pregnancy were reported among women receiving romiplostim for ITP prior to conception. In all three women, romiplostim was continued up to, during, and after the ectopic pregnancy. One molar pregnancy was reported in a woman who received romiplostim for chronic ITP for approximately one year before conception. Of the 96 known birth outcomes, 57.3% were normal term, 11.5% were spontaneous abortion, 9.4% were term with complication (inguinal hernia, congenital cytomegalovirus infection, trisomy 8, and single umbilical artery), 9.4% were elective termination, and 12.4% were other outcomes (including 11 premature births, and one stillbirth). Twelve infants (including one case of twins) had thrombocytopenia at birth, of whom nine received immunoglobulins, and three received platelet transfusions. Out of the 12 infants, eight had resolution of thrombocytopenia within a week, and four (including the twins) had no available information about outcomes. No infant had defective immune system development, neoplasm, or bone marrow reticulin formation. One infant was diagnosed with fetal and neonatal alloimmune thrombocytopenia that resolved two months after birth. Among the 12 thrombocytopenic infants, six had good and six had unknown current/discharge health status. Conclusions The available data from the PSP suggested that the risk of adverse birth outcomes was low regardless of the timing of exposure. Additionally, no substantial safety concerns were identified for the mothers, fetuses, and infants due to romiplostim use during pregnancy. The results are complicated, however, by the abnormal pregnancies in women with severe ITP who comprised the majority of cases where romiplostim was used. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bussel: UCB: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: DSMB; Dova/Sobi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Rigel: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL: Other: DSMB; Principia/Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Momenta/Janssen: 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; UptoDate: Honoraria; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; RallyBio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cooper: Principia and Sanofi: Consultancy; Sanofi and Principia: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations expenses. Lawrence: Amgen Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Michel: Amgen: Consultancy; Rigel: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Argenx: Honoraria; UCB: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria. Wang: Amgen Inc: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Saad: Amgen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Download Full-text