Phase I Dose-Finding Study of Eltrombopag Following High Dose Cytarabine and Mitoxantrone Chemotherapy in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Abstract Background: Thrombocytopenia is prevalent at presentation and following induction chemotherapy (chemo) regimens in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Eltrombopag (EPAG), oral, nonpeptide thrombopoietin (TPO)-receptor agonist, is currently approved for treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia, hepatitis-associated thrombocytopenia, and aplastic anemia. It has also been evaluated as a strategy to mitigate chemo-induced thrombocytopenia in pts with solid tumors, myelodysplastic syndrome, and following allotransplant. Prior studies have demonstrated that EPAG can directly inhibit the proliferation of human AML cells in vitro. Although EPAG has been studied following induction and consolidation chemo in the frontline AML setting, to date, the tolerability and efficacy of EPAG in pts receiving salvage chemo for R/R AML is not known. Objectives: This study's objectives were to (a) estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and tolerability of EPAG, (b) examine platelet (plt) response (defined as plt count ≥ 100 x 10 9/L), and (c) anti-leukemic activity of EPAG in pts receiving high dose cytarabine (HiDAC) and mitoxantrone (Mito) for R/R AML. Methods: In this phase I open-label study, adult pts (³ 18 yrs) with R/R AML with adequate organ functions and grade 4 thrombocytopenia following HiDAC (given every 12 hrs (3 g/m 2 for age < 50; 1.5 g/m 2 for age ≥50) for 12 doses) and Mito (dosed at 12 mg/m 2 x 3 doses every other day) were eligible. All pts must have had marrow hypoplasia demonstrated on Day 14 ± 3 days from the initiation of HiDAC. EPAG was started daily on Day 14 ± 3 days with dose determined using a standard '3+3' dose-escalation design. EPAG was discontinued if an adequate plt response was achieved or following 9 weeks of therapy. The dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) window was defined as the first 15 days of EPAG dosing. Results: Nine pts with R/R AML were enrolled (Table 1). Median age was 64 yrs (range, 33-80), and 5 pts were men. All pts had intermediate (6/9, 67%), adverse (2/9, 22%), or unknown (1/9, 11%) cytogenetic risk disease. One (1/9) pt had NPM1+FLT3-ITD+ disease. Five pts (56%) had relapsed disease (2pts had prior allotransplant). All pts received HiDAC+Mito chemo and started on EPAG on Day 14 ± 3 days. Three received EPAG 150 mg, and 6 pts received 200 mg daily. The median duration on EPAG was 26 days (range, 11-82). One pt experienced a DLT of grade 3 myocardial ischemia while receiving EPAG 200 mg/day and was taken off study. No other DLTs were reported, and no MTD was determined. The most frequent grade ³3 adverse events (AEs, Table 2): were bacteremia (56%), neutropenic fever (44%), and hyperbilirubinemia (33%). Similarly, common grade 1-2 AEs consisted of hyperbilirubinemia, tachycardia, and confusion (33% each, respectively). At a median follow-up of 30.3 months (mo), all 9 pts had discontinued EPAG. Six pts (67%) achieved plt response (3 each in 150 mg and 200 mg/day dose level). The median time to achieve plt response and the duration of plt response was 27 days (range, 14-41) and 40.5 mo (range, 2-49.6), respectively. Three other pts discontinued EPAG therapy: 1 each due to cardiac ischemia, donor lymphocyte infusion, and patient choice, respectively (Table 3). Of note, 7/9 pts (78%) had clinical response: CR in 5 (56%), CRc (CR+CRp) in 6 (67%), MLFS in 1 (11%, Table 4). Two (2/7 responders) went on to subsequent allotransplant, and 6 died; 2-progressive disease, one each from pneumonia, failure to thrive, encephalopathy, and unknown cause, respectively. Among the 6 pts who achieved plt recovery on EPAG, 5 achieved CR and 1-MLFS following HiDAC+Mito. Conclusion: This phase 1 dose-finding study demonstrated that EPAG 150-200 mg daily following HiDAC+Mito chemo for R/R AML was well tolerated with one DLT of cardiac ischemia (200 mg dose). Two-thirds (67%) of pts achieved plt recovery on EPAG after a median of 27 days (range, 14-41). In these small number of pts (n=9), addition of EPAG therapy did not seem to adversely affect clinical outcomes (CRc 67%) and may have contributed to long-term platelet recovery. Further studies are required to determine the optimal schedule and potential benefit of EPAG added to chemo regimens for R/R AML. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Przespolewski: Jazz: Research Funding. Griffiths: Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Apellis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Taiho Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Boston Biomedical: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Thompson: Novartis/ Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Elshoury: Bristol Meyers Squibb: Other: advisory board. Wang: Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Kura Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, steering committee, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mana Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau; Stemline Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; DAVA Oncology: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Other: Data safety monitoring committee; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; PTC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Advisory board; Genentech: Consultancy; MacroGenics: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Results from a Phase 1/2, Open-Label, Dose-Finding Study of Pralatrexate and Oral Bexarotene in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.2677.2677 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 2677-2677

Author(s):

Madeleine Duvic ◽

Steven M Horwitz ◽

Youn H Kim ◽

Pier Luigi Zinzani ◽

Gajanan Bhat ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Objective Response ◽

Dose Finding ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Finding Study ◽

Dose Finding Study ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Ecog Ps

Abstract Background: Cutaneous T-cell Lymphomas (CTCL) include several variants of extra-nodal non-Hodgkin's lymphomas characterized by their skin lesions and T-cell surface markers. The most common, mycosis fungoides (MF), often has an indolent course but can transform and rapidly disseminate. While skin-directed therapies are effective for early-stage MF, patients with refractory, transformed or late-stage disease require systemic therapy. Methods: Adult patients with CTCL including MF, transformed MF (T-MF), Sézary syndrome (SS), primary cutaneous anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) ≤ 2 were eligible and signed consent. FOL was administered weekly via intravenous push for 3 of 4 weeks; BEX was self-administered orally with food. The standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), with cohort expansion for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The MTD was the highest dose with < 33% DLT incidence in any cohort. DLTs included the following in Cycle 1: ≥ Grade 3 neutropenia (or G-CSF administered), thrombocytopenia, treatment-related non-hematologic toxicity, hyperlipidemia, or hypothyroidism, and treatment-related adverse events (AEs) causing BEX dose omission for ≥10/28 days or FOL dose omission/reduction. Results: In Cohort 1 (15 mg/m2 FOL + 150 mg/m2 BEX), 0/3 patients had DLTs. In Cohort 2a (15 mg/m2 FOL + 300 mg/m2 BEX), 2/3 patients had DLTs: Grade 3 neutropenia and Grade 2 hypotension (n = 1) and Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia (n = 1). Therefore, the combination MTD was identified as 15 mg/m2 + 150 mg/m2. An additional 28 patients were enrolled at the MTD for a total of 34 patients (53% male, 47% female) in the study; all have discontinued treatment. The median age was 66 (range 39-85) years, and the median number of prior therapies was 4 (range 2-14). Histology included MF (53%), T-MF (32%), SS (12%), and ALCL (3%). ECOG PS was 0 (68%), 1 (18%), or 2 (15%). Patients received a median of 6 (range 1-33) cycles of therapy. All patients reported ≥ 1 AE. The most common (>20%) FOL-related AEs were mucositis or mucosal inflammation (68%), fatigue (41%), neutropenia and nausea (32% each), and anemia (24%). The most common (>20%) BEX-related AEs were hypertriglyceridemia (56%), fatigue (44%), neutropenia (32%), nausea (26%), and uncorrected hypothyroidism (24%). Grade 3 and 4 AEs were reported for 79% and 9% of patients, respectively: neutropenia (29% and 6%), hypertriglyceridemia (29% and 0%), and stomatitis (21% and 0%) and one Grade 5 AE of respiratory failure. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported for 35% of all patients; SAEs in > 1 patient were neutropenia and hypotension (6% each). Dose omissions and reductions for AEs were required for 74% and 21% of patients, respectively. AEs led to discontinuation for 32% of all patients, most commonly stomatitis (9%) and anemia, fatigue, and neutropenia (6% each). The overall Objective Response Rate was 61% (20/33 evaluable patients); 18/30 [60%] in Cohort 1 and 2/3 [67%] in Cohort 2. Four [12%] patients had a complete response, 16 [48%] partial response, 11 [33%] stable disease, and 2 [6%] progressive disease. Duration of Response ranged from 0-29+ months; median Response Duration was not reached, as 14 patients (3 CRs, 11 PRs) remained in response. Median PFS at the MTD was 12.8 (range 0.5-29.9+) months. Table 1. Response by CTCL Subtype Objective Response Rates CTCL Subtype Overall CR PR All Evaluable, n=33 20 (61%) 4 16 ALCL, n = 1 1 (100%) 1 0 MF, n = 19 12 (63%) 2 10 T-MF, n = 10 5 (50%) 1 4 SS, n = 3 2 (67%) 0 2 Conclusions: The combination of FOL + BEX was well tolerated and efficacious in patients with various CTCL subtypes, as measured by response rates (61% including patients with durable CRs) in this dose-finding study. Disclosures Duvic: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Therakos: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Co: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Array Biopharma: Consultancy; Allos (spectrum): Research Funding; Rhizen Pharma: Research Funding; Spatz Foundation: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Research Funding; Tetralogics SHAPE: Research Funding; Cell Medica Ltd: Consultancy; Soligenics: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; MiRagen Therapeutics: Consultancy; Huya Bioscience Int'l: Consultancy. Bhat:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment.

Download Full-text

Ritumixab in Combination with Adapted-Dose of Ifosfamide and Etoposide As Salvage Treatment in Elderly Refractory/Relapsed Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma Patients Non-Candidate for High Dose Therapy: A Retrospective Study of Lyon Hospital University

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-116734 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4215-4215

Author(s):

Guillaume Aussedat ◽

Delphine Maucort-Boulch ◽

Philippe Rey ◽

Violaine Safar ◽

Lionel Karlin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

First Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Previously Treated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: standard treatment for relapsed/refractory (R/R) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) but this strategy is not appropriate for elderly DLBCL patients (pts) related to a high risk of toxicities. Multiple chemotherapy regimens had been developed for heavily pretreated elderly DLBCL patients such as R-bendamustine, R-gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (R-GEMOX) and pixantrone; the median progression free survival (PFS) of these regimens were 2, 4 and 3.5 months, respectively in prospective phase II studies for patients previously treated with R (Sehn 2017, Mounier 2013, Pettengel 2016). Adapted dose of ifosfamide and etoposide was firstly developed as sequential consolidation regimen after high-dose CHOP (ACVBP regimen) in first line therapy of young DLBCL patients (Tilly 2003). This regimen with a safe toxicity profile was then used in combination with R in Lyon University Hospital in elderly R/R DLBCL ineligible to intensive strategy. Methods: we retrospectively reviewed the efficacy and the safety profile of this regimen performed in two Lyon University Hospitals (Centre Hospitalier Lyon Sud and Leon Berard Cancer Center). Between June 2004 and March 2017, 75 pts with R/R DLBCL (63 de novo DLBCL, 12 transformed DLBCL) received R (375 mg/m2) in combination etoposide (300 mg/m2) and ifosfamide (1500 mg/m2) on day 1 (N=72, 96%) and on days 1-2 (N=3, 4%) at 2 (N=46, 61%) or 3-week (N=29, 39%) intervals. All medical records were reviewed for clinical and biological characteristics, modality of treatment and supportive care, toxicities, responses and outcome. Results: the median age was 79 years (range, 64-92) at the beginning of R-ifosfamide/VP16 treatment with 46% of the patients over 80 years. 13% of pts had a CIRS-G grade 3 or 4 >2 categories and 35% had a cumulative CIRS-G score more than 6. The performance status according to EORTC scale was 2-4 in 37% of the pts and 93% had III-IV Ann Arbor stages. Age-adjusted IPI were 0-1 in 20 pts (27%) and 2-3 in 55 pts (73%). All patients were previously treated in first-line therapy by R in combination with chemotherapy (CHOP, N=56, 75%, low-dose CHOP, N=14, 19%, other, N=5, 6%). The patients received a median number of 1 previous line (range, 1-8) and no patient was previously treated by ASCT. The median time between initial diagnosis and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 20 months (range 4-187). The median time between the last treatment and R-ifosfamide/VP16 was 5 months (range 0-181). A refractory disease to first-line treatment was showed in 14 pts (19%). 31% of the patients had a refractory disease to the last regimen performed before R-ifosfamide/VP16. Patients received a median of 6 cycles (1-12). At the end of treatment, the overall response rate (ORR), defined by the rate of complete response (CR) and partial response (PR) was 37%, with 18% of CR. Evaluations were assessed for 29% of the pts by TEP scanner. For toxicity, among the 387 cycles, 10 patients developed febrile neutropenia (2.6%); 15 (20%) a grade 3-4 neutropenia; 7 (9%) a grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia; 5 patients needed platelet units and 16 patients received packed red blood cell units. No grade 3-4 non-hematological toxicity was observed and no toxic death occurred. With a median follow up of 31.3 months (range, 5.0-202.8), the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.3 months with a 1-year PFS rate of 26.0% (95%CI, 17.7-38.3) (Figure 1A). The median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 months with a 1-year OS rate of 40.8% (95%CI, 30.9-54.0) (Figure 1B). The median duration of response was 4 months (range 1-97). The median PFS was adversely affected by response (refractory versus CR/PR) to the last treatment (3.0 months versus 5.5 months, P=0.001) (Figure 1C). Conclusions: in this retrospective study, R-Ifosfamide/VP16 regimen provided effective results in R/R DLBCL transplant-ineligible pts with 37% of ORR and a median of PFS of 4.3 months with a safe toxicity profile. This regimen could also be considered as a platform for combinations with novel targeted agents in these categories of patients. Disclosures Karlin: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sarkozy:ROCHE: Consultancy. Bachy:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Takeda: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria. Salles:Abbvie: Honoraria; Epizyme: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Acerta: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Takeda: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Merck: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria. Ghesquieres:Sanofi: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Safety and Efficacy of Subcutaneous (SC) Blinatumomab for the Treatment of Adults with Relapsed or Refractory B Cell Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (R/R B-ALL)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-150018 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2303-2303

Author(s):

Pilar Martínez Sánchez ◽

Paul Gordon ◽

Stefan Schwartz ◽

Giuseppe Rossi ◽

Francoise Huguet ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Steady State ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Dose Finding ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Pharmacodynamic Profile ◽

Finding Study ◽

Phase 1B ◽

Dose Finding Study

Abstract Background Blinatumomab is a BiTE ® (bispecific T cell engager) molecule that engages patients' T cells to the CD19 antigen on lymphoid tumor cells. Blinatumomab administered as a 28-day continuous intravenous infusion (cIV) is approved in multiple regions for the treatment of R/R B-ALL in adults and children. Subcutaneous delivery may improve the convenience and satisfaction of patients with R/R B-ALL who are candidates for blinatumomab therapy. Here we report the results from the first cohort of adults with R/R B-ALL receiving SC blinatumomab. Methods In this ongoing multicenter, single arm, open-label, phase 1b dose-finding study (NCT04521231), patients received multiple cycles of SC blinatumomab. Each cycle included a treatment period and a treatment-free interval. In cohort 1, cycle 1, patients received a lower first dose of SC blinatumomab for several days followed by a higher dose multiple times weekly; in subsequent cycles, patients received the higher dose several times weekly during the treatment period. Bone marrow (BM) evaluation was performed on day 27 of each cycle. Results Six patients from cohort 1 were included in this June 22, 2021 data cutoff. Median age was 64 (range 38-83) years. The number of prior therapies ranged from 2-4. Two patients had disease refractory to primary therapy or salvage therapy, 2 patients relapsed after chemotherapy, and 2 patients relapsed after prior allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant. Median BM blast count at study start was 85% (range 28%-95%). Only 1 patient had <50% BM blasts (BM blasts=28%). At enrollment, all patients had an ECOG score of 0-1. The median number of SC blinatumomab cycles initiated was 1 (range 1-3). Preliminary pharmacokinetic results support the SC dosing intervals used in this study and potentially longer intervals. Exposures for SC doses were similar to the efficacious exposures of the approved cIV regimen: mean average concentrations at steady state of 215 and 853 pg/mL for the lower and higher SC dosing regimens of cohort 1, respectively, vs mean steady state concentrations of 228 and 616 pg/mL for 9 and 28 µg/day cIV dosing, respectively. The pharmacodynamic profile following SC blinatumomab of peripheral immune cell redistribution (circulating CD3+ and CD8+ CD69+ T cells), transient cytokine elevation (IL-6, IL-10, IFN-γ) and CD19+ B cell counts declining below the detection limit was consistent with the historical pharmacodynamic profile following cIV blinatumomab. No grade ≥3 cytokine release syndrome events were reported (Table). One patient developed herpes encephalitis and experienced a grade 5 neurological event unrelated to blinatumomab; no other neurological events were reported. Two patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events (injection site reaction in patient with no response, hyperleukocytosis due to disease progression). Three patients had complete hematological response (CR) with no measurable residual disease (MRD) (<10 -4) within 2 cycles and 1 patient had a morphological partial response (95% BM blasts at start of cycle 1 to 22% blasts on day 15). This patient discontinued on day 15 of cycle 1 after progression of extramedullary disease. At the time of the data cutoff, 2 patients remained on study. These patients had CR with no MRD. Conclusions In this phase 1b dose-finding study, SC blinatumomab has demonstrated encouraging anti-leukemia activity in heavily pretreated patients with R/R B-ALL. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results support the use of SC dosing in this population. The safety profile was manageable and consistent with that reported for cIV blinatumomab. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Gordon: Amgen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Schwartz: Morphosys: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: Travel grants, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel grants, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel grants, Speakers Bureau; BTG International Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Basilea: Other: Travel grants. Rossi: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Huguet: Novartis: Other: Advisor; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Advisor; Celgene: Other: Advisor; BMS: Other: Advisor; Amgen: Other: Advisor; Pfizer: Other: Advisor. Hernández-Rivas: Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene/BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wong: Amgen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Amgen: Current Employment. Markovic: Amgen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Katlinskaya: Amgen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Panwar: Amgen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Zugmaier: Micromet/Amgen: Patents & Royalties: Patents 20190300609 and 20130323247 licensed; receives royalties of family members of international applications published as WO2010/052014; WO2010/052013; WO2011/051307; WO2012/055961; WO 2012/062596; WO2014/122251; and WO2015/181683; Amgen: Current Employment; Amgen: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company.

Download Full-text

An Open-Label, Phase 2, Dose-Finding Study of Sotatercept (ACE-011) in Patients with Low or Intermediate-1 (Int-1)-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) or Non-Proliferative Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia (CMML) and Anemia Requiring Transfusion

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.3251.3251 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 3251-3251 ◽

Cited By ~ 15

Author(s):

Rami S Komrokji ◽

Guillermo Garcia-Manero ◽

Lionel Ades ◽

Abderrahmane Laadem ◽

Bond Vo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Lower Risk ◽

Research Funding ◽

Dose Finding ◽

Open Label ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Treatment Start ◽

Finding Study ◽

Dose Finding Study ◽

Dose Levels

Abstract Introduction: Anemia, a hallmark of MDS, is challenging to treat, particularly after failure of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). Sotatercept (ACE-011) is a novel and first-in-class activin type IIA receptor fusion protein that acts on late-stage erythropoiesis to increase mature erythrocyte release into the circulation (Carrancio et al. Br J Haematol 2014;165:870-82). Treatment with sotatercept stimulated erythropoiesis and significantly increased hemoglobin (Hb) levels in healthy volunteers (Sherman et al. J Clin Pharmacol 2013;53:1121-30), supporting its clinical development for the treatment of anemia in patients (pts) with lower-risk MDS. Methods: The primary objective of this phase 2, open-label, dose-finding study is to determine a safe, tolerable, and effective dose of sotatercept resulting in erythroid hematological improvement (HI-E; modified IWG 2006 criteria) in pts with anemia and IPSS-defined Low or Int-1-risk MDS or non-proliferative CMML (white blood cells < 13,000/µL). Secondary objectives include rate of RBC-transfusion independence (RBC-TI) ≥ 8 weeks. Eligible pts had anemia (≥ 2 RBC units transfusion requirement in the 12 weeks prior to enrollment for Hb ≤ 9.0 g/dL) with no response, loss of response, or low chance of response to ESAs (serum erythropoietin [EPO] > 500 mIU/mL). Pts received subcutaneous sotatercept at dose levels of 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, or 1.0 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01736683. Results: As of May 22, 2014, a total of 54 MDS pts were enrolled: 7, 6, 21, and 20 in the sotatercept 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg dose groups, respectively. Median age was 71 years (range 56–86) and median time from diagnosis was 4 years (range 0–31); most pts were male (70%). Pts received a median of 6 RBC units (range 0–18) in the 8 weeks prior to treatment start. Forty-five pts (83%) received ≥ 4 RBC units in the 8 weeks prior to treatment start (high transfusion burden; HTB), and 9 pts (17%) received < 4 units in the 8 weeks prior to treatment start (low transfusion burden; LTB). Nineteen pts (35%) had IPSS Low and 34 pts (63%) had IPSS Int-1-risk MDS; IPSS risk data were missing for 1 pt. Fifty-one pts (94%) had prior treatment with ESAs, 30 (56%) with hypomethylating agents, 26 (48%) with lenalidomide, and 26 (48%) with other MDS treatments; 15 pts (28%) had serum EPO > 500 mIU/mL. Of the 53 pts evaluable for efficacy, HI-E was observed in 21 pts (40%) overall: 0, 4 (67%), 8 (40%), and 9 pts (45%) in the sotatercept 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg dose groups, respectively. Nineteen of 44 HTB pts responded with a ≥ 4 RBC units/8 weeks transfusion burden reduction; duration of transfusion response appeared to be dose-dependent. Five HTB pts achieved RBC-TI ≥ 8 weeks, with RBC-TI duration ranging from 59–345+ days. Eight of 9 LTB pts showed Hb increases, not influenced by transfusion, ranging from 1.3–3.8 g/dL. Of these, 2 pts had a Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL sustained for ≥ 8 weeks. Pts with Hb > 11.0 g/dL were subject to dose delay per protocol, which may have impacted Hb increase sustainability. RBC-TI ≥ 8 weeks was achieved in 6 LTB pts. Increases in platelet and neutrophil levels were seen in pts with baseline thrombocytopenia and pts with baseline neutropenia, respectively. Sotatercept was generally well tolerated. Twenty pts (37%) reported ≥ 1 suspected treatment-related adverse event (AE); fatigue (11%), headache (9.3%), decreased appetite (7.4%), and nausea (7.4%) were the most common. Of 35 pts (65%) who discontinued treatment, 28 discontinued due to lack of therapeutic effect and 4 due to AEs. Of those AEs leading to discontinuation, 3 were suspected to be treatment-related: 1 pt with grade 2 hemolytic anemia, 1 pt with grade 3 hypertension, and 1 pt with grade 2 muscular weakness in the sotatercept 0.3, 0.5, and 1.0 mg/kg dose groups, respectively. Other reasons for discontinuation were withdrawal of consent (n = 2; 4%) and pt decision (n = 1; 2%). Conclusions: Sotatercept was well tolerated in lower-risk MDS pts at the dose levels tested, with promising evidence of clinical activity in this largely HTB cohort of ESA-refractory, anemic, lower-risk MDS pts. Further exploration of higher sotatercept dose levels and longer-term treatment is planned. PF and AFL contributed equally to this abstract as senior co-authors. Disclosures Komrokji: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Sotatercept (ACE-011) is an investigational agent that is being assessed for efficacy and safety in myelodysplastic syndromes.. Garcia-Manero:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Ades:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vo:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Prebet:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Boyd:US Oncology: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer-Ingelheim Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Beyne-Rauzy:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Zou:Celgene: Employment. Attie:Acceleron Pharma: Employment. Sherman:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. List:Celgene: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Conventional Immunochemotherapy (R-CHOEP) Vs High-Dose Immunochemotherapy (R-MegaCHOEP) in Younger Patients with High-Risk Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma: 10-Year Long-Term Follow-up of a German Lymphoma Alliance (GLA) Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123637 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1589-1589

Author(s):

Fabian Frontzek ◽

Marita Ziepert ◽

Maike Nickelsen ◽

Bettina Altmann ◽

Bertram Glass ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Scientific Advisory Board ◽

Scientific Advisory

Introduction: The R-MegaCHOEP trial showed that dose-escalation of conventional chemotherapy necessitating autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) does not confer a survival benefit for younger patients (pts) with high-risk aggressive B-cell lymphoma in the Rituximab era (Schmitz et al., Lancet Oncology 2012; 13, 1250-1259). To describe efficacy and toxicity over time and document the long-term risks of relapse and secondary malignancy we present the 10-year follow-up of this study. Methods: In the randomized, prospective phase 3 trial R-MegaCHOEP younger pts aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk (aaIPI 2-3) aggressive B-cell lymphoma were assigned to 8 cycles of CHOEP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubcine, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone) or 4 cycles of dose-escalated high-dose therapy (HDT) necessitating repetitive ASCT both combined with Rituximab. Both arms were stratified according to aaIPI, bulky disease, and center. Primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). All analyses were calculated for the intention-to-treat population. This follow-up report includes molecular data based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for MYC (IHC: 31/92 positive [40-100%], FISH: 14/103 positive), BCL2 (IHC: 65/89 positive [50-100%], FISH: 23/111 positive) and BCL6 (IHC: 52/86 positive [30-100%], FISH: 34/110 positive) and data on cell of origin (COO) classification according to the Lymph2CX assay (GCB: 53/88; ABC: 24/88; unclassified: 11/88). Results: 130 pts had been assigned to R-CHOEP and 132 to R-MegaCHOEP. DLBCL was the most common lymphoma subtype (~80%). 73% of pts scored an aaIPI of 2 and 27% an aaIPI of 3. 60% of pts had an initial lymphoma bulk and in 40% more than 1 extranodal site was involved. After a median observation time of 111 months, EFS at 10 years was 57% (95% CI 47-67%) in the R-CHOEP vs. 51% in the R-MegaCHOEP arm (42-61%) (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8, p=0.228), overall survival (OS) after 10 years was 72% (63-81%) vs. 66% (57-76%) respectively (p=0.249). With regard to molecular characterization, we were unable to detect a significant benefit for HDT/ASCT in any subgroup analyzed. In total, 16% of pts (30 pts) relapsed after having achieved a complete remission (CR). 23% of all relapses (7 pts) showed an indolent histology (follicular lymphoma grade 1-3a) and 6 of these pts survived long-term. In contrast, of 23 pts (77%) relapsing with aggressive DLBCL or unknown histology 18 pts died due to lymphoma or related therapy. The majority of relapses occurred during the first 3 years after randomization (median time: 22 months) while after 5 years we detected relapses only in 5 pts (3% of all 190 pts prior CR). 11% of pts were initially progressive (28 pts) among whom 71% (20 pts) died rapidly due to lymphoma. Interestingly, the remaining 29% (8 pts) showed a long-term survival after salvage therapy (+/- ASCT); only 1 pt received allogeneic transplantation. The frequency of secondary malignancies was very similar in both treatment arms (9% vs. 8%) despite the very high dose of etoposide (total 4g/m2)in the R-MegaCHOEP arm. We observed 2 cases of AML and 1 case of MDS per arm. In total 70 pts (28%) have died: 30 pts due to lymphoma (12%), 22 pts therapy-related (11 pts due to salvage therapy) (9%), 8 pts of secondary neoplasia (3%), 5 pts due to concomitant disease (2%) and 5 pts for unknown reasons. Conclusions: This 10-year long-term follow-up of the R-MegaCHOEP trial confirms the very encouraging outcome of young high-risk pts following conventional chemotherapy with R-CHOEP. High-dose therapy did not improve outcome in any subgroup analysis including molecular high-risk groups. Relapse rate was generally low. Pts with aggressive relapse showed a very poor long-term outcome while pts with indolent histology at relapse survived long-term. Secondary malignancies occurred; however, they were rare with no excess leukemias/MDS following treatment with very high doses of etoposide and other cytotoxic agents. Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Figure Disclosures Nickelsen: Roche Pharma AG: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grants; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: advisory board; Roche: Honoraria. Truemper:Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: scientific advisory board; Sandoz: Other: scientific advisory board; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Other: scientific advisory board. Viardot:Kite/Gilead: 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; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenwald:MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lenz:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Employment, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy. Schmitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Download Full-text

A Pilot Study of Acalabrutinib with Bendamustine/Rituximab Followed By Cytarabine/Rituximab (R-ABC) for Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-143095 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 8-9

Author(s):

Daniel Guy ◽

Marcus Watkins ◽

Fei Wan ◽

Nancy L. Bartlett ◽

Amanda F Cashen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Complete Response ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Stem Cell Collection

Introduction The management of younger fit patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) varies widely with no consensus on an optimal induction therapy. To date, the treatments with the longest progression-free survival incorporate a chemotherapy backbone that includes high dose cytarabine, followed by consolidation with an autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) (Hermine et al. Lancet 2016, Eskelund et al. Br J Haematol 2016). Recent data showed that a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab achieved high complete response rates with high minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (Merryman RW et al. Blood Adv 2020). We hypothesized that adding the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib to the same chemotherapeutic backbone would be safe and increase complete response rates as well as minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity pre-transplant, and potentially improve clinical outcomes. Methods We conducted a single arm, single institution pilot study registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03623373). Patients with untreated MCL, who were between ages 18-70 and were candidates for ASCT, were eligible. Patients received six 28-day cycles of treatment. Cycles 1-3 consisted of bendamustine 90 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2, rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1 and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 28. Cycles 4-6 consisted of rituximab 375 mg/m2 on day 1, cytarabine 2 g/m2 (1.5 g/m2 if age>60) q12 hours on days 1 and 2, and acalabrutinib 100mg BID on days 1 through 7 and 22 through 28. Restaging PET/CT and response assessment based on the Lugano classification were obtained following cycles 3 and 6. After cycle 6 patients underwent leukapheresis and stem-cell collection as preparation for ASCT. Blood for MRD status was collected after cycles 2, 4 and 6 and will be evaluated using the ClonoSeq assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies). The primary objective was to determine the stem cell mobilization success rate. Secondary objectives included safety and tolerability, overall response rate (ORR), pre-transplant complete response rate (CR), and the MRD negativity rate during and after completion of therapy. Results The trial enrolled 14 patients from December 2018 to February 2020. One patient withdrew consent prior to start of treatment and another was found to have an undiagnosed adenocarcinoma shortly after starting MCL treatment. Both are excluded from the analysis. The median age was 57 years (range 52-66). 11 patients were males (92%), all patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1. 11 patients (92%) presented with stage IV disease. The mean MCL International Prognostic Index (MIPI) score was 6.3 (25% high-risk, 42% intermediate-risk and 33% low-risk). Of the 12 patients who began treatment, 9 completed all 6 cycles. Three patients did not complete therapy due to: insurance issues (n = 1), and thrombocytopenia (n = 2) following cycle 5 and 4. The side effect profile showed expected hematologic toxicities with grade 3-4 cytopenias in all patients, mostly during cytarabine cycles. In total, 100% of patients developed grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia and 83% of patients developed grade 3-4 neutropenia. Three episodes of febrile neutropenia were observed. One patient had a grade 3 transaminase increase, and one patient had grade 3 diarrhea. No bleeding events or treatment related deaths occurred. The remainder of the side effects were low grade and the treatment was generally well tolerated. Of the 12 evaluable patients, 10 responded (ORR 83%) with 9 achieving CR (75%). One patient achieved PR prior to being removed from the study due to thrombocytopenia and then achieved CR off study. Two patients experienced PD during induction. With a median follow up of 9 months, no responding patients have relapsed. The median CD34+ stem cell collection was 3.84x106 cells/kg (range 2.77 - 5.9). MRD results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions This is the first study attempting to combine BTK inhibition with a high dose cytarabine containing regimen. The addition of acalabrutinib to a regimen of bendamustine/rituximab followed by cytarabine/rituximab appears to be safe. The R-ABC combination will be further tested in the recently activated intergroup trial EA4181. Disclosures Bartlett: Autolus: Research Funding; BMS/Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Kite, a Gilead Company: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BTG: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy; Affimed Therapeutics: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy. Fehniger:ImmunityBio: Research Funding; HCW Biologics: Research Funding; Kiadis: Consultancy; Nkarta: Consultancy; Indapta: Consultancy; Wugen: Consultancy; Orca Biosystems: Consultancy; Compass Therapeutics: Research Funding. Ghobadi:Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy; WuGen: Consultancy. Mehta-Shah:Bristol Myers-Squibb: Research Funding; C4 Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Genetech/Roche: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Verastem: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Corvus: Research Funding. Kahl:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Roche Laboratories Inc: Consultancy; BeiGene: 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; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

A Phase I Study of Bendamustine Combined with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Patients with Refractory or Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.1856.1856 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 1856-1856 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Suzanne Lentzsch ◽

Amy O’Sullivan ◽

Silvana Lalo ◽

Carrie Kruppa ◽

Diane Gardner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Partial Response ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Level ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Clinical Activity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1856 Poster Board I-882 Background: Lenalidomide is an analog of thalidomide that has shown significant clinical activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM), both as a single agent and in combination with dexamethasone. Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent that is approved for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia and indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma that has progressed during or relapsed within 6 months following a rituximab-containing regimen. Bendamustine combined with lenalidomide may be an effective treatment option for MM patients, particularly those with preexisting or bortezomib-induced neuropathy. Our primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety profile of bendamustine and lenalidomide when administered with dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory MM. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with confirmed, measurable stage 2 or 3 MM that was refractory to or progressed after 1 or more prior therapies, including lenalidomide, received bendamustine by intravenous infusion on days 1 and 2, oral lenalidomide on days 1–21, and oral dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each 28-day cycle. Treatment was continued until a plateau of best response, as determined by the IBMTR/ABMTR, was reached. Study drug doses were escalated through 4 levels (Table), with 3–6 patients enrolled at each level depending on the rate of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). After determining the MTD, up to an additional 12 patients will be enrolled in an MTD expansion arm to better evaluate toxicity and clinical activity. Secondary endpoints included preliminary efficacy, as evidenced by objective response, time to disease progression, and overall survival. Results: To date, 11 patients have been enrolled, with a median age of 63 years (range, 38–75 years). The MTD of bendamustine and lenalidomide has not been identified at this point; currently, patients are enrolling on dose level 3 with 100 mg/m2 bendamustine and 10 mg lenalidomide. Thus far, DLT included 1 grade 4 neutropenia at dose level 2. Nine of 11 patients are currently eligible for response assessment. A partial response was observed in 67% of patients, including 1 very good partial response and 5 partial responses (PR). Two patients experienced stable disease and 1 exhibited progressive disease. Grade 3/4 adverse events included grade 3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, hyperglycemia, and prolonged QTC, and 1 grade 4 neutropenia. Conclusions: Bendamustine, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone form a well-tolerated and highly active regimen even in heavily pretreated MM patients, with a PR rate of 67%. Additional updates on response and MTD will be available at the time of presentation. Disclosures: Lentzsch: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cephalon: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Bendamustine is not FDA approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma in the USA. Burt:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Mapara:Resolvyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Spouse is consultant , has received research funding, and participates on advisory board; Cephalon: Spouse has received funding for clinical trial and participates on advisory board. Redner:Biogen: Equity Ownership; Wyeth: Equity Ownership; Glaxo-Smith-Kline: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Equity Ownership; Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roodman:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Acceleron: Consultancy. Zonder:Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Cephalon: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Speaking (CME only); no promotional talks.

Download Full-text

Superiority of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone Versus Thalidomide-Dexamethasone as Initial Therapy for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3884.3884 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3884-3884

Author(s):

Francesca Gay ◽

Suzanne Hayman ◽

Martha Q. Lacy ◽

Francis Buadi ◽

Morie A Gertz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Initial Therapy ◽

High Dose ◽

Toxicity Profile ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Intention To Treat ◽

High Dose Dexamethasone ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3884 Poster Board III-820 Background and Objective Thalidomide/dexamethasone (thal/dex) combination has shown high activity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) (Rajkumar SV. at al, J Clin Oncol 2006;24:431-436). In newly diagnosed patients, lenalidomide/dexamethasone (len/dex) has demonstrated superiority compared with high-dose dexamethasone alone (Zonder JA et al, Blood 2007;110:77). Although both thal/dex and len/dex are active in newly diagnosed MM, no randomized trial has been reported comparing these two regimens, and unfortunately none are ongoing or planned. We compared the efficacy and the toxicity of thal/dex and len/dex as primary therapy in 411 newly diagnosed MM patients treated at the Mayo Clinic. Patients and methods 411 consecutive patients seen at Mayo Clinic between 2001 and 2008, who received induction with thal/dex (n=183) or len/dex (n=288) were retrospectively studied. Thalidomide was given at a dose ranging from 100 mg/day to 400 mg/day continuously; the lenalidomide dose was 25 mg/day, days 1-21 on a 28-day cycle. All patients received dexamethasone, either at high-dose (40 mg orally on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20) or at low-dose (40 mg orally day 1, 8, 15, 22); each cycle was repeated every 4 weeks. In addition, a case-matched subgroup analysis that adjusted for age, gender and transplantation status was performed among patients who received high-dose dexamethasone comparing the thal/dex (n=72) and len/dex (n=72) groups. Outcome was analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Chi-square or the rank sum tests were used to compare variables. Time-to-event analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method and all comparisons were determined by the log-rank test and by the Cox proportional hazards model. Results On intention-to-treat analysis, of 411 patients, 80.3% versus 61.2% patients, respectively in the len/dex group and in the thal/dex group (p < 0.001), achieved at least a partial response. A significant difference between the 2 groups was found in terms of both very good partial response or better (34.2% vs 12.0%, p < 0.001) and complete response rate (13.6% vs 3.3%, p < 0.001). Duration of therapy was significantly longer in len/dex patients as compared to thal/dex patients: 36.7% vs 12.6% of patients who did not stop treatment to receive SCT were still receiving therapy at 1 year (p < 0.001).Time-to-progression was significantly better in the len/dex group than in patients receiving thal/dex (median 27.4 vs 17.2 months, HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.44-0.93; p = 0.019). Similarly, progression-free-survival was significantly higher in len/dex patients (median 26.7 vs 17.1 months, HR 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.98; p = 0.036). This translated into an increase in overall survival (OS) (median not reached for len/dex group compared to 57.2 months in thal/dex patients, HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.40-0.92; p = 0.018). Survival advantages were evident in patients presenting with International Staging System Stage (ISS) I/II (HR 0.57; 95% CI 0.32-1.00; p = 0.052) at diagnosis but not in patients with ISS stage III in subgroup analysis. There was a trend toward better OS in len/dex group compared to thal/dex group both for patients who underwent transplant and for patients who did not. A similar rate of patients experienced at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event (57.5% vs 54.6% in len/dex and thal/dex groups, respectively, p = 0.568). However, the toxicity profile was different in the two groups: major grade 3-4 toxicities of len/dex were hematological, in particular neutropenia (14% with len/dex vs 0.6% with thal/dex, p<0.001) while the most common toxicities in thal/dex were venous thromboembolism (15.3% vs 9.2%, p = 0.058) and peripheral neuropathy (10.4% vs 0.9%, p < 0.001). The data on efficacy and safety shown above were also confirmed in the subgroup case-matched analysis which included only high-dose dexamethasone patients. Conclusions This cohort study shows the superiority of len/dex in terms of response rates and survival, compared to thal/dex. The toxicity profile of the 2 regimens is different and len/dex treatment, although more active, was not associated with increased toxicity (grade 3-4 AEs). These data need to be carefully evaluated and randomized prospective phase III studies are necessary to confirm these results and determine the optimal initial therapy for MM. Disclosures: Off Label Use: research drugs in combination to standard care. Lacy:celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; genzyme: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria; amgen: Honoraria. Kumar:celgene: Research Funding; millenium: Research Funding; bayer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:celgene: Research Funding. Bergsagel:amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; genetech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; merck: Research Funding; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzig:celgene: Research Funding. Fonseca:medtronic: Consultancy; genzyme: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; otsuka: Consultancy. Greipp:celgene: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Alternating Courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP Plus Rituximab Followed by a High Dose ARA-C Containing Myeloablative Regimen and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) Is Superior to 6 Courses CHOP Plus Rituximab Followed by Myeloablative Radiochemotherapy and ASCT In Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Results of the MCL Younger Trial of the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network (MCL net)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.110.110 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 110-110 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Olivier Hermine ◽

Eva Hoster ◽

Jan Walewski ◽

Vincent Ribrag ◽

Nicole Brousse ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Treatment Failure ◽

Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Mantle Cell ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 110 Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) has been characterized by poor long term prognosis with a median survival of only 3 to 4 years. However, outcome has improved during the last decades. In its first randomized trial, the MCL net demonstrated that myeloablative consolidation followed by ASCT resulted in a significant prolongation of PFS in advanced stage MCL (Dreyling et al Blood 2005). Recent phase II studies suggested that the addition of rituximab to CHOP like chemotherapy and/or high dose ARA-C may significantly improve remission rates and PFS. A French phase II trial using sequential R-CHOP/R-DHAP followed by ASCT showed an overall response rate of 95% with a CR rate of 61% translating into a median EFS of 83 months and a 75% survival rate at 5 years (Delarue et al ASH 2008). Methods: To evaluate the potential superiority of a high dose ARA-C containing regimen, the MCL net initiated a randomized trial comparing 6 courses of CHOP plus Rituximab followed by myeloablative radiochemotherapy (12 Gray TBI, 2×60mg/kg Cyclophosphamide) and ASCT (control arm A) versus alternating courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP plus Rituximab followed by a high dose ARA-C containing myeloablative regimen (10 Gray TBI, 4×1,5 g/m2 Ara-C, 140mg/m2 melphalan) and ASCT (experimental arm B). Patient eligibility criteria included previously untreated MCL stage II-IV up to the age of 65 years. Histological diagnosis was confirmed by a central pathology review board. The primary end point time to treatment failure (TTF) was monitored continuously by a sequential procedure based on a one sided triangular test. Stable disease after induction, progression or death from any causes, were considered as treatment failure. Sample size was calculated to detect a hazard ratio of 52% for arm B with a power of 95%. Randomization was stopped as soon as a significant difference was observed between the two arms. Results: From July 2004 to May 2010, 497 patients were randomized in 4 countries (Germany, France, Poland, Belgium). The 391 patients evaluable for the primary analysis (19 no MCL, 87 not yet documented) displayed similar characteristics in both treatment arms: median age 55 vs 56 years, male 78% vs 79%, stage IV 85% vs 79%, B symptoms 43% vs 33%, ECOG >2 5% vs 5%, elevated LDH 37% vs 38%, and MIPI low/int/high risk 61%/25%/14% vs 62%/23%/15%, respectively. After induction overall response was similarly high in both arms (A: 90% vs B: 94%; p=0.19) and CR rate and combined CR/CRu rate were significantly higher in arm B (26% vs 39%; p=0.012 and 41% vs 60%; p=0.0003). The number of patients transplanted was similar in both arms (72% vs 73%) and after transplantation overall response and CR rates were comparable in both arms (97% vs 97% and 63% vs 65%, respectively). After a median follow up of 27 months, patients in arm B experienced a significantly longer TTF (49 months vs NR; p=0.0384, hazard ratio 0.68) mainly due to a lower number of relapses after CR/CRu/PR (20% vs 10%), whereas the rate of ASCT-related deaths in remission was similar in both arms (3% vs 4%). Although CR rate after ASCT was comparable in both arms, remission duration (RD) after ASCT was superior in Arm B (48m vs NR; p=0.047). Interestingly, for patients in CR after ASCT, RD after ASCT was also presumably superior in arm B (51 months vs NR; p=0.077). At the time of analysis overall survival was similar in both arms with medians not reached and 79% vs. 80% survival rates at 3 years (p=0.74). Safety after induction was comparable in both arms except for an increased grade 3/4 hematological toxicity (Hb 8% vs 28%, WBC 48% vs 75%, platelets 9% vs 74%, respectively), an excess of renal toxicity (creatinine grade 1/2: 8% vs 38%, grade 3/4: none vs 2%), and more frequent grade 1/2 nausea and vomiting in arm B. Toxicities of both conditioning regimen were similar, except for higher grade 3/4 mucositis (43% vs. 61%) in Arm B, and higher grade 1/2 liver toxicity and constipation in Arm A. Conclusions: High dose ARA-C in addition to R-CHOP+ASCT increases significantly complete response rates and TTF without clinically relevant increase of toxicity. Therefore, induction regimen containing high dose ARA-C followed by ASCT should become the new standard of care of MCL patients up to 65 years. Disclosures: Walewski: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stilgenbauer:Amgen: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding. Feugier:roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bosly:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gisselbrecht:Roche: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

A Phase I Study of Vorinostat, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone In Patients with Relapsed or Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Excellent Tolerability and Promising Activity In a Heavily Pretreated Population

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.1951.1951 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 1951-1951 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Paul Richardson ◽

Donna Weber ◽

Constantine S. Mitsiades ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Jean-Luc Harousseau ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase I Study ◽

Response Rate ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1951 Background: Although novel treatment combinations for multiple myeloma (MM) have improved outcomes, the disease remains incurable and new drug combinations are urgently needed. Vorinostat is an oral histone deacetylase inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment of patients (pts) with advanced cutaneous T-cell lymphoma who failed prior therapies. Vorinostat alters gene expression and protein activity, promoting MM cell death through multiple pathways, and has been shown in preclinical studies to synergistically enhance the anti-MM activity of bortezomib and immunomodulatory drugs, including lenalidomide, with or without dexamethasone. Aims: The primary objective of this Phase I study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vorinostat plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in pts with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM. Secondary objectives included overall safety, tolerability, response rate, duration of response, and time to progression (TTP). Methods: Pts in this Phase I multicenter open-label study were sequentially enrolled into 1 of 5 escalating doses of the combination regimen using a standard 3 + 3 design for ≤8 cycles. Pts who tolerated treatment and experienced clinical benefit were eligible for enrollment in an extension phase. Toxicity was evaluated using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria (version 3.0). Response was assessed using the modified European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria and International Myeloma Working Group Uniform Criteria. Safety and efficacy data were analyzed using summary statistics, except for TTP, which was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: As of July 15, 2010, 31 pts were treated and evaluable for toxicity; 4 pts remain on study. Most pts had received prior thalidomide (n=22; 71%), bortezomib (n=20; 65%), or lenalidomide (n=14; 45%), with a median of 4 prior therapies (range, 1–10). The patient population contained both high-risk and low-risk pts, based on cytogenetic and/or fluorescence in situ hybridization analyses. Most adverse events (AEs) were mild or moderate in severity. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs, experienced by 19 (61%) pts, were neutropenia (26%), thrombocytopenia (16%), diarrhea (13%), anemia (10%), and fatigue (10%); 8 pts discontinued due to toxicity. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 diarrhea lasting >48 h) was observed at the maximum assessed dose (level 5), but MTD was not reached (Table) and there were no treatment-related deaths. Among 30 pts evaluable for response, the median TTP was 32 weeks (5 mo), and 4 pts remain on study as of the data cutoff date; 26 of 30 pts (87%) have achieved at least stable disease (SD). Best single responses included 2 complete responses, 3 very good partial responses (VGPR), 11 partial responses (PR), and 5 minimal responses (MR), with 5 pts achieving SD and 4 developing progressive disease, resulting in an overall response rate (ORR; PR or better) of 53%. Of 13 evaluable pts who had previously received lenalidomide, a best single response of SD or better was observed in 9 (69%; 2 VGPR, 3 PR, 1 MR, 3 SD), resulting in a 38% ORR. Notably, SD or better (2 PR, 1 MR, 3 SD) was observed in 60% of 10 evaluable pts who were relapsed, refractory, or intolerant to previous lenalidomide-containing regimens. Conclusions: Preliminary data from this Phase I study suggest that vorinostat plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone is a convenient and generally well-tolerated regimen with promising activity for relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM. The MTD for this combination was not reached. Importantly, responses were observed in pts who had received prior lenalidomide, bortezomib, and thalidomide. Further evaluation of this regimen is planned in future trials. Disclosures: Richardson: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Vorinostat, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for treatment in Multiple Myeloma. Weber:Novartis-unpaid consultant: Consultancy; Merck- unpaid consultant: Consultancy; Celgene- none for at least 2 years: Honoraria; Millenium-none for 2 years: Honoraria; Celgene, Millenium, Merck: Research Funding. Mitsiades:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck & Co.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kosan Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centrocor: Consultancy, Honoraria; PharmaMar: Patents & Royalties; OSI Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Amgen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; AVEO Pharma: Research Funding; EMD Serono: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Gloucester Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Dimopoulos:MSD: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Harousseau:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Houp:Merck Research Laboratories: Employment. Graef:Merck Research Laboratories: Employment. Gause:Merck Research Laboratories: Employment. Byrne:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Acetylon: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Celgene and Millennium: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Advisory Board.

Download Full-text