scholarly journals Evaluating the Carg Chemotherapy Toxicity Calculator Among Older Adults Newly Diagnosed with Hematologic Malignancy

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1931-1931
Author(s):  
Ashley E. Rosko ◽  
Sarah A Wall ◽  
Ying Huang ◽  
Alice S. Mims ◽  
Jennifer A. Woyach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hematologic Malignancy ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Chemotherapy Toxicity ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
Physical Health Score

Abstract Background: Older adults with hematologic malignancy (HM) are a growing demographic and providing effective treatments that balance toxicity and health related quality-of-life (HRQL) is imperative. The well-studied and utilized chemotherapy toxicity tool, the Cancer and Aging Research Group (CARG) chemotherapy toxicity score, has not been validated in hematologic malignancies. Methods: The primary objective of this study was to validate the predictive ability of the CARG score for grade 3-5 toxicity in newly diagnosed (ND) patients >60 years with HM. This was a prospective longitudinal study with 4 study visits: baseline (pre-therapy), visit 2 (Day 90), visit 3 (Day 180), and end-of-study (EOS) which occurred at the earliest of the following events: progression, transplant, or 1-year from baseline. The CARG score was evaluated at baseline. HRQL (PROMIS-GHS) and physical function measured by short physical performance battery (SPPB) were assessed longitudinally at all visits. Treatment toxicity using the NCI CTCAE (version 5.0) were captured monthly, and the worst grade of each type of chemo-related adverse event (AE) was recorded and summarized for each patient. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was used to test if variables changed significantly across visits. Fine and Gray model was used to associate comprehensive geriatric metrics and CARG score with the development of grade 3-5 chemotherapy-related toxicity with death as the competing risk, and Cox model was used to analyze overall survival (OS). Results: Ninety-seven patients with hematologic malignancy (myeloid n=34, lymphoma n=35, plasma cell n=28) were enrolled. The median age was 70 years (range 60-88) with a median 159 days on study (range 1-435). Baseline evaluations: ECOG PS was 0-1 in 69 (85%), median IADL score was 13 (range 5-14), median MOS physical health score was 44.4 (range 0-100), median self-reported KPS was 80% (50-100%), and median comorbidity score was 6 (range 2-12). PROMIS median scores improved from baseline (32, range: 12-49) to EOS (35, range: 16-47, p=0.05). Median SPPB scores improved significantly from baseline (5, range 0-12) to EOS (9, range 0-12, p=0.005). During the study period, 75 patients had 334 grade 1-2 AEs, and 42 patients had 82 grade 3-5 AEs. Hematologic toxicities were more common with 36 (37%) patients having anemia (30 grade 1-2, and 6 grade 3-5) and 11 (11%) patients having febrile neutropenia (all grade 3-5). In multivariable analysis, significant risk factors associated with grade 3-5 toxicity (p<.05) included living alone (HR 3.11, 95%CI: 1.52-6.34) and social activities score (HR 1.21, 95%CI: 1.02-1.42). Risk factors associated with OS in univariable models (p <0.05) were ECOG PS (HR 4.35, 95%CI 2.43-7.79), physical health score (HR 0.86, 95%CI 0.77-0.97), IADL (HR 0.83, 95%CI 0.73-0.95), comorbidities (HR 1.26, 95%CI 1.07-1.48), number of supplements (HR = 0.76, 95% CI 0.60-0.96), memory score (HR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01-1.14), SPPB score (HR 0.87, 95%CI 0.80-0.95) and CARG score (HR 1.12, 95%CI 1.02-1.23). In multivariable analysis, the SPPB score (HR 0.85, 95%CI 0.78-0.93) remained significant for OS. Conclusions: The CARG chemotoxicity score was not predictive of grade 3-5 toxicities in patients ND with HM, but was univariably associated with OS. Higher SPPB scores were strongly associated with OS. Future studies, evaluating modifications of the CARG score are indicated for patients with HM. Objective measures of function, such as the SPPB, may be a reliable method to stratify treatment intensities for older adults with HM. Disclosures Mims: Glycomemetics: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aptevo: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's Beat AML clinical study: Consultancy, Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Kartos Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Kura Oncology: Consultancy; Syndax Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Aptevo: Research Funding. Woyach: AbbVie Inc, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Janssen Biotech Inc, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company,: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: Data & Safety; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc, AstraZeneca, Beigene: Other: Advisory Committee.

scholarly journals Evaluation of the Incidence and Risk Factors Associated with Bleeding Events in Patients Receiving Acalabrutinib Therapy

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3729-3729
Author(s):  
Pooja S. Kumar ◽  
Tracy Wiczer ◽  
Lindsay Rosen ◽  
Arthur J. Pollauf ◽  
Amy Zheng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Hematologic Malignancy ◽  
Hematologic Malignancies ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Major Bleed ◽  
Concomitant Medications ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Acalabrutinib is a more selective, second generation covalent binding Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor. It was designed with the intent to mitigate adverse events (AEs) associated with ibrutinib, such as bleeding and cardiovascular events. In the phase 3 trial that that led to acalabrutinib approval in the front line setting for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 37% and 2% of patients who received acalabrutinib monotherapy experienced grade 1-2 or ≥3 bleeding events, respectively. Currently, there are no long term studies evaluating the incidence of bleeding events associated with acalabrutinib. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the incidence of bleeding events, and risk factors associated with bleeding events for patients treated with acalabrutinib for hematologic malignancies. Methods: This was a single center retrospective study conducted at The Ohio State University. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old, diagnosed with a hematologic malignancy, and initiated on acalabrutinib (monotherapy or combination therapy) between January 1, 2010 and August 31, 2019. The International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis (ISTH) bleeding scale (no bleed, clinically non-relevant bleed, and clinically relevant/major bleed) and Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V5.0 (CTCAE) were used to evaluate the grade and class of bleed events. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize demographic information and bleed events; univariable analysis was used to assess risk factors. Results: We analyzed 289 patients who received acalabrutinib for a hematologic malignancy. The main source of acalabrutinib was from clinical trials (85%) and the median acalabrutinib exposure time for all patients was 40.8 months (range: 0-81.6 months). 89% of patients had CLL, 2% had mantle cell lymphoma, and 9% had other non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Additionally, 18% of patients had a prior bleed history and 51% were continued on concomitant medications that increase bleeding (Table 1). There were a total of 241 (83%) patients who experienced at least one bleed event. Per ISTH categorization, 143 (59%) patients' most severe bleed event was clinically non-relevant and 98 (41%) patients' was clinically relevant/major; cutaneous bleeds were most common in both groups, 71% and 31%, respectively. Only 6% of patients had a major bleed, hence, clinically relevant and major bleeds were analyzed together for the purpose of this study. There were a total of 633 bleed events that occurred in this study population; 76% were clinically-non relevant and only 3% (n=17) were CTCAE grade ≥3. Acalabrutinib was not discontinued or held for any clinically non-relevant bleeds, was discontinued for six (1%) clinically relevant/major bleeds, and held for 44 (7%) clinically relevant/major bleeds. Clinically relevant /major bleeds also resulted in discontinuations of concomitant anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy in only 4% (n=24) of cases. 1263 procedures were identified and the incidence of clinically non-relevant and clinically relevant/major bleeds related to surgeries/procedures was 1% (n=12) and 1.3% (n=16), respectively. 10% of clinically non-relevant and 57% of clinically relevant/major bleeds led to hospitalizations, emergency room visits, or physician office visits; including two major CNS bleed events which resulted in death. The overall survival (OS) was not reached in the clinically non-relevant and clinically relevant/major bleed groups and was 14 months (95% CI 6-40) in the no bleed group (p=0.021). Univariate analysis showed that risk factors associated with a clinically relevant/major bleed included concomitant medications (OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.49-6.26) and prior bleed history (OR 4.40, 95% CI 1.45-13.40) (Table 3). Conclusions: Overall, our study had a long acalabrutinib exposure time and demonstrated a low incidence of grade ≥3 bleeds. There was also a low risk of bleeds related to procedures. The majority of bleeds were clinically non-relevant that did not result in significant treatment adjustments, hospitalizations, or death. This study identified prior bleed history and concomitant medications that increase bleeding as risk factors for bleeds and should be evaluated prior to starting acalabrutinib therapy. Our data supports acalabrutinib as a safe long-term treatment in regards to bleeds for patients with hematologic malignancies. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wiczer: BTG Specialty Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Bhat: Beigene: Consultancy; Aptitude Health: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Onclive: Honoraria. Byrd: Novartis, Trillium, Astellas, AstraZeneca, Pharmacyclics, Syndax: Consultancy, Honoraria; Newave: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Vincerx Pharmaceuticals: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rogers: Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Acerta Pharma: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; ovartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; AbbVie Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Woyach: AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc, AstraZeneca, Beigene: Other: Advisory Committee; AbbVie Inc, ArQule Inc, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Janssen Biotech Inc, Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company,: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc, Loxo Oncology Inc, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences Inc: Other: Data & Safety. Kittai: Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy.

scholarly journals A Pediatric-Inspired Regimen Containing Multiple Doses of Intravenous Pegylated Asparaginase Appears Safe and Effective in Newly Diagnosed Adult Patients with Ph-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in Adults up to Age 60: Results of a Multi-Center Phase II Clinical Trial

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1629-1629 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jae H. Park ◽  
Ellen K. Ritchie ◽  
Arati V. Rao ◽  
Sean Devlin ◽  
Meier Hsu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Older Adults ◽  
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Enzymatic Activity ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Hypersensitivity Reactions ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: The U.S. Intergroup C10403 trial has demonstrated that treating acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in adolescents and young adults up to age 39 using a pediatric regimen improves event-free and overall survival compared with adult regimens (Stock W et al. ASH 2014). However, the safety and efficacy in implementing pediatric regimens in older adults above age 40 have not been well studied. Herein, we report the results from a phase II multicenter study of pediatric-inspired regimen in newly diagnosed adult patients (pts) with ALL up to age 60 (NCT01920737). Methods: Newly diagnosed adult pts aged 18 to 60 with ALL were eligible. Burkitt type and Ph+ ALL were excluded. The treatment regimen consisted of induction 1 (I1), induction 2 (I2) followed by several cycles of intensifications and re-inductions and 3 years of maintenance therapy. The treatment contained a total of 6 doses of 2,000 IU/m2 pegylated asparaginase (Peg-ASP), administered IV at various intervals of ³4 weeks based on our previous pharmacokinetics (PK) data (Douer D et al. Blood 2007). Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed after I1 and I2 by multiparameter flow cytometry. Serum asparaginase enzymatic activity and presence of anti-asparaginase antibody (Ab) were assessed on day 7 after each Peg-ASP dose. Results: 27 pts were enrolled between 4/2014 and 4/2016. The median age at diagnosis was 43.6 (range, 20-60) years: 52% were 40-60 years. The majority had precursor B-ALL (70%) and rest T-ALL. Four pts (15%) had extramedullary disease only (mediastinal mass, lymph nodes, bone). Of the 27 pts, 26 pts (96%) achieved complete remission (CR) after I1. MRD was assessed in 20 pts; 8 (40%) and 15 (75%) pts achieved MRD neg CR after I1 and after I2, respectively. Six pts proceed to allogeneic HSCT. With a median follow-up of 7.8 months (range, 0.9-22.5), 3 patients (12%) relapsed: 2 occurred among the 12 MRD+CR group (17%) after I1 at 4.5 and 8.8 months, and 1 occurred among the 8 MRD negative CR group (13%) after I1 at 7 months from I1 completion. No relapses occurred among the 6 MRD unknown pts. No pt died on study. Grade 3-4 Peg-ASP-related toxicities (Table 1) included hypertriglyceridemia (59%), transaminitis (52%), hyperglycemia (41%), hyperbilirubinemia (30%), and pancreatitis (4%). Notably, all cases of hyperbilirubinemia occurred during I1 but despite continued use of Peg-ASP, grade 3-4 hyperbilirubinemia did not recur. Four pts (15%) developed hypersensitivity reactions to Peg-ASP and subsequently received Erwinia asparaginase without reaction and completed the full intended doses of Peg-Asp treatments. Three pts (11%) discontinued Peg-ASP due to toxicity (n=2; hyperbilirubinemia, transaminitis) and physician preference (n=1). Asparaginase PK and anti-ASP Ab data were available in 16 pts. In pts without hypersensitivity to Peg-ASP, a median asparaginase enzymatic activity was 0.58 IU/ml (range, 0.30-0.88) and 0.73 IU/ml (range, 0.53-0.88) on day 7 of Peg-ASP during I1 and I2, respectively. One pt developed silent inactivation after I1 with the activity level <0.01 IU/ml during I2 but without detectable anti-ASP Ab; 3 pts with hypersensitivity reactions had no or lowest activity levels, ranging from <0.01-0.1 IU/ml. Four pts (15%) had pre-existing anti-ASP Ab at pre-treatment; none of these was neutralizing and all 4 pts had adequate enzymatic activity. Conclusions: This phase 2 study suggests that a pediatric-inspired regimen containing rationally synchronized 6 doses of 2,000 IU/m2 IV Peg-ASP is safe and effective in older adults with newly diagnosed Ph-negative ALL up to age 60. Although follow-up remains short, we have observed high CR rates and few relapses. Hypertriglyceridemia, hyperglycemia, transaminitis and hyperbilirubinemia occurred frequently but few discontinued treatment due to toxicities. The rate of silent inactivation of asparaginase was low (6%), and almost all pts without hypersensitivity had adequate activity on day 7. Further results of asparaginase PK analysis and silent inactivation will inform the appropriate dosing of Peg-ASP and utility of PK/Ab tests in future adult ALL trials. Disclosures Park: Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ritchie:Arian: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Rao:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Douer:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Gilled Sciences, Inc: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Long Term Outcome of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (Rd) Vs Melphalan-Lenalidomide-Prednisone (MPR) Vs Cyclophosphamide-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (CPR) As Induction Followed By Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) Vs Lenalidomide (R) As Maintenance in a Community-Based Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Population: Updated Analysis of EMN01 Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 901-901
Author(s):  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Introduction : Rd and MPR showed to be effective combinations in elderly newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts). Cyclophosphamide is a less toxic alkylating alternative agent. EMN01 is the first trial to formally compare these three different Lenalidomide-based combinations. Maintenance with Lenalidomide has been recently approved in patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Few data are available about the best combination as maintenance in patients not eligible for ASCT. Methods : 662 pts with NDMM were randomized to receive 9 28-day cycles of Rd (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15 and 22 in pts 65-75 years old and 20 mg in those &gt;75 years), MPR (lenalidomide 10 mg/day for 21 days; melphalan orally 0.18 mg/Kg for 4 days in pts 65-75 years old and 0.13 mg/Kg in &gt;75 years pts; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days) or CPR (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in pts 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day in &gt;75 years pts; prednisone 25 mg every other day). After induction, pts were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (R; 10 mg/day for 21 days) or with prednisone (RP; R, 10 mg/day for 21 days and P, 25 mg every other day), until disease progression. Results : Pts characteristics were well balanced in all groups; 217 pts in Rd, 217 in MPR and 220 in CPR arms could be evaluated. After a median follow-up of 63.7 months, median PFS was 23.2 months in MPR, 18.9 months in CPR and 18.6 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.02; MPR vs Rd p=0.08). Median overall survival (OS) was 79.9 months in MPR, 69.4 months in CPR and 68.1 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.98; MPR vs Rd p=0.64). The most common grade ≥3 adverse event (AEs) was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR and 25% in Rd pts (p&lt;0.0001). Grade ≥3 non hematologic AEs were similar among arms. At the end of induction, 402 pts were eligible for maintenance, 198 in the RP and 204 in the R groups. PFS from start of maintenance was 22.2 months in the RP group and 17.6 in the R group, with 20% reduced the risk of death/progression for pts receiving RP maintenance (HR 0.81, p=0.07; Figure 1). A subgroup analysis was performed to determine the consistency of RP vs R treatment effect in different subgroups using interaction terms between treatment and cytogenetic abnormalities, ISS, age, sex, induction treatment and response before maintenance (Figure 1). No difference in OS was observed (HR 1.02, p=0.93) but the OS analysis was limited by the low number of events. Median duration of maintenance was 23.0 months in RP pts and 20.5 months in R pts, 14% and 13% of pts discontinued due to AEs, in RP and R groups, respectively. Conclusion : This phase III trial compared 2 different Lenalidomide-containing induction regimens and 2 different Lenalidomide-containing maintenance regimens in an elderly community-based NDMM population. MPR prolonged PFS by approximately 5 months, yet the higher incidence of hematologic toxicity should be carefully considered. The addition of low-dose prednisone to standard lenalidomide maintenance reduced the risk of death/progression by 20%, with a good safety profile. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Bringhen: Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Karyipharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Offidani: celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Musto: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Gaidano: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. De Sabbata: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hájek: Amgen, Takeda, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Phase 2 Study of Combination of Cytarabine, Idarubicin, and Nivolumab for Initial Therapy of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 815-815
Author(s):  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
Naval Daver ◽  
Guillermo Garcia-Manero ◽  
Christopher B Benton ◽  
Philip A Thompson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cells ◽  
T Cell ◽  
Cd8 T Cells ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
T Cell Subsets ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Effector Cells ◽  
T Effector Cells ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Blocking PD-1/PD-L1 pathways enhances anti-leukemia responses by enabling T-cells in murine models of AML (Zhang et al, Blood 2009). PD-1 positive CD8 T-cells are increased in bone marrow (BM) of pts with AML (Daver et al, AACR 2016). PD1 inhibition has shown activity in AML (Berger et al, Clin Cancer Res 2008). We hypothesized that addition of nivolumab to an induction regimen of ara-C and idarubicin may prolong relapse-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS); this study was designed to determine the feasibility of this combination. Methods: Pts with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (by WHO criteria; ≥20% blasts) and high risk MDS (≥10% blasts) were eligible to participate if they were 18-65 yrs of age and had adequate performance status (ECOG ≤3) and organ function (LVEF ≥ 50%; creatinine ≤ 1.5 g mg/dL, bilirubin ≤ 1.5 mg/dL and transaminases ≤ 2.5 times upper limit of normal). Treatment included 1 or 2 induction cycles of ara-C 1.5 g/m2 over 24 hours (days 1-4) and Idarubicin 12 mg/m2 (days 1-3). Nivolumab 3 mg/kg was started on day 24 ± 2 days and was continued every 2 weeks for up to a year. For pts achieving complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) up to 5 consolidation cycles of attenuated dose ara-C and idarubicin was administered at approximately monthly intervals. Eligible pts received an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) at any time during the consolidation or thereafter. Results: 3 pts with relapsed AML were treated at a run-in phase with a dose of nivolumab 1 mg/kg without specific drug-related toxicity. Subsequently, 32 pts (median age 53 yrs; range, 26-65) were treated as above including 30 with AML (24 de novo AML, 2 therapy-related AML, 3 secondary AML and 1 therapy-related secondary AML) and 2 high risk MDS. Pre-treatment genetic risk by ELN criteria was 11 adverse, 16 intermediate, and 5 favorable, including 2 FLT3 -ITD mutated, 5 NPM1 mutated, and 7 TP53 mutated. All 32 pts were evaluable for response and 23 (72%) achieved CR/CRi (19 CR, 4 CRi). The 4-week and 8 week mortality was 6% and 6%. The median number of doses of nivolumab received was 6 (range, 0-13); one pt did not receive nivolumab due to insurance issues. 9 pts underwent an alloSCT. After a median follow-up of 8.3 mths (range, 1.5-17.0) the median RFS among the responding pts has not been reached (range, 0.1 - 15.8 mths) and the median OS has not been reached (range 0.5-17.0 mths). Grade 3/4 immune mediated toxicities have been observed in 5 pts and include rash, pancreatitis, and colitis. Other grade 3/4 toxicities thought to be potentially related to nivolumab include cholecystitis in one pt. 9 pts proceeded to an alloSCT. Donor source was matched related in 2, matched unrelated in 6 and haplo-identical in 1 pt. Conditioning regimen was Fludarabine plus busulfan-based in 8, and fludarabine plus melphalan in 1 pt. 4 pts developed graft versus host disease (GVHD)(grade I/II in 3, grade III/IV in 1), which responded to treatment in 3. Multicolor flow-cytometry studies are conducted by the Immunotherapy Platform on baseline (prior to first dose of nivolumab) and on-treatment BM aspirate and peripheral blood to assess the T-cell repertoire and expression of co-stimulatory receptors and ligands on T-cell subsets and leukemic blasts, respectively. The baseline BM was evaluated on 23 of the 32 evaluable pts, including 18 responders and 5 non-responders. Pts who achieved a CR/CRi had a trend of higher frequency of live CD3+ total T cell infiltrate as compared to non-responders in the baseline BM aspirates (Fig 1A). We evaluated expression of immune markers on T cell subsets: CD4 T effector cells [Teff]: CD3+CD4+CD127lo/+Foxp3-, CD4 T regulatory cells [Treg]: CD3+CD4+CD127-Foxp3+, and CD8 T cells. At baseline, BM of non-responders had significantly higher percentage of CD4 T effector cells co-expressing the inhibitory markers PD1 and TIM3 (p&lt;0.05) and a trend towards higher percentage of CD4 T effector cells co-expressing PD1 and LAG3 compared to responders (Fig 1B). Co-expression of TIM3 or LAG3 on PD1+ T cells have been shown to be associated with an exhausted immune phenotype in AML (Zhou et al., Blood 2011). Conclusion: Addition of nivolumab to ara-C and anthracycline induction chemotherapy is feasible and safe in younger pts with AML. Among the pts proceeding to alloSCT the risk of GVHD is not significantly increased. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Daver: Pfizer Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc.: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kiromic: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Immunogen: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Thompson: Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jabbour: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Takahashi: Symbio Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. DiNardo: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sharma: Jounce: Consultancy, Other: stock, Patents & Royalties: Patent licensed to Jounce; Astellas: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Consetellation: Other: stock; Evelo: Consultancy, Other: stock; Neon: Consultancy, Other: stock; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Other: stock; BMS: Consultancy. Cortes: BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sun Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy, Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian: Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Metaphase Cytogenetics for Risk Stratification in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4396-4396
Author(s):  
Patrick Mellors ◽  
Moritz Binder ◽  
Rhett P. Ketterling ◽  
Patricia Griepp ◽  
Linda B Baughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Risk Stratification ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Risk Modeling ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cytogenetic Abnormalities ◽  
Improve Risk Stratification

Introduction: Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics are associated with inferior survival in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). These abnormalities are only detected in one third of cases due to the low proliferative rate of plasma cells. It is unknown if metaphase cytogenetics improve risk stratification when using contemporary prognostic models such as the revised international staging system (R-ISS), which incorporates interphase fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). Aims: The aims of this study were to 1) characterize the association between abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics and overall survival (OS) in newly diagnosed MM treated with novel agents and 2) evaluate whether the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to R-ISS, age, and plasma cell labeling index (PCLI) improves model discrimination with respect to OS. Methods: We analyzed a retrospective cohort of 483 newly diagnosed MM patients treated with proteasome inhibitors (PI) and/or immunomodulators (IMID) who had metaphase cytogenetics performed prior to initiation of therapy. Abnormal metaphase cytogenetics were defined as MM specific abnormalities, while normal metaphase cytogenetics included constitutional cytogenetic variants, age-related Y chromosome loss, and normal metaphase karyotypes. Multivariable adjusted proportional hazards regression models were fit for the association between known prognostic factors and OS. Covariates associated with inferior OS on multivariable analysis included R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, PCLI ≥ 2, and abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. We devised a risk scoring system weighted by their respective hazard ratios (R-ISS II +1, R-ISS III + 2, age ≥ 70 +2, PCLI ≥ 2 +1, metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities + 1). Low (LR), intermediate (IR), and high risk (HR) groups were established based on risk scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-5 in modeling without metaphase cytogenetics, and scores of 0-1, 2-3, and 4-6 in modeling incorporating metaphase cytogenetics, respectively. Survival estimates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Survival analysis was stratified by LR, IR, and HR groups in models 1) excluding metaphase cytogenetics 2) including metaphase cytogenetics and 3) including metaphase cytogenetics, with IR stratified by presence and absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities. Survival estimates were compared between groups using the log-rank test. Harrell's C was used to compare the predictive power of risk modeling with and without metaphase cytogenetics. Results: Median age at diagnosis was 66 (31-95), 281 patients (58%) were men, median follow up was 5.5 years (0.04-14.4), and median OS was 6.4 years (95% CI 5.7-6.8). Ninety-seven patients (20%) were R-ISS stage I, 318 (66%) stage II, and 68 (14%) stage III. One-hundred and fourteen patients (24%) had high-risk abnormalities by FISH, and 115 (24%) had abnormal metaphase cytogenetics. Three-hundred and thirteen patients (65%) received an IMID, 119 (25%) a PI, 51 (10%) received IMID and PI, and 137 (28%) underwent upfront autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). On multivariable analysis, R-ISS (HR 1.59, 95% CI 1.29-1.97, p < 0.001), age ≥ 70 (HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.83-2.93, p < 0.001), PCLI ≥ 2, (HR 1.52, 95% CI 1.16-2.00, p=0.002) and abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics (HR 1.35, 95% CI 1.05-1.75, p=0.019) were associated with inferior OS. IR and HR groups experienced significantly worse survival compared to LR groups in models excluding (Figure 1A) and including (Figure 1B) the effect of metaphase cytogenetics (p < 0.001 for all comparisons). However, the inclusion of metaphase cytogenetics did not improve discrimination. Likewise, subgroup analysis of IR patients by the presence or absence of metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities did not improve risk stratification (Figure 1C) (p < 0.001). The addition of metaphase cytogenetics to risk modeling with R-ISS stage, age ≥ 70, and PCLI ≥ 2 did not improve prognostic performance when evaluated by Harrell's C (c=0.636 without cytogenetics, c=0.642 with cytogenetics, absolute difference 0.005, 95% CI 0.002-0.012, p=0.142). Conclusions: Abnormalities on metaphase cytogenetics at diagnosis are associated with inferior OS in MM when accounting for the effects of R-ISS, age, and PCLI. However, the addition of metaphase cytogenetics to prognostic modeling incorporating these covariates did not significantly improve risk stratification. Disclosures Lacy: Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Alnylam: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kumar:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding.

PreVent-ACaLL Short-term combined acalabrutinib and venetoclax treatment of newly diagnosed patients with CLL at high risk of infection and/or early treatment, who do not fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria for treatment. A randomized study with extensive immune phenotyping

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4304-4304
Author(s):  
Caspar Da Cunha-Bang ◽  
Rudy Agius ◽  
Arnon P. Kater ◽  
Mark-David Levin ◽  
Anders Österborg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Severe Infection ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Risk Of Infection ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Educational Grant ◽  
Travel Grant ◽  
Grade 3

Background Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) have an increased risk of infections both prior to and upon treatment. Infections are the major cause of death for these patients, the 5-year incidence of severe infection prior to treatment is approximately 32 % with a 30-day mortality of 10 % (Andersen et al., Haematologica, 2018). Chemoimmunotherapy is still 1st line standard of treatment for patients without del17p or TP53 mutation despite association with neutropenia, immunesuppression and infections. The combination of BTK inhibitors and the bcl-2 inhibitor venetoclax has demonstrated synergy in vitro and in vivo, while translational data indicate that the CLL-related immune dysfunction can be improved on treatment with reduced risk of infections. Employing the Machine-Learning based CLL treatment infection model (CLL-TIM) that we have developed, patients with a high (>65%) risk of infection and/or need of CLL treatment within 2 years of diagnosis can be identified (CLL-TIM.org). The significant morbidity and mortality due to infections in treatment-naïve CLL warrants trials that challenge the dogma of only treating symptomatic CLL. Thus, we initiated the randomized phase 2 PreVent-ACall trial of 12 weeks acalabrutinib + venetoclax to reduce risk of infections. Methods Design and statistics A phase 2, randomized, open label, multi-center clinical trial for newly diagnosed patients with CLL. Based on the CLL-TIM algorithm, patients with high risk of severe infection and/or treatment within 2 years from diagnosis can be identified. Approximately 20% of newly diagnosed CLL patients will fall into this high-risk group. First patient in trial planned for September 2019, primary outcome expected in 2021. Only patients identified as at high risk, who do not currently fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria are eligible. Patients will be randomized between observation in terms of watch&wait according to IWCLL guidelines or treatment. Primary endpoint Grade ≥3-Infection-free survival in the treatment arm compared to the observation arm after 24 weeks (12 weeks after end of treatment). Study treatment Acalabrutinib 100 mg BID from cycle 1 day 1 for 12 weeks. Venetoclax, ramp up during the first five weeks starting cycle 1 day 1, thereafter 400 mg once daily for a total of 12 weeks counted from cycle 1 day 1. Patients A sample size of 25 patients in each arm, 50 patients in total. Major inclusion criteria CLL according to IWCLL criteria ≤1 year prior to randomizationHigh risk of infection and/or progressive treatment within 2 years according to CLL-TIM algorithmIWCLL treatment indication not fulfilledAdequate bone marrow functionCreatinine clearance above 30 mL/min.ECOG performance status 0-2. Major exclusion criteria Prior CLL treatmentRichter's transformationPrevious autoimmune disease treated with immune suppressionMalignancies other than CLL requiring systemic therapies or considered to impact survivalRequirement of therapy with strong CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 inhibitors/inducers or anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonistsHistory of bleeding disorders, current platelet inhibitors / anticoagulant therapyHistory of stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months Trial registry number EUDRACT NUMBER: 2019-000270-29 Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT03868722 Perspectives: As infections is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with CLL prior to any treatment, we aim at changing the natural history of immune dysfunction in CLL. The PreVent-ACaLL trial includes an optional extension into a phase 3 part with the primary outcome of grade ≥3 infection-free, CLL treatment-free survival two years after enrollment to address the unmet need of improved immune function in CLL for the first time. Figure Disclosures Da Cunha-Bang: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Grant; Roche: Other: Travel Grant. Levin:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant ; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant . Österborg:BeiGene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Kancera AB: Research Funding. Niemann:Novo Nordisk Foundation: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel grant; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel grant; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: acalabrutinib and venetoclax in combination for CLL.

Dexamethasone and Individualized Asparaginase Dosing Are Each Associated with Superior Event-Free Survival in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Results From DFCI-ALL Consortium Protocol 00-01.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 321-321 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lynda M. Vrooman ◽  
Donna S. Neuberg ◽  
Kristen E. Stevenson ◽  
Jeffrey G. Supko ◽  
Stephen E. Sallan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Multivariable Analysis ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Induction Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Event Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Abstract 321 BACKGROUND: The DFCI-ALL Consortium Protocol 00-01 aimed to determine the relative efficacy and toxicity of 1) dexamethasone (DEX) vs. prednisone (PRED) and 2) asparaginase (ASP) with individualized dosing (ID) based on pharmacokinetic measurements vs. standard fixed dosing (FD) based on body surface area, in the treatment of children with newly diagnosed acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). PATIENTS and METHODS: Between 2000 and 2004, 492 eligible patients (pts) ages 1-18 years (yrs) with newly diagnosed ALL enrolled on Protocol 00-01 from 10 institutions. 282 pts were standard risk (SR) and 210 high risk (HR). Post-induction treatment for all patients included 30 weeks of intramuscular E. coli ASP (beginning at week 7) and vincristine/corticosteroid pulses every 3 weeks for 24 months. Pts who achieved complete remission (CR) were eligible for two randomized comparisons: 1) Steroids: Pts were randomized to receive either DEX or PRED given as 5-day pulses every 3-weeks, and 2) ASP: Pts were randomized to receive either FD (25,000IU/m2) or ID (starting dose 12,500 IU/m2) for 30 weeks. Nadir serum ASP activity (NSAA) was assessed every 3 weeks, and ASP doses on the ID arm were adjusted to maintain NSAA between 0.10-0.14 IU/mL. NSAA was assayed centrally by a validated biochemical assay. RESULTS: 473 pts (96%) achieved CR. With a median follow-up of 4.9 years, the 5-year event-free survival (EFS) ± standard error for all 492 pts was 80 ± 2% and overall survival (OS) was 91 ± 1%. Steroid randomization: 408/473 pts (86%) participated in the steroid randomization (DEX: 201, PRED: 207). Pts randomized to DEX had 5-yr EFS of 90 ± 2% compared with 81 ± 3% for PRED (p=0.01) [Table I]. For pts 10-18 yrs of age, there was a significant increase in the rate of osteonecrosis (ON) with DEX, with 5-yr cumulative incidence (CI) of 23% compared with 4.7% for PRED (p=0.02). There was no difference in the 5-yr CI of ON based on steroid type in pts 1-10 yrs of age (DEX: 2.6% vs. PRED: 4.3%, p=0.43). Fractures were also more common in pts 10-18 yrs of age randomized to DEX (p=0.06), but not in younger pts (p=0.25). Infection (positive blood culture or radiographic evidence of invasive fungal disease) developed in 38 pts (18.8%) randomized to DEX compared with 22 pts (10.6%) randomized to PRED (p=0.03). There was no difference in remission death rate based on steroid randomization (DEX 0% vs. PRED 2%, p=0.5). ASP randomization: 384/473 pts (81%) participated in the ASP randomization (FD: 195, ID: 189). Pts randomized to ID had superior EFS with 5-yr EFS of 90 ± 2% compared with 82 ± 3% for FD (p=0.04) [Table I]. There was no difference between the two arms in the frequency of ASP-related allergy (p=0.46), pancreatitis (p=0.66) or thrombosis (p=0.77). There was also no difference by treatment arm in the proportion of pts able to complete at least 25 weeks of ASP (FD: 88% vs. ID: 87%, p=0.76). There was no difference between the two arms in the proportion of pts with non-detectable NSAA, although fewer pts on the ID arm had high NSAA (>0.14 IU/mL). On multivariable analysis, both DEX and ID ASP were independent predictors of favorable outcome (hazard ratio 0.49 for DEX, p=0.02; hazard ratio 0.52 for ID, p=0.04), with no indication of an interaction. Only 5/92 (5%) pts randomized to both DEX and ID ASP experienced an event. CONCLUSIONS: DEX was associated with superior EFS, but also more bone and infectious toxicities, especially in older children/adolescents. Future studies should focus on minimizing DEX toxicity in older pediatric pts without compromising efficacy. ID of ASP was feasible and was associated with superior EFS. The improved EFS with ID was not due to a reduction in ASP-related toxicity or improved tolerability, but was associated with a reduction in the proportion of pts with high NSAA. Disclosures: Supko: Enzon Inc.: Research Funding. Sallan:Enzon Inc.: Research Funding; Enzon Inc.: Contributed to support of an investigator meeting.

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

Blood ◽  
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.

Phase I Study of Bortezomib(Bz), Pegylated Doxorubicin(DOX) and Dexamethasone(dex); ( VDD) with Escalating Doses of Cyclophosphamide(Cy) in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 617-617
Author(s):  
Melissa Alsina ◽  
Rachid Baz ◽  
Jose L Ochoa ◽  
Jyotishankar Raychaudhuri ◽  
Kara Kosakowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Stem Cell Mobilization ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Long Term Outcome ◽  
Cell Mobilization ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 617 Background: The VDD treatment regimen has been shown to be highly effective as initial therapy for multiple myeloma. Given the established synergy between bortezomib and alkylating agents, incorporating an alkylator to VDD may increase the depth of response and may improve long term outcome. We report the results from a Phase I trial combining VDD with escalating doses of cyclophosphamide ( CVDD) in patients (Pts) with newly diagnosed myeloma. Methods: Pts received Bz 1.0–1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, 11, DOX 30mg/m2 on day 4, Dex 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12 and Cy 250-750 mg/m2 on day 1, for up to eight 21-day cycles, at four planned dose levels (Cy/Bz: 250/1.0, 500/1.0, 750/1.0, 750/1.3). Dose-escalation proceeded (three-pt cohorts) depending on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity; thrombocytopenia with platelets <10,000/mm3 on >1 occasion despite transfusion support; Grade 4 neutropenia for >5 days and/or resulting in neutropenic fever; inability to receive cycle 2/day 1 dose due to drug-related toxicity). Pts with Grade 2 peripheral neuropathy (PNY) were excluded. Responses were assessed by International Working Group criteria. Pts with at least partial response ( PR) and standard risk cytogenetics could proceed to autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after 6 cycles. Responsive pts with high risk cytogenetics defined as the presence of one of the following at diagnosis; deletion of chromosome 13 by cytogenetics, hypodiploidy, or t (4;14), t(14;16) or deletion of 17 p by FISH, completed 8 cycles of therapy. Results: 26 pts have been enrolled to date: 12 in phase l, and 14 additional pts at the maximum planned dose (MPD). Median age 60 yrs, 62% men, 50% IgG MM, 81% with ISS stage II/III. Pts have received a median of 6 cycles; 17 have completed all 6-8 cycles, 1 has discontinued therapy. No DLTs were observed in the phase I portion of study. Dose reductions in cycle 2 and beyond have occurred in 31% of patients. Toxicities to date have been manageable, including all Grade 3/4 hematological toxicities (4-35%), Grade 3 hand foot syndrome( 15%), Grade 3 pneumonia (8%), Grade 3 UTI (8%), and Grade 3/4 metabolic (19%). There were no grade 3/4 PNY. There was 1 treatment-related mortality secondary to infection. The overall response rate in patients that have completed at least 4 cycles of therapy (ORR; ≥PR) is 90%, including 57% ≥VGPR, and 24% CR. ORR and VGPR rates were similar in patients with standard or high risk cytogenetics. Nine patients have proceeded to transplant and all have had successful stem cell mobilization with G-CSF alone. Conclusions: CVDD produces high quality responses and is well tolerated in newly diagnosed MM pts, regardless of their cytogenetic status or ISS stage. MPD has been reached at CY 750 mg/m2, Bz 1.3 mg/m2, DOX 30 mg/m2, and Dex 20 mg, with phase II enrollment ongoing. Stem cell mobilization has been successful in all pts, with transplant course in pts otherwise unremarkable. Updated efficacy will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Alsina: Millenium: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document