Update On Imatinib-Resistant Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) On Nilotinib Therapy at 24 Months: Clinical Response, Safety, and Long-Term Outcomes.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1129-1129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Francis J. Giles ◽  
Kapil N. Bhalla ◽  
Javier Pinilla-Ibarz ◽  
Richard A. Larson ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1129 Poster Board I-151 Background Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL inhibitor, developed through structure-based drug design, indicated for the treatment of Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) CML patients in CP or accelerated phase (AP) resistant or intolerant to prior therapy including imatinib. Recently, 24-month follow-up data from the pivotal nilotinib 2101 study demonstrated achievement of rapid and durable cytogenetic responses in the majority of patients and an excellent overall survival (OS) rate of 87%. The current update focuses on the major molecular response (BCR-ABL transcript levels ≤ 0.1% according to the international scale; MMR) of patients treated with nilotinib. Methods Imatinib-resistant and -intolerant CML-CP patients (n=321) were treated with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily and followed for at least 24 months. In this report, the efficacy parameters studied were: rate of MMR, rate of major and complete cytogenetic response (MCyR, CCyR), time to and duration of response, time to progression (TTP), and OS. Efficacy parameters were also analyzed based on the presence or absence of a CHR at study entry. Results The median duration of exposure to nilotinib was 18.7 months (< 1.0–36.5), with 62% of patients on therapy for at least 12 months and 42% on therapy for ≥ 24 months. Median dose intensity of nilotinib was 788.5 mg/day, very close to planned dosing. Overall, 58% of patients required dose interruption (defined conservatively ≥ 1 day of interruption regardless of reason) with a median cumulative duration of interruption of 20 days (4% of days of exposure). Importantly, 73% of patients that required treatment interruptions resumed treatment after interruption at the planned dose. The achievement of MMR in imatinib-resistant and -intolerant CML-CP patients who had BCR-ABL transcript levels available post-baseline (n=294) were included in this efficacy analysis (Table). Of these patients, 105/294 (36%) entered the study with a CHR and 189/294 (64%) did not have a CHR at study entry. The overall MMR rate was 28%; MMR was higher in patients with CHR at study entry (38% vs. 22%). Overall, CCyR was achieved in 46% of patients, among whom 56% achieved MMR. Median time to MMR was 5.6 months. Overall, 77% and 84% of responding patients maintained MCyR and CCyR at 24 months, respectively. Overall (n=321), the estimated rate of progression-free survival (PFS), defined as progression to AP/BC or discontinuation due to progression or death, at 24 months was 64%, however, only 9 patients (3%) progressed to AP/BC based on actual laboratory values. PFS rate at 24 months was higher for patients with baseline CHR (77%) compared with patients without CHR at study entry (56%). OS at 24 months is 87% for the entire patient population. The safety profile of nilotinib remains unchanged at 24 months of follow-up. The majority of first episodes of grade 3/4 bilirubin and lipase elevations occurred within the first month of therapy and were brief in duration (median duration 15 days). The incidences of hepatic and pancreatic disorders on nilotinib were 1.3 and 1.7 per 100-patient years of therapy and no cumulative risk of hepatic and pancreatic events was observed in this population with longer follow-up. Importantly, discontinuations due to hepatobiliary adverse events were uncommon (n=2; < 1.0%). Conclusions Nilotinib therapy led to the achievement of MMR in a majority of patients with CCyR, and in 38% of patients with CHR at study entry. Furthermore, the response and outcomes of patients treated with nilotinib was higher in patients with CHR at baseline suggesting that patients with imatinib resistance and intolerance who lost cytogenetic response but not hematologic response have a more favorable response compared to those patients who have lost hematologic response when switched to nilotinib. Overall, the safety profile of nilotinib remains well-tolerated with long-term follow-up. At 24 months, nilotinib therapy remains an effective and tolerable therapy for patients with imatinib-resistant or -intolerant CML. Disclosures Kantarjian: Novartis: Research Funding. Giles:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Clavis: Research Funding. Bhalla:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gattermann:Novartis, Celgene: Honoraria, Participation in Advisory Boards on deferasirox clinical trials, Research Funding. Ottmann:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Radich:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding. Martinelli:Novartis: Research Funding. Kim:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Wyeth: Research Funding. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Gallagher:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Novartis: Employment. Cortes-Franco:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Wyeth: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Baccarani:Novartis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Mayer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3292-3292 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Branford ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Simona Soverini ◽  
Enrico Gottardi ◽  
Lan Beppu ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3292 Poster Board III-1 Background: Nilotinib is a potent and highly selective BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor, approved for the treatment of Philadelphia positive CML patients (pts) in CP or accelerated phase (CML-AP) who are resistant or intolerant to prior therapy including imatinib. A recent analysis demonstrated an association between BCR-ABL transcript levels at 3 months (mos) and response in pts treated with second-line tyrosine kinase inhibitors (Branford et al. Blood. 2008). This multi-center analysis was conducted to examine the association specifically between the initial molecular response to nilotinib with response and outcomes. Methods: CML-CP pts (N = 321) with imatinib resistance or intolerance were included and post-baseline BCR-ABL transcript levels were available for 294 patients. Intolerant pts also exhibited some degree of resistance to imatinib and were not eligible for the study if demonstrating major cytogenetic response (MCyR), the primary study endpoint. We aimed to determine if the initial molecular response to nilotinib could predict the response and outcome of patients with or without BCR-ABL mutations at baseline or those with imatinib resistance or intolerance. BCR-ABL transcript levels at 3 mos were used to perform a landmark analysis to assess the association between the initial molecular response and estimated probability of MCyR, major molecular response (MMR), and event-free survival (EFS) at 24 mos. Events were defined as loss of hematologic or cytogenetic response, progression to AP/BC, discontinuation due to progression or death. The analysis excludes patients who had already attained MCyR (n = 111) or MMR [BCR-ABL% (IS) ≤ 0.1%] (n = 28) or who had an event (n = 22) within the first 3 mos of therapy for each respective landmark analysis. Patients censored within the first 3 mos were also excluded. Patients were then grouped according to their level of BCR-ABL% (IS). Results: BCR-ABL% (IS) at 3 mos correlated with MCyR rates at 24 mos; pts with BCR-ABL% (IS) ≤ 10 had better probability of response compared with pts with BCR-ABL% (IS) > 10 (62% vs 35%, respectively). This difference in MCyR rate was most significant for pts with baseline mutations (60% vs 19%, P = .006) and those with imatinib resistance (63% vs 33%, P = 0.0007). A similar trend was observed for patients without baseline mutations (64% vs 47%) and imatinib intolerance (57% vs 40%). BCR-ABL% (IS) at 3 mos was highly predictive of MMR rates at 24 mos (Table). Pts with BCR-ABL% (IS) values > 0.1 - ≤ 1 had significantly higher probability (65%) of achieving MMR for all patient groups, whereas those with BCR-ABL% (IS) > 10 had estimated rates of 10% or less. The BCR-ABL% (IS) value at 3 mos was also found to correlate with EFS at 24 mos (Table). The estimated EFS rate at 24 mos was highest for pts with BCR-ABL% (IS) values of ≤ 1 at 3 mos for each patient group and ranged from 75% to 100%. Patients with BCR-ABL% (IS) values > 10 at 3 mos had the poorest outcome and the estimated EFS rates ranged from 36% for patients with baseline mutations to 57% for those without baseline mutations. Conclusion: BCR-ABL% (IS) at 3 mos predicts response and long-term outcomes of imatinib-resistant and intolerant pts regardless of baseline mutation status at 24 mos on nilotinib therapy. Rapid reduction of BCR-ABL may be important for optimal response and outcome. Pts whose BCR-ABL % (IS) levels decreased below 10% at 3 mos demonstrated a high probability of achieving MMR and MCyR at 24 mos. Pts who achieve early molecular response may also have an increased probability of improved long-term outcomes on nilotinib therapy, while pts with BCR-ABL% (IS) value > 10 at 3 mos may have poorer prognosis. Disclosures: Branford: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Wyeth: Research Funding. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Woodman:Novartis: Employment. Kantarjian:Novartis: Research Funding. Radich:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4112-4112
Author(s):  
Charline Moulin ◽  
Romain Morizot ◽  
Thomas Remen ◽  
Hélène Augé ◽  
Florian Bouclet ◽  
...  

Introduction: About 2 to 10% of patients (pts) diagnosed with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) develop diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL, so-called Richter transformation (RT)) over long-term follow-up. The outcomes of pts with RT are variable and poorly understood and there is no consensus on the best therapeutic approach. The aim of this study was to analyze the clinical characteristics, outcomes and factors predictive of survival in a large series of RT from the French Innovative Leukemia Organization (FILO). Methods: Biopsy-confirmed RT (limited to DLBCL and excluding Hodgkin lymphoma) diagnosed from 2001 to 2018 were identified from eight FILO centers. Clinical and biological characteristics of CLL and RT at diagnosis, including cytogenetics, clonal relation with the pre-existing CLL, Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) status, cell of origin (COO) analyzed by immunohistochemistry and RT score (Tsimberidou AM et al, J Clin Oncol, 2006) were analyzed as well as treatment and outcomes. Overall survivals (OS) were defined as time from CLL and RT diagnosis to death from any cause and analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Statistical analyses were performed with SAS version 9.4. Results: A total of 70 CLL pts who developed RT were identified. The median age at CLL diagnosis was 62 years old (range 35-82), and 50 (71.4 %) were male. The median time to transformation was 5.5 years (range 0 to 22 years), with 12 simultaneous diagnosis of CLL and RT. Prior to RT, 20 (29%) pts had not been treated for CLL, 50 received one (n=21) or more (n= 29) line of treatment ; 6 pts had received a novel agent (ibrutinib, idelalisib or venetoclax). The median age at RT diagnosis was 68 years old (range 42-88). All biopsies were centrally reviewed; 38/58 pts (66%) had elevated LDH (>1.5N) ; 35/65 pts (54 %) had bulky disease (≥ 5 cm); 10/54 (18.5%) pts had del(17p) or TP53 mutation ; 9/42 pts (21%) had a complex karyotype (at least 3 abnormalities). The CLL and RT were clonally related in 27/27 (100%) tested pts. COO by Hans algorithm was non germinal center B cell-like (GCB) in 26/28 pts (93%). EBV was positive or detected in 5/40 (12.5%) pts. The median of Ki67 positivity was 70% (range 30% to 100%). The RT score (based at RT diagnosis on ECOG performance status 2-4, LDH >1.5 x normal, platelets<100 x 109/L, tumor size >5 cm and >1 prior therapy for CLL) was : low risk in 17 pts (31%), low-intermediate risk in 10 pts (19%), high-intermediate risk in 14 pts (25%) and high risk in 14 pts (25%). The most common first-line treatment of RT was immunochemotherapy (n=57, 87%) including R-CHOP-like regimen (n=48, 73%). Autologous or allogeneic transplantation was performed for 7 pts (11%). Response to first-line treatment was complete or partial response in 26 pts (40%), and stable disease or progression in 39 pts (60%). After a median follow-up of 8 years, 51/64 pts (80%) have died. The main causes of death were progressive DLBCL (n=36, 71%), infection (n=8, 16%) or progressive CLL (n=2, 4%). The median OS of the cohort from CLL and RT diagnosis (Figure 1) were 7.8 years and 9.5 months, respectively. In univariate analysis, patients with TP53 disruption at CLL stage, low platelets count, elevated LDH, elevated beta2-microglobulin, high ECOG score, high RT score, EBV positivity and absence of response to first-line RT treatment had worse OS. The ECOG score, platelets count and TP53 disruption remain significant in multivariate Cox-regression. Last, we compared the clinical and biological parameters of two Richter groups defined as: (i) short-term survivors (<12 months, n = 34) and (ii) long-term survivors (>48 months, n = 18). Long survival was significantly associated with elevated platelets count, low LDH, low ECOG, low RT score and response to RT first-line treatment. Discussion: The clinical outcomes of RT patients is poor and novel treatment options are needed. However, a group of long-term survivors was identified, characterized by elevated platelets count, low LDH, low ECOG, low RT score and response to immunochemotherapy. Disclosures Leblond: Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Thieblemont:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Kyte: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cymbalista:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Sunesis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria. Guièze:Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Broseus:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding. Feugier:gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1589-1589
Author(s):  
Fabian Frontzek ◽  
Marita Ziepert ◽  
Maike Nickelsen ◽  
Bettina Altmann ◽  
Bertram Glass ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1565-1565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Mondello ◽  
Irene Dogliotti ◽  
Jan-Paul Bohn ◽  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Simone Ferrero ◽  
...  

Purpose: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is a highly curable disease even in advanced-stage, with &gt;90% of long-term survivors. Currently, the standard of care is ABVD (doxorubicin, etoposide, vinblastine and dacarbazine), as it is less toxic and as effective as other more intensive chemotherapy regimens. Alternatively, BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone) has been proposed as front-line intensified regimen with a better initial disease control and prolonged time to relapse when compared to ABVD. However, this advantage is associated with higher rates of severe hematologic toxicity, treatment-related deaths, secondary neoplasms and infertility. To date, the debate regarding which regimen should be preferred as first line for advanced-stage HL is still ongoing. To shed some light on this open question we compared efficacy and safety of both regimens in clinical practice. Patients and Methods: From October 2009 to October 2018, patients with HL stage III-IV treated with either ABVD or BEACOPP escalated (BEACOPPesc) were retrospectively assessed in 7 European cancer centers. Results: A total of 372 consecutive patients were included in the study. One-hundred and ten patients were treated with BEACOPPesc and 262 with ABVD. The baseline characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, except for a higher rate of high-risk patients in the BEACOPPesc group in contrast to the ABVD one (47% vs 18%; p= 0.003). Complete response rate (CR) assessed by PET imaging at the end of the second cycle was 67% and 78% for the ABVD and BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.003), respectively. Thirteen patients of the ABVD group achieved stable disease (SD) and 6 had a progression disease (PD). On the other hand, 4 of the patients in the BEACOPPesc group progressed, another 2 interrupted therapy because life-threatening toxicity. At the end of the therapy, CR was 76% in the ABVD group and 85% in the BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.01). A total of 20% patients in the ABVD group and 14% patients in the BEACOPPesc group received consolidation radiotherapy on the mediastinal mass at the dose of 30Gy. After radiotherapy, the number of patients with CR increased to 79% and 87% in the two groups (p= 0.041), respectively. Thirty-nine patients (35%) in the BEACOPPesc group required dose reduction of chemotherapy due to toxicity compared to 12 patients (5%; p= &lt;0.001) in the ABVD group. Overall, the rate of severe toxicities was higher in the BEACOPPesc group in comparison with the ABVD cohort. In particular, there was a significant increased frequency of acute grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (neutropenia 61% vs 24%; anemia 29% vs 4%; thrombocytopenia 29% vs 3%), febrile neutropenia (29% vs 3%), severe infections (18% vs 3%). Myeloid growth factors were administered to 85% and 59% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD group. Blood transfusions were required in 51% and 6% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD cohort. Progression during or shortly after treatment occurred in 5 patients in the BEACOPPesc group (4%) and in 16 patients in the ABVD group (6%; p= 0.62). Among the 96 patients who achieved a CR after BEACOPPesc and radiotherapy, 8 relapsed (8%), compared to 29 of 208 patients in the ABVD group (14%; p= 0.04). At a median follow-up period of 5 years, no statistical difference in progression free survival (PFS; p=0.11) and event-free survival (EFS; p=0.22) was observed between the BEACOPPesc and ABVD cohorts. Similarly, overall survival (OS) did not differ between the two groups (p=0.14). The baseline international prognostic score (IPS &lt;3 vs ≥ 3) significantly influenced the EFS with an advantage for the high-risk group treated with BEACOPPesc (Figure 1A; p=0.03), but not the PFS (Figure 1B; p=0.06) and OS (Figure 1C; p=0.14). During the follow-up period, in the BEACOPPesc group one patient developed myelodysplasia and one acute leukemia. Second solid tumors developed in one patient in the ABVD group (lung cancer) and one in BEACOPPesc group (breast cancer). Conclusion: We confirm that the ABVD regimen is an effective and less toxic therapeutic option for advanced-stage HL. Although BEACOPP results in better initial tumor control especially in high-risk patients, the long-term outcome remains similar between the two regimens. Disclosures Ferrero: EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Martinelli:BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Willenbacher:European Commission: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myelom- und Lymphomselbsthilfe Österreich: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Science: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; IQVIA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; oncotyrol: Employment, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujimoto: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tirol Program: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1130-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald P. Radich ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Enrico Gottardi ◽  
Simona Soverini ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1130 Poster Board I-152 Background Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL inhibitor, with in vitro activity against most BCR-ABL mutants (excluding T315I) indicated for the treatment of patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) CML in CPor AP resistant or -intolerant to prior therapy, including imatinib. In a previous analysis of nilotinib in patients with BCR-ABL mutations, mutations occurring at three specific amino acid residues (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V) were shown to be associated with less favorable response to nilotinib. The current analysis is based on mature data with a minimum follow-up of 24-months for all patients. Outcomes of patients at 24 months were analyzed by mutation type. Methods Imatinib-resistant CML-CP (n = 200) and CML-AP (n = 93) patients were subdivided into the following mutational subsets: no mutation, sensitive mutations (including mutations with unknown in vitro IC50). or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations at baseline. Patients with mutations of unknown in vitro sensitivity were classified as sensitive in this analysis based on a previous finding that patients with these mutations responded similarly to nilotinib as patients with sensitive mutation. Patients with baseline T315I mutations were excluded from this analysis. Patient groups were analyzed for kinetics and durability of cytogenetic and molecular response to nilotinib, as well as event-free survival (EFS), defined as loss of hematologic or cytogenetic response, progression to AP/BC, discontinuation due to disease progression, or death, and overall survival (OS). Results In CML-CP and -AP patients with no mutation, sensitive mutations, or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations, hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular responses are provided in the Table. Overall, patients with no mutations responded similarly to patients with sensitive mutations, whereas patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had less favorable responses. This correlation was observed in both CML-CP and CML-AP patients, respectively. Median time to CCyR was 3.3 months (range, 1.0–26.7) for CML-CP patients with no mutations, and 5.6 months (range, 0.9–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. At 24 months, CCyR was maintained in 74% of CML-CP patients with no mutation and in 84% of patients with sensitive mutations. One patient with CML-CP and an E255K mutation achieved CCyR at 25 months and maintained until last assessment at 30 months. Median time to MMR was similar at 5.6 months (range, 0.9–25.8) for CML-CP patients with no mutations and 5.6 months (range, 2.7–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. No patient with a less sensitive mutation achieved MMR. Median EFS and 24-month estimated OS rate are provided in the Table. Conclusions Imatinib-resistant CML-CP and CML-AP patients treated with nilotinib therapy with BCR-ABL mutations (excluding E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V) achieved rapid and durable cytogenetic responses, and estimated EFS and OS at 24 months similar to that of patients with no mutations, respectively. Patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had lower and less-durable responses and shorter EFS than patients with sensitive mutations. Alternative therapies may be considered for patients with these uncommon mutations (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V). Disclosures Radich: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Branford:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Woodman:Novartis: Employment. Kantarjian:Novartis: Research Funding. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Wyeth: Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3286-3286 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp D. le Coutre ◽  
Anna Turkina ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Bernadeta Ceglarek ◽  
Giuliana Alimena ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3286 Poster Board III-1 Introduction: Nilotinib, a potent and highly selective BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogeneous leukemia (Ph+ CML) in chronic phase (CML-CP) and accelerated phase (CML-AP) who are resistant or intolerant to prior therapy including imatinib. The ENACT study is a Phase IIIb, open-label, multicenter study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of nilotinib in adult pts with imatinib-resistant or intolerant CML in a clinical practice setting outside of a registration program. It is the largest single source of efficacy and safety information of any available tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) in CML, particularly among the elderly. Methods: The present is a sub-analysis of the ENACT study on the efficacy and safety of 400 mg twice daily nilotinib in elderly (aged =60 years) pts initiating treatment in CML-CP who were resistant and/or intolerant to imatinib. Results: Of the 1,422 CML-CP pts enrolled in the ENACT study between January 2006 and October 2008, 452 (32%) were elderly (=60 years) at study initiation and 165 (37%) of these pts were =70 years [10 (2%) were =80 years]. Countries that enrolled =20 elderly pts include France, Italy, USA, Germany, UK, Spain, Canada, and Brazil. At study initiation, elderly pts had longer median durations of CML (<60: 51.1 months; =60: 69.3; =70: 66.6) and higher proportions with CML duration >5 years (<60: 43%; =60: 56%; =70: 52%). Besides imatinib, prior CML treatments received by elderly pts included dasatinib (=60: 20%; =70: 19%), cytarabine (=60: 23%; =70: 19%), busulfan (=60: 10%; =70: 7%), and interferons (=60: 50%; =70: 42%). Elderly pts were previously treated with imatinib for longer median durations (<60: 27.4 months; =60: 32.7; =70: 29.9), with higher proportions treated for >5 years (<60: 12%; =60: 19%; =70: 18%). The proportion of imatinib-intolerant to resistant elderly pts was about 1:1, which was higher than the proportion among <60 pts at about 0.6:1, such that relatively few elderly pts had prior highest imatinib dose >800 mg (<60: 34%; =60: 26%; =70: 21%). While response rates to prior imatinib were similar, among pts who required therapy after failing imatinib, elderly pts had lower cytogenetic response rates (<60: 22%; =60: 17%; =70: 19%) to prior dasatinib. During ENACT, less than 50% of elderly pts experienced nilotinib dose interruptions (=60: 46%; =70: 41%) and reductions (=60: 7%; =70: 6%) lasting >5 days, which was consistent with the overall ENACT dataset. The median duration of dose interruptions and reductions was 15 (=70: also 15) and 41 (=70: 32) days, respectively. The main reason for dose interruptions and reductions was adverse events (AEs). The median duration of nilotinib exposure was 227 days (=70: 219) and the median dose intensity was 749 mg/day (=70: 775). Efficacy was similar among elderly pts, with 39% (=70: 35%) of pts achieving complete hematologic response (CHR), 41% (=70: 39%) achieving major cytogenetic response (MCyR) and 31% (=70: 33%) achieving complete cytogenetic response (CCyR). MCyR rate was also similar among elderly hematologic responders (=60: 64%; =70: 65%). Among elderly pts requiring nilotinib therapy after both imatinib and dasatinib, and therefore have more resistant CML, CHR rate was 39% (=70: 32%), MCyR rate was 28% (=70: 29%) and CCyR rate was 20% (=70: 16%). Safety was likewise similar among elderly pts, with grade 3/4 study drug-related AEs occurring in 56% of pts (=70: 53%). The most frequent of these AEs were thrombocytopenia (=60: 24%; =70: 21%) and neutropenia (=60: 14%; =70: 11%). The most common method of managing these AEs was brief dose interruptions and/or reductions [thrombocytopenia (=60:86/108 pts; =70: 30/35), neutropenia (=60: 42/62 pts; =70: 9/18)]. Among elderly pts with prior dasatinib, 53% (=70: 58%) experienced grade 3/4 study drug-related AEs, while 7 out of 8 pts with pleural effusion on dasatinib no longer had it on nilotinib. Conclusions: In ENACT, pts aged =60 years at study initiation appear to have longer durations of CML, be more heavily pre-treated and more intolerant to imatinib than the younger cohort. Nonetheless, nilotinib induced comparable clinical responses in CML-CP pts regardless of age. Importantly, the safety profile of nilotinib is maintained in elderly pts. Disclosures: le Coutre: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Turkina:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Kim:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Wyeth: Research Funding. Ceglarek:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Shen:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Smith:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Rizzieri:Novartis Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Szczudlo:Novartis: Employment. Berton:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wang:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Wang:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Nicolini:Novartis Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chemgenex: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3697-3697
Author(s):  
Rebecca Elstrom ◽  
Soo Y. Lee ◽  
James B. Bussel

Abstract Abstract 3697 Introduction: Rituximab has been a useful treatment for patients with ITP; many hundreds of patients have been treated. 30–40% of patients will achieve a complete remission (CR: platelet count >150 × 109/l) with initial treatment and, of this group, the CR will last at least a year in almost all patients. However, emerging data suggests that at least 40% of these patients in CR will relapse between 1 and 3 years from initial treatment suggesting that long-term “cures” only occur in 20% of the initial patients. Therefore it would be desirable if CR's could be achieved in more patients and especially if these would be durable in more than 20%. One approach would be to use rituximab maintenance, however it results in suppression of B-cells for more than 2 years. Dexamethasone has also been used to achieve “cure” in ITP especially in adults at or near diagnosis. Cheng's study suggested that approximately 50% of patients would achieve a long-term response with only one 4-day cycle of high dose (40 mg/day) dexamethasone (N Engl J Med, 2003). A follow up study from GIMEMA suggested that 3–4 cycles of dexamethasone would be better than 1 cycle (Blood, 2007). Finally, Zaja's study suggested that rituximab plus one cycle of dexamethasone was superior to dexamethasone alone with a > 50% CR rate at 6 months (Blood, 2010). Therefore, we elected to perform a pilot study to explore the combination of rituximab with three cycles of dexamethasone at 14 day intervals. Methods: Patients with ITP with platelet counts < 30,000 off therapy and in need of treatment were enrolled. The standard dose (4 infusions of 375mg/m2) rituximab was given on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 and dexamethasone 40 mg (adjusted for size) on days 1–4, 15–18, and 29–32. Results: Fourteen patients between the ages of 4 and 53 years with ITP were treated with rituximab and dexamethasone (R&D) (Table 1). All had received previous steroid therapy as well as other treatments. The median platelet count was 40,000 at initiation of rituximab (range 7,000-230,000); several patients with low counts started with dexamethasone prior to initiating Rituximab to sustain their counts during initial treatment. Patients received rituximab weekly for between 2 and 4 doses and dexamethasone for either 2 or 3 courses at intervals between 1 and 8 weeks (median 2 week intervals). A summary of the results is shown in table 2 demonstrating short-lived platelet increases in response to dexamethasone in almost all patients. With short follow up, there were 7 CR's, 3 PR's and 4 NR's. If this was divided by duration of ITP prior to R&D, there were 4 CR's and 1 NR for ≤ 12 months and 3 CR, 3 PR, and 3 NR for > 12 months. More of the children who were treated had chronic disease than did adults explaining their apparently poorer response. Observed toxicities included hyperglycemia, grade 1 and 2 liver function abnormalities, weight gain, and 1 episode of colitis requiring hospitalization. Three patients opted to skip the third cycle of dexamethasone. Conclusion: A regimen of rituximab + 2–3 courses of dexamethasone is active in patients with pretreated ITP with appreciable but usually manageable toxicity. It appears to yield superior results if administered to patients within one year of diagnosis. This combination merits further exploration in a prospective clinical trial. Disclosures: Bussel: Portola: Consultancy; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ligand: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Shionogi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eisai, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cangene: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 111-111
Author(s):  
Wendy T Parker ◽  
Musei Ho ◽  
Hamish S Scott ◽  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Susan Branford

Abstract Abstract 111 Specific imatinib resistant BCR-ABL1 mutations confer clinical resistance to nilotinib (NIL; Y253H, E255K/V, T315I, F359V/C) and/or dasatinib (DAS; V299L, T315I/A, F317L/I/V/C). Therefore, mutation analysis is recommended for CML patients (pts) after imatinib failure to facilitate selection of appropriate therapy. However, around 40% of chronic phase (CP) pts without these NIL/DAS resistant mutations also fail second line inhibitor therapy. For imatinib resistant pts without these mutations at the time of commencing NIL/DAS therapy (switchover) we investigated whether sensitive mutation analysis could identity pts at risk of poor response to subsequent therapy. Switchover samples of 220 imatinib resistant pts (DAS n=131, NIL n=89) were analysed by direct sequencing (detection limit 10–20%) and sensitive, high throughput mass spectrometry (mass spec; Sequenom MassARRAY, detection limit 0.05–0.5%), which detects 31 common BCR-ABL1 mutations (approximately 89% of mutations detected in pts receiving imatinib). We previously demonstrated that mass spec could detect NIL/DAS resistant mutations at switchover in an extra 9% of pts compared to sequencing and that these low level resistant mutations were associated with subsequent failure of these inhibitors (Parker et al, JCO. 2011 In Press). Therefore, for the current analysis, pts with NIL/DAS resistant mutations detected by either method (n=45) were excluded since response is already known to be poor in these cases. In the switchover samples of the remaining 175 pts, 159 mutations were detected in 86 pts by mass spec, but just 108 mutations were detected in 89 pts by sequencing. Thirteen rare mutations detected by sequencing were not included in the mass spec assay design. Mass spec detected all other mutations detected by sequencing, plus an additional 64 low level mutations. Multiple NIL/DAS sensitive mutations (≥2 mutations) were detected at switchover in more of the 175 pts by mass spec (34/175, 19%; 2–9 mutations per pt) than sequencing (16/175, 9%; 2–3 mutations per pt), P=.009. We divided pts into 2 groups; those with multiple mutations detected by mass spec at switchover (n=34) and those with 0/1 mutation (n=141), and investigated the impact of multiple mutations on response to subsequent NIL/DAS therapy. Pts with 0 or 1 mutation, and similarly pts with 2 or >2 mutations, were grouped together, as no difference in response was observed. The median follow up for CP, accelerated phase and blast crisis pts was 17 (2–33), 18 (1–33) and 3 (1–27) mo, and the frequency of multiple mutations was 18%, 24% and 18%, respectively. During follow up, multiple mutations at switchover was associated with lower rates of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR; 21% vs 50%, P=.003, Fig 1A) and major molecular response (MMR; 6% vs 31%, P=.005, Fig 1B), and a higher incidence of acquiring new NIL/DAS resistant mutations detectable by sequencing (56% vs 25%, P=.0009, Fig 1C). At 18 mo, the failure-free survival rate (European LeukemiaNet recommendations) for CP pts with multiple mutations at switchover was 33% compared to 51% for CP pts with 0 or 1 mutation (P=.26, Fig 1D). The number of mutations detected per pt by mass spec at switchover (max of 9, 8 of 86 pts with mutations had ≥4, 9%) far exceeded the number concurrently detected by sequencing (max of 3). This suggests that mass spec detected a pool of subclonal mutants, each with a small survival advantage after imatinib therapy that was insufficient for their clonal predominance. Multiple low level mutations may be a marker of an increased propensity for subsequent selection of resistant mutations, possibly driven by genetic instability, demonstrating the advantage of a sensitive multiplex mutation assay. In conclusion, sensitive mutation analysis identified a poor-risk subgroup with multiple mutations that were not identified by sequencing. This subgroup represented 15.5% of the total cohort (34/220), who would not otherwise be classified as being at risk of poor response on the basis of their mutation status. These pts did not have NIL/DAS resistant mutations at switchover; however, they had a lower incidence of CCyR and MMR, and higher incidence of acquiring new NIL/DAS resistant mutations during NIL/DAS therapy compared to pts with 0 or 1 mutation. This poor-risk subgroup may warrant closer monitoring or experimental approaches to reduce the high risk of kinase inhibitor failure after imatinib resistance. Disclosures: Hughes: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Branford:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 1518-1518
Author(s):  
Hun Ju Lee ◽  
Susan O'Brien ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
Stefan Faderl ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1518 Background: Treatment with TKIs has greatly improved the outcome of patients with Ph+ ALL. However, many patients treated with TKI-based therapy eventually have a relapse. The response to salvage therapy and long-term outcomes of these patients are unknown. Aims: Describe the outcomes of patients with Ph+ ALL with resistance to or relapse after frontline TKI-based chemotherapy. Methods: We analyzed the outcome of patients who were treated in clinical trials at our institution between February 2001 and July 2008 with TKI-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed Ph+ ALL who had refractory or relapsed disease. Results: One hundred thirteen patients were treated with frontline hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and dexamethasone (HCVAD) plus imatinib (HCVAD+I; n=54) or HCVAD plus dasatinib (HCVAD+D; n=59). Of these, 35 (31%) experienced primary resistance (n=1) or relapse (n=34). The median age was 51 years [range (r): 20–85]; 12 patients (34%) were older than 60 years. Median follow-up was 21.1 mo (r: 4.2–56.7). Median white blood cell and platelet counts at diagnosis were 14.4 × 109/L (r: 1.2–292.9) and 48 × 109/L (r: 4–425), respectively. White blood cell count was >30 × 109/L in 13 patients (37%). Median peripheral and bone marrow blast percentages were 53% (r: 0–97%) and 80% (r: 1–98%), respectively. Twenty-two patients (63%) had received HCVAD+I and 13 (37%) HCVAD+D. Twenty-three patients (66%) had experienced first complete remission (CR1) with 1 cycle of induction. Median CR1 duration was 12 mo (r: 1.9–42). Four patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in CR1. ABL kinase domain mutations were investigated in 28 patients (80%) at relapse; 16 (57%) had mutations, including 5 (14%) with T315I (all had received HCVAD+D). Upon relapse, 31 patients received first salvage therapy (S1), 24 with chemotherapy [HCVAD+D, n=8; HCVAD+I, n=3; HCVAD+nilotinib (N), n=1; HCVAD+asparaginase (Asp), n=1; methotrexate, vincristine, Asp, and dexamethasone (MOAD), n=2; others, n=9]; 6 with a TKI only (I, n=2; D, n=1; N, n=1; others, n=2); and 1 with ASCT. Three patients were unfit for treatment. Median cycles of S1 were 2 (r: 1–8). Thirteen patients (42%) had second complete remission (CR2) (HCVAD+D, n=6; HCVAD+I, n=2; HCVAD+N, n=1; HCVAD+Asp, n=1; others, n=3). Median time to CR2 was 1.5 mo (r: 0.7–8.8). Five patients underwent ASCT in CR2. Median CR2 duration was 7.3 mo (r: 1.4–36.2). Complete cytogenetic response was seen in 11 patients (35%); major molecular response (BCR-ABL/ABL ratio <0.05%) in 9 (29%); and complete molecular response in 7 (22%); and complete hematologic response in 15 (48%). Times to complete cytogenetic response and complete molecular response were 1.3 mo (r: 0.7–10.6) and 3 mo (r: 1.5–8.7), respectively. Seven patients had second relapse. Fifteen patients (7 relapse, 8 refractory) received second salvage therapy (S2) with systemic chemotherapy (MOAD, n=2; phase I/single-agent TKI, n=8; others, n=5); 1 patient had solitary central nervous system (CNS) relapse treated with intrathecal cytarabine and methotrexate. CR3 was obtained in 1 patient, the patient with sole CNS relapse. Median disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) after S1 were 6.5 mo (r: 0.5–45) and 7.3 mo (r: 1.4–36.2), respectively. At last follow-up, 2 patients (6%) were alive and 33 had died, 11 (33%) of infectious complications, 5 (15%) of organ failure, 3 (9%) of bleeding complications, 2 (6%) of graft-versus-host disease complications, 2 (6%) of CNS relapse, and 10 (30%) of other or unknown causes. Median OS after S2 was 2.1 mo (r: 1.4–2.6). In univariate analysis, age >60 years was associated with worse OS after S1 [4.2 vs. 12.7 mo; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.8 to 6.7 vs. 7.5 to 17.9 (P=0.006)]. Complete hematologic response was associated with improved OS after S1 [15.4 vs. 4.3 mo; 95% CI 9.1 to 21.8 vs. 2.5 to 6.0 (P<0.001)]. Major molecular response was associated with improved OS after S1 [18.1 vs. 5.7 mo; 95% CI 9.3 to 26.8 vs. 3.6 to 7.8 (P=0.003)]. Choice of prior TKI (HCVAD+I vs. HCVAD+D) did not significantly influence CR and OS after relapse. Conclusion: Patients with refractory or relapsed Ph+ ALL after TKI-based therapy have poor outcome, particularly those who are older or have persistent BCR/ABL transcripts. New agents are needed to improve the outcome in this population. Disclosures: Kantarjian: BMS: Research Funding. Ravandi:Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria. Cortes:Chemgenex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3077-3077
Author(s):  
Sascha Dietrich ◽  
Damien Roos-Weil ◽  
Ariane Boumendil ◽  
Emanuelle Polge ◽  
Jian-Jian Luan ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3077 Blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDC), formerly known as blastic NK cell lymphoma, is a rare hematopoietic malignancy preferentially involving the skin, bone marrow and lymph nodes. The overall prognosis of BPDC is dismal. Most patients show an initial response to acute leukemia-like chemotherapy, but relapses with subsequent drug resistance occur in virtually all patients resulting in a median overall survival of only 9–13 months. However, anecdotal long-term remissions have been reported in young patients who received early myeloablative allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). We therefore performed a retrospective analysis of patients identified in the EBMT registry in order to evaluate the outcome of autologous stem cell transplantation (autoSCT) or alloSCT for BPDC. Eligible were all patients who had been registered with a diagnosis of BPDC or Blastic NK cell lymphoma and had received autologous stem cell transplantation (autoSCT) or alloSCT in 2000–2009. Centres were contacted to provide a written histopathology and immunophenotyping report and information about treatment and follow-up details. Patients who did not have a diagnostic score ≥ 2 as proposed by Garnache-Ottou et al. (BJH 2009) were excluded. RESULTS: Overall, 139 patients could be identified in the database who fulfilled the inclusion criteria (alloSCT 100, autoSCT 39). Of 74 patients for whom the requested additional information could be obtained, central review confirmed the diagnosis of BPDC in 39 patients (34 alloSCT, 5 autoSCT). The 34 patients who had undergone alloSCT had a median age of 41 years (range: 10–70 years), were transplanted from a related (n=11) or unrelated donor (n=23); received peripheral blood stem cells (n=9), bone marrow stem cells (n=19) or cord blood (n=6); and had been treated with a reduced intensity conditioning regimen (RIC, n=9) or myeloablative conditioning (MAC, n=25). Nineteen of 34 patients were transplanted in CR1. After a median follow up time of 28 months (range: 4–77+ months), 11 patients relapsed (median time to relapse: 8 months, range: 2–27 months) of whom 8 died due to disease progression. 9 patients died in the absence of relapse. No relapse occurred later than 27 months after transplant. Median disease free survival (DFS) was 15 months (range: 4–77+ months) and median overall survival (OS) was 22 months (range: 8–77+ months; Figure 1a). However, long-term remissions of up to 77 months after alloSCT could be observed. Patients allografted in CR1 tended to have a superior DFS (p=0.119) and OS (p=0.057; Figure 1b). MAC was associated with a better OS (p=0.001) which was attributable to the significantly higher non-relapse mortality (NRM) rate of patients after RIC (p=0.014), who had been significantly older (age RIC: 56 years, age MAC: 36 years, p=0.0014). The relapse rate was not different in patients after RIC and MAC, respectively. However, there was no survivor after RIC. Median age in the autoSCT group was 47 years (range: 14–62 years). Three of 5 patients were transplanted in CR1 of whom 1 patient relapsed after 8 months, 1 patient experienced treatment related mortality and 1 patient remained in CR for 28 months. The 2 remaining patients had more advanced disease at autoSCT and relapsed 4 and 8 months thereafter. CONCLUSION: AlloSCT is effective in BPDC and might provide curative potential in this otherwise incurable disease, especially when performed in CR1. However, it remains to be shown by prospective studies if the potential benefit of alloSCT in BPDC is largely due to conditioning intensity, or if there is a relevant contribution of graft-versus-leukemia activity. Disclosures: Tilly: Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, Travel/accommodations/meeting expenses; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Speakers Bureau.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document