Bortezomib, Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone (VTD) Versus VTD Plus Cyclophosphamide as Induction Therapy in Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma Patients Eligible for HDT-ASCT: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

Abstract Abstract 2312 Poster Board II-289 Bortezomib (Velcade®) has shown substantial activity and manageable toxicity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) in combination with thalidomide (Thalomid®) and dexamethasone (VTD) in a phase 3 study (Cavo et al, ASH 2008), and with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone (VCD) in a phase 2 study (Knop et al, ASCO 2009). Four-drug combinations may be more effective than 3-drug regimens, but may also be associated with increased toxicity. This randomized, non-comparative, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of VTD and VTD plus cyclophosphamide (VTDC) as induction therapy prior to high-dose therapy plus autologous stem cell transplant (HDT-ASCT). A total of 98 previously untreated MM patients with measurable disease who were candidates for HDT-ASCT were enrolled. Additional eligibility criteria included: age 18–70 years, Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) ≥60%, adequate hematologic, hepatic, and renal function, and no grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (PN)/neuropathic pain. Patients were randomized (1:1), stratified by International Staging System (ISS) disease stage (I / II / III), to receive four 21-day cycles of bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11, thalidomide 100 mg daily, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1–4 and 9–12 (VTD), or VTD plus cyclophosphamide 400 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 8, as induction therapy prior to HDT-ASCT. All patients received antithrombotic prophylaxis. Patients who became ineligible for HDT-ASCT or had a complete response (CR) after induction therapy could receive an additional 4 cycles of treatment. Responses were categorized using modified IMWG Uniform Response Criteria (stringent CR [sCR] were unconfirmed by immunohistochemistry) through blinded review by the principal investigator and medical monitor, using central laboratory M-protein data and local bone marrow data. The primary efficacy endpoint was combined CR rate (sCR + CR + near-CR) following induction therapy. Secondary objectives included combined CR rate post-HDT-ASCT, overall response rate (ORR: ≥partial response) post-induction and post-HDT-ASCT, time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), and safety. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using NCI CTCAE v3.0. Forty nine patients were randomized to each arm; median age was 57 and 58 years in the VTD and VTDC arms, respectively, 53% and 51% of patients were male, 49% and 43% had KPS ≤80%, and 24 / 45 / 31% and 18 / 47 / 35% had ISS stage I / II / III MM. All but 7 patients completed induction; these patients discontinued due to AEs (3 [6%] each arm) and disease progression (1 [2%] VTDC). Four VTDC patients received additional cycles of treatment. One patient (VTDC arm) was not evaluable for response. Response rates following induction are shown in the table. Median CD34+ stem cell yields were 8.16 (VTD; n=48) and 8.13 (VTDC; n=40) x 106/kg. At data cut-off (April 10, 2009), 47 VTD and 35 VTDC patients had undergone HDT-ASCT; response rates post-HDT-ASCT in 38 and 27 evaluable patients are shown in the table. Time-to-event data are not mature (median follow-up: 9.8 months). The 1-year survival rate was estimated to be 94% in each arm. At least one AE was reported in 98% and 96% of patients on the VTD and VTDC arms, with at least one grade ≥3 AE reported in 47% and 59%, respectively. The most common non-hematologic grade 3/4 AEs included fatigue (2% and 8%) and constipation (6% and 2%); analyses of hematology laboratory values indicated grade 3/4 AEs of lymphopenia (39% and 77%), anemia (8% and 18%), neutropenia (14% and 18%), and thrombocytopenia (6% each). PN was reported in 35% (VTD) and 29% (VTDC) of patients, including 8% grade 3 in each arm and 2% grade 4 in the VTD arm. Two patients (1 [2%] each arm) had deep vein thrombosis; one (VTDC arm) was a grade 3 SAE. At least one serious AE (SAE) was reported in 22% (VTD) and 41% (VTDC) of patients, including 6% and 14% with SAEs of infections (MedDRA SOC), and 2% and 14% with musculoskeletal-related pain. In conclusion, both VTD and VTDC are highly active induction regimens, with CR rates and ORRs among the highest reported; the efficacy profiles were similar between the arms, but there were higher rates of toxicity in the VTDC arm compared with the VTD arm. Table. Response rates following induction and post-HDT-ASCT. Post-induction n=49 n=48 Combined CR*, % 51 44 sCR†, % 27 27 ORR, % 100 96 Post-HDT-ASCT n=38 n=27 Combined CR*, % 76 78 sCR, % 39 33 ORR, % 100 100 * sCR + CR + near-CR † unconfirmed Disclosures: Ludwig: Celgene: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; AMGEN: Honoraria; Ortho-Biotech : Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Masszi:Janssen Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shpilberg:Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hajek:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Dmoszynska:Milllennium: Research Funding. Cakana:Janssen Cilag: Employment, Equity Ownership. Enny:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Feng:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. van de Velde:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

A Phase 2 Study of the Safety and Efficacy of INCB050465, a Selective PI3Kδ Inhibitor, in Combination with Ruxolitinib in Patients with Myelofibrosis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-111338 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 353-353 ◽

Cited By ~ 7

Author(s):

Naval G. Daver ◽

Marina Kremyanskaya ◽

Casey O'Connell ◽

Kim-Hien Dao ◽

Stephen T Oh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Percent Change ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Median Percent Change

Abstract Introduction: Despite the demonstrated efficacy of ruxolitinib (Rux) in patients (pts) with myelofibrosis (MF), suboptimal or declining responses to Rux occur, possibly due to persistent PI3K/AKT activation with chronic JAK inhibitor therapy. We evaluated the combination of INCB050465, a potent and highly selective PI3Kδ inhibitor (≥19,000-fold selectivity for PI3Kδ vs other isoforms) and Rux in pts with MF with suboptimal response to chronic Rux monotherapy. Methods: Pts with primary, post-polycythemia vera or post-essential thrombocythemia MF with suboptimal response or loss of response (palpable spleen >10 cm below left subcostal margin [LSM], or splenomegaly 5-10 cm below LSM and presence of 1 symptom score ≥5 or 2 symptom scores ≥3 using the Screening Symptom Form) after ≥6 months of Rux monotherapy (5-25 mg twice daily, stable dose for ≥8 weeks [wks]), and ECOG performance status ≤2 were eligible for this phase 2 study (NCT02718300). All pts in Part 1 (safety run-in) and Part 2 (expansion) received oral INCB050465 once-daily (QD) for 8 wks followed by once-weekly (QW) at the same dose plus Rux (existing stable dose for ≥8 wks). Part 1 assessed up to 3 dose levels of INCB050465 (5, 10, and 20 mg). In Part 2, pts were randomized to treatment groups (TGs) in a 1:1 ratio between two doses of INCB050465 determined in Part 1. Primary endpoints were to identify tolerated INCB050465 dose in combination with Rux (Part 1) and percent change in spleen volume from baseline through wk 12 (Part 2). Results: At data cutoff (May 01, 2018), 10 and 18 pts were enrolled in Parts 1 and 2, respectively. INCB050465 doses of 10 mg (TG10, n=3) followed by 20 mg (TG20, n=7) were explored in Part 1. No DLTs were observed, thus the 5 mg dose was not assessed, and the 10 mg (TG10, n=11) and 20 mg (TG20, n=7) doses were expanded in Part 2. In Part 1 (n=10) (median age, 69 years [60-79]; males, 60%), median spleen volume (cm3) was 3058 (996-5324) at baseline. Five pts (50%) discontinued treatment due to progressive disease (n=1, TG10), physician decision (n=1; TG20), adverse event (AE; n=1; TG20, blood bilirubin increased), consent withdrawal (n=1; TG10), and decision to proceed to transplant (n=1; TG10). Median percent change in spleen volume was +4.3% and -2.0% at wks 12 and 24, respectively (Figure). By wk 16, 40% of pts reported that their MF-related symptoms were much improved on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) form. In Part 2 (n=18) (median age, 63.5 years [41-89]; males, 38.9%), median spleen volume (cm3) was 2201 (327-3569) and median total symptom score (TSS; by the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Symptom Assessment Form [MPN-SAF]) was 30 (3-61) at baseline. One pt in TG20 discontinued treatment due to physician decision. Median percent change in spleen volume was -0.3% and -5.2% at wks 12 and 24, respectively (Figure). By wk 16, 33.3% of pts reported that their MF-related symptoms were much or very much improved on the PGIC. Median percent change in TSS by the MPN-SAF was -21.9% and -27.8% at wks 12 and 24, respectively. MPN-SAF TSS was a planned longitudinal endpoint only for Part 2 and updated data for Part 2 pts will be presented. In both Parts 1 and 2, nonhematologic treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) occurring in ≥3 pts were primarily grade (Gr) 1/2 (Table). Most common new or worsening Gr 3/4 hematologic AEs were thrombocytopenia (Gr 3: 4 pts [14.3%]; Gr 4: 4 pts [14.3%]) and neutropenia (Gr 3: 2 pts [7.1%]; both pts had Gr 2 neutropenia at baseline). No serious TEAEs of interest were reported. TEAEs led to INCB050465 dose interruption in 11 pts (thrombocytopenia [n=8 events], pyrexia [n=2 events], and abdominal pain, diarrhea, alanine aminotransferase increased, and aspartate aminotransferase increased [n=1 event each]), and to Rux dose interruption in 3 pts (pyrexia [n=2 events] and thrombocytopenia [n=1 event]). Conclusion: The add-on strategy of INCB050465 plus Rux demonstrated preliminary efficacy in MF pts with suboptimal spleen and/or symptom response to chronic Rux monotherapy. The dosing regimen (QD for 8 wks followed by QW) of INCB050465 in this study seemed to mitigate AEs observed with other PI3K inhibitors (limited Gr 3/4 TEAEs and no TEAEs of colitis or rash reported). Long term dosing strategies will be explored in Part 3 of the study, and additional trials are underway to identify optimal dosing of INCB050465 for enhanced safety and efficacy in combination with other agents. Disclosures Daver: Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; ImmunoGen: Consultancy; ARIAD: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Kiromic: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Kremyanskaya:Incyte: Research Funding. O'Connell:Incyte: Research Funding. Dao:Incyte: Consultancy. Oh:Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Gerds:Celgene: Consultancy; Apexx Oncology: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy. Verstovsek:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhou:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Assad:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yacoub:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Study of Zanubrutinib (BGB-3111) in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Marginal Zone Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122629 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 5256-5256 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stephen Opat ◽

Robert Marcus ◽

Craig A. Portell ◽

William Reed ◽

Chris Tankersley ◽

...

Keyword(s):

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Marginal Zone ◽

Marginal Zone Lymphoma ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Background: Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) plays a critical role in B-cell receptor signaling, which mediates B-cell proliferation, migration, and adhesion. Inhibition of BTK has emerged as a strategy for targeting B-cell malignancies including marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). Zanubrutinib (BGB-3111) is an investigational, next-generation BTK inhibitor that was designed to maximize BTK occupancy and minimize off-target inhibition of TEC- and EGFR-family kinases. Increased specificity may minimize toxicities reported with ibrutinib potentially due to off-target inhibition such as diarrhea, thrombocytopenia, bleeding, atrial fibrillation, rash, and fatigue (Coutre et al. Blood Advances 2019). In non-clinical studies, zanubrutinib has been shown to be highly potent, selective, bioavailable, and irreversible, with potentially advantageous pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties. Complete and sustained BTK occupancy has been observed with zanubrutinib treatment in both peripheral blood mononuclear cells and in lymph nodes (Tam et al. Blood 2019). Based on drug-drug interaction studies and population PK analyses (internal data), zanubrutinib may be co-administered with strong or moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors at a reduced dose, proton pump inhibitors, vitamin K antagonists, as well as direct oral anticoagulants. Zanubrutinib does not prolong the QT interval. Pooled clinical data from 6 zanubrutinib monotherapy trials including 682 patients with either non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Waldenström macroglobulinemia, or chronic lymphocytic leukemia suggests that zanubrutinib has been generally well tolerated amongst patients with B-cell malignancies (Tam et al. EHA 2019). This data further showed that some toxicities often associated with BTK inhibitors were infrequent with zanubrutinib, including 1.9% atrial fibrillation/flutter (0.6% grade ≥3), 2.5% major hemorrhage (2.1% grade ≥3), 10.9% fatigue (0.7% grade ≥3), 18.0% rash (0.1% grade ≥3), 18.3% thrombocytopenia (6.6% grade ≥3), and 19.4% diarrhea (0.9% grade ≥3). Early clinical data from a phase 1 study demonstrated responses in 7 of 9 patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MZL treated with zanubrutinib (Tam et al. ASH 2017); the remaining 2 patients had stable disease indicating an encouraging rate of overall disease control. Study Design and Methods: This ongoing global phase 2, single-arm, open-label study (MAGNOLIA; NCT03846427) is examining zanubrutinib monotherapy in patients with R/R MZL who have received 1 or more prior lines of systemic therapy (Figure). Eligible patients must have histologically confirmed diagnosis of MZL including splenic, nodal, and extranodal subtypes, have received prior anti-CD20 antibody therapy, and have measurable disease. Patients must have documented clinical need for therapy as well as adequate marrow and organ function. Patients are treated with oral zanubrutinib at 160 mg twice daily until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The primary efficacy endpoint is ORR according to the Lugano Classification (Cheson et al. J Clin Oncol. 2014) measured by computed tomography and bone marrow assessment data as determined by an independent review committee (IRC). A 2-sided Clopper-Pearson 95% CI for ORR will be calculated. Key secondary endpoints include ORR by investigator assessment, time to and duration of response, time to treatment discontinuation, progression-free survival (all determined by IRC and investigator assessments), overall survival, safety, and patient-reported outcomes. All patients are tested for the MYD88 mutation at study entry. Recruitment is ongoing. Disclosures Opat: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, 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: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Beigene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Epizyme: Research Funding; CSL: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Marcus:Gilead: Consultancy; Roche: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Roche-Genentech: Honoraria. Portell:Xencor: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Reed:BeiGene: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Tankersley:BeiGene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:BeiGene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trotman:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; BeiGene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Zanubrutinib is an investigational agent and has not yet been approved in the US

Download Full-text

Lyra: A Phase 2 Study of Daratumumab (Dara) Plus Cyclophosphamide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (Cybord) in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed Patients (Pts) with Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-152 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 152-152 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Habte Yimer ◽

Jason Melear ◽

Edward Faber ◽

William Bensinger ◽

John M Burke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Split Dose ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Line Of Therapy

Abstract Background: Dara, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, is approved in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) for the treatment of newly diagnosed (ND) MM. CyBorD is another commonly used immunomodulatory drug-sparing regimen for MM. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of dara-CyBorD and administered the first dara infusion as a split dose over 2 days in pts with NDMM or relapsed MM (RMM) after 1 prior line of therapy. Methods: This is an ongoing, multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study conducted at US community oncology centers in pts aged ≥18 years with documented MM per IMWG criteria; measurable disease; ECOG performance score (PS) of 0-2; and ≤1 prior line of therapy. Pts received 4-8 cycles (C) of dara-CyBorD (oral cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22; subcutaneous bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8, and 15; and oral or IV dexamethasone 40 mg weekly) every 28 days. Dara was administered at 8 mg/kg IV in 500 ml on Days 1 and 2 of C1, 16 mg/kg weekly from C1D8 through C2, 16 mg/kg every 2 weeks (q2w) for C3-6, and 16 mg/kg q4w for C7-8. After induction, pts could undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). All pts receive 12 cycles of maintenance dara 16 mg/kg IV q4w. The primary endpoint was the proportion of pts achieving very good partial response or better (VGPR+) after 4 induction cycles using a computer algorithm based upon IMWG response criteria. Results: A total of 101 (87 ND, 14 RMM) pts were enrolled; 100 (86 ND, 14 RMM) pts received at least 1 dose of study treatment. Median age was 63 years (63 ND, 68 RMM); most pts were white (81%), male (64%), had ECOG PS 0-1 (94%), and had IgG (57%) or IgA (17%) MM; 35% of pts had high-risk cytogenetics defined as del(17p), t(4:14), or t(14;16). Eighty-two ND pts completed at least 4 induction cycles, 55 at least 6 cycles, and 26 the maximum of 8 cycles; 28 ND pts underwent ASCT by the data cutoff date. After 4 induction cycles, 44% of ND pts achieved VGPR+ (5% CR) with an overall response rate (ORR) of 79%. The VGPR+ rate (57%), CR rate (14%), and ORR (71%) were similar in RMM pts. At the end of induction (median 6 cycles), the VGPR+ rate, CR rate, and ORR in ND pts were 56%, 9%, and 81%, respectively. With a median follow up of 7.9 months, median PFS and OS were not reached; the 12-month PFS and OS rates were 87% and 99%, respectively, in ND pts. All 100 evaluable pts experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (AE). AEs with incidence ≥20% included fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, cough, insomnia, vomiting, constipation, upper respiratory tract infection, dyspnea, headache, and back pain. Grade ≥3 AEs were reported for 56% of pts; the most common (≥10%) was neutropenia. Serious AEs (SAEs) occurred in 21% of pts; the most common (≥2%) were atrial fibrillation, bacteremia, pulmonary embolism, and mental status changes. AEs led to permanent treatment discontinuation in 3% of pts. Infusion reactions (IRs) occurred in 54% of pts, including 49% at C1D1 and 4% at C1D2; 2 Grade 3 IRs (hypertension, anaphylactic reaction) occurred at C1D1; no Grade ≥4 IRs occurred. The most common (≥5%) IRs were chills, cough, dyspnea, nausea, pruritus, and flushing. Median infusion time was 4.5 hours for C1D1, 3.8 hours for C1D2, and 3.5 hours for subsequent doses. Conclusion: Dara-CyBorD was active and well tolerated in pts with ND and RMM, including pts with high-risk cytogenetics. ORR, VGPR+, and CR rates improved with cycles 5-8 of induction, indicating that longer therapy with dara results in deeper response. Preliminary PFS and OS data in ND pts in the first year are comparable to dara-VMP. The safety profile was consistent with that previously reported for dara, with no new safety signals observed. Split first daratumumab dosing was feasible, reduced Day 1 infusion time, and resulted in a similar IR rate as previously described for single-dose administration. These findings indicate that dara-CyBorD, using a split-dose first infusion, can be safely administered in the community setting and may be an effective treatment option for pts with MM. www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02951819 Figure 1. Kaplan-Meier estimate of progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Disclosures Yimer: AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Puma Biotechnology: Equity Ownership; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Equity Ownership; Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Melear:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Faber:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cardinal Health: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bensinger:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; amgen: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Burke:Gilead: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Tempus Labs: Consultancy. Narang:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Stevens:Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gunawardena:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lutska:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Qi:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ukropec:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Employment. Qi:Janssen Research & Development, LLC: Employment. Lin:Janssen/ Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Amgen: Consultancy; McKesson: Equity Ownership; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; EMD Serono: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Randomized Phase 2 Study of Subcutaneous Daratumumab Plus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone Versus Carfilzomib/Dexamethasone Alone in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Who Have Been Previously Treated with Intravenous Daratumumab to Evaluate Retreatment (LYNX)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123486 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1831-1831

Author(s):

Nizar Bahlis ◽

Jeffrey A. Zonder ◽

Susan Wroblewski ◽

Ming Qi ◽

Thomas Renaud ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Standard Of Care ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Randomized Phase 2

Background: Daratumumab is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38 with a direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanism of action. The intravenous (IV) formulation of daratumumab is approved in many countries for use as monotherapy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), and in combination with standard-of-care regimens in RRMM and patients with NDMM who are transplant ineligible. A subcutaneous (SC) formulation of daratumumab is currently under investigation in several ongoing studies. In the phase 3 COLUMBA study, daratumumab SC was shown to be non-inferior to daratumumab IV, demonstrating similar efficacy and pharmacokinetics, with a significantly decreased rate of infusion-related reactions and reduced administration time. The randomized phase 2 LYNX (MMY2065) study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of retreatment with subcutaneous daratumumab in patients with RRMM who were previously exposed to daratumumab IV therapy. Study Design and Methods: In this ongoing, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 2 study, approximately 230 patients with prior exposure to daratumumab will be randomized 1:1 to receive daratumumab plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone (D-Kd) or carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd) alone. Patients must have received 1 to 2 prior lines of therapy (at least one of which included daratumumab IV) with the daratumumab-based therapy completed ≥3 months prior to randomization. Eligible patients must have achieved a partial response or better (as defined by International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG] criteria) to daratumumab-based therapy, with a duration of response of ≥4 months. Patients must not have discontinued daratumumab due to a daratumumab-related adverse event or received prior treatment with carfilzomib. All patients will receive 20 mg/m2 carfilzomib IV on Day 1 of Cycle 1, escalated to 70 mg/m2 on Days 8 and 15; carfilzomib 70 mg/m2 will be administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle thereafter. Dexamethasone 40 mg will be administered (IV or PO) QW for Cycles 1-9 and then on Days 1, 8, and 15 from Cycle 10 onwards. Patients in the D-Kd group will also receive daratumumab SC (1,800 mg co-formulated with recombinant human hyaluronidase PH20 [rHuPH20; 2,000 U/mL; ENHANZE® drug delivery technology, Halozyme, Inc.]) QW in Cycles 1-2, Q2W in Cycles 3-6, and Q4W thereafter. The primary endpoint is the rate of patients achieving a very good partial response or better. Secondary endpoints include overall response rate, rate of patients achieving complete response or better, progression-free survival, overall survival, overall MRD-negativity rate, time to next treatment, pharmacokinetics, and safety. The ClinicalTrials.gov identifier is NCT03871829. Disclosures Bahlis: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Zonder:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alnylam: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wroblewski:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Qi:Janssen: Employment. Renaud:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jackson:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: This presentation/paper includes information/discussion of a subcutaneous formulation of daratumumab, which is currently under investigation in several clinical trials, but has not yet been approved. The intravenous formulation of daratumumab is approved as monotherapy and in combination with standard-of-care regimens for the treatment of MM.

Download Full-text

A Phase I Trial of Janus Kinase (JAK) Inhibition with INCB039110 in Acute Graft-Versus-Host Disease (aGVHD)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.390.390 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 390-390 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Mark A. Schroeder ◽

H. Jean Khoury ◽

Madan Jagasia ◽

Haris Ali ◽

Gary J. Schiller ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Janus Kinase ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Daily Dose ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Steroid Refractory

Abstract Background: Corticosteroids are considered standard first-line systemic therapy for patients with aGVHD, but this approach is effective in only approximately half of all cases. For patients who progress or do not respond to corticosteroids, no specific agent has been identified as standard, and regimens are typically selected based on investigator experience and patient co-morbidities. In preclinical models, JAK inhibition has been shown to impair production of cytokines as well as the differentiation and trafficking of T cells implicated in the pathogenesis of aGVHD. Retrospective studies have suggested that JAK1/JAK2 inhibition with ruxolitinib treatment provides clinical benefit in patients with steroid-refractory GVHD (Zeiser et al, Leukemia 2015;29:2062-2068). Herein, we report preliminary safety results from a prospective randomized, parallel-cohort, open-label phase 1 trial evaluating the potent and selective JAK 1 inhibitor INCB039110 in patients with aGVHD. Methods: Male or female patients 18 years or older who underwent their first allo-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) from any donor source and developed grades IIB-IVD aGVHD were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either a 200 or 300 mg oral daily dose of INCB039110 in combination with corticosteroids, and were stratified based on prior treatment status (treatment-naive [TN] versus steroid-refractory [SR]). The primary endpoint of the study was safety and tolerability; secondary endpoints included overall response rate at Days 14, 28, 56, and 100, non-relapse mortality, and pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluations. Patients were assessed through Day 28 for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and response. A Bayesian approach was used for continuous monitoring of DLTs from Days 1-28. Treatment continued until GVHD progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. Acute GVHD was graded according to MN-CIBMTR criteria; adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCICTCAE v 4.03. Results: Between January and June 2016, 31 patients (TN, n=14; SR, n= 17) were randomized. As of July 25, 2016, data were available from 30 patients who received an oral daily dose of 200 mg (n=14) or 300 mg (n=16) INCB039110 in combination with 2 mg/kg methylprednisolone (or equivalent dose of prednisone). The median durations of treatment were 60.8 days and 56.5 days for patients receiving a daily dose of 200 mg and 300 mg INCB039110, respectively. One DLT of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia was reported. The most frequently reported AEs included thrombocytopenia/platelet count decrease (26.7%), diarrhea (23.3%), peripheral edema (20%), fatigue (16.7%), and hyperglycemia (16.7%). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 77% of patients and with similar frequency across dose groups and included cytomegalovirus infections (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), and sepsis (n=3). Five patients had AEs leading to a fatal outcome, including multi-organ failure (n=2), sepsis (n=1), disease progression (n=1), and bibasilar atelectasis, cardiopulmonary arrest, and respiratory distress (n=1); none of the fatal events was attributed to INCB039110. Efficacy and PK evaluations are ongoing and will be updated at the time of presentation. Conclusion: The oral, selective JAK1 inhibitor INCB039110 can be given safely to steroid-naive or steroid-refractory aGVHD patients. The safety profile was generally consistent in both dose groups. Biomarker evaluation, PK, and cellular phenotyping studies are ongoing. The recommended phase 2 dose will be selected and reported based on PK studies and final safety data. Disclosures Schroeder: Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Khoury:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Arbushites:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delaite:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yan:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rhein:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Perales:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. DiPersio:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Daratumumab (DARA) Maintenance Therapy Improves Depth of Response and Results in Durable Progression-Free Survival (PFS) Following Dara Plus Cyclophosphamide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (CyBorD) Induction Therapy in Multiple Myeloma (MM): Update of the Lyra Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-122497 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 863-863 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Robert M. Rifkin ◽

Jason M. Melear ◽

Edward Faber ◽

William I. Bensinger ◽

John M Burke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Safety Profile ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Depth Of Response ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Background: DARA, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody targeting CD38, is approved in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (VMP) and bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) for newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) and relapsed MM (RMM), respectively. CyBorD is a commonly used immunomodulatory drug-sparing regimen for MM. In the LYRA (NCT02951819) study, DARA plus CyBorD (DARA-CyBorD) demonstrated efficacy and a tolerable safety profile at the end of induction. Here, we present updated findings examining the effect of monthly DARA maintenance on the efficacy and safety of DARA-CyBorD in NDMM and RMM. Methods: LYRA is an ongoing, single-arm, open-label, phase 2 study conducted at US community oncology centers. Patients (pts) were aged ≥18 years with documented MM per IMWG criteria, an ECOG performance score (PS) of 0-2, and ≤1 prior line of therapy. Pts received 4-8 induction cycles of DARA-CyBorD (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 PO on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22; bortezomib 1.5 mg/m2 SC on Days 1, 8, and 15; and dexamethasone 40 mg PO or IV weekly [qw]) every 28 days. DARA was given at 8 mg/kg IV on Days 1 and 2 of C1, 16 mg/kg qw from C1D8 through C2, 16 mg/kg q2w for C3-6, and 16 mg/kg q4w for C7-8. After induction, eligible pts could undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). All pts received up to 12 maintenance cycles with DARA 16 mg/kg IV q4w. Results: A total of 101 (87 NDMM, 14 RMM) pts were enrolled; 100 (86 NDMM, 14 RMM) pts received ≥1 treatment dose. Median age was 63 years; most pts were white (81%), male (64%), had ECOG PS 0-1 (94%) and had IgG (57%) MM; 36% of pts had high cytogenetic risk, defined as a del(17p), t(4:14) or t(14;16) abnormality. NDMM and RMM pts received a median of 6 and 8 cycles, respectively, of induction therapy. Thirty-nine NDMM pts and 1 RMM pt underwent ASCT. Fifty percent of pts received plerixafor; median stem cell yield for NDMM pts was 6.2 x 106 (range 2-15 x 106) CD34+ cells/kg. A total of 85 (75 NDMM, 10 RMM) pts received ≥1 dose of maintenance treatment; 63 (56 NDMM, 7 RMM) pts have received all 12 maintenance cycles. In NDMM pts, ORR was 87%, with 64% ≥VGPR and 12% ≥CR, by the end of induction. By the end of maintenance, ORR, ≥VGPR and ≥CR rates were 97%, 82% and 51% in NDMM pts who underwent ASCT and 83%, 70% and 30% in NDMM pts who did not receive ASCT. In RMM pts, ORR, ≥VGPR and ≥CR rates were 79%, 71% and 29% by the end of induction and 86%, 71% and 64% by the end of maintenance. At a median follow up of 24.8 mo in NDMM pts and 26.6 mo in RMM pts, median duration of response was not reached (NR). Median PFS (Figure) was NR in NDMM pts, regardless of transplant status, and was 21.7 mo in RMM pts; median OS was NR in NDMM pts and was 30.1 mo in RMM pts. In NDMM pts the 24-mo PFS rate was 89% in pts who underwent ASCT and 72% in pts who did not receive ASCT. The 24-mo OS rate was 90% for NDMM pts. In RMM pts, the 24-mo PFS and OS rates were 48% and 64%, respectively. All treated pts had ≥1 TEAE. Common TEAEs (≥25%) included fatigue, nausea, cough, diarrhea, upper respiratory tract infection, back pain, vomiting, insomnia, dyspnea, constipation, and headache. Grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported in 62% of pts; the most common (≥10%) was neutropenia (14%). Serious TEAEs occurred in 33% of pts; the most common (>2%) were pneumonia, atrial fibrillation and pulmonary embolism. TEAEs led to permanent treatment discontinuation in 7% of pts, with 2% related to treatment. TEAEs resulted in death in 2 pts (nephrotic syndrome, sudden death); both unrelated to treatment. Infusion reactions (IRs) occurred in 56% of pts including grades 1-2 in 52% of pts, grade 3 in 3% of pts and grade 4 in 1% of pts. Most common (>5%) IRs were chills, cough, dyspnea, nausea, pruritus, flushing and nasal congestion. Conclusion: Maintenance with DARA monotherapy for 12 mo increased the >CR rate in NDMM and RMM pts, consistent with observations in prior studies that longer DARA treatment improves depth of response. Importantly, the increase in ≥CR rate was associated with durable PFS and OS. The 24-mo PFS rates in NDMM and RMM pts compare favorably with results for DARA-VMP and DARA-Vd in NDMM and RRMM, respectively. Safety profile was consistent with previous reports of DARA, with no new safety concerns observed with longer follow-up. These data indicate that DARA-CyBorD is a safe, effective MM treatment and that DARA maintenance increases depth of response and achieves durable remissions. Disclosures Rifkin: Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Melear:Texas Oncology: Employment; DARA: Speakers Bureau. Faber:Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bensinger:Amgen, Celgene: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda, Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Karyopharm: Other: Grant. Burke:Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Stevens:Astellas: Consultancy. Gunawardena:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lutska:Janssen: Employment. Qi:Janssen: Employment. Ukropec:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Qi:Janssen: Employment. Lin:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yimer:Amgen: Consultancy; Clovis Oncology: Equity Ownership; Puma Biotechnology: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

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

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3866.3866 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3866-3866 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽

Igor W. Blau ◽

Paolo Corradini ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Johannes Drach ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Bortezomib Treatment ◽

Best Response ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

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

Download Full-text

Phase II Study of the Pan-Deacetylase Inhibitor Panobinostat in Combination with Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Bortezomib-Refractory Multiple Myeloma (PANORAMA 2)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.814.814 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 814-814 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Melissa Alsina ◽

Donna M. Weber ◽

Steven E. Coutre ◽

Sagar Lonial ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Treatment Phase ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Stage 1

Abstract Abstract 814FN2 Background: Patients with refractory multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and an extremely poor prognosis. A recent study of patients who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD, thalidomide or lenalidomide) demonstrated a median event-free survival of only 5 months (Kumar S et al, Leukemia, 2011). Panobinostat is an oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that increases acetylation of proteins involved in multiple oncogenic pathways. Preclinical studies have demonstrated synergistic anti-myeloma activity of the combination of panobinostat and bortezomib through dual inhibition of the aggresome and proteasome pathways. In a phase I study (B2207) of patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM treated with panobinostat + bortezomib, clinical responses (≥ minimal response [MR]) were observed in 65% of patients, including in patients with bortezomib-refractory disease. PANORAMA 2 seeks to expand upon these preliminary results and seeks to determine whether panobinostat can sensitize resistant patients to a bortezomib-containing therapeutic regimen. Methods: PANORAMA 2 is a single arm, phase II study of panobinostat + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. Patients with relapsed and bortezomib-refractory MM (≥ 2 prior lines of therapy including an IMiD and who had progressed on or within 60 days of the last bortezomib-based therapy) are treated in 2 phases. Treatment phase 1 consists of 8 three-week cycles of oral panobinostat (20 mg days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12) + intravenous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) + oral dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). Patients demonstrating clinical benefit (≥ stable disease) can proceed to treatment phase 2, consisting of 4 six-week cycles of panobinostat (20 mg TIW 2 weeks on 1 week off, and repeat) + bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 22, 29) + dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). The primary endpoint is overall response (≥ partial response [PR]), as defined by the European Group of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 1998 criteria, in the first 8 cycles of treatment phase 1. A Simon 2-stage design is used to test the primary endpoint where ≥ 4 responses (≥ PR) in 24 patients are needed in stage 1 in order to proceed to stage 2, where ≥ 9 responses in all patients (N = 47) are required to reject the null hypothesis (overall response rate ≤ 10%). Results: A sufficient number of responses ≥ PR were observed in stage 1 to allow for enrollment to continue to stage 2. As of 15 July 2011, 53 patients with bortezomib-refractory MM were enrolled. Safety and demographic data were available for 48 patients. The median age was 61 (41–88) years. Patients were heavily pretreated, with a median of 4 (2–14) prior regimens, and most patients (69%) received prior autologous stem cell transplant. Efficacy data were available for 44 patients. At the time of this analysis, 9 patients achieved ≥ PR (2 near CR [nCR] and 7 PR) as best overall response, and an additional 7 patients achieved an MR. Responders exhibited a long duration on therapy, and, to date, 8 patients have proceeded to treatment phase 2. The 2 patients with nCR have received ≥ 10 cycles of treatment (duration of therapy 190 and 253 days). Four patients who achieved PR have received ≥ 9 cycles (duration of therapy 155–225 days). Updated response data will be presented. Common adverse events (AEs) of any grade included, fatigue (52%), diarrhea (41%), thrombocytopenia (38%), nausea (38%), and anemia (21%). Gastrointestinal AEs were generally mild, with a relatively low incidence of grade 3/4 events. Grade 3/4 AEs were generally hematologic in nature, with grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia reported in 38%, 12%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Other common nonhematologic grade 3/4 AEs included fatigue (10%) and pneumonia (10%). Of note, to date, a relatively low rate of peripheral neuropathy (17%) has been observed. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy has been observed. Conclusions: The combination of panobinostat and bortezomib is a promising treatment for patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. These data, along with forthcoming data from the phase III study of panobinostat/placebo + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM (PANORAMA 1), will further define the potential role of panobinostat in the treatment of patients with MM. Disclosures: Richardson: Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alsina:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Ortho Biotech: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding. Weber:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Warsi:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ondovik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mukhopadhyay:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Snodgrass:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Pomalidomide (POM) with Low-Dose Dexamethasone (LoDEX) in Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Outcomes Based on Prior Treatment Exposure

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.4070.4070 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 4070-4070 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ravi Vij ◽

Craig C. Hofmeister ◽

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

David S. Siegel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Low Dose ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Prior Exposure ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Duration Of Response ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 4070 Background: There are currently limited effective treatment options for patients (pts) with RRMM with prior exposure to lenalidomide (LEN), bortezomib (BORT) and chemotherapy. In a multicenter, randomized phase 2 study, POM with or without LoDEX (n=221) was active in RRMM pts who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT (Richardson PG, et al. Blood 2011;118:abs 634); activity was also observed in those with disease refractory to LEN, BORT, or both (Vij R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:abs 8016). Here we characterize outcomes in the POM+LoDEX group (n=113) according to the prior treatment exposure. Methods: Pts with RRMM who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT, and had progressive disease (PD) within 60 days of their last treatment were randomized (1:1 ratio) to POM+LoDEX (POM, 4 mg/day for days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle; LoDex, 40 mg/week) or POM alone. At randomization, pts were stratified by age, prior number of treatments, and prior thalidomide exposure. At progression, pts receiving POM alone could receive POM+LoDEX at investigator's discretion. All pts received thromboprophylaxis (daily low-dose aspirin). The endpoints in this study were progression-free survival (PFS), response rates (using European Bone Marrow Transplantation [EBMT] criteria), duration of response, time to response, overall survival (OS), and safety. Response data according to prior therapy were assessed by investigator assessment. Results: All 113 pts assigned to POM+LoDEX had prior exposure to LEN (100%), BORT (100%), and steroids (100%). Most pts had also received prior alkylator therapy (93%), stem cell transplant (SCT) (73%), and thalidomide (THAL) (68%); 49% had received prior anthracyclines. Regimens immediately prior to study entry included BORT (50%), LEN (39%), cyclophosphamide (13%), THAL (8%), vorinostat (8%), carfilzomib (5%), and melphalan (5%). The median number of exposures to LEN and BORT in prior lines was once (range 1–4) and twice (range 1–6), respectively. The majority of pts (80%) had received >3 prior therapies. The overall response rate (ORR) was 48% and 30% in pts who had received ≤3 and >3 prior therapies, respectively. Of the pts who had ≤3 vs > 3 prior therapies, 9% vs 1% pts achieved complete response (CR), 39% vs 29% pts achieved partial response (PR), 9% vs 12% pts achieved minimal response (MR) and 44% vs 36 % pts achieved stable disease (SD), respectively. ORR was 34% and appeared similar regardless of prior exposure to alkylators (33%), anthracyclines (35%), SCT (35%), or THAL (35%). Median duration of response was also similar in pts who had received prior alkylators (8.4 mos), anthracyclines (10.1 mos), SCT (7.7 mos), and THAL (7.7 mos). Of the 69 pts who had a best response of SD or PD to their last prior antimyeloma therapy, 21 pts (12 SD and 9 PD) achieved a PR and 3 pts (1 SD and 2 PD) achieved a CR with POM+LoDEX treatment. Responding pts had longer time to progression (TTP; 11.1 mos) with POM+LoDex compared with the TTP (4.4 mos) observed with their last antimyeloma regimen prior to study. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the POM+LoDEX group were neutropenia (41%), anemia (22%), pneumonia (22%), thrombocytopenia (19%), and fatigue (14%). The incidence of at least 1 grade 3–4 adverse event was 100% in pts with ≤ 3 prior therapies, and 88% in pts with >3 therapies. Conclusions: The combination of POM+LoDEX has demonstrated an ORR of 34% in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM who have been previously exposed to LEN, BORT, steroids, and other treatments. Early treatment of POM+LoDEX (≤3 prior therapies) achieved better ORR (48%) compared with pts who received POM+LoDex later (>3 prior therapies; ORR, 30%). Disclosures: Vij: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide is an investigational drug and is not approved for the treatment of patients with any condition. Hofmeister:Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria. Richardson:Celgene, Millennium, Johnson & Johnson: Advisory Board Other. Jagannath:Onyx Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Onyx: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharma: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Baz:Celgene, Millennium, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Acetylon, Oncopep: Scientific Founder, Scientific Founder Other; Celgene, Millennium, BMS, Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Safety, Efficacy, and Survival Findings From Comfort-II, a Phase 3 Study Comparing Ruxolitinib with Best Available Therapy (BAT) for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis (MF)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.801.801 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 801-801 ◽

Cited By ~ 21

Author(s):

Francisco Cervantes ◽

Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽

Dietger Niederwieser ◽

Andres Sirulnik ◽

Viktoriya Stalbovskaya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Extension Phase ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 801 Background: Ruxolitinib is a potent JAK1 & 2 inhibitor that has demonstrated superiority over traditional therapies for the treatment of MF. In the two phase 3 COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life. COMFORT-II is a randomized, open-label study evaluating ruxolitinib versus BAT in patients (pts) with MF. The primary and key secondary endpoints were both met: the proportion of pts achieving a response (defined as a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume) at wk 48 (ruxolitinib, 28.5%; BAT, 0%; P < .0001) and 24 (31.9% and 0%; P < .0001), respectively. The present analyses update the efficacy and safety findings of COMFORT-II (median follow-up, 112 wk). Methods: In COMFORT-II, 219 pts with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF and splenomegaly were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib (15 or 20 mg bid, based on baseline platelet count [100-200 × 109/L or > 200 × 109/L, respectively]) or BAT. Efficacy results are based on an intention-to-treat analysis; a loss of spleen response was defined as a > 25% increase in spleen volume over on-study nadir that is no longer a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median follow-up was 112 wk (ruxolitinib, 113; BAT, 108), and the median duration of exposure 83.3 wk (ruxolitinib, 111.4 [randomized and extension phases]; BAT, 45.1 [randomized treatment only]). Because the core study has completed, all pts have either entered the extension phase or discontinued from the study. The primary reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs; ruxolitinib, 11.6%; BAT, 6.8%), consent withdrawal (4.1% and 12.3%), and disease progression (2.7% and 5.5%). Overall, 72.6% of pts (106/146) in the ruxolitinib arm and 61.6% (45/73) in the BAT arm entered the extension phase to receive ruxolitinib, and 55.5% (81/146) of those originally randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment at the time of this analysis. The primary reasons for discontinuation from the extension phase were progressive disease (8.2%), AEs (2.1%), and other (4.1%). Overall, 70 pts (48.3%) treated with ruxolitinib achieved a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at any time during the study, and 97.1% of pts (132/136) with postbaseline assessments experienced a clinical benefit with some degree of reduction in spleen volume. Spleen reductions of ≥ 35% were sustained with continued ruxolitinib therapy (median duration not yet reached); the probabilities of maintaining the spleen response at wk 48 and 84 are 75% (95% CI, 61%-84%) and 58% (95% CI, 35%-76%), respectively (Figure). Since the last report (median 61.1 wk), an additional 9 and 12 deaths were reported in the ruxolitinib and BAT arms, respectively, resulting in a total of 20 (14%) and 16 (22%) deaths overall. Although there was no inferential statistical testing at this unplanned analysis, pts randomized to ruxolitinib showed longer survival than those randomized to BAT (HR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27–1.00). As expected, given the mechanism of action of ruxolitinib as a JAK1 & 2 inhibitor, the most common new or worsened grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities during randomized treatment were anemia (ruxolitinib, 40.4%; BAT, 23.3%), lymphopenia (22.6%; 31.5%), and thrombocytopenia (9.6%; 9.6%). In the ruxolitinib arm, mean hemoglobin levels decreased over the first 12 wk of treatment and then recovered to levels similar to BAT from wk 24 onward; there was no difference in the mean monthly red blood cell transfusion rate among the ruxolitinib and BAT groups (0.834 vs 0.956 units, respectively). Nonhematologic AEs were primarily grade 1/2. Including the extension phase, there were no new nonhematologic AEs in the ruxolitinib group that were not observed previously (in ≥ 10% of pts), and only 1 pt had a new grade 3/4 AE (epistaxis). Conclusion: In COMFORT-II, ruxolitinib provided rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly; this analysis demonstrates that these reductions are sustained over 2 years of treatment in the majority of pts. Ruxolitinib-treated pts showed longer survival than those receiving BAT, consistent with the survival advantage observed in previous (Verstovsek et al. NEJM. 2012) and current analyses of COMFORT-I, as well as with the comparison of pts of the phase 1/2 study with matched historical controls (Verstovsek et al. Blood. 2012). Disclosures: Cervantes: Sanofi-Aventis: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Pfizer: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: AdvisoryBoard Other, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Niederwieser:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stalbovskaya:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. McQuity:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hunter:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte: Employment, stock options Other. Passamonti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barbui:Novartis: Honoraria. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knoops:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Harrison:Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text