A Phase II Trial of the Oral mTOR Inhibitor Everolimus (RAD001) in Relapsed or Refractory Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia.

Abstract Abstract 587 Background: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signal transduction pathway controls cell proliferation and survival. Everolimus is an oral agent targeting raptor mTOR (mTORC1). The trial's goal was to determine the anti-tumor activity and safety of single-agent everolimus in patients with relapsed/refractory Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM). Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had measurable disease (IgM monoclonal protein >1000 mg/dL with >10% marrow involvement or nodal masses >2 cm), a platelet count ≥75,000 × 106/L, a neutrophil count ≥1,000 × 106/L, and a creatinine and bilirubin ≤2x laboratory upper limit of normal. Patients received everolimus 10 mg PO daily and were evaluated monthly. Tumor response was assessed after cycles 2 and 6 and then every 3 cycles until progression. Results: 50 pts were treated. The median age was 63 years (range, 43-85). The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) was 70% (95% CI: 55-82%), with a PR of 42% and 28% MR. The median duration of response and median progression-free survival (PFS) has not been reached. The estimated PFS at 6 and 12 months is 75% (95%CI: 64-89%) and 62% (95%CI: 48-80%), respectively. Grade 3 or higher related toxicities were observed in 56% of patients. The most common were hematological toxicities with cytopenias. Pulmonary toxicity occurred in 10% of patients. Dose reductions due to toxicity occurred in 52% of patients. Conclusions: Everolimus has high single-agent activity with an overall response rate of 70% and manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed WM, and offers a potential new therapeutic strategy for this patient group. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Keryx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Treon:Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Witzig:Novartis: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase 1/1b Study of the Efficacy and Safety of the Combination of Panobinostat + Carfilzomib in Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.4081.4081 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 4081-4081 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Jatin J. Shah ◽

Sheeba K. Thomas ◽

Donna M. Weber ◽

Michael Wang ◽

Raymond Alexanian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Elevated Creatinine

Abstract Abstract 4081 Background: Carfilzomib, a novel irreversible proteasome inhibitor (PI), has demonstrated single agent activity in, and was recently FDA approved for relapsed and refractory myeloma. Panobinostat, a potent histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi), has been studied as a single agent and in combination with bortezomib, demonstrating promising response rates and a favorable safety profile in bortezomib-refractory patients. Our hypothesis proposed that the combination of carfilzomib and panobinostat (Car-Pan) would also be highly active, and we therefore aimed to combine these two agents for the first time. We report the initial findings from the phase I dose-escalation and expansion portions of our phase I/II trial of this novel combination regimen. Methods: The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the safety/tolerability of Car-Pan in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Secondary objectives included determination of the overall response rate, time to progression, progression free survival, and time to next therapy. Panobinostat was administered orally on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12 of every 28-day cycle, while carfilzomib was given intravenously over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16. Dose level 1 started carfilzomib at 20 mg/m2 with 15 mg of panobinostat, and escalated from there using a standard 3+3 schema based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. An amendment was later introduced to allow carfilzomib to be given at 20 mg/m2for days 1 and 2 of cycle 1, followed by an increase to the full dose level for that cohort. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the NCI-CTCAE v4, and responses were assessed with the modified International Uniform Response Criteria. Results: To date, 20 patients have been enrolled, 3 of whom are still in their first cycle, leaving 17 evaluable patients who are described herein, who have received a median of 4 cycles (range 1–8). The median age was 62 years (range 46–73), 11/17 (70%) were male, and the median number of prior regimens was 5 (range 2–15). Patients were very heavily pretreated, with 16/17 (94%) having undergone stem cell transplantation, 16/17 (94%) having prior bortezomib, including 8/17 (47%) who were bortezomib-refractory, and 17/17 (100%) having prior lenalidomide, including 12/17 (70%) who were lenalidomide-refractory. Cytogenetic abnormalities were common, including: 4 with del(17p), 4 with t(4;14), 2 with t(11;14), 9 with del(13), of whom 7 had additional mutations. Grade 1–4 AEs regardless of causality occurring in >20% of patients included anemia (14/17), thrombocytopenia (17/17), neutropenia (8/17), diarrhea (9/17), nausea/emesis (7/17), fatigue (10/17), elevated creatinine (8/17), and pneumonia (5/17). Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of causality included anemia (7/17), thrombocytopenia (10/17), neutropenia (6/17), diarrhea (2/17), nausea/emesis (1/17), fatigue (4/17), elevated creatinine (2/17), and pneumonia (4/17). An MTD has not been established, and dosing is ongoing in cohort 4, with Carfilzomib at 45mg/m2and 20 mg of Panobinostat. Of the 17 evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 35% (6/17) who achieved at least a partial response (PR); including 2 with very good PR (VGPR). In addition, one patient had a minor response, and 65% overall achieved stable disease or better. Conclusions: The combination of Carfilzomib + Panobinostat is well tolerated with a manageable side effect profile. Importantly, the combination achieves a promising response rate in a very heavily pre-treated, lenalidomide/bortezomib/high dose melphalan-refractory population, with an overall response (≥PR) rate of 35%. Updated safety and efficacy data for all patients will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Shah: Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: This presentation will include information about panobinostat, which is not yet approved for use in patients with multiple myeloma. Thomas:Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wang:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Orlowski:Onyx: 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.

Download Full-text

Belinostat Induces High Overall Response Rate (ORR) in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Angioimmunoblastic T-Cell Lymphoma (AITL)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-127155 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4050-4050

Author(s):

Ahmed Sawas ◽

Helen Ma ◽

Andrei Shustov ◽

Pamela Hsu ◽

Gajanan Bhat ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Single Agent ◽

T Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response

Background: Angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) is a relatively common subtype of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL) that typically presents with lymphadenopathy, extranodal disease, including rash, and is associated with frequent infections due to immune dysregulation. Patients with AITL generally have a poor prognosis, even with aggressive chemotherapy as responses to standard chemotherapy are often suboptimal. Recent advances in cancer biology suggest that AITL is derived from T-follicular helper cells and is often characterized by gross epigenetic dysregulation. Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have demonstrated significant activity in T-cell neoplasms. The BELIEF trial established an overall response rate of 25% in patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL who were treated with belinostat, with a duration of response of about 1 year, leading to accelerated approval. Herein, we present a subset analysis of the data for patients with AITL. Methods: Patients with histologically confirmed PTCL (N = 129) who experienced failure with or refractory to ≥ 1 prior systemic therapy received belinostat 1,000 mg/m(2) as daily 30-minute infusions on days 1 to 5 every 21 days. Central assessment of response used International Working Group criteria. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR) and progression-free and overall survival (PFS). Results: Of 129 patients, 22 patients had AITL; most had advanced disease (91% stage III/IV; 36% with bone marrow involvement). The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5), and 3 (14%) patients were refractory to their last line of therapy. The ORR for patients with AITL was 46% (10/22; 95%CI: 24 - 68%), with a complete response (CR) in 4 of 22 patients (18%). Of the ten responders, the median time to response of 11.3 weeks (range, 4.7 - 24.4 weeks) in the AITL subgroup. After a median follow up of 21.5 months, the median PFS was 4.2 months (95%CI: 1.5 -13.9) and the median DOR was 13.6 months (95%CI: 1.4 - 29.4) as shown in Figure 1. For all patients with AITL treated with belinostat, the median OS was 9.2 months (95%CI: 6.8 - 21.5). The most common grade 3 to 4 adverse events were asthenia (n=2), fatigue (n=2), anemia (n=2), thrombocytopenia (n=2), neutropenia (n=2), and septic shock (n=2). Conclusions: Single-agent belinostat induced rapid and durable responses in patients with relapsed/refractory AITL. At the end of the study, there were 37% patients with ongoing responses at 2 years. Patients with clinical benefit from belinostat continued treatment until progression of disease. These results support the use of belinostat in relapsed/refractory AITL as a single agent and provide rationale for combination therapies in clinical trials. Disclosures Sawas: Seattle Genetics, Gilead, Daiichi Sanko: Consultancy; Affimed: Research Funding. Shustov:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hsu:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Bhat:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Acosta:Acrotech Biopharma: Employment. Horwitz:Astex: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Trillium: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kura: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Miragen: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kura: Consultancy; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Kura: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Astex: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Aileron: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Infinity/Verastem: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Aileron: Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Kura: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Consultancy; Miragen: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy; Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Innate Pharma: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Research Funding; Affimed: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding. O'Connor:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADCT Therapeutics, Affimed, Agensys, Merck, Seattle Genetics, Spectrum, Trillium, and Verastem Oncology.: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Other: Travel Support, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Twice Weekly Induction with Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (IRd) Combination Followed By Extended IRD Consolidation and Lenalidomide Maintenance in Transplant Eligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM): A Phase 2 Study from the Intergroupe Francophone Du Myelome (IFM 2014-03)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123184 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 3159-3159 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Murielle Roussel ◽

Benjamin Hebraud ◽

Cyrille Hulin ◽

Xavier Leleu ◽

Thierry Facon ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Dose Intensity ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Open Label ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response

Background: triplet combinations comprising a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD) are current standard induction and consolidation regimens in NDMM. The all-oral combination of weekly ixazomib plus lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) has been evaluated by several groups in NDMM and is approved in relapsed-refractory MM. The IFM 2014-01 phase 2 trial previously studied the weekly IRd regimen as induction and extended consolidation followed by single-agent ixazomib maintenance in frontline transplant eligible patients (Moreau et al ASH meeting 2016): IRd was well tolerated and overall response rate was 81%, including 38% very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) at the completion of induction (3 cycles). Responses further increased at each step of the program and 76% of patients (per protocole analysis) achieved ≥VGPR before maintenance with 6% CR and 38% sCR. To stay in line with current RVd regimen, and to increase dose intensity, we examined the efficacy and safety of twice-weekly ixazomib +Rd as induction prior to transplant, followed by weekly IRd consolidation and single-agent lenalidomide maintenance (NCT02897830). Methods: This is a phase II, single-arm, open-label, multicenter study. During induction, patients received three 21-day cycles of twice-weekly oral IRd: ixazomib (3 mg on days 1, 4, 8 and 11), lenalidomide (25 mg daily, days 1-14), and dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 4, 8 and 11) followed by transplant. Patients then received two 28-day cycles of weekly IRd early consolidation followed by 6 additional cycles of IR (no dexamethasone) as late consolidation (ixazomib 4mg on days 1-8 and 15; lenalidomide 25mg daily, days 1-21). Single-agent lenalidomide maintenance was administered for up to 1 year (10 mg daily, days 1-21). The primary endpoint was the stringent complete response (sCR) rate at the completion of consolidation. The secondary endpoints included assessments of overall response rate (ORR) and rates of response categories at each step of the program, progression-free survival (PFS), feasibility and safety. Responses were assessed in accordance with the IMWG uniform criteria. Toxicity was evaluated according to NCI CTCAE, version 4.03. Results Between 07/2016 and 08/2017, 50 patients with NDMM were screened at 10 IFM centers, 46 were enrolled with a median age of 59 years, and 59% were male. The percentages of patients with ISS stage I, II, and III were 41.5%, 41.5%, and 17%, respectively. High-risk cytogenetics, defined as t (4; 14), or del17p (central Lab, H. Avet-Loiseau), was observed in 9% of patients (6.5% FISH failure). As of July 1st 2019 (data cut-off), 10 patients prematurely discontinued therapy. Considering efficacy, 43/46 patients (94%) completed consolidation and 9 achieved sCR (20.9%; 90% CI [11.4 to 33.7]). This result did not meet the minimum efficacy threshold (40%) for the primary efficacy endpoint (p=0.998). Overall, at the completion of consolidation, ORR was 91% including 21% sCR, 30% ≥CR and 58%≥VGPR. Responses at each step of the program are described in the table 1. If we focus on twice-weekly IRd induction, at the completion of 3 cycles, ORR was 74%, including 33% ≥VGPR. The feasibility of the program was good and overall, 39/46 patients (85%) were able to receive maintenance therapy with single-agent lenalidomide. After a median follow-up of 22 months, 7 patients progressed and 3 patients died. Concerning safety: 31 serious treatment emergent AEs were reported in 20 patients (43.5%) comprising infections (8 patients), cardiac disorders (2 patients: ischemic heart disease and aortic valve incompetence), psychiatric, renal and respiratory disorders (2 cases each). No grade 3-4 peripheral neuropathy was described. Conclusions The all-oral Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (IRd) induction/consolidation regimen in the transplant setting is convenient, well tolerated, leading to 21% sCR before maintenance. Twice-weekly IRd induction does not seem superior to weekly IRd induction Results on response rates following maintenance and MRD data will be presented during the meeting. Table Disclosures Roussel: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; takeda: Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; Amgen: Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding. Hebraud:celgene: Other: travel fees, lecture fees; takeda: Other: travel fees, lecture fees. Hulin:Janssen, AbbVie, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Leleu:Oncopeptide: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Carsgen: Honoraria; Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria. Facon:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 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; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Touzeau:celgene: Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; takeda: Other: travel fees, lecture fees. Perrot:jannsen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; takeda: Honoraria. Stoppa:celgene: Other: travel fees, lecture fees; takeda: Other: travel fees. Moreau:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Avet-Loiseau:takeda: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding. Attal:celgene: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; takeda: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ixazomib is indicated in RRMM in association with Rd

Download Full-text

A Multi-Center, Open-Label Phase II Study of Lenalidomide Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Chinese Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma - the MM-021 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.1864.1864 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 1864-1864

Author(s):

Jian Hou ◽

Jie Jin ◽

Zhen Cai ◽

Fangping Chen ◽

Li Yu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Disease Progression ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Chinese Patients ◽

Open Label ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Best Response

Abstract Abstract 1864 Background: Previous studies (i.e. ECOG E4A03) have shown that lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) has a better safety profile compared with lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (RD) in newly diagnosed MM patients. It is hypothesized that Rd may also provide benefits in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The MM-021 trial is the largest study in Chinese patients with RRMM aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of Rd in patients who had progressed or were refractory to previous treatment. Methods: This was a phase II, multi-center, single arm, open-label study, RRMM patients received lenalidomide (25 mg/day on days 1–21) and dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 8, 15 and 22) in 28-day treatment cycles until disease progression. Thromboembolic prophylaxis with aspirin or other anti-thrombotic medication was required. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (partial response [PR] or better) based on the investigator's assessment. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and PK parameters. Results: As of April 23, 2012 (median follow-up of 10.8 months), 199 patients have completed at least 1 cycle, 134 patients have completed at least 6 cycles, and 187 patients were evaluable for efficacy. Median age was 59 years (range 35–81) and 63% were male. The majority of patients (86%) had Durie-Salmon stage III disease and 57% had received ≥4 prior anti-myeloma regimens including bortezomib (64%), thalidomide (69%), or both bortezomib and thalidomide (45%). After median treatment duration of 8 months (range 1–18) or 8 cycles (range 1–19), best overall response rate (≥PR) was 54% (100 patients); including 8% (14 patients) with a best response of complete response (CR). Overall disease control (≥stable disease [SD] or better) was 95%, including 42% (78 patients) with best response of SD. Nine patients (5%) had best response of disease progression. Best overall response rates were consistent across subgroups when analyzed according to baseline renal function (creatinine clearance ≥60 mL/min: 68 patients [54%], 330 to <60 mL/min: 26 patients [52%], <30 mL/min: 6 patients [50%]) and number of prior therapies (64% if ≤2 prior regimens, 50% if >2 prior regimens). Responses were also consistent regardless of prior therapy received; 50%, 52%, and 47% for patients who previously received bortezomib, thalidomide, or both, respectively. Of the 5% (10 patients) presenting with IgD at baseline, 7 patients achieved ≥PR. Median time to first response was 2 months (range 1–12) and median duration of response was 7 months (range 0–16). The median PFS was 8 months (95% CI: 6–9) and the OS rate was 86% at 6 months and 73% at 1 year. Among the 199 patients evaluable for safety, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were anemia (25%), neutropenia (24%), thrombocytopenia (15%), and pneumonia (13%). Only 1 patient experienced febrile neutropenia. AEs led to dose reduction/interruption of lenalidomide in 40% of patients, 41% for dexamethasone; and 6.5% discontinued treatment due to one or more AEs. No patient discontinued due to anemia or neutropenia. Sixty-one patients (31%) died on study and the most common cause of death was disease progression (15 patients, 8%). Conclusions: Based on a median follow-up of nearly 11 months, the Rd regimen achieved a substantial best overall response rate (54%) in heavily pretreated RRMM Chinese patients. Response rates were consistent across subgroups including patients with renal impairment. The combination of Rd regimen was generally well tolerated. Disclosures: Hou: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Xian: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jensen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mei:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Wortman-Vayn:Celgene Corporation: Employment.

Download Full-text

Pomalidomide, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone Is Superior to Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Myeloma: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Phase II Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.303.303 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 303-303 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Rachid Baz ◽

Thomas G. Martin ◽

Melissa Alsina ◽

Kenneth H. Shain ◽

Hearn J. Cho ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Best Response ◽

Randomized Phase Ii ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: Pomalidomide-dexamethasone results in an overall response rate of 33% and median PFS of 4.2 months in patients with prior lenalidomide and bortezomib (Richardson et al. Blood 2014). In this randomized phase II trial, we compared pomalidomide-dexamethasone (arm B) versus the addition of oral weekly cyclophosphamide to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (arm C) in patients with lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma (MM). We have previously reported that the recommended phase II dose of cyclophosphamide with standard-dose pomalidomide + dexamethasone was 400 mg PO D1, 8, 15. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had relapsed and refractory MM after at least 2 prior therapies and were lenalidomide refractory. Patients had a platelet count ≥ 50,000/mm3 and ANC ≥ 1,000/mm3 (patients with ≥50% bone marrow plasmacytosis were allowed if platelet count was ≥ 30,000/mm3and ANC could be supported with GCSF during screening and therapy). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pomalidomide 4 mg PO D1-21 and dexamethasone 40 mg PO D1, 8, 15, 22 (20 mg if older than 75 years) (arm B) with or without oral cyclophosphamide 400 mg PO D1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle (arm C). Patients randomized to arm B were allowed to cross over to arm C in the event of disease progression. Thromboprophylaxis was mandated with aspirin, warfarin, or LMWH. The primary endpoint was overall response rate using IMWG criteria. Secondary endpoints included an evaluation of PFS, OS and safety of the two arms. Results: Between 7/2012 and 3/2014, 36 patients were randomized to arm B and 34 to arm C. Patients characteristics were not different between the 2 arms (table below). The median number of prior therapies was 4 (2-12). All patients were lenalidomide refractory and none received prior pomalidomide. After a median follow up of 15 months, the overall response rate (partial response or better) was 39% and 65% (p=0.03) for arm B and C, respectively. The clinical benefit rate (minimal response or better) was 64% and 79% (p=0.2) for arm B and C, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI 2.3-5.9) for arm B and 9.2 months (95% CI 4.6-16) for arm C (log rank p=0.04). As of July 2014, 28 patients had died (16 arm B, 12 arm C) with median overall survival of 10.5 versus 16.4 months (p=0.08) for arm B and C, respectively. Hematologic grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequent in arm C, although this was not statistically significant (see table). Thirteen patients crossed over and oral weekly cyclophosphamide was added to their tolerated dose of pomalidomide dexamethasone. For those patients, the best response was as follows: 2 PR, 2 MR, and 6 SD, 3 PD. Conclusions: Pomalidomide-dexamethasone in combination with oral weekly cyclophosphamide resulted in a superior response rate and PFS compared to pomalidomide-dexamethasone alone in patients with relapsed and refractory MM. The increased hematologic toxicities, as a result of the addition of oral cyclophosphamide, were manageable. Table Arm B (N=36) Arm C (N=34) P value Age, years, median (range) 63 (50-78) 64 (47-80) 0.7 Male, n (%) 23 (64) 18 (53) 0.3 Number of prior therapies, median (range) 4 (2-12) 4 (2-9) 0.5 Bortezomib refractory, n (%) 28 (78) 24 (71) 0.3 Carfilzomib refractory, n (%) 16 (44) 13 (38) 0.5 Prior high-dose therapy, n (%) 27 (75) 28 (82) 0.6 Prior alkylating agent, n (%) 32 (89) 32 (94) 1 B2-microglobulin, median (range) 3.2 (1.6-10) 3.6 (1.5-13.9) 0.5 Serum creatinine, median (range) 1 (0.5-2.3) 0.9 (0.6-2.1) 0.6 High-risk cytogenetics, n (%) 5 (24) 6 (28) 0.8 Deletion 17p, n (%) 3 (14) 4 (20) 0.8 t(4;14), n (%) 3 (14) 3 (14) 0.9 Trisomy or tetrasomy 1q, n (%) 11 (55) 6 (33) 0.4 Best response (partial response or better), n (%) 14 (39) 22 (65) 0.03 Clinical benefit rate (MR or better), n (%) 23 (64) 27 (79) 0.2 Grade 3/4 neutropenia, n (%) 12 (33) 17 (50) 0.2 Grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia, n (%) 4 (11) 6 (18) 0.5 Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, n (%) 2 (5) 5 (15) 0.2 Grade 3/4 anemia, n (%) 3 (8) 7 (20) 0.2 Grade 3/4 pneumonia, n (%) 4 (11) 3 (9) 1 Grade 3/4 fatigue, n (%) 2 (5) 4 (12) 0.4 Number of serious adverse events 17 20 Disclosures Baz: Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karypharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide cyclophosphamide dexamethasone in relapsed refractory myeloma. Martin:Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Alsina:Triphase: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding. Shain:Onyx / Amgen: Research Funding; Treshold: Research Funding. Chari:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

A Phase Ib/II Study of Ibrutinib in Combination with Obinutuzumab-Gazyva As First-Line Treatment for Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia > 65 Years Old or with Coexisting Conditions

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-118990 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1863-1863

Author(s):

Juliana Velez Lujan ◽

Michael Y. Choi ◽

Chaja Jacobs ◽

Colin McCarthy ◽

Alaina Heinen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Complete Response ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Standard treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is rapidly evolving and gradually has incorporated the combined use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and targeted therapy with small molecules. Single agent Ibrutinib (Ibr), a first-in-class BTK inhibitor, is effective in previously untreated patients including those that are older than 65 or considered unfit to receive chemotherapy-based combinations. The complete response rate in patients receiving single agent Ibr is relatively low (overall response rate of 86% and complete response of 4% based on 2008 iwCLL criteria), though most patients have durable remissions. The combination of Ibr with mAbs like Obinutuzumab-Gazyva (G), a third-generation anti-CD20 mAb, can ameliorate the Ibr-induced lymphocytosis and increase the overall and complete response rates. Accordingly, we initiated an open-label phase Ib/II clinical study of Ibr in combination with G for first-line therapy of previous untreated pts with CLL. The study completed enrollment of 32 previously untreated patients with CLL. Patients received G administered based on FDA dosing recommendations for 6 cycles (28 days/cycle) and Ibr 420mg po (1-3 hours before starting G infusion), and daily for up to 3 years. All patients received prophylactic medications. Patients were assessed for response by 2008 iwCLL criteria two months after completion of G, as the primary efficacy endpoint. The median age of the patients was 65 (range: 46-78) years. 84% of the patients had a CIRS >6, 45% had a Rai stage III-IV and 19% had an ECOG performance ≤2. The median baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 79x103/mm3(range: 1.4-412.4). Patients showed the following FISH/cytogenetic abnormalities: del(13q) in 55%, trisomy 12 in 23% and del(11q) in 19%. Only 2 (6%) of these patients showed del(17p). From the patients with IGVH mutational status available (n=17), 11 (65%) were unmutated (>98% homology). Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1-2 (74%). Six patients (19%) had grade 1-2 G-infusion-related reaction (IRR) and only one patient (3%) showed grade 3 IRR (without the need for G discontinuation). We observed neutropenia (all grades: 52%, grade 3-4: 23%), thrombocytopenia (all grades: 71%, grade 3-4: 19%) and anemia (all grades: 26%). There were no cases of febrile neutropenia. Two patients (6%) had grade 1 bleeding (one patient with asymptomatic lower gastrointestinal bleeding and the second patient with epistaxis) that resolved spontaneously without requirement of blood transfusion or study treatment discontinuation. Two patients (6%) developed pneumonia, one was community-acquired pneumonia requiring inpatient treatment with IV antibiotics; the study treatment was held until resolution of symptoms and re-initiated at full dose. The most frequent non-hematological AEs were diarrhea, transaminitis, hyperbilirubinemia, hyperglycemia, and electrolyte alterations (grade 1-2). Three patients (9%) discontinued Ibr due to atrial fibrillation grade 1 (n=1), rash and headaches grade 2 (n=1), and persistent grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n=1). Twenty-three patients were evaluable for response assessment by 2008 iwCLL criteria (median follow-up of 11 months). 84% of the patients showed a rapid decrease in ALC from baseline during the first cycle of treatment and only four patients (13%) required more than 3 cycles of treatment to achieve an ALC response. The overall response rate was 100%. The majority of pts had a partial response and six of 23 evaluable patients (26%) achieved a complete remission with detectable Minimal Residual Disease in the bone marrow by multiparametric flow cytometry. In summary, Ibr-G combination has been generally well tolerated. AEs have been consistent with the known safety profiles of Ibr and G individually. The patients that discontinued Ibr remain in follow-up without disease progression. 100% of evaluable patients achieved response after 6 months of combination therapy, and 26% of patients met CR criteria. One important finding thus far has been a very low rate of IRR, (19% grade 1-2 and 3% grade 3-4), suggesting that Ibr can strongly mitigate the incidence and severity of G associated IRR. Disclosures Choi: AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Equity Ownership, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.. Kipps:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Castro:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company:: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

D.C.E.P. in Patients with Quad- or Penta-Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-117713 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2021-2021

Author(s):

Scott Goldsmith ◽

Mark A. Fiala ◽

Brandon B. Wang ◽

Mark A. Schroeder ◽

Tanya M. Wildes ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Retrospective Study ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Salvage Regimen ◽

Overall Response

Abstract Introduction: Despite the recent introduction of novel agents for multiple myeloma (MM), the disease remains incurable and invariably progresses through these new therapies. Patients with quad-refractory MM (refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide) and penta-refractory MM (refractory to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody as well) are left with few treatment options and poor prognoses. The chemotherapy regimen of dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DCEP) has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM. We and others employ DCEP as a salvage regimen, however, few outcomes data exist in this heavily pretreated population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to identify all patients who received DCEP for quad- or penta-refractory MM at our institution between 2013 and 2018. Disease response and refractoriness were defined by IMWG criteria. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) defined as PR or better. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR). Results: We identified 31 patients who received DCEP, 8 (26%) for quad-refractory and 23 (74%) for penta-refractory MM (Table 1). Twenty-eight (90%) had at least one autologous stem cell transplant, and one had a prior allogeneic transplant. Sixteen (52%) were female, 27 (87%) were white, and median age at DCEP was 60. Median number of prior treatment regimens was 8. All patients received dexamethasone (40mg/day), cyclophosphamide (400mg/m2/day), etoposide (40mg/m2/day), and cisplatin (10mg/m2/day) on days 1-4 (Lazzarino et al. 2001). Cycles were generally 28 days in length, but doses were delayed in cases of cytopenias or other toxicities. Dose reductions occurred in cases of renal impairment or prolonged cytopenias. Twenty patients (65%) received more than one cycle (range: 1-5). The overall response rate was 35%. One patient achieved CR allowing him to proceed to a second autologous transplant. One patient achieved a VGPR, 9 (29%) a PR. Four of the 8 (50%) quad-refractory patients responded compared to 7 of the 23 (30%) of the penta-refractory patients. Eleven (35%) were primary refractory to DCEP, and two patients died after one cycle prior to response assessment. The overall median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI 1.5-3.8) and median OS was 6.2 months (95% CI 4.4-7.8). For responders, median DOR was 4.2 months (95% CI 3.0-5.4) and median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI 7.2-10.9). Conclusion: Quad- and penta-refractory MM carry a grim prognosis. In our retrospective study, DCEP led to a notable ORR of 35% (95% CI 19%-55%) in this very heavily-treated population, and suggests that it remains a reasonable salvage therapy. Furthermore, it supports prospective study of this regimen, possibly in combination or in comparison with other agents effective in quad- or penta-refractory MM. Disclosures Schroeder: Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: 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, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharma: 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.

Download Full-text

Rituximab and Cyclophosphamide Based Regimens for Treatment of Waldensterom Macroglobulemia, Lessons from Clinical Literature: A Systemic Review

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-138964 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 10-11

Author(s):

Qasim Khurshid ◽

Abdul Jabbar Dar ◽

Muhammad Ali Mirza ◽

Muhaddis Ejaz Ahmad ◽

Sobia Aamir ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Retrospective Study ◽

Partial Response ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Waldenström’S Macroglobulinemia ◽

Overall Response ◽

Major Response ◽

Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia ◽

Waldenstrom’S Macroglobulinemia ◽

Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia

Introduction: Waldenström's macroglobulinemia is a rare low-grade lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma characterized by CD20 expression on malignant cells and produces a monoclonal immunoglobulin M (IgM). Rituximab is a chimeric monoclonal antibody against CD20 antigen and the most widely used therapeutic agents in WM. Rituximab works by adhering to CD20, causes B-cell lysis mainly through antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity. Cyclophosphamide is an alkylating agent binds to DNA. Its cytotoxic effect is mainly due to cross-linking of strands of DNA and RNA, and to inhibition of protein synthesis. Our objective is to analyze and summarize the published literature for the efficacy of regimens containing both rituximab and cyclophosphamide for the treatment of Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM). Methods:We performed a comprehensive literature search on articles following PRISMA guidelines. Beginning with articles published after January 2005, we used databases like PubMed, Embase, Clinicaltrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. A total of 585 articles were identified initially, and after a detailed screening, we finalized 10 studies involving 425 WM patients. Results:The total number of patients were 425. The dose was 375 mg/m2. The complete response (CR) ranged from 3-19%, very good partial response (VGPR) ranged from 4-22%, and the partial response (PR) ranged from 8-82%. The overall response rate (ORR) ranged from 79-95%. Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone (R-CHOP): In a retrospective study by Ioakimidis et al., included 23 WM patients were given R-CHOP. The ORR was 95%, with 69% achieving a major response, 43%, PR, and VGPR OF 9%. In a randomized control trial by Buske et al., N=23, the major response rate was 91%, and PR was 82%. Treon et al. (N=13) observed a major response rate of 27%. (Table 1). Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide and Rituximab (FCR): In a retrospective study by Peinert et al., involving 29 patients receiving the FCR regimen, the ORR was 90%, with 79%, 3%, and 10% of patients achieving PR, CR, and NR, respectively. In a study by Tedeschi et al., involving 40 patients, ORR was 80%, and the major response rate was 80%. Souchet et al., N=82 reported an ORR of 84% and a PR of 46%. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 51.2 months for Tedeschi et al. Dexamethasone, Rituximab and Cyclophosphamide (DRC) In study Paludo et al., (N=50), receiving the DRC regimen, the highest ORR was 87%, PR 64%, and major response was 68%. In a phase II study by Dimopoulos et al., (N=72), the ORR of 82% and PR of 67% was observed. PFS was 24 months in this study. (Table 1) 4.Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, Vincristine, and Prednisone (R-CVP) In study Ioakimidis et al, N=16, the ORR was 87%, the major response rate was 62%, and the PR was 43%. Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, and Prednisone (RCP) Ioakimidis et al., reported 19 patients who were given RCP. The ORR, PR, and the major response rate was 94%, 73%, and 73%, respectively.Lenalidomide, Rituximab, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone (LR-CD) A study by Rosenthal et al., 15 patients were given LR-CD. ORR was 80%, with a major response rate in 80% and PR in 73% of patients. PFS was 38 months. Conclusion: Rituximab and cyclophosphamide, in combination regimens for the treatment of WM showed the overall response rate of 95%. Neutropenia was the dominant side effect reported in these regimens. There is a paucity of phase 3 randomized trials demonstrating a clinical benefit of anyone regimen over another. We recommend future randomized prospective trials better to understand the efficacy and safety profile of regimens containing both rituximab and cyclophosphamide base combinations. Disclosures Anwer: Incyte, Seattle Genetics, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, AbbVie Pharma, Astellas Pharma, Celegene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals.:Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Phase II Trial of Weekly Bortezomib in Combination with Rituximab in Relapsed or Relapsed/Refractory Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.2727.2727 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 2727-2727

Author(s):

Irene M. Ghobrial ◽

Fangxin Hong ◽

Swaminathan Padmanabhan ◽

Ashraf Z. Badros ◽

Meghan Rourke ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Significant Activity ◽

Waldenström’S Macroglobulinemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Minor Response ◽

Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia ◽

Waldenstrom’S Macroglobulinemia ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia

Abstract Abstract 2727 Poster Board II-703 INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to determine activity and safety of weekly bortezomib and rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (WM). METHODS: Patients who had at least one previous therapy were eligible. All patients received bortezomib IV weekly at 1.6 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15, q 28 days x 6 cycles, and rituximab 375 mg/m2 weekly on cycles 1 and 4. Primary endpoint was the percent of patients with at least a minor response. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients were treated. Majority of patients (78%) completed treatment per protocol. At least minimal response (MR) or better was observed in 81% (95% CI: [65,92]) with 2 patients (5%) in complete remission (CR)/near CR, 17 (46%) in partial response (PR), and 11(30%) in MR. The median time to progression was 16.4 months (95% CI, 11.4–21.1). Death occurred in 1 patient due to viral pneumonia. The most common grade 3 and 4 therapy related adverse events included reversible neutropenia in 16%, anemia in 11%, and thrombocytopenia in 14%. Grade-3 peripheral neuropathy occurred in only 2 patients (5%). The median event-free survival (EFS) is 12 months (95% CI, 11–20) with estimated 12 month and 18 month EFS of 49% (95% CI: [31, 67%]) and 38% (95% CI: [20, 56%]). The median overall survival has not been reached. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of weekly bortezomib and rituximab showed significant activity and minimal neurological toxicity in patients with relapsed WM. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Anderson:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Richardson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Keryx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Treon:Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Matous:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cephalon: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Vemurafenib in Patients with Erdheim-Chester Disease (ECD) and Langerhans Cell Histiocytosis (LCH) Harboring BRAFV600 Mutations: A Cohort of the Histology-Independent VE-Basket Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.480.480 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 480-480 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Eli L. Diamond ◽

Vivek Subbiah ◽

Craig Lockhart ◽

Jean-Yves Blay ◽

Jason E. Faris ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Fdg Pet ◽

Research Funding ◽

Adaptive Design ◽

Response Rate ◽

Metabolic Response ◽

Single Agent ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

18F Fdg

Abstract Background: ECD and LCH are rare disorders for which no approved therapies are available. BRAFV600E mutations have been observed in 50% of patients with LCH and in 50-60% of patients with ECD. Here we present data from a planned Week 16 analysis of patients with ECD/LCH who were enrolled in the VE-BASKET study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01524978). Methods: This open-label, Simon 2-stage adaptive-design, phase 2 study included patients with BRAFV600E-mutant ECD and LCH. Patients received vemurafenib (960 mg bid) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed response rate at Week 8; secondary endpoints included best overall response rate, clinical benefit rate, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). For a subset of patients (n=15), metabolic response by 18F-FDG-PET was assessed; five target lesions were selected and their maximal standardized uptake value (SUVmax), normalized for body weight (BW), was compared with background (liver) SUV. Data cut-off was 2 October 2015. Results: 26 patients (22 with ECD and 4 with LCH; median age 61y) were enrolled. Seven patients (27%) had one prior therapy, six (23%) had two prior therapies, four (15%) had ≥3 prior therapies, and nine (35%) had no prior systemic therapy. Six patients were in follow-up at data cut-off; 16 were on treatment. Best overall response (according to RECIST v1.1) in 25 patients with measurable disease at baseline was 60% (95% CI 38.7-78.9%) with complete response (CR) in two patients (8%) and partial response (PR) in 13 patients (52%) (Figure). Responses were seen in patients with ECD (1 CR, 10 PRs) and LCH (1 CR, 3 PRs). After a median treatment exposure of 14.2 months (range 4.2-22.5 months), median OS and PFS have not been reached. All of the 15 patients assessed by 18F-FDG-PET showed a response: 12 patients had a complete metabolic response (normalization of all lesions' SUVmax-BW to background SUV) and three had a partial metabolic response (>50% decrease in sum of baseline SUVmax of all target lesions) (Figure). Overall, safety data were consistent with prior studies of vemurafenib. Arthralgia (n=17; 65%), fatigue (n=15; 58%), rash macropapular (n=14; 54%), alopecia (n=14; 54%), skin papilloma (n=14; 54%), prolonged QT (n=12; 46%), and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (n=12; 46%) were the most common all-grade adverse events (AEs). Seventeen patients had serious AEs, including 10 with squamous cell carcinoma of the skin. Seven patients discontinued vemurafenib due to AEs. Conclusion: These data, which represent the only prospective clinical trial data of BRAF inhibition in histiocytosis to date, reveal that vemurafenib has potent single-agent activity in patients with ECD/LCH. Moreover, vemurafenib treatment had remarkable durability of response in histiocytosis, such that no evidence of resistance has been encountered following a median of 14.2 months of treatment. These results are distinct from vemurafenib use in other solid or hematologic malignancies. Figure Figure. Disclosures Subbiah: Abbvie: Research Funding; Nanocarrier: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Blay:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; MDS: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmamar: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Puzanov:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Immunocore: Consultancy. Wolf:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Clovis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ulaner:GE Healthcare: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Blue Earth Diagnostics: Research Funding; Susan Komen Foundation: Research Funding; Department of Defense: Research Funding; National Institutes of Health: Research Funding; Zevacor: Honoraria. Lacouture:Quintiles: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Foamix: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Berg: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Robson:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment. Makrutzki:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment.

Download Full-text