Final Analysis of Induction Treatment with Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide Plus Rituximab (FCR) Followed by Fludarabine Plus Rituximab (FR) and Remission Maintenance Therapy with Rituximab In Previously Untreated B-Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (B-CLL): The Chairos AGMT CLL4/Roche ML18434 Study

Abstract Abstract 1380 Introduction: Intensification of treatment in CLL, specifically with FCR, has yielded impressive remission rates across almost all risk groups, with the exception of disease with del17p. However, despite initial remission patients relapsed with a median PFS time of 51.8 months in the CLL8 German randomized FCR trial, making remission maintenance an interesting concept. Study design: Three cycles of FCR, used initially to break potential resistance, were followed by 3 cycles of FR, with the intent to limit toxicities. Maintenance treatment was rituximab 375mg/m2 in 3 monthly intervals for 2 years. Here we report final results from this phase II study in previously untreated patients with CLL. Primary objective was the analysis of CR rates, according to NCI-WG criteria. An interim analysis of the induction phase of the study had been presented at ASH 2007. Results: We present 43 patients as intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The median age was 60 years (36 to 81), Rai stages III and IV were present in 21%, median β2-MG levels were 3.35 mg/L and 60% had at least one high risk factor out of mutation state, CD38 or FISH. Median follow up is currently 32 months. All ITT patients are evaluable for toxicity and 33 patients are evaluable for response after induction. 10 patients failed to reach the staging after the end of induction: 4 for septicemia/neutropenia, 1 for rituximab intolerance, 2 for hemolysis and 3 due to unrelated adverse events. The currently presented response assessment includes stringent use of CT scan results and is thus corrected from the 2007 interim results, obtained using clinical staging only. The response rates at the end of induction treatment were 27% CR, 36% CRi, 6% CRu, 21% PR and 9% SD. The previously reported high rate of CRi with incomplete marrow recovery argues that following FCR by FR did not improve tolerability. Nevertheless 81% of ITT patients were able to receive 6 cycles of therapy. Overall response and toxicity results are comparable with previously presented large datasets on FCR. A completely novel experience, however, is presented regarding the rituximab maintenance phase. Of the 43 ITT patients, 31 (72%) received at least one dose of maintenance treatment (the maintenance population). Regarding the maintenance population 74% finished all 8 cycles. Reasons to stop maintenance were: infections in 13% (all of them grade 1 and 2, although one patient died from herpetic encephalitis, 4 months after maintenance treatment had been stopped for a grade 2 infection), leucopenia 3%, progressive disease in 3 % and patient wish in 6%. Surprisingly, only a maximal 10% drop in serum IgG or IgM levels was observed during 2 years of maintenance. Regarding response assessment 5/31 (16%) patients receiving maintenance treatment improved their responses and 7/7 patients in CRi after induction resolved their cytopenias during maintenance treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) in the ITT population was 78% after 36 months and was not significantly influenced by age >60, mutation state, β2-MG > 3,5 mg/L, creatinine clearance <60ml/min or permitted comorbidities. However, positive DAT and best response to therapy as well as an early drop in measured MRD levels predicted PFS. Two patients with del17p had expected inferior PFS, while none of the 5 patients with del11q has relapsed yet. Considering only the maintenance population, the PFS at 36 months was 77% and an overall best response of CR/CRu during maintenance led to a PFS of 91% after 36 months. Conclusion: Induction with an FCR like-induction protocol followed by rituximab maintenance proved feasible. However, 28% of the ITT population did not start maintenance treatment and 18% (ITT) could not finish the maintenance treatment, although no severe toxicities were responsible for the latter. One toxic death was observed, which is in the range reported for FCR without maintenance. Noteworthy, we did not find an influence of mutation state or β2-MG on PFS as has been previously reported, making it interesting to speculate that maintenance may be able to overcome such risk factors at least in mid-term, while keeping in mind the limited size of our sample. We currently run a multi-national randomized trial comparing rituximab maintenance with observation after R-containing induction in 1st and 2nd line that may be able to more definitely answer these questions (NCT01118234). Disclosures: Egle: Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Rituximab maintenance therapy in CLL. Petzer:Roche: Honoraria. Fridrik:Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Greil:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Prognostic Impact of the MRD Status After Induction Treatment with Rituximab Plus Fludarabine, Cyclophosphamide and Mitoxantrone (R-FCM) in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Receiving Rituximab Maintenance Therapy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.3930.3930 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 3930-3930

Author(s):

Pau Abrisqueta ◽

Neus Villamor ◽

María José Terol ◽

Eva González-Barca ◽

Marcos González ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Clinical Response ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Maintenance Treatment ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

Prognostic Impact ◽

Rituximab Maintenance ◽

The Impact

Abstract Abstract 3930 Chemoimmunotherapy combination regimens achieve high rates of negative minimal residual disease responses in CLL, which has been correlated with prolonged PFS and OS. In the present study, we addressed the prognostic value of MRD levels obtained after rituximab, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and mitoxantrone (R-FCM) induction treatment in the response duration of patients with CLL included in the GELLC-1 trial and receiving maintenance rituximab treatment (Bosch et al. J Clin Oncol 27:4578–4584, 2009). Patients achieving CR or PR after R-FCM induction received rituximab maintenance consisting of rituximab 375 mg/m2 every three months for two years (up to 8 cycles). MRD was evaluated by four-color flow cytometry assays giving a sensitivity < 10−4 in paired peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM) samples three months after R-FCM induction therapy, every 6 months during rituximab maintenance, and at the final restaging 3 months after conclusion of treatment. Sixty-seven patients (median age 60 years, 70% male) received a median of 8 cycles of rituximab maintenance (range, 1 to 8), 76% of them completing the entire planned treatment. After R-FCM induction, MRD was considered negative in 45/59 patients (76%) in PB and in 35/63 patients (55%) in BM. Of note, these patients with negative MRD in PB had longer PFS in comparison to those with detectable MRD (at 4 years, 88%, [95%IC 98%-78%] vs 27%, [95%IC 51%-3%] respectively; p<0.01) (Figure 1). MRD negativity in BM showed a trend for a prolonged PFS (p=0.056). When MRD levels in BM after R-FCM induction where categorized, we observed that PFS was similar between the MRD negative (<10−4; n=35) and intermediate (>10−4 to <10−2; n=20) subgroups, whereas it was significantly shorter in patients showing high (>10−2, n=8) MRD levels (PFS at 4 years, 84%, 74%, and 25%, respectively, p<0.01). MRD levels after RFCM induction were compared between PB and BM paired samples. Whereas 12/57 patients (21%) that were MRD negative in PB resulted positive in BM, all patients with negative MRD in BM also had negative MRD in PB. Patients with discrepancies (negative in PB but positive in BM) in their MRD status presented a similar PFS than those with negative MRD in BM (4 year PFS, 85% vs. 90%, P=NS). The impact of MRD levels in PB achieved after R-FCM induction on PFS was also analyzed. MRD status proved to be a superior predictor for PFS than clinical response (Figure 2). In addition, when different prognostic variables (lymphocyte doubling time [LDT, cutoff 12 months], ZAP-70, serum ß2microglobulin and LDH, cytogenetic abnormalities, and MRD levels) were analyzed as predictors for PFS, only MRD status in PB along with LDT remained significantly predictive. After rituximab maintenance, 40.6% of patients achieved a MRD-negative CR, 40.6% a MRD+ CR, 5% a PR, and 14% failed to treatment. Median time to conversion from negative to positive MRD was 45.4 months, significantly longer than that observed in patients treated with FCM only (45.4 vs. 16.4 months; p=0.011) (Bosch et al. Clin Can Res 14:155–161,2008). Moreover, 3 patients that achieved MRD negative in PB but remained MRD positive in BM after the initial R-FCM treatment, became MRD-negative in BM upon rituximab maintenance. Patients that remained MRD negative in PB at the end of rituximab maintenance treatment had an excellent outcome with a PFS of 93% at 4 years in comparison to 68% in patients with MRD positive status (p=0.016). In conclusion, in patients receiving rituximab maintenance MRD levels obtained after R-FCM induction correlated with PFS duration, this correlation being independent of the clinical response attained. The sensitivity of the detection of MRD in these patients was higher in BM than in PB. Finally, maintenance treatment with rituximab seems to prolong the PFS of patients with MRD positive status, minimizing the negative impact of low levels of MRD after induction therapy. Figure 1. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Rituximab is currently not approved as maintenance therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Bosch:Hoffman La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

The JPJDF has Synergistic Effect with Fluoropyrimidine in the Maintenance Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Recent Patents on Anti-Cancer Drug Discovery ◽

10.2174/1574892815666200717141205 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 (3) ◽

pp. 257-269

Author(s):

Xiaoling Fu ◽

Yanbo Zhang ◽

Lisheng Chang ◽

Dengcheng Hui ◽

Ru Jia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Colorectal Cancer ◽

Synergistic Effect ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽

Maintenance Treatment ◽

Advanced Colorectal Cancer ◽

Treated Group ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

Chemotherapeutic Regimen ◽

Significant Difference

Background: Maintenance chemotherapeutic regimen with low toxicity is needed for metastatic colorectal cancer. A recent patent has been issued on the spleen-strengthening and detoxification prescription (JPJDF), a traditional Chinese herbal medicinal formula with anti-angiogenesis effect. The clinical effect of JPJDF on the maintenance treatment of advanced colorectal cancer has not been evaluated. Objective: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of JPJDF in combination with fluoropyrimidine compared to fluoropyrimidine alone as maintenance therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Methods: We applied a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, single center clinical study design. A total of 137 patients with advanced colorectal cancer were recruited. Patients received either Fluoropyrimidine (Flu-treated group, n = 68), or Fluoropyrimidine plus JPJDF (Flu-F-treated group, n = 69) as maintenance treatment after 6-cycle of FOLFOX4 or FOLFORI induction treatment. The primary endpoints were Progression-Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were safety, Performance Status (PS) score and other symptoms. Results: The endpoint of disease progression was observed in 91.7% of patients. The PFS was 5.0 months and 3.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. The OS was 15.0 months and 9.0 months in the Flu-F-treated and Flu-treated groups, respectively. Some common symptoms, such as hypodynamia, anepithymia, dizziness and tinnitus and shortness of breath, were improved in the Flu-F-treated group. There was no significant difference in the common adverse reactions between the two groups. Conclusion: JPJDF and fluoropyrimidine have synergistic effect in the maintenance treatment of mCRC.

Download Full-text

Open-Labeled, Multicenter Phase II Study of Bortezomib for Maintenance Therapy in Patients with High Risk Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): Borma Trial from Consortium for Improving Survival of Lymphoma (CISL)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-132192 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 2884-2884

Author(s):

Jae-Cheol Jo ◽

Ho Sup Lee ◽

Cheolwon Suh ◽

Hye Jin Kang ◽

Won Seog Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

B Cell ◽

Research Funding ◽

Maintenance Treatment ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

High Risk Patients ◽

Large B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Risk Patients

Background: High-intermediate or high risk in international prognostic index (IPI) has a long-term chance of cure in the range about 50% in patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) treated by R-CHOP. These high risk patients should be considered for additional new treatment to standard R-CHOP or investigational approaches in the context of clinical trials that are designed to ensure that potentially curative therapy. Bortezomib inhibits NF-κB activation through proteasome inhibition, providing rationale for its use in cells that constitutively express NF-κB. Non-germinal center B cell (GCB) DLBCL has a worse survival after upfront chemotherapy and is characterized by constitutive activation of the antiapoptotic NF-κB pathway, which can inhibit chemotherapy. There is no study of bortezomib as maintenance therapy after treated with R-CHOP in high risk patients with DLBCL. So we applied additional bortezomib as maintenance therapy in order to assess improving efficacy and survival rates in high risk patients with non-GCB DLBCL who had been confirmed complete response (CR) after treated with R-CHOP. Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed stage II(bulky)-IV DLBCL with high or high intermediate IPI score of 3 to 5, and patients achieving a CR at the end of 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP21 were eligible for enrollment. Non-GCB DLBCL according to Hans criteria confirmed by central review was need before enrollment. Bortezomib maintenance treatment was consisted of bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 subcutaneously administration day 1 and day 15 per 28-day cycle with a total of 12 cycles. The primary endpoint was 3-year progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were 3-year overall survival (OS), and toxicites. Toxicity was graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0. Results: Fifty-nine patients were enrolled between May 2014 and Oct 2018. The type of Non-GCB DLBCL in all patients was confirmed by the central pathology review. The median age was 65 years (range: 27-86 years), and 60% were > 61 years. The baseline clinical features were as follows: female sex, 45.8%; ECOG >1, 10.2%; stage II bulky (>10cm), 6.8%; stage III/IV, 93.2%. At the time of analysis, 29 patients completed 12-cycles of bortezomib maintenance, and 3 patients is ongoing. Seven patients did not finished maintenance therapy due to toxicities (fatigue, atrial flutter, neuropathy, pleural effusion, thrombocytopenia), and withdrawal of informed consent (n=4). Sixteen patients experienced disease progression during bortezomib maintenance treatment. With a median follow-up of 25.1 months, 3-year PFS rate was 56.9% and 3-year OS rate was 86.4% (Figure 1). Toxicity was assessed in 489 cycles of bortezomib maintenance in all 59 patients. There was no treatment-related death and febrile neutropenia. Conclusion: Bortezomib maintenance showed 3-year PFS rate of 56.9% with acceptable toxicities in patients with high risk DLBCL achieving a CR at the end of 6 or 8 cycles of R-CHOP21. Figure 1 Disclosures Kim: Celltrion: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; J + J: Research Funding; Donga: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Results of the Interim Analysis of the “HUSOM” Trial: Hungarian Study of Maintenance After Rituximab Pretreatment, A Multicentre, Phase III, Open-Label Study Evaluating the Benefit of a Long-Term MabThera (rituximab) Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Advance Follicular Lymphoma After Induction of Response (CR(u) or PR) with a MabThera (rituximab)-Containing First Line Regimen

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.2714.2714 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 2714-2714

Author(s):

Tamas J. Schneider ◽

Andras Rosta ◽

Hajna Losonczy ◽

Gaspar Radvanyi ◽

Gyorgy Ujj ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Complete Remission ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Interim Analysis ◽

Risk Group ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

First Line ◽

Open Label ◽

Rituximab Maintenance ◽

Follicular Lymphomas

Abstract Abstract 2714 Background: The addition of immunotherapy–rituximab–to the treatment regimen of follicular lymphomas has led to a significant improvement in therapeutic efficacy. In the mid-2000's, immuno-chemotherapy was approved by European authorities as part of the induction treatment for untreated and relapsed follicular lymphomas followed by maintenance therapy. Data about efficacy and safety of rituximab maintenance following first-line induction with R-CVP or R-CHOP have not been available. Therefore the Hungarian National Working-Group initiated a trial: Hungarian Study of Maintenance after Rituximab Pretreatment. Methods: Between July 2005 and December 2008 126 newly diagnosed patients with follicular lymphoma who had achieved partial or complete remission after induction treatment with either R-CVP or R-CHOP were treated with two years of rituximab maintenance. In this open-label, single-arm study rituximab was administered in standard dose (375 mg/m2) every 8 weeks, 12 times in total. Results: 126 patients have been included. Data of 99 patients are available for this interim analysis. Average age of the 30 male (30%) and 69 female (70%) patients were 53.2 (29–80) years. Histological subtypes were grade-1 in 32% of patients, grade-2 in 49%, and grade-3a in 19%. Twenty-eight percent of patients had tumors with size over 7 cm. Sixty-four percent of patients were in the moderate risk group (FLIPI: 1–2) and 36% in the high risk group. Fifty-six percent of patients received R-CVP and 44% R-CHOP induction treatment. After induction 61% achieved complete remission and 39% partial remission. With respect to induction treatment regimen, patients treated with R-CVP 52% showed CR and 48% PR. In patients treated with R-CHOP 75% had CR and 25% had PR. Fourteen patients (37%) in PR converted to CR during or after rituximab maintenance therapy. Three-year OS after initiation of maintenance was 94%, EFS was 84%, and PFS was 88%. With respect to FLIPI, OS rates were 97% and 89% for moderate and high risk groups respectively. Patients treated with R-CHOP achieved significantly better PFS (98% vs. 80%; p=0.0096) and EFS (93% vs. 76%; p=0.0332) than those treated with R-CVP. Patients achieving CR compared to PR showed significantly higher PFS (100% vs. 68 %; p<0.0001) and EFS (95 % vs. 65 %; p<0.0001) values respectively. Safety: Four patients experienced SAEs. Three patients died (due to causes other than lymphoma). Two hepatitis B reactivations occurred. Conclusion: These data confirm that rituximab maintenance is a safe and effective treatment for patients after induction with rituximab based immuno-chemotherapy. Interestingly those patients who were treated with more intense induction regimen R-CHOP and those who achieved a better remission status seemed to have a favorable outcome. Thirty-seven percent of patients receiving rituximab maintenance converted from PR to CR. Therefore these data support the use of rituximab maintenance in 1st line treatment. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Download Full-text

Rituximab Maintenance after Chemoimmunotherapy Induction in 1st and 2nd Line Improves Progression Free Survival: Planned Interim Analysis of the International Randomized AGMT-CLL8/a Mabtenance Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.20.20 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 20-20 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Richard Greil ◽

Petra Obrtlikova ◽

Lukas Smolej ◽

Tomas Kozak ◽

Michael Steurer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Primary Endpoint ◽

Interim Analysis ◽

Research Funding ◽

Alternative Hypothesis ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

P Value ◽

Secondary Malignancies ◽

Secondary Neoplasms ◽

Rituximab Maintenance ◽

Induction Regimen

Abstract Introduction: Chemoimmunotherapy has become a standard approach in previously untreated and also in pretreated CLL. Addition of Rituximab to FC in fit patients has proven superior to chemotherapy alone and more recently aCD20 treatment was shown to improve outcomes in patients treated with Chlorambucil, suggesting that immunotherapy may be of benefit, independent of the chosen chemotherapy backbone. In follicular and mantle cell lymphoma rituximab maintenance treatment has become a clinical standard. While we and others have presented Phase II data on the feasibility of Rituximab maintenance after chemoimmunotherapy induction, there are currently no available randomized data on the efficacy of such an approach. Study design: Patients were recruited after informed consent at the end of any Rituximab-containing induction treatment in 1st or 2nd line that achieved at least a PR. Excluded were patients with uncontrolled bacterial or viral infections and conditions that might severely affect life-expectancy (such as other malignancy, heart disease etc). The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov with the identifier NCT01118234. Randomization was stratified by country, line of treatment, induction response and type of induction regimen. Primary endpoint was PFS and a planned sample-size of 256 patients was calculated. All patients were recruited in participating centers between September 2009 and December 2013. An interim analysis was planned to be conducted after half of the planned events (i.e. 46) were observed and is presented here. Results: The current analysis includes 263 patients enrolled into the trial. Patients had a median age of 63 years, 28.9% were female and 80.6% were enrolled after 1st induction treatment. Hierarchical FISH cytogenetic risk was available in 221 patients: del17p 3.1%, del11q 27.6%, tris 12 10.8%, del13q 36.2%, and normal FISH karyotype 21.2%. IgVH Mutation state was available in 161 patients at time of interim analysis and 67% were unmutated. The induction regimen was FCR in 73.5% and BR in 20.2%, the response to induction treatment was CR/CRi in 58% and PR in 41.8% of patients and 57% scored negative in an 8-colour MRD flowcytometric analysis after induction. Rituximab treatment was allocated to 134 patients and 129 were in the observation arm. No significant imbalances in randomization were found in the above-mentioned parameters. Median observation time is currently 17.3 months. Regarding toxicities the current state of monitoring allows an analysis on the level of SAEs only. SAE causes were well balanced between arms with the exception of infectious SAEs - 32 in the rituximab and 22 in the observation arm, 3 deaths were attributed to infections (1 in the rituximab arm and 2 in the observation arm) - and secondary malignancies (8 in the rituximab arm vs. 1 in the observation arm). Four of the neoplasms in the rituximab arm were localized non-melanoma skin cancers and the 2 deaths from malignomas occurred one in each arm. Regarding efficacy, currently 27.9% have progressed in the observation arm and 14.9% in the rituximab arm. Ten patients died in the observation arm and 7 in the rituximab arm. The primary endpoint (PFS) is significantly in favour of rituximab maintenance (see Fig) with a p-value of 0.007 and a PFS at 17.3 months of 85.1% vs.75.5% in rituximab vs. observation arms, respectively. To account for toxicities and secondary neoplasms an EFS was calculated counting secondary malignancies, termination of treatment due to toxicities, progression or death as events. In this analysis the benefit was preserved, albeit with a lower p-value of 0.03. The observed benefit seemed independent from response after induction (CR vs. PR), but associated with positive MRD state after induction. Further factors that influenced the benefit in exploratory subgroup analyses were sex, cytogenetics, IgVH and B-symptoms at diagnosis. Conclusions: Rituximab maintenance after chemoimmunotherapy induction in CLL seems feasible, although with an increase in infectious complications, and shows signs of efficacy in this interim analysis. The presented interim analysis refutes the alternative hypothesis and allows the trial to continue. Exploratory analyses suggest that with longer follow-up it may be possible to define subpopulations with larger benefit from extended immunotherapy. Figure: PFS by treatment arm (Observation arm: ; Rituximab arm: __) Figure:. PFS by treatment arm (Observation arm: ; Rituximab arm: __) Disclosures Greil: Roche: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Honoraria; Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Eisai: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Cephalon: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; GSK: Research Funding; Ratiopharm: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Rituximab in Maintenace Treatment of CLL. Kozak:Roche: Honoraria, Travel grants Other. Girschikofsky:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharm: Consultancy, Honoraria. Petzer:Celgene: Honoraria, unrestricted grant Other. Egle:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Grants Other.

Download Full-text

Capecitabine plus bevacizumab (Cape-Bev) as a maintenance treatment after induction treatment with FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab (FOLFIRI-Bev) in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.e14683 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e14683-e14683

Author(s):

Ali Murat Tatli ◽

Hasan Senol Coskun ◽

Mukremin Uysal ◽

Sema Sezgin Goksu ◽

Deniz Arslan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Disease Progression ◽

Maintenance Treatment ◽

Human Monoclonal Antibody ◽

Objective Response ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Complete Response ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

Severe Toxicity ◽

First Line

e14683 Background: Bevacizumab is human monoclonal antibody that inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor and has been shown improvement progression-free survival and overall survival when combined with chemotherapy for treatment of mCRC in the first and second-line settings. The purpose of this study is to show the effectiveness of maintenance therapy with Cape-Bev in patients with mCRC who benefit of first-line (induction) chemotherapy with FOLFIRI-Bev. Methods: The study included patients with mCRC who received FOLFIRI-Bev as first-line chemotherapy. Maintenance therapy with Cape-Bev (Cape 1000 mg/m2 bid d1-14, Bev 7,5 mg/kg d1 q3w) was given until disease progression to patients who had achieved an objective response after 6-months FOLFIRI-Bev regimen. The time to disease progression, survival and toxic effects were analyzed from the beginning of bevacizumab-based chemotherapy. Results: We enrolled 30 patients, 16 men and 14 women. The mean age of the patients was 62 years. The patients who administered maintenance treatment received a median number of 11 cycles. The median progression-free and overall survivals were 22±4 months and 39±4 months, respectively. Significantly higher PFS and OS were seen among patients who complete or near-complete response to induction therapy with FOLFIRI-Bev (Table). Acceptable hand-foot syndrome was observed 14 patients (%51) treated with the Cape-Bev. No patient experienced severe toxicity. Conclusions: Cape-Bev regimen may be an effective maintenance treatment after response to first-line (induction) FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab treatment in selected mCRC with favorable safety profile. Further studies will be needed to demonstrate conclusively that. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

Bortezomib Maintenance Therapy after Induction with R-CHOP, ARA-C and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed MCL Patients, Results of a Multicenter Phase II HOVON Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.339.339 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 339-339 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Jeanette K Doorduijn ◽

Monique C. Minnema ◽

Marie Jose Kersten ◽

Pieternella J Lugtenburg ◽

Martin R. Schipperus ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Stem Cell ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progressive Disease ◽

Induction Treatment ◽

High Dose ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction. The standard first-line treatment of young and fit mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients consists of a rituximab containing induction of CHOP and high dose ARA-C, followed by high dose consolidation and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Thus far, almost all patients relapse after ASCT. Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor with activity in MCL. We investigated in a randomized phase II study whether there was any indication that maintenance therapy with bortezomib after ASCT could improve the outcome of treatment, measured as event free survival (EFS). Methods. Patients 18-65 years with newly diagnosed MCL were treated with 3 cycles of R-CHOP and 2 cycles of ARA-C (2 x 2 g/m2 iv d1-4) and rituximab (375 mg/m2, iv d11). Patients in PR or CR continued with ASCT after BEAM conditioning. Patients with a PR or CR after ASCT, with a neutrophil count > 0.5 x 109/l and platelets > 80 x 109/l were randomized between bortezomib and no further treatment. Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 iv was given once every two weeks, for 2 years, starting between 6 - 12 weeks after transplantation. Results . Between October 2007 and February 2012, 140 patients aged 34-66 years (median 57) were registered. Five patients were not eligible. The MIPI score was low, intermediate, high or unknown in 57%, 32%, 10% and 1% respectively. All eligible patients started induction treatment with R-CHOP. Two patients did not receive the first ARA-C cycle, because of progressive disease and physician decision. Hundred-fifteen patients (85%) received the BEAM and ASCT. Reasons to stop protocol treatment before ASCT were: progressive disease (PD) (n=6), inadequate stem cell harvest (n=3), excessive toxicity (n=3), other reasons (n=8). The response after ASCT was CR/CRu in 99 patients (86%), PR in 15 (13%), unknown in 1 (1%). Only 62 patients (45%), aged 34-65 years (median 56) were randomized between bortezomib maintenance and no further treatment. Two patients were randomized, but not eligible. Reasons for no randomization were: not eligible (n=30), patient refusal (n=14), excessive toxicity (n=2, and other reasons (n=7). In each treatment arm 30 patients were included. The patient characteristics were well balanced, except the MIPI score. In the no maintenance arm 21 patients (70%) had a low MIPI, compared to 15 patients (50%) in the bortezomib arm, and 6 (20%) versus 11 (37%) patients had an intermediate MIPI score. In both arms 3 patients (10%) had a high MIPI. Fifteen patients (50%) in the maintenance group continued bortezomib for 2 years. Reasons to stop earlier were excessive toxicity (n=6), PD/relapse (n=4), patients refusal (n=3) and other (n=2). The main adverse events during maintenance therapy were neurologic (CTC grade 2: 14%, grade 3: 4%), and infectious (grade 2: 11%, grade 3: 7%). Three patients developed a secondary malignancy: a basal cell carcinoma in the no maintenance group, a melanoma and a prostate carcinoma in the bortezomib group. With a median follow-up of the patients still alive of 50.9 months EFS at 4 years for all patients is 61%, and the overall survival (OS) 78%. The median follow-up of the randomized patients still alive is 42.9 months. The EFS at 4 years is 72% without maintenance versus 71% in the patients randomized for bortezomib maintenance. The OS at 4 years also shows no significant difference between the groups, 90% versus 93% respectively. Conclusion. There is no indication that bortezomib iv maintenance in a frequency of once every 2 weeks does improve the EFS of newly diagnosed MCL patients after intensive induction treatment with R-CHOP, double ARA-C and BEAM followed by ASCT. Figure 1. Figure 1. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Doorduijn: Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Off Label Use: bortezomib maintenance in MCL. Minnema:Celgene: Consultancy; Jansen Cilag: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Kersten:janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; takeda millennium: Research Funding; roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lugtenburg:Mundipharma: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Schipperus:Novartis: Consultancy. Zijlstra:Celgene: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Effect of Timing and Duration of Maintenance Lenalidomide in Myeloma Patients after Autologous Stem Cell Transplantations

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.194.194 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 194-194

Author(s):

Idrees Mian ◽

Denai Milton ◽

Uday R. Popat ◽

Nina Shah ◽

Yago Nieto ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Maintenance Treatment ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Disease Status ◽

Hazard Ratio ◽

P Value ◽

Free Survival ◽

Late Initiation

Abstract Introduction: Maintenance lenalidomide after autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto HCT) has been shown to improve progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in myeloma patients. In this analysis we sought to determine the impact of lenalidomide treatment on achievement of complete remission (CR), survival and the incidence of secondary primary malignancies (SPM). Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all (N=466) consecutive myeloma patients who underwent auto HCT and received maintenance lenalidomide between August 2006 and September 2013 at our institution. Patients received doses of maintenance lenalidomide ranging from 5 mg – 15 mg/day or every other day. We looked at whether lenalidomide improved disease status, specifically CR in patients who had not achieved this before maintenance initiation and the median time to achieve CR. We also analyzed the effects of early initiation (<4-months after auto HCT) of maintenance lenalidomide versus late initiation (≥ 4-months after auto HCT) with regards to PFS and OS using the Kaplan-Meier method. Lastly we assessed if continuation of maintenance therapy beyond 2 and 3-years after auto HCT improved PFS and OS and increased the incidence of SPM. Results: The median follow-up time for all patients was 26.6 months. 173 patients (37%) experienced improvements in their disease status. Of these, 86 patients (50% of those with noted improvements and 19% of total patients assessed) who were not in CR before maintenance achieved CR while on maintenance. The average time to achieve CR in these patients was 12.9 months. Comparing the patients who were started on early maintenance treatment with those who were started on late maintenance therapy, we did not find any difference with regards to PFS (Hazard Ratio [HR]=0.90; p-value=0.57) and OS (HR=0.90; p-value=0.74). However, patients who had been on lenalidomide for > 2 years experienced a significant benefit in OS compared with those on lenalidomide for ≤ 2 years (HR=0.36; p-value=0.0015), although no difference in PFS was observed between the two cohorts (HR=0.77; p-value=0.18). A similar trend in OS was seen for patients who had been on lenalidomide > 3 years compared with those on maintenance treatment ≤ 3 years, though not statistically significant (HR=0.47; p-value=0.10). Again, no difference in PFS was noted between the two groups. Lastly there were only 12 cases of SPM reported in all patients assessed with no statistically significant association to the duration of lenalidomide use. In all 12 cases, lenalidomide was suspended and the mortality among these patients was 50%. Conclusions: Maintenance lenalidomide improves response rates after auto HCT in some patients including the CR rate, however, the median time to achieve CR in these patients is approximately 13 months. The patients who received maintenance therapy for > 2years had a significantly lower risk of death with a trend of improved OS in patients who continued maintenance therapy beyond 3-years. We conclude that the maintenance therapy should be continued for at least 2 years and possibly longer after auto HCT. Table 1 Summary of Survival Outcomes Maintenance Treatment Initiation Measure Early (N=155) Late (N=184) p-value Progression-free survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)a 0.90 (0.63, 1.30) 0.57 Overall survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)a 0.90 (0.49, 1.66) 0.74 Duration of Maintenance Treatment Measure > 2 years (N=115) ≤ 2 years (N=224) p-value Progression-free survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)b 0.77 (0.52, 1.13) 0.18 Overall survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)b 0.36 (0.19, 0.67) 0.0015 > 3 years (N=49) ≤ 3 years (N=290) p-value Progression-free survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)b 0.75 (0.45, 1.26) 0.28 Overall survival Hazard ratio (95% CI)b 0.47 (0.19, 1.15) 0.10 a Cox proportional hazards regression model: measure included as a baseline covariate with the following additional covariates: patient’s cytogenetic risk, creatinine, hemoglobin, B2-microglobulin, ISS stage at diagnosis, disease status at auto HCT, and response prior to auto HCT. b Cox proportional hazards regression model: measure included as a time-dependent covariate with the covariates listed above. Figure 1 Comparison of Overall Survival in Early vs Late initiation of Revlimid Figure 1. Comparison of Overall Survival in Early vs Late initiation of Revlimid Figure 2 Overall Survival – All Patients Figure 2. Overall Survival – All Patients Disclosures Shah: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array: Consultancy, Research Funding. Orlowski:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Venetoclax in Combination with FLAG-IDA Chemotherapy (FLAG-V-I) for Fit, Relapsed/Refractory AML Patients: Interim Results of a Phase 1b/2 Dose Escalation and Expansion Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-114812 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4048-4048 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Courtney D. DiNardo ◽

Maher Albitar ◽

Tapan M. Kadia ◽

Kiran Naqvi ◽

Kenneth Vaughan ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Adverse Events ◽

Research Funding ◽

Single Agent ◽

Response Assessment ◽

Early Mortality ◽

Genetics Research ◽

Best Response ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Phase 1B ◽

Refractory Aml

Abstract Background: Venetoclax (VEN) is a potent and selective small molecule BCL2 inhibitor, with activity both as a single agent in relapsed/refractory AML, and in frontline combinations with hypomethylating agents and low-dose cytarabine. The ability of VEN to reduce the apoptotic threshold indicates it may be effective in combination with genotoxic agents which induce apoptosis, such as the FLAG-IDA regimen. Objectives: A Phase 1b/2 clinical trial was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of VEN in combination with FLAG-IDA induction/consolidation. The primary safety endpoint was the overall incidence and severity of adverse events by CTCAE criteria. The primary efficacy endpoint was ORR by modified IWG AML criteria, and defined as CR, CRi, and PR. Secondary analyses include duration of response (DOR) and overall survival (OS), and exploratory analyses include gene expression signatures by RNA sequencing. Methods: Eligibility for the Phase 1b portion includes medically fit, relapsed/refractory (R/R) AML patients of any age with adequate organ function and ECOG PS ≤ 2. Patients receive FLAG-IDA induction/consolidation, in combination with VEN orally daily. FLAG-IDA induction for R/R AML consists of fludarabine 30 mg/m2 IV days 2-6, cytarabine 2 g/m2 IV days 2-6, idarubicin 6 mg/m2 IV days 4-6, and filgrastim 5 mcg/kg daily days 1-7 (or peg-filgrastim 6 mg after day 5 to replace remaining injections). The first cohort (dose -1) received FLAG-IDA with VEN 200 mg on days 1-21 of induction, incorporating a 2-day VEN dose ramp up. After the observation of gram-negative bacteremia and/or sepsis in 5 of the first 6 patients during cycle 1 nadir, an amended dose level -1 induction was designed with VEN 200 mg on days 1-14 and cytarabine 1.5 g/m². After completion of induction/consolidation, single-agent VEN at 400 mg orally continuously is provided as maintenance for patients not proceeding to SCT. The data cutoff for this analysis was 7.26.2018. Results: Twelve patients with a median age of 49 years (range 32 - 72) have been enrolled. All patients had relapsed/refractory AML with a median of 2 (range 1 - 4) prior treatments, and four (33%) patients had received ≥1 prior allogeneic SCT. Six patients (50%) had complex cytogenetics, 3 (25%) were intermediate risk, and 3 (25%) were favorable risk. Additional demographics including molecular annotation at study enrollment are provided in Table 1. The median number of FLAG-IDA + VEN cycles received is 2 (0.5 - 3). Severe adverse events regardless of causality were neutropenic fever/bacteremia (n=5), pneumonia/lung infection (n=4), sepsis (n=4), typhlitis (n=1), and hypotension (n=2). All cases of sepsis occurred in the original dose -1 cohort. No early mortality was observed on study (30-d and 60-d mortality 0%). Of 12 patients, one remains too early for response assessment. Of 11 patients, 8 patients (73%) achieved a best response of CR/CRi (7 CR, 1 CRi). Seven patients attained a best response within the first induction cycle, and one attained blast reduction after cycle 1 followed by CR after re-induction. Median time to ANC recovery > 500/ul in responding patients was 28 days (range 23 to 33 days). Of the 8 responding patients, three patients proceeded to allogeneic SCT, 2 remain on study, 2 patients relapsed, and 1 patient died in CR. Figure 1 depicts OS and DOR. With a median follow-up time of 4 months to date, median DOR has not been reached and the 6-month OS is 67%. NGS evaluation of RNA at pre-treatment and end of cycle 1 (EOC1) timepoints demonstrated no significant difference in BCL2 expression, either before/after therapy per patient, or based on clinical response. In patients who failed to achieve CR/CRi, significantly lower EOC1 expression (p=0.05) of BAX, BCLXL, BCL10, BCL2A1, BCL3, BCL9, TRS1, and TP53 was identified. Additionally, increased MCL1 expression at EOC1 was significantly (p=0.04) associated with relapse. Conclusion: FLAG-IDA chemotherapy with venetoclax demonstrates notable activity in a heavily pre-treated and R/R yet medically fit patient population. Neither prolonged cytopenias nor early mortality was observed. The ongoing Phase 1b portion aims to establish the best VEN dose in combination with intensive chemotherapy, to be followed with a Phase 2 portion with treatment arms for both newly diagnosed and R/R AML patients. Disclosures DiNardo: Medimmune: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Agios: Consultancy. Albitar:Neogenomics Laboratories: Employment. Kadia:Abbvie: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding. Ravandi:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria; Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Orsenix: Honoraria; Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Orsenix: Honoraria; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Arog: Research Funding. Konopleva:Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Depth of Response in Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-111540 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 4141-4141

Author(s):

Jonas Paludo ◽

Jithma Prasad Abeykoon ◽

Morie A. Gertz ◽

Prashant Kapoor ◽

Aneel Paulus ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response To Therapy ◽

Response Criteria ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Depth Of Response ◽

Best Response ◽

The Impact ◽

Disease Free

Abstract Introduction Recent advances in the understanding of the WM pathobiology led to the expansion of our therapeutic options in this disease. A number of targeted drugs are either available or under investigation and are poised to change the chemo-immunotherapy paradigm in the treatment of WM. Now more than ever, an individualized treatment approach for patients with WM is possible, where patient characteristics and preferences can be matched by different treatment goals and side effect profiles. While deep responses have been associated with longer disease-free survival in other hematologic malignancies, data on patients with WM are sparse. We report the impact of depth of response in disease-free and overall survival (OS) in WM. Methods WM patients consecutively seen at Mayo Clinic between 01/1998 and 12/2016 were reviewed for response to therapy and disease burden. The best response achieved after the treatment of interest (TOI) was classified using the IWWM-7 Response Criteria. The included TOI were: BR, DRC, BDR and high-dose chemotherapy followed by ASCT. All time-to-event analyses were performed from the TOI initiation date using the Kaplan-Meier method and the log-rank test. A landmark analysis from the date-of-best response was also performed for OS to prevent immortal-time bias. Univariate and multivariate analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time-to-next therapy (TTNT) were performed using the Cox regression method. Results A total of 181 patients had disease response assessed after the TOI. Baseline characteristics at time of diagnosis are summarized in table 1. The median follow up from TOI was 3.8 years (95% CI: 3-4), the majority of patients received TOI as salvage therapy [n=112 (63%); median 2nd line (rage 1-11)]. Best response rates with the corresponding 5-year PFS and TTNT are summarized in table 2. The median OS from TOI was longer in patients who achieved at least a PR [median 7.2 years (95% CI: 5-NR) vs 3.7 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.01]. A trend towards a longer OS was also seen with deeper responses (PR or better) achieved with frontline therapy [median 5.8 years (95% CI: 5.8-NR) vs 3.4 years (95% CI: 1.6-NR), p=0.24]. Figure 1 shows the correlation between deeper responses with PFS and TTNT. Among patients achieving a PR or VGPR, those with a normal FLC ratio post TOI demonstrated a longer PFS and TTNT [PFS: median NR (95% CI: 3.4-NR) vs 4.9 years (95% CI: 2.8-8.7), p=0.01; TTNT: median NR (95% CI: 3.5-NR) vs 5.2 years (95% CI: 4.2-9.4), p=0.04], figure 2. In a multivariate analysis including normal FLC ratio, normal IgM level and minimal BM involvement (<5%) post TOI, normal FLC ratio remained an independent prognostic factor for longer PFS and TTNT. Similar trends were seen when considering treatment naïve and relapsed/refractory patients independently (data not shown). Discussion Our results not only suggest an association between depth of response with PFS and TTNT, but also with OS in patients with WM. A normal FLC ratio (not part of the IWWM-7 response criteria) seems to predict a longer disease-free interval in patients achieving a PR or VGPR. Disclosures Gertz: Ionis: Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Teva: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Reeder:Affimed: Research Funding. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Kumar:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ansell:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Merck & Co: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding.

Download Full-text