Rapid Prospective Identification of Non-Germinal Center B Cell-Like (GCB) Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) Patients for Targeted Trials: Early Results From PYRAMID, A Phase 2 Randomized Study of R-CHOP ± Bortezomib In Newly Diagnosed Non-GCB DLBCL.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1792-1792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kevin Doner ◽  
Ian W. Flinn ◽  
Brian K. Ulrich ◽  
Stephen J. Noga ◽  
Naveed M. Chowhan ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1792 Background: With increasing knowledge of cancer pathogenesis and availability of target-specific novel agents, it is expected that therapy will be increasingly tailored to individual biology. This is particularly true in lymphoma because translational research has characterized the molecular basis of the clinical heterogeneity in major lymphoma types, and many new agents are in development. However, a major challenge for clinical studies of specific lymphoma patient subgroups is the real-time testing of patient material in a way that enables prospective targeted clinical trials. Here we describe early patient selection results from a phase 2 trial of newly diagnosed DLBCL that prospectively identifies and enrolls only patients with the non-GCB subtype for randomization to rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) with or without the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (VELCADE®). The non-GCB subtype exhibits inferior outcome compared to the GCB subtype after therapy with either CHOP or R-CHOP. Both preclinical and clinical data suggest that inhibition by bortezomib of the nuclear factor-κB pathway, which is frequently activated in non-GCB tumors, specifically benefits these patients (Dunleavy K et al, Blood 2009). Methods: This multicenter phase 2 study is enrolling patients at academic centers (n=10), major hospitals (n=13), and community practices (n=32), providing insight that may be broadly informative with respect to both patient outcomes and future targeted trial design. Obstacles to non-GCB-specific patient selection in this setting include change in standard treatment practice for DLBCL, as well as the challenges of collecting a tumor sample, running the assay, and reporting the subtype in a timely manner. All clinical centers in this study have agreed to release diagnostic pathology blocks to a College of American Pathologists/Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-certified pathology lab for centralized subtyping. The pathology samples are subject to non-GCB testing via a 3-marker immunohistochemistry panel (CD10, bcl-6, mum-1; Hans CP et al, Blood 2004), and the results are reported directly to the clinical site. Results: To date, 45 patients have provided consent and have been subtyped. The mean turnaround time from receipt of sample to reporting of subtype was 1.2 business days (range 1–2 business days). All pathology blocks have been returned to the clinical sites; the mean time elapsed was 4.6 business days (range 4–6 business days). Rapid return of these samples was cited by clinical centers as an important aspect of the study design. There is no indication that pathology block release and central laboratory subtyping has led to delays in patient treatment. Of the 42 patients with results available to date, 5 samples were inevaluable, primarily due to limited tumor cells in the biopsy. Of the 37 samples successfully subtyped, 22 were GCB (59.5%) and 15 were non-GCB (40.5%); this is generally consistent with the ∼50% prevalence of the non-GCB subtype reported in retrospective studies of DLBCL. Fourteen patients have been randomized to therapy. Conclusions: Updates to turnaround time, patient subtype frequency, and enrollment will be presented. These data indicate that many centers are interested in targeted trials that offer new and potentially tailored therapies for their DLBCL patients. These centers can overcome their reluctance to release diagnostic pathology samples and actively enroll patients to randomized studies of frontline therapy. Overall, these results suggest that with careful trial design and attention to key logistical issues, prospective enrichment of specific patient subtypes is feasible in lymphoma. The PYRAMID trial (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00931918) continues to enroll patients. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Discussion of Velcade in NHL subtypes other than mantle cell lymphoma is included. Flinn:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding. Noga:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Cephalon: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ortho-Centicor: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Papish:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi Aventis: Consultancy; MD Advantage: Consultancy; Genomic Health: Speakers Bureau. Reeves:Celgene: Equity Ownership. Parasuraman:Millennium: Employment, Equity Ownership. Corvez:Millennium: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mulligan:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Leonard:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3983-3983
Author(s):  
Andrzej Hellmann ◽  
Simon A. Rule ◽  
Jan Walewski ◽  
Ofer Shpilberg ◽  
Huaibao Feng ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3983 Background: Bortezomib is primarily metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and 2C19 enzymes. Effects of co-administration of rifampicin (a potent CYP3A4 inducer) and dexamethasone (weak CYP3A4 inducer) on the pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD) and safety profiles of bortezomib were evaluated. Methods: Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) were enrolled in this open-label, 2-stage, parallel-group study. In stage 1, patients were randomized (1:1) to receive 3 cycles of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2) on d 1, 4, 8, and 11 q3wk either alone or in combination with rifampicin 600 mg once-daily on d 4 to 10 of cycle 3 only. Stage 2 patients received bortezomib at same dose and schedule in combination with dexamethasone 40 mg once-daily on d 1 to 4 and d 9 to 12 of cycle 3 only. Patients could continue with bortezomib monotherapy for up to 10 cycles in case of clinical benefit. For PK/PD, blood samples were collected before and through 72 hours following bortezomib administration on d 11 of cycles 2 and 3. PK was the primary endpoint, secondary endpoints included PD (proteasome inhibition) and safety. Results: 61 patients were enrolled (39 MM, 22 NHL) in the study. 13 were treated with bortezomib + rifampicin, 18 with bortezomib + dexamethasone, and 30 with bortezomib only. Co-administration of rifampicin reduced the mean bortezomib maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) by approximately 23% (118 vs 93 ng/mL) and the mean area under plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 72 hours (AUC72) by approximately 45% (223 vs 123 ng.h/mL). Co-administration of dexamethasone had no effect on mean AUC72 (179 vs 170 ng.h/mL). The mean bortezomib Cmax was 20% lower after co-administration of dexamethasone (140 vs 119 ng/mL); however this difference in Cmax was within the observed variability in Cmax during cycle 2 (CV=38%) and cycle 3 (CV=45%). Mean (SD) maximum percent proteasome inhibition (Emax) and area under percent proteasome inhibition-time curve from 0 to 72 hours (AUE72h) were comparable for bortezomib alone and in combination with rifampicin (Emax: 61.9 [4.56] vs. 62.3 [3.81] and AUE72h: 836 [323] vs. 777 [358]). Co-administration of dexamethasone did not affect the Emax (66.7 [4.27] vs. 61.8 [6.69]) or AUE72h (1329 [638] vs. 1157 [381]). Safety profiles were consistent with prior bortezomib experience in this population. Drug-related serious adverse events and treatment discontinuations were reported in 7/30 (23%) and 8/30 (27%) in bortezomib-only, in 3/13 (23%) and 3/13 (23%) in bortezomib + rifampicin, and 3/18 (17%) and 5/18 (28%) in bortezomib + dexamethasone subgroups. Investigator-assessed responses (CR+PR) were observed in 13/17 MM and 6/13 NHL patients in bortezomib-only, in 6/9 MM and 3/4 NHL patients in bortezomib + rifampicin, and in 10/13 MM and 2/5 NHL patients in bortezomib + dexamethasone subgroups. Conclusions: Co-administration of dexamethasone did not affect the PK or PD profiles of bortezomib. Co-administration of rifampicin reduced bortezomib exposure (AUC) by approximately 45%. Patients receiving bortezomib concomitantly with strong CYP3A4 inducers, such as rifampicin, should be monitored for reduction in clinical effect, while concomitant administration of weak CYP3A4 inducers, such as dexamethasone, is not expected to affect the bortezomib pharmacologic profile. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Discussion of Velcade in NHL subtypes other than mantle cell lymphoma is included. Rule:Johnson & Johson: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy. Walewski:Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Investigators fee. Shpilberg:Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Feng:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. van de Velde:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Patel:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Skee:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. Girgis:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. Louw:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Key Oncologics: 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.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 690-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Alessandro M. Vannucchi ◽  
Alessandro Rambaldi ◽  
Jason R. Gotlib ◽  
Adam J. Mead ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms (MLNs) with rearrangement of FGFR1 on chromosome band 8p11 are rare but aggressive neoplasms characterized by heterogeneous presentation with myeloid and/or lymphoid proliferation, extramedullary involvement, and rapid progression to blast phase (Strati P, et al., Leuk Lymphoma. 2018;59:1672-1676). FGFR1 gets constitutively activated through fusion genes involving various partner genes, most frequently ZMYM2-FGFR1 or BCR-FGFR1 as consequence of a t(8;13)(p11;q12) or a t(8;22)(p11;q11), respectively. Chemotherapy is usually ineffective, effective targeted treatment has not been described, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) is the only potentially curative option. Pemigatinib, a selective, potent, oral inhibitor of FGFR1, 2, and 3, has shown efficacy in patients with FGF/FGFR-activated tumors, including cholangiocarcinoma and urothelial carcinoma. We report interim results from the ongoing fight-203 study (NCT03011372) of pemigatinib in patients with FGFR1-rearranged MLNs. Methods: Fight-203 is a phase 2, open-label study enrolling patients ≥ 18 years of age with FGFR1-rearranged MLN. Patients enrolled in the study must have progressed on ≥ 1 prior treatment and be ineligible for alloHSCT. Patients receive a daily oral dose of pemigatinib 13.5 mg on a 21-day cycle (2 weeks on, 1 week off) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is overall clinical benefit rate, which includes complete clinical (CR) or partial clinical response (PR), and either complete or partial cytogenetic response (CCyR, PCyR). Secondary endpoints include duration of response/benefit, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety/tolerability. Efficacy is assessed by evaluation of bone marrow histomorphology changes, standard cytogenetic and FISH evaluation of the FGFR1 rearrangement, and PET/CT scan. Results: At data cutoff (July 23, 2018), 14 patients were enrolled. Ten patients who had ≥ 1 response assessment were included in the analysis (Table). Patients received an average of 6.9 cycles of pemigatinib (range, 2-12 cycles). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range, 0-5), including 2 patients who received alloHSCT. Eight patients (80%) had a major CyR, including 6 patients with CCyR and 2 with PCyR. Eight patients (80%) had a CR or PR in bone marrow, peripheral blood, and extramedullary disease. One patient died of progression to myeloid blast crisis, 2 patients were bridged to alloHSCT, and 7 patients are ongoing. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were hyperphosphatemia (n=7 [70%]), diarrhea (n=5 [50%]) and anemia (n=5 [50%]); hyperphosphatemia was managed with diet and phosphate binders. Nine events in 4 patients (40%) were grade 3/4; 2 of these events (diarrhea and leukopenia) in 2 patients were related to pemigatinib. There were no drug-related AEs leading to dose interruption, dose reduction, or discontinuation. Conclusions: Pemigatinib showed promising efficacy, with an 80% major CyR rate accompanied by complete or partial remission, and was generally well tolerated by patients with FGFR1-rearranged MLN. The protocol was amended to allow continuous dosing, and the study is currently enrolling. Disclosures Verstovsek: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Gotlib:Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mead:Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Evotek: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elstar: Research Funding. Hochhaus:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hernandez Boluda:Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Asatiani:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lihou:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhen:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Reiter:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4248-4248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
David P. Steensma ◽  
Koen Van Eygen ◽  
Azra Raza ◽  
Valeria Santini ◽  
...  

Background: Current treatment options for red blood cell (RBC) transfusion-dependent (TD) patients with lower risk (LR) myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) relapsed after or refractory to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) have limited efficacy and durability; new approaches are needed. Imetelstat is a 13-mer lipid-conjugated oligonucleotide that targets the RNA template of human telomerase and is a competitive inhibitor of telomerase enzymatic activity (Asai et al, Cancer Res 2003; Herbert et al, Oncogene 2005). Preclinical, in vivo xenograft models (Dikmen et al, Cancer Res 2005; Hochreiter et al, Clin Cancer Res 2006) and preliminary clinical data from a pilot study conducted at Mayo Clinic (Tefferi et al, Blood Cancer Journal 2016) supported initiation of a study in TD LR MDS patients. A Phase 2 study of imetelstat, IMerge, demonstrated an 8-week RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) rate of 42%, 24-week RBC-TI rate of 29%, and 68% erythroid hematologic improvement (HI-E) rate in 38 heavily TD patients (median prior RBC transfusion burden 8 units / 8 weeks over the 16 weeks pre-study period) with LR MDS. Responses were durable with median duration of 8-week RBC-TI of 85.9 weeks by Kaplan Meier estimates (range 8.0-140.9) (Steensma ASH 2018, Fenaux EHA 2019). These Phase 2 results provided further evidence of potential clinical benefit of imetelstat treatment in TD LR MDS, and supported initiation of a Phase 3 trial. Methods: IMerge is two-part, Phase 2/3 study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02598661). The Phase 2 portion of the study described above is closed for enrollment. The Phase 3 portion of the study is open for enrollment of adult patients with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) low or intermediate-1 risk, non-del(5q) MDS, who are TD, are relapsed after or refractory to ESAs, and have not received treatment with lenalidomide or hypomethylating agents. The study is a randomized (2:1) double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to compare efficacy of imetelstat vs. placebo that will enroll approximately 170 patients and will be conducted at approximately 90 centers in North America, Europe, Asia and Middle East. Imetelstat will be administered as 2-hour IV infusion every 4 weeks at 7.5 mg/kg. The primary endpoint of the study is to assess the rate of RBC-TI lasting ≥8 weeks. Secondary endpoints include safety, rate of RBC-TI ≥24 weeks, time to RBC-TI start, RBC-TI duration, rate of HI-E, the amount and relative change in RBC transfusions, rate of CR or PR, overall survival, progression of MDS, pharmacokinetics and effect of treatment on quality of life. Biomarkers relevant to the mechanism of action of imetelstat will be assessed to demonstrate target inhibition and their association with clinical responses. Cytogenetics and mutation analyses will be performed to evaluate the impact of imetelstat on reduction/depletion of malignant clones leading to disease modification. Disclosures Platzbecker: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Steensma:Astex: Consultancy; Arrowhead: Equity Ownership; Summer Road: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy; Aprea: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Stemline: Consultancy; H3 Biosciences: Other: Research funding to institution, not investigator.. Santini:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria; Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Germing:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Font:Celgene: Consultancy, 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; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Díez-Campelo:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Patnaik:Stem Line Pharmaceuticals.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sherman:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dougherty:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Feller:Geron Corporation: Employment. Sun:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wan:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Huang:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rizo:Geron Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3184-3184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caitlin L. Costello ◽  
Tara K. Gregory ◽  
Syed Abbas Ali ◽  
Jesus G. Berdeja ◽  
Krina K. Patel ◽  
...  

P-BCMA-101 is a novel chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell product targeting B Cell Maturation Antigen (BCMA). P-BCMA-101 is produced using the piggyBac® (PB) DNA Modification System instead of the viral vector that is used with most CAR-T cells, requiring only plasmid DNA and mRNA. This makes it less costly and produces cells with a high percentage of the favorable T stem cell memory phenotype (TSCM). The higher cargo capacity of PB permits the incorporation of multiple genes in addition to CAR(s), including a safety switch allowing for rapid CAR-T cell elimination with a small molecule drug infusion in patients if desired, and a selection gene allowing for enrichment of CAR+ cells. Rather than using a traditional antibody-based binder, P-BCMA-101 has a Centyrin™ fused to a CD3ζ/4-1BB signaling domain. Centyrins are fully human proteins with high specificity and a large range of binding affinities, but are smaller, more stable and potentially less immunogenic than traditional scFv. Cumulatively, these features are predicted to result in a greater therapeutic index. A Phase 1, 3+3 dose escalation from 0.75 to 15 x 106 P-BCMA-101 CAR-T cells/kg (RP2D 6-15 x 106 cells/kg) was conducted in patients with r/r MM (Blood 2018 132:1012) demonstrating excellent efficacy and safety of P-BCMA-101, including notably low rates and grades of CRS and neurotoxicity (maximum Grade 2 without necessitating ICU admission, safety switch activation or other aggressive measures). These results supported FDA RMAT designation and initiation of a pivotal Phase 2 study. A Phase 2 pivotal portion of this study has recently been designed and initiated (PRIME; NCT03288493) in r/r MM patients who have received at least 3 prior lines of therapy. Their therapy must have contained a proteasome inhibitor, an IMiD, and CD38 targeted therapy with at least 2 of the prior lines in the form of triplet combinations. They must also have undergone ≥2 cycles of each line unless PD was the best response, refractory to the most recent line of therapy, and undergone autologous stem cell transplant or not be a candidate. Patients are required to be >=18 years old, have measurable disease by International Myeloma Working Group criteria (IMWG; Kumar 2016), adequate vital organ function and lack significant autoimmune, CNS and infectious diseases. No pre-specified level of BCMA expression is required, as this has not been demonstrated to correlate with clinical outcomes for P-BCMA-101 and other BCMA-targeted CAR-T products. Interestingly, unlike most CAR-T products patients may receive P-BCMA-101 after prior CAR-T cells or BCMA targeted agents, and may be multiply infused with P-BCMA-101. Patients are apheresed to harvest T cells, P-BCMA-101 is then manufactured and administered to patients as a single intravenous (IV) dose (6-15 x 106 P-BCMA-101 CAR-T cells/kg) after a standard 3-day cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2/day) / fludarabine (30 mg/m2/day) conditioning regimen. One hundred patients are planned to be treated with P-BCMA-101. Uniquely, given the safety profile demonstrated during Phase 1, no hospital admission is required and patients may be administered P-BCMA-101 in an outpatient setting. The primary endpoints are safety and response rate by IMWG criteria. With a 100-subject sample, the Phase 2 part of the trial will have 90% power to detect a 15-percentage point improvement over a 30% response rate (based on that of the recently approved anti-CD38 antibody daratumumab), using an exact test for a binomial proportion with a 1-sided 0.05 significance level. Multiple biomarkers are being assessed including BCMA and cytokine levels, CAR-T cell kinetics, immunogenicity, T cell receptor diversity, CAR-T cell and patient gene expression (e.g. Nanostring) and others. Overall, the PRIME study is the first pivotal study of the unique P-BCMA-101 CAR-T product, and utilizes a number of novel design features. Studies are being initiated in combination with approved therapeutics and earlier lines of therapy with the intent of conducting Phase 3 trials. Funding by Poseida Therapeutics and the California Institute for Regenerative Medicine (CIRM). Disclosures Costello: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gregory:Poseida: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Ali:Celgene: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding. Berdeja:Amgen Inc, BioClinica, Celgene Corporation, CRISPR Therapeutics, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Janssen Biotech Inc, Karyopharm Therapeutics, Kite Pharma Inc, Prothena, Servier, Takeda Oncology: Consultancy; AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Acetylon Pharmaceuticals Inc, Bluebird Bio, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, Constellation Pharma, Curis Inc, Genentech, Glenmark Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Biotech Inc, Kesios Therapeutics, Lilly, Novartis, Poseida: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding. Patel:Oncopeptides, Nektar, Precision Biosciences, BMS: Consultancy; Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Poseida Therapeutics, Cellectis, Abbvie: Research Funding. Shah:University of California, San Francisco: Employment; Genentech, Seattle Genetics, Oncopeptides, Karoypharm, Surface Oncology, Precision biosciences GSK, Nektar, Amgen, Indapta Therapeutics, Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Indapta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Celgene, Janssen, Bluebird Bio, Sutro Biopharma: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nkarta: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teneobio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ostertag:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Martin:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ghoddusi:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shedlock:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Spear:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Orlowski:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Cohen:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 2312-2312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinz Ludwig ◽  
Luisa Viterbo ◽  
Richard Greil ◽  
Tamas Masszi ◽  
Ivan Spicka ◽  
...  

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


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 303-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luciano J Costa ◽  
Edward A. Stadtmauer ◽  
Gareth Morgan ◽  
Gregory Monohan ◽  
Tibor Kovacsovics ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Venetoclax (Ven), an oral agent that targets the antiapoptotic protein, BCL-2, has demonstrated efficacy, as monotherapy and combined with proteasome inhibitor (PI) bortezomib, in relapsed/refractory (R/R) multiple myeloma (MM). We report preliminary safety and efficacy data for Ven combined with the second generation PI carfilzomib (K) and dexamethasone (VenKd) in R/R MM. Methods: In this ongoing phase 2, dose escalation study (NCT02899052), patients with R/R MM and no prior K exposure received VenKd on 28-d cycles in 4 dose finding and one expansion cohorts: Ven 400 mg/day + K 27 mg/m2 Day 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 + dex 40 mg Day 1, 8, 15, 22 (Cohort 1), same regimen but with Ven 800 mg/day (Cohort 2), Ven 800 mg/day + K 70 mg/m2 Day 1, 8, 15 + dex 40 mg Day 1, 8, 15, 22 (Cohort 3/expansion cohort), or Ven 800 mg + K 56 mg/m2 Day 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 + dex 40 mg Day 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16, 22, 23 (Cohort 4). Treatment continued until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. Results: As of June 11, 2018, 42 patients were enrolled. The median age was 66.5 years (min, max: 37, 79), 63% had ISS II/III disease, and 8 patients (19%) had t(11;14). Patients received a median of 2 prior therapies (range: 1 - 3), 93% had received prior PI (50% refractory), 62% were refractory to immunomodulatory therapies, and 33% double refractory. At the data cut off, 29 patients were still active and had completed ≥2 cycles and 13 patients discontinued with the primary reason being disease progression (n=4), death (n=3), physician decision (n=2), withdrawal of consent (n=2), lack of efficacy (n=1), and AE (n=1). All patients experienced at least one AE, and grade 3/4 AEs experienced by >10% of subjects included: decreased lymphocyte count (26%), decreased neutrophil count (14%), and hypertension (12%). Thirteen subjects experienced at least one serious AE. Maximum tolerated dose was not reached and Ven 800 mg/day + K 70 mg/m2 was selected for expansion. Ven mean (% coefficient of variation) maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours (AUC24) on Cycle 1 Day 15 were 2.7 (57) mg/mL and 33.1 (54) mg×h/mL, respectively, at 400 mg venetoclax (n=4); and were 2.42 (53) mg/mL and 38.7 (51) mg×h/mL, respectively, at 800 mg venetoclax (n=13) in the dose escalation cohorts. The overall response rate (ORR) was 78% and the very good partial response (VGPR) or better rate was 56% (Table). Median time from first dose to the data cut or discontinuation was 5.7 months (range: 0.9 - 16.3) and the median time to first response was 1.9 months (95% CI: 0.9, 9.2). ORRs for subgroups of interest are reported in the Table. Conclusions: The combination of VenKd appears tolerable with no new safety signals or changes in Ven pharmacokinetics. VenKd shows promising preliminary efficacy in R/R MM patient subgroups. Response rates were comparable in all high risk subgroups and overall population. However, the subset of patients with t(11;14) had the highest response. Overall, these results demonstrate that VenKd is a safe and efficacious regimen in R/R MM and support the continued study of VenKd. Disclosures Costa: Abbvie: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Stadtmauer:Celgene: Consultancy; AbbVie, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Morgan:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kovacsovics:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Jakubowiak:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; SkylineDx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kaufman:Roche: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Other: data monitoring committee; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Mobasher:Genentech Inc: Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Ownership interests non-PLC. Freise:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pesko:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Munasinghe:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gudipati:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mudd:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bueno:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kumar:Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Merck: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: 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; 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.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 353-353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naval G. Daver ◽  
Marina Kremyanskaya ◽  
Casey O'Connell ◽  
Kim-Hien Dao ◽  
Stephen T Oh ◽  
...  

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


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3165-3165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Darrell J White ◽  
Suzanne Lentzsch ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Nizar Bahlis ◽  
Christine I Chen ◽  
...  

Introduction: The nuclear export protein Exportin 1 (XPO1) is overexpressed in a wide variety of cancers including multiple myeloma. Selinexor is a novel, first-in-class selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE), which blocks XPO1, forcing the nuclear retention and activation of tumor suppressor proteins. Selinexor in combination with low dose dexamethasone (Sel-dex) was recently approved based on data from the STORM study, wherein Sel-dex induced an overall response rate (ORR) of 26.2% in patients with penta-exposed, triple-class refractory multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide in combination with dexamethasone has been approved for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma with an ORR of 60-76%. The STOMP study assessed the efficacy and safety of the all oral combination of selinexor, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (SRd) in patients with relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. We previously reported the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of once weekly selinexor 60 mg, lenalidomide 25 mg and dexamethasone achieved an ORR of 92% in patients with RRMM who were lenalidomide naive. Here we evaluated once weekly selinexor in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Methods: STOMP is a multicenter, open-label study with a dose escalation (phase 1) and expansion (phase 2) to assess the maximum tolerated dose, RP2D, efficacy and safety of SRd in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were eligible if they had symptomatic myeloma per the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) guidelines with either hypercalcemia, renal failure, anemia, bone lesions (CRAB) criteria or myeloma defining events needing systemic therapy. Enrollment in this arm is ongoing. Results: As of July 01 2019, 8 patients (4 males and 4 females ) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were enrolled at the starting dose level of selinexor 60 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; lenalidomide 25 mg daily 1-21and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly on a 28 day cycle. The median age was 74 years (range: 51-86 years). No dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed in 5 DLT evaluable patients, 3 patients were not DLT evaluable because 1 patient did not finish cycle 1 due to social reasons and 2 patients missed doses due to serious adverse events (SAEs) unrelated to study drugs.. Common treatment related hematologic AEs (Grades 1/2, ≥3) were neutropenia (0%, 75%), anemia (0%, 25%), and thrombocytopenia (0%, 25%). Common non-hematologic AEs were diarrhea (63%, 0%), nausea (50%, 0%), fatigue (0%, 38%) decreased weight (38%, 0%), constipation (25%, 0%), hypokalemia (25%, 0%), and hypomagnesemia (25%, 0%). Among 7 efficacy evaluable patients, 6 patients achieved a response (ORR of 86%) including 1 complete response, 1 very good partial responses, 4 partial responses (2 unconfirmed), and 1 patient achieved a minimal response. With a median follow-up of 6.1 months, median progression-free survival was not reached. Conclusions: The all oral combination of SRd has promising activity with 6 of 7 efficacy evaluable patients achieving an objective response in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and no new or unexpected safety signals. Disclosures White: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lentzsch:Bayer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Proclara: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Clinical Care Options: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Honoraria; International Myeloma Foundation: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Columbia University: Patents & Royalties: 11-1F4mAb as anti-amyloid strategy; Caelum Biosciences: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Bahlis:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chen:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lipe:Celgene: Consultancy; amgen: Research Funding; amgen: Consultancy. Schiller:Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Sangamo Therapeutics: Research Funding; Pfizer Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Other, Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Biomed Valley Discoveries: Research Funding; Bristol Myer Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Constellation Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Eli Lilly and Company: Research Funding; FujiFilm: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Tuchman:Karyopharm: Honoraria; Prothena: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Alnylam: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kotb:Karyopharm: Equity Ownership; Janssen: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Leblanc:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sebag:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: 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. Venner:Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; J&J: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Bensinger:Amgen, Celgene: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda, Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Karyopharm: Other: Grant. Sheehan:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chai:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kai:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shah:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shacham:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties. Kauffman:Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Baljevic:Karyopharm: Other: Internal Review Committee participant; Cardinal Health Specialty Solutions: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 712-712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikas Gupta ◽  
Steffen Koschmieder ◽  
Claire N. Harrison ◽  
Francisco Cervantes ◽  
Florian H Heidel ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, has been shown to effectively reduce splenomegaly, manage myelofibrosis (MF)-related symptoms, and improve survival, but has limited anticlonal activity. Inhibition of hedgehog signaling via therapy with sonidegib, a selective inhibitor of smoothened (SMO), in combination with ruxolitinib reduced white blood cell (WBC) and platelet counts, JAK2 mutant allele burden, and bone marrow (BM) fibrosis in preclinical MF models more than ruxolitinib alone (Bhagwat, ASH 2013). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of sonidegib in combination with ruxolitinib for patients (pts) with MF is being assessed in the phase 1b portion of this phase 1b/2 study (NCT01787552). The safety-expansion cohort is currently ongoing; updated data will be presented. Methods: Adults with primary or secondary (post–polycythemia vera or –essential thrombocythemia) intermediate- or high-risk MF with palpable splenomegaly not previously treated with JAK or SMO inhibitors were eligible. Pts received oral doses of sonidegib once daily (QD) and ruxolitinib twice daily (BID). The first dose level enrolled was sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 10 mg BID. Dose escalations were guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model. In addition to safety and pharmacokinetics (PK), spleen length was assessed by palpation at screening, wk 1, every 2 wk until wk 13, monthly after wk 13, and at the end of treatment. BM fibrosis was assessed in biopsies collected every 24 wk. Results: As of March 26, 2014, 23 pts (16 male) with a median age of 67 y (range, 42-77 y) were treated at 3 dose levels (1: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 10 mg BID [n = 8]; 2: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 15 mg BID [n = 10]; 3: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 20 mg BID [n = 5]). Median (range) levels for hemoglobin, platelet count, and WBC count at baseline (BL) were 102 g/L (64-142 g/L), 232 × 109/L (81-900 × 109/L) and 21 x 109/L (2-59 x 109/L), respectively. Median (range) palpable spleen size at BL was 13 cm (5-38 cm) below costal margin. According to the International Prognosis Scoring System, 5, 7, and 11 pts were intermediate-1, intermediate-2, and high-risk, respectively. At data cutoff, 4 pts had discontinued treatment due to an adverse event (AE), physician decision, progressive disease, or patient decision (n = 1 each). PK parameters and trough levels for both agents generally aligned with single-agent data. Fatigue was the most commonly reported AE regardless of causality (Table). Six serious AEs were reported, 4 at dose level 1 (face edema, hyponatremia, pyrexia, right ventricular failure; n = 1 each) and 2 at dose level 2 (blood creatine kinase [CK] increased; n = 2). Dose-limiting toxicities of grade 3 and 4 CK elevations were reported in 2 pts at dose level 2. At data cutoff, 65% of pts achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in palpable spleen length from BL and 9 pts had resolution of splenomegaly. Conclusions: The evaluated combination doses of sonidegib and ruxolitinib were generally well tolerated in pts with MF, and preliminary efficacy data appear promising. Sonidegib and ruxolitinib in combination did not appear to affect the PK of either agent. Once the MTD and/or RP2D are determined, the safety and efficacy of this combination will be further evaluated in the phase 2 study. Abstract 712. Table.Dose Level 1Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 10 mg BID(n = 8)Dose Level 2Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 15 mg BID(n = 10)Dose Level 3Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 20 mg BID(n = 5)All(N = 23)AEs of any cause reported in > 10% of all pts, n (%)AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4Fatigue5 (63)1 (13)3 (30)0008 (35)1 (4)Anemia5 (63)5 (63)00005 (22)5 (22)Dysgeusia3 (38)02 (20)0005 (22)0Abdominal pain2 (25)02 (20)01 (20)05 (22)0Alopecia1 (13)04 (40)0005 (22)0Muscle spasms1 (13)04 (40)1 (10)005 (22)1 (4)Thrombocytopenia2 (25)1 (13)1 (10)01 (20)04 (17)1 (4)Diarrhea3 (38)01 (10)0004 (17)0Hyponatremia2 (25)2 (25)1 (10)1 (10)003 (13)3 (13)Blood CK increased1 (13)02 (20)2 (20)003 (13)2 (9)Muscular weakness1 (13)02 (20)1 (10)003 (13)1 (4)Aspartate aminotransferase increased002 (20)1 (10)1 (20)03 (13)1 (4)Decreased appetite3 (38)000003 (13)0Nausea2 (25)01 (10)0003 (13)0Constipation2 (25)01 (10)0003 (13)0Asthenia1 (13)02 (20)0003 (13)0Upper respiratory tract infection1 (13)02 (20)0003 (13)0Headache003 (30)0003 (13)0Myalgia003 (30)0003 (13)0Alanine aminotransferase increased002 (20)01 (20)03 (13)0 Disclosures Gupta: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Koschmieder:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Travel, Accomodation, Expenses Other; Novartis Foundation: Research Funding. Harrison:SBio: Consultancy; Gilead: Honoraria; CTI: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Cervantes:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Heidel:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Drummond:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Rey:Novartis: Consultancy. Hurh:Novartis NIBR: Employment. Bao:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Rampersad:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kalambakas:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2249-2249
Author(s):  
Kevin H. M. Kuo ◽  
D. Mark Layton ◽  
Katrin Uhlig ◽  
Megan Lynch ◽  
Li Liu ◽  
...  

Background: Thalassemia is a group of inherited blood disorders in which genetic mutation(s) in the α- and/or β-globin locus lead to excess precipitation of β- or α-globin, respectively, and compromised red blood cell (RBC) survival. The condition is characterized by ineffective erythropoiesis and peripheral hemolysis, with resultant anemia. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) supply appears to be insufficient in thalassemic RBCs to maintain RBC membrane fitness and clearance of globin precipitates. Mitapivat (AG-348) is an oral, small-molecule, allosteric activator of the RBC-specific form of pyruvate kinase (PK-R). PK-R is a key enzyme for maintaining energy homeostasis in RBCs, as they rely almost exclusively on the process of glycolysis to generate ATP. In healthy adults, mitapivat activates wild-type PK-R and increases ATP levels in RBCs. In adults with PK deficiency who were not regularly transfused, oral mitapivat was well tolerated and induced rapid, durable hemoglobin (Hb) increases (NCT02476916). In the Hbbth/3+ mouse model of β-thalassemia, mitapivat increased ATP levels; reduced markers of ineffective erythropoiesis; and improved anemia, RBC survival, and indices of iron overload. These data support the hypothesis that increased ATP synthesis mediated via PK-R activation by mitapivat may improve the survival of thalassemic RBCs in the bone marrow and/or peripheral circulation, and thus represents a novel mechanism to treat patients with thalassemia. Here we present the design of a phase 2, open-label study designed to test this hypothesis and assess the proof of concept of mitapivat in patients with thalassemia. Methods: This phase 2, multicenter, open-label study (NCT03692052) is evaluating the efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of mitapivat in adults with non-transfusion-dependent thalassemia (NTDT). Four sites in North America and the United Kingdom are enrolling patients. The study consists of a 24-week core period followed by a 2-year extension period (Figure). Approximately 17 subjects with NTDT, i.e., β-thalassemia with or without α-globin gene mutations, HbE β-thalassemia, or α-thalassemia (HbH disease), will be enrolled. Non-transfusion dependence is defined as ≤5 units of RBCs transfused in the preceding 24 weeks and no transfusions in the 8 weeks prior to the first day of study drug. The hemoglobin inclusion criterion is ≤10.0 g/dL, which was increased from ≤9.0 g/dL in a recent protocol amendment to better reflect the clinical representation in the NTDT patient population. All eligible patients will receive an initial mitapivat dose of 50 mg twice daily (BID). At the week 6 visit the dose may be increased to 100 mg BID, depending on safety and Hb response. The primary endpoint is the proportion of subjects who achieve an Hb response, defined as an increase in Hb of ≥1.0 g/dL from baseline at any time between week 4 and week 12 (inclusive). Key secondary and exploratory endpoints include changes in Hb and markers of hemolysis; hematopoietic activity; iron metabolism and iron overload; and assessments of safety and pharmacokinetics. The study is currently enrolling. Figure Disclosures Kuo: Agios: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Bioverativ: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy. Layton:Cerus Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Uhlig:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lynch:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vichinsky:GBT: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Research Funding; bluebird bio: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document