Phase 2 Study of MLN8237, An Investigational Aurora A Kinase (AAK) Inhibitor In Patients with Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML) or Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS)

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3273-3273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stuart L Goldberg ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Michael D Craig ◽  
Emmanuel Gyan ◽  
John Lister ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Investigational Agent ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3273 Background: AAK is essential for mitotic progression and is amplified or overexpressed in AML and other hematologic malignancies. The investigational agent MLN8237 is an orally available, potent, and selective AAK inhibitor with preclinical activity against leukemias, lymphomas, and myeloma. Phase 1–2 and pharmacodynamic results show a mechanism of selective AAK inhibition, and some durable clinical activity in patients with treatment-resistant malignancies. Methods: Open-label, multicenter, phase 2 trial (NCT00830518) of MLN8237 in patients aged ≥18 years with advanced AML or intermediate-2/high-risk MDS. Eligibility criteria included ECOG performance status 0–2, adequate organ function, and >10% blasts in bone marrow. Patients were not excluded based on number of prior therapies, treatment with hydroxyurea or steroids, prior transplant, or ongoing cytopenias. Patients received 21-day cycles of MLN8237 50 mg BID for 7 days followed by 14 days' rest until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was response rate, defined as complete (CR) plus partial (PR) response, which included CR (CRi) or PR (PRi) with incomplete blood count recovery in AML patients and marrow CR or PRi in MDS patients. Response was evaluated by modified AML/MDS international working group (IWG) criteria; stable disease was defined as failure to achieve PRi but no evidence of progression in AML patients, and as failure to achieve PR but no evidence of progression for >8 weeks in MDS patients. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for AEs (NCI CTCAE) version 3.0. Results: 57 patients were enrolled; median age was 72 years (range 46–85), 56% were male, and 81% white. Forty-six (81%) patients had AML, of whom 21 (37%) had secondary leukemia. Of 11 (19%) patients with MDS, 8 had an IPSS score of intermediate-2 (1.5 or 2.0), and 3 had a high (≥2.5) score. Forty-nine (86%) patients had received prior therapies, and 9 (16%) received ≥3 prior therapies. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1–16) of MLN8237. Treatment-related grade 3/4 AEs were seen in 24 (42%) patients and included febrile neutropenia (11%), thrombocytopenia (9%), anemia (9%), fatigue (7%), and neutropenia (7%). Treatment-emergent somnolence was identified in 14 (25%) patients, and grade 3/4 treatment-related somnolence was reported in 2 (4%) patients. Fourteen (25%) patients discontinued due to AEs. Twenty-two on-study deaths were reported, caused by events unrelated to MLN8237, including progressive disease (46%), and sepsis (14%); of these, 9 deaths from AML occurred within 2 months of study entry. Overall, 6 (13%) responses were observed (all AML patients; response-evaluable population n=45); 5 patients had PR. One CR was documented in a 79-year old female with AML and no prior therapy, who presented with 23% bone marrow blasts at the time of progression from MDS/RAEB-2, and remains in CR through 16 cycles (1 year). Seventeen (49%) AML and 2 MDS (20%) patients achieved stable disease. Ongoing analyses suggest that co-morbidities influenced clinical outcomes. Conclusions: Data suggest that single-agent MLN8237 has anti-leukemia activity with a 13% response rate (all AML) in this clinical study of patients with advanced, mainly pre-treated disease. In patients with rapidly progressive disease, these results indicate that improved outcomes require strategies to enhance both disease control and risk management in early cycles, allowing time needed to achieve clinical benefit from AAK inhibition. These results support further clinical studies of MLN8237 in heme-lymphatic malignancies and solid tumors. Disclosures: Goldberg: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Investigational agent in clinical development for the treatment of AML/MDS. Fenaux:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cephalon: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Craig:Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gyan:Amgen: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding; Celegene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Schiller:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Jung: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Leonard:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Fingert:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Westervelt:Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Ixazomib and Daratumumab without Dexamethasone (I-Dara) in Elderly Frail RRMM Patients. a Multicenter Phase 2 Study (IFM 2018-02) of the Intergroupe Francophone Du Myélome (IFM)

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 83-83
Author(s):  
Magaret Macro ◽  
Cyrille Touzeau ◽  
Clara Mariette ◽  
Salomon Manier ◽  
Sabine Brechignac ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Frail Patients ◽  
Phase 2 Study ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Frailty Score

Abstract Purpose: Frail patients with multiple myeloma have an inferior outcome, especially in the relapse setting. This adverse prognosis is mainly related to a high discontinuation rate due to treatment related adverse events. The aim of this phase 2 study is to evaluate efficacy and tolerability of Ixazomib-Daratumumab (I-Dara) without Dexamethasone in elderly frail patients with relapsed myeloma (NCT03757221). Methods: Fifty Ixa-Dara naïve RRMM patients (1-2 prior therapy) were planned to receive oral Ixa (4 mg: days 1, 8, 15), IV Dara (16 mg/kg; days 1, 8, 15, 22, cycles 1-2; days 1, 15, cycles 3-6; days 1, cycles 7+) and IV Methylprednisolone before Dara (100 mg at day 1, 8, cycle 1 and then 60 mg). They were enrolled if frailty score was ≥2 by IMWG score and FIRST proxy score (Facon T et al, Leukemia, 2020). The primary endpoint was ≥very good partial response rate at one year. Secondary endpoints included ORR, PFS, OS & toxicity according to NCI-CTCAE version 5.0. Results: Among 52 patients screened during this ongoing trial, 44 were included between 03/2018 and 05/2021. Patient were at first (n=28) or second relapse (n=16). Thirty -eight patients (86%) were previously exposed to bortezomib and 8 (18%) were previously refractory to lenalidomide. Median age was 82 (80-84). All patients had a frailty score ≥2. In 22 patients ISS was stage I (n=5), II (n=10) or III (n=7). Eleven (32%) patients harbored high-risk cytogenetic, including t(4;14) (n=3) or del17p (n=8). The median duration of Tx among 23 pts with ongoing Tx was 6 months [0-27] at data cutoff (July 19)]. The median duration of Tx among 21 pts who stopped Tx was 7 months [0-21]: 13 had progressive disease. Six patients died during the study: Daratumumab-related bronchospasm (D1C1); Ixazomib-related overdose (C2); progressive disease (C2 & C4), sepsis (C1 & C2). Regarding toxicity, 28 ≥grade 3 AE occurred amongst 24 pts (54%). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (n=5), other cytopenias (n=4), infection (n=4) and gastrointestinal disorders (n=2). Fourteen out of 28 were SAE including 1 bronchospasm, 1 acute respiratory failure and 2 ixazomib overdoses. Overall response rate, including minimal response, was 86 % in pts with ongoing treatment and 71% in pts who stopped Tx; ≥VGPR rate was 33% and 6% respectively. Conclusions: These preliminary results show a favorable safety profile of ixazomib and daratumumab combination, without dexamethasone, in this specific population of very elderly frail patients with RRMM and high risk cytogenetic for almost one third of them. Efficacy results will be analyzed when the 50 patients will be enrolled in the study and evaluable for the primary endpoint. Disclosures Macro: GSK: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgen/BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel accomodation, Research Funding. Manier: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Regeneron: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene - Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Vincent: Celgene: 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. Decaux: Amgen BMS Celgene Janssen Sanofi Takeda: Honoraria. Leleu: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Carsgen Therapeutics Ltd: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Non-financial support. OffLabel Disclosure: Ixazomib and Daratumumab association is not approved in NDMM or in RRMM

Bendamustine + Rituximab (BR) Chemoimmunotherapy and Maintenance Lenalidomide in Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) and Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma (SLL): A Wisconsin Oncology Network (WON) Study

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3647-3647
Author(s):  
Julie E. Chang ◽  
Chong Zhang ◽  
KyungMann Kim ◽  
Rachel Kirby ◽  
Lynn Volk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Fish Analysis ◽  
Minor Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3647 Introduction: BR chemoimmunotherapy was shown to have an overall response rate (ORR) of 59%, a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 14.7 months, and an acceptable toxicity profile in R/R CLL (Fischer K, et al. J Clin Oncol 2011). Given the single-agent activity of lenalidomide in R/R CLL/SLL, we hypothesized that maintenance lenalidomide after BR induction could improve PFS. Methods: Thirty-four patients requiring therapy for R/R CLL/SLL were treated with bendamustine 90 mg/m2 IV on days 1 & 2 and rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV on day 1 every 28 days for a maximum of 6 cycles. Growth factor support was permitted. Patients achieving at least a minor response (objective improvement even if not meeting criteria for partial response) were eligible to proceed with 12 cycles of maintenance therapy with lenalidomide 5–10 mg/day orally given continuously in each 28-day cycle. Patients were eligible if they had histologically proven CLL/SLL and had received >1 but ≤5 prior cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens (retreatment with an identical regimen was not counted as a separate treatment). The primary endpoint was PFS. Results: Baseline characteristics include median age 67 (range 38–86), 25 men/9 women, 26 CLL/8 SLL, and median of 2 prior therapies (range 1–4). Cytogenetic profiling by FISH analysis was available in 22 patients (65%), with 11/22 demonstrating presence of 17p and/or 11q deletions. Twenty-five patients (74%) completed 6 cycles of induction BR. Two patients died from toxicities of pneumonia and heart failure during cycle 1; 7 patients received <6 cycles due to toxicities (n=4), progressive disease (n=2), and stable disease (n=1). Dose modifications were required in 14 (41%) patients, most commonly for neutropenia (12/14), thrombocytopenia (3/14), and weight loss/failure to thrive (3/14). Grade 3/4 toxicities were primarily hematologic, with neutropenia in 20 patients, anemia in 1, and thrombocytopenia in 7. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 4 patients. Infections with or without neutropenia were common; grade 2 infections in 16 patients, grade 3 in 7 patients. Grade 2 rash occurred in 4 patients. Eleven deaths have been observed, 7 events due to progressive disease (including 2 events of transformed lymphoma). Responses were evaluable in 31/34 patients. The ORR was 65%, with 6 complete (18%) and 16 partial (47%) responses. An additional 7 patients achieving stable disease were eligible to proceed to maintenance therapy. With a median follow up of 20.1 months, the median PFS and overall survival are 24.3 months and 27.9 months, respectively. Conclusions: In our multicenter trial for patients with R/R CLL/SLL, the BR induction produced an ORR that is comparable to historical observations (65% vs 59%). However, the median PFS is longer (24.3 vs 14.7 months), suggesting maintenance lenalidomide may be contributing to an improved response duration. Based upon these promising results, we have initiated a successor study in which patients will receive lenalidomide plus rituximab maintenance after a BR induction. Disclosures: Chang: Celgene: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide as maintenance therapy for CLL after induction rituximab + bendamustine chemoimmunotherapy. Fenske:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kahl:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Determination of Recommended Phase 2 Dose of ABT-199 (GDC-0199) Combined with Rituximab (R) in Patients with Relapsed / Refractory (R/R) Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 325-325 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew W. Roberts ◽  
Shuo Ma ◽  
Danielle M. Brander ◽  
Thomas J. Kipps ◽  
Jacqueline C. Barrientos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Institutional Funding ◽  
Eliza Hall Institute ◽  
Hall Institute

Abstract Introduction: ABT-199 is a selective, orally bioavailable BCL-2 inhibitor that rapidly induces responses in ~80% of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) as a single agent (Seymour, EHA 2014). Rituximab (R) has only modest and short-lived activity as a single-agent in CLL; it can enhance the activity of other agents with minimal additional toxicity. ABT-199 and R demonstrate synergy in preclinical models of CD20-positive lymphoid malignancies, and the combination has the potential to improve efficacy. Methods: Primary objectives of this phase 1b, open-label, dose-escalation, multicenter study were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD)/recommended phase 2 dose (RPTD) of ABT-199 + R in pts with R/R CLL/SLL and evaluate the safety profile; secondary objectives examine the pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy of the combination. Eligible pts began treatment with 20 or 50 mg ABT-199 (modified to 20 mg during the study) daily, with weekly increases in a ramp-up phase to a final cohort dose of 200 - 600 mg. After completion of the ramp-up phase, R was added starting at 375 mg/m2 and then 500 mg/m2 monthly for a total of 6 doses. ABT-199 was continued daily until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCI-CTCAE v4.0. The MTD was determined using the Continual Reassessment Method. Responses were assessed using established criteria for CLL/SLL, including CT scan at month 3 and CT scan and bone marrow (BM) biopsy at the end of combination therapy. MRD was assessed using four color flow cytometry in peripheral blood (PB) and/or BM aspirate ≥2 months after response criteria were first met, and in PB every 12 weeks until MRD negativity was achieved. Results: As of July 6, 2014, 49 pts enrolled in 5 dose escalation cohorts (n = 41) and a safety expansion cohort (n = 8), with a median time on study of 201 days (1 – 624). Median age was 68 years (range 50–88) and 30 (61%) were male. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (1–10). Thirteen (27%) had fludarabine-refractory disease and 9 (18%) R-refractory. Nine (18%) had del (17p) and 19/27 (70%) with available data had unmutated IGVH. Thirteen pts have discontinued therapy: 6 due to PD; 3 after attaining complete remission; 2 due to AEs and 2 withdrew consent. Preliminary PK data suggest a negligible effect of R on ABT-199 exposure. The most common overall treatment-emergent AEs (>25% pts) were neutropenia (47%), nausea (41%), diarrhea (37%), pyrexia (31%), headache (31%), fatigue, upper respiratory tract infection, and cough (each 29%). The most common overall grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (47%), thrombocytopenia (16%), and anemia (14%). Treatment-emergent SAEs occurred in 20 (41%) pts; the most common were pyrexia (6%), and febrile neutropenia, infusion-related reaction, TLS, and Richter's Transformation (each 4%). Six pts experienced a DLT: 1 febrile neutropenia (200mg), 1 each thrombocytopenia, hematophagocytic syndrome, neutropenia (300mg), 1 neutropenia (600mg), and 1 pt experienced a fatal event of hyperkalemia in the setting of TLS after the first dose (50mg). That event led to a modified dosing scheme; no TLS was observed in the 32 subsequent pts using the revised ramp up dosing scheme. No MTD was identified. Of 34 pts who were evaluable for response in dose escalation cohorts, the overall response rate (ORR) was 88%, with 11 (32%) achieving a CR/CRi and 20 (56%) achieving a partial response (PR). MRD was quantified by local laboratory in 19 pts. Thirteen pts (7 in CR (6 at 10-4 and 1 at 10-3 sensitivity) and 6 in PR (10-4 sensitivity)) were MRD negative in bone marrow while one was MRD negative in peripheral blood (10-4 sensitivity). The RPTD of ABT-199 is 400 mg daily based on safety data; key safety and efficacy data for the dose selection are summarized in the table. Conclusions: The combination of ABT-199 and R is well-tolerated and achieves an overall response rate of 86% with 31% CRs in pts with CLL/SLL. Efficacy was observed across all dose cohorts. The RPTD of ABT-199 is 400mg daily, supported by a trend of lower rates of neutropenia and GI toxicity events in the absence of a clear difference in efficacy, compared to the higher doses. A phase 3 trial comparing ABT-199 and R versus bendamustine and R in pts with previously treated CLL is underway. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Roberts: Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research : Employment, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Ma:Genentech: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding. Kipps:AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding. Barrientos:Gilead: institutional funding Other; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, institutional funding, institutional funding Other; AbbVie: institutional funding, institutional funding Other; Celgene: Consultancy. Davids:Genentech: Consultancy; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Anderson:Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research: Employment, milestone payments related to ABT-199 Other; AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Tam:Roche: Honoraria. Mason-Bright:AbbVie : Employment. Rudersdorf:AbbVie: Employment. Gressick:AbbVie: Employment. Yang:AbbVie, Inc: Employment. Munasinghe:AbbVie: Employment. Zhu:AbbVie, Inc: Employment. Cerri:AbbVie: Employment. Enschede:AbbVie, Inc: Employment. Humerickhouse:AbbVie, Inc: Employment. Seymour:AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy.

scholarly journals A Phase 1/2 Study of Umbralisib Ublituximab and Venetoclax in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 360-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul M. Barr ◽  
Brian T. Hill ◽  
Shuo Ma ◽  
Andrea M Baran ◽  
Andrew Bui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Safety Monitoring ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3

Background:Despite the effectiveness of novel agents in treating CLL, single agent use requires prolonged administration which can lead to drug resistance, toxicity and considerable cost over time. Combinations may provide deeper prolonged remissions using defined treatment durations. Umbralisib (Umbra) is a novel, highly-specific PI3Kδ inhibitor and ublituximab (Ubli) is a chimeric monoclonal antibody targeting a unique epitope on CD20 and glycoengineered to enhance antibody dependent cellular toxicity. Combining these agents with the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax (Ven) may prevent drug resistance (Choudhary, Cell Death Dis 2015), avoid tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) and achieve undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD). This phase 1/2 trial evaluates the safety and efficacy of Umbra + Ubli + Ven for 12 cycles followed by MRD evaluation in relapsed or refractory CLL patients (pts). Methods:Pts received three 28-day cycles of Umbra daily along with Ubli, administered weekly during cycle 1, then once during cycles 2 and 3, followed by Umbra + Ven for 9 additional cycles. During the phase 1 study, dose levels including Umbra 600mg and 800mg were tested with Ubli 900mg and Ven, increased in standard fashion to 400 mg during cycle 4. The primary endpoint for phase 1 was safety; the primary endpoint for phase 2 was complete remission (CR) rate by iwCLL criteria. MRD negativity (&lt;10-4by 8-color flow cytometry) was a key secondary endpoint with bone marrow and peripheral blood MRD negative pts stopping therapy after 12 cycles and other pts continuing on single agent Umbra. Results: 21 pts have been treated to date: 9 in phase 1 and 12 in phase 2. Baseline demographics were as follows: male/female (12/9), median age 65 yrs (range 49-83), median prior therapies 2 (1-5). 9 pts had prior ibrutinib of which 4 were BTK inhibitor refractory. BTK resistance mutations were found in 2 pts. High risk genetic features included unmutated IGHV genes (11 pts), del17p or del11q (7 pts), TP53 mut (1 pt), NOTCH1 mut (4 pts) and SF3B1 mut (1 pt). Baseline TLS risk was high, medium and low risk in 2, 12 and 7 pts respectively. During dose escalation, 3 pts were treated using Umbra 600mg and subsequently 6 pts using Umbra 800mg. No DLTs occurred, and the MTD was not reached. As such, the phase 2 dose used was Ubli 900 mg + Umbra 800 mg with venetoclax, undergoing ramp up to 400 mg. For all pts treated to date, the most common AEs were (all causality and all grade; &gt;20% of pts) infusion reactions (62%), thrombocytopenia (57%), neutropenia (52%), anemia (52%), fatigue (52%), ALT or AST increase (43%), nausea (33%), diarrhea (29%) and headache (24%). Grade 1 creatinine increase, hypocalcemia and hyperkalemia were observed in 12 (57%), 6 (29%) and 5 (24%) of pts respectively. These AEs predominately occurred outside of venetoclax ramp up. Grade 3/4 AE's occurring in ≥ 2 pts included neutropenia (n=4, 19%), infusion reaction (n=2, 10%) and thromboembolism (n=2, 10%). No grade ≥ 3 PI3Kδ-associated toxicities were noted (0 events of pneumonitis, colitis or grade 3/4 transaminitis). No events of TLS were observed. One pt discontinued study treatment due to grade 3 rash. All pts were converted to low TLS risk after 3 cycles of Umbra + Ubli, except for 1 pt who remained medium risk after discontinuing Ubli secondary to a grade 3 infusion reaction, allowing outpatient venetoclax initiation in all pts. In evaluable pts, the overall response rate was 85% (11/13) after cycle 3, 100% (9/9) after cycle 7 and 100% (5/5) after cycle 12. Of the 5 pts who finished 12 cycles of therapy, a median reduction in nodal disease of 87% occurred resulting in 2 CRs and 3 PRs by iwCLL criteria. 4 pts have undetectable MRD (&lt;0.01%) in both the peripheral blood and bone marrow and have stopped therapy. MRD was undetectable in peripheral blood and intermediate (0.01% - 1.0%) in the bone marrow for 1 pt who continues on Umbra. With a median f/u of 4.2 months (range 0.2-14.2), no pts have experienced disease progression. (Figure) Conclusion: We established the phase 2 dose of Umbra + Ubli + Ven and demonstrated good tolerability in pts with relapsed or refractory CLL. Preliminary results suggest that this chemotherapy-free regimen can provide undetectable MRD after only 12 cycles, representing an effective treatment plan for this population. Ongoing enrollment is focused on pts who have relapsed after BTK inhibitors and a multi-center trial is planned to further develop the triplet regimen. Figure Disclosures Barr: Gilead: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Verastem: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie company: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hill:TG therapeutics: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celegene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ma:Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding; Xeme: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Bioverativ: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Liesveld:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onconova: Other: Data safety monitoring board. Sportelli:TG Therapeutics: Employment. Miskin:TG therapeutics Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Weiss:TG Therapeutics: Employment. Friedberg:Acerta: Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee; Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee. Zent:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Mentrik Biotech: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: umbralisib and ublituximab as treatment of CLL

scholarly journals A Phase 1/2 Trial of Pomalidomide, Dexamethasone and Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 4774-4774
Author(s):  
James R. Berenson ◽  
Laura V. Stampleman ◽  
Alberto Bessudo ◽  
Peter J. Rosen ◽  
Leonard M Klein ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Pegylated Liposomal Doxorubicin ◽  
Great Promise ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Immunomodulatory drugs (IMiD), such as thalidomide and lenalidomide (LEN) and its newest derivative pomalidomide (POM), have shown great promise for the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts). POM has in vitro anti-MM potency and has shown efficacy for the treatment of relapsed/refractory (RR) MM pts. POM with dexamethasone (DEX) induces responses even for MM pts who are refractory to bortezomib (BORT) and LEN (Richardson et al, 2012). Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with BORT is FDA-approved for the treatment of MM pts who have received one prior therapy not containing BORT. The combination of PLD and LEN or thalidomide has shown efficacy for both RR and frontline MM pts (Offidani et al, 2006; 2007). We have also demonstrated that both the efficacy and tolerability of LEN in combination with DEX, PLD and BORT (DVD-R) may be improved by changing the doses and schedules of these drugs (Berenson et al, 2012). Based on these results, we hypothesized that the combination of POM, DEX and PLD would be effective for the treatment of RRMM pts. Thus, we conducted the first study investigating the safety and efficacy of POM in combination with intravenous (IV) DEX and PLD as a phase 1/2 trial using a modified dose, schedule and longer 28-day cycles for pts with RRMM. Methods The phase 1 portion enrolled MM pts w/ progressive disease whereas those enrolled in phase 2 also had to be refractory to LEN (single-agent or in combination), as demonstrated by progressive disease while receiving their last LEN-containing regimen or relapsed within 8 weeks of their last dose of this IMiD. Pts who have previously received POM treatment were ineligible. In the phase 1 portion, POM was administered at 2, 3 or 4 mg daily in three cohorts on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle and DEX (40 mg) and PLD (5 mg/m2) were fixed and given intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11. Results As of June 20th, 2014, 48 pts were enrolled in the trial and a total of 47 pts had received study drug. Pts had received a median of 4 prior treatments (range 1-18), with a median of 2 prior IMiD-containing regimens (range, 0-8). Fifty-three percent of the pts had received a prior PLD-containing regimen and 21% had received a prior IMiD and PLD combination treatment. Among all enrolled pts, 40 pts discontinued treatment and seven remain active. Pts completed a median of 3 cycles (range: 1-8), with a median follow-up time of 5.4 months (range: 0-22). During the phase 1 portion of the trial, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of POM was established at 4 mg. Enrollment of pts into the phase 2 portion of the trial began at the MTD. However, neutropenia ≥ grade 3 was observed at this dose in 10/17 (58.8%) phase 2 pts; and, as a result, the protocol was amended so that the MTD was lowered to 3 mg for all pts subsequently enrolled. Among the 36 pts enrolled in phase 2, 78% percent were refractory to LEN and steroids with or without other agents and 47% had previously received PLD. A median of 2 cycles (range, 1 to 8) were administered among the pts enrolled in phase 2. Thirty-five pts were evaluable for response as one pt was active but had not yet had any post-baseline disease assessments. Among all pts enrolled in phase 2, the overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) were 29% and 49%, respectively, with 6 pts (17%) showing stable disease and 12 pts (34%) demonstrating progressive disease. For all pts enrolled in phase 2, the median follow-up time was 4.7 months (range 0-12) and the median PFS was 5.3 months. ORR and CBR for pts in the phase 2 were higher among pts receiving POM at 3 mg (32% and 58%, respectively) than among pts receiving POM at 4 mg (25% and 37%, respectively). Pts receiving the 4 mg dose of POM experienced more toxicities resulting in discontinuations, which likely explains the lower ORR and CBR observed among pts receiving this POM dose. Common ≥ grade 3 adverse events observed throughout the trial were neutropenia (21 pts; 44.7%), lymphopenia (10 pts; 21.3%), and hyponatremia (4 pts; 8.5%). One pt died of grade 5 sepsis. Conclusions This phase 1/2 trial is the first evaluating POM with PLD and DEX and demonstrates that the combination of POM at 3 mg, PLD and DEX using a modified 28-day cycle schedule is safe and effective for the treatment of MM pts refractory to LEN. Disclosures Berenson: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Swift:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Vescio:Celgene: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Phase 3 Study of Pomalidomide with Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone Versus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Asian Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Myeloma (RRMM) - Interim Analysis of a Trial By the Asian Myeloma Network (AMN)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1-1
Author(s):  
Wee-Joo Chng ◽  
Xinhua Li ◽  
Cindy Lin ◽  
Jin Seok Kim ◽  
Hiroshi Handa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Prior Exposure ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Asian Patients ◽  
Phase 2 Study ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Experienced Grade

Background Pomalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug that has been approved for the treatment of relapse refractory myeloma. A previous small randomized phase 2 study in the United States showed that combination of Pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induce a greater response rate than pomalidomide and dexamethasone1. In our prior study, AMN0012, we should that in patients with sub-optimal response to pomalidomide and dexamethasone, the addition of cyclophosphamide can increase response resulting in improvement of progression free survival. In the current study, we seek to randomize Asian patients with RRMM between PCD and PD to confirm the benefit of PCD. Method We conducted a prospective randomized trial of pomalidomide (4mg daily for 21 days followed by 7 days rest) plus dexamethasone 40mg once weekly for 4 weeks with or without cyclophosphamide (400mg once a week) in patients with relapse and refractory myeloma that has to be refractory to lenalidomide and has prior exposure to proteasome inhibitors. Each cycle is 4 weeks. Patients from Singapore, Japan and Korea (NCT03143049) were included in this Asian Myeloma Network trial. The trial was started in Sep 2017 and is still ongoing. To date, 53 patients have been recruited so far. This interim report presents data available up till the data cut-off date of 24 June 2020. Results Forty-six patients have available base line information and safety data and is included in this interim analysis. 50% of patients are male and median age of the cohort is 68 years old. 39% and 28% of patients are International Stage System (ISS) stage 2 and 3 respectively. 20% of patients have abnormal creatinine clearance. Median prior line of treatment is 3. All patients are refractory to lenalidomide and 96% have prior exposure to bortezomib. In addition, 12 patients (26%) and 5 (11%) have been treated with Carfilzomib and Ixazomib respectively. 15 (33%) patients had prior high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant. 20 (44%) patients required dose reduction of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide or dexamethasone. 89% of patients experience adverse events (AEs) of any grade. Of the 297 episodes of AEs, 43% are grade 3 or higher, with 50% of these episodes related to the study drugs. 57% of patients experienced serious AEs (SAEs) of any grade. Of the 74 episodes of SAE, 89% are grade 3 or higher, with 49% of these episodes related to the study drugs. Almost all of these events are related to cytopenias and infections. 20 (44%) of the patients develop grade 3 neutropenic fever and 9 (20%) patients have grade 3 or higher pneumonia. Only 1 patient experienced grade 3 peripheral neuropathy, 1 patient develop grade 3 pulmonary embolism, 1 patient developed grade 3 venous thromboembolism, and 1 patient experienced grade 3 renal impairment. At a median follow-up of 10.9 months, 9 of the 46 patients have died, and 21 have progressed. Three patients withdrew due to toxicity. While the overall response of the study population is not part of this interim analysis, we assessed the response of patients from the National University Cancer Institute, Singapore which has the highest number of patients recruited to get an idea of the therapeutic efficacy. Of the 14 patients recruited at NCIS, 1 patient achieved CR, 3 VGPR, 7 PR, producing a response rate of 79%. Conclusion In this interim analysis of a prospective randomized study of pomalidomide and dexamethasone with or without cyclophosphamide in Asian patients, we demonstrated the feasibility and efficacy of this combination. Longer follow-up and final analysis of the study will be needed to ascertain the therapeutic advantage of PCD over PD in relapse and refractory myeloma that is refractory to lenalidomide. References 1. Baz RC, Martin TG 3rd, Lin HY, Zhao X, Shain KH, Cho HJ, Wolf JL, Mahindra A, Chari A, Sullivan DM, Nardelli LA, Lau K, Alsina M, Jagannath S. Randomized multicenter phase 2 study of pomalidomide, cyclophosphamide, and dexamethasone in relapsed refractory myeloma. Blood. 2016 May 26;127(21):2561-8. 2. Soekojo CY, Kim K, Huang SY, Chim CS, Takezako N, Asaoku H, Kimura H, Kosugi H, Sakamoto J, Gopalakrishnan SK, Nagarajan C, Wei Y, Moorakonda R, Lee SL, Lee JJ, Yoon SS, Kim JS, Min CK, Lee JH, Durie B,Chng WJ. 3. Pomalidomide and dexamethasone combination with additional cyclophosphamide in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (AMN001)-a trial by the Asian Myeloma Network. Blood Cancer J. 2019 Oct 8;9(10):83. Disclosures Chng: Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kim:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy.

Bortezomib (Velcade™) + Adriamycin™ + Thalidomide + Dexamethasone (VATD) as an Effective Regimen in Patients with Refractory or Relapsed Multiple Myeloma (MM).

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 2399-2399 ◽  
Author(s):  
Klaus Hollmig ◽  
Julie Stover ◽  
Giampaolo Talamo ◽  
Athanasios Fassas ◽  
Choon-Kee Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Platelet Count ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
M Protein ◽  
Ambulatory Care Setting ◽  
Pet Scans

Abstract Velcade™ (Vel) has shown promising activity as single agent and, more recently, in combination with other antimyeloma agents (dexamethasone, thalidomide) in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We have now explored the efficacy and safety of adding Adriamycin™ 2.5–10.0mg/m2 continuous infusion on days 1–4 and days 9–12 to Velcade™ 1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2 administered on days 1, 4, 9 and 11; thalidomide 50 or 100 mg days 1–12; and dexamethasone 20 or 40 mg days 1–4 and 9–12 (VATD). The treatment was administered in an out-patient, ambulatory care setting to 20 patients. Of the 20 patients evaluable for toxicity, 14 are also evaluable for response. Patient characteristics are outlined in Table 1. Prior resistance to Velcade™-based treatment was demonstrated in 19 patients, with progressive disease in 13 and stable disease in 6. All patients have received systemic therapy immediately prior to the initiation of VATD, which included Vel + thal (7), VTD (5), DT-PACE (4), Revlimid (3), and dex + thal (1). Hematologic toxicities were dependent on the pre-VATD platelet count and WBC levels, as outlined in Table 2. Out of 14 evaluable patients, partial response (≤ 75% of serum M protein reduction, ≤ 75% of urinary M excretion) was obtained in 7 (50%); none had a complete response. Serum M protein decreased by a median of 57% (21–90%) and urine M decreased by a median of 93% (21–90%). Bone marrow follow-up examinations were available in 13 patients and revealed a median reduction in monoclonal plasmacytosis of 50% (range 33–94%); none had a normal bone marrow. Pre-VATD PET scans showed evidence of disease in 10 patients. Post VATD PET scans showed improvement in 5, stable disease in 1 and progressive disease in 4 patients. Our results are promising and demonstrate that administration of Adriamycin™ can be safely added to VTD, and that this addition does overcome the resistance to Velcade-based therapy even in metronomic doses. This approach is now being formally evaluated in a randomized trial comparing VTD alone versus added Adriamycin™ 2.5 mg/m2 on days 1–4 and 9–12 as a salvage protocol in patients with recurrent or progressive MM. Patient Characteristics Velcade 1.0 mg/m² Velcade 1.3 mg/m² Parameter Total Adria 2.5 mg/m² Adria 5 mg/m² Adria 10 mg/m² Adria 5 mg/m² 1: Autotransplant; 2: Thalidomide; 3: Velcade; 4: Velcade; Thalidomide, Dexamethasone N 20 7 10 1 2 % Age ≥ 65 14 14 60 100 0 % Abn Cytogen 55 43 60 100 50 % Prior Autotx1 85 86 80 100 100 % Prior Thal2 100 100 100 100 100 % Prior Vel³ 95 100 90 100 100 % Prior VTD[sup4] 45 71 20 100 50 % LDH > 190 U/l 55 57 60 100 0 Hematologic Toxicities Pre-Treatment Median WBC Nadir Platelet Count WBC < 2,000 WBC > 2,000 WBC < 2,000 WBC > 2,000 > 100k (n=6) 1 5 .65 2.07 50k-100k (n=9) 3 6 .94 1.73 < 50k (n=4) 1 3 1.98 3.44 Median Platelet Nadir > 100k 46,000 51,000 50K–100k 11,000 20,000 < 50K 36,000 47,000

SDX-105 Demonstrates a High Response Rate as a Single-Agent with Acceptable Safety in Rituximab-Refractory, Relpased Indolent or Transformed Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL).

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 2480-2480 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Friedberg ◽  
Philip Cohen ◽  
Robert O. Kerr ◽  
K. Sue Robinson ◽  
Andres Forero-Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Mitotic Catastrophe ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Cell Death Pathway ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract SDX-105 (Treanda™, Bendamustine HCl) is an alkylating agent that may exert its anti-tumor activity via mitotic catastrophe, an apoptosis-independent cell-death pathway, as well as, through apoptosis. Its cytotoxic potency is unattenuated in chemotherapy-resistant lymphoma cell lines. We initiated a multi-center Phase II trial to investigate the safety and efficacy of SDX-105 in patients with rituximab-refractory, relapsed indolent or transformed B cell NHL. Patients must have pathologically-confirmed disease that has been demonstrated to be rituximab-refractory (no response or progression within 6 months) or must be intolerant of rituximab. Other requirements include measurable disease, adequate renal, hepatic and bone marrow function (ANC ≥1K/mm3, platelet ≥ 100K/mm3, except in cases of &gt;50% NHL in bone marrow), up to 3 prior chemotherapies, and no prior allogeneic transplant. Patients receive SDX-105, 120 mg/m2 IV over 30–60 min, days 1 and 2, every 21 days. Grade 4 hematologic toxicity during a cycle results in dose reduction for subsequent cycles (to 90 mg/m2 and then to 60 mg/m2). Patients achieving stable disease or better after 6 cycles may receive up to 6 more cycles. 49 patients have been accrued to date with data available on the first 15 patients. The median age is 69 yrs (range 47–84), 47% male, median 6 yrs since diagnosis with NHL. Histologies: 10 follicular (6 Grade 1, 3 Grade 2, 1 Grade 3), 2 SLL, 1 marginal zone and 2 transformed NHL. Other features include: 93% Stage III/IV, 20% with B symptoms, 87% with extranodal disease, median 2 prior chemotherapies with 40% not responding to last chemotherapy. 4 patients have required dose reduction to 90 mg/m2 and 2 patients have withdrawn prior to completing 6 cycles due to treatment-associated toxicity. The current overall response rate (ORR) based upon best response in the intent-to-treat population is 80% (CR/CRu 20%, PR 60%). Overall 73% of patients experienced a related non-hematologic adverse event (AE), of which 20% were Grade 3 and 0% Grade 4. The most frequent AEs were nausea (40%), vomiting (27%), fatigue (33%), anorexia (20%), and constipation (20%). Alopecia was not observed. Grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity was seen in 53% (neutropenia), 20% (thrombocytopenia), and 13% (anemia) of patients. 4 patients experienced serious AEs, including 1 patient with baseline renal insufficiency who died on study from renal failure and pulmonary edema; other events include admissions for fever and anemia, urinary tract infection, and dehydration. Based upon these preliminary findings, SDX-105 demonstrates a high overall response rate with acceptable hematologic toxicity and modest non-hematologic toxicity in a relapsed lymphoma patient population, many of whom are refractory to rituximab-chemotherapy combinations. An additional study evaluating the combination of SDX-105 and rituximab in patients with relapsed indolent NHL who are rituximab-sensitive is also ongoing.

A Phase I/II Study of Bortezomib and Low Dose Intravenous Melphalan (BM) for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 2555-2555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
Heather E. Oakervee ◽  
Nicola Foot ◽  
Samir Agrawal ◽  
Patricia Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Number Of Cycles

Abstract Background: Bortezomib as a single agent has known efficacy in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma. The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) was 35% in the SUMMIT study and 46% in the APEX study. In-vitro studies including our own have demonstrated potent synergy with other chemotherapeutic agents such as melphalan. It therefore follows that responses to bortezomib may be further improved by the combination of such drugs. Aims: The primary objectives of this Phase I/II study was to assess the safety, tolerability and response rates in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma; secondary objectives being time to progression (TTP) and overall surival (OS). Methods: This was a multi-centre, non-randomised trial for patients with relapsed myeloma. Patients received bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 on days 1,4,8 and 11 of each 28 day cycle with melphalan on day 2 at increasing dose levels. This was initially at 10mg/m2, but due to cytopenias subsequently at 2.5 and 5mg/m2 (levels 1a, 1 and 2) and we plan to escalate to 7.5mg/m2. Up to 8 cycles were given with dexamethasone added for stable or progressive disease after 4 or 2 cycles respectively. Responses were determined by EBMT criteria. Results: To date, 18 patients have been enrolled (12 male 6 female; median age 60 [range 44–73]; median number of prior therapies 3 [range 1–5] of which 17 have had at least one autologous stem cell procedure with high dose melphalan; 10 prior thalidomide and 2 prior bortezomib). 12 patients received melphalan at 10mg/m2 but due to unacceptable delays predominantly due to thrombocytopaenia, subsequent treatment levels commenced at 2.5mg/m2. The median number of cycles completed thus far is 4 (range 0–8) and of the 16 evaluable, the overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) across all treatment levels was 50% rising to 75% following the addition of dexamethasone as per protocol. At level 1a (melphalan 10mg/m2 ,N=12, median number of cycles completed =5) the best responses (with dexamethasone as indicated) were: 1CR, 1 VGPR, 5 PR, 2 MR; at level 1 (melphalan 2.5mg/m2, N=4) 1 PR, 2 MR (after 2 cycles only). The median time to any response was 1 cycle (range 1–3 ). Three patients have progressive disease, but the median TTP and OS have not yet been reached (median follow-up 3 months). Non-haematological toxicities have been modest with 7 SAEs reported of which only 1 was possibly drug related (myocardial infarction), and 4 episodes of Grade 3 neuropathy (2 resulting in study withdrawal). The commonest grade 3–4 haematological toxicity was thrombocytopaenia (N=10) complicated by bleeding in one patient, followed by neutropenia (N=6). Summary: The combination of bortezomib and intravenous melphalan can be given safely to patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and dose escalation is ongoing. Myelosupression was the commonest grade 3–4 adverse event. A response rate of 50% was seen, which was further improved to 75% with the addition of dexamethasone. This combination may therefore result in higher responses than single agent bortezomib in heavily pretreated patients.

Combined Autophagy and Proteasome Inhibition for Multiple Myeloma: Final Results of a Phase 1 Trial of Hydroxychloroquine and Standard Dose Bortezomib for Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 1869-1869 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dan T. Vogl ◽  
Edward A. Stadtmauer ◽  
James Bradner ◽  
Lisa Davis ◽  
Thomas M. Paul ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Peripheral Blood ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Bone Marrow Plasma ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1869 BACKGROUND: The aggresome/autophagy pathway is the primary mechanism for disposal of ubiquitinated proteins for cells exposed to proteasome inhibition. Preclinical evidence shows that combining inhibition of the proteasome with bortezomib (Bz) and inhibition of autophagy with the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) leads to enhanced cytotoxicity in myeloma cells. METHODS: Patients with relapsed or refractory myeloma enrolled on a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. Patients received 2-weeks of single-agent oral HCQ, followed by the addition of Bz on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of 21-day cycles. HCQ and Bz doses were determined by dose level: (1) 200 mg qod / 1.0 mg/m2, (2) 200 qod / 1.3, (3) 200 qd / 1.3, (4) 200 bid / 1.3, (5) 400 bid / 1.3, (6) 600 bid / 1.3. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade ≥3 toxicity probably related to study therapy and occurring during the first 5 weeks, with the exception of any anemia or lymphopenia, neutropenia responsive to growth factor, platelets >10,000/mm3 not associated with bleeding, or gastrointestinal complaints relieved by symptomatic therapy. We used electron microscopy to characterize changes in autophagic vesicles in serial samples of peripheral blood mononuclear cells and CD138-selected bone marrow plasma cells. RESULTS: We enrolled 25 patients between 1/2008 and 2/2011, of which 21 patients completed at least 1 cycle of combined therapy and were evaluable for toxicity. The median duration of study participation was 14 weeks (range 1–77). Reasons for study discontinuation were side effects of therapy (6), lack of response (7), disease progression (11), and non-compliance (1). No protocol-defined dose limiting toxicities occurred, and the maximum tolerated dose was determined to be the top dose level of Bz 1.3 mg/m2 and HCQ 600 mg twice daily. Hematologic abnormalities were generally more attributable to disease progression than to treatment toxicity, but at the top dose level one patient had grade 3 thrombocytopenia and neutropenia after starting with a normal platelet count and ANC, without evidence of progression through therapy. At the top dose level, gastrointestinal toxicities predominated, including 5 out of 6 evaluable patients with some form of grade 3 GI toxicity. Treatment emergent neuropathy occurred in 7 patients but was restricted to grade 1 or 2 and was easily managed with dose reduction of the Velcade. Three patients came off study before receiving the combined regimen and were not evaluable for response. The best responses for the remaining 22 patients included 3 near complete responses (nCR), 3 minor responses (MR), 9 stable disease (SD), and 7 progression (PD). The 3 nCRs occurred in Bz-naïve patients receiving HCQ at 400 mg/d (1 pt) and 1200 mg/d (2 pts). Two patients who had previously progressed while receiving weekly maintenance Bz had MRs on study, including one who maintained a MR for over 7 months. Three additional Bz-refractory patients initially achieved stable disease during study treatment, with on study TTP of 8 weeks (at HCQ 1200 mg/d), 15 weeks (100 mg/d), and 17 weeks (200 mg/d). Preliminary analyses of vesicle counts at HCQ doses up to 800 mg/d identify individual patients with increases in autophagic vesicles in either peripheral blood or bone marrow plasma cells, but these are not consistent, nor is there any evident correlation with response. CONCLUSION: Combined Bz and HCQ is tolerable, with a phase 2 dose of Bz 1.3 mg/m2 and HCQ 1200 mg/d and likely hematologic and gastrointestinal DLTs. There is a suggestion of improved efficacy over Bz alone, with minor responses and long periods of stable disease in Bz-refractory patients. Final analysis of autophagy inhibition in correlative specimens, including the top dose cohort, will be available for the meeting. Disclosures: Vogl: Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Hydroxychloroquine is FDA approved for treatment of malaria and rheumatoid arthritis. This paper discusses its use in treatment of myeloma. Carroll:Agios Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; TetraLogic Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis Corporation: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline, Inc.: Research Funding. Amaravadi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document