Effect of the Cytochrome P450 3A4 Inducers, Rifampicin and Dexamethasone, on the Pharmacokinetic, Pharmacodynamic and Safety Profile of Bortezomib In Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) and Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma (NHL)

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3983-3983
Author(s):  
Andrzej Hellmann ◽  
Simon A. Rule ◽  
Jan Walewski ◽  
Ofer Shpilberg ◽  
Huaibao Feng ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Time Curve ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Cyp3a4 Inducer ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
The Mean

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.

Phase 1 Clinical Trial of the Novel Structure Proteasome Inhibitor NPI-0052 in Patients with Relapsed and Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM).

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 431-431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul Richardson ◽  
Craig Hofmeister ◽  
Andrzej Jakubowiak ◽  
Todd M. Zimmerman ◽  
Matthew A. Spear ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Light Chain ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 431 Background: NPI-0052 has a novel, non-peptide based, bicyclic structure resulting in a unique proteasome inhibition and safety profile. In contrast to other proteasome inhibitors, NPI-0052 produces rapid, broad and prolonged inhibition of all 3 catalytic activities. Preclinical data subsequently suggested improvements in toxicology and efficacy, including activity MM resistant to bortezomib (BZ) and other agents (Chauhan et al, Cancer Cell 2005), thus this Phase 1 dose escalation trial in patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory MM was initiated. Materials and Methods: Patients (pts) were treated with NPI-0052 IV weekly for 3 weeks in 4-week cycles. Measurable disease by EBMT criteria was not required. The dose of NPI-0052 was escalated using a combination of accelerated titration and 3+3 design. PK and proteasome inhibition (blood and PBMCs) were assayed after the first and third doses. Preliminary Results: 27 pts have been treated at doses ranging from 0.025 to 0.7 mg/m2; median age is 62; 18 males/9 females; IgG/IgA/light chain/non-secretory 14/4/2/6; median of 4 prior regimens and 27% refractory to prior bortezomib. Reversible DLT was observed in two out of eight patients treated at 0.7 mg/m2 (Grade 3 fatigue; Grade 3 mental status changes and loss of balance), with 2 additional pts undergoing dose reductions in Cycle 1 (nausea and vomiting; vertigo and confusion/word-finding difficulties). Prophylactic anti-emetics have been instituted with a decrease in infusion-related nausea; similarly, pts with dizziness/vertigo have been administered meclizine with symptomatic improvement. Other drug-related adverse events have consisted principally of mild-to-moderate fatigue, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, headache and diarrhea; interestingly, myelosuppression, neuropathy and thrombosis do not appear to be elicited by NPI-0052. PK assessment demonstrates a rapid elimination half-life (<20 minutes) and relatively large Vz. NPI-0052 produces dose dependent proteasome inhibitions. At 0.7 mg/m2, Day 1/Day 15 inhibition of chymotrypsin-like activity in whole blood is 73% and 99%, respectively (the value for bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m2 is 65%). One patient with IgA MM (4 prior regimens plus ASCT; relapsed after prior BZ, not refractory) had a 71% decrease in M-protein (unconfirmed PR; off study after 3 cycles). A second pt with non-secretory disease (4 prior regimens;relapsed after prior BZ, not refractory) had a nearly 50% reduction in involved light chain; this pt remains active on study at 5+ months. In addition, 8 pts with relapsed/refractory MM remained on study for between 6-15 months (3 pts were on-study for over one year) with stable disease and no significant toxicity; 2 of these pts were BZ-refractory. Conclusions: Tolerability of 0.7 mg/m2 continues to be investigated in pts with MM, with prophylactic antiemetics and meclizine to reduce common drug-related toxicities of nausea and dizziness. The safety profile of NPI-0052 is importantly different from bortezomib in spite of higher and more durable proteasome inhibition; peripheral neuropathy and thrombocytopenia were not seen. Accrual continues to expand upon these results and assess the new lyophile formulation of NPI-0052. Disclosures: Richardson: Millennium: 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, Speakers Bureau; Keryx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Vorinostat is a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor that was approved in the FDA in October 2006 for the treatment of cutaneous manifestations in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) who have progressive, persistent, or recurrent disease on or following two systemic therapies. Jakubowiak:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers-Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spear:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Palladino:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Longenecker:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Neuteboom:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cropp:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Lloyd:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hannah:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Anderson:Nereus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Effects Of Inhibition Of XPO1/CRM1-Dependent Nuclear Export By Selinexor (KPT-330), Alone and In Combination With Carfilzomib (CFZ), On Apoptosis and Autophagy In Multiple Myeloma (MM)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 279-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaun Rosebeck ◽  
Malathi Kandarpa ◽  
Mattina M. Alonge ◽  
Jagoda Jasielec ◽  
Dominik Dytfeld ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Death ◽  
Cancer Cells ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Nuclear Export ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Nuclear Retention ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction Exportin 1 (XPO1/CRM1) is the sole transporter of most tumor suppressor proteins (TSP) from the nucleus to the cytoplasm. Small molecule selective inhibitors of nuclear export (SINE) block XPO1-mediated nuclear export, leading to nuclear retention of TSP, inducing cancer cell death and sensitizing cancer cells to other cytotoxic drugs. Although the cytotoxic and apoptotic effects of SINE on different cancer cells have now been established, the mechanism of cell death is still not fully understood. Recently, autophagy emerged as a possible cell death pathway and alternate to the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway (UPP) by which excess and/or dysfunctional proteins and organelles are degraded and recycled. MM cells require basal autophagy for survival and caspase 10 protease activity is required to limit autophagic cell death. The possibility that autophagy may be involved in the mechanism of action of SINE is supported by observations that knockdown of XPO1 can promote autophagy and that cytoplasmic p53 can repress autophagy. In this study, we evaluated the contribution of autophagy to the effects of Selinexor (KPT-330), a SINE currently in two phase I clinical trials, on MM cell cytotoxicity. Because proteasome inhibition can also induce autophagy, we hypothesized that the combination of Selinexor and CFZ, a next generation irreversible proteasome inhibitor approved for treatment of MM, may synergistically augment cytotoxicity in MM cells. Methods Plasma cells (PC) were purified from consented MM patient bone marrow aspirates using EasySep (Stem Cell Technology). PC purity (>80%) was determined by Wright-Giemsa staining of cytospins. Human myeloma cell lines (HMCL) NCI-H929, RPMI-8226, MM1.S and MM1.R were cultured in RPMI1640 with 10% FBS. IC50 values were determined using GraphPad Prism. Drug combination efficacy was determined using CalcuSyn (Biosoft). Combination index (CI) values <1.0 indicate synergy. Transcription factor profiling plate array II was from Signosis (Sunnyvale, CA). Otherwise, our studies used standard cellular and molecular biology techniques. Results Selinexor caused significant cytotoxicity in HMCL (IC50 10-100 nM), induced cell cycle arrest in G1, and promoted apoptotic cell death typified by caspase activation, DNA fragmentation, and Annexin V binding. Importantly, purified PC from newly-diagnosed MM patients were also sensitive to the cytotoxic effects of Selinexor. HMCL treated with KPT-330 also exhibited nuclear retention of p53. To gain insight into more global effects of SINE treatment, we assayed DNA binding activity of approx. 100 different transcription factors. TSP, such as Rb, p53, and EGR-1, exhibited increased activity, whereas proto-oncogenes, including NF-κB, Myc, and Myb, were inactivated in response to KPT-330. Western blot analysis of inactivated targets showed nearly total loss of protein. Unlike XPO1, which is degraded via the UPP upon treatment with SINE, loss of Myc and NF-κB subunits, including RelA, RelB, and p52, could not be reversed by proteasome inhibition. Instead, we found that Selinexor treatment induced markers of autophagy, including LC3B induction and processing, and promoted loss of caspase 10, which is associated with autophagic cell death in MM. Importantly, we have determined that the combination of Selinexor and CFZ results in synergistic cell death (CI 0.2-0.6) characterized by enhanced induction of both apoptosis and autophagy in HMCL. The effects of Selinexor and CFZ were also evaluated in NOD-SCID mice inoculated subcutaneously with NCI-H929 cells. Mice were treated 3 times weekly per oswith Selinexor (5 or 10 mg/kg) alone and in combination with twice-weekly IV-administered CFZ (1.5 or 3 mg/kg). After 16 days of treatment, high doses of either CFZ or Selinexor alone moderately inhibit tumor growth. Treatment with the combination of CFZ and Selinexor at all dose levels was more effective than single agent treatment, and high dose combination treatment completely impaired xenograft tumor growth with good tolerability. Conclusion Our studies are the first to suggest that Selinexor-induced cell death correlates with both apoptosis and autophagy, and that both cell death pathways are enhanced in response to combined treatment with CFZ. Overall, our pre-clinical study provides strong rationale for evaluation of Selinexor in combination with CFZ for the treatment of MM. Disclosures: McCauley: Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. 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, Patents & Royalties. Jakubowiak:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Safety and Efficacy of Dasatinib (DAS) Vs. Imatinib (IM) by Baseline Comorbidity In Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia In Chronic Phase (CML-CP): Analysis of the DASISION Trial.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3421-3421 ◽  
Author(s):  
H. Jean Khoury ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Hagop Kantarjian ◽  
Michele Baccarani ◽  
Neil P. Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 3421 Background: BCR-ABL kinase inhibitors DAS, nilotinib and IM have become the primary treatment modality for patients (pts) with CML-CP. Pre-treatment comorbid conditions have been proposed to help select a second-line BCR-ABL inhibitor for IM-resistant CML-CP. The DASISION trial is a large Phase 3 trial comparing DAS with IM as initial treatment in pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP and has demonstrated superior efficacy of DAS 100 mg once daily after a minimum follow-up of 12 months (Kantarjian, H, et al. N Engl J Med 2010;362:2260). This analysis assessed the impact of baseline comorbidities on safety and efficacy of these agents when used as initial therapy for CML-CP. Methods: 519 pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP were randomized to either DAS 100 mg once daily (n = 259) or IM 400 mg once daily (n = 260). Key exclusion criteria included serious uncontrolled medical disorders or active infections; uncontrolled or serious cardiovascular disease; prior or concurrent malignancy; inadequate hepatic or renal function; and ECOG performance status of ≥ 3. Pts were analyzed according to the number (0, ≥ 1 and ≥ 2) and type of baseline comorbidity (allergic, dermatologic, diabetes, endocrine-metabolic, gastrointestinal, hematologic-lymphatic, hepatobiliary, hyperlipidemia, musculoskeletal, renal and respiratory), and age (< 46, 46–65 and > 65 y). Complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), major molecular response (MMR) and drug-related adverse events (AEs) were analyzed across these groups. Cardiovascular comorbidities were analyzed separately and are not included here. Results: Across the 2 treatment arms, 74% of the pts had 31 baseline comorbidity and 47% had 32. The distribution of comorbidities including allergic (n = 61), dermatologic (n = 62), diabetes (n = 31), endocrine/metabolic (n = 98), gastrointestinal (n = 176), hematologic/lymphatic (n = 57), hepatobiliary (n = 56), hyperlipidemia (n = 41), musculoskeletal (n = 150), neoplasia (n = 17), renal (n = 33) and respiratory (n = 72) was balanced across the 2 arms. Proportions of pts across 3 Hasford risk groups were similar between pts with baseline comorbidity and those without. Safety profiles of DAS and IM in pts with and without baseline comorbidities were comparable (Table). Proportions of pts with at least 1 dose interruption or dose reduction were also similar with or without any comorbidity (Table). Pts with 32 comorbidities and pt grouped by comorbidity type including diabetes mellitus, hepatobiliary conditions and hyperlipidemia also had generally similar safety profiles. In both arms, the 12-mo rates of CCyR and MMR were similar (Table). In DAS-treated pts with diabetes (n = 18), hepatobiliary conditions (n = 32) and hyperlipidemia (n = 22), CCyR rates were 67, 78 and 96%, respectively; the respective MMR rates were 44, 56 and 59%. IM pts with diabetes (n = 13), hepatobiliary conditions (n = 24) and hyperlipidemia (n = 19) had CCyR rates of 69, 75 and 79%, respectively; and MMR rates of 15, 29 and 32%, respectively. In DAS-treated pts, CCyR rates were 88% for pts aged < 46 y (n = 128), 78% for those aged 46–65 y (n = 111) and 85% for those aged > 65 y (n = 20); the corresponding MMR rates were 45, 47 and 50%, respectively. The corresponding IM age groups (n = 111, 125 and 24, respectively) had CCyR rates of 70, 70 and 83%, respectively; and MMR rates of 26, 30, 29%, respectively. Safety profiles were generally similar across age groups in both treatment arms, except that fluid retention rates in pts aged < 46, 46–65 and > 65 y were 13, 25 and 35%, respectively, for DAS; and 34, 45 and 67%, respectively, for IM. Conclusions: The presence of baseline comorbidities appeared to have no effect on the safety and efficacy of either DAS or IM as initial therapy for CML-CP. Disclosures: Cortes: Brostol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Wyeth: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kantarjian:BMS, Pfizer and Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Baccarani:Brostol-Myers Squibb and Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shah:Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Ariad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bradley-Garelik:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dejardin:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hochhaus:Brostol-Myers Squibb, Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals A Phase 2a Study of the LSD1 Inhibitor Img-7289 (bomedemstat) for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 556-556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristen Pettit ◽  
Aaron T. Gerds ◽  
Abdulraheem Yacoub ◽  
Justin M. Watts ◽  
Maciej Tartaczuch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Platelet Count ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Spleen Volume ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Equity Ownership

Ruxolitinib (Jakafi®) is the one approved therapy for myelofibrosis (MF) based on reduction of splenomegaly and symptoms but JAK inhibition has not proven to significantly modify disease progression. There remains the need for novel therapies with distinct modes of action that can improve the patient experience of MF and impact progression. Lysine-specific demethylase, LSD1, is an epigenetic enzyme critical for self-renewal of malignant myeloid cells and differentiation of myeloid progenitors. LSD1 bound to GFI1b permits maturation of progenitors to megakaryocytes and enables their normal function. IMG-7289 (bomedemstat) is an orally available LSD1 inhibitor. In mouse models of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), IMG-7289 reduced elevated peripheral cell counts, spleen size, inflammatory cytokines, mutant allele frequencies, and marrow fibrosis (Jutzi et al. 2018) supporting its clinical development. IMG-7289-CTP-102 is an ongoing, multi-center, open-label study that recently transitioned from a Phase 1/2a dose-range finding study to a Phase 2b study of IMG-7289 administered orally once-daily in adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF resistant to or intolerant of ruxolitinib. The key objectives are safety, PD, changes in spleen volume (MRI/CT) and total symptoms scores (TSS) using the MPN-SAF instrument. Inclusion criteria included a platelet count ≥100K/μL. Bone marrow (BM) biopsies and imaging studies (both centrally-read) were conducted at baseline and during washout (post-Day 84). The MPN-SAF was self-administered weekly. Phase 1/2a patients were treated for 84 days followed by a washout of up to 28 days. Patients demonstrating clinical benefit could resume treatment for additional 12 week cycles. Dosing was individually tailored using platelet count as a biomarker of effective thrombopoiesis. Patients were started at a presumed sub-therapeutic dose of 0.25 mg/kg/d and up-titrated weekly until the platelet count rested between 50 and 100K/μL. This preliminary analysis includes 20 patients; 18 enrolled in the Phase 1/2a study, 2 in the Phase 2b portion. 50% had PMF, 35% Post-ET-MF, 15% Post-PV-MF. The median age was 65 (48-89) with 70% males. The median baseline platelet count was 197 k/μL (102-1309k/μL). 12 patients (56%) were transfusion-dependent at baseline. Sixty percent were IPSS-classified as high risk, the remainder, intermediate risk-2. 71% had more than 1 mutation of the 261 AML/MPN genes sequenced of which 63% were high molecular risk (ASXL1, U2AF1, SRSF2) mutations; 31% had abnormal karyotypes. Sixteen patients completed the first 12 weeks; 4 patients withdrew, one due to fatigue (Day 33), one for progressive disease (Day 39), one due to physician decision (Day 76), one for an unrelated SAE of cellulitis (Day 83). All patients were up-titrated from the starting dose 0.25 mg/kg to an average daily dose of 0.89 mg/kg ± 0.20 mg/kg, the dose needed to achieve the target platelet count range; 17 achieved the target platelet range in a mean time of 45 days. Of patients evaluable for response after cycle 1 in Phase1/2a (N=14), 50% had a reduction in spleen volume from baseline (median SVR: -14%; -2% to -30%). Further, 79% (N=11) recorded a reduction in TSS (mean change -28%; -13% to -69%); for 21% of patients (N=3), the change was &gt;-50%. Improved BM fibrosis scores at Day 84 were observed in 2/13 patients. Two patients had improvement in transfusion requirements. Plasma IL-8 levels were significantly elevated in 6/14 patients at baseline and dropped in a dose-dependent manner over 21 days in 5/6 patients. The mean duration of treatment is 166 days (14-539) at the census point in this ongoing study. Nineteen patients (95%) reported 358 AEs of which 22 were SAEs. Of the SAEs, 2 were deemed by investigators as possibly related: painful splenomegaly and heart failure. There have been no safety signals, DLTs, progression to AML, or deaths. This is the first clinical study of an LSD1 inhibitor in patients with MPNs. Once-daily IMG-7289 was well-tolerated in a heterogeneous population of patients with advanced MF and limited therapeutic options. Despite under-dosing and slow dose escalation, IMG-7289 improved symptom burdens in most patients and modestly reduced spleen volumes in a subset of patients. The Phase 2b 24-week expansion study with more aggressive dosing aimed at preserving safety and enhancing efficacy is open for enrollment in the US, UK and EU. Figure Disclosures Pettit: Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Gerds:Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Yacoub:Hylapharm: Equity Ownership; Agios: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ardelyx: Equity Ownership; Cara: Equity Ownership; Dynavax: Equity Ownership. Watts:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Bradley:AbbVie: Other: Advisory Board. Shortt:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astex: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Natsoulis:Imago BioSciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Jones:Imago BioSciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Talpaz:Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Imago BioSciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding. Peppe:Imago BioSciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rienhoff:Imago Biosciences: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties.

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Turnaround Time ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Specific Patient ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Pathology Samples

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.

A Phase 3 Prospective Randomized International Study (MMY-3021) Comparing Subcutaneous and Intravenous Administration of Bortezomib In Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 312-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Halyna V Pylypenko ◽  
Sebastian Grosicki ◽  
Evgeniy E Karamanesht ◽  
Xavier Leleu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Proteasome Inhibition ◽  
Venous Access ◽  
Local Tolerability ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 312 Background: Bortezomib (VELCADE®) is approved in the US and Europe for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) in both the frontline and the relapse settings. The recommended dose of bortezomib is 1.3 mg/m2 administered as a 3- to 5-second bolus intravenous (IV) injection. As an alternative to IV delivery, subcutaneous (SC) administration of bortezomib may be a good option for some patients, particularly those with poor venous access, since it would eliminate the need for repeated IV access or insertion of long-term central venous access devices, improving convenience for some patients and physicians. In a randomized phase 1 trial of SC versus IV bortezomib in 24 relapsed or refractory MM patients, both routes of administration demonstrated similar systemic drug exposure and proteasome inhibition, good local tolerability and, importantly, comparable response rates and safety profiles (Moreau et al. Haematologica 2008). A large, multicenter, international, randomized, phase 3 open-label trial was therefore undertaken to compare SC and IV administration in patients with previously treated MM to confirm these preliminary findings. Methods: Eligible patients were aged ≥18 years with measurable secretory MM who had relapsed or progressed following prior systemic therapy and had a Karnofsky performance status of ≥70%. Patients who had received prior bortezomib or >3 previous lines of therapy, or who had peripheral neuropathy or neuropathic pain of NCI CTCAE grade ≥2 were excluded. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive SC or IV bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 every 21 days for a total of eight cycles. SC injection sites were the thighs or abdomen, and the injection site was rotated for subsequent injections within a cycle. IV injections were administered at a concentration of 1 mg/ml as a 3- to 5-second IV push, and SC injections were administered at 2.5 mg/ml. For cycles 1–4, patients received bortezomib monotherapy. After 4 cycles, if a patient had no change or partial response (PR) as the best response and had not progressed, oral dexamethasone 20 mg could be added on the day of and day after bortezomib dosing (days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 11, 12) in the next 4 cycles. At the end of 8 cycles, patients who had an unconfirmed PR or who were evolving steadily to a delayed PR could receive two additional cycles of study medication. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR; complete response [CR + PR]) after 4 cycles. Response was evaluated using EBMT response criteria, modified with the addition of the response categories of near CR (nCR) and very good partial response (VGPR). Secondary endpoints were CR, nCR and VGPR rates after 4 cycles, ORR after 8 cycles including the effect of adding dexamethasone, duration of response (DOR), time to progression (TTP), progression-free survival, 1-year survival, and time to response. Safety and tolerability of the two administration routes, including local tolerability of SC administration, were also assessed. Pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) (via whole blood 20S proteasome inhibition assay) were evaluated in a subset of patients. Results: Between July 2008 and February 2010, 222 patients from 53 centers in 10 countries across Asia, Europe and South America were enrolled and randomized to SC or IV bortezomib (148 SC, 74 IV). 32 patients (18 SC, 14 IV) in 8 centers participated in the PK/PD substudy. The primary study analysis will occur in October 2010. Conclusion: Final data for all primary and secondary endpoints will be presented during the meeting, including time-to-event data for DOR, TTP and 1-year survival rate, as well as PK/PD data. Disclosures: Moreau: Jansen-Cilag: Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Advisory board, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Discussion of Velcade administered as an SC rather than an IV bolus is included. Leleu:Jansen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Co-Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Robak:Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding. Kropff:ORTHO BIOTECH: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cavet:OrthoBiotech: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Parasuraman:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Feng:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. Skee:Johnson & Johnson: Employment. van de Velde:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Deraedt:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harousseau:Jansen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Joint Bleeding Patterns in Patients Treated Prophylactically with an Extended Half-Life, Pegylated, Full-Length Recombinant Factor VIII (BAX 855)

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2300-2300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marilyn J. Manco-Johnson ◽  
Alice D. Ma ◽  
Robert Klamroth ◽  
Werner Engl ◽  
Lorena Griparic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Factor Viii ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Half Life ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Recombinant Factor Viii ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Bleeding Episodes ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
The Mean

Abstract BAX 855 is a pegylated full-length recombinant factor VIII (PEG rFVIII) built on ADVATE with an extended half-life and is in development for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding in patients with hemophilia A. In a pivotal trial, 101 previously treated patients (PTPs) received BAX 855 for prophylaxis twice weekly (in the per protocol analysis set). At screening, 67/101 (66.3%) of patients had arthropathy (reported in medical history or history of joint surgery) and 69/101 (68.3%) had at least 1 target joint. A target joint was defined as a single joint (ankle, knee, hip, or elbow) with ≥ 3 spontaneous bleeding episodes in any consecutive 6-month period. Overall, among these 101 PTPs, the mean (standard deviation) annualized joint bleeding rate (AJBR) was 1.8 (3.0) and 57.4% of patients had zero joint bleeding episodes. There were 32, 40, and 29 subjects with 0, 1-2, and ≥3 target joints, respectively, at screening. Patients with more target joints at screening experienced higher AJBRs: with mean AJBRs of 1.15, 1.84, and 2.58 for patients with 0, 1-2, and ≥3 target joints, respectively, at screening. Of the individual joints, ankle and knee joints had highest AJBRs. BAX 855 demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of joint bleeding, with the majority of joint bleeding episodes, irrespective of target joint status, treated with 1-2 infusions: 92.8%, 91.9% and 94.4% for patients with 0, 1-2, and ≥3 target joints, respectively, at screening. Hemostatic efficacy of BAX 855 at 24 hours was rated as excellent or good in >90% of patients, regardless of target joint status at screening. Patients with 0 target joints at screening had 57.1% of joint bleeding episodes considered mild in severity, while patients with 1-2 or ≥3 target joints had 59.5% and 66.7% of joint bleeding episodes, respectively, rated moderate in severity. There were few joint bleeding episodes considered severe. Similar doses per infusion of BAX 855 were used to treat joint bleeding episodes: the mean dose per BAX 855 infusion was 35, 33.8, and 36.2 IU/kg for patients with 0, 1-2, and ≥3 target joints, respectively. In conclusion, BAX 855 demonstrated a favorable efficacy profile in the treatment of breakthrough joint bleeding episodes, and twice-weekly use was efficacious in prevention of bleeding, with the lowest overall AJBRs achieved in patients in the trial without target joints. Disclosures Manco-Johnson: Baxter/Baxalta, Bayer, CSL Behring, Biogen NovoNordisk: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Research Funding. Ma:Biogen Idec: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kedrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Klamroth:Bayer, Baxter, CSL Behring, Pfizer, Novo Nordisk, and Octapharma: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biogen and SOBI: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Engl:Baxalta: Employment, Equity Ownership. Griparic:Baxalta: Employment. Dyck-Jones:Baxalta: Employment. Abbuehl:Baxalta: Employment, Equity Ownership.

scholarly journals Rapid and Robust Mobilization of CD34+ HSCs without G-CSF Following Administration of Mgta-145 Alone or in Combination with Plerixafor

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1961-1961
Author(s):  
John F. DiPersio ◽  
Jonathan Hoggatt ◽  
Steven Devine ◽  
Lukasz Biernat ◽  
Haley Howell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Fold Change ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cd34 Cells ◽  
Equity Ownership

Background Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is the standard of care for mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). G-CSF requires 4-7 days of injections and often multiple aphereses to acquire sufficient CD34+ cells for transplant. The number of CD34+ HSCs mobilized can be variable and patients who fail to mobilize enough CD34+ cells are treated with the combination of G-CSF plus plerixafor. G-CSF use is associated with bone pain, nausea, headaches, fatigue, rare episodes of splenic rupture, and is contraindicated for patients with autoimmune and sickle cell disease. MGTA-145 (GroβT) is a CXCR2 agonist. MGTA-145, in combination with plerixafor, a CXCR4 inhibitor, has the potential to rapidly and reliably mobilize robust numbers of HSCs with a single dose and same-day apheresis for transplant that is free from G-CSF. MGTA-145 plus plerixafor work synergistically to rapidly mobilize HSCs in both mice and non-human primates (Hoggatt, Cell 2018; Goncalves, Blood 2018). Based on these data, Magenta initiated a Phase 1 dose-escalating study to evaluate the safety, PK and PD of MGTA-145 as a single agent and in combination with plerixafor. Methods This study consists of four parts. In Part A, healthy volunteers were dosed with MGTA-145 (0.0075 - 0.3 mg/kg) or placebo. In Part B, MGTA-145 dose levels from Part A were selected for use in combination with a clinically approved dose of plerixafor. In Part C, a single dose MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered on day 1 and day 2. In Part D, MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered followed by apheresis. Results MGTA-145 monotherapy was well tolerated in all subjects dosed (Table 1) with no significant adverse events. Some subjects experienced mild (Grade 1) transient lower back pain that dissipated within minutes. In the ongoing study, the combination of MGTA-145 with plerixafor was well tolerated, with some donors experiencing Grade 1 and 2 gastrointestinal adverse events commonly observed with plerixafor alone. Pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure and maximum plasma concentrations increased dose proportionally and were not affected by plerixafor (Fig 1A). Monotherapy of MGTA-145 resulted in an immediate increase in neutrophils (Fig 1B) and release of plasma MMP-9 (Fig 1C). Neutrophil mobilization plateaued within 1-hour post MGTA-145 at doses greater than 0.03 mg/kg. This plateau was followed by a rebound of neutrophil mobilization which correlated with re-expression of CXCR2 and presence of MGTA-145 at pharmacologically active levels. Markers of neutrophil activation were relatively unchanged (<2-fold vs baseline). A rapid and statistically significant increase in CD34+ cells occurred @ 0.03 and 0.075 mg/kg of MGTA-145 (p < 0.01) relative to placebo with peak mobilization (Fig 1D) 30 minutes post MGTA-145 (7-fold above baseline @ 0.03 mg/kg). To date, the combination of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor mobilized >20/µl CD34s in 92% (11/12) subjects compared to 50% (2/4) subjects receiving plerixafor alone. Preliminary data show that there was a significant increase in fold change relative to baseline in CD34+ cells (27x vs 13x) and phenotypic CD34+CD90+CD45RA- HSCs (38x vs 22x) mobilized by MGTA-145 with plerixafor. Mobilized CD34+ cells were detectable at 15 minutes with peak mobilization shifted 2 - 4 hours earlier for the combination vs plerixafor alone (4 - 6h vs 8 - 12h). Detailed results of single dose administration of MGTA-145 and plerixafor given on one day as well as also on two sequential days will be presented along with fully characterized graft analysis post apheresis from subjects given MGTA-145 and plerixafor. Conclusions MGTA-145 is safe and well tolerated, as a monotherapy and in combination with plerixafor and induced rapid and robust mobilization of significant numbers of HSCs with a single dose in all subjects to date. Kinetics of CD34+ cell mobilization for the combination was immediate (4x increase vs no change for plerixafor alone @ 15 min) suggesting the mechanism of action of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor is different from plerixafor alone. Preliminary data demonstrate that MGTA-145 when combined with plerixafor results in a significant increase in CD34+ fold change relative to plerixafor alone. Magenta Therapeutics intends to develop MGTA-145 as a first line mobilization product for blood cancers, autoimmune and genetic diseases and plans a Phase 2 study in multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2020. Disclosures DiPersio: Magenta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; NeoImmune Tech: Research Funding; Cellworks Group, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; RiverVest Venture Partners Arch Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; WUGEN: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bioline Rx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Amphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hoggatt:Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Other: Protocol development (via institution); Bristol Myers: Other: Grant for monitoring support & travel support; Magenta Therapeutics: Other: Travel support for advisory board; My employer (National Marrow Donor Program) has equity interest in Magenta. Biernat:Medpace, Inc.: Employment. Howell:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schmelmer:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Neale:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boitano:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Cooke:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Goncalves:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Raffel:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Falahee:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Morrow:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Davis:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership.

scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results from the Connect® MM Registry

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3129-3129
Author(s):  
Hans C. Lee ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Robert M. Rifkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Causes Of Death ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. 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 . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Impact of Modified Thalidomide Dosing in Bortezomib/Thalidomide/Dexamethasone for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Transplant-Eligible: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4739-4739
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Adrián Alegre ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Post Induction ◽  
Adjusted Indirect Comparison ◽  
Equity Ownership

Introduction: For patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are transplant-eligible, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTd) is a standard of care (SoC) for induction and consolidation therapy. Clinical practice has evolved to use a modified VTd dose (VTd-mod; 100 mg thalidomide daily), which is reflected in recent treatment guidelines. As VTd-mod has become a real-world SoC, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the VTd-mod dose from recent clinical trials versus the dose included in the label (VTd-label; ramp up to 200 mg thalidomide daily) was performed to understand the effect on efficacy of modified VTd dosing for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. Methods: For each outcome (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], overall response rates [ORR] post-induction and post-transplant, and rate of peripheral neuropathy), a naïve comparison and a MAIC were performed. Data for VTd-label were obtained from the phase 3 PETHEMA/GEM study (Rosiñol L, et al. Blood. 2012;120[8]:1589-1596). Data for VTd-mod were pooled from the phase 3 CASSIOPEIA study (Moreau P, et al. Lancet. 2019;394[10192]:29-38) and the phase 2 NCT00531453 study (Ludwig H, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31[2]:247-255). Patient-level data for PETHEMA/GEM and CASSIOPEIA were used to generate outcomes of interest and were validated against their respective clinical study reports; aggregate data for NCT00531453 were extracted from the primary publication. Matched baseline characteristics were age, sex, ECOG performance status, myeloma type, International Staging System (ISS) stage, baseline creatinine clearance, hemoglobin level, and platelet count. Results: Patients received VTd-mod (n = 591) or VTd-label (n = 130). After matching, baseline characteristics were similar across groups. For OS, the naïve comparison and the MAIC showed that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC HR, 0.640 [95% CI: 0.363-1.129], P = 0.121; Figure 1A). VTd-mod significantly improved PFS versus VTd-label in the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC HR, 0.672 [95% CI: 0.467-0.966], P = 0.031; Figure 1B). Post-induction ORR was non-inferior for VTd-mod versus VTd-label (MAIC odds ratio, 1.781 [95% CI: 1.004-3.16], P = 0.065). Post-transplant, VTd-mod demonstrated superior ORR in both the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC odds ratio, 2.661 [95% CI: 1.579-4.484], P = 0.001). For rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy, the naïve comparison and MAIC both demonstrated that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC rate difference, 2.4 [⁻1.7-6.49], P = 0.409). Conclusions: As naïve, indirect comparisons are prone to bias due to patient heterogeneity between studies, a MAIC can provide useful insights for clinicians and reimbursement decision-makers regarding the relative efficacy and safety of different treatments. In this MAIC, non-inferiority of VTd-mod versus VTd-label was demonstrated for OS, post-induction ORR, and peripheral neuropathy. This analysis also showed that VTd-mod significantly improved PFS and ORR post-transplant compared with VTd-label for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. A limitation of this analysis is that unreported or unobserved confounding factors could not be adjusted for. Disclosures Sonneveld: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; SkylineDx: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mateos:Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, Adaptive: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Biotech Inc, Mundipharma EDO, PharmaMar, Roche Laboratories Inc, Takeda Oncology: Other: Advisory Committee; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, GSK, Abbvie, EDO, Pharmar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Takeda Oncology.: Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc: Other: Data and Monitoring Committee. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Facon:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hulin:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen, AbbVie, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria. Hashim:Ingress-Health: Employment. Vincken:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kampfenkel:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cote:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Moreau:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document