Multicenter Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Lenalidomide in Patients with Relapsed Adult T-Cell Leukemia-Lymphoma (ATL) or Peripheral T-Cell Lymphoma (PTCL).

Abstract Abstract 2737 Introduction: ATL is prevalent in Japan and has the worst prognosis among T-cell malignancies. PTCL also has a poor prognosis with currently available chemotherapeutic regimens, and both would benefit from better treatment modality. Lenalidomide is an immunomodulatory agent with direct tumoricidal and antiproliferative activity, and is approved for multiple myeloma (MM) in combination with dexamethasone after at least 1 prior therapy and for transfusion-dependent anemia due to low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes associated with 5q deletion. We conducted a phase 1 study of lenalidomide in patients with relapsed ATL or PTCL to establish the recommended dose and schedule for a subsequent phase 2 study. Patients and Methods: This multicenter, phase 1, dose-escalation study assessed the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in patients with relapsed advanced ATL or PTCL. Dose-escalation was conducted according to the standard 3+3 design. Up to one PTCL patient was allowed to be included in each cohort of 3 patients. Patients in Cohort 1 received oral lenalidomide 25 mg daily on Days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle. Patients in Cohorts 2 and 3 received 25 and 35 mg/day, respectively, on each day of the 28-day cycle. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as febrile neutropenia lasting 5 or more days; thrombocytopenia (platelets <10,000/uL or bleeding requiring platelet transfusion); ALT/AST elevation of Grade 4 or that of Grade 3 lasting 7 or more days; and/or clinically unacceptable Grade 3 or higher other non-hematological adverse events (AEs). Treatment was continued until the development of unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease (PD). Response was assessed by internationally accepted standard criteria for ATL and PTCL. Results: From July 2010–June 2012, 13 Japanese patients (9 ATL and 4 PTCL; age 32–74 years [median, 64]; 1–11 prior therapies [median, 1]) were enrolled: 3 in Cohort 1, 6 in Cohort 2, and 4 in Cohort 3. The 3 patients in Cohort 1 received lenalidomide for 21, 103, and 637 days, respectively, until PD with no instances of DLT. In Cohort 2, 1 patient experienced DLT (thrombocytopenia, platelets <10,000/uL) and 4 patients received lenalidomide for 37, 56, 138, and 387 days, respectively, until PD in 3 patients and unrelated death in one. The sixth patient is still receiving lenalidomide for 28+ days without a DLT. In Cohort 3, 2 patients had DLTs (thrombocytopenia, platelets <10,000/uL in one patient and Grade 3 prolongation of QTc interval in one patient on concomitant fluconazole with preexisting cardiac disease and grade 1 QTc prolongation at baseline), 1 patient received lenalidomide for 71 days before withdrawal of consent, and 1 patient is still receiving lenalidomide for 323+ days without a DLT. Based on these results, 25 mg daily per 28-day cycle was regarded as the MTD. Other Grade 3/4 non-DLT AEs occurring in 2 or more patients included neutropenia (n=8), lymphocytopenia (n=7), thrombocytopenia (n=3), skin rash (n=3), hyperbilirubinemia (n=2), and increased ALT/AST (n=2). Among the 9 ATL patients, 3 achieved partial responses (PR) with hematological complete response in 2 patients, including the disappearance of skin lesions in 1 patient. These responses occurred between 54 and 57 days, and lasted for 92, 279+ and 505 days. Among the 4 PTCL patients, 1 achieved a PR at day 106 with >75% reduction in lymph nodes, which lasted for 282 days. PK profiles of patients in the study were generally consistent with that observed in Japanese MM patients. Plasma exposure of lenalidomide increased with increasing dose with a mean Cmax on Day 1 for 25 mg and 35 mg of 493 ng/mL and 628 ng/mL, respectively, and a mean AUC24 of 2774 ng/mL and 3062 ng/mL, respectively. There was no evidence of accumulation following multiple dosing for 8 days. Conclusions: This phase 1 study identified lenalidomide 25 mg daily per 28-day cycle as the dose and schedule for a subsequent phase 2 study in patients with ATL or PTCL. Based on the preliminary evidence of antitumor activity in ATL and PTCL patients, a phase 2 study in patients with relapsed ATL in Japan is planned. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Lenalidomide (CC-5013) is an investigational agent in Japan; this abstract assesses its use in adult ATL patients. Tobinai:Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Zenyaku: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Symbio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Biomedics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Solasia Pharma: Clinical trials, Clinical trials Other, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Chugai/Roche: Research Funding; Takeda: Clinical trials, Clinical trials Other, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Final Results of Phase 1/1b Study of Tenalisib, Dual PI3K δ/γ Inhibitor in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory T-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123954 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 2831-2831 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Swaminathan P. Iyer ◽

Brad M. Haverkos ◽

Jasmine Zain ◽

Radhakrishnan Ramchandren ◽

Mary Jo Lechowicz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

T Cell ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Safety Profile ◽

Research Funding ◽

Cell Lymphoma ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Clinical Activity ◽

Advisory Committees

Introduction: Tenalisib (RP6530) is a novel, highly specific, dual PI3K δ/γ inhibitor with nano-molar inhibitory potency at the enzyme and cellular level. PI3K plays a critical role in T-cell development and activation and several studies have validated the PI3K-AKT pathway as a potential therapeutic target in T cell lymphomas. Preliminary results of the ongoing Phase 1/1b T-cell lymphoma (TCL) study demonstrated an acceptable safety profile with encouraging clinical activity in relapsed/refractory TCL (Oki, ASCO 2018 and Iyer, ASH 2018). We now present the final results of the study (NCT02567656). Methods: This study comprised of four-dose escalation cohorts, followed by two dose expansion cohorts at MTD enrolling 20 patients each in PTCL and CTCL cohorts. Patients had histologically confirmed TCL, ECOG PS ≤2, and had received ≥1 prior therapy. Patients received Tenalisib [200 mg BID-800 mg BID (fasting), 800 mg (fed only)] orally until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objectives were to determine the MTD and pharmacokinetic profile. The secondary objective was to evaluate overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response. Responses were evaluated for PTCL and CTCL based on IWG criteria (Cheson 2007) and mSWAT respectively. Adverse events were graded according to CTCAE v4.03. Results: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled in study, 19 in dose escalation and 39 in dose expansion (28 PTCL and 30 CTCL). Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range, 1-15). Safety assessment of 58 patients receiving at least one dose of Tenalisib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. Treatment related Grade≥3 AEs were elevated ALT/AST (21%), rash (5%), and hypophosphatemia (3%). These events were reversible and managed by withholding study drug. Additionally, in few patients (N=9), steroids were used to manage elevated ALT/AST. There were six treatment related serious adverse events, none of these led to fatal outcome. At end of the study, four (3 CTCL; 1 PTCL) patients who completed minimum 8 cycles of therapy were rolled over to a compassionate use study (NCT03711604) and were followed up. Efficacy assessments demonstrated an ORR of 46% (3 CR and 13 PR) and clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) of 77%. Subset efficacy analysis showed an ORR in PTCL of 47% (3 CR; 4 PR) and in CTCL of 45% (9 PR). The median time to initial response was 1.8 months and was similar in both sub-types. The overall median DOR was 4.91 months (range 0.9-26.6); in PTCL patients the DOR was 6.53 months, (range: 0.97-21.0) and 3.8 months (range: 1.67-25.67) in CTCL patients. In 3 PTCL patients who achieved CR, the median DOR was 19.5 months (range 7.5-21). Conclusion: Tenalisib demonstrated promising clinical activity and an improved safety profile in patients with relapsed/ refractory TCL. Currently, a phase I/II combination study to further evaluate safety and efficacy with romidepsin is ongoing in this target population. Disclosures Iyer: Arog: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Zain:Spectrum: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Korman:Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Glaxo: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immune Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kyowa: Research Funding; Leo: Research Funding; Menlo: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Principia: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Regeneron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Sun: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syntimmune: Research Funding; UCB: Research Funding; Valeant: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eli Lilly: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Dermira: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Routhu:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Barde:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Nair:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Huen:Galderma Inc: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline Inc: Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Retreatment with Bortezomib in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Interim Results From RETRIEVE, a Prospective International Phase 2 Study.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3866.3866 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3866-3866 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽

Igor W. Blau ◽

Paolo Corradini ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Johannes Drach ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Bortezomib Treatment ◽

Best Response ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3866 Poster Board III-802 Bortezomib (Velcade®) retreatment has been shown to be active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) in a number of retrospective studies and a small prospective phase 4 study (EVEREST). This large, prospective, international, multi-center, open-label phase 2 study was conducted to confirm the efficacy and safety of retreatment with bortezomib in MM patients who had previously responded (at least partial response [PR]) to bortezomib-based therapy as their most recent prior treatment. Patients had to have previously tolerated bortezomib 1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2 alone or in combination and have had a treatment-free interval (TFI; time from last dose of initial bortezomib treatment to first dose of bortezomib retreatment) of ≥6 months. Additional eligibility criteria included progressive disease or relapse from complete response (CR) by EBMT criteria, no MM therapy (except maintenance with dexamethasone, thalidomide, or interferon) since the last dose of initial bortezomib treatment, KPS ≥60, and adequate renal, hepatic, and hematologic function; patients with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy or neuropathic pain (as defined by NCI CTCAE v3.0) were excluded. Patients received bortezomib at the last tolerated dose (1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2) during initial treatment on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to eight 21-day cycles, either alone or in combination with dexamethasone at the investigator's discretion. Response was assessed by EBMT criteria every 6 weeks during treatment and then every 2 months until disease progression. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCI CTCAE v3.0. A total of 130 patients received at least 1 dose of bortezomib retreatment and were included in the safety population. Patients had a median age of 67 years, 57% were male, and 16% had KPS '70%. Median time from diagnosis of MM was 4.5 years (range 0–14 years); median number of prior therapies was 2; 15, 80, 23, and 12 patients had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib therapy). Best response by EBMT criteria to initial bortezomib treatment was CR in 26% and PR in 74% of patients; median time to progression and TFI after initial bortezomib treatment were 17.9 months and 14.3 months, respectively. Last tolerated dose of previous bortezomib therapy was 1.3 mg/m2 and 1.0 mg/m2 for 62% and 29% of patients, respectively; 9% received another dose. Patients received a median 7.0 (range 1–8) cycles of bortezomib retreatment (23% of patients completed all 8 cycles); 72% of patients received concomitant dexamethasone. A total of 126 patients were evaluable for response. In the 126 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR; CR+PR) by best confirmed response (EBMT criteria) was 40%; in addition, 18% of patients achieved minimal response (MR), to give a CR+PR+MR rate of 58%. After a planned secondary efficacy analysis, the ORR (CR+PR) by single best response was 55% (75% ≥MR). Median time to best confirmed response (≥MR) was 2.9 months; time to first response was 1.5 months. Analysis of ORR by patient subgroups showed comparable results in patients who did versus did not receive concomitant dexamethasone (42% vs 32%), in those who received ≤1.0 mg/m2 vs 1.3 mg/m2 bortezomib (35% vs 41%), and in those aged ≤65 years vs >65 years (45% vs 36%). ORR was 67%, 39%, 33%, and 25% in patients who had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib), respectively. Analysis of best confirmed responses according to response to initial bortezomib showed that 63% and 52% of patients who achieved a CR or PR, respectively, to initial bortezomib treatment responded to retreatment. Most (98%) patients experienced a treatment-emergent AE; 60% experienced a grade 3/4 AE, and 32% experienced a serious AE; there were 8 deaths, 2 of which (due to sepsis and stroke) were possibly treatment-related. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (35%), neutropenia (7%), diarrhea (7%), and pneumonia (5%). AEs leading to dose reductions or discontinuations were reported for 22% and 12% of patients, respectively. The incidence of neuropathy was 39%, including 9% grade 3; 4% of patients discontinued treatment due to PN; 61% of neuropathy events resolved or improved within a median 1.3 months. These results confirm that bortezomib retreatment is a well-tolerated, feasible, and active therapeutic option for heavily pretreated MM patients without evidence of cumulative toxicity. Disclosures: Petrucci: Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria. Drach:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Blade:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

An Open-Label Phase 2 Study Of Ofatumumab In Combination With a Novel AKT Inhibitor (Afuresertib) In Previously Treated Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.4175.4175 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 4175-4175

Author(s):

Christine I. Chen ◽

Susi Snitzler ◽

Trina Wang ◽

Harminder Paul ◽

Lisa W Le ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Single Agent ◽

Treatment Phase ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Akt Inhibitor ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Previously Treated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction Ofatumumab is a novel anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody which led to impressive single-agent responses of 47-58% in a phase 2 study of CLL patients (pts) with refractory disease (Wierda et al 2010). Unfortunately, response durations were short (median 5.6-7.1 mos). In order to improve upon these results, we combined ofatumumab with a novel pan-AKT kinase inhibitor, afuresertib (GSK2110183). The AKT pathway plays a centralized role in tumor differentiation, migration, proliferation and survival and is frequently aberrantly activated in CLL (Longo et al 2007). Single agent afuresertib is very well-tolerated with minimal myelotoxicity in relapsed/refractory hematologic malignancies (Spencer et al ASH 2011). We present an interim analysis of the initial 19 of 31 planned pts in an ongoing trial of ofatumumab and afuresertib in relapsed/refractory CLL. Methods Previously treated CLL pts who have received at least one prior fludarabine-containing regimen with disease progression are eligible. During the initial 6 month Treatment Phase, ofatumumab 2000mg IV is administered weekly for 8 doses, then once every 4 week cycle for 4 doses (dose/schedule identical to the pivotal phase 2 trial) with afuresertib 125mg orally daily. An initial 10 day Lead-in Phase with afuresertib alone allows for evaluation of pharmacodynamic (PD) changes in phosphoproteins and pharmacokinetic (PK) studies. Pts are assessed for safety and response on day 1 of each cycle. Pts achieving SD, PR or CR by the end of the Treatment Phase proceed to the Maintenance Phase with single-agent afuresertib for a maximum of 12 mos (12 cycles). Results Demographics: To date, 19 pts have been enrolled. Median age is 65 yrs (range 43-76), baseline median Hb 108g/L (range 80-145), absolute lymphocytes 29.7 x109/L (range 1.0-464.9), β2M 4.42mg/L (range 1.42-3.21), bulky nodes ≥5cm in 5 pts (32%), organomegaly in 8 pts (42%), del17p/del11q on FISH in 9 pts (47%), and ZAP70+ in 13 pts (68%). Eight pts (42%) were fludarabine-refractory; only 2 pts had received prior alemtuzumab. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1-6). Toxicity: Hematologic: 4 pts (21%) developed Gr 3-4 neutropenia during at least 1 cycle; 1 pt (5%) had a febrile neutropenia event. Only 2 pts (10.5%) have developed Gr 3-4 thrombocytopenia, without bleeding. Nonhematologic toxicity: Most common related grade 3-4 toxicities were GI: dyspepsia (53%), diarrhea (37%), nausea (21%), temporally related to oral afuresertib and easily managed symptomatically. Infusion reactions to ofatumumab were frequent (12 pts; 63%) with grade 3 reactions in 3 pts. Five pts (26%) developed non-infectious pneumonitis, with 3 pts requiring hospitalization. Two pts with preexisting atrial arrhythmias sustained exacerbation with weekly ofatumumab infusions. Most infections were mild, with only 1 grade 3 cellulitis. Efficacy: Of the 19 response-evaluable pts receiving a median of 6 cycles (range 1-9), 8 pts (42%) have achieved a PR, 11 SD (58%), and no CR. Response onset was rapid at a median 0.9 mos (range 0.8-2.8). At a median follow-up of 6.8 mos (range 0.3-12.9 mos), 5 pts (26%) have progressed and one patient has died after cycle 1 on therapy due to progressive CLL. PD Studies: CD19+ cells are assayed for phosphorylated AKT and its downstream targets RAS40 and GSK3 in addition to phospho-proteins of alternative pathways including ERK and pS6 by multiplexed phospho-flow cytometry. Peripheral blood samples are collected at screening and on cycle 1 day 10, after dosing with afuresertib. Of the 7 patients evaluated thus far, 5 demonstrated constitutive AKT phosphorylation at baseline. Partial inhibition of AKT signaling evidenced by increased phosphorylation of AKT and inhibition of GSK3 and/or RAS40 phosphorylation in response to BCR stimulation was observed post-treatment, indicating target engagement by afuresertib. PK Studies: Afuresertib exposure (Cmax and AUC) was similar when afuresertib was administered alone or in combination with ofatumumab. Conclusion Preliminary results from this phase 2 study suggests that a combination of ofatumumab plus a novel oral AKT inhibitor, afuresertib, has activity in previously treated CLL and is generally well-tolerated with minimal myelotoxicity. Response data are encouraging but whether durable responses can be achieved requires more mature follow-up. Disclosures: Chen: Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Off-label use of ofatumumab and afuresertib for the treatment of relapsed/refractory CLL. Smith:GSK: Employment, Equity Ownership. Johnston:Roche: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Lundbeck: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Safety and Efficacy of Venetoclax Combined with Rituximab, Ifosfamide, Carboplatin and Etoposide Chemoimmunotherapy (VICER) for Treatment of Relapsed Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma: Results from the Phase 1 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-115587 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 397-397 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Paolo Caimi ◽

Deepa Jagadeesh ◽

Kirsten Marie Boughan ◽

Robert M. Dean ◽

Brenda Cooper ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Hematologic Toxicity ◽

Second Line ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Line Therapy ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: Diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory (r/r) disease after front line chemoimmunotherapy have poor survival. Standard second line therapy for r/r DLBCL consists of platinum-based chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Approximately 50% of pts do not respond to second line therapy, highlighting the need for increased efficacy of these regimens. The antiapoptotic protein Bcl-2 is overexpressed in approximately 30% of DLBCL cases. Preclinical and early clinical data suggest that addition of venetoclax (VEN), a potent selective Bcl-2 inhibitor, to chemoimmunotherapy augments response rates and durability in lymphoma. We conducted a phase 1 dose escalation and dose expansion study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of VEN in combination with R-ICE (rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin and etoposide) (VICER) r/r DLBCL pts. Here we present the results after completion of VEN dose escalation. Methods: Patients (≥18 years of age) with r/r DLBCL who failed one or two lines of therapy were enrolled. The primary objective was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of VEN when combined with R-ICE. VEN was given orally on days 1 - 10 of each 21 - day cycle x 3 cycles. Dose escalation was conducted according to a 3+3 design, with 3 dose levels (400, 600 and 800mg). R-ICE was given at standard dose and schedule on days 1 - 3 of each cycle for 3 cycles. No intra-patient dose escalation was allowed. Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) mitigation included inpatient administration, hydration, allopurinol and frequent laboratory evaluation during cycle 1. All patients received pegfilgrastim; use of prophylactic antibiotics during neutropenia was left at the discretion of the treating physician. Results: As of July 20, 2018, 18 pts with DLBCL (14 male, 4 female) were enrolled (VEN 400mg, n = 3; 600 mg, n = 3; 800 mg, n = 12). Median age of pts was 55.5 years [range 27-78]. All pts received rituximab and anthracycline containing first - line therapy, 4 patients had failed a second line of therapy. One patient experienced dose limiting toxicity (DLT) at 800 mg VEN, with acute renal failure, febrile neutropenia, sepsis and rapid tumor progression and died after cycle 1. No other DLTs were observed. Hematologic toxicity was common, with grade ≥3 anemia in 6 (33%) pts; grade ≥3 neutropenia in 14 (78%) pts and grade ≥3 thrombocytopenia in 10 (55%) pts. Five (28%) pts experienced febrile neutropenia. The most common non-hematologic all-grade treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were fatigue (7 [38%] pts), nausea (6 [33%] pts); diarrhea (6 [33%] pts), anorexia (5 [27%] pts], infection (5 [27%] pts) and sensory neuropathy (5 [27%] pts). Grade ≥3 TEAEs included infection (4 [22%] pts), cholecystitis (2 [11%]) and one case each (5.5%) of peripheral edema, acute renal failure, acute coronary syndrome, atrial fibrillation, hyponatremia and hypokalemia. One case of laboratory TLS occurred, but no clinical TLS was observed. At data cutoff, the intent-to-treat (ITT) population included 13 patients that had at least one cycle of therapy and end of treatment response or had discontinued prior to response assessment; 3 pts did not complete all planned cycles of VICER: one patient died after DLT, one patient proceeded to ASCT in complete remission (CR) after 2 cycles and another withdrew after cycle 1, achieving partial remission (PR) with additional 2 cycles of R-ICE. Nine pts (69%) achieved CR and 2 (15%) achieved PR (overall response rate (ORR): 11/13 [84.6%]) (Tables 2 and 3). Figure 1 depicts tumor response data. Among 11 responding pts, 7 have undergone stem cell collection, with a median CD34 cell count of 3.73x106 cells/kg. Seven pts have completed their ASCT, with hematopoietic engraftment in all cases. Median follow up of patients in CR/PR is 6 months (range 1 - 12), none has experienced progression. Conclusions: In this Phase 1 study, VICER shows encouraging antilymphoma activity in r/r DLBCL, including double hit/double expressor lymphomas, with high rates of complete metabolic response (69% CR by PET), which is higher than historical levels reported with R-ICE alone (CR typically <45%). The RP2D of VEN is 800 mg. Hematologic toxicity - particularly neutropenia - is common, and G-CSF support as well as antibiotic prophylaxis are necessary to prevent infectious complications. Updated safety, progression-free survival and response data will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Caimi: Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Hill:Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Study of Nilotinib 400 Mg Twice Daily in Newly Diagnosed Patients with Accelerated Phase of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, Results after 5.7 Years of Follow-up

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-120155 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3011-3011 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lucia Masarova ◽

Jorge E. Cortes ◽

Keyur P. Patel ◽

Susan M. O'Brien ◽

Graciela M. Nogueras González ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Genetics Research ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Abstract OBJECTIVES Nilotinib is a potent, second generation inhibitor of BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase (TKI) and represent a standard of care for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), including accelerated phase (AP-CML). In 2005, we initiated a phase 2 study of nilotinib 400 mg twice daily as a frontline therapy in patients with AP-CML, and herein present the efficacy and safety data after a median follow-up of 68.4 months (range, 0.3-124.8). METHODS This was a prospective, single institution, phase 2 study in patients of age ≥18 years with a newly diagnosed, untreated AP-CML (except for <1 month of previous imatinib) defined according to MD Anderson criteria (Kantarjian, 1988). Patients were treated with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID). Data are presented on an intention to treat analysis with a cutoff date of June 30st, 2018. Response criteria are standard. Fisher exact test and χ2 were used for analysis of categorical variables; and survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Time to events (e.g., overall survival, event free survival) was calculated from the date of treatment to the date of an event or to last follow-up as previously reported (Cortes et al, 2010). RESULTS Twenty two patients of a median age of 53.7 years (range, 26-79.7) were enrolled. Table 1 summarizes clinical characteristics of all patients. The median treatment duration was 47.3 months (range; 0.3-124.4), and the median follow-up 68.4 months (range, 0.3-124.8). All patients discontinued study as of January 2017 due to planned study closure; but 11 patients (50%) continued on nilotinib off protocol at data cut-off (400 mg BID [3]; 300 mg BID [2]; and 200 mg BID [6]). Median time to treatment discontinuation in the remaining 11 patients was 12.9 months (range, 0.3-112); reason for discontinuation was: inadequate response [3], toxicity [2], non-compliance/financial [4]; elective discontinuation after sustained MR4.5 >2 years [1]; and death due to stroke [1]. Sixteen patients (73%) achieved complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall rates of CCyR, MMR, MR4.5 and CMR (undetectable transcripts with at least 100,000 ABL copies) were 73%, 73%, 55%, and 41%, respectively. Median times to CCyR, MMR, and MR4.5 were 2.9 months (range, 2.7-6.4), 5.7 months (range, 2.7-99.2) and 6.0 months (range, 2.7-36), respectively. Seven patients (32%) achieved sustained MR4.5 >2 years. In total, 4 patients lost their best achieved response (CHR [1], CCyR [2] and MR4.5 [1]) while on study. All events were associated with acquired ABL domain mutation; Y253H [2], T315I [1], and F359I [1] with a median time to detection of 16.7 months (range, 7-40). During the study conduct, one patient progressed to blast phase after 2 months on nilotinib. Two patients died while on study, one due to stroke and one due to unrelated medical condition, after being on therapy for 3 and 0.4 months, respectively. One patient electively discontinued nilotinib after being in sustained MR4.5 for 107 months, and remains in MR4.5 after 6 months off therapy. Estimated overall survival and event free survival at 5 years were 84% and 70%, respectively (Figures 1a & 1b). On univariate analysis, age >55 years was associated with lower rate of MMR (p = 0.034; HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.12-0.92); MR4 (p = 0.013; HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.08-0.75); and MR4.5 (p = 0.01; HR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04-0.63). Overall survival was inferior in patients older than 55 years (p = 0.014; HR 2.4; 95% CI 2.36-not estimated); and in those with > 1 AP-CML defining abnormality (p = 0.018; HR 9.53; 95% CI 0.98-92). The most frequent non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were hyperbilirubinemia (63% of patients), rash (63%), hypertension (59%), and transaminitis (50%). Grade ≥3 AEs observed in more than one patient were hyperbilirubinemia (n=2), and transaminitis (=2). Two patients developed arterio-thrombotic AEs: stroke and myocardial infarction (one each). Hematologic AEs included (all grades; grade ≥3): anemia (36%; 9%), thrombocytopenia (32%; 14%) and neutropenia (14%; 9%). Two patients (9%) discontinued therapy due to nilotinib related AE, one for G3 peripheral neuropathy and one for G3 hyperbilirubinemia with G2 thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION Nilotinib is safe and highly effective in patients with AP-CML, and induces fast and durable responses. More than 50% of patients can achieve MR4.5. Clinical trial.gov: NCT00129740. Disclosures Cortes: novartis: Research Funding. O'Brien:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences Inc.: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Vaniam Group LLC: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Konopleva:Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; abbvie: Research Funding; cellectis: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kadia:Celgene: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ravandi:Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Orsenix: Honoraria; Orsenix: Honoraria; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

The MP0250-CP201 Mirror Study: A Phase 2 Study Update of MP0250 Plus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Relapse/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Patients Previously Exposed to Proteasome Inhibitors and Immunomodulatory Drugs

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-129827 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 1899-1899 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Norbert Grząśko ◽

Stefan Knop ◽

Hartmut Goldschmidt ◽

Marc S Raab ◽

Jan Dürig ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Bone Marrow ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Proteasome Inhibitors ◽

Immunomodulatory Drugs ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Background Bone marrow neovascularization is a hallmark of multiple myeloma and progression is associated with a substantial increase in pro-angiogenic factors that promote bone marrow angiogenesis, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A) and hepatocyte growth factor (HGF). At present, anti-angiogenic agents are not part of treatment strategies in multiple myeloma, neither alone nor in combination with approved agents. MP0250 is a first-in-class, tri-specific multi-DARPin® drug candidate neutralizing VEGF-A and HGF as well as binding to human serum albumin to increase plasma half-life. This is a report on early safety and efficacy of MP0250 in combination with bortezomib plus dexamethasone (Vd) in RRMM patients that have previously been exposed to proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs). Aims To assess the efficacy and safety of MP0250 in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with RRMM (MiRRoR, NCT03136653). Trial Design This trial is recruiting adults ≥18 years of age with RRMM who have progressed after at least two prior treatment regimens including bortezomib and an IMiD. Patients were enrolled to receive iv MP0250 on day 1 + subcutaneous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² on days 1, 4, 8, 11, oral dexamethasone 20 mg on days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9, 11-12 of each 21-day cycle. Patients will receive treatment until there is documented disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Methods The primary endpoint is efficacy in terms of overall response rate (ORR) per International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Secondary endpoints include safety, immunogenicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and duration of response (DOR). Exploratory endpoints include overall survival, and pharmacokinetics. Exploratory biomarkers for HGF and cMET in bone marrow biopsies are detected by IHC; MM specific markers, circulating HGF and VEGF levels are measured using patient plasma samples. Results As of 01 July 2019, 20 patients (7 ongoing) received a total of 137 doses (1-33 cycles) of MP0250 at the maximum tolerated dose of 8 mg/kg on Day 1 of each 21-day cycle in combination with Vd. Median age was 61 years (46-76), median time since diagnosis was 6.7 years. Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range, 2-9). All 20 patients had prior exposure to IMiDs and PIs and 9 patients received PI-based regimens as their immediate prior line of therapy before start of MP0250 + Vd. Importantly, 6 out of these 9 patients achieved responses ≥ Partial Response (PR). Treatment had been discontinued in 40% of patients due to PD, 15% due to Adverse Event (AE), 5% due to physician's decision and in 1 case at patient's request. The most frequent drug-related grade 3/4 AEs were hypertension in 7/1 patients, thrombocytopenia in 4/1 patients, grade 3 proteinuria in 4 patients and grade 3 anemia in 4 patients. There were no infusion-related reactions. No treatment-related deaths were reported. 20 patients received ≥ 1 dose of MP0250 + Vd and had at least 1 assessment of response and were included in the efficacy analysis. 1 patient (5%) achieved Complete Response, 4 patients achieved Very Good Partial Response (20%) and 3 patients achieved PR (15%) for an ORR of 40%. DOR at cutoff date is 6 months (range, 2-21). Pharmacokinetic data show sustained exposure over multiple cycles with a mean half-life of 11 days (range, 6-17). No indication of ADA-mediated drug clearance was observed. Summary Combining MP250 at 8 mg/kg with standard doses of bortezomib and dexamethasone was generally well tolerated with discontinuation due to AE in only 15% of patients. No unexpected toxicity was observed and AEs consistent with the toxicity profile of the individual agents. Analysis of the preliminary efficacy results showed an encouraging ORR of 40%. Recruitment to this Phase 2 study is ongoing. Disclosures Knop: Janssen, AMGEN, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; John-Hopkins University: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; John-Hopkins University: Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Stiftung: Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dürig:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel or accommodations, Speakers Bureau. Bringhen:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gamberi:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, 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; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Castellano Acosta:Molecular Partners AG: Employment. Lang:Molecular Partners AG: Employment. Lemaillet:Molecular Partners AG: Employment. Sudhir:Molecular Partners AG: Employment.

Download Full-text

Combination Treatment of the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Ibrutinib and Carfilzomib in Patients with Relapsed or Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Initial Results from a Multicenter Phase 1/2b Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v126.23.377.377 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 126 (23) ◽

pp. 377-377 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Ajai Chari ◽

Saurabh Chhabra ◽

Saad Usmani ◽

Sarah Larson ◽

Ruben Niesvizky ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Stem Cell ◽

Tyrosine Kinase ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: Recent advances have improved outcomes for patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM); however, novel agents targeting different pathways are still needed. Ibrutinib (ibr) is a first-in-class, once-daily, oral, covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), an enzyme overexpressed in malignant plasma cells, whose expression may positively regulate the myeloma stem cell-like population (Yang 2015). Clinical activity was observed at the 840-mg dose of ibr in heavily pretreated pts with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM), when combined with weekly dexamethasone (dex) (Vij 2014). Furthermore, BTK-mediated upregulation of NF-κB p65 contributes to proteasome inhibitor (PI) resistance in MM cell lines; thus, BTK inhibition with ibr may help overcome PI resistance (Murray 2015). In vitro, ibr has demonstrated synergy with PIs in MM (Rushworth 2013) and mantle cell lymphoma cells (Ou 2013). PCYC-1119 (NCT01962792) is an ongoing phase 1/2b study of ibr + carfilzomib (CFZ) ± dex in RRMM. Methods: Eligible pts received ≥2 prior therapies, including bortezomib (BTZ) and an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD) and had either no response or documented disease progression following the most recent treatment. Dose escalation followed a 3+3 design, followed by expansion of 2 cohorts (Table). Phase 1 primary objectives were maximum tolerated dose/recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) determination and safety. Results: As of July 8, 2015, 40 pts were enrolled and received ibr combined with CFZ ± dex across multiple dose levels during the phase 1 portion. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed, and cohorts 2b and 3b were chosen for expansion to further evaluate safety and efficacy. Pts had a median age of 63 y (range, 44-83) and a median time from diagnosis of 4.3 y (range, 0.5-25.3). Cytogenetic assessment by FISH identified that 20% and 8% of pts had t4;14 and del17p, respectively. Overall, pts received a median of 3 prior lines of therapy (range, 2-11), including 10% prior CFZ, 25% pomalidomide, 25% thalidomide, 73% autologous stem cell transplant, and 100% BTZ and lenalidomide. Moreover, 88% of pts were refractory to their last therapy, with 73% refractory to BTZ, 73% refractory to lenalidomide, and 58% refractory both to IMiD and PI. No relevant differences were observed across cohorts. Thirty-six pts were evaluable for efficacy. With early follow-up, the initial objective response rate (ORR) was 58% and the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 67%. In cohort 3b, the ORR and CBR were 65% and 77%, respectively, including 3 very good partial responses (VGPRs) and 1 stringent complete response (sCR). No clinically meaningful tolerability differences were seen between cohorts, and no new safety findings were observed. Across all cohorts, the most common all-grade nonhematologic adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (43%), cough (35%), constipation and fatigue (30% each), and nausea (28%). Grade ≥3 hematologic AEs included thrombocytopenia (15%), anemia (13%), and neutropenia (5%). Grade ≥3 nonhematologic AEs occurring in ≥10% of pts were pneumonia and hypertension (15% each), diarrhea (13%), and fatigue (10%). Eleven pts reported treatment related SAEs. No clinically relevant differences in AEs were observed across cohorts. Ten pts discontinued study treatment due to progressive disease; an additional 6 pts discontinued due to an AE, and 6 pts discontinued due to investigator or pt decision. Duration of treatment ranged from 0.3 to 13.6 months, and 17 pts remain on treatment. Updated data will be presented. Conclusions: The initial phase 1 data indicated promising clinical potential for ibr + CFZ + dex, as it is well tolerated with no DLTs, no new toxicities, and no increase in the severity of known toxicities for the individual agents. The preliminary ORR of 58%, with 1 sCR and 3 VGPRs in cohort 3b, is encouraging in this mostly refractory patient population, especially with the high number refractory to BTZ. Cohort 3b was established as the RP2D and will be further evaluated in the phase 2 portion of the study. Table. Dosing Cohorts Cohort ibr* mg/qd CFZ† mg/m2 dex‡ mg 1(n=3) 560 20/27 - 2a(n=5) 560 20/36 - 2b(n=14) 560 20/36 20 3b(n=18) 840 20/36 20 *Starts on Day (D) 8 of Cycle (C) 1; continuous thereafter. †D1-2, 8-9, 15-16 through C12; thereafter D1-2, 15-16. ‡D1-2, 8-9, 15-16, 22-23; 10 mg for pts age ≥75 y; 4 mg prior to CFZ during C1 only (cohorts 1 and 2a) with re-initiation as needed. Disclosures Chari: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array: Consultancy, Research Funding. Off Label Use: ibrutinib in relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM. Usmani:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Larson:BMS: Consultancy. Niesvizky:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Matous:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Holkova:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Lunning:TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Valent:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Anderson:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Kwei:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Chang:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. Graef:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment; AbbVie: Equity Ownership. Bilotti:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Employment. McDonagh:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Subcutaneous Epcoritamab in Combination with R-CHOP in Patients with Previously Untreated High-Risk Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: Preliminary Results from a Phase 1/2 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-146569 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1413-1413

Author(s):

David Belada ◽

Jacob Haaber Christensen ◽

Kristina Drott ◽

Sylvia Snauwaert ◽

Joshua Brody ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

B Cell ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Escalation ◽

Research Funding ◽

Metabolic Response ◽

Phase 1 ◽

B Cell Lymphoma ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: In patients (pts) with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) that is considered high risk (revised International Prognostic Index [R-IPI]: 3-5), standard treatment with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) is associated with a 4-year overall survival rate of 55% (Sehn et al, Blood 2007). Epcoritamab (DuoBody ®-CD3×CD20) is a subcutaneously administered bispecific antibody that simultaneously binds to CD3 on T cells and CD20 on malignant B cells to induce T-cell-mediated killing. Single-agent epcoritamab demonstrated a manageable safety profile and substantial antitumor activity in pts with heavily pretreated B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in the first-in-human phase 1/2 trial (EPCORE NHL-1; NCT03625037). Among pts with relapsed/refractory DLBCL treated at the identified recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of 48 mg (n=8), the overall response rate was 88% and the complete response rate was 38% (Hutchings, Lancet, in press). These encouraging data supported initiation of the EPCORE NHL-2 phase 1/2 trial (NCT04663347), which is evaluating epcoritamab in combination with various standard of care therapies in pts with B-cell NHL. We present data from arm 1 of this trial, in which epcoritamab in combination with R-CHOP is evaluated in pts with previously untreated high-risk DLBCL. Methods: Adults with previously untreated DLBCL and an R-IPI score ≥3 received flat-dose epcoritamab in combination with standard R-CHOP for 6 cycles followed by epcoritamab monotherapy. The study includes a dose-escalation cohort (epcoritamab doses: dose level 1 = 24 mg; dose level 2 = 48 mg). Step-up dosing of epcoritamab (ie, priming and intermediate doses before first full dose) and corticosteroid prophylaxis were used as previously described (Hutchings, Lancet, in press) to mitigate cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Tumor response was evaluated by positron emission tomography-computed tomography obtained once every 6 weeks for the first 24 weeks. Results: As of July 15, 2021, 9 pts have been treated with the combination of epcoritamab + R-CHOP (4 with epcoritamab 24 mg; 5 with 48 mg). Median age was 66 years (range, 56-78). All pts had stage III-IV disease. At data cutoff, all pts remained on treatment with a median follow-up of 12.2 weeks (range, 2.2-28.2). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were CRS (56%; all grade 1/2), anemia (56%; grade 1-3), neutropenia (44%; all grade 3/4), fatigue (33%; all grade 1/2), and peripheral neuropathy (33%; all grade 1/2). Notably, no grade ≥3 CRS events or cases of febrile neutropenia were reported. No dose-limiting toxicities have been observed. Four pts have had ≥1 response assessment, with 3 achieving complete metabolic response (CMR; all in the epcoritamab 24 mg dose-escalation cohort) and 1 pt achieving partial metabolic response (epcoritamab 48 mg cohort) by week 6; 2 of the 3 pts with CMR had response assessments at 6 months, and both remained in CMR at that time. Both dose cohorts have been cleared by the Dose Escalation Committee and Safety Committee, and the expansion part has been opened to enroll additional pts. Conclusions: These preliminary data from a small number of pts suggest that epcoritamab in combination with R-CHOP has a manageable safety profile with no new safety signals. Adverse events were similar to those previously reported for epcoritamab and R-CHOP individually. All evaluable pts achieved early responses, and all pts remain on treatment. Updated and additional data from pts treated in the expansion phase will be presented. These findings warrant further evaluation of epcoritamab for the treatment of high-risk, newly diagnosed DLBCL. Disclosures Belada: Genmab: Research Funding. Drott: Roche: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Respiratorius AB: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Narkhede: TG Therapeautics: Research Funding; Genmab: Other: Medical writing support, Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Elliot: Genmab: Current Employment, Patents & Royalties: P158-US-PSP3 . Liu: Genmab: Current Employment. Cota Stirner: AbbVie: Current Employment. Abbas: Genmab: Current Employment. Falchi: Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genmab: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding. Clausen: Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel expences ASH 2019; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: Travel expences 15th ICML ; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Bortezomib, Thalidomide, and Dexamethasone (VTD) Versus VTD Plus Cyclophosphamide as Induction Therapy in Previously Untreated Multiple Myeloma Patients Eligible for HDT-ASCT: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.2312.2312 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 2312-2312 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Heinz Ludwig ◽

Luisa Viterbo ◽

Richard Greil ◽

Tamas Masszi ◽

Ivan Spicka ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rates ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

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

Download Full-text

Elotuzumab In Combination with Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone In Patients with Relapsed Multiple Myeloma: Interim Results of a Phase 2 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.986.986 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 986-986 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Philippe Moreau ◽

Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽

Thierry Facon ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Phase 1 Study ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Infusion Reactions

Abstract Abstract 986 Introduction: Elotuzumab is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody directed against CS1, an antigen highly and uniformly expressed on multiple myeloma (MM) cells but with restricted expression on normal cells. Elotuzumab exhibits significant antimyeloma activity in vitro and against MM xenografts, and its antitumor activity is enhanced independently by both lenalidomide and dexamethasone. In a dose-escalation phase 1 study that evaluated the combination of elotuzumab (5, 10, and 20 mg/kg), lenalidomide, and dexamethasone, the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and the combination showed encouraging clinical activity (82% response rate) in patients with advanced MM. The most frequent infusion-related adverse events (AEs) were headache (21%), nausea (21%), and dizziness (11%), with 7% (2/28) of patients experiencing 3 serious infusion-related AEs during cycle 1 (1 with a grade 4 hypersensitivity reaction and 1 with 2 grade 3 stridor events). Key objectives of this dose randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase 2 study in patients with relapsed MM were to select the optimum dose of elotuzumab and to evaluate an enhanced premedication regimen to minimize the occurrence of infusion reactions. Methods: Patients with confirmed relapsed and/or refractory MM who had received 1–3 prior therapies were enrolled; prior lenalidomide therapy was excluded. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive elotuzumab either 10 or 20 mg/kg (IV infusion on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of a 28-day cycle in the first 2 cycles and then days 1 and 15 of subsequent cycles), along with lenalidomide 25 mg PO daily on days 1 to 21 and dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly. Patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, if earlier. To control potential infusion reactions, patients received methylprednisolone (50 mg IV), diphenhydramine (25–50 mg PO or IV) or equivalent, ranitidine (50 mg IV) or equivalent, and acetaminophen (650–1000 mg PO) 30 to 60 minutes prior to each elotuzumab infusion. Objective responses (OR) were assessed according to the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) criteria. Results: As of July 8, 2010, a total of 59 patients were randomized (intent to treat population); 47 patients received at least 1 dose of study medication (safety population); and 26 patients completed or progressed prior to completing 2 cycles of treatment (efficacy population). Median age was 64 years; 36 (61%) had received ≥2 prior therapies; 28 (48%) and 31 (53%) had received bortezomib or thalidomide, respectively, and 40 (68%) had undergone transplantation. Among efficacy evaluable patients, 22/26 (85%) had a confirmed or an unconfirmed response (≥ PR) including 31% VGPR/CR. The remaining 4/26 (15%) had stable disease (Table). Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 36/47 patients (77%); the most common events were fatigue (26%) and nausea (21%). Serious treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 22% of patients; 2 events, nausea and febrile neutropenia with thrombocytopenia, were considered to be related to elotuzumab and lenalidomide. The most common infusion-related AEs within 24 hours of elotuzumab infusion were dizziness (15%), nausea (15%), and headache (9%). These decreased in frequency after the first treatment cycle. There were no severe AEs associated with infusion reactions. Conclusion: The combination of elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone resulted in a high response rate in patients with advanced MM and was generally well tolerated. These results are consistent with the results previously reported from the phase 1 study. The revised premedication regimen appeared to be more effective in controlling infusion reactions, which were generally mild to moderate with no severe infusion reactions reported to date. Updated response and safety data on all patients by dose level will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Richardson: Millennium, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide. Moreau:Celgene, Facet, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Jakubowiak:Millennium, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Johnson & Johnson Ortho-Centocor: Honoraria; Millennium, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium, Celgene, Centocor-Ortho Biotech: Speakers Bureau. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Millennium, Takeda Pharm, Janssen: Honoraria. Vij:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Reece:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rossi:Sanofi-Aventis, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Tsao:Facet Biotech: Employment. Fry:Facet Biotech: Employment. Berman:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Singhal:Facet Biotech: Employment. Lonial:Millennium, Celgene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis, Onyx: Advisory Board, Consultancy; Millennium, Celgene, Novartis, Onyx, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding.

Download Full-text