Change in Chronic Low-Grade Nonhematologic Adverse Events (AEs) and Quality of Life (QoL) in Adult Patients (pts) with Philadelphia Chromosome–Positive (Ph+) Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) Switched From Imatinib (IM) to Nilotinib (NIL)

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3782-3782 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Jeffrey H. Lipton ◽  
Carole B. Miller ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Luke Akard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
End Point ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 3782 Background: A large number of Ph+ CML pts treated with IM experience mild to moderate AEs that can negatively impact QoL. A recent study (Efficace F et al. Ann Hematol. 2012) reported that pts and healthcare professionals ranked several AEs induced by BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitors (fatigue ranked first) in the top 10 issues that adversely impact QoL in pts. The primary objective of the ongoing ENRICH study is to evaluate improvement of IM-related chronic low-grade nonhematologic AEs at the end of cycle (EOC) 3 (ie, after 12 weeks) in CML-CP pts when switched from IM to NIL because of chronic low-grade AEs. This is a report on 45 evaluable pts who completed EOC 3 as of the data cut-off (6/1/2012). Methods: Pts were eligible if they were treated with IM 400 mg/d for ≥3 mo and had IM-related grade (G) 1/2 nonhematologic AEs persisting '2 mo or recurring ≥3 times and recurring despite best supportive care. The study planned to enroll 50 pts in the US and Canada. Pts received NIL 300 mg twice daily for 1 y (or longer if NIL was not yet commercially available for frontline treatment). Nonhematologic AEs were graded using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.03; 6/14/2010) grading scale. Molecular response was monitored by a central PCR lab monthly for the first 3 mo and then every 3 mo on study. Pt-reported outcomes, measured by 2 QoL questions and the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI)-CML, were administered at baseline, EOC 1, EOC 3, and then every 3 mo thereafter. Results: 52 pts were enrolled into the study; enrollment closed in January 2012. The median duration (range) of previous IM treatment (tx) was 24.7 mo (2.3–123.0 mo); median duration (range) of NIL tx was 11.9 mo (0.2–23.7 mo). At baseline 199 IM-related nonhematologic AEs were reported (141 G1; 58 G2). Data for 49 pts were available and included in the safety and molecular response analyses; 45 pts were included in the primary end point analysis since 4 withdrew consent prior to EOC 3. These 45 pts accounted for 183/199 of the baseline IM-related AEs (130 G1; 53 G2); 1 AE evaluation is missing at EOC 3. 130/182 AEs (71.4%) improved by EOC 3 (primary end point): 117 resolved (90, 19, 8 by mo 1, 2, 3, respectively) and 13 improved from G2 to G1 (Table). By EOC 3, 64.1% and 53.8% of pts (n = 39) reported an improvement in global QoL from baseline over the last 24 h and last 7 d, respectively. Mean reductions from baseline in MDASI-CML severity score and interference score, and therefore improvement in symptoms, were 1.1 (n = 40) and 1.4 (n = 39) at EOC 1, and 1.2 (n = 39) and 1.7 (n = 38) at EOC 3, respectively. At baseline, 31/49 (63.3%) pts had major molecular response (MMR, 3-log reduction of BCR-ABL1; ≤0.1% IS); 18 and 10 pts had 4-log (MR4; BCR-ABL1 ≤0.01% IS) and 4.5-log reductions (MR4.5; BCR-ABL1 ≤0.0032% IS) in BCR-ABL1, respectively. After switch to NIL, all pts with a baseline MMR maintained MMR and 14/17 remaining pts without baseline MMR achieved MMR. Deeper responses were reported for 16 pts who reached MR4 after the switch, and 14 reached MR4.5. 20 pts were dose-reduced for NIL-related AEs, 2 of whom did not restart study drug. The other 18 pts were dose-reescalated to the original dose when the AEs improved to G1 or resolved. 40 G3 AEs occurred in 19 pts; of these, 24 AEs were investigator-reported as suspected to be NIL-related (hypophosphatemia, hyperglycemia, hypokalemia, increased bilirubin, increased lipase, arthralgia, pleural effusion, acute pancreatitis, dehydration, bronchitis, pruritus, rash, erythematous rash, exfoliative rash, papular rash, abdominal pain, gastroenteritis, and joint pain). 1 G4 AE (cardiac arrest, NIL-suspected) was reported; the pt recovered from the event but was discontinued from the study. Most AEs were managed by brief dose interruption. 9 pts discontinued study (5 due to AEs; 4 withdrew consent). No QTcF prolongation >500 msec occurred. Conclusions: The majority of IM-related nonhematologic AEs improved within 3 mo after switching to NIL; nearly half of the AEs resolved by EOC 1. More than half of pts experienced improvement in QoL and symptom burden on NIL. In general, pts achieved deeper molecular responses on study and approximately a quarter of pts reached MR4.5 after the switch to nilotinib. Disclosures: Cortes: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; ChemGenex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Deciphera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Lipton:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Miller:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria. Akard:Cellerant: Research Funding; ChemGenex: Research Funding; Millennium: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lin:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ericson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mauro:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Effect of Switching to Nilotinib in Patients with Imatinib-Related Low-Grade Non-Hematologic Adverse Events

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 4422-4422 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey H. Lipton ◽  
Michael J. Mauro ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Carole B. Miller ◽  
Lambert Busque ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Low Grade ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Log Reduction ◽  
End Point ◽  
Severity Scores ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 4422 Background: Nilotinib is a potent, highly selective Bcr-Abl kinase inhibitor approved for newly diagnosed adult patients (pts) with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) and for adult pts with imatinib-resistant or -intolerant Ph+ CML-CP and CML-AP (accelerated phase). This ongoing study assesses the change in chronic low-grade (LG) non-heme adverse events (AEs) when pts are switched from imatinib (IM) to nilotinib. Methods: Adult CML-CP pts were eligible for the study if they were treated with imatinib 400 mg/d for ≥3 months (mos) and had imatinib-related Grade 1 or 2 non-heme AEs persisting ≥2 mos or recurring ≥3 times and recurring despite best supportive care. Pts are treated with nilotinib 300 mg twice daily on study for up to 1 year. The primary end point is to measure the improvement of imatinib-related LG non-heme AEs at the end of cycle (EOC) 3 after switching to nilotinib therapy. Disease response was monitored and patient-reported outcomes measured by 2 quality-of-life (QoL) questions and the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI)-CML. Results: Thirty-eight pts were enrolled as of the data cut-off date (6/27/11) and were included in this analysis. The median time of nilotinib treatment was 7.2 mos. A total of 155 imatinib-related non-heme AEs were reported at baseline; 113 AEs were Grade 1 and 42 AEs were Grade 2. A total of 30 pts completed EOC 3 by the data cut-off date. These pts accounted for 126 of the baseline imatinib-related LG non-heme AEs (Grade 1 = 93, Grade 2 = 33). The median number of IM-related LG non-heme AEs at baseline was 3 per patient. Twenty-one pts reported 1–4 baseline IM-related AEs, 6 pts reported 5–9 IM-related AEs, and 3 pts reported 10–12 IM-related AEs. Of these AEs, 81 (64%) improved (primary end point) by EOC 3; 71 IM-related AEs resolved (51, 15, 5 resolved by mos 1, 2, 3, respectively) and 10 IM-related AEs decreased from Grade 2 to 1. Forty-two AEs were unchanged across 18 pts (20 of which were reported by 3 pts). Three AEs increased in severity by month 3. Overall, 31 (82%) pts had major molecular response (MMR) at entry. MMR is defined as a 3-log reduction of Bcr-Abl from a standardized baseline (Bcr-Abl ≤0.1% IS). All pts maintained MMR after switching to nilotinib on study. The remaining 7 pts achieved MMR during the study. At baseline, 15 pts had a 4-log reduction in Bcr-Abl (Bcr-Abl ≤0.01% IS) and 7 pts with complete molecular response (CMR = Bcr-Abl ≤0.0032% IS). Twelve additional pts achieved a 4-log reduction on study and 9 went on to achieve CMR. Patients completed 2 global QoL questions and the MDASI-CML questionnaire during the study. The MDASI-CML is a patient-reported outcome measure of symptom burden in patients with CML. These were administered at baseline, EOC 1, EOC 3, and then every 3 mos thereafter while on study. Compared to baseline, 68% and 62% of pts (n=34) reported an improvement in global QoL over the last 24 hours and last 7 days, respectively, by EOC 3. The mean reductions from baseline in MDASI-CML severity score and interference score, and therefore improvement in symptoms, were at EOC 1: 1.2 (n=26) and 1.5 (n=25) and at EOC 3: 1.2 (n=24) and 1.6 (n=23), respectively. Thirteen pts were dose reduced for nilotinib-related AEs and subsequently dose re-escalated if the AEs recovered to Grade 1 or resolved. Twenty-seven Grade 3 AEs occurred in 12 pts; of these, 17 AEs were investigator reported and suspected to be nilotinib related (increased bilirubin, hyperglycemia, hypokalemia, hypophosphatemia, increased lipase, pruritus, bronchitis, dehydration, exfoliative rash, rash erythematous, rash, and arthralgia). No pt had a Grade 4 AE. Most AEs were managed by brief dose interruption. A total of 5 pts discontinued, 4 for AEs, and 1 pt withdrew consent. No QTcF prolongation >500 msec occurred. Conclusions: In this analysis, at EOC 3, 64% of the chronic LG non-heme IM-related AEs showed improvement after switching to nilotinib. Twenty-eight of 30 pts who completed 3 mos on study had at least 1 LG non-heme IM-related AE improve after switching to nilotinib. At least 62% of pts improved in QoL. In addition, an overall improvement of symptoms as measured by MDASI-CML was seen by the reduction of severity scores. Disclosures: Lipton: Novartis Canada: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mauro:Novartis Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ailawadhi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Miller:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Busque:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Akard:Eisai: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Chemgenex: Consultancy. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Ericson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shah:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cortes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; ChemGenex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Deciphera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

An Ongoing Phase 3 Study of Bosutinib (SKI-606) Versus Imatinib In Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 208-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Tim H. Brummendorf ◽  
Irina Dyagil ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 208 Bosutinib is an orally bioavailable dual Src/Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), with minimal inhibitory activity against PDGFR or c-kit. In a phase 2 study, bosutinib demonstrated activity in patients with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) chronic phase (CP) chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in the second- and third-line treatment settings (Cortes JE, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6502; Khoury JH, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6514), as well as in patients with advanced Ph+ leukemias (Gambacorti-Passerini C, et al. ASCO 2010, Abstract #6509) following resistance or intolerance to imatinib and other TKIs. The current randomized, open-label, phase 3 study compared the activity and safety of bosutinib with that of imatinib in newly diagnosed patients with CP CML. The study enrolled adults aged 318 years with cytogenetic diagnosis of Ph+ CP CML within 6 months, adequate hepatic and renal function, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1. Patients were randomized to daily oral treatment with 500 mg bosutinib or 400 mg imatinib. Adverse events were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria, version 3.0. The primary efficacy endpoint was the rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) at 1 year; the rates of hematologic response, molecular response, and progression and transformation to accelerated or blast phase were also evaluated. The study randomized 502 patients: 56.6% male, median age of 48 years (range, 18–91 years), and median time since diagnosis of 0.7 months (range, -0.3-7.9 months; the range minimum is negative due to CML diagnosis during the study screening period, and the range maximum is >6 months because of 1 patient considered a major protocol violator). The median duration of treatment was 11.1 months (range, 0.03–24.8 months). At Week 48 (approximately 11 months), 71.5% and 74.8% of patients (both treatment arms combined) were in CCyR and complete hematologic response (CHR), respectively. During the study, 81.4% of patients achieved a CCyR at or before Week 48, with a median time to CCyR of 24 weeks; 82.6% of patients achieved a CHR, with a median time to CHR of 8 weeks; and 40.6% of patients achieved a major molecular response (MMR), with a median time to MMR of 49 to 61 weeks for the 2 treatment arms. For the combined treatment arms, common treatment-emergent adverse events included diarrhea (43.7%), nausea (32.3%), vomiting (22.0%), rash (16.8%), pyrexia (11.6%), and fatigue (11.0%). The only grade 33 treatment-emergent adverse event observed in 32% of patients was diarrhea (5.2%), which was usually limited to the first weeks of treatment. Grade 33 hematologic laboratory abnormalities included neutropenia (14.2%), thrombocytopenia (12.4%), and anemia (5.8%). Other grade 33 laboratory abnormalities (35% of patients) included alanine aminotransferase elevation (11.6%), phosphatemia (7.6%), and aspartate aminotransferase elevation (6.4%). Overall, 22.2% patients discontinued therapy; adverse events led to discontinuation or death in 12.8% of patients, and 4.2% of patients discontinued due to disease progression. The high combined percentage of patients achieving MMR, CCyR, and CHR and the relatively low incidence of generally manageable grade 33 events observed suggest good efficacy and an overall favorable safety profile. Data for individual treatment arms will be unblinded by the end of August 2010, and will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Gambacorti-Passerini: Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Kim:BMS, Novartis, Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS, Pfizer: Research Funding. Brummendorf:Pfizer Inc: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Griskevicius:Pfizer Inc: Research Funding. Goh:Novartis and Janssen Ciliag: Research Funding. Wang:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gogat:Pfizer Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cortes:Pfizer Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Effect of Nilotinib (NIL) on Molecular Response in Chronic Myelogenous Leukemia - Chronic Phase (CML-CP) Patients (pts) with a Suboptimal Molecular Response to Imatinib (IM)–ENABL Study Update

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 2771-2771 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Carole B. Miller ◽  
Anand P. Jillella ◽  
Nebu Koshy ◽  
Brian Tudor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Transcript Levels ◽  
Log Reduction ◽  
End Point ◽  
Day Range ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Abstract 2771 Background: NIL is a potent, highly selective Bcr-Abl kinase inhibitor approved for newly diagnosed adult pts with Philadelphia-chromosome positive (Ph+) CML-CP and in Ph+ CML-CP and accelerated-phase pts who are resistant or intolerant to IM. Achieving complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR, 3-log reduction of Bcr-Abl transcript level from the baseline mean) are favorable prognostic factors for CML. This multicenter, open-label study (ENABL) was designed to explore nilotinib Bcr-Abl effects in pts with CCyR but who have suboptimal molecular response to IM. Methods: This study evaluates change in Bcr-Abl trends in 2 groups of CML-CP pts (total n = 18) who achieved CCyR but have suboptimal molecular response to IM defined as: (Group 1) treated ≥ 1 year with IM, but Bcr-Abl transcript levels did not reach ≤ 0.1% on the international scale (IS) (MMR); or (Group 2) > 1-log increase in Bcr-Abl transcript levels from best response regardless of IM treatment duration. Pts are treated with NIL 300 mg twice daily for ≥ 1 year. RQ-PCR analysis is performed by a central lab at screening, then every 3 months (mos) for Group 1. Group 2 pts are monitored by RQ-PCR monthly for the first 3 mos, then every 3 mos. The 1° end point is change in Bcr-Abl transcript levels from a standardized baseline value by RQ-PCR at 12 mos. The data cutoff date for this analysis was June 30, 2011. Results: Eighteen pts (Group 1, n = 17; Group 2, n = 1) have been treated with NIL for a median of 17 mos on study (range 3–34 mos). Thirteen pts have been treated for ≥ 6 mos and 10 for ≥ 12 mos. One pt was deemed ineligible due to lack of evidence of CCyR at baseline but is included in the analysis because there was at least 1 post-baseline evaluation performed. The remaining 17 pts had CCyR at baseline. Before enrollment, pts were treated with at least 400 mg once-daily IM; the mean dose of prior IM treatment was 487 mg/day (range 342–786 mg/day). Median duration of prior IM treatment was 3.4 yrs (range 1.3–10.2 yrs). Three pts had prior interferon treatment. All 18 pts were treated for ≥ 3 mos and had ≥ 1 post-baseline RQ-PCR result. Overall, 15 of 18 evaluable pts (83%) achieved MMR during treatment; 10 pts by 3 mos, 1 pt by 4.5 mos (measured at end of study), 1 pt by 6 mos, 2 pts by 9 mos, and 1 pt by 30 mos (Figure 1). The 3 pts who did not reach MMR at any point were only followed for up to 3 mos before discontinuing from the trial but showed a decreasing Bcr-Abl trend. Overall, pts achieved a median log reduction of PCR transcript levels of 3.1 (0.08% IS) at 3 mos; median 3.3-log reduction (0.05% IS) at 6 mos, and median 3.5-log reduction (0.035% IS) at 9 mos. Four pts had > 4-log (≤ 0.01% IS) reduction in Bcr-Abl; of these, 2 pts reached > 4.5-log (≤ 0.0032% IS) reduction in Bcr-Abl at least once during the study. Median Bcr-Abl transcript log reduction at 12 mos was 3.6 (0.025% IS, 1° end point) for 10 evaluable pts. All these pts reached MMR during NIL treatment; 9 pts by 12 mos, 1 pt after 30 mos. NIL was well tolerated and brief dose interruptions were sufficient to manage most adverse events (AEs). Seven of 18 pts were dose reduced for NIL-related AEs and re-escalated if the patient recovered from the AEs. Patients were permitted to dose escalate to 400 mg b.i.d. per physician's discretion if MMR was not achieved after 6 mos (n = 1). The Grade 3 AEs reported include 2 cases of rash and 1 case each of pneumonia, squamous cell carcinoma, bladder prolapse, uterine prolapse, bradycardia, hypertension, hyperbilirubinemia and hypophosphatemia. The rashes and bradycardia were suspected to be related to NIL. No Grade 4 AEs were reported. The median dose intensity was 600 mg/day (range 300–683 mg/day). Five pts were discontinued from the study (3 due to abnormal laboratory values, 1 due to an AE, and 1 due to protocol violation). No pts who experienced QTcF changes had differences > 33 msec from baseline. No QTcF prolongation > 500 msec was observed. Conclusions: NIL treatment results in high molecular response rates in CML-CP pts with suboptimal molecular responses to IM. Overall 83% of pts who switched to NIL achieved MMR, and the median Bcr-Abl log reduction for pts who reached 12 mos on study was 3.6 (0.025% IS). The IRIS study has shown that MMR rates increase with time in pts treated with IM (Hughes Blood 2010); however, this study appears to demonstrate that MMR is achieved relatively quickly in suboptimal molecular IM-treated pts when switched to NIL. Disclosures: Ailawadhi: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Miller:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Akard:Eisai: Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Chemgenex: Consultancy. Ericson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lin:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Radich:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. DeAngelo:Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy.

Subcutaneous Omacetaxine (OM) Treatment of Chronic Phase (CP) Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) Patients Following Multiple Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor (TKI) Failure

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 2290-2290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Meir Wetzler ◽  
Jeff Lipton ◽  
Franck E Nicolini ◽  
Michele Baccarani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Bone Marrow Failure ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 2290 Introduction: Multiple TKI failure is a growing problem in a subset of CML patients. Treatment with a third TKI after two have failed often yields poor results. New treatment options are needed for this patient population. OM is a first-in-class cetaxine with demonstrated activity as a single agent in CML. It inhibits the production of short-lived oncoproteins (such as Mcl-1) involved in cancer cell survival via a mechanism independent of Bcr-Abl binding. Several studies have suggested that OM has a favorable toxicity profile when given to patients with CML via the subcutaneous route. We explored OM efficacy and safety in a subset of patients who had received therapy with multiple prior approved TKI. Methods: We analyzed a subset of adult CML-CP patients who had received two or more TKI (imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib), from a combined interim dataset of two prospective Phase 2 studies (CML-202, for patients with the T315I kinase domain mutation, and CML-203, for patients with failure to ≥2 TKI) utilizing OM in the treatment adult patients with all phases of CML who had failed TKI. TKI failure was defined as no complete hematologic response (CHR) by 12 weeks (wk), no cytogenetic response by 6 months (mo), no major cytogenetic response (MCyR) by 12 mo, loss of CHR or MCyR, or progressive leukocytosis. The focus of this analysis was to assess the CHR and MCyR response rates as well as the overall safety of OM in these patients. Adverse events presented are Grade 3/4 events that occurred in ≥ 5% of patients (regardless of causality). Results: A total of 73 of the 93 CML-CP patients from these two studies had received two or more TKI prior to OM treatment. Median time from initial CML diagnosis to first dose of OM was 74.4 months. Mutations of any kind were seen in 48% of the patients, whereas 29% had no identified mutation and 23% had no available data on mutation status. Sixty (82%) of these 73 patients achieved or maintained (twelve patients were in CHR at study entry) a CHR and 17 (23%) achieved a MCyR (9 complete and 8 partial). The median duration of MCyR was 4.4+ months (range 1.2–14.1+). Median overall survival for patients treated with OM after failure of 2 or more TKI has not yet been reached [95% Confidence Interval (CI) 22.9, NA months] (Figure 1). Eleven patients had a treatment—emergent adverse event leading to death, and two deaths were probably related to study drug. Median progression-free survival was 11.1 months (95% CI 6.5, 13.8 months). Median follow-up time was 7.5 months for all patients with twenty-five patients remaining on study at the time of this data cut. A total of 36 of the 93 CP patients from these two studies had been treated with three or more TKI; 27 (75.0%) achieved or maintained a CHR and 7 (19.4%) achieved a MCyR (4 complete and 3 partial) on OM treatment. The median duration of MCyR in this group was 4.0+ months (range 1.2–11.5+) at the time of data cut-off. The primary Grade 3/4 adverse events in patients who received OM after failure of 2 or more TKI were hematologic, including thrombocytopenia (64%), neutropenia (48%) and anemia (40%) most commonly, followed by febrile neutropenia (12%), bone marrow failure (12%), pancytopenia (7%) and febrile bone marrow aplasia (6%). These events were dosing schedule dependent. Clinical sequelae were uncommon and managed with transient treatment interruptions and dose adjustments. Grade 3/4 non-hematologic adverse events were infrequent, with only fatigue (6%) occurring ≥5% of patients. Conclusions: OM, through a mechanism of action independent of Bcr-Abl, may offer a clinically viable option for patients who have progressed on multiple TKI treatment. Disclosures: Off Label Use: The drug is currently in development and has an NDA submitted for use in TKI resistant CML. Cram: ChemGenex: Employment, Equity Ownership. Humphriss: ChemGenex: Employment, Equity Ownership. Benichou: ChemGenex: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Craig: ChemGenex: Employment, Equity Ownership, Executive Management Level.

Hospitalizations of Patients with Newly Diagnosed CML-CP Treated with Nilotinib or Imatinib: Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3826-3826
Author(s):  
Jennifer L Beaumont ◽  
John Coombs ◽  
amsi Bollu ◽  
Richard C. Woodman ◽  
David Cella
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Hospital Days

Abstract Abstract 3826 Background: Imatinib is the current standard of care for chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). Nilotinib is a highly potent and the most selective inhibitor of BCR-ABL. A Phase III multi-center, open label, randomized study (ENESTnd) was conducted comparing these two therapies in adult patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia Chromosome positive (Ph+) CML in chronic phase. The primary endpoint analysis at 12 months demonstrated that major molecular response (MMR) was significantly improved with nilotinib 300 mg BID (44%) and nilotinib 400 mg BID (43%) compared to imatinib 400 mg QD (22%; p < 0.001). The discontinuation rate due to adverse events was lowest among the nilotinib 300mg BID treatment arm (5%) compared to 7% in the imatinib arm, and nilotinib 400 mg BID (9%). Based on the results of this clinical trial, nilotinib 300 mg BID was approved for initial use for CML-CP in the US. Aim: To evaluate the occurrence and rate of hospitalizations and time away from usual activities in this phase III trial. Methods: A total of 846 patients were randomized to receive nilotinib 300 mg BID (n=282), nilotinib 400 mg BID (n=281) or imatinib 400mg QD (n=283). Hospitalizations, defined as any visit to the hospital requiring an overnight stay, excluding pre-planned or elective surgery, were assessed throughout the study period. Overdispersed Poisson regression models were used to compare the days hospitalized per 1,000 patient-days on study. Patients were asked to report time-off, defined as average number of hours per week taken away from all usual activities due to CML and side effects of CML treatment over the past 4 weeks, at Baseline and at the end of Months 3 and 12. The Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare the time off from usual activities at each assessment; and t-tests were used to evaluate the within-group changes in time off. Results: There were a total of 57 hospitalizations in the imatinib arm versus 48 hospitalizations in the nilotinib 300 mg BID arm, and 74 hospitalizations in the nilotinib 400 mg BID arm (Table). Descriptive statistics for length of stay (LOS) are presented in the Table. The hospitalization rate, expressed as hospital days per 1,000 patient days, was 47% higher in the imatinib arm compared to the nilotinib 300 mg BID arm (p=0.057) and 8% higher compared to the nilotinib 400 mg BID arm (p=0.68). Patients in the nilotinib 300mg BID arm had fewer stays and shorter LOS than the imatinib arm, whereas patients in the nilotinib 400mg BID arm had more stays than the imatinib arm but shorter LOS on average resulting in fewer total hospital days. The majority of hospitalizations (56%) in all three arms occurred within the first 9 months. Time off from usual activities, which began at an average level of 8–10 hours per week at Baseline, decreased in each arm, but the decrease did not significantly differ between arms (Table). Similar results were observed when patients reporting zero hours of time off were excluded from the analysis. There was no association between time off and age. Summary/conclusions: In patients with newly diagnosed CML-CP, nilotinib resulted in less hospital time compared to imatinib, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. Additionally, patients in all three treatment groups reported significant improvements from baseline in time off from usual activities. Disclosure: Beaumont: Novartis: Research Funding. Coombs:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bollu:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Woodman:Novartis Oncology: Employment. Cella:Novartis: Research Funding.

Nilotinib Versus Imatinib in Patients (pts) with Newly Diagnosed Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive (Ph+) Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP): ENESTnd 36-Month (mo) Follow-up

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 452-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Philipp D. LeCoutre ◽  
Ricardo Pasquini ◽  
Saengsuree Jootar ◽  
Hirohisa Nakamae ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 452FN2 Background: In ENESTnd, pts treated with nilotinib demonstrated higher and faster rates of major molecular response (MMR, ≤ 0.1% BCR-ABLIS), deeper molecular response (MR4, ≤ 0.01%IS and MR4.5, ≤ 0.0032%IS), and complete cytogenetic responses (CCyR) along with significantly lower rates of progression to AP/BC and fewer CML-related deaths compared with imatinib by 12 and 24 mo. Here, we report data with a minimum follow-up of 24 mo; however, efficacy and safety data based on considerably longer follow-up of ≥ 36 mo will be presented. As demonstrated in IRIS and other imatinib trials, most pts who progress on imatinib do so within the first 3 years of therapy. Thus, this 36-mo update of ENESTnd will be important to further verify the benefits of nilotinib in newly-diagnosed pts. Methods: 846 adult pts with newly-diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP were randomized to nilotinib 300 mg twice daily (BID) (n = 282), nilotinib 400 mg BID (n = 281), or imatinib 400 mg once daily (QD) (n = 283). MMR, MR4, MR4.5, time to progression to AP/BC on treatment, progression-free survival (PFS) on treatment, and overall survival (OS) were evaluated. Results: By 24 mo, both doses of nilotinib demonstrated significantly higher rates of MMR, MR4, and MR4.5 vs imatinib (Table). Nilotinib-treated pts achieved median BCR-ABLIS levels of 0.09% (300 mg BID) and 0.10% (400 mg BID) by 12 mo, while this level of reduction was not observed before 24 mo on imatinib. More pts with CCyR achieved MMR at 12 and 24 mo with either dose of nilotinib vs imatinib (Table). Regardless of Sokal risk, rates of MMR and MR4.5 were higher for nilotinib at both doses vs imatinib (Table). Progression to AP/BC (excluding clonal evolution [CE]) on treatment was significantly lower for nilotinib vs imatinib (2 pts and 3 pts with nilotinib 300 mg BID [P = .0059] and 400 mg BID [P =.0196]), respectively vs 12 pts with imatinib). After achieving CCyR, 4 pts treated with imatinib progressed to AP/BC and 2 pts treated with nilotinib 400 mg BID progressed after achieving both CCyR and MMR (1 also achieved MR4). No pt who achieved MR4.5 progressed at any time. All but 1 pt who progressed to AP/BC on treatment were in the intermediate and high Sokal risk groups; 1 pt treated with nilotinib 400 mg BID progressed in the low Sokal risk group who had an E255V mutation at progression. When considering progression events of pts after discontinuation of treatment, an additional 7, 2, and 6 events (excluding CE) were observed with nilotinib 300 mg BID, nilotinib 400 mg BID and imatinib, respectively. Twice as many pts had emergent mutations on imatinib (n = 20) vs nilotinib (n = 10 on 300 mg BID; n = 8 on 400 mg BID). At 24 mo, OS remained similar in all groups, but there were fewer CML-related deaths in both nilotinib 300 mg BID (5 pts) and nilotinib 400 mg BID (3 pts) arms vs imatinib (10 pts). Both drugs were well tolerated and few new adverse events (AEs) and lab abnormalities were observed between 12- and 24-mo of follow-up. Nilotinib 300 mg BID had the fewest discontinuations due to AEs/lab abnormalities (9% vs 13% and 10% with nilotinib 400 mg BID and imatinib, respectively). Conclusions: With a minimum follow-up of 24 mo, nilotinib continued to demonstrate superiority vs imatinib with faster and deeper molecular responses and a significantly decreased risk of progression. These data support the use of nilotinib as a standard of care option in newly-diagnosed adult pts with Ph+ CML-CP. Disclosures: Saglio: Novartis Pharmaceutical: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Nilotinib is a safe and effective treatment for patients with CML. LeCoutre:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Pasquini:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau. Nakamae:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Flinn:nOVARTIS: Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, 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; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Larson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hoenekopp:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gallagher:Novartis: Employment. Yu:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Blakesley:Novartis Pharmaceutical: Employment. Kim:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding.

Treatment-Free Remission in Patients with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase According to Reasons for Switching from Imatinib to Nilotinib: Subgroup Analysis from ENESTop

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 792-792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Carla Maria Boquimpani ◽  
Naoto Takahashi ◽  
Noam Benyamini ◽  
Nelma Cristina D Clementino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Loss Of Response ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Treatment Free Remission

Abstract Background: ENESTop, an ongoing, single-arm, phase 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01698905), is the first trial specifically evaluating treatment-free remission (TFR; ie, stopping tyrosine kinase inhibitor [TKI] treatment without a loss of response) in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) who achieved a sustained deep molecular response after switching from imatinib (IM) to nilotinib (NIL). Of 126 patients in ENESTop who were eligible to stop NIL, 57.9% (95% CI, 48.8%-66.7%) maintained TFR at 48 weeks. Here we present results from a subgroup analysis based on reasons for switching from IM to NIL, categorized as intolerance, resistance, and physician preference. Methods:Eligible patients were adults with CML-CP who received ≥ 3 years of total TKI therapy (> 4 weeks of IM, followed by ≥ 2 years of NIL) and achieved a sustained MR4.5 (BCR-ABL1 ≤ 0.0032% on the International Scale [BCR-ABL1IS]) on NIL therapy; patients with a documented MR4.5 at the time of switch from IM to NIL were not eligible. Enrolled patients continued NIL treatment in a 1-year consolidation phase, and those without confirmed loss of MR4.5 (ie, consecutive BCR-ABL1IS > 0.0032%) were eligible to stop NIL in the TFR phase. Patients with loss of major molecular response (MMR; ie, BCR-ABL1IS > 0.1%) or confirmed loss of MR4 (ie, consecutive BCR-ABL1IS > 0.01%) during the TFR phase reinitiated NIL treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who maintained TFR (ie, no loss of MMR, confirmed loss of MR4, or treatment reinitiation) at 48 weeks after stopping NIL. In this post hoc analysis, rates of TFR at 48 weeks after stopping NIL and a Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis of treatment-free survival (TFS; defined as the time from the start of TFR to the earliest occurrence of any of the following: loss of MMR, confirmed loss of MR4, reinitiation of NIL due to any cause, progression to accelerated phase/blast crisis, death due to any cause) were evaluated in subgroups of patients who switched from IM to NIL due to intolerance, resistance, or physician preference. These categories were determined by grouping the reasons for switching from IM to NIL, as reported by the investigators, based on relatedness to safety (intolerance), loss of response/treatment failure (resistance), and the physician's clinical judgment (physician preference); individual reasons included within each category are presented in the Figure. Results:A total of 125 patients who entered the TFR phase were included in this analysis; 1 patient who was found to have had atypical transcripts was excluded. Among these 125 patients, the reasons for switching to NIL were categorized as intolerance in 51 patients (40.8%), resistance in 30 patients (24.0%), and physician preference in 44 patients (35.2%). The proportion of patients who maintained TFR at 48 weeks after stopping NIL was generally similar across the 3 subgroups: 30 of 51 (58.8%; 95% CI, 44.2%-72.4%) in the intolerance subgroup, 16 of 30 (53.3%; 95% CI, 34.3%-71.7%) in the resistance subgroup, and 27 of 44 (61.4%; 95% CI, 45.5%-75.6%) in the physician preference subgroup. KM analysis of TFS showed that in all 3 subgroups, the majority of TFS events occurred within the first 24 weeks after stopping NIL (Figure). There were no notable differences in the kinetics of TFS events among subgroups. The KM-estimated median duration of TFS was not reached by the data cutoff date in all 3 subgroups. Conclusion: Primary analysis from ENESTop showed that among patients with CML-CP who achieved a sustained MR4.5after switching from IM to NIL, 57.9% of those who stopped NIL maintained TFR at 48 weeks. In the present analysis, TFR was maintained at 48 weeks after stopping NIL by > 50% of patients in the intolerance, resistance, and physician preference subgroups, with generally similar results across subgroups. These findings suggest that the rate of successful TFR following second-line NIL does not differ based on the reasons for switching from IM to NIL. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Hughes: Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group (ALLG): Other: Chair of the CML/MPN Disease Group. Boquimpani:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Takahashi:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Shuvaev:Pfizer: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis pharma: Honoraria. Ailawadhi:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen Inc: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy. Lipton:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Turkina:Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Moiraghi:BMS: Speakers Bureau; NOVARTIS: Speakers Bureau. Nicolini:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ariad pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sacha:BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Adamed: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kim:Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ILYANG: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Fellague-Chebra:Novartis: Employment. Acharya:Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.: Employment. Krunic:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jin:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mahon:BMS: Honoraria; PFIZER: Honoraria; NOVARTIS PHARMA: Honoraria, Research Funding; ARIAD: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Bosutinib in Imatinib-Resistant Vs Dasatinib/Nilotinib-Resistant Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia: Results from the Phase 4 BYOND Study

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1650-1650 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Douglas Smith ◽  
Tim H Brümmendorf ◽  
Gail J. Roboz ◽  
Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini ◽  
Aude Charbonnier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Myeloid Leukemia ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistant ◽  
Equity Ownership

Introduction: The tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) bosutinib is approved for patients with Philadelphia chromosome (Ph)+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) resistant/intolerant to prior therapy and newly diagnosed patients in chronic phase (CP). Methods: The ongoing phase 4 BYOND study (NCT02228382) is further evaluating the efficacy and safety of bosutinib for CML resistant/intolerant to prior TKIs. Patients were administered bosutinib at a starting dose of 500 mg once daily (QD). Primary results were previously reported. Here, we report the efficacy of bosutinib 500 mg QD in patients with Ph+ CP CML and resistance to imatinib (but not to nilotinib or dasatinib) vs patients with resistance to ≥1 second-generation TKI (dasatinib and/or nilotinib), as well as in patients with intolerance to all prior TKIs. Data are reported at ≥1 year after last enrolled patient; 85% of patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Results: Of 163 patients who received bosutinib, 156 had Ph+ CP CML: 52 had resistance only to imatinib, 31 had resistance to dasatinib/nilotinib, and 73 were intolerant to all prior TKIs. Corresponding median treatment duration (range) was 24.1 (0.2-42.2), 8.9 (0.9-41.6), and 25.3 (0.4-41.9) months, and median dose intensity (range) was 360 (125-500), 431 (195-561) and 292 (80-500) mg/day. In all, 69.2%, 41.9%, and 53.4% of imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, were still receiving treatment as of the data cutoff date. The main reason for discontinuation was adverse events (AEs), with 10 (19.2%), 8 (25.8%), and 21 (28.8%) imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, discontinuing due to AEs. Corresponding discontinuations due to insufficient response occurred in 2 (3.8%), 5 (16.1%), and 1 (1.4%) patients. No patient experienced on-treatment transformation to advanced phase CML or discontinued treatment due to disease progression. In the evaluable cytogenetic population, cumulative major cytogenetic response (MCyR) rates were 85.4%, 69.0%, and 88.1% in imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively (Table). The majority of patients, across all cohorts, achieved a complete cytogenetic response (CCyR). In the evaluable molecular population, cumulative major molecular response (MMR) rates were 72.3%, 44.8%, and 82.2% in imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively; the 50th percentile of the cumulative incidence curve was 5.66 months, not reached and 3.22 months, respectively. Correspondingly, 59.6%, 24.1%, and 68.5% achieved molecular response (MR)4, and 48.9%, 17.2%, and 56.2% achieved MR4.5. In imatinib-resistant, dasatinib/nilotinib-resistant, and TKI-intolerant patients, respectively, Kaplan-Meier estimated overall survival rates (95% confidence interval) were 96.1% (85.2-99.0), 100% (100-100), and 98.6% (90.5-99.8) at 1 year, and 96.1% (85.2-99.0), 92.6% (73.4-98.1), and 97.2% (89.2-99.3) at 2 years with 4, 3, and 3 deaths occurring on study. Conclusions: Cytogenetic and molecular responses were seen in a high proportion of patients with Ph+ CP CML and TKI-resistance or TKI-intolerance. Response rates were similar between patients with resistance to imatinib and patients who were intolerant to all prior TKIs. Although to a lesser degree, responses were also seen in patients with resistance to second-generation TKIs, including patients achieving MR despite the shorter treatment duration. These results further support bosutinib use for patients with Ph+ CP CML and resistance/intolerance to prior TKIs. Disclosures Smith: Agios: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy. Brümmendorf:Janssen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; University Hospital of the RWTH Aachen: Employment; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roboz:AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gambacorti-Passerini:Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding. Charbonnier:Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Viquiera:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Leip:Pfizer: Employment, Equity Ownership. Giles:Novartis: Consultancy; Epigene Therapeutics Inc: Consultancy, Other: leadership, stock/other ownership ; Actuate Therapeutics Inc: Employment. Ernst:Novartis: Research Funding. Hochhaus:Incyte: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Rosti:BMS: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Nilotinib Demonstrates Superior Efficacy Compared with Imatinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase: Results From the International Randomized Phase III ENESTnd Trial

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. LBA-1-LBA-1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Dong-Wook Kim ◽  
Surapol Issaragrisil ◽  
Philipp D. le Coutre ◽  
Josy Reiffers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract LBA-1 Background: Nilotinib is a highly potent and the most selective inhibitor of BCR-ABL, the only proven molecular target for CML therapy. ENESTnd (Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials-Newly Diagnosed Patients) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study comparing the efficacy and safety of 300 or 400 mg bid nilotinib with 400 mg qd imatinib in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML in chronic phase (CML-CP). Methods: 846 pts with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP, diagnosed within 6 mos, and stratified by Sokal risk score, were randomized 1:1:1 to nilotinib 300 mg bid (n=282), nilotinib 400 mg bid (n=281), and imatinib 400 mg qd (n=283) arms. The primary endpoint was rate of major molecular response (MMR) at 12 months (mos). All pts had a minimum of 12 mos of treatment or discontinued early; median follow-up was 14 mos. MMR was defined as a value of ≤ 0.1% of BCR-ABL/ABL ratio on the International Scale. Molecular response was assessed by RQ-PCR at baseline, monthly for 3 mos and every 3 mos thereafter. Samples were analyzed at a central PCR laboratory. The major secondary endpoint was rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) by 12 mos based on bone marrow cytogenetics. Results: Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and Sokal scores were well balanced among the 3 arms; pts with high-risk Sokal scores were 28% in all arms. Median dose intensities of nilotinib delivered were 592 mg/day for 300 mg bid and 779 mg/day for 400 mg bid; imatinib dose intensity was 400 mg/day. Overall, 84%, 82%, and 79% of pts remained on the study for 300 mg bid nilotinib, 400 mg bid nilotinib, and 400 mg qd imatinib, respectively. Rates of MMR at 12 mos (Table) were superior for nilotinib 300 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (44% vs. 22%,P < .0001) and also for nilotinib 400 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (43% vs. 22%,P < .0001). Median time to MMR among pts who achieved MMR was faster for nilotinib 300 mg bid (5.7 mos) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (5.8 mos) compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (8.3 mos). Rates of CCyR by 12 mos were significantly higher for both nilotinib at either 300 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (80% vs. 65%,P < .0001) and for nilotinib 400 mg bid compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (78% vs. 65%,P = .0005). Overall, progression to advanced disease was lower for nilotinib 300 mg bid (2 pts) and nilotinib 400 mg bid (1 pt) compared with imatinib 400 mg qd (11 pts). Overall, both drugs were well-tolerated. Rates of discontinuation due to adverse events or laboratory abnormalities were 7% for nilotinib 300 mg bid, 11% for nilotinib 400 mg bid, and 9% for imatinib 400 mg qd. Pts were monitored for QT prolongation and LVEF. No patients in any treatment arm showed a QTcF interval > 500 msec. There was no decrease from baseline in mean LVEF anytime during treatment in any arm. The study is ongoing. Conclusions: Nilotinib at both 300 mg bid and 400 mg bid induced significantly higher and faster rates of MMR and CCyR compared with imatinib 400 mg qd, the current standard of care in pts with newly diagnosed CML. Nilotinib was effective across all Sokal scores. After only one year of treatment, both nilotinib arms resulted in a meaningful clinical benefit compared to imatinib, with reduction of transformation to AP/BC. Nilotinib exhibited a favorable safety and tolerability profile. The superior efficacy and favorable tolerability profile of nilotinib compared with imatinib suggests that nilotinib may become the standard of care in newly diagnosed CML. Disclosures: Saglio: Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Nilotinib is not currently approved for first-line treatment of CML. The presentation will report the results from a randomized study of imatinib versus nilotinib in patients with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP. Kim:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Wyeth: Research Funding. le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria. Reiffers:Novartis: Research Funding. Pasquini:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Schering: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Clark:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Gallagher:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoenekopp:Novartis: Employment. Dong:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Larson:Novartis:

scholarly journals Ponatinib in Chronic-Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients: Final Report from a Phase 1 Trial

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3063-3063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael J. Mauro ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Neil P. Shah ◽  
Dale L. Bixby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Phase 1 Trial ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: Ponatinib, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor with potent activity against native and mutant BCR-ABL1, is approved for patients with refractory chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia (Ph+ ALL) for whom no other tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy is indicated, or for patients with the T315I mutation. The efficacy and safety of ponatinib in patients with resistant/refractory hematologic malignancies were evaluated in a phase 1 trial (NCT00660920). Here, we report 4-year follow-up data from chronic-phase (CP)-CML patients; final data (approximately 5-year follow-up) will be presented. Methods: In this open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 trial, 81 patients with resistant/refractory hematologic malignancies (CP-CML, 43 patients; accelerated-phase CML, 9 patients; blast-phase CML, 8 patients; Ph+ ALL, 5 patients) were enrolled. Patients were treated with ponatinib at a starting dose of 2 mg/d - 60 mg/d; intra-patient dose escalation was permitted. In Oct 2013, dose reduction instructions were provided in response to an observed accumulation of arterial occlusive events (AOEs) with longer follow-up across the ponatinib clinical program. For data presented herein, the data cutoff date is 2 Feb 2015, with median follow-up of 53.1 months (range, 1.7 - 69.9 months) for CP-CML patients. Results: Among CP-CML patients, at baseline, median age was 55 years and median time since diagnosis was 6.6 years; BCR-ABL1 kinase domain mutations were reported in 63% of patients, with T315I confirmed at a central laboratory in 28% of patients. Patients were heavily pretreated, with 37% having received 2 prior TKIs and 60% having received ≥3 prior TKIs. Of 43 CP-CML patients, 22 (51%) remained on ponatinib treatment at data cutoff. Adverse events (AEs; 26%) and disease progression (9%) were the most common reasons for discontinuation of treatment. Cumulative response rates were: major cytogenetic response (MCyR), 72%; complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), 65%; major molecular response (MMR; assessed at a central laboratory), 56%; molecular response 4 (MR4), 42%; MR4.5, 28%. Responses were durable (Table), with median durations of response not reached for MCyR, CCyR, and MMR. Among patients who received ponatinib at starting doses of ≤30 mg/d (n = 15), MCyR was achieved by 67%, CCyR by 53%, and MMR by 47%; ponatinib dose was ≤30 mg/d in all but one of these patients at the time of response. Of 19 patients who were ongoing and in MCyR as of Oct 2013, 13 had their dose reduced; all 13 dose-reduced patients maintained MCyR at data cutoff. Of the 22 ongoing patients at the time of the present analysis, 18 (82%) had CCyR and 17 (77%) had MMR or better (MMR, 6 patients; MR4, 1 patient; MR4.5, 9 patients; MR5, 1 patient) as their response at the data cutoff; 14/22 (64%) ongoing patients were receiving 15 mg/d as their current dose as of the data cutoff. Rash (65%), fatigue (63%), abdominal pain (58%), headache (58%) and arthralgia (53%) were the most common treatment-emergent AEs. The incidence of AOEs (any/serious) was 40%/30% (by subcategory: cardiovascular, 30%/21%; cerebrovascular, 9%/7%; peripheral vascular, 14%/9%). Conclusions: With median follow-up of over 4 years in this phase 1 study, ponatinib continues to provide clinical benefit to heavily pre-treated CP-CML patients, approximately half of whom continue to receive ponatinib, with a majority in deep response that has been long-lasting; final study data will be presented. The most common treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with the AE profile across the clinical program. Potential for long-term benefit, demonstrated herein, versus risk should be considered when using ponatinib in this patient population. Study sponsor: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Disclosures Mauro: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cortes:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squib: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding. Kantarjian:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding; Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Shah:ARIAD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Plexxikon: Research Funding. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. Rivera:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lustgarten:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Santillana:ARIAD: Employment, Equity Ownership. Heinrich:Novartis: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Bayer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy; MolecularMD: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy. Druker:Agios: Honoraria; Ambit BioSciences: Consultancy; ARIAD: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Array: Patents & Royalties; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses ; BMS: Research Funding; CTI: Equity Ownership; Curis: Patents & Royalties; Cylene: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; D3 Oncology Solutions: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses ; Lorus: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; MolecularMD: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Novartis: Research Funding; Oncotide Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer: Patents & Royalties; Roche: Consultancy. Deininger:Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Talpaz:Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Other: Travel expense reimbursement, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Expense reimbursement, travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document