Pomalidomide in Combination with Low-Dose Dexamethasone: Demonstrates a Significant Progression Free Survival and Overall Survival Advantage, in Relapsed/Refractory MM: A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. LBA-6-LBA-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Martha Q Lacy ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Katja C Weisel ◽  
Kevin W. Song ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract LBA-6 Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) patients who have become refractory to bortezomib (BORT) and refractory or otherwise ineligible for thalidomide or lenalidomide (LEN) have a poor prognosis, with a median overall survival (OS) of 9 months (Kumar. Leukemia. 2012). There is no standard treatment available for these patients. Pomalidomide (POM) is a novel immunomodulatory drug that has shown activity in LEN- and BORT-refractory patients (Vij. ASCO 2012). MM-003 is an open-label, multicenter, phase 3 trial designed to compare the efficacy and safety of POM + low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) vs high-dose dexamethasone (HiDEX) in a population of patients who are refractory to both LEN and BORT. Here we present the final progression-free survival (PFS) and interim OS analysis of MM-003. Methods: Eligible patients with primary refractory or relapsed and refractory disease were enrolled. All patients with documented disease progression during treatment or within 60 days of completing their last myeloma therapy (including ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of LEN and BORT either alone or in combination), were randomized 2:1 to receive either POM + LoDEX (arm A) or HiDEX alone (arm B). Patients progressing on HiDEX had the opportunity to receive POM in the companion trial, MM-003C. Patients in arm A received POM 4 mg on days 1–21 and DEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients > 75 years of age) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in a 28-day cycle. Patients in arm B received DEX 40 mg (20 mg for patients > 75 years of age) on days 1–4, 9–12, and 17–20 in a 28-day cycle. Treatment was continued until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were stratified by age (≤ 75 vs > 75 years), disease population (refractory vs refractory and relapsed vs refractory and intolerant [intolerant to BORT only]), and number of prior therapies (2 vs > 2). The primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included safety, OS, overall response rate (ORR; ≥ partial response) by IMWG and EBMT criteria, duration of response, time to progression, and quality of life. OS was to be tested only if PFS would be statistically significant; therefore, alpha was controlled at 0.05 2-sided for both PFS and OS. Results: The Data and Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) reviewed the protocol-specified final analysis results. 455 patients were randomized from March 2011 to Sept 2012. 302 patients received POM + LoDEX, and 153 patients received HiDEX. At the time of analysis, 45% of patients in arm A and 25% of patients in arm B remained on study. The median number of prior therapies was 5 (range, 1–17). 72% of patients were refractory to both LEN and BORT. At the PFS final analysis, with a median follow-up of 18 weeks, PFS was significantly longer with POM + LoDEX vs HiDEX alone (median 15.7 vs 8.0 weeks; 267 total events; hazard ratio [HR], 0.45; P <.001). OS interim analysis was performed as planned; OS also was significantly longer with POM + LoDEX vs HiDEX alone (median not reached vs 34 weeks; 134 events; HR, 0.53; P<.001), crossing the prespecified O’brien-Fleming superiority boundary. This includes 45 pts who received POM after progressing on HiDEX. Median duration of treatment was 12.4 weeks in arm A and 8 weeks in arm B. Following DSMB review of the data, immediate crossover of arm B patients to arm A was recommended. Overall, 25% of patients in arm A and 38% in arm B died, with progressive disease and infections as the primary reasons. Frequent grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (42% in arm A vs 15% in arm B), thrombocytopenia (21% vs 24%), and febrile neutropenia (7% vs 0%). Other toxicities (grade 3/4) were predominantly infections (24% vs 23%), hemorrhage (3% vs 5%), glucose intolerance (3% vs 7%), neuropathy (1% vs 1%), and venous thromboembolism (1% vs 0%). The primary reason for discontinuation was progressive disease: 35% arm A and 49% arm B. Complete results will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: POM + LoDEX significantly increased PFS and OS compared with HiDEX in patients who are refractory to LEN and BORT, a population with limited treatment options. The OS superiority boundary was crossed. Based on these data, POM + LoDEX should become the new standard of care in patients who have exhausted the novel agents, LEN and BORT. Disclosures: Dimopoulos: Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide is an investigational drug and is not approved for the treatment of patients with any condition. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Weisel:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Song:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Delforge:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Karlin:Celgene: Consultancy. Goldschmidt:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Yu:Celgene: Employment. Sternas:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. San Miguel:Onyx: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 3190-3190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Yee ◽  
Peter Vorhees ◽  
William I. Bensinger ◽  
Jesus Berdeja ◽  
Jeffrey G Supko ◽  
...  

Abstract Background ACY-1215 is the first selective HDAC6 inhibitor in clinical trials and is well-tolerated as monotherapy up to 360 mg/day, the maximum dose examined. Cmax ≥ 1µM was achieved at dose levels >80 mg. Unlike nonselective HDAC inhibitors, which are associated with severe fatigue, vomiting, diarrhea and myelosuppression, DLTs have not been observed with ACY-1215. ACY-1215 synergizes in in vitro with both lenalidomide and dex in MM cell lines providing the rationale to conduct a phase 1b trial of ACY-1215 in combination with these agents. Methods Relapsed and relapsed and refractory pts who have progressed on at least one prior treatment regimen, who have creatinine clearance >50 mg/mL/min, adequate bone marrow and hepatic function, and who gave informed consent were enrolled. In Part A, patients were treated with escalating doses of oral ACY-1215 on days 1-5 and 8-12 of a 28 day cycle with lenalidomide 25 mg d 1-21 and dex 40 mg weekly. In Part B, the schedule includes ACY-1215 on days 15-19. Subsequent cohorts will explore twice daily dosing based on emerging clinical, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) data. Peripheral blood samples were obtained for PK and PD analysis. PD assessment measured the fold increase of acetylated tubulin (a marker of HDAC6 inhibition) and acetylated histones (a marker of class 1 HDAC inhibition) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). Results As of July 3, 2013, 15 pts who progressed after 1 to >3 prior therapies have been enrolled; 8 were relapsed and 7 were refractory to the most recent therapy. Patients were treated daily at up to 240 mg ACY-1215. Fourteen pts had received prior lenalidomide of which 6 were previously refractory as defined by having less than a minimal response (MR) to therapy (1) or progressive disease on either full dose or maintenance therapy (5). Pts have completed 0 to 11+ cycles of therapy with 10 pts continuing on therapy. Five pts have discontinued therapy due to progressive disease (PD) (3), travel difficulties (1), or missed doses of lenalidomide (1). The latter pt was replaced. The most common treatment emergent events were fatigue (43%), upper respiratory infection (36%), anemia and peripheral edema (21% each), neutropenia (29%) and muscle spasms (21%). Most were grade 1 and 2 and there was no dose relationship to ACY-1215. There were 9 grade 3-4 events in 6 pts, primarily hematologic, as well as fatigue and asymptomatic laboratory investigations. Only 1 event, grade 3 neutropenia, was considered possibly related to ACY-1215 by the investigator. PK and PD data is available from 12 pts up to 160 mg dose level. PK for ACY-1215 is similar to the analogous dose levels in phase 1a monotherapy suggesting coadministration of lenalidomide does not significantly impact the PK of ACY-1215. Maximal levels were ≥ 1µM at ≥ 80 mg correlating with measurable increases >2x in acetylated tubulin with a minimal increase in acetylated histones. Twelve pts, at doses up to 160 mg ACY-1215, are evaluable for response (after at least two cycles). In addition, 1 pt who discontinued therapy after one cycle had response data available. Nine patients (69%) have ≥ PR, including 1 CR, 4 VGPR, 3 PR, and 1 PRu. Two pts had MR and 2 had SD as the best response. Reponses are durable up to 11+ cycles of therapy. Of the 6 patients who were refractory to lenalidomide, best responses included 1 PR, 1 VGPR, 2 MR and 2 SD. Conclusions ACY-1215 at doses which have biological activity (as determined by PD data in PBMC) can be safely combined with lenalidomide and dex with favorable toxicity to date. Significant responses were observed in pts, and responses have been seen in pts previously refractory to lenalidomide. Future cohorts will explore longer duration of exposure as well as a twice daily dosing schedule for ACY-1215. Disclosures: Vorhees: Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; GlaxcoSmithKline: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Prolexys: Research Funding; Abbott: Consultancy. Bensinger:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Supko:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jones:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Patrick:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wheeler:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Raje:Acetylon Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Research Funding; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 390-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Schroeder ◽  
H. Jean Khoury ◽  
Madan Jagasia ◽  
Haris Ali ◽  
Gary J. Schiller ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Corticosteroids are considered standard first-line systemic therapy for patients with aGVHD, but this approach is effective in only approximately half of all cases. For patients who progress or do not respond to corticosteroids, no specific agent has been identified as standard, and regimens are typically selected based on investigator experience and patient co-morbidities. In preclinical models, JAK inhibition has been shown to impair production of cytokines as well as the differentiation and trafficking of T cells implicated in the pathogenesis of aGVHD. Retrospective studies have suggested that JAK1/JAK2 inhibition with ruxolitinib treatment provides clinical benefit in patients with steroid-refractory GVHD (Zeiser et al, Leukemia 2015;29:2062-2068). Herein, we report preliminary safety results from a prospective randomized, parallel-cohort, open-label phase 1 trial evaluating the potent and selective JAK 1 inhibitor INCB039110 in patients with aGVHD. Methods: Male or female patients 18 years or older who underwent their first allo-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) from any donor source and developed grades IIB-IVD aGVHD were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either a 200 or 300 mg oral daily dose of INCB039110 in combination with corticosteroids, and were stratified based on prior treatment status (treatment-naive [TN] versus steroid-refractory [SR]). The primary endpoint of the study was safety and tolerability; secondary endpoints included overall response rate at Days 14, 28, 56, and 100, non-relapse mortality, and pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluations. Patients were assessed through Day 28 for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and response. A Bayesian approach was used for continuous monitoring of DLTs from Days 1-28. Treatment continued until GVHD progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. Acute GVHD was graded according to MN-CIBMTR criteria; adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCICTCAE v 4.03. Results: Between January and June 2016, 31 patients (TN, n=14; SR, n= 17) were randomized. As of July 25, 2016, data were available from 30 patients who received an oral daily dose of 200 mg (n=14) or 300 mg (n=16) INCB039110 in combination with 2 mg/kg methylprednisolone (or equivalent dose of prednisone). The median durations of treatment were 60.8 days and 56.5 days for patients receiving a daily dose of 200 mg and 300 mg INCB039110, respectively. One DLT of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia was reported. The most frequently reported AEs included thrombocytopenia/platelet count decrease (26.7%), diarrhea (23.3%), peripheral edema (20%), fatigue (16.7%), and hyperglycemia (16.7%). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 77% of patients and with similar frequency across dose groups and included cytomegalovirus infections (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), and sepsis (n=3). Five patients had AEs leading to a fatal outcome, including multi-organ failure (n=2), sepsis (n=1), disease progression (n=1), and bibasilar atelectasis, cardiopulmonary arrest, and respiratory distress (n=1); none of the fatal events was attributed to INCB039110. Efficacy and PK evaluations are ongoing and will be updated at the time of presentation. Conclusion: The oral, selective JAK1 inhibitor INCB039110 can be given safely to steroid-naive or steroid-refractory aGVHD patients. The safety profile was generally consistent in both dose groups. Biomarker evaluation, PK, and cellular phenotyping studies are ongoing. The recommended phase 2 dose will be selected and reported based on PK studies and final safety data. Disclosures Schroeder: Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Khoury:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Arbushites:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delaite:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yan:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rhein:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Perales:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. DiPersio:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 814-814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Melissa Alsina ◽  
Donna M. Weber ◽  
Steven E. Coutre ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 814FN2 Background: Patients with refractory multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and an extremely poor prognosis. A recent study of patients who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD, thalidomide or lenalidomide) demonstrated a median event-free survival of only 5 months (Kumar S et al, Leukemia, 2011). Panobinostat is an oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that increases acetylation of proteins involved in multiple oncogenic pathways. Preclinical studies have demonstrated synergistic anti-myeloma activity of the combination of panobinostat and bortezomib through dual inhibition of the aggresome and proteasome pathways. In a phase I study (B2207) of patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM treated with panobinostat + bortezomib, clinical responses (≥ minimal response [MR]) were observed in 65% of patients, including in patients with bortezomib-refractory disease. PANORAMA 2 seeks to expand upon these preliminary results and seeks to determine whether panobinostat can sensitize resistant patients to a bortezomib-containing therapeutic regimen. Methods: PANORAMA 2 is a single arm, phase II study of panobinostat + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. Patients with relapsed and bortezomib-refractory MM (≥ 2 prior lines of therapy including an IMiD and who had progressed on or within 60 days of the last bortezomib-based therapy) are treated in 2 phases. Treatment phase 1 consists of 8 three-week cycles of oral panobinostat (20 mg days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12) + intravenous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) + oral dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). Patients demonstrating clinical benefit (≥ stable disease) can proceed to treatment phase 2, consisting of 4 six-week cycles of panobinostat (20 mg TIW 2 weeks on 1 week off, and repeat) + bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 22, 29) + dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). The primary endpoint is overall response (≥ partial response [PR]), as defined by the European Group of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 1998 criteria, in the first 8 cycles of treatment phase 1. A Simon 2-stage design is used to test the primary endpoint where ≥ 4 responses (≥ PR) in 24 patients are needed in stage 1 in order to proceed to stage 2, where ≥ 9 responses in all patients (N = 47) are required to reject the null hypothesis (overall response rate ≤ 10%). Results: A sufficient number of responses ≥ PR were observed in stage 1 to allow for enrollment to continue to stage 2. As of 15 July 2011, 53 patients with bortezomib-refractory MM were enrolled. Safety and demographic data were available for 48 patients. The median age was 61 (41–88) years. Patients were heavily pretreated, with a median of 4 (2–14) prior regimens, and most patients (69%) received prior autologous stem cell transplant. Efficacy data were available for 44 patients. At the time of this analysis, 9 patients achieved ≥ PR (2 near CR [nCR] and 7 PR) as best overall response, and an additional 7 patients achieved an MR. Responders exhibited a long duration on therapy, and, to date, 8 patients have proceeded to treatment phase 2. The 2 patients with nCR have received ≥ 10 cycles of treatment (duration of therapy 190 and 253 days). Four patients who achieved PR have received ≥ 9 cycles (duration of therapy 155–225 days). Updated response data will be presented. Common adverse events (AEs) of any grade included, fatigue (52%), diarrhea (41%), thrombocytopenia (38%), nausea (38%), and anemia (21%). Gastrointestinal AEs were generally mild, with a relatively low incidence of grade 3/4 events. Grade 3/4 AEs were generally hematologic in nature, with grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia reported in 38%, 12%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Other common nonhematologic grade 3/4 AEs included fatigue (10%) and pneumonia (10%). Of note, to date, a relatively low rate of peripheral neuropathy (17%) has been observed. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy has been observed. Conclusions: The combination of panobinostat and bortezomib is a promising treatment for patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. These data, along with forthcoming data from the phase III study of panobinostat/placebo + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM (PANORAMA 1), will further define the potential role of panobinostat in the treatment of patients with MM. Disclosures: Richardson: Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alsina:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Ortho Biotech: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding. Weber:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Warsi:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ondovik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mukhopadhyay:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Snodgrass:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 4070-4070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Vij ◽  
Craig C. Hofmeister ◽  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David S. Siegel ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 4070 Background: There are currently limited effective treatment options for patients (pts) with RRMM with prior exposure to lenalidomide (LEN), bortezomib (BORT) and chemotherapy. In a multicenter, randomized phase 2 study, POM with or without LoDEX (n=221) was active in RRMM pts who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT (Richardson PG, et al. Blood 2011;118:abs 634); activity was also observed in those with disease refractory to LEN, BORT, or both (Vij R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:abs 8016). Here we characterize outcomes in the POM+LoDEX group (n=113) according to the prior treatment exposure. Methods: Pts with RRMM who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT, and had progressive disease (PD) within 60 days of their last treatment were randomized (1:1 ratio) to POM+LoDEX (POM, 4 mg/day for days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle; LoDex, 40 mg/week) or POM alone. At randomization, pts were stratified by age, prior number of treatments, and prior thalidomide exposure. At progression, pts receiving POM alone could receive POM+LoDEX at investigator's discretion. All pts received thromboprophylaxis (daily low-dose aspirin). The endpoints in this study were progression-free survival (PFS), response rates (using European Bone Marrow Transplantation [EBMT] criteria), duration of response, time to response, overall survival (OS), and safety. Response data according to prior therapy were assessed by investigator assessment. Results: All 113 pts assigned to POM+LoDEX had prior exposure to LEN (100%), BORT (100%), and steroids (100%). Most pts had also received prior alkylator therapy (93%), stem cell transplant (SCT) (73%), and thalidomide (THAL) (68%); 49% had received prior anthracyclines. Regimens immediately prior to study entry included BORT (50%), LEN (39%), cyclophosphamide (13%), THAL (8%), vorinostat (8%), carfilzomib (5%), and melphalan (5%). The median number of exposures to LEN and BORT in prior lines was once (range 1–4) and twice (range 1–6), respectively. The majority of pts (80%) had received >3 prior therapies. The overall response rate (ORR) was 48% and 30% in pts who had received ≤3 and >3 prior therapies, respectively. Of the pts who had ≤3 vs > 3 prior therapies, 9% vs 1% pts achieved complete response (CR), 39% vs 29% pts achieved partial response (PR), 9% vs 12% pts achieved minimal response (MR) and 44% vs 36 % pts achieved stable disease (SD), respectively. ORR was 34% and appeared similar regardless of prior exposure to alkylators (33%), anthracyclines (35%), SCT (35%), or THAL (35%). Median duration of response was also similar in pts who had received prior alkylators (8.4 mos), anthracyclines (10.1 mos), SCT (7.7 mos), and THAL (7.7 mos). Of the 69 pts who had a best response of SD or PD to their last prior antimyeloma therapy, 21 pts (12 SD and 9 PD) achieved a PR and 3 pts (1 SD and 2 PD) achieved a CR with POM+LoDEX treatment. Responding pts had longer time to progression (TTP; 11.1 mos) with POM+LoDex compared with the TTP (4.4 mos) observed with their last antimyeloma regimen prior to study. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the POM+LoDEX group were neutropenia (41%), anemia (22%), pneumonia (22%), thrombocytopenia (19%), and fatigue (14%). The incidence of at least 1 grade 3–4 adverse event was 100% in pts with ≤ 3 prior therapies, and 88% in pts with >3 therapies. Conclusions: The combination of POM+LoDEX has demonstrated an ORR of 34% in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM who have been previously exposed to LEN, BORT, steroids, and other treatments. Early treatment of POM+LoDEX (≤3 prior therapies) achieved better ORR (48%) compared with pts who received POM+LoDex later (>3 prior therapies; ORR, 30%). Disclosures: Vij: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide is an investigational drug and is not approved for the treatment of patients with any condition. Hofmeister:Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria. Richardson:Celgene, Millennium, Johnson & Johnson: Advisory Board Other. Jagannath:Onyx Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siegel:Onyx: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharma: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Baz:Celgene, Millennium, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Acetylon, Oncopep: Scientific Founder, Scientific Founder Other; Celgene, Millennium, BMS, Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 801-801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Cervantes ◽  
Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽  
Dietger Niederwieser ◽  
Andres Sirulnik ◽  
Viktoriya Stalbovskaya ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 801 Background: Ruxolitinib is a potent JAK1 & 2 inhibitor that has demonstrated superiority over traditional therapies for the treatment of MF. In the two phase 3 COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life. COMFORT-II is a randomized, open-label study evaluating ruxolitinib versus BAT in patients (pts) with MF. The primary and key secondary endpoints were both met: the proportion of pts achieving a response (defined as a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume) at wk 48 (ruxolitinib, 28.5%; BAT, 0%; P < .0001) and 24 (31.9% and 0%; P < .0001), respectively. The present analyses update the efficacy and safety findings of COMFORT-II (median follow-up, 112 wk). Methods: In COMFORT-II, 219 pts with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF and splenomegaly were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib (15 or 20 mg bid, based on baseline platelet count [100-200 × 109/L or > 200 × 109/L, respectively]) or BAT. Efficacy results are based on an intention-to-treat analysis; a loss of spleen response was defined as a > 25% increase in spleen volume over on-study nadir that is no longer a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median follow-up was 112 wk (ruxolitinib, 113; BAT, 108), and the median duration of exposure 83.3 wk (ruxolitinib, 111.4 [randomized and extension phases]; BAT, 45.1 [randomized treatment only]). Because the core study has completed, all pts have either entered the extension phase or discontinued from the study. The primary reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs; ruxolitinib, 11.6%; BAT, 6.8%), consent withdrawal (4.1% and 12.3%), and disease progression (2.7% and 5.5%). Overall, 72.6% of pts (106/146) in the ruxolitinib arm and 61.6% (45/73) in the BAT arm entered the extension phase to receive ruxolitinib, and 55.5% (81/146) of those originally randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment at the time of this analysis. The primary reasons for discontinuation from the extension phase were progressive disease (8.2%), AEs (2.1%), and other (4.1%). Overall, 70 pts (48.3%) treated with ruxolitinib achieved a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at any time during the study, and 97.1% of pts (132/136) with postbaseline assessments experienced a clinical benefit with some degree of reduction in spleen volume. Spleen reductions of ≥ 35% were sustained with continued ruxolitinib therapy (median duration not yet reached); the probabilities of maintaining the spleen response at wk 48 and 84 are 75% (95% CI, 61%-84%) and 58% (95% CI, 35%-76%), respectively (Figure). Since the last report (median 61.1 wk), an additional 9 and 12 deaths were reported in the ruxolitinib and BAT arms, respectively, resulting in a total of 20 (14%) and 16 (22%) deaths overall. Although there was no inferential statistical testing at this unplanned analysis, pts randomized to ruxolitinib showed longer survival than those randomized to BAT (HR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27–1.00). As expected, given the mechanism of action of ruxolitinib as a JAK1 & 2 inhibitor, the most common new or worsened grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities during randomized treatment were anemia (ruxolitinib, 40.4%; BAT, 23.3%), lymphopenia (22.6%; 31.5%), and thrombocytopenia (9.6%; 9.6%). In the ruxolitinib arm, mean hemoglobin levels decreased over the first 12 wk of treatment and then recovered to levels similar to BAT from wk 24 onward; there was no difference in the mean monthly red blood cell transfusion rate among the ruxolitinib and BAT groups (0.834 vs 0.956 units, respectively). Nonhematologic AEs were primarily grade 1/2. Including the extension phase, there were no new nonhematologic AEs in the ruxolitinib group that were not observed previously (in ≥ 10% of pts), and only 1 pt had a new grade 3/4 AE (epistaxis). Conclusion: In COMFORT-II, ruxolitinib provided rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly; this analysis demonstrates that these reductions are sustained over 2 years of treatment in the majority of pts. Ruxolitinib-treated pts showed longer survival than those receiving BAT, consistent with the survival advantage observed in previous (Verstovsek et al. NEJM. 2012) and current analyses of COMFORT-I, as well as with the comparison of pts of the phase 1/2 study with matched historical controls (Verstovsek et al. Blood. 2012). Disclosures: Cervantes: Sanofi-Aventis: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Pfizer: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: AdvisoryBoard Other, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Shire: 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; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Niederwieser:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stalbovskaya:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. McQuity:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hunter:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte: Employment, stock options Other. Passamonti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: 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. Barbui:Novartis: Honoraria. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knoops:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Harrison:Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 3026-3026 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús F. San-Miguel ◽  
Vania T.M. Hungria ◽  
Sung-Soo Yoon ◽  
Meral Beksac ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Panobinostat is a potent pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that targets key aberrations in multiple myeloma (MM) cell biology, including epigenetics and protein metabolism. In the phase 3 clinical trial PANORAMA 1, panobinostat in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone (PAN-BTZ-Dex) led to a statistically significant and clinically relevant increase in progression-free survival of approximately 4 months compared with that with placebo plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Pbo-BTZ-Dex). Further analyses of patient outcomes by prior treatment demonstrated that the magnitude of PFS benefit was greatest among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD; PAN-BTZ-Dex [n = 73]: 12.5 months [95% CI, 7.3-14.0 months]; Pbo-BTZ-Dex [n = 74]: 4.7 months (95% CI, 3.7-6.1 mo; HR 0.47 [95% CI, 0.32-0.72]). These data supported the regulatory approvals of PAN-BTZ-Dex for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Here we present the final analysis of overall survival (OS) for the entire patient population and among patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. Methods: The study design for the PANORAMA 1 trial was described previously (San-Miguel. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15:1195-206). The key secondary endpoint was OS. As of June 29, 2015, the 415 events required to conduct the final analysis of OS had been observed. Kaplan-Meier estimation was utilized for OS analyses for the entire population (N = 768), the pre-specified subgroup of patients who received prior bortezomib and IMiD (n = 193), and patients who received at least 2 prior regimens including bortezomib and an IMiD (n = 147). Results: The median OS of patients who received PAN-BTZ-Dex in the overall population was 40.3 months (95% CI, 35.0-44.8 months) vs 35.8 months (95% CI, 29.0-40.6 months) for the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm with HR 0.94 [95% CI, 0.78-1.14], P = .5435 (Fig 1A). The percentage of patients in each arm who received post-study therapy was 37.7% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 48.8% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. The median OS of patients who received at least 2 prior lines, including bortezomib and an IMiD, was 25.5 months (95% CI, 19.6-34.3 months) in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm vs 19.5 months (95% CI, 14.1-32.5 months) in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm (Fig. 1B). The proportion of patients in this subgroup who received post-study therapy was 35.6% in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm and 66.2% in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm. Conclusion: For the overall PANORAMA 1 study population, patients in the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm demonstrated an increase in median OS of 4.5 months vs patients in the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm, but this result was not statistically significant (P = .5435). Median OS was also slightly longer for the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm among the more heavily pretreated subgroup of patients who received at least 2 prior regimens, including bortezomib and an IMiD. A higher percentage of patients on the Pbo-BTZ-Dex arm received post-study therapy vs the PAN-BTZ-Dex arm, which may have confounded the OS results. In summary, PAN-BTZ-Dex demonstrates statistically significant increases in PFS vs Pbo-BTZ-Dex in patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory MM; however, this did not translate to a statistically significant increase in OS. Future trials will plan to focus on further optimization of dose and schedule of panobinostat and bortezomib to improve outcome, as well as novel combinations with other agents, including IMiDs and next-generation proteasome inhibitors. Figure 2. Figure 2. Disclosures Beksac: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Dimopoulos:Janssen: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Jedrzejczak:Onconova: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siritanaratkul:Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding. Schlossman:Millennium: Consultancy. Hou:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lonial:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sopala:Novartis Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bengoudifa:Novartis: Employment. Corrado:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 679-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Hervé Dombret ◽  
Patrice Chevallier ◽  
Oliver G. Ottmann ◽  
Nicola Goekbuget ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction. Prognosis of patients (pts) with R/R Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) ALL is dismal despite the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) which may be used as single agents or in combination regimens. Blinatumomab is a bispecific T-cell engaging (BiTE®) antibody construct that has shown antileukemic activity. Among adults with R/R Ph-negative ALL receiving blinatumomab, 43% achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) during the first two cycles (Topp MS et al. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:57). We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of blinatumomab in pts with R/R Ph+ ALL who progressed after or were intolerant to a 2nd or later (2+) generation TKI. Methods. Eligible adult pts (≥18 years) had Ph+ B-precursor ALL and had relapsed after or were refractory to at least one 2+ generation TKI; or were intolerant to 2+ generation TKI and intolerant or refractory to imatinib. All pts had to have >5% blasts in the bone marrow and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2. Blinatumomab was dosed by continuous IV infusion (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) for up to 5 cycles (9 μg/d on days 1-7 in cycle 1, and 28 μg/d thereafter). The primary endpoint was CR or CRh during the first two cycles; minimal residual disease (MRD) response based on RT-PCR amplification of BCR-ABL per central laboratory, relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) rate were key secondary endpoints. Complete MRD response was defined as no RT-PCR amplification of BCR-ABL at a sensitivity of 10-5. Results. Of 45 treated pts, 44 were resistant to 2+ generation TKI; one patient was resistant to imatinib and never exposed to 2+ generation TKI (protocol deviation). 53% of pts were men. Median (range) age was 55 (23-78) years (≥65 years, 27%). Ten pts (22%) had a BCR-ABL gene with T315I mutation. All pts had received prior TKI (dasatinib, 87%; ponatinib, 51%; imatinib, 56%; nilotinib, 36%; bosutinib, 2%), with 60% having received ≥ 2 prior 2+ generation TKI; most pts (96%) had received prior chemotherapy. 38% of pts had ≥ 2 prior relapses and 44% had prior alloHSCT. Efficacy outcomes for key endpoints are shown in the table. 16 pts achieved CR/CRh during the first two cycles for a response rate of 36% (95% CI: 22%, 51%); of those, 14 pts achieved CR, most of them (10/14, 71%) in cycle 1. The patient who never received 2+ generation TKI did not respond to treatment. 12 of the 14 pts (86%) with CR and two of the two pts with CRh achieved a complete MRD response. Among the 10 pts with T315I mutation, four achieved CR/CRh; all four also achieved a complete MRD response. Eight CR/CRh responders (50%) relapsed, three during treatment (including two with CR who did not achieve complete MRD response). One patient died in CR post alloHSCT. Median (95% CI) RFS was 6.7 (4.4, not estimable) months (median follow-up, 9.0 months); median OS was 7.1 (5.6, not estimable) months (median follow-up, 8.8 months). Patient incidence of grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 82%, most commonly febrile neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (22%), anemia (16%), and pyrexia (11%). Five pts had fatal AEs; one (septic shock) was considered treatment-related by the investigator. Three pts discontinued because of AEs. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in three pts (all grade 1 or 2). 21 pts (47%) had neurologic events (paraesthesia, 13%; confusional state, 11%; dizziness, 9%; tremor, 9%); three pts had grade 3 neurologic events (aphasia, hemiplegia; and depressed level of consciousness and nervous system disorder), one of which (aphasia) required treatment interruption. Conclusion. In this population of pts with R/R Ph+ ALL who have very poor prognosis after failure of 2+ generation TKI therapy, treatment with CD19-targeted immunotherapy blinatumomab as single agent showed antileukemic activity. AEs were consistent with those previously reported for pts with R/R Ph-negative ALL treated with blinatumomab. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Martinelli: Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy. Dombret:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ottmann:Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Goekbuget:Bayer: Equity Ownership; Eusapharma/Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Erytech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medac: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SigmaTau: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Sanofi: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Topp:Astra: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support. Fielding:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sterling:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Benjamin:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stein:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 737-737
Author(s):  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Marcie Riches ◽  
Nancy A. Kernan ◽  
Joel A. Brochstein ◽  
Shin Mineishi ◽  
...  

Introduction Hepatic veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (VOD/SOS), is a rare and potentially life-threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Severe cases, historically defined by multi-organ dysfunction (MOD), may be associated with mortality rates of >80%. There is no FDA-approved treatment for VOD/SOS. Defibrotide (DF) has a proposed mechanism of action that includes stabilization of endothelial cells and restoration of thrombo-fibrinolytic balance. Earlier analyses of a pivotal phase 3 trial of DF in VOD/SOS plus MOD (Richardson et al. Blood. 2009;114:Abstract 654) underpinned approval of DF in the EU to treat severe hepatic VOD/SOS after HSCT. Additional data were obtained at the request of US health authorities. Here we present the final analysis: day +100 survival (primary endpoint) and complete response (CR; secondary). Methods This was a multicenter, open-label, phase 3 historical control (HC) study assessing DF. Eligible patients met Baltimore VOD/SOS criteria (total bilirubin ≥2.0 mg/dL with ≥2 of: hepatomegaly, ascites, or 5% weight gain) by day +21 post-HSCT, plus MOD (renal [trebling of creatinine levels, reduced creatinine clearance, or dialysis] and/or pulmonary [oxygen saturation ≤90%, need for oxygen supplementation/ventilator dependence]) by day +28 post-HSCT. Exclusion criteria included severe graft-versus-host disease (GvHD) of liver or gut, clinically significant bleeding, or need for ≥2 pressors. HC patients were reviewed for inclusion/exclusion criteria in a sequential review of medical charts starting 6 months prior to use of DF at each site; a blinded medical review committee made the final determination of HCs unequivocally meeting criteria for VOD/SOS with MOD. DF dose was 25 mg/kg/d in 4 divided 2-hour IV infusions q6h; recommended treatment duration was ≥21 days. Primary endpoint was day +100 survival. CR by day +100 was a secondary endpoint. Treatment difference in survival and CR rates and their 95% confidence intervals were estimated using propensity-stratified and weighted (Koch-adjusted) estimates of differences in proportions that account for baseline prognostic factors of survival (ie, ventilator and/or dialysis dependency at entry, age ≤/>16 years, transplant type, and prior HSCT). Analyses included patients treated with DF and HCs. Results There were 102 patients in the DF group and 32 cases selected as HCs. Baseline characteristics were similar in the DF and HC groups: mean age (26 and 25 years; 43% and 44% ≤16 years), allogeneic graft (88% and 84%), prior HSCT (13% and 9%), ventilator- and/or dialysis-dependent at study entry (33% and 22%), myeloablative conditioning (87% and 94%), and the most common underlying diseases (acute leukemias: 45% and 47%), respectively. In the DF-treated group, common GvHD medications included tacrolimus (49%), methotrexate (41%), and cyclosporine (38%); in the HC group, common medications were cyclosporine (72%) and methotrexate (63%). Survival at day +100 in the DF and HC groups was 38% and 25%, respectively. The propensity-stratified difference in survival was 23.0% (95.1% CI, 5.2-40.8, P = .0109). Respective observed CR rates by day +100 were 25.5% and 12.5%, and the propensity-stratified difference in CR was 19.0% (95.1% CI, 3.5-34.6, P = .0160). Comparing the earlier EU and final analyses, the survival rates at day +100 in each group did not vary; however, the propensity adjusted final analysis provided a different level of statistical significance. Day +100 CR rates in the original analysis were slightly lower in both arms at 24% and 9% due to increased data capture to investigate CR; the P value was essentially unchanged. For the DF group, 45% had an adverse event (AE) at least possibly related to study drug, and 21% had a serious AE at least possibly related to study drug. In this very sick population, percentages of patients with ≥1 AE leading to death were similar between DF and HC patients (64% and 69%), as were hemorrhagic AEs (64%, 75%) and hypotension (39%, 50%). Conclusions Based on observed study data and using a propensity-adjusted rate difference estimator, patients treated with DF had a 23% reduction in risk of death by day +100 and 19% improvement in CR rate. Overall incidence of hemorrhage and fatal AEs were similar between groups with AEs consistent with those expected in this critically ill population. Support: Jazz Pharmaceuticals. Disclosures Richardson: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Marizomib, pmalidomide, and low dose dexamethasone in RR MM. Defibrotide is an investigational treatment for hepatic veno-occlusive disease/sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in the United States. . Kernan:Gentium S.p.A.: Research Funding. Grupp:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Guinan:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: My institution received fees for research.. Martin:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Steinbach:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Krishnan:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy; Millenium: Speakers Bureau. Giralt:SANOFI: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Consultancy, Research Funding; JAZZ: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; TAKEDA: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Rodriguez:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Doyle:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Antin:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. D'Agostino:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Massaro:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Miloslavsky:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hume:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Iacobelli:Gentium SpA: Employment. Nejadnik:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hannah:Gentium SpA: Other: Personal fees during conduct of the study.. Soiffer:Gentium SpA/Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2883-2883
Author(s):  
Matthew S. Davids ◽  
Andrew W. Roberts ◽  
William G. Wierda ◽  
Kathryn Humphrey ◽  
Debbie J Alter ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Venetoclax is a selective, oral inhibitor of BCL2, a key regulator of the intrinsic apoptotic pathway. The dose-escalation phase 1 study of venetoclax in patients with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) enrolled 106 patients from June 2011, and the overall response rate across the entire NHL cohort was 44%. The highest response rate (75%) was seen in the 28 patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) (Davids et al., J Clin Oncol. 2017). Here, we report longer-term outcomes for those patients, now with a median of 27 months (range: 0.2 - 59) follow up. Methods: Venetoclax was administered in dose cohorts ranging from a maximum dose of 300-1200 mg and continued until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable toxicity; intra-patient dose escalation was allowed. Adverse events (AEs) were assessed by NCI-CTCAE v4.0 and responses were assessed using 2007 Cheson IWG response criteria, utilizing CT scans beginning at week 6. The data cut off for this analysis was June 4th, 2018. Results: For the 28 patients with MCL, the median age was 72 years (range: 35 - 85). They had received a median of 3 (range: 1 - 7) prior treatments; 5 patients received prior PI3K inhibitor (but no prior ibrutinib). The median time from the preceding treatment to start of venetoclax was 13 months (range: 2 - 148). The median dose of venetoclax was 400 mg/day; 25/28 received at least 400mg/day. Median time on study drug was 11 months (range: 0.2 - 59). Three patients have been on therapy for over 4 years. The overall response rate was 75%, with 6 (21%) patients achieving complete remission (CR) and 15 (54%) partial response (PR). The median duration of response was 16 months (95% CI: 4, 30) and median progression free survival was 11 months (95% CI: 5, 21) for all patients (Figure). The 2 year PFS estimate was 30% (95% CI: 14%, 47%) for all patients, 83% (95% CI: 27%, 97%) for patients who achieved CR and 14% (95% CI: 2%, 37%) for patients who achieved PR. One patient who achieved PR proceeded to allogeneic stem cell transplant and remained disease free at the last protocol defined follow-up (24 months after coming off study). Three patients developed progressive disease after receiving venetoclax for more than two years of therapy (time to progression: 31, 33, and 33 months). Two patients with CR continue on study without evidence of progression, currently at 47 and 59 months of venetoclax monotherapy. The most common (≥25% of patients with MCL) all grade treatment emergent AEs were nausea (57%), diarrhea (50%), fatigue (39%), constipation (29%) and upper respiratory infection (25%). The most common (≥10% of patients with MCL) grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (14%), anemia (14%), pneumonia (11%), and thrombocytopenia (11%). Biochemical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), without accompanying clinical features, was reported in one patient considered high risk for TLS. Specific interventions were not required, and the patient continued on study drug. Conclusions: Venetoclax monotherapy leads to durable remission in a meaningful proportion of patients with pretreated MCL. Further studies in MCL are currently investigating potential biomarkers for durable response to venetoclax combination regimens, including a Phase 3 randomized study with ibrutinib (SYMPATICO, NCT03112174). Disclosures Davids: Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Surface Oncology: Research Funding. Roberts:Walter and Eliza Hall: Employment, Patents & Royalties: Employee of Walter and Eliza Hall Institute of Medical Research which receives milestone and royalty payments related to venetoclax; AbbVie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Wierda:Genentech: Research Funding; AbbVie, Inc: Research Funding. Humphrey:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Alter:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Masud:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Buss:Abbvie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verdugo:AbbVie, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Seymour:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.


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

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


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document