Switching To Nilotinib In Patients (pts) With Chronic Myeloid Leukemia In Chronic Phase (CML-CP) With Suboptimal Cytogenetic Response (CyR) On Imatinib: First Results Of The LASOR Trial

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 95-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Carmino Antonio De Souza ◽  
Jose Luis Lopez ◽  
Manuel Ayala ◽  
Eduardo Bullorsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Alternate Treatment ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Loss Of Response

Abstract Introduction The phase 3 LASOR trial is the only randomized trial that compares the effects of imatinib dose escalation with those of switching to nilotinib in pts with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) CML-CP who experience suboptimal response to frontline imatinib. Suboptimal response has been associated with inferior long-term outcomes in several landmark analyses and was observed in 13% of pts randomized to the imatinib arm of ENESTnd by 12 mo (vs 4% in each nilotinib arm). Methods Adults (N = 191) with CML-CP with suboptimal CyR to frontline imatinib 400 mg once daily (QD) were randomized 1:1 to nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID; n = 96) or imatinib 600 mg QD (n = 95). Suboptimal CyR was defined according to 2009 European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria as: no CyR ≥ 3 to < 6 mo (Ph+ > 95%), no partial CyR (PCyR) ≥ 6 to < 12 mo (Ph+ 36%-95%), or no complete CyR (CCyR) ≥ 12 to <18 mo (Ph+ 1%-35%) after starting imatinib. All pts had complete hematologic response at study entry. The primary endpoint was CCyR (Ph+ 0%) at 6 mo after randomization. The key secondary endpoint was major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABLIS ≤ 0.1%) at 12 mo. Crossover to the alternate treatment arm was allowed for pts who failed to achieve CCyR by 6 mo or had intolerance or loss of response at any time. Results Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms, with most pts entering study for not having PCyR at 6 mo or CCyR at 12 mo (Table). The primary endpoint, CCyR at 6 mo after randomization, was observed in 47 (49.0%) and 40 (42.1%) pts in the nilotinib and imatinib arms, respectively (P = .3844). Crossover was more common in pts randomized to the imatinib arm. Crossover occurred before the primary endpoint analysis at 6 mo in 6 pts in the nilotinib arm (5 for intolerance; 1 for lack of efficacy) and 15 pts in the imatinib arm (13 for intolerance; 1 for lack of efficacy; 1 for loss of response). Median time to crossover was 3.9 and 3.6 mo in the nilotinib and imatinib arms, respectively. None of the nilotinib pts who crossed over to imatinib vs 6 of the 15 imatinib pts who crossed over to nilotinib achieved CCyR at the primary analysis time point 6 mo after randomization. Ten pts in the nilotinib arm and 7 in the imatinib arm had neither samples evaluable for CyR at 6 mo nor had crossed over to the alternate treatment arm. Excluding these pts (evaluable population) and counting crossed-over pts as non-responders, 47 of 86 pts (54.7%) in the nilotinib arm and 34 of 88 (38.6%) in the imatinib arm achieved CCyR at 6 mo. Analyses of molecular response at 6 mo after randomization suggested higher rates in the nilotinib arm for BCR-ABLIS ≤ 1% (CCyR equivalent) and ≤ 0.1% (MMR) compared with the imatinib arm (52.1% vs 29.5% and 31.3% vs 11.6%, respectively). The safety profile for both drugs was consistent with prior reports of pts who switched therapy after inadequate responses to imatinib. Conclusions Patients with suboptimal CyR to imatinib (today classified by ELN as warning/failure) represent a significant unmet need in the treatment of CML-CP. This important study is the only randomized evaluation of imatinib dose escalation vs switch to the more potent BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor nilotinib in this population. Although the primary endpoint was not met, sensitivity analyses accounting for crossover and more sensitive molecular monitoring demonstrated higher rates of response with switch to nilotinib vs imatinib dose escalation in pts with suboptimal response to frontline imatinib. Disclosures: Cortes: Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Research Funding. Bullorsky:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Sacha:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Owugah:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Kumar Nidamarthy:NOVARTIS HEALTH CARE Pvt Ltd: Employment. Szczudlo:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Piccolo:Novartis: Employment. le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria.

Response and Outcomes to Nilotinib at 24 Months in Imatinib-Resistant Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Patients in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) and Accelerated Phase (CML-AP) with and without BCR-ABL Mutations.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1130-1130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jerald P. Radich ◽  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Enrico Gottardi ◽  
Simona Soverini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Imatinib Resistant

Abstract Abstract 1130 Poster Board I-152 Background Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL inhibitor, with in vitro activity against most BCR-ABL mutants (excluding T315I) indicated for the treatment of patients with Philadelphia chromosome positive (Ph+) CML in CPor AP resistant or -intolerant to prior therapy, including imatinib. In a previous analysis of nilotinib in patients with BCR-ABL mutations, mutations occurring at three specific amino acid residues (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V) were shown to be associated with less favorable response to nilotinib. The current analysis is based on mature data with a minimum follow-up of 24-months for all patients. Outcomes of patients at 24 months were analyzed by mutation type. Methods Imatinib-resistant CML-CP (n = 200) and CML-AP (n = 93) patients were subdivided into the following mutational subsets: no mutation, sensitive mutations (including mutations with unknown in vitro IC50). or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations at baseline. Patients with mutations of unknown in vitro sensitivity were classified as sensitive in this analysis based on a previous finding that patients with these mutations responded similarly to nilotinib as patients with sensitive mutation. Patients with baseline T315I mutations were excluded from this analysis. Patient groups were analyzed for kinetics and durability of cytogenetic and molecular response to nilotinib, as well as event-free survival (EFS), defined as loss of hematologic or cytogenetic response, progression to AP/BC, discontinuation due to disease progression, or death, and overall survival (OS). Results In CML-CP and -AP patients with no mutation, sensitive mutations, or E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations, hematologic, cytogenetic and molecular responses are provided in the Table. Overall, patients with no mutations responded similarly to patients with sensitive mutations, whereas patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had less favorable responses. This correlation was observed in both CML-CP and CML-AP patients, respectively. Median time to CCyR was 3.3 months (range, 1.0–26.7) for CML-CP patients with no mutations, and 5.6 months (range, 0.9–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. At 24 months, CCyR was maintained in 74% of CML-CP patients with no mutation and in 84% of patients with sensitive mutations. One patient with CML-CP and an E255K mutation achieved CCyR at 25 months and maintained until last assessment at 30 months. Median time to MMR was similar at 5.6 months (range, 0.9–25.8) for CML-CP patients with no mutations and 5.6 months (range, 2.7–22.1) for patients with sensitive mutations. No patient with a less sensitive mutation achieved MMR. Median EFS and 24-month estimated OS rate are provided in the Table. Conclusions Imatinib-resistant CML-CP and CML-AP patients treated with nilotinib therapy with BCR-ABL mutations (excluding E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V) achieved rapid and durable cytogenetic responses, and estimated EFS and OS at 24 months similar to that of patients with no mutations, respectively. Patients with E255K/V, Y253H, or F359C/V mutations had lower and less-durable responses and shorter EFS than patients with sensitive mutations. Alternative therapies may be considered for patients with these uncommon mutations (E255K/V, Y253H, and F359C/V). Disclosures Radich: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Research Funding. Branford:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Haque:Novartis: Employment. Woodman:Novartis: Employment. Kantarjian:Novartis: Research Funding. Hughes:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Advisor, Honoraria, Research Funding. 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. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

A phase II study of dasatinib therapy in children and adolescents with newly diagnosed chronic phase chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML-CP) or Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) leukemias resistant or intolerant to imatinib.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS9594-TPS9594
Author(s):  
Michel Zwaan ◽  
Linda C. Stork ◽  
Yves Bertrand ◽  
Lia Gore ◽  
Nobuko Hijiya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Dose Escalation Study

TPS9594 Background: Dasatinib is a BCR-ABL inhibitor approved for treatment in adult patients (pts) with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP; CML resistant/intolerant to prior therapy, including imatinib; and Ph+ acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). There are no established dasatinib treatment regimens for children/adolescents with relapsed/refractory leukemia, but pediatric trials are underway. A phase I dose-escalation study of dasatinib in pediatric pts with refractory solid tumors (n=28) and imatinib-refractory, Ph+ leukemia (n=11) reported a maximum tolerated dose of 85 mg/m2 twice daily in solid-tumor pts and at least a partial cytogenetic response (CyR) in all evaluable CML pts (n=9) (Aplenc, J Clin Oncol 2011). Preliminary results from a phase I dose-escalation study in pediatric pts with subtypes of relapsed/refractory leukemia (NCT00306202) indicate that dasatinib was well tolerated up to 120 mg/m2 (Zwaan, Blood 2010 [abstr 2265]). Further study of dasatinib in pediatric pts is warranted. Methods: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of dasatinib monotherapy in children/adolescents with newly diagnosed CML-CP or Ph+ leukemias resistant/intolerant to imatinib, a phase II nonrandomized, global study of dasatinib in pts birth to <18 y is ongoing (NCT00777036): Cohort 1 (C1), Ph+ CML-CP pts resistant/intolerant to imatinib; Cohort 2 (C2), Ph+ ALL, accelerated or blast phase CML pts resistant/intolerant to or relapsed after imatinib therapy; or Cohort 3 (C3), newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve Ph+ CML-CP pts. Treatments are once daily with dasatinib 60 mg/m2 (C1/C3) or 80 mg/m2 (C2) for ≥24 months. Primary endpoints are major CyR (C1), complete hematologic response (C2), and complete CyR (C3). Secondary endpoints include safety, tolerability, best response, time to/duration of response, survival, and molecular response rates. BCR-ABL mutations are evaluated. First patient first visit was March 2009; estimated trial completion is September 2016. As of January 2012, 63 pts (n=27 aged <12 y; n=36 aged ≥12 y) have been treated in C1/C2 (n=41) and C3 (n=22). Enrollment is ongoing at 79 sites.

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.

A Phase 1/2 Study Of Bosutinib (SKI-606) In Japanese Adults With Philadelphia Chromosome-Positive (Ph+) Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2736-2736
Author(s):  
Naoto Takahashi ◽  
Kenichi Ishizawa ◽  
Chiaki Nakaseko ◽  
Yukio Kobayashi ◽  
Kazuteru Ohashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Multiple Doses ◽  
Starting Dose ◽  
Daily Dose ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Bosutinib (BOS), an oral dual Src/Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated efficacy and acceptable safety in patients (pts) with chronic phase (CP)-CML resistant/intolerant to imatinib (IM). This ongoing open-label, 2-part, phase 1/2 study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of BOS in Japanese pts with Ph+ CML. Methods In this study, Part 1 was designed to confirm the safety of BOS up to 600 mg/d (or establish a maximum tolerated dose <600 mg/d) and evaluate PK parameters in IM-resistant/intolerant CP-CML pts. In Part 1, BOS (400 mg, 500 mg, and 600 mg) was administered to successive cohorts of pts aged ≥20 to <75 y as a single daily dose on d 1 and as a continuous once-daily dose from d 3, with each cohort (3-6 pts) evaluated for 28 d before enrolling the next dosing cohort. Part 2 evaluated the efficacy and safety of BOS in CP-CML or advanced (ADV) CML pts after resistance/intolerance to IM (second-line [2L]) or to IM plus dasatinib or nilotinib (third-line [3L]; exploratory cohort). In Part 2, BOS (starting dose: 500 mg/d) was administered to pts aged ≥20 y, with dose escalation to 600 mg/d allowed for lack of efficacy. The primary efficacy endpoint was the cumulative major cytogenetic response (MCyR) rate by wk 24 in CP-CML 2L pts (primary cohort). Results In Part 1, 17 pts received BOS (400 mg, n=7, 500 mg, n=7; 600 mg, n=3); 1 pt each in the 400 mg and 500 mg dose groups was not evaluable for dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) due to early study discontinuation (disease progression and pt request, respectively). DLTs during the first 28 d of treatment occurred in 1/6 pt receiving BOS 400 mg (grade 3 liver injury) and 1/6 pt receiving BOS 500 mg (grade 4 abnormal hepatic function); no DLTs occurred in the 3 BOS 600-mg pts. BOS 500 mg was chosen as starting dose for Part 2 based on DLTs and previous results (Cortes et al. Blood. 2011;118:4567-76). PK analyses indicated relatively slow absorption, with a median Tmax of ∼4 h after single or multiple doses of BOS 400–600 mg. BOS exposure (Cmax and AUC) generally increased with increasing dose after single and multiple doses. In Part 2, 46 additional pts were enrolled (2L, n=35 [28 CP-CML, 7 ADV]; 3L, n=11 [10 CP-CML, 1 accelerated-phase (AP)]); 63 pts were treated with BOS (median [range] age: 55 [20-78] y; 62% male; entry diagnosis: CP-CML, n=58; AP-CML, n=3; blast phase [BP]-CML, n=2). Median follow-up was 132 wk for 2L pts and 37 wk for 3L pts. In the CP-CML 2L cohort in Part 2 (n=28), the MCyR rate by wk 24 was 36% (10/28 pts; complete [CCyR], n=8; partial [PCyR], n=2) (primary endpoint); maintained MCyR at wk 24 was 64% (18/28 pts; CCyR, n=16; PCyR, n=2); median time to MCyR was 12.3 wk. Only 1 of 13 CP-CML 2L pts who attained MCyR at any point during the study lost it. Cumulative major molecular response (MMR) rate through the study was 43% (12/28 pts). AP/BP transformation occurred in 1 CP-CML 2L pt; at wks 48 and 96, progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 100% and 94%, respectively, and overall survival (OS) rate was 96% (both). Of 7 ADV 2L pts, 1 had confirmed complete hematologic response (cCHR) at wk 84 with duration of 95 wk (cCHR lost). AP/BP transformation occurred in 1 ADV 2L pt; at wks 48 and 96, PFS rate was 21% (both), and OS rate was 43% (both). In the 3L cohort, the cumulative MCyR rate by wk 24 and maintained MCyR rate at wk 24 were 18% (2/11 pts) and 64% (7/11 pts [CCyR, n=6; PCyR, n=1]); cumulative MMR rate through the study was 18% (2/11 pts). The only 3L pt with AP-CML attained cCHR at 12 wk with a duration of 24 wk as of the date of this analysis (censored due to data cutoff). No AP/BP transformation occurred in the 3L cohort; treatment duration was inadequate for assessment of PFS and OS. Overall, the most common treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were diarrhea (95%), rash (57%), nasopharyngitis (51%), nausea (38%), vomiting (38%), increased alanine aminotransferase (ALT; 38%), lymphopenia (35%), thrombocytopenia (30%), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (30%). Grade 3/4 TEAEs were reported in 54 (86%) pts, most commonly lymphopenia (21%), increased lipase (19%), neutropenia (18%), thrombocytopenia (18%), and increased ALT (18%). 16 (25%) pts discontinued treatment due to AEs. No deaths occurred within 30 d of last BOS dose. Conclusions The safety and PK profiles of BOS up to 600 mg/d was confirmed in Japanese pts with Ph+ CML resistant/intolerant to IM. BOS 500 mg/d demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in this population. Disclosures: Kobayashi: Ariad: Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Ohtsuka: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding. Shibata:Pfizer Japan Inc: Employment. Fujii:Pfizer Japan Inc: Employment. Ono:Pfizer Japan Inc: Employment.

Early Switch to Nilotinib Does Not Overcome the Adverse Outcome for CML Patients Failing to Achieve Early Molecular Response On Imatinib, Despite Excellent Overall Outcomes in the TIDEL II Trial

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3771-3771 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T Yeung ◽  
Michael Philip Osborn ◽  
Deborah L White ◽  
Susan Branford ◽  
Michael Kornhauser ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Blast Crisis ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Time Dependent ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Trough Levels

Abstract Abstract 3771 Background: We have previously reported promising results from the TIDEL-II trial, using imatinib (IM) treatment upfront in patients (pts) newly diagnosed with Philadelphia chromosome positive Chronic Myeloid Leukaemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP), and switching selected pts to nilotinib (NIL) on the basis of failure to achieve time-dependent molecular response (MR). This strategy showed excellent rates of major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL ≤0.1% IS) at 12 months (mos) and transformation free survival. Aim: To optimise molecular outcome and survival in treatment naïve CML-CP pts by selective dose escalation of IM for pts with low trough levels and early switching to NIL for pts with poor MR. Methods: TIDEL-II enrolled 210 CML-CP pts across 23 Australasian centres in 2 equal and sequential cohorts. All pts started treatment with IM 600mg/d and dose escalated to IM 800mg/d if IM trough levels were <1000ng/mL. A series of time-dependent MR targets were set: BCR-ABL ≤10%, ≤1% and ≤0.1% (IS) at 3, 6 and 12 mos. Cohort 1 (C1) pts failing to meet these targets dose escalated to IM 800 mg/d. Pts who failed to improve molecular response, or were already on IM 800mg/d, switched to NIL 400mg BID. Pts in cohort 2 (C2) who failed these targets switched to NIL directly. Pts with grade III/IV or persistent grade II toxicity were also allowed to switch from IM to NIL. Results: Median follow up (f/u) for C1 and C2 pts were 42 & 24 mos respectively, and 31 mos for all pts (15–56 mos) – see table 1. The primary end-point, confirmed MMR at 12 mos, was achieved by 64%, with no difference between C1 and C2. This climbed to 75% at 24 mos. At 12 & 24 mos, the proportion of pts with confirmed MR4.5 (BCR-ABL ≤ 0.0032% IS) was 18% and 29% respectively. Six pts progressed to blast crisis (BC) : 4 in their 1st year of treatment, and 1 each in the 2nd and 3rd yrs, resulting in 2 deaths. Four other deaths were recorded, caused by stroke (1), pneumonia (1) and cardiac disease (2); 2 pts had NIL treatment before death. Eighteen mutations had been identified in 11 pts, including 4 pts with the highly resistant mutations T315I or E255K either singly or in combination with others. These were identified in the context of BC (3), loss of MMR (2), lack of MMR by 12 mos (4), and lack of CCR by 6 mos (2). One other pt lost MMR in the absence of a mutation and regained MMR with switching to NIL. Thirty-one pts in C1 switched to NIL: 19 for intolerance and 12 for failure to achieve targets after a trial of IM 800mg/d. Of the latter, with median f/u of 26 mos on NIL, 5/12 reached MMR subsequently. In C2, 44 patients switched to NIL, 12 for intolerance and 32 for failing targets: of the latter, 9 reached MMR with median f/u of 14 mos. In contrast, in the 31 (C1+C2) pts switching for IM-intolerance, all but 2 reached MMR (including 12 patients already in MMR at time of switch). Of the 25 pts with BCR-ABL ≥ 10% at 3mos, 3 pts progressed to BC (1 at 3.5mos), 6 more withdrew from study. Of the remainder, four pts achieved MMR, 9 more achieved BCR-ABL<1% but without MMR. None of these 25 pts have achieved MR4.5. (Table 2). Conclusion: Overall, the TIDEL-II strategy compares well with other upfront studies of CML-CP pts with regard to MR, as well as risk of death and progression to BC. A small proportion of pts experience further falls in BCR-ABL when switching from IM to NIL for failure to achieve deep MR. In the 12% of pts who fail to achieve BCR-ABL ≤10% at 3 mos, there is greater risk of BC and so far no deep MR are seen, despite intensification in kinase inhibition instituted at as early as 3 mos. Alternative approaches are needed both to identify these pts early and protect them from disease transformation. Disclosures: Yeung: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. White:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Branford:Novartis : Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad : Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cepheid : Consultancy. Slader:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Hiwase:CSL Ltd: Research Funding. Schwarer:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ross:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Grigg:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hughes:Novartis Oncology: 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; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Cryptic Philadelphia Chromosome in Newly Diagnosed Chronic Phase CML (CML-CP): Clinical Characteristics and Treatment Outcome after Treatment with 5 TKI Modalities

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3082-3082
Author(s):  
Ahmad N. Ghorab ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Preetesh Jain ◽  
Courtney D DiNardo ◽  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research Funding ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Initial Therapy ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Blastic Phase

Abstract Background: The Philadelphia chromosome (Ph) is the hallmark of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). However a few patients present without Ph by conventional G-banding but express the BCR/ABL1 rearrangement detectable by molecular FISH and/or PCR representing a cryptic Philadelphia chromosome (i.e., Ph-, BCR-ABL1+ CML). There is a paucity of data regarding the outcome this small but important subset of patients when treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI). In this report, we report the clinical characteristics and treatment outcome of these patients. Methods: We reviewed the medical records of all 630 patients with CML in chronic phase treated at a single institution in consecutive or parallel clinical trials with TKI as initial therapy between 2000 and 2015. Nine patients with Ph-negative BCR-ABL1-positive disease were identified. We analyzed their clinical characteristics and clinical outcome. Results: Median age of this group of patients was 34 years (range, 23 to 69); only 1 patient was aged >50 years. This is in contrast to the median age of 53 years for patients with standard Ph-positive CML. Male to female ratio was 1.2. Baseline cytogenetic characteristics are shown in Table-1. Transcript type was e14a2 in 4, e13a2 in 4, and both in 2. Eight patients presented with low risk Sokal score and one with high-risk score. Four patients received initial therapy with imatinib (400 mg daily in 1, 800 mg daily in 3), 2 with dasatinib, 2 with nilotinib and one with ponatinib. The cumulative response is presented in Table-2. All patients achieved complete hematological response (CHR) within 3 months. Eight patients achieved complete cytogenetic response (CCyR), 6 of them within 6 months from start of therapy; 7 patients achieved MMR within 12 months from the start of therapy. MR4.5 was achieved in 7, and it has been sustained for at least 2 years in 5 patients; no patient has electively discontinued therapy. After a median follow-up of 79 months from start of therapy, 5 patients remain on their original TKI (including the 2 patients who started on imatinib 800 but currently receiving imatinib 400 due to dose reduction) with the molecular response at last follow-up being undetectable BCR-ABL1 in 4 and MMR in 1. One patient transformed to blastic phase. Median overall survival (OS) of these patients was not reached (two patients died from unrelated causes: one from a car accident, the other, who had transformed to blastic phase, received therapy with clofarabine, idarubicin, ara-C then imatinib followed by SCT, and died from a fall); the other 7 patients are alive 13, 11,7.8, 6.5, 5, 4, and 3.4 years from diagnosis. Conclusion: Ph-negative BCR-ABL1-positive CML presents at a younger age than the average CML population, and usually presents with low-risk disease. These patients respond well to therapy with TKI and have a very favorable long-term outcome. *One patient did not have molecular response assessment since he PCR testing was not routinely done before CCyR in 2001 when the patient had the 3 month response assessment. Disclosures Kantarjian: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Pfizer Inc: Research Funding; Delta-Fly Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. DiNardo:Abbvie: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Other: advisory board, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Agios: Other: advisory board, Research Funding. Jabbour:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Cortes:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Teva: 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 and Safety of Nilotinib 300 Mg Twice Daily (BD) in Patients with CML in Chronic Phase (CML-CP) Who Are Intolerant to Prior BCR-ABL Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors (TKIs): Results from the Randomized, Phase IIIb E.N.E.S.Tswift Study

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 5447-5447
Author(s):  
Devendra K Hiwase ◽  
Peter Tan ◽  
James D'Rozario ◽  
John Taper ◽  
Anthony Richard Powell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Myeloproliferative Disease ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Log Reduction ◽  
Treatment Interruptions

Abstract Background: Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) CML is a myeloproliferative disease characterized by the presence of the abnormal Ph+ in hematopoietic cells. Imatinib, dasatinib and nilotinib are BCR-ABL TKIs commonly used in the treatment of CML-CP. Many patients on BCR-ABL TKI therapy will experience adverse events (AEs). Some of the more common AEs associated with first- and second-generation BCR-ABL TKIs include fluid retention, diarrhea, rash, musculoskeletal pain, nausea, vomiting, muscle cramps, and headache. Some patients will be unable to tolerate these AEs and will discontinue therapy. The current study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of nilotinib in patients with CML-CP who are responsive to but intolerant of treatment with imatinib or dasatinib. Although the study was stopped early due to low recruitment, here we present results on cross-intolerance and molecular response in the patients who were switched from imatinib or dasatinib to nilotinib. Methods: Eligible adult patients had: Ph+ CML-CP associated with BCR-ABL quantifiable by real-time quantitative reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR); received ≥3 months imatinib or dasatinib or both; were <1% (IS) BCR-ABL level in the blood during imatinib or dasatinib treatment; and were experiencing any non-hematological AEs (any grade) that persisted for ≥1 month or recurred at least once despite supportive care. After a washout period of ≥3 days, patients were switched to nilotinib 300 mg BD and treated for up to 24 months. The dose could be reduced to 450 mg QD for safety reasons. Treatment interruptions, dose reductions and dose re-escalation to 300 mg BD were allowed for management of AEs. The primary outcome was achievement of MR4.5 (BCR-ABL ≤0.0032%) by 24 months. Major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL ≤0.1%) and MR4.0 (BCR-ABL ≤0.01%) were also assessed in an exploratory capacity at each visit (month 1, 2, 3, then every 3 months to month 24). Secondary endpoints included the kinetics of molecular response. Preliminary results are summarized descriptively. Planned enrolment was 130 patients. Results: The study was stopped early due to low recruitment; 20 patients were enrolled (mean age 53.9 years [range 31-77]; 14 female). 16 patients had received prior imatinib therapy, 4 patients prior dasatinib. Median nilotinib treatment duration was 494 days (mean 480, SD 167.6 days). At screening, 30% of patients were not in MMR, 45% had MMR and 25% had MR4.0. By month 3 and 24 of nilotinib treatment, 55% (11/20) and 65% (13/20) of patients, respectively, achieved at least a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL levels. 35% (7/20) of patients achieved MR4.5 between baseline and month 3 of nilotinib treatment, and 50% (10/20) achieved MR4.5 at any time up to month 24. The proportion of patients with a molecular response at each visit up to month 15 is shown in the Figure. AEs during prior treatment with imatinib and dasatinib included gastrointestinal events (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea), superficial edema, myalgia, fatigue, rash, and headache, among others. 68% of AEs had resolved by month 3 of nilotinib treatment. Among the 13 evaluable patients on prior imatinib, 7 (54%) had resolution of all AEs during treatment with nilotinib; of 3 evaluable patients on prior dasatinib, 3 (100%) had AE resolution on nilotinib. Grade 3/4 AEs during nilotinib therapy occurred in 3 patients: diabetes mellitus, fatigue, neutropenia, pneumonia, osteoarthritis, and hyperuricemia. Conclusions: Although early termination of the study has not allowed for a robust analysis, these results suggest that nilotinib is effective and well tolerated in most patients intolerant of imatinib or dasatinib. During the first 3 months of switching to nilotinib, 55% of patients had achieved at least a 1 log reduction in BCR-ABL levels, and 35% of patients had achieved MR4.5. The cumulative rate of MR4.5 by 24 months was 50%. Achievement of this endpoint has been linked to favorable long-term outcomes, such as treatment-free remission. Furthermore, the majority of the AEs had resolved by month 3 of nilotinib therapy. This improved tolerance to nilotinib may result in improved treatment adherence. As such, although further study in a larger population is needed for confirmation, these results provide further evidence that nilotinib is a favorable option to establish a molecular response in patients intolerant of imatinib or dasatinib. Disclosures D'Rozario: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Branford:Qiagen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cepheid: Consultancy. Yeung:Ariad: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals: 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. Anderson:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Gervasio:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Hughes: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; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Phase III Randomized Study of Imatinib Therapy in Chronic Phase Chronic Myeloid Leukemia Comparing Standard Dose-Escalation with Progressive Dose-Escalation (JALSG CML207 study)

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 941-941
Author(s):  
Koichi Miyamura ◽  
Shigeki Ohtake ◽  
Kazunori Ohnishi ◽  
Noriko Usui ◽  
Chiaki Nakaseko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract Imatinib mesylate (IM) given orally at a daily dose of 400 mg was the standard of care as initial therapy for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in the chronic phase (CML-CP), before 2ndTKI era. Treatment guidelines by European Leukemia Net (ENL) propose dose escalation based on clinical assessments of disease response in 2006. Preclinical data and results of single-arm studies raised the suggestion that better results could be achieved with a higher dose. However, randomized study to compare high-dose IM (800 mg) with the standard dose (400 mg) as front-line in all CML high-risk patients did not support the extensive use of high-dose IM. To improve the results of CML therapy, another alternative strategy is a dose-escalation based on more aggressive clinical assessments of disease response in comparison with the standard ELN proposed. In 2007, we conducted a prospective randomized study to compare different dose escalation programs; the standard-dose escalation program proposed by ENL (Group A) and the aggressive dose escalation program (Group B) among newly diagnosed patients with CML-CP. The aggressive dose escalation program consisted of the following interventions. If the patients do not obtained a complete cytogenetic response at 3 months or do not reach a major molecular response (MR3, IS=0.1%), IM is increased from standard dose of 400mg daily to 600 mg daily. The primary endpoint is the rate of major molecular response at 12 months, which is a surrogate for long-term progression-free survival (PFS). It is also a surrogate for complete molecular response, which is pointed out recently to be the condition for treatment free survival. Total 248 patients entered to this study between June 16 2007 and June 15, 2011. Median age was 49 years old (range 15-69); 86 were female and 162 were male. Sokal score index was high-risk in 46 patients, intermediate-risk in 77 and low-risk in the remaining. White blood cell count at diagnosis was 43X10^9/L in median (10-881 in range). There was no significant difference between Group A (N=126) and Group B (N=127) according to these factors. Overall survival was 100%, 98% and 98% at 1, 2 and 3 years after treatment, respectively. Three patients developed blast crisis during 3 years (day 177, 272, 481) and all received hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Two other patients who had no cytogenetic response also received HSCT. Eleven patients (4.5%, Group A, N=8, Group B, N=3) failed to achieve complete hematological remission. The overall complete cytogenetic response (CCR) rate at 6 months after the treatment was better in Group B (89%) than in Group A (79%) with borderline significance (p=0.05, Fisher's exact test). However, the overall CCR rate at 12 months was 92% in both groups. At 12 months, MR3 was achieved in 61% and 64% of patients in Group A and Group B, respectively (p=0.69). Also, at 24 months, MR3 was achieved in 91% and 87% of patients in Group A and Group B, respectively. At 3 months, plans called for 8 and 45 patients to increase the dose of IM to 600 mg in Group A and B, respectively; however, only 4 and 27 patients followed the protocol. At 6 months, 10 and 55 patients were to increase the dose of IM to 600 mg in Group A and B, respectively; however, only 2 and 24 patients followed this protocol. The main reason was intolerance of IM. Among the patients who were to increase the dose at 3 and 6 months, 53% of those who could do according to the protocol achieved MR3 at 12 months, while only 16% of patients failed to increase (p=0.08). Eighty patients experienced drug discontinuation during 1 year. The incidence of discontinuation was 37% in Group B, whereas it was 29% in Group B (p=0.18). A substantial part of patients withdrew from this study; however, there was no difference between Groups (A 20%, B 21%). This is the first randomized study to compare two different dose escalation programs. The aggressive dose escalation program showed a better early cytogenetic response than the standard-dose escalation program, but, failed to evidence a better molecular response in a later period. Higher efficacy of high dose IM might be cancelled by the more frequently discontinuation of IM in this group. This study concluded that aggressive dose escalation is not recommended and careful management of drug dose according to patients' condition (residual leukemia, adverse effect, emotion) might be the best way for better outcome, which is applicable to new generation TKIs. Disclosures Miyamura: Nippon Shinyaku CO, LT: Honoraria; Pfizer Inc: Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceutical: Honoraria; Alexion Pharmaceutical Inc: Honoraria. Usui:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding. Nakaseko:BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; PFIZER: Honoraria, Research Funding; NOVARTIS: Honoraria. Fujita:Chugai Pharmaceutical Co.,LTD: Honoraria. Okumura:Novartis Pharma: Honoraria. Hatta:Novartis Pharma: Honoraria. Naoe:Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Kyowa-Hakko Kirin Co.,Ltd.: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Celgene K.K.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen Astellas BioPharma K.K.: Honoraria; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co.,LTD.: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties; TOYAMA CHEMICAL CO.,LTD.: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co.,Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; CMIC Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Fujifilm Corporation: Honoraria, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co.,Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim Co., Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer Inc.: Research Funding.

Selective Escalation of Imatinib Therapy and Early Switching to Nilotinib In De Novo Chronic Phase CML Patients: Interim Results From the TIDEL-II Trial

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 209-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
David T. Yeung ◽  
Michael Osborn ◽  
Deborah L. White ◽  
Susan Branford ◽  
Lauren Haswell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
De Novo ◽  
Chronic Phase ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Treatment Targets ◽  
T315i Mutation

Abstract Abstract 209 Background: Although the majority of chronic phase (CP) Philadelphia positive (Ph+) chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) patients (pts) achieve good disease control with imatinib, some pts demonstrate suboptimal responses. Early dose escalation or switching to nilotinib, a more potent BCR-ABL kinase inhibitor, as soon as suboptimal molecular response is recognised may improve response and disease outcome. Aim: To optimise clinical and molecular outcomes in Ph+ CML using imatinib (IM) as frontline therapy with selective IM dose escalation based on pharmacokinetic (PK) results and switching to nilotinib (NIL) in case of suboptimal response, or IM-intolerance. Method: TIDEL-II is a multicentre, single arm prospective ALLG trial in de novo CP-CML pts with 2 separate sequential cohorts. In Cohort I, pts are treated with IM 600mg/d up-front, aiming for BCR-ABL RQ-PCR target values of ≤ 10%, 1%, and 0.1% IS (major molecular response, MMR) at 3, 6, and 12 months respectively. Pts who do not reach these treatment targets are classified as suboptimal responders. Dose escalation to 800mg/d or maximal tolerated dose occurs if trough IM level is <1000ng/mL at day 22, or for suboptimal response. A switch to NIL (400mg bid) is triggered if molecular targets are still not met 3 months after IM escalation, or for loss or response, or for IM intolerance (Grade III/IV or persistent Grade II non-haematological toxicity). Results: 105 pts were assessed with median follow up of 18.9 months (range: 9–33) in cohort I. For pts with a minimum of 12 months follow up (n=80), complete cytogenetic response (CCR), MMR and complete molecular response (CMR)# rates at 12 months were 92%, 66% and 11% respectively. BCR-ABL levels at 3 months were predictive of MMR at 12 months, but not for CMR due to small pt numbers (Table 1). For pts who failed to achieve BCR-ABL of ≤10% at 3 months, the 12 month MMR rate was 25% (vs 5% in TIDEL-I where pts were also started on IM 600mg/d and suboptimal responders were dose escalated to IM 800mg/d). Of the 105 pts, 16 pts dose escalated IM due to a day 22 IM blood level <1000ng/mL, after which 2/16 switched to NIL (1 suboptimal, 1 intolerant); all achieved CCR. Twelve pts dose escalated for suboptimal response, 7 subsequently switched to NIL for again failing treatment targets. In all, 21/105 pts (20%) switched to NIL: 7 for suboptimal response and 14 for intolerance. The median time to switching and the median pre-switch prescribed IM dose were 468 days & 800mg/d for the suboptimal group; and 183 days & 600mg/d for the intolerant group respectively. Of these, 20/21 achieved or remained in CCR. At the time of switching to NIL, 19/21 pts were not in MMR. With a median follow-up of 295 days post switch to NIL, 9/12 intolerant pts (75%) achieved MMR, whereas 1/7 suboptimal IM responders (14%) achieved MMR (median follow up after switching: 286 days). Only 7/105 pts (7%) discontinued treatment: 4 for non-compliance, 1 pt with a T315I mutation and 2 pts with blast crisis (BC). Progression to BC was associated with detectable mutations: 1 pt with 4 different mutations including T315I and 1 pt with H396P mutation. The progression rate to AP/BC was 2%. The overall mutation rate was 5/105 (5%). The 2 pts who progressed and the pt who discontinued when a T315I mutation was detected were among the 28 pts with BCR-ABL values >1.0% at 3 months. In contrast, no resistant mutations were detected or transformations occurred in the 49 pts with BCR-ABL values ≤1.0% at 3 months. Conclusion: A strategy of selective intensification of BCR-ABL inhibitor therapy based on molecular response and PK values resulted in a 66% MMR rate by 12 months. Despite a minority of pts (20%) requiring a switch to NIL, this has enhanced the rate of MMR by 12 months when compared to IM intensification alone as seen in TIDEL-I where the rate of MMR and CMR by 12 months was 47% and 9% respectively. The IM intolerant pts demonstrated excellent response rates after switching to NIL. To date, the results from TIDEL-II compare favourably with other frontline strategies with regards to response and transformation rates. Disclosures: Yeung: Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Osborn:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. White:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Branford:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Slader:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mills:Novartis Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Meyers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document