scholarly journals Weekly Carfilzomib, Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (wCCd) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: A Phase I- II Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 175-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Fabiana Gentilini ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Carfilzomib is a novel second generation proteasome-inhibitor with significant anti MM activity and favorable toxicity profile, including very limited neurotoxicity and neutropenia. This Phase I/II study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of once weekly carfilzomib combined with cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (wCCd) and to assess safety and efficacy of this combination in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM. Here we report the first findings from the Phase I dose-escalation and expansion portions. Enrolment in the phase II portion is ongoing. Methods In the Phase I, the standard 3+3 dose-escalation scheme was adopted, with Carfilzomib as the only escalating agent starting at 45 mg/m2 (level 0), maximal planned dose 70 mg/m2 (level 2), and 36 mg/m2, if needed (level -1), given IV on days 1, 8, 15 in 28-day cycles. Oral cyclophosphamide was administered at 300 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 and oral dexamethasone at 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, 22 for all dose levels. Dose escalation of Carfilzomib was based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. After completion of 9 cycles, patients receive 28-day maintenance cycles with Carfilzomib (days 1, 8, 15) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) defined by the Phase I study until disease progression or intolerance. The objectives were to determine the MTD and assess activity and safety. Results As of June 15, 2014, 28 newly diagnosed MM patients were enrolled. Median age was 74 years, 29% of patients were older than 75 years, 36% had ISS stage III, 24% had unfavorable FISH profile [t(4;14) or t (14;16) or del17p]. Twelve patients were enrolled in the Phase I portion of the study. At dose level 0 (Carfilzomib 45 mg/m2) no DLT was reported; at dose level 1 (Carfilzomib 56 mg/m2), 1 of 6 patients experienced DLT, consisting of grade 3 creatinine increase; at dose level 2 (Carfilzomib 70 mg/m2) no DLT occurred. The MTD of weekly Carfilzomib was thus established as 70 mg/m2. Toxicity and response data are available for 25 patients, who have completed at least the first cycle; 3 patients are currently receiving their first cycle of treatment. Grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events occurred in less than 15% of patients and included neutropenia (12%, 3 patients), anemia (12%, 3 patients), acute pulmonary edema (8%, 2 patients), pulmonary embolism (4%, 1 patient), creatinine increase (4%, 1 patient), nausea (4%, 1 patient), and fatigue (4%, 1 patient). No peripheral neuropathy was observed. Overall, the wCCd regimen was well tolerated, 3 patients (12%) required Carfilzomib dose reduction (grade 3 creatinine increase, grade 3 transaminase increase and grade 2 fever) and 3 patients (12%) required drug discontinuation due to adverse events (2 acute pulmonary edemas and 1 creatinine increase). Patients received a median of 5 cycles (range 1-9). After 4 induction cycles, 83% of patients achieved at least partial response, 39% at least very good partial response, and 22% complete response. Responses improved over time, as shown in table 1. During the study, only 2 patients progressed and 1 patient died, due to acute pulmonary edema considered probably related to treatment. Conclusions This is the first prospective study evaluating once weekly carfilzomib in treatment-naïve MM. wCCd therapy appears safe and effective in newly diagnosed MM patients. Responses became deeper with subsequent cycles and toxicities were manageable. The response rate observed with weekly carfilzomib compares favorably with similar studies with standard twice weekly carfilzomib infusion. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Table 1 2nd cycle 4th cycle 6th cycle Complete Response 5% 22% 27% At least Very Good Partial Response 9% 39% 63% At least Partial Response 73% 83% 91% Disclosures Palumbo: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Use off-label of Carfilzomib (proteasome inhibitor).. Bringhen:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen and Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy. Larocca:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cavallo:Onyx: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gaidano:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 1940-1940 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Patrizia Falco ◽  
Giulia Benevolo ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Angelo Michele Carella ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1940 The combination of Melphalan-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (MPR) has shown promising results in elderly newly diagnosed myeloma patients. In the transplant setting, low-dose chemotherapy (induction) precedes high-dose chemotherapy (autologous transplantation consolidation). This approach reduces tumor mass, with few side effects, before achieving the maximum cyto-reduction with autologous transplantation. The same approach has been designed for the elderly patients. Accordingly induction with lenalidomide plus corticosteroids precedes consolidation with MPR. A two-stage phase II clinical trial was planned to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) as induction, followed by Melphalan-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (MPR) as consolidation and Lenalidomide as maintenance in elderly myeloma patients. Unfit patients with newly diagnosed symptomatic myeloma older than 65 years were enrolled. No exclusion criteria were included in the protocol, to avoid the selection of fit elderly subjects only. Patients with low blood count, abnormal performance status, hepatic, renal, cardiac or pulmonary functions were enrolled. Patients received 4 RP courses (Lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks, plus Prednisone 50 mg three times/week for 4 weeks) followed by 6 MPR cycles (Melphalan 2 mg and Prednisone 50 mg three times/week, for 4 weeks plus Lenalidomide 10–15 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks) and maintenance with Lenalidomide alone (10 mg/day for 21 days every 4 weeks). Two different dose-levels of Lenalidomide were tested in combination with MP: 15 mg (dose-level 1) and 10 mg (dose-level 2). Each cohort included 12 patients, with additional 22 patients enrolled at dose-level 2. Patients were evaluated for efficacy and toxicity after completion of at least 2 MPR cycles. Forty-six patients (median age 75, range 65–88) were enrolled. Thirty-six patients were evaluable after a median of 7 cycles and a median follow-up of 8.5 months. During RP induction, the most frequent grade 3–4 hematological adverse events were neutropenia (19%), anemia (11 %), thrombocytopenia (6%). During MPR consolidation, grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (45%), and thrombocytopenia (3%). Neutropenia was increased by the addition of melphalan, but both thrombocytopenia and anemia were reduced. Non-hematological toxicities were more frequent during RP cycles and reduced during MPR cycles (cutaneous rash and infections). After RP induction, at least partial response (PR) rate was 67%, at least very good partial response (VGPR) was 17%. After 2 MPR cycles, PR rate increase to 72%, including 22% of patients who achieved at least a VGPR. Conclusions. Induction with RP followed by consolidation with MPR showed a manageable safety profile and reduced the risk of anemia, thrombocytopenia and non-hematological toxicity in unfit elderly myeloma patients. These data will be updated at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Celgene Srl: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janseen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide in combination with melphalan for multiple myeloma patients at diagnosis. Guglielmelli:Celgene: Honoraria; Janseen-Cilag: Honoraria. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria. Cavallo:Celgene: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janseen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 632-632 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Angelo Michele Carella ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Vittorio Montefusco ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 632 Background: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) relapsed/refractory after immunomodulatory drugs and bortezomib have limited treatment options. Recently, the combination pomalidomide-dexamethasone has led to at least partial response (PR) of 25–42% in relapsed/refractory MM and 32% in patients refractory to lenalidomide. Aims: In this study we evaluate the safety and efficacy of the combination pomalidomide-cyclophosphamide-prednisone (PCP) in patients with MM who received 1–3 lines of treatment and were relapsed/refractory to lenalidomide therapy. Methods: Between August 2010 and July 2011, 41 patients were enrolled; median age was 69 years (range 49–82); 23 patients relapsed after lenalidomide and 18 patients were refractory to lenalidomide. The first 24 patients entered the phase I of the study to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of PCP: 4 dose levels of pomalidomide (1, 1.5, 2 and 2.5 mg/day, days 1–28) were tested in combination with cyclophosphamide (50 mg every other day, days 1–28) and prednisone (50 mg every other day, days 1–28) for six 28-day cycles. Thromboprophylaxis with aspirin (100 mg/day) was recommended, low-molecular weight heparin was given to high risk patients. Dose Limiting Toxicities (DLTs) were defined as: grade 4 neutropenia for more than 3 days, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, grade 3–4 neutropenic fever, any grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicity. The MTD was achieved when 25% of patients experienced a DLT, using the Bayesian Continual Reassessment Method. In the phase II of the study, the Simon two-stage design was used and 17 additional patients were enrolled and received the MTD of pomalidomide. Results: DLTs occurred in 1/4 patient who received pomalidomide 1.5 mg (grade 4 thrombocytopenia) and in 3/12 patients who received pomalidomide 2.5 mg (grade 3 neuropathy, grade 3 hepatic toxicity and grade 4 thrombocytopenia). The MTD was defined at 2.5 mg/day, with an estimated DLT probability of 0.258 (95% credibility interval: 0.101–0.468). 32 patients received at least one cycle of therapy and could be evaluated for efficacy and safety. At least PR was reported in 19/32 (59%) patients, including 2 complete response (CR), 5 very good partial response (VGPR), 12 PR. In patients refractory to lenalidomide, at least PR was reported in 11/15 (73%) patients, including 1 CR, 2 VGPR, 8 PR. Grade 4 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (9%) and thrombocytopenia (9%). Grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicity included infection (9%), rash (9%), neurologic (6%) and hepatic (3%) toxicities. Thromboembolism occurred in 1 patient. Conclusions: At least PR was achieved in 73% of patients refractory to lenalidomide; grade 4 neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia were less than 10%. The combination pomalidomide (2.5 mg/day), cyclophosphamide (50 mg every other day), prednisone (50 mg every other day) showed high response rates with limited toxicities in patients relapsed/refractory to lenalidomide. Updated data will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Amgen: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Janssen: 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. Larocca:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Guglielmelli:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Giuliani:Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 1856-1856 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzanne Lentzsch ◽  
Amy O’Sullivan ◽  
Silvana Lalo ◽  
Carrie Kruppa ◽  
Diane Gardner ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 1856 Poster Board I-882 Background: Lenalidomide is an analog of thalidomide that has shown significant clinical activity in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM), both as a single agent and in combination with dexamethasone. Bendamustine is a bifunctional alkylating agent that is approved for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia and indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma that has progressed during or relapsed within 6 months following a rituximab-containing regimen. Bendamustine combined with lenalidomide may be an effective treatment option for MM patients, particularly those with preexisting or bortezomib-induced neuropathy. Our primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety profile of bendamustine and lenalidomide when administered with dexamethasone for patients with relapsed or refractory MM. Methods: Patients aged ≥18 years with confirmed, measurable stage 2 or 3 MM that was refractory to or progressed after 1 or more prior therapies, including lenalidomide, received bendamustine by intravenous infusion on days 1 and 2, oral lenalidomide on days 1–21, and oral dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each 28-day cycle. Treatment was continued until a plateau of best response, as determined by the IBMTR/ABMTR, was reached. Study drug doses were escalated through 4 levels (Table), with 3–6 patients enrolled at each level depending on the rate of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). After determining the MTD, up to an additional 12 patients will be enrolled in an MTD expansion arm to better evaluate toxicity and clinical activity. Secondary endpoints included preliminary efficacy, as evidenced by objective response, time to disease progression, and overall survival. Results: To date, 11 patients have been enrolled, with a median age of 63 years (range, 38–75 years). The MTD of bendamustine and lenalidomide has not been identified at this point; currently, patients are enrolling on dose level 3 with 100 mg/m2 bendamustine and 10 mg lenalidomide. Thus far, DLT included 1 grade 4 neutropenia at dose level 2. Nine of 11 patients are currently eligible for response assessment. A partial response was observed in 67% of patients, including 1 very good partial response and 5 partial responses (PR). Two patients experienced stable disease and 1 exhibited progressive disease. Grade 3/4 adverse events included grade 3 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, hyperglycemia, and prolonged QTC, and 1 grade 4 neutropenia. Conclusions: Bendamustine, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone form a well-tolerated and highly active regimen even in heavily pretreated MM patients, with a PR rate of 67%. Additional updates on response and MTD will be available at the time of presentation. Disclosures: Lentzsch: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cephalon: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Bendamustine is not FDA approved for the treatment of multiple myeloma in the USA. Burt:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Mapara:Resolvyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Spouse is consultant , has received research funding, and participates on advisory board; Cephalon: Spouse has received funding for clinical trial and participates on advisory board. Redner:Biogen: Equity Ownership; Wyeth: Equity Ownership; Glaxo-Smith-Kline: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Equity Ownership; Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Roodman:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Acceleron: Consultancy. Zonder:Amgen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Cephalon: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy, Speaking (CME only); no promotional talks.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2154-2154
Author(s):  
Noa Biran ◽  
Shijia Zhang ◽  
Scott D. Rowley ◽  
David H. Vesole ◽  
Michele L. Donato ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: A regimen of escalating doses of thalidomide, in combination with bortezomib and high dose melphalan (Mel/Vel/Thal) was evaluated as a conditioning regimen for autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) in a phase I/II study. Methods: Patients received Mel/Vel/Thal as a second of tandem ASCT if they achieved <CR to their first ASCT (tandem), or as conditioning for a salvage ASCT (salvage). Exclusion criteria were dose-intense therapy within 56 days, uncontrolled infections, severe organ dysfunction, Karnofsky score <70%, or painful grade 2 or greater peripheral neuropathy. Conditioning consisted of Vel 1.6 mg/m2 intravenously on days -4 and -1 with Mel 200 mg/m2 on day -2. Thal was given on days -5 through -1 and was administered in a planned step-wise dose escalation of 600, 800 and 1000 mg (in cohorts of 3 pts). Dexamethasone (Dex) 10-20 mg was given prior to Vel and Mel. All pts received G-CSF every other day starting day +3 until engraftment. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were graded according to CTCAE version 3. Results: Twenty-nine pts were enrolled: 9 in the phase 1 dose-escalation phase and an additional 20 pts in phase 2. In the phase I portion, all pts experienced somnolence, with grade 3 occurring in 1 pt at the 800 mg/day dose. Subsequently, Dex 40 mg was given with first dose of Thal at the 1000 mg level with decreased severity of somnolence. No dose limiting toxicities defined as ≥ grade 4 non-hematological SAEs occurred in the phase I portion, allowing full dose escalation with 9 pts enrolled. The maximum tolerated dose for Thal was not reached and the 1000 mg dose was chosen for the phase 2 dose expansion. No regimen related mortality occurred in either phase I or phase II portion of the study. All SAEs except lethargy and dizziness occurred after ASCT and were not attributed to Thal. The most common grade 1 and 2 non-hematologic toxicities included nausea (65.5%), mucositis (51.7%), diarrhea (48.3%), somnolence (48.3%), lethargy (27.6%), and vomiting (17.2%). The most common grade 3 non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were neutropenic fever (58.6%), mucositis (6.9%), and somnolence (13.8%), which increased risk of falls. SAEs included somnolence (13.8%), tumor lysis syndrome (3.4%), and engraftment syndrome (3.4%). All transplant-related SAEs resolved by day +28 after ASCT. All pts achieved prompt hematological recovery with the median time to ANC >500/uL 10 days (range, 8-14 days), and platelet >20,000 12 days (range 9-26 days). All pts received at least one ASCT prior to enrolling on the study. Seventeen pts (59%) had interim salvage chemotherapy between their upfront and Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT (i.e. received a salvage ASCT), with median time from first to salvage ASCT 29 months. The remaining 12 (41%) went directly from an upfront ASCT Mel-based ASCT to the Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT (tandem ASCT) within 6 months of the first ASCT. Twenty-seven (93%) were Durie-Salmon stage III, and 13 (44%) had >2 prior lines of therapy. Of those who had Mel/Vel/Thal as a salvage ASCT, 70% had ≥3 prior lines of therapy. The overall response rate (ORR) was 69% with 38% complete remission. ORR for Mel/Vel/Thal compared to upfront Mel ASCT was 69% versus 62% with 11 patients achieving CR with Mel/Vel/Thal compared to 5 patients with Mel alone (Figure 1). Ten of 27 evaluable patients (37%) had an upgrade in response in the Mel/Vel/Thal salvage ASCT compared to their upfront ASCT: 2 pts (7%) went from PD to PR, 1 (4%) from SD to CR, 1 (4%) from PR to VGPR; 3 (11%) from PR to CR and 2 (7%) from VGPR to CR. Median PFS and OS were 9.3 and 65.4 months, respectively, with a median follow-up of 17.8 months. Of those who underwent tandem Mel followed by Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT the median PFS was 14.9 months with a median OS not yet reached at time of analysis. For the 17 patients who received a salvage Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT, median PFS from their upfront ASCT was 11.9 months, compared to 9.1 months with the salvage Mel/Vel/Thal ASCT. Conclusions: High-dose Thal up to 1000 mg daily for 5 days can be safely combined with Vel and dose-intense Mel as an ASCT conditioning regimen with acceptable toxicities. Confirmation of potential synergistic effects of this combination regimen will require an appropriately designed phase III study. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Biran: BMS: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Skarbnik:Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Siegel:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 540-540
Author(s):  
Meagan A. Jacoby ◽  
David A. Sallman ◽  
Bart L. Scott ◽  
Megan Haney ◽  
Fei Wan ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: CPX-351 (Vyxeos ©; daunorubicin and cytarabine liposome for injection) is a dual-drug liposomal encapsulation of daunorubicin and cytarabine in a synergistic 1:5 molar drug ratio that is FDA approved for treatment of adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes. Secondary AML is clinically and biologically similar to MDS, sharing many of the same genetic mutations. We hypothesize that CPX-351 therapy may result in deeper responses than traditional therapy with hypomethylating agents, with acceptable tolerability, and translate into better outcomes in the MDS population. This is a multicenter, dose-escalation and safety expansion study (NCT03572764) to investigate induction and consolidation therapy with CPX-351 in a transplant eligible, higher risk MDS population. Methods: Two dose levels were investigated in the dose-escalation portion. Induction Dose Level 1: (daunorubicin 29 mg/m 2 and 65 mg/m 2 cytarabine) liposome on days 1, 3, 5; and Induction Dose Level 2: (daunorubicin 44 mg/m 2 and 100 mg/m 2 cytarabine) liposome on Days 1, 3, 5. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and to determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D). DLTs were assessed during the induction period (up to day 56 to evaluate for prolonged myelosuppression). Additionally, a dose expansion (for up to 20 treated patients) was performed at the RP2D. After induction, patients could receive up to two cycles of consolidation per dose level: Dose Level 1, (daunorubicin 14.3 mg/m 2 and 32 mg/m 2 cytarabine) liposome on Days 1 and 3; or Dose Level 2 (daunorubicin 29 mg/m 2 and 65 mg/m 2 cytarabine) liposome on Days 1 and 3. After induction, the patient could proceed to alloHCT at any time at the discretion of the treating physician. Key eligibility criteria included MDS patients who were naïve to hypomethylating agents, aged 18-70 years, an IPSS-R score &gt; 3 (Intermediate, High or Very High Risk), ≥ 5% bone marrow myeloblasts, and suitable candidates for cytotoxic induction therapy and allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (alloHCT). Key secondary endpoints were day 30 and 60 post-induction mortality, the proportion of patients proceeding to alloHCT, and response assessments per IWG 2006 criteria. Results: As of abstract submission, 19 patients have been treated and dose escalation is complete. The dose escalation portion included 12 patients (Dose Level 1, n=6; Dose Level 2, n=6), and the safety expansion to date includes 7 patients treated at Dose Level 2. The median age was 64 years (range, 18-68), 67% were female, and the IPSS-R risk categories were as follows: intermediate (n=1, 5%), high (n=10, 53%) and very high (n=8, 42%). There were no DLTs in either Dose Level 1 or Dose Level 2, and Dose Level 2 was selected for safety expansion. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated in the 18 patients who had completed induction (Table). The most common TEAEs were hematologic, as expected. The most common non-hematologic TEAEs were febrile neutropenia (n=13, 72.2%), hypertension (n=9, 50%), and sepsis (n=5, 27.8%). SAEs included febrile neutropenia (n=5), sepsis (n=2), lower GI hemorrhage (n=2, two instances in the same patient), atrial fibrillation (n=1), pneumonitis (n=1), and catheter related infection (n=1). To date, the 30 and 60 day mortality is 0% and 5% (n=1), respectively, with the 1 death unrelated to therapy and due to progression of disease to AML. Of the 19 patients, 13 have received alloHCT with 4 still potentially alloHCT candidates. Of response evaluable pts (n=18, 1 pt pending response evaluation at data cutoff), the overall response rate was 78% with best overall responses of CR (n=4), mCR (n=10), stable disease (n=2), progressive disease (n=2) and pending (n=1). Of the 10 patients with mCR, 3 also had hematologic improvements. Conclusions: CPX-351 (daunorubicin 44 mg/m 2 and 100 mg/m 2 cytarabine) liposome on Days 1, 3, 5, has demonstrated a tolerable safety and promising efficacy profile when used in a transplant eligible, higher risk MDS population, warranting further study. Updated safety and efficacy outcomes will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Jacoby: Abbvie: Research Funding; Jazz: Research Funding. Sallman: Shattuck Labs: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Magenta: Consultancy; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Syndax: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Aprea: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scott: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Komrokji: AbbVie: Consultancy; Acceleron: Consultancy; Geron: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PharmaEssentia: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Taiho Oncology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMSCelgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Uy: AbbVie: Consultancy; Macrogenics: Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Astellas: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: CPX-351 (Vyxeos©; daunorubicin and cytarabine liposome for injection) is FDA approved for treatment of adults with newly diagnosed therapy-related AML or AML with myelodysplasia-related changes


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 631-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽  
Dominik Dytfeld ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David H. Vesole ◽  
Tara B. Anderson ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 631 Introduction: In relapsed and/or refractory MM, the combination of carfilzomib (CFZ) with lenalidomide (Len), and low-dose dexamethasone (Dex) (CRd) has shown very promising efficacy (78% ≥partial response [PR], 40% ≥very good partial response [VGPR], and 24% CR/nCR) and good tolerability including a low rate of peripheral neuropathy (Wang et al, ASCO, 2011). In a Phase I/II study of newly diagnosed MM, the regimen was well tolerated in the Phase I portion of the study up to a maximum dose of CFZ 36 mg/m2, Len 25 mg, and Dex 40 mg, and very active with 96% ≥PR, 70% ≥VGPR, and 55% CR/nCR (Jakubowiak et al, ASH 2010). The lack of overlapping toxicities has allowed these agents to be used at full doses and for extended periods. Here we report the results for all patients (pts) enrolled in both phases of this first prospective trial of CFZ combination in new MM. Methods: In the initial eight 28-day cycles, pts were treated with CFZ at 20 mg/m2, 27 mg/m2 (Phase I), and 36 mg/m2 (Phase I and II), given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16, Len at 25 mg PO (days 1–21), and Dex at 40/20 mg PO weekly (cycles 1–4/5–8). Pts achieving ≥PR could proceed to stem cell collection (SCC) using growth factors alone (protocol recommendation) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after 4 cycles. Per protocol, ASCT candidates were offered the option to continue CRd treatment after SCC. After 8 cycles, pts received 28-day maintenance cycles of CFZ (days 1, 2, 15, 16), Len days 1–21, and Dex weekly at the doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. Responses were assessed by IMWG criteria with the addition of nCR. Results: Enrollment was completed (53 pts): 4 pts at CFZ 20 mg/m2, 13 at CFZ 27 mg/m2 and 36 at CFZ 36 mg/m2 (18 in Phase I and 18 in Phase II). Median age was 59 years (range 35–81; 23 pts ≥65), 60% had ISS stage II/III, and 33% (of 49 with available data) had unfavorable cytogenetics: del 13 or hypodiploidy by metaphase, or t(4;14), t (14;16), del 17p by FISH. As of June 30, 2011, toxicity data (cycles 1–8) were available for 51 pts. Hematologic toxicities were reversible and included Grade (G) 3/4: anemia (18%), neutropenia (12%), and thrombocytopenia (10%). The most common non-hematologic toxicities (all G) were hyperglycemia (76%), hypophosphatemia (61%), and infection (53%). G3/4 non-hematologic AEs included hyperglycemia (24%), DVT/PE while on ASA prophylaxis (10%), infection (6%), and mood alteration (2%). PN was limited to G1/2 sensory (24%). Forty-five pts continue treatment with 22 pts in the maintenance phase. Six pts discontinued treatment: 2 proceeded to ASCT, 1 due to toxicity, and 3 due to events unrelated to treatment or per pt wish. The majority of pts did not require dose modifications, either in the initial (31%) or in the maintenance (25%) phase. After a median of 8 cycles (range 1–20), the best responses per IMWG criteria for 49 response-evaluable pts (all pts who completed 1+ cycle) are shown in the Table. Responses were rapid with 46/49 pts achieving at least PR after 1 cycle, and improved with the duration of treatment reaching 100% ≥PR after 4 cycles and 100% ≥VGPR, 79% CR/nCR after 12 cycles. Responses were deep even at the 2 lower dose levels with the majority of pts at 36 mg/m2 still early in treatment. Responses in pts with unfavorable cytogenetics were similar to response rates in all remaining pts and included a 100% ≥PR in 6 pts with del 17p. Twenty-four pts proceeded to SCC after a median of 5 cycles of CRd (range 4–9); using growth factors only in 23 pts and cyclophosphamide and growth factors in 1 pt, with a median 6.55 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg collected (range 3.75–9.6); all resumed CRd treatment. After a median of 9.5 months of follow-up, only 1 pt has progressed, and all are alive Conclusions: CRd is highly active and well-tolerated allowing the use of full doses for an extended time in newly-diagnosed MM pts with limited need for dose modification. Responses are rapid and improve over time reaching 100% ≥VGPR and early time-to-event data are very encouraging. These results compare favorably to the best frontline regimens in MM. Disclosures: Jakubowiak: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Use of the investigational agent carfilzomib, proteasome inhibitor, in the treatment of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; OrthoBiotec.Imedex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medicom World Wide: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Optum Health Education: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PER Group: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Hussein:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Leveque:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment. Vij:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 4402-4402 ◽  
Author(s):  
Irene M. Ghobrial ◽  
Erica N Boswell ◽  
Stacey Chuma ◽  
Ranjit Banwait ◽  
Courtney Hanlon ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The phase I aimed to determine the safety and maximum tolerated dose of the combination of everolimus and rituximab, or everolimus, bortezomib, and rituximab and the phase II study aimed to examine response and safety of the combination of all 3 agents in relapsed and/or relapsed/refractory Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia. This trial was based on our preclinical studies that demonstrated synergistic activity of everolimus and bortezomib with rituximab in WM. Methods Eligibility criteria include: 1) patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory WM with any number of prior lines of therapy, including everolimus and bortezomib 2) not completely refractory to rituximab 3) measurable disease by monoclonal IgM protein in the serum and lymphoplasmacytic cells in the bone marrow, 4) Not receiving chemotherapy > 3 weeks, or biological/novel therapy for WM > 2 weeks. A cycle is 28 days and a total of 6 cycles are given, followed by everolimus maintenance until Progression. The phase I trial included two stages with a total of four dose levels. In stage A, patients received everolimus at the recommended dose orally daily for 28 days and rituximab at the recommended dose IV on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 28 days at cycle 1 and 4 only. In stage B, patients received everolimus at the recommended dose orally daily for 28 days, bortezomib at the recommended dose IV on days 1, 8, 15 every 28 days, and rituximab at the recommended dose IV on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 28 days at cycle 1 and 4 only. For the phase II study, patients received everolimus 10 mg daily, bortezomib IV 1.6mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 every 28 days, and rituximab 375mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 28 days at cycle 1 and 4 only. Patients were assessed for response after every cycle. Subjects who had a response continued on therapy for a total of 6 cycles, and then continued on to maintenance therapy with everolimus alone until progression Results Forty-Six patients were enrolled in this phase I/II clinical trial from April 2009 to July 2013. The median age is 65 (range, 47–84) yrs and the median lines of prior therapy is 5 (range, 1–9) with 45 (98%) patients receiving prior rituximab and 23 (50%) receiving prior bortezomib. The median number of cycles on therapy was 19.5 (range, 0–39). Overall, this combination therapy is very well tolerated. Grade 4 toxicities included: neutropenia (4.3%), leukopenia (2.2%), thrombocytopenia (13%), lymphopenia (2.2%) and hypertriglyceridemia (2.2%). Grade 3 toxicities included: neutropenia (13%), leukopenia (13%), anemia (10.9%), lymphopenia (8.7%), pneumonitis (4.3%), SGPT (4.3%), neuropathy (4.3%), Herpes zoster reactivation (4.3%), (2.2%) bacterial endocarditis, (2.2%) congestive heart failure, (2.2%) hearing loss, hyperglycemia (4.3%) hypernatremia (4.3%) and 1(2.2%) subject had an incarcerated inguinal hernia with small bowel obstruction. Two patients discontinued therapy due to grade 3 anemia. For the phase II study, sixteen patients are currently evaluable for response, including 2 (13%) complete response (CR), 11 (68%) partial response and 1 (6%) minimal response (MR), for an overall response rate including MR of 14/16 (88%) in this relapsed/refractory population. Furthermore, overall response including MR in phase I was 1/23 (4%) complete response, 7/23 (30%) partial response and 10/23 (43%) minimal response. In phase II 1/23 (4%) complete response, 14/23 (61%) partial response and 2/23 (9%) minimal response. Additionally, 8 (17%) patients achieved stable disease. Conclusions The combination of everolimus, bortezomib, and rituximab is generally well tolerated, and importantly no grade 3/4 neuropathy was seen. The responses observed to date indicate that this combination is highly effective in this relapsed/refractory population. This study was supported from the FDA Office of Orphan Products Development and by Millennium/Takeda and Novartis Inc. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Onyx: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Treon:Millennium: Consultancy. Matous:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 39-40
Author(s):  
Hongtao Liu ◽  
Bulent Aydogan ◽  
Yasmin Hasan ◽  
Amy Wang ◽  
Kamil Yenice ◽  
...  

Background: Treatment options for relapse after allo-SCT remain limited with poor outcomes. Second Allo-SCT provides benefit to a small subset of patients (pts). However, relapse rates after second Allo-SCT are high and novel approaches to improve outcomes after second Allo-SCT are needed. Conventional total body irradiation (TBI) can reduce relapse rates, but greater radiation doses cannot be delivered safely without increasing the toxicity to surrounding normal tissues and organs. Total marrow irradiation (TMI) techniques permit dose escalation while substantially reducing doses delivered to normal tissues relative to conventional TBI. We conducted a phase I study to assess the feasibility of combining TMI with a fludarabine-melphalan conditioning regimen for second or beyond Allo-SCT to decrease relapse. Methods: Inclusion criteria required a matched/mismatched donor and relapse after previous allo-SCT. GVHD prophylaxis was tacrolimus and mycophenolate mofetil, plus ATG for mismatched donors (NCT02333162). From December 2015 to May 2020, twenty-two pts with were consented to this 3 + 3 phase I trial design; one pt failed to proceed and was replaced. 21 pts (18 AML, 2 MDS/MPN, one ALL) were treated with linac-based volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) technique using 6 MV photons. TMI was provided twice daily at 1.5 Gy per fraction starting with a total dose of 6 Gy, with dose escalation to 9 Gy and 12 Gy. Mucositis was an adverse event of special interest and assessed by the WHO Mucositis Score on days 7, 14, 21, and 28 post-transplant to investigate the combined mucosal injury from alkylating chemotherapy and radiation. Results: Baseline characteristics are summarized in Table 1. The median age was 56 years. All had matched donors except for one mismatched unrelated donor. 6 pts were in CR2, 4 pts in CR3, and 11 pts had refractory disease prior to 2nd SCT. 3 pts treated on dose level 6 Gy had no DLTs. At dose level 2 (9 Gy), the first pt of the cohort of six pts had grade 3 mucositis as a DLT on day 7; it resolved by day 21. The first 2 pts at dose level 3 (12 Gy) had no DLT, but the 3rd pt had DLT of grade 3 mucositis on day 7, resolving by day 14. Two more pts were treated and none had DLT. A sixth pt with refractory disease was treated but had graft failure with concurrent bacterial, fungal, and viral infections. This pt also developed grade 3 mucositis on day 14 that progressed to grade 4 on day 21 but resolved by day 28. Thus, we determined the MTD for TMI was 12 Gy; 9 Gy was an alternative dose for less fit or older pts. SCT outcomes were listed in Table 1. As mentioned above, 1 pt had primary graft failure, and one pt failed to have platelet engraftment due to early relapse. 11 pts developed aGVHD with cumulative aGVHD at 58%, and 4 pts developed cGVHD with cumulative cGVHD at 33%. With median follow up of 11 months (1 - 30 months), 6 pts had disease relapse after a median of 205 days (46-464 days); 10 pts have died (5 from PD; 2 from infection, 1 from GVHD, 1 from PTLD, 1 from second malignancy). Two year PFS and OS were 48% and 50% respectively, which compare favorably to the 2 years PFS and OS of 17.5% and 22.6% from our historical data with 65 pts who had 2nd Allo-SCT prior to this TMI trial at our center (Fan et al. Exp Hematol Oncol 2019). Conclusion: We recommend 12 Gy of VMAT-TMI as the MTD combined with fludarabine-melphalan (140mg/m2) as a conditioning regimen for second allo-SCT. Grade 3-4 mucositis was transient, peaking at days 7-14, and resolving by day 21-28. 9 Gy may be appropriate for less fit or older pts. The 2 year PFS and OS of 48% and 50% after second Allo-SCT for this novel TMI-based regimen are sufficiently encouraging to warrant further study. Table 1 Disclosures Liu: Agios: Honoraria, Other: Regional Advisory board meeting; BMS: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Stock:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Research to Practice: Honoraria; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Leukemia and Lymphoma Society: Research Funding; American Society of Hematology: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; UpToDate: Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Larson:Novartis, Takeda, CVS/Caremark, Celgene, Amgen, Epizyme: Consultancy; Astellas, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Novartis, Rafael Pharmaceuticals, Cellectis, Forty Seven: Research Funding. Kline:Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding. Riedell:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite Pharmaceuticals/Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria; Celgene/Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Honoraria, Research Funding; Verastem Oncology: Honoraria; Morphosys: Research Funding; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Honoraria. Bishop:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Autolus: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CRSPPR Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kite: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3686-3686 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin JS Dyer ◽  
Andrew Grigg ◽  
Marcos González ◽  
Martin Dreyling ◽  
Simon A. Rule ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3686 GA101 is a glycoengineered, humanized type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody (mAb) anticipated to have superior B-cell-depleting activity to rituximab in vivo on the basis of its enhanced FcR binding and because of the direct cell death induced by type II CD20 mAbs. GA101 has shown significant single-agent activity in Phase I and II studies in patients with FL, and activity in combination with CHOP and fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide in patients with resistant/refractory FL in the first part of this Phase I trial (Radford et al. ASH 2011; abstract 270). This report describes the safety, toxicity, and efficacy of remission induction of GA101 in combination with CHOP or bendamustine in 81 patients aged > 18 years with treatment-naïve CD20+ grade 1–3b FL with at least one measurable lesion (longest diameter > 1.5 cm by CT scan). All patients received a flat dose of GA101 (1,000 mg on Days 1 and 8 of Cycle 1 and Day 1 of subsequent cycles) combined with either 6–8 cycles of CHOP (every 3 weeks) or 4–6 cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m2Days 1 and 2 every 4 weeks) on a per center choice basis. Patients achieving complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) were eligible to receive GA101 maintenance therapy (1,000 mg) every 3 months for 2 years or until progression. The primary objective was safety, and secondary objectives included overall response rate (ORR), CR rate, and pharmacokinetics. Response was assessed at the end of induction using International Working Group response criteria; unconfirmed CRs were classified as PRs. 40 patients received G-CHOP and 41 G-bendamustine. Baseline characteristics were similar for both groups: median age 53.5 and 57 years; bone marrow involvement 53% and 49%; bulky disease (≥ 7 cm) 45% and 41%; Median time from diagnosis was only 1.20 months for both groups, high-risk FLIPI status (3–5) 45% and 46%, and intermediate risk (FLIPI 2) 38% and 34%. 38 G-CHOP and 37 G-bendamustine patients completed all cycles of planned induction therapy. Three patients withdrew without any response assessment. In the G-CHOP arm, one withdrawal was due to a GA101-associated infusion-related reaction [IRR] after Cycle 1 and another patient was found to be ineligible and withdrawn after Cycle 1. In the G-bendamustine arm one patient withdrew consent after Cycle 2. Three other patients were withdrawn after interim response assessment, none for safety reasons (insufficient response in the G-bendamustine arm and administrative reasons for two in the G-CHOP arm). The most frequent adverse events were IRRs (all grades: 58% G-CHOP; 59% G-bendamustine; grade 3/4: 5% G-CHOP; 10% G-bendamustine). No Grade 3/4 IRRs occurred after cycle 3. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was reported in 43% of patients in the G-CHOP arm and 29% of patients in the G-bendamustine arm during induction, resulting in delayed delivery of 7.0% and 4.8% of chemotherapy cycles. All delays but one were no longer than 2 weeks. Grade 3/4 infections occurred in 23% of patients receiving G-CHOP and 10% of patients receiving G-bendamustine. Approximately half of these were neutropenic infections or sepsis and all resolved with appropriate management. ORR at the end of the induction period was 95% (38/40) in the G-CHOP arm (CR rate 35%) and 92.7% (38/41) in the G-bendamustine arm (CR rate 39%) (Table). Serum GA101 concentrations increased during the induction period and were similar for both regimens. Mean Cmax was 300–600 μg/mL and Cmin100–300 μg/mL. Following the final administration, a decline in GA101 serum concentration was seen that was similar for the two treatment combinations. In conclusion, efficacy and safety data for GA101 combined with CHOP and bendamustine are encouraging for first-line treatment of patients with FL. Based on these promising results GA101 is now being studied in combination with various chemotherapy regimens in a randomized Phase III study against the standard of care, rituximab-based immunochemotherapy. Patients, n (%) G-CHOP (n = 40) G-bendamustine (n = 41) Efficacy     Overall response 38 (95.0) 38 (92.7)     Complete response* 14 (35.0) 16 (39.0)     Partial response 24 (60.0) 22 (53.7)     Stable disease 0 1 (2.4)     Progressive disease 0 1 (2.4)     Not assessed 2 (5.0) 1 (2.4) Safety     Grade 3/4 IRRs 2 (5.0) 4 (9.8)     Grade 3/4 neutropenia 17 (43) 12 (29)     Grade 3/4 infections 9 (23) 4 (10) * CRu were classified as PR Disclosures: Dyer: Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Obinutuzumab (GA101) in Combination with Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine and Prednisone (CHOP) or Bendamustine in Patients with Previously Untreated Follicular Lymphoma (FL). Grigg:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Honoraria, Support of (other) clinical trials and Scientific Advisory Boards Other. Rule:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lei:Roche: Employment. Wassner-Fritsch:Roche: Employment. Wenger:Roche: Employment. Marlton:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 74-74 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Edward A. Stadtmauer ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Adam D Cohen ◽  
William I. Bensinger ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 74 Background: Carfilzomib, a novel proteasome inhibitor (PI), and pomalidomide, an immunomodulatory agent (IMiD), have both demonstrated promising activity as single agents or in combination with dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. IMiD+PI combinations including lenalidomide, bortezomib, dexamethasone and lenalidomide, carfilzomib, dexamethasone have had high response rates and good tolerability. We aimed to combine carfilzomib and pomalidomide with dexamethasone (Car-Pom-d) for the first time and hypothesized that this regimen would be highly active in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Here, we report the first findings from the Phase I dose-escalation and expansion portions of the first phase I/II trial of Car-Pom-d in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (NCT01464034). Methods: The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the safety/tolerability of Car-Pom-d. Secondary objectives included determination of overall response rate, time to progression, progression free survival, and time to next therapy. All patients had to be refractory to prior lenalidomide, and must have been relapsed/refractory to their most recent therapy. Treatment consisted of 28-day cycles of oral pomalidomide once daily on days 1–21, intravenous (IV) carfilzomib over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16, and oral or IV dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22. Dose-escalation of carfilzomib started with 27mg/m2 carfilzomib/4mg pomalidomide/40 mg dexamethasone using a standard 3+3 schema based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. Carfilzomib was initiated at 20 mg/m2for Cycle 1, days 1–2 at all dose levels. Investigators were permitted to adjust the dose of dexamethasone at any point based on their discretion. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4. Response was assessed by the modified International Uniform Response Criteria. Results: In the Phase I dose-escalation portion of the trial, a total of 12 patients were enrolled from 6 centers. The median age was 61 years (range 44–78), 67% were male. The median number of prior regimens was 6 (range 2–15), and median time from diagnosis was 5.1 years. Four (33%) patients had prior stem cell transplant, 11 (92%) had prior bortezomib, and all were lenalidomide-refractory. Cytogenetic abnormalities included 5 patients with del(17p), 2 patients with t(4;14), and 1 patient each with del(13), t(11;14), and t(14;16). In these first 12 patients, drug-related AEs occurring in >20% of patients included fatigue (42%), anemia (33%), pneumonia (33%), dyspnea (25%), and thrombocytopenia (25%). Six (50%) patients experienced grade ≥3 AEs including 2 incidence each of neutropenia and febrile neutropenia. The MTD was established as the starting dose level (carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m2, pomalidomide 4mg, dexamethasone 40 mg). At this dose, 1 of 6 patients experienced a protocol-defined DLT of febrile neutropenia. At dose level 2 (carfilzomib 20/36 mg/m2, pomalidomide 4 mg, dexamethasone 40 mg), 2 of 6 patients experienced DLTs, consisting of grade 4 thrombocytopenia and grade 3 rash. All 12 patients were response evaluable with 2 very good partial response (VGPR), 4 partial response (PR), 2 minor response (MR), 2 stable disease (SD), and 2 progressive disease (PD) for a ≥ MR rate of 67%. The 6 month progression free survival was 70% (95% CI: 37 to 90%). Of the 5 patients with del(17p), 1 achieved VGPR, 2 achieved PR, 1 achieved SD. We then enrolled an expansion cohort of 20 patients from 8 centers resulting in a total study population of 32 patients, with 25 still receiving treatment. Three patients have died, all from progressive multiple myeloma. Early response assessments in 27 out of 32 patients show 2 VGPR, 7 PR, 6 MR, 8 SD, and 4 PD for a ≥MR rate of 56%. Conclusions: The Car-Pom-d regimen is well tolerated and achieves a high response rate in a heavily pre-treated, lenalidomide-refractory population with prior bortezomib exposure. Importantly, we have seen responses in patients with poor risk cytogenetics, specifically del (17p). We are beginning enrollment in a larger phase 2 cohort, and updated safety and efficacy data for all patients will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Shah: Celgene: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Array: Consultancy. Stadtmauer:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Abonour:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Cohen:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: 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. Bensinger:Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kaufman:Millenium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Lentzsch:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Vogl:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium/Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Acetylon: Research Funding. Orlowski:Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Durie:Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document