Pomalidomide, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone Is Superior to Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone in Relapsed and Refractory Myeloma: Results of a Multicenter Randomized Phase II Study

Abstract Background: Pomalidomide-dexamethasone results in an overall response rate of 33% and median PFS of 4.2 months in patients with prior lenalidomide and bortezomib (Richardson et al. Blood 2014). In this randomized phase II trial, we compared pomalidomide-dexamethasone (arm B) versus the addition of oral weekly cyclophosphamide to pomalidomide-dexamethasone (arm C) in patients with lenalidomide-refractory multiple myeloma (MM). We have previously reported that the recommended phase II dose of cyclophosphamide with standard-dose pomalidomide + dexamethasone was 400 mg PO D1, 8, 15. Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had relapsed and refractory MM after at least 2 prior therapies and were lenalidomide refractory. Patients had a platelet count ≥ 50,000/mm3 and ANC ≥ 1,000/mm3 (patients with ≥50% bone marrow plasmacytosis were allowed if platelet count was ≥ 30,000/mm3and ANC could be supported with GCSF during screening and therapy). Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive pomalidomide 4 mg PO D1-21 and dexamethasone 40 mg PO D1, 8, 15, 22 (20 mg if older than 75 years) (arm B) with or without oral cyclophosphamide 400 mg PO D1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle (arm C). Patients randomized to arm B were allowed to cross over to arm C in the event of disease progression. Thromboprophylaxis was mandated with aspirin, warfarin, or LMWH. The primary endpoint was overall response rate using IMWG criteria. Secondary endpoints included an evaluation of PFS, OS and safety of the two arms. Results: Between 7/2012 and 3/2014, 36 patients were randomized to arm B and 34 to arm C. Patients characteristics were not different between the 2 arms (table below). The median number of prior therapies was 4 (2-12). All patients were lenalidomide refractory and none received prior pomalidomide. After a median follow up of 15 months, the overall response rate (partial response or better) was 39% and 65% (p=0.03) for arm B and C, respectively. The clinical benefit rate (minimal response or better) was 64% and 79% (p=0.2) for arm B and C, respectively. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI 2.3-5.9) for arm B and 9.2 months (95% CI 4.6-16) for arm C (log rank p=0.04). As of July 2014, 28 patients had died (16 arm B, 12 arm C) with median overall survival of 10.5 versus 16.4 months (p=0.08) for arm B and C, respectively. Hematologic grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequent in arm C, although this was not statistically significant (see table). Thirteen patients crossed over and oral weekly cyclophosphamide was added to their tolerated dose of pomalidomide dexamethasone. For those patients, the best response was as follows: 2 PR, 2 MR, and 6 SD, 3 PD. Conclusions: Pomalidomide-dexamethasone in combination with oral weekly cyclophosphamide resulted in a superior response rate and PFS compared to pomalidomide-dexamethasone alone in patients with relapsed and refractory MM. The increased hematologic toxicities, as a result of the addition of oral cyclophosphamide, were manageable. Table Arm B (N=36) Arm C (N=34) P value Age, years, median (range) 63 (50-78) 64 (47-80) 0.7 Male, n (%) 23 (64) 18 (53) 0.3 Number of prior therapies, median (range) 4 (2-12) 4 (2-9) 0.5 Bortezomib refractory, n (%) 28 (78) 24 (71) 0.3 Carfilzomib refractory, n (%) 16 (44) 13 (38) 0.5 Prior high-dose therapy, n (%) 27 (75) 28 (82) 0.6 Prior alkylating agent, n (%) 32 (89) 32 (94) 1 B2-microglobulin, median (range) 3.2 (1.6-10) 3.6 (1.5-13.9) 0.5 Serum creatinine, median (range) 1 (0.5-2.3) 0.9 (0.6-2.1) 0.6 High-risk cytogenetics, n (%) 5 (24) 6 (28) 0.8 Deletion 17p, n (%) 3 (14) 4 (20) 0.8 t(4;14), n (%) 3 (14) 3 (14) 0.9 Trisomy or tetrasomy 1q, n (%) 11 (55) 6 (33) 0.4 Best response (partial response or better), n (%) 14 (39) 22 (65) 0.03 Clinical benefit rate (MR or better), n (%) 23 (64) 27 (79) 0.2 Grade 3/4 neutropenia, n (%) 12 (33) 17 (50) 0.2 Grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia, n (%) 4 (11) 6 (18) 0.5 Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, n (%) 2 (5) 5 (15) 0.2 Grade 3/4 anemia, n (%) 3 (8) 7 (20) 0.2 Grade 3/4 pneumonia, n (%) 4 (11) 3 (9) 1 Grade 3/4 fatigue, n (%) 2 (5) 4 (12) 0.4 Number of serious adverse events 17 20 Disclosures Baz: Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Karypharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide cyclophosphamide dexamethasone in relapsed refractory myeloma. Martin:Sanofi: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Alsina:Triphase: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding. Shain:Onyx / Amgen: Research Funding; Treshold: Research Funding. Chari:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jagannath:Celgene: Honoraria; Millennium: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

A Multi-Center, Open-Label Phase II Study of Lenalidomide Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Chinese Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma - the MM-021 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.1864.1864 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 1864-1864

Author(s):

Jian Hou ◽

Jie Jin ◽

Zhen Cai ◽

Fangping Chen ◽

Li Yu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Disease Progression ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Chinese Patients ◽

Open Label ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Best Response

Abstract Abstract 1864 Background: Previous studies (i.e. ECOG E4A03) have shown that lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) has a better safety profile compared with lenalidomide plus high-dose dexamethasone (RD) in newly diagnosed MM patients. It is hypothesized that Rd may also provide benefits in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The MM-021 trial is the largest study in Chinese patients with RRMM aimed to assess the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of Rd in patients who had progressed or were refractory to previous treatment. Methods: This was a phase II, multi-center, single arm, open-label study, RRMM patients received lenalidomide (25 mg/day on days 1–21) and dexamethasone (40 mg on days 1, 8, 15 and 22) in 28-day treatment cycles until disease progression. Thromboembolic prophylaxis with aspirin or other anti-thrombotic medication was required. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (partial response [PR] or better) based on the investigator's assessment. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), safety, and PK parameters. Results: As of April 23, 2012 (median follow-up of 10.8 months), 199 patients have completed at least 1 cycle, 134 patients have completed at least 6 cycles, and 187 patients were evaluable for efficacy. Median age was 59 years (range 35–81) and 63% were male. The majority of patients (86%) had Durie-Salmon stage III disease and 57% had received ≥4 prior anti-myeloma regimens including bortezomib (64%), thalidomide (69%), or both bortezomib and thalidomide (45%). After median treatment duration of 8 months (range 1–18) or 8 cycles (range 1–19), best overall response rate (≥PR) was 54% (100 patients); including 8% (14 patients) with a best response of complete response (CR). Overall disease control (≥stable disease [SD] or better) was 95%, including 42% (78 patients) with best response of SD. Nine patients (5%) had best response of disease progression. Best overall response rates were consistent across subgroups when analyzed according to baseline renal function (creatinine clearance ≥60 mL/min: 68 patients [54%], 330 to <60 mL/min: 26 patients [52%], <30 mL/min: 6 patients [50%]) and number of prior therapies (64% if ≤2 prior regimens, 50% if >2 prior regimens). Responses were also consistent regardless of prior therapy received; 50%, 52%, and 47% for patients who previously received bortezomib, thalidomide, or both, respectively. Of the 5% (10 patients) presenting with IgD at baseline, 7 patients achieved ≥PR. Median time to first response was 2 months (range 1–12) and median duration of response was 7 months (range 0–16). The median PFS was 8 months (95% CI: 6–9) and the OS rate was 86% at 6 months and 73% at 1 year. Among the 199 patients evaluable for safety, the most common grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) were anemia (25%), neutropenia (24%), thrombocytopenia (15%), and pneumonia (13%). Only 1 patient experienced febrile neutropenia. AEs led to dose reduction/interruption of lenalidomide in 40% of patients, 41% for dexamethasone; and 6.5% discontinued treatment due to one or more AEs. No patient discontinued due to anemia or neutropenia. Sixty-one patients (31%) died on study and the most common cause of death was disease progression (15 patients, 8%). Conclusions: Based on a median follow-up of nearly 11 months, the Rd regimen achieved a substantial best overall response rate (54%) in heavily pretreated RRMM Chinese patients. Response rates were consistent across subgroups including patients with renal impairment. The combination of Rd regimen was generally well tolerated. Disclosures: Hou: Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Xian: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jensen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Mei:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Wortman-Vayn:Celgene Corporation: Employment.

Download Full-text

A Phase II Trial of the Oral mTOR Inhibitor Everolimus (RAD001) in Relapsed or Refractory Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.587.587 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 587-587

Author(s):

Irene M Ghobrial ◽

Morie A Gertz ◽

Betsy LaPlant ◽

John Camoriano ◽

Suzanne R. Hayman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Waldenström’S Macroglobulinemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia ◽

Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia

Abstract Abstract 587 Background: The phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signal transduction pathway controls cell proliferation and survival. Everolimus is an oral agent targeting raptor mTOR (mTORC1). The trial's goal was to determine the anti-tumor activity and safety of single-agent everolimus in patients with relapsed/refractory Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia (WM). Patients and Methods: Eligible patients had measurable disease (IgM monoclonal protein >1000 mg/dL with >10% marrow involvement or nodal masses >2 cm), a platelet count ≥75,000 × 106/L, a neutrophil count ≥1,000 × 106/L, and a creatinine and bilirubin ≤2x laboratory upper limit of normal. Patients received everolimus 10 mg PO daily and were evaluated monthly. Tumor response was assessed after cycles 2 and 6 and then every 3 cycles until progression. Results: 50 pts were treated. The median age was 63 years (range, 43-85). The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) was 70% (95% CI: 55-82%), with a PR of 42% and 28% MR. The median duration of response and median progression-free survival (PFS) has not been reached. The estimated PFS at 6 and 12 months is 75% (95%CI: 64-89%) and 62% (95%CI: 48-80%), respectively. Grade 3 or higher related toxicities were observed in 56% of patients. The most common were hematological toxicities with cytopenias. Pulmonary toxicity occurred in 10% of patients. Dose reductions due to toxicity occurred in 52% of patients. Conclusions: Everolimus has high single-agent activity with an overall response rate of 70% and manageable toxicity in patients with relapsed WM, and offers a potential new therapeutic strategy for this patient group. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Gertz:celgene: Honoraria; millenium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Keryx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Treon:Millennium: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Witzig:Novartis: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Trial of PRM-151, an Anti-Fibrotic Agent, in Patients with Myelofibrosis: Stage 1 Results

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.713.713 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 713-713 ◽

Cited By ~ 29

Author(s):

Srdan Verstovsek ◽

Ruben A. Mesa ◽

Lynda M Foltz ◽

Vikas Gupta ◽

John O Mascarenhas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Clinical Benefit ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Jak Inhibitor ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Stage 1

Abstract PRM-151 (PRM) is a recombinant form of Pentraxin-2, an endogenous human protein that acts at sites of tissue damage, inducing macrophage differentiation to prevent and reverse fibrosis. PRM has broad anti-fibrotic activity in multiple preclinical models of established fibrotic diseases and no dose limiting toxicities in phase 1 trials. Myelofibrosis (MF: primary (PMF), post-essential thrombocythemia (post-ET MF), and post polycythemia vera (Post PV MF)) is a myeloid malignancy characterized by progressive bone marrow (BM) fibrosis with resultant anemia, abnormal platelet and leukocyte counts, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and a well-defined symptom complex. This study investigated the potential of PRM in MF to reduce BM fibrosis and to improve key disease features including abnormal blood counts, symptoms, and splenomegaly. MF patients (pts) with Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, intermediate-2, or high-risk disease and grade ≥ 2 BM fibrosis, either on no current therapy or on a stable dose of ruxolitinib (RUX) for ≥ 12 weeks and no improvement in spleen for ≥ 4 weeks, were eligible for stage 1 of this open-label adaptive trial. Assignment to one of the 4 treatment arms was per investigator and pt choice: PRM 10 mg/kg IV 1-hour infusion days 1, 3, 5, then weekly (QW) or every 4 weeks (Q4W), alone or with RUX, for 24 weeks. Primary endpoint was overall response rate by IWG-MRT (symptoms by MPN-SAF Total Symptom Score (TSS), spleen by palpation) and/or decrease in BM fibrosis by ≥ 1 grade with otherwise stable disease. BM biopsies were obtained at baseline, 3 and 6 months, and were evaluated centrally by two blinded hematopathologists. Pts with clinical benefit were allowed to continue treatment in an extension. At least one response in any arm was required for that regimen to be evaluated in Stage 2. Twenty seven pts were enrolled: 8 PRM QW, 7 PRM Q4W, 6 PRM QW + RUX, 6 PRM Q4W + RUX. Median age 67 years (52-85); 70% DIPSS Int-2 or High Risk; 52% PMF, 15% post-ET MF, 33% post-PV MF; 63% grade 3 BM fibrosis, Hemoglobin (Hgb) < 100 g/L in 56% and < 85 g/L in 26%, platelet count (PLT)< 100 x 109/L in 52% and < 25 x 109/L in 30%; 22% were JAK inhibitor-naive and 52% had received a prior JAK inhibitor (not including ongoing RUX). Twenty pts completed 24 weeks of therapy; 18 continued extension treatment. PRM-151 was well-tolerated alone and with RUX; most adverse events (AEs) were Grade 1/2 and unrelated, with 3 Grade 3 possibly related AEs and 5 possibly related serious AEs. Nine of 26 evaluable pts responded, for an overall response rate (ORR) of 35%, with 4 IWG symptom clinical improvements (CI) and 6 BM fibrosis responses (Table 1), with ≥ 1 response in each arm. One pt had a CI and BM response. Reduction in BM fibrosis was associated with normal erythroid microarchitecture, normal or decreased myeloid:erythroid ratio, and fewer paratrabecular megakaryocytes, all potential surrogates of improved bone marrow microenvironment. IWG stable disease was observed in 77% of pts, with trends of clinical benefit in Hgb, PLT, peripheral blood blasts, spleen, and symptoms (Table 2). In 14 patients (54%), all parameters were stable or improved. Conclusion: PRM-151 was well-tolerated in patients with advanced MF, with no evidence of drug-related myelosuppression and encouraging trends in both clinical and histologic aspects of the disease. Reduction in BM fibrosis, stable to improved hematologic parameters, symptom responses, and stable to reduced spleen size support further development of PRM-151 in MF. Table 1 Two additional subjects had decrease in bone marrow fibrosis but progressive disease. Number of Patients BM Fibrosis Grade at Last Study Timepoint 3 2 1 BM Fibrosis Grade at Baseline 3 8 3 1 2 1 4 2 Abstract 713. Table 2 Outcome Parameter Denominator (n) Clinical Benefit Pts with Improvement (n/%) ORR (primary endpoint) All evaluable pts (26) IWG-MRT CI AND/OR reduction in BM fibrosis by ≥ 1 grade 9 (35%) Hgb Hgb < 100 g/L (15) ≥10 g/L increase from baseline AND no transfusions or 50% reduction in transfusions if transfusion dependent 6 (40%) PLT PLT < 100 x 109/L (13) > 100 x 109/L AND increase of ≥20 x 109/L ; increase of ≥20 x 109/L if baseline < 50, AND/OR increase of ≥ 10 x 109/L with discontinuation of transfusions 8 (62%) Blasts ≥ 1% peripheral blasts (14) No peripheral blasts 3 (21%) Symptoms All evaluable pts (26) ≥ 25% reduction in TSS ≥ 12 weeks 10 (38%) Spleen Palpable spleen (19) ≥ 25% decrease ≥ 4 weeks AND any decrease ≥ 12 weeks 5 (26%) Disclosures Verstovsek: Incyte: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Lilly Oncology: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte, CTI, NS pharma, Gilead, Celgene: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Foltz:Janssen: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Ritchie:Celgene, Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Promedior: Research Funding. Hoffman:Geron: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; All Cells LLC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Promedior: Research Funding. Pozdnyakova:Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Promedior: Consultancy. Hasserjian:Sanofi: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Promedior: Consultancy. Trehu:Promedior: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:ARIAD, Pfizer, Amgen: Research Funding. Gotlib:Novartis: Research Funding, Travel Reimbursement, Travel Reimbursement Other; Sanofi: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Reimbursement Other; Promedior: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase 1/1b Study of the Efficacy and Safety of the Combination of Panobinostat + Carfilzomib in Patients with Relapsed and/or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.4081.4081 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 4081-4081 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Jatin J. Shah ◽

Sheeba K. Thomas ◽

Donna M. Weber ◽

Michael Wang ◽

Raymond Alexanian ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Elevated Creatinine

Abstract Abstract 4081 Background: Carfilzomib, a novel irreversible proteasome inhibitor (PI), has demonstrated single agent activity in, and was recently FDA approved for relapsed and refractory myeloma. Panobinostat, a potent histone deacetylase inhibitor (HDACi), has been studied as a single agent and in combination with bortezomib, demonstrating promising response rates and a favorable safety profile in bortezomib-refractory patients. Our hypothesis proposed that the combination of carfilzomib and panobinostat (Car-Pan) would also be highly active, and we therefore aimed to combine these two agents for the first time. We report the initial findings from the phase I dose-escalation and expansion portions of our phase I/II trial of this novel combination regimen. Methods: The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the safety/tolerability of Car-Pan in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Secondary objectives included determination of the overall response rate, time to progression, progression free survival, and time to next therapy. Panobinostat was administered orally on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12 of every 28-day cycle, while carfilzomib was given intravenously over 30 minutes on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16. Dose level 1 started carfilzomib at 20 mg/m2 with 15 mg of panobinostat, and escalated from there using a standard 3+3 schema based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. An amendment was later introduced to allow carfilzomib to be given at 20 mg/m2for days 1 and 2 of cycle 1, followed by an increase to the full dose level for that cohort. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the NCI-CTCAE v4, and responses were assessed with the modified International Uniform Response Criteria. Results: To date, 20 patients have been enrolled, 3 of whom are still in their first cycle, leaving 17 evaluable patients who are described herein, who have received a median of 4 cycles (range 1–8). The median age was 62 years (range 46–73), 11/17 (70%) were male, and the median number of prior regimens was 5 (range 2–15). Patients were very heavily pretreated, with 16/17 (94%) having undergone stem cell transplantation, 16/17 (94%) having prior bortezomib, including 8/17 (47%) who were bortezomib-refractory, and 17/17 (100%) having prior lenalidomide, including 12/17 (70%) who were lenalidomide-refractory. Cytogenetic abnormalities were common, including: 4 with del(17p), 4 with t(4;14), 2 with t(11;14), 9 with del(13), of whom 7 had additional mutations. Grade 1–4 AEs regardless of causality occurring in >20% of patients included anemia (14/17), thrombocytopenia (17/17), neutropenia (8/17), diarrhea (9/17), nausea/emesis (7/17), fatigue (10/17), elevated creatinine (8/17), and pneumonia (5/17). Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of causality included anemia (7/17), thrombocytopenia (10/17), neutropenia (6/17), diarrhea (2/17), nausea/emesis (1/17), fatigue (4/17), elevated creatinine (2/17), and pneumonia (4/17). An MTD has not been established, and dosing is ongoing in cohort 4, with Carfilzomib at 45mg/m2and 20 mg of Panobinostat. Of the 17 evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 35% (6/17) who achieved at least a partial response (PR); including 2 with very good PR (VGPR). In addition, one patient had a minor response, and 65% overall achieved stable disease or better. Conclusions: The combination of Carfilzomib + Panobinostat is well tolerated with a manageable side effect profile. Importantly, the combination achieves a promising response rate in a very heavily pre-treated, lenalidomide/bortezomib/high dose melphalan-refractory population, with an overall response (≥PR) rate of 35%. Updated safety and efficacy data for all patients will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Shah: Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: This presentation will include information about panobinostat, which is not yet approved for use in patients with multiple myeloma. Thomas:Celgene: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wang:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Orlowski:Onyx: 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.

Download Full-text

Isatuximab Rescue for Inadequate Response to Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Transplant Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Interim Analysis of the Phase II Iril Study of the Australian Myeloma Research Consortium (AMaRC 18-02)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-151871 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1671-1671

Author(s):

Slavisa Ninkovic ◽

Nicholas E. Murphy ◽

Hasib Sidiqi ◽

Craig Thomas Wallington-Beddoe ◽

Anish Puliyayil ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Inadequate Response ◽

Target Response ◽

Treatment Intensification ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Depth Of Response ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: Almost two thirds of transplant-ineligible, treatment naïve multiple myeloma (NDMM, TNE) patients (pts) do not proceed to second line anti-MM therapy. Given depth of response to initial therapy correlates to overall survival (OS), a deep remission should also be the target for this cohort of generally elderly and frail patients. However, this should not come at the expense of either treatment-related or fiscal toxicity. IRIL is a phase II, multicentre, response-adapted study examining treatment intensification with isatuximab (Isa; supported by Sanofi/Genzyme), an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, for pts not achieving pre-defined target responses to lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd). Method: TNE NDMM pts meeting IMWG criteria for treatment are eligible for enrolment. Pts commence treatment with lenalidomide [25mg D1-D21 of a 28-day cycle (C)] and dexamethasone [40mg (20mg for those aged ³75 years) PO weekly]. Failure to achieve pre-defined target response [<PR after 4 cycles, <VGPR after 6, or <CR after 9 cycles of Rd] or progressive disease (PD) within the first 9 cycles of Rd leads to addition of Isa (10mg/kg IV weekly for cycle 1, then fortnightly) until PD or adverse events (AEs) that warrant treatment cessation. The primary endpoint is to evaluate the rate of achievement of ³PR following completion of 6 cycles Isa-Rd in those who failed to achieve <PR after C4 Rd. The secondary endpoints are to evaluate overall improvement in depth of response to Isa-Rd, progression free survival (PFS), OS, and safety. Results: From June 2019 to June 2021, 42 pts [52.3% male, median age 77.7 yrs (range 68.5-86.0), R-ISS Stage I (n=8), Stage II (n=23) and Stage III (n=7)] were accrued. 30 pts have completed at least C4 Rd and were deemed evaluable (12 non-evaluable; 5 only recently recruited, 5 withdrew consent (WD) due to logistic reasons, 2 PD pre-C4 and were taken of study at investigator discretion). Of the 30 evaluable pts (see Figure 1), 25 remain on study with 2 further WD (logistic reasons) and 3 deaths. In total, 25pts have had treatment intensification with Isa [9pts (5<PR and 4 PD) prior to C4 Rd, 11/13 eligible < VGPR after C6 Rd (1 omission in error, 1 pt WD consent), 4/5 eligible pts < CR after C9 Rd (1 omission in error) and 1 PD at C6]. 18/25 patients have had at least 6 months of Isa intensification with increased depth of response in 12 (66.7%) pts. Of the 9 pts rescued with Isa after not reaching target response post C4 Rd, 7 have completed 6 Isa-Rd cycles with 100% deepening of response (5 PR, 4 VGPR). The overall response rate in the cohort of evaluable patients is 100% (16 PR, 14 VGPR). The median (±SD) follow-up time of the evaluable cohort was 9.96 ± 6.24 months with med OS not reached. Thirty-one (73.8%) pts experienced any grade AE (median = 6; range 1-21). Grade 3 or 4 AEs were reported in 16 pts (34 events in total; median per pt = 2; range 1-5). Most common ³ Grade 3 events include infection (10), neutropenia (7) and insomnia and mood disorder (3 each). Neutropenia was the single grade 4 AE in a patient on Rd. Fewer of the reported grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred while on Isa-Rd (16) than while on Rd alone (n=18) with causality was less frequently attributed to Isa (n=4) than R (n=17) or d (n=14). Conclusion: A response-adapted approach for TNE NDMM pts with isatuximab intensification upon inadequate response to standard-of-care lenalidomide-dexamethasone is both safe and effective. Isa-Rd leads to universal deepening of response in patients failing to achieve a PR or better after 4 months of Rd, while the overall response rate in evaluable patients, irrespective of initial response to Rd, is 100%. Isa-Rd is well tolerated in this elderly patient cohort. The safety profile for the combination Isa-Rd is similar to previous reports. Patient accrual is ongoing. Figure 1: Swimmer's plot highlighting patient response after C4 Rd, timepoints of isatuximab intensification (*Isa) and subsequent depth and duration of response. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Janowski: Astrazeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Regeneron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS/Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spencer: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; STA: Honoraria. Quach: Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Antengene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen/Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; CSL: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

A Phase Ib/II Study of Ibrutinib in Combination with Obinutuzumab-Gazyva As First-Line Treatment for Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia > 65 Years Old or with Coexisting Conditions

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-118990 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1863-1863

Author(s):

Juliana Velez Lujan ◽

Michael Y. Choi ◽

Chaja Jacobs ◽

Colin McCarthy ◽

Alaina Heinen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Single Agent ◽

Complete Response ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Standard treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is rapidly evolving and gradually has incorporated the combined use of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and targeted therapy with small molecules. Single agent Ibrutinib (Ibr), a first-in-class BTK inhibitor, is effective in previously untreated patients including those that are older than 65 or considered unfit to receive chemotherapy-based combinations. The complete response rate in patients receiving single agent Ibr is relatively low (overall response rate of 86% and complete response of 4% based on 2008 iwCLL criteria), though most patients have durable remissions. The combination of Ibr with mAbs like Obinutuzumab-Gazyva (G), a third-generation anti-CD20 mAb, can ameliorate the Ibr-induced lymphocytosis and increase the overall and complete response rates. Accordingly, we initiated an open-label phase Ib/II clinical study of Ibr in combination with G for first-line therapy of previous untreated pts with CLL. The study completed enrollment of 32 previously untreated patients with CLL. Patients received G administered based on FDA dosing recommendations for 6 cycles (28 days/cycle) and Ibr 420mg po (1-3 hours before starting G infusion), and daily for up to 3 years. All patients received prophylactic medications. Patients were assessed for response by 2008 iwCLL criteria two months after completion of G, as the primary efficacy endpoint. The median age of the patients was 65 (range: 46-78) years. 84% of the patients had a CIRS >6, 45% had a Rai stage III-IV and 19% had an ECOG performance ≤2. The median baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 79x103/mm3(range: 1.4-412.4). Patients showed the following FISH/cytogenetic abnormalities: del(13q) in 55%, trisomy 12 in 23% and del(11q) in 19%. Only 2 (6%) of these patients showed del(17p). From the patients with IGVH mutational status available (n=17), 11 (65%) were unmutated (>98% homology). Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1-2 (74%). Six patients (19%) had grade 1-2 G-infusion-related reaction (IRR) and only one patient (3%) showed grade 3 IRR (without the need for G discontinuation). We observed neutropenia (all grades: 52%, grade 3-4: 23%), thrombocytopenia (all grades: 71%, grade 3-4: 19%) and anemia (all grades: 26%). There were no cases of febrile neutropenia. Two patients (6%) had grade 1 bleeding (one patient with asymptomatic lower gastrointestinal bleeding and the second patient with epistaxis) that resolved spontaneously without requirement of blood transfusion or study treatment discontinuation. Two patients (6%) developed pneumonia, one was community-acquired pneumonia requiring inpatient treatment with IV antibiotics; the study treatment was held until resolution of symptoms and re-initiated at full dose. The most frequent non-hematological AEs were diarrhea, transaminitis, hyperbilirubinemia, hyperglycemia, and electrolyte alterations (grade 1-2). Three patients (9%) discontinued Ibr due to atrial fibrillation grade 1 (n=1), rash and headaches grade 2 (n=1), and persistent grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n=1). Twenty-three patients were evaluable for response assessment by 2008 iwCLL criteria (median follow-up of 11 months). 84% of the patients showed a rapid decrease in ALC from baseline during the first cycle of treatment and only four patients (13%) required more than 3 cycles of treatment to achieve an ALC response. The overall response rate was 100%. The majority of pts had a partial response and six of 23 evaluable patients (26%) achieved a complete remission with detectable Minimal Residual Disease in the bone marrow by multiparametric flow cytometry. In summary, Ibr-G combination has been generally well tolerated. AEs have been consistent with the known safety profiles of Ibr and G individually. The patients that discontinued Ibr remain in follow-up without disease progression. 100% of evaluable patients achieved response after 6 months of combination therapy, and 26% of patients met CR criteria. One important finding thus far has been a very low rate of IRR, (19% grade 1-2 and 3% grade 3-4), suggesting that Ibr can strongly mitigate the incidence and severity of G associated IRR. Disclosures Choi: AbbVie, Inc: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Rigel: Consultancy; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Speakers Bureau. Amaya-Chanaga:AbbVie: Equity Ownership, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.; Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie Company: Employment, Other: Research performed while employed as an investigator of this study at UCSD. Review and approval of abstract performed while employed at Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company.. Kipps:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Verastem: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Castro:F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company:: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

D.C.E.P. in Patients with Quad- or Penta-Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-117713 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2021-2021

Author(s):

Scott Goldsmith ◽

Mark A. Fiala ◽

Brandon B. Wang ◽

Mark A. Schroeder ◽

Tanya M. Wildes ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Retrospective Study ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Salvage Regimen ◽

Overall Response

Abstract Introduction: Despite the recent introduction of novel agents for multiple myeloma (MM), the disease remains incurable and invariably progresses through these new therapies. Patients with quad-refractory MM (refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide) and penta-refractory MM (refractory to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody as well) are left with few treatment options and poor prognoses. The chemotherapy regimen of dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, etoposide, and cisplatin (DCEP) has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM. We and others employ DCEP as a salvage regimen, however, few outcomes data exist in this heavily pretreated population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to identify all patients who received DCEP for quad- or penta-refractory MM at our institution between 2013 and 2018. Disease response and refractoriness were defined by IMWG criteria. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) defined as PR or better. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR). Results: We identified 31 patients who received DCEP, 8 (26%) for quad-refractory and 23 (74%) for penta-refractory MM (Table 1). Twenty-eight (90%) had at least one autologous stem cell transplant, and one had a prior allogeneic transplant. Sixteen (52%) were female, 27 (87%) were white, and median age at DCEP was 60. Median number of prior treatment regimens was 8. All patients received dexamethasone (40mg/day), cyclophosphamide (400mg/m2/day), etoposide (40mg/m2/day), and cisplatin (10mg/m2/day) on days 1-4 (Lazzarino et al. 2001). Cycles were generally 28 days in length, but doses were delayed in cases of cytopenias or other toxicities. Dose reductions occurred in cases of renal impairment or prolonged cytopenias. Twenty patients (65%) received more than one cycle (range: 1-5). The overall response rate was 35%. One patient achieved CR allowing him to proceed to a second autologous transplant. One patient achieved a VGPR, 9 (29%) a PR. Four of the 8 (50%) quad-refractory patients responded compared to 7 of the 23 (30%) of the penta-refractory patients. Eleven (35%) were primary refractory to DCEP, and two patients died after one cycle prior to response assessment. The overall median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI 1.5-3.8) and median OS was 6.2 months (95% CI 4.4-7.8). For responders, median DOR was 4.2 months (95% CI 3.0-5.4) and median OS was 9.0 months (95% CI 7.2-10.9). Conclusion: Quad- and penta-refractory MM carry a grim prognosis. In our retrospective study, DCEP led to a notable ORR of 35% (95% CI 19%-55%) in this very heavily-treated population, and suggests that it remains a reasonable salvage therapy. Furthermore, it supports prospective study of this regimen, possibly in combination or in comparison with other agents effective in quad- or penta-refractory MM. Disclosures Schroeder: Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: 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, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Karyopharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Final Results of the Phase I/II Trial of Weekly Bortezomib In Combination with Temsirolimus (CCI-779) In Relapsed or Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma Specifically In Patients Refractory to Bortezomib

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.990.990 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 990-990 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Irene M. Ghobrial ◽

Edie Weller ◽

Ravi Vij ◽

Nikhil C. Munshi ◽

Ranjit Banwait ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Phase I Study ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase Ii Study ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Overall Response ◽

Phase I And Ii

Abstract Abstract 990 Introduction: This study aimed to determine activity and safety of weekly bortezomib (Takeda Inc) and temsirolimus (Pfizer Inc) in patients with relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM). Methods: Eligibility criteria included: 1) patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM with any prior lines of therapy including bortezomib, 2) no chemotherapy within 3 weeks, or biological/novel therapy within 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was the percent of patients with at least a minimal response (MR). Results: Twenty patients were enrolled on the phase I study and 43 on the phase II study. The MTD was determined at 1.6 mg/m2 bortezomib Days 1, 8, 15, and 22 every 35 days in combination with 25 mg IV temsirolimus Days 1, 8, 15, 22, and 29 every 35 days. Twenty % were stage III by ISS staging system in the phase I, and 21% in the phase II. The overall response rate of MR or better in the Phase II study was 20/43 (47%, 95%CI: 33,60), with 5% CR, 9% VGPR, 19% PR and 14% MR. Progression without any response occurred in just 1 patient (3%). One patient had an unconfirmed PR, but was included in the stable disease category. An additional 3 (6%) patients were unevaluable in the phase II trial because they did not complete their first cycle of therapy and had no follow up laboratory results for response. If these patients are excluded, the ORR including MR improves to 50% (95% CI: 36,64). The overall response rate in the phase I study was 20% with responses occurring in all the stages of the dose escalation. If three patients who were unevaluable in the phase I trial are excluded, then the response rate of evaluable phase I patients is 24% (95% CI: 9,46). Response was also evaluated by whether patients were bortezomib-refractory or not. These were defined as progressing while on therapy or progressing within 60 days of completing bortezomib therapy. Fifty-one patients had received bortezomib as part of prior treatment. Of these patients, 32 were refractory to bortezomib therapy immediately prior to study entry, and an additional 2 pts were refractory at prior time points. Responses observed among the 32 patients refractory to their most recent bortezomib therapy include 3 PR and 3 MR (ORR: 19%, 95% CI: 9,34). Another 21 patients had SD, 2 PD and 3 patients were unevaluable. Of the evaluable patients, the ORR was 6/29 (21%). Responses observed among the 19 patients who were not refractory to their last bortezomib treatment include 2 VGPR, 5 PR and 3 MR with 6 patients with SD, 0 PD and 3 unevaluable. The ORR among the evaluable patients who received bortezomib but were not refractory was 62%. Median time to response of MR or better (min, max) among all patients was 1.7 months (0.5,14.2) and among phase II patients 1.3 months (0.5,8.0). Median duration of MR or better (min, max) among all patients is 5.2 months (0.5,15.8) and among phase II patients is 4.6 months (0.5,10.8). Median duration of PR or better response (min, max) among all patients is 6.0 months (1.8,15.8) and among phase II patients is 5.2 months (1.8,10.8). The median time to progression for all patients in the phase I and II studies was 7.3 months (95% CI: 5.7 –17.2) and the median progression free survival was 6.4 months (95% CI: 4.8–7.4). The median overall survival in all phase I and II patients was 11.4 months (95%CI: 8.6-undetermined). Three deaths occurred during therapy in the phase I and II studies, 1 of septic shock, 1 with H1N1 infection, and 1 with cardiac amyloid and ventricular arrhythmia. The most common G1-4 toxicities that occurred in > 25% of patients included cytopenias, hypertrigyceridemia and diarrhea. Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 48% of patients in the phase I and II studies, G3 and 4 neutropenia occurred in 36%, and anemia in 26% of phase I and II patients. G3 and 4 hypertriglyceridemia occurred in 5% and diarrhea in 9%. Peripheral neuropathy (PN) was rare with no G3 or 4 neuropathy reported. Overall, there was 34% grade 1 and 2 PN seen. Conclusions: The combination of weekly bortezomib and temsirolimus showed an encouraging response rate in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory MM, with an overall response rate in evaluable patients as part of the phase II portion of the trial of 50%, and a 21% ORR including MR or better in evaluable bortezomib refractory patients. Cytopenias were the most common toxicities, specifically thrombocytopenia, as well as GI toxicity, with side effects proving manageable. Significant PN was rare in this study. Disclosures: Ghobrial: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Novartis: Honoraria; Eisai: Speakers Bureau. Munshi:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Jakubowiak:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Centocor Ortho Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Anderson:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Final Results of Phase I/II Trial of the Oral mTOR Inhibitor Everolimus (RAD001) in Combination with Bortezomib and Rituximab (RVR) in Relapsed or Refractory Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.3081.3081 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 3081-3081 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Irene M. Ghobrial ◽

Robert Allyn Redd ◽

Jeffrey Matous ◽

Philippe Armand ◽

Erica N Boswell ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Maintenance Therapy ◽

Phase I ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Phase Ii ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Phase Ii Study ◽

Advisory Board ◽

Advisory Committees

Abstract Background: Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia is a distinct lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma. Several clinical trials have shown high rates of response in patients with relapsed WM using bortezomib and rituximab combinations. In addition, the TORC1 inhibitor everolimus has previously shown a high response rate of 70% in this patient population. In this trial, we aimed to examine the safety and activity of the combination of everolimus with bortezomib and rituximab (RVR) and to determine whether a deep response can be achieved with a triple combination of targeted therapeutic agents in WM. Methods: The phase I portion of the study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose of everolimus, rituximab combination or RVR combination, while the phase II portion evaluated the depth of responses to the RVR combination. Patients were eligible for this trial if they had relapsed or refractory WM. There was no limit on the number of prior therapies. Patients were required to be ≥18 years old and have measurable and symptomatic disease. For the phase I, patients were assigned to a dose level in the order of study entry. In the dose-escalation scheme, everolimus was given at 5 or 10 mg PO with rituximab, or with bortezomib at 1.3 or 1.6 mg/m2 and rituximab. Rituximab was given at a fixed dose of 375 mg/m2 IV. In the phase II, patients received everolimus 10 mg flat dose PO daily, Bortezomib IV 1.6mg/m2 weekly on days 1, 8, 15 q 28 days and rituximab IV 375 mg/ m2 weekly on days 1, 8, 15 22 q 28 days on cycles 1 and 4 only. Treatment was daily and 4 weeks (28 days) was considered one cycle. Patients received a total of 6 cycles followed by maintenance therapy with everolimus 10 mg PO daily until progression. Dexamethasone was not permitted. Patients were assessed every cycle while on combination therapy, and every 3 months while on maintenance therapy. Patients with stable disease (SD) or responding disease could continue therapy until progression. Results: From April 2010 to July 2013, a total of 46 patients were enrolled on this trial; of these, 23 patients were in the phase I study and 23 patients in the phase II study. The median number of prior treatments was 2 (range 1-9) Prior therapies received included bortezomib-based therapy (26, 56%) and rituximab (45, 98%). Median treatment duration was 10 months (range, 3 weeks to 41 months) for all patients. There were no DLTs observed and no deaths occurred on this study. The most common toxicities in all patients on study were fatigue (29 patients, 63%); anemia and leukopenia (each in 24 patients, 52%); neutropenia (22, 48%); diarrhea (20, 43%); and neuropathy, pneumonitis/pulmonary infiltrates (each in 19 patients, 41%). The overall response rate (ORR) which includes patients with minor response (MR) or better in the phase II study (N=23) was 91% (95% CI, 72-99%) with 1 CR, 1 VGPR, 16 PR, and 3 MR. When all 36 patients on the phase I and phase II studies who received full dose of RVR were combined, the ORR was 89% (95% CI 74 – 97%), with 2 CR, 3 VGPR, 21 PR, and 6 MR. Conclusions: The RVR regimen is safe and well tolerated. RVR led to an overall response rate of 89% with PR or better achieved in 72% making this a highly effective regimen even in patients previously treated with bortezomib and/or rituximab. This study represents one of the first combination efforts of novel agents targeting the PI3K signaling pathway with a proteasome inhibitor. Disclosures Ghobrial: Sanofi: Research Funding; Noxxon: Research Funding; BMS: Advisory board, Advisory board Other, Research Funding; Onyx: Advisory board Other; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Bortezomib and everolimus are not approved for WM. Laubach:Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Anderson:Celgene: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Acetylon: Scientific Founder, Scientific Founder Other; Oncoprep: Scientific Founder Other; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Bendamustine in Patients with Quad- and Penta-Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-112258 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 5627-5627

Author(s):

Scott Goldsmith ◽

Mark A. Fiala ◽

Brandon B. Wang ◽

Mark A. Schroeder ◽

Tanya M. Wildes ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Overall Response Rate ◽

Response Rate ◽

Autologous Stem Cell Transplant ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Salvage Regimen ◽

Overall Response

Abstract Introduction: Despite significant advances in multiple myeloma (MM) therapy, disease progression through multiple novel treatments is often inevitable. Quad-refractory MM (refractory to bortezomib, carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and pomalidomide), or penta-refractory MM (refractory to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody as well) portends a poor prognosis, with few subsequent lines of treatment currently available. We and others have used bendamustine combined with corticosteroids as a salvage regimen, but there is a paucity of outcomes data in this heavily pretreated population. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study to identify all patients who received bendamustine with corticosteroids for quad- or penta-refractory MM at our institution between 2013 and 2018. Disease response and refractoriness were defined by IMWG criteria. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) defined as PR or better. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and duration of response (DOR). Results: Twenty-seven patients were identified; 5 patients were quad-refractory, and 22 penta-refractory (Table 1). Twenty-two (81%) patients had at least one prior autologous stem cell transplant and 1 had a prior allogeneic. The median age at time of bendamustine was 61, 52% were female, and 85% were white. All patients received bendamustine at a dose of 90mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of a 28 day cycle. Twelve patients (44%) received more than one cycle (range: 1-8). The overall response rate was 26%. While no patient achieved CR, 4 achieved VGPR and 3 a PR. Two of the 5 (40%) quad-refractory patients responded compared to 5 of the 22 (23%) penta-refractory. Sixteen (59%) were primary refractory to bendamustine and one patient went onto hospice prior to response evaluation. Overall the median PFS was 1.4 months (95% CI 1.1-1.6) and median OS was 8.7 months (95% CI 2.3-15.0). For responders (≥PR), median DOR was 6.6 months (95% CI 0.0-13.7) and median OS was 14.0 months (95% CI 0.6-27.4). Conclusion: The prognosis of quad- and penta-refractory MM remains poor. In this heavily pre-treated population, bendamustine demonstrates a 26% ORR (95% CI 11%-46%). The DOR and OS of the patients was poor but highly heterogeneous. Those who did respond to bendamustine had notably improved OS. Given the limited available options for quad- and penta-refractory MM, bendamustine remains a reasonable salvage therapy. Prospective trials are warranted perhaps including additional agents that are effective in penta-refractory patients. Disclosures Schroeder: Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vij:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text