scholarly journals Disease Characteristics, Treatment Patterns, and Outcomes of Follicular Lymphoma in Patients 40 Years of Age and Younger: An Analysis from the National LymphoCare Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3044-3044 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Casulo ◽  
Michelle Byrtek ◽  
Keith L Dawson ◽  
Xiaolei Zhou ◽  
Christopher R. Flowers ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma in the world and has a median age at diagnosis in the seventh decade. FL in young adults (YA; 40 years old or younger) is extremely rare. Currently, there are no standard approaches guiding treatment of YA patients with FL, and very little is known about disease characteristics and outcomes of YA patients with FL given limited research conducted in this vulnerable population. To gain further insight into FL in YA, we analyzed the National LymphoCare Study (NLCS) to describe disease and patient characteristics, as well as features of treatment in YA patients with FL. We previously reported that 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) is an important survival endpoint in patients with FL undergoing chemo-immunotherapy. Hence, we also sought to characterize 2-year PFS in this age group and compare it to older cohorts. Methods: Evaluablepatients were identified in the NLCS, and those between 18–40 years of age with newly diagnosed FL at any stage were classified as YA patients. Patients with mixed histology or transformed disease were excluded, as were patients with progression of disease prior to beginning first-line treatment. Survival probability was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. We estimated the association of age group with PFS using hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) from multivariable Cox models. Results: A total of164 YA patients with FL were analyzed, representing 6.2% of the NLCS population, similar to the observed frequency in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program data (4.8% of all FL). Sixty nine percent of YA patients had advanced stage disease. The majority of patients (80%) had low-grade histology, and 50% had good risk disease according to the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI). Nineteen percent of patients (31/164) underwent watchful waiting, 12% received rituximab monotherapy, and 47% received chemo-immunotherapy (61% of whom received R-CHOP [rituximab, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone]). There was no significant difference in FLIPI score or other baseline disease characteristics compared to adult patients aged 41–60 years. Eleven deaths occurred among YA with FL; only 5 of these were lymphoma related. Overall survival (OS) at 2 years was 97.4% (95% CI 93.3%, 99.0%), and at 5 years, 93.7% (88.3%, 96.7%), which was similar to patients aged 41–60 (97.2% [96.0%, 98.0%] at 2 years, and 92.0% [90.1%, 93.5%] at 5 years). After a median follow-up of 7.1 years, OS in YA FL was 92%. Through follow-up, there were 64 PFS events. The estimated 2-year PFS (95% CI) for YA and adults 41–60 was 75.9% (67.1%, 82.6%) and 80.9% (78.1%, 83.4%), respectively. After adjusting for FLIPI score, there was no difference in PFS for YA with FL requiring first-line treatment (excluding watchful waiting) compared to adults aged 41–60 years (HR=0.93; 95% CI 0.69, 1.25), and no difference in OS compared to adults aged 41–60 years (HR=1.19; 95% CI 0.64, 2.23). Conclusions: In the largest cohort of YA patients with FL to date, we found few differences in outcomes compared to patients aged 41–60. FLIPI and other disease characteristics were similar to adults aged 41–60 years. There were no differences between YA FL and adults aged 41–60 in PFS for all treated patients. OS in the YA group of patients with FL was outstanding. YA patients with FL have reassuringly similar outcomes to patients aged 41–60. Fertility preservation and survivorship issues should be taken into consideration when defining management strategies, but otherwise these data support that YA patients with FL should not be approached differently from older adults with the same disease. Disclosures Byrtek: Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dawson:Genentech, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhou:RTI-HS: Employee of RTI-HS, which has research contracts with Genentech Other. Flowers:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Abbott: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Allos: Consultancy. Farber:Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Janssen/Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Leukemia Lymphoma Society NJ Chapter: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Speakers Bureau, Stock ownership Other. Cerhan:Genentech, Inc.: LymphoCare Scientific Advisory Board Other. Link:Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Scientific Advisory Board for Genentech Other.

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5263-5263
Author(s):  
Karin Hohloch ◽  
Christine Windemuth-Kieselbach ◽  
Pier Luigi Zinzani ◽  
Roberto E. Cacchione ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
...  

To assess the efficacy of radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with 90yttrium-ibrutinib-tiuxetan (90Y-IT) in mantle cell lymphoma, data from 90 patients registered in the RIT Network with a median follow-up (FU) of 5.5 years after RIT were evaluated. 90Y-IT was given as first-line therapy in 45 (50%) (consolidation 44 pts., primary therapy 1 pt.) and at relapse in 45 (50%) patients (consolidation 24 pts., recurrence 12 pts., therapy refractory 3 pts., conditioning 2 pts., other 4 pts.). As a first-line treatment, 30 patients (pts.) (67%) achieved CR, 10 pts. (22%) PR%., 1 pt. (2%) PD, and for 4 pts. (9%) no response data was available. At relapse, CR was achieved in 17 pts. (38%), PR in 6 pts. (13%), SD in 2 pts. (4%), and 6 pts. (13%) had PD, while the response was not documented for 14 pts. (31%). After a median FU of 5.5 years, median PFS for all patients was 2.11 (95%CI: 1.03-2.32) years, and median OS was 4.05 (95%CI 2.79-7.21) years. Eleven pts. (12.2%) developed second malignancy. In conclusion, this is the largest report of MCL pts. treated with 90Y-IT to date. 90Y-IT was most often used as consolidation after first- and second-line chemotherapy and may improve the results achieved using chemoimmunotherapy alone. However, the results are less encouraging compared to treatment with small molecules such as ibrutinib. Disclosures Zinzani: TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy. Jurczak:Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Truemper:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy. Scholz:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Hexal: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy; GILEAD: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankio: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Yttrium 90 (90Y) Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin) is approved for treatment of patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma and as consolidation therapy after chemo(immuno)therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3750-3750
Author(s):  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Ricardo Pasquini ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
David Joske ◽  
Luis A Meillon ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3750 Background: The WORLD CML Registry is a multinational, prospective registry established to longitudinally assess global patterns of current and evolving methods for diagnosis, treatment, and clinical outcome measures in pts with CML and to compare clinical practice patterns to management recommendations provided by the European LeukemiaNet (ELN; Baccarani M, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6041–6051). Here, we report overall efficacy and safety data from this registry, as well as clinical monitoring practices and outcomes in the subgroup of pts with CML in chronic phase (CP) treated with first-line imatinib. Methods: Pts (≥ 16 y of age) with CML in CP, accelerated phase (AP), or blast crisis (BC) within 6 mo + 2 weeks of confirmed CML diagnosis were enrolled at sites in Latin America, Asia-Pacific, the United States, Russia, Turkey, the Middle East, and Africa. Baseline demographics and medical history were collected at enrollment; disease status and management information were collected at approximate 6-mo intervals or when there was a change in disease status/management. Adverse events (AEs) were collected only if they resulted in a dose/regimen change, nonadherence to treatment, or death. Results: A total of 1837 of the 1889 pts enrolled between February 2008 and December 31, 2010, were evaluable (ie, had confirmed informed consent forms and no protocol deviations) and are the basis for this analysis. Median age was 47 y (range, 16–92 y), and 58% of pts were male. CML diagnosis was established using hematologic (91% of pts), bone marrow (82%), cytogenetic (83%), and molecular (polymerase chain reaction [PCR]; 53%) assessments. Nearly all pts (94%) were initially diagnosed in CP (Table). As of the data cutoff (December 31, 2010), median overall survival (OS) and median event-free survival (EFS) in all pts were not reached. Estimated OS and EFS rates at 3 y were 90.4% and 74.8%, respectively. AEs reported in ≥ 1% of pts were thrombocytopenia (3%) and neutropenia (2%). In the CML-CP subgroup, imatinib (Glivec®/Gleevec®) was administered as first-line therapy (in clinical practice or in a clinical trial) to 63% of pts (n = 1083). Disease burden in CML-CP pts on imatinib over time was most commonly assessed via blood counts (Table). Cytogenetic and molecular assessments were used in a minority of CML-CP pts at most time points. Only 50% of pts had a disease assessment at 3 mo (hematologic, 49%; cytogenetic, 10%; molecular, 15%). Of the pts on first-line imatinib outside of a clinical trial setting (n = 1024), 95 (9%) had their dose increased, 77 (8%) had their dose decreased, and 82 (8%) were switched to nilotinib or dasatinib. In all CML-CP pts treated with first-line imatinib, estimated OS and EFS rates at 3 y were 92.1% and 76.6%, respectively (Table). Estimated OS and EFS rates at 3 y were higher in pts who had higher imatinib exposure (treatment received ≥ 85% of total days) vs pts who received imatinib treatment on < 85% of days. Conclusions: The majority of CML-CP pts treated with first-line imatinib did not have cytogenetic or molecular assessments in accordance with current ELN recommendations, particularly at early time points. Additionally, pts who had higher drug exposure to imatinib had higher estimated OS and EFS rates at 3 y than those who did not. Disclosures: Cortes: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Piccolo:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Zernovak:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sivarathinasami:Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd,: Employment. Eng:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kim:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Research Funding; II-Yang: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hughes:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; CSL: Research Funding.


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

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


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4229-4229
Author(s):  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Mohit Narang ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
Howard R. Terebelo ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Triplet therapies are used for treatment (Tx) of both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Actual patterns and outcomes of Tx are not fully understood. Connect MM® is the first and largest multicenter, US-based, prospective observational cohort study designed to characterize Tx patterns and outcomes for pts with NDMM. This analysis describes demographic and disease characteristics of pts who received triplet Tx as an induction regimen and for whom transplant was or was not intended. The analysis explores the relationship of these factors with overall survival (OS) and other efficacy endpoints. Patients and Methods: Pts aged ≥ 18 y with NDMM within 60 days of diagnosis were eligible for enrollment regardless of disease severity, medical history, or comorbidities. Data including transplant intent (yes/no) was collected at baseline; follow-up data was collected quarterly thereafter. Based on the initial intent, 2 groups were identified: patients with intent to transplant who received transplant (TT) and pts with no intent to transplant who did not receive a transplant (NT). Triplet Tx was defined as the combination of ≥ 3 concurrent therapeutic agents in the first course of Tx (within 56 days of study entry). KM analysis adjusted for age was conducted for OS. Because decisions on use of transplant and triplet therapy are influenced by multiple factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the contribution of the triplet therapy (yes/no) to OS and was adjusted for other variables, including age, comorbidities, and ISS staging. Results: Between September 2009 and December 2011, 1493 pts were enrolled. This analysis was on 1436 pts: 650 pts with transplant intent and 786 pts without transplant intent. The data cutoff date was November 30, 2014, and the median follow-up for overall survival (OS) was 33.8 mos. Of pts with transplant intent, 451 (69%) received transplant (TT) and 199 (31%) did not. Of pts without transplant intent, 62 (8%) received transplant and 724 (92%) did not (NT). The abstract focuses on TT and NT groups only. NT pts tended to be older and have more advanced ISS staging and higher β2-microglobulin levels than TT pts (Table). The most common triplet regimen given during the first course treatment (within 56 days) was lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd). RVd was administered to 34% of the NT pts (76/225) and 59% of the TT pts (152/257). The most common non-triplet regimen was bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), which was given to 31% of NT pts (156/499) and 38% of TT pts (73/194). Within the NT group, pts given triplet Tx had a lower risk of death than those who did not receive triplet Tx (P = .0013). The multivariable analysis found triplet Tx to be associated with a 36% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50-0.82]; P = .001). ISS disease stage (HR = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.21-1.69]; P < .001) and history of diabetes (HR = 1.38 [95% CI, 1.08-1.78]; P = .012) were negative prognostic factors for OS. Within the TT group, pts who received triplet Tx did not attain an OS benefit (P = .8993), and no baseline characteristics were significantly associated with OS. These results may be limited by other factors not considered that may have influenced physicians' choice of treatment, including the use of maintenance therapy and a short follow-up period of 33.8 months. Conclusions: Triplet Tx as a first regimen is associated with longer OS in pts without transplant intent who did not receive a transplant. RVd and Vd were the most common first Tx regimens, respectively. Continued follow-up of these pts and enrollment of an additional cohort will provide additional data with mature follow-up. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Shah: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: 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, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abonour:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacylics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Other: Export Board Committee, Speakers Bureau. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Srinivasan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nagarwala:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: 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.


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

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


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2000-2000
Author(s):  
Hagop Kantarjian ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽  
Jeffrey Szer ◽  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Thrombocytopenia occurs in ~50% of patients with low/int-1 risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and is associated with reduced survival. In a placebo (PBO)-controlled study, 250 patients with MDS were randomized 2:1 to receive weekly romiplostim or PBO. In the original June 2011 analysis, romiplostim reduced clinically significant bleeding events [hazard ratio (HR) romiplostim vs PBO 0.83, 95% CI: 0.66−1.05, P = 0.13] and platelet transfusions (relative risk 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66−0.88, P<0.001) and increased IWG hematologic improvement platelets (HI-P) incidence (odds ratio 15.6, 95% CI: 4.7−51.8, P<0.001). Peripheral blast count increases >10% were more frequent with romiplostim (25/167, 15%) than PBO (3/83, 3.6%) and resolved after discontinuation in most cases. In February 2011, the DMC recommended that treatment with study drug be discontinued as the potential benefit seen in the reduction of bleeding did not outweigh the potential risk for disease progression to AML, and that transient increases in blast cell counts might put patients at risk for diagnosis of and treatment for AML. Patients were moved into long-term follow-up (LTFU). Previously reported (Giagounidis et al, Cancer 2014) 58-week incidence of AML was 6.0% (N = 10) for romiplostim and 4.9% for PBO (N = 4); HR 1.20 (95% CI: 0.38−3.84). This report provides final 5-year LTFU data. Methods: Eligible patients were receiving only supportive care and had IPSS low/int-1 risk MDS and platelets 1) ≤20 × 109/L or 2) ≤50 × 109/L with a history of bleeding. Disease progression to AML was defined as 1) ≥20% blasts in bone marrow or peripheral blood after 4 weeks following discontinuation of romiplostim; 2) pathology consistent with leukemia; or 3) antileukemic treatment. Results are presented by treatment group. Results: At baseline, median (Q1, Q3) age was 70 (61, 77) years, the majority (59%) of patients were male; 27.6% were IPSS low risk and 72.4% were int-1 risk. WHO classifications were RCMD: 67.6%, RAEB-1: 13.2%, MDS-U: 11.2%, RA: 4.4%, RCMD-RS: 2.4%, RARS: 0.8%, and RAEB-2: 0.4%. Of 250 patients in the study, 210 entered LTFU and 66 completed the 5 years of LTFU; median (Q1, Q3) follow-up was 27.5 (10.8, 58.7) months. Reasons for discontinuation (death, lost to follow-up, and consent withdrawal) during LTFU were similar in both groups. During the active study period and LTFU, death was reported in 93 (55.7%) patients in the romiplostim group and 45 (54.2%) patients in the PBO group (HR romiplostim vs PBO 1.03, 95% CI: 0.72−1.47) (Figure); mortality rates were greater in those with IPSS int-1 vs low risk for both groups (Table). AML was reported in 20 (11.9%) patients in the romiplostim group and 9 (11.0%) patients in the PBO group (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.48−2.33). The proportions of patients who either died or developed AML were 56.9% (N = 95) in the romiplostim group and 55.4% (N = 46) in the PBO group (HR for AML-free survival 1.04, 95% CI: 0.73−1.48) (Figure). Nearly half (N = 14, 48%) of the 29 AML cases occurred in patients who were RAEB-1 at screening (none RAEB-2), and 6 cases were diagnosed because of anti-AML treatment use alone (Table). In LTFU, patient-reported use of MDS therapy (eg, azacitidine or cyclosporine) was 42.8% (N = 59, 95% CI: 34.4%−51.5%) in the romiplostim group and 31.4% (N = 22, 95% CI: 20.9%−43.6%) in the PBO group. AML therapy (eg, chemotherapy) was used in 14 (10.2%) patients in the romiplostim group and 7 (10.0%) patients in the PBO group. Conclusions: Following the decision in 2011 to stop study drug secondary to increased AML rates at that time and transient blasts increases, final 5-year LTFU HRs (romiplostim vs placebo) for death or progression to AML, respectively, are 1.03 (95% CI: 0.72−1.47) and 1.06 (95% CI: 0.48−2.33). In conclusion, romiplostim reduced bleeding events and platelet transfusions, with no increase in AML incidence or impact on survival. Disclosures Kantarjian: Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Fenaux:Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Szer:Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion Australia: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Platzbecker:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kuendgen:Celgene: Research Funding. Gaidano:Morphosys: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wiktor-Jedrzejczak:Angelini: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Carpenter:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mehta:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Franklin:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Giagounidis:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria.


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

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


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2020-2020
Author(s):  
Sutapa Sinha ◽  
Justin C Boysen ◽  
Kari G. Chaffee ◽  
Brian F Kabat ◽  
Susan L. Slager ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The use of B-cell receptor (BCR) signal inhibitors-based therapies (e.g., Ibrutinib) for B-chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) was initiated just a few years ago but has rapidly escalated due to their clinical efficacy and relative ease of use. However newer therapeutic approaches are needed due to multiple issues including the continued need to improve complete responses and reduce toxicity profiles. To that end our group has discovered a novel membrane target in the ubiquitous presence of Axl receptor tyrosine kinase (Axl RTK) on CLL B-cells and has reported that the Axl RTK inhibitor TP-0903 is able to induce apoptosis of CLL B-cells at nanomolar doses (Sinha, Clin Cancer Res, 2015). Given this we assessed if TP-0903 would be effective in the induction of apoptosis of leukemic B-cells from CLL patients who are currently on Ibrutinib therapy or whom have relapsed while on Ibrutinib treatment. Methods: Relapsed/refractory CLL patients (n=22) who were placed on Ibrutinib for progressive disease provided blood samples at a median of 3.2 months after Ibrutinib therapy initiation for these studies. We also obtained sequential samples on 8 patients from initial start of ibrutinib therapy and then over a 6 month follow-up period. CLL B-cells from these blood samples were subject to Ficoll separation, purified by using a Rosette Sep B-cell enrichment kit and then studied by flow cytometry to determine Axl RTK expression levels by flow cytometric analysis. Purified CLL B-cells (CD19+/CD5+) were cultured with TP-0903 in vitroat increasing doses (0.01µM - 0.50µM) for 24 hours and the LD50 dose was determined. In addition, 3 CLL patients who had been on Ibrutinib therapy and had a documented relapse were studied in similar fashion using TP-0903. LD50-sensitivity was measured. "LD50-sensitivity" was defined as an LD50 ≤0.50µM and "insensitive" was defined as an LD50 dose >0.50µM. CLL prognostic factors (e.g., FISH, IGHV mutation status, Rai stage, CD38, and CD49d) were evaluated at the time of ibrutinib treatment. Differences in factors between sensitive and insensitive cases were computed using the Kruskal-Wallis test for continuous variables and Chi-square test for categorical variables. Results: Twenty-two CLL patients (5 female, 17 male) were included in the analysis. Fourteen (64%) patients were found to be TP-0903 LD50-sensitive. Axl expression on CLL B-cells for this cohort was heterogeneous with a median of CD19+/CD5+ cells positive for Axl at 69.9% (range of 2.7-91.3%). The sensitive subjects tended to be younger with a median age at Ibrutinib treatment initiation of 62 vs 75.5 years (p=0.004). There were no significant differences in gender, FISH, IGHV mutation status, CD38, CD49d, or Rai stage between the sensitive and insensitive LD50 groups. There were no significant differences in relation to median Axl expression on CLL B-cells (sensitive: 72.6%, range: 2.7-91.3%; insensitive: 41.5%, range: 16.5-83.1%; p=0.35). The median number of treatments prior to initiation of ibrutinib did not differ between sensitivity groups (sensitive: 2.53, range: 8-10; insensitive: 43.5, range 12-20; p=0.2833). Association for ZAP70+ CLL B-cells tended to have more apoptosis induction by TP-0903 (sensitive: 84.6% ZAP70+; insensitive: 42.9% ZAP70+; p=0.052). In 8 CLL patients that were studied sequentially while on Ibrutinib continued to express Axl or increased their Axl expression (n=2) over a 3-6 month follow-up period. Three CLL patients who had relapsed on Ibrutinib were sensitive to TP-0903 with LD50 values of ≤0.50µM. Summary: Here we find that CLL B-cells from over 60% of relapsed CLL patients on Ibrutinib therapy were highly sensitive to the high-affinity Axl inhibitor TP-0903 with induction of apoptosis at nanomolar doses (≤0.50µM). The sensitivity of CLL B-cells to TP-0903 appears to be independent of Axl expression levels and of the known CLL prognostic factors but more evident for younger patients and for ZAP70+ expression status. Given this level of activity for apoptosis induction of CLL B-cells by TP-0903 encourages the further testing of this drug in clinical trials for CLL patients. Disclosures Parikh: Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shanafelt:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding. Warner:Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Bearss:Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Kay:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Tolero Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morpho-Sys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity Pharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3859-3859 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Paul G Richardson ◽  
Rudolf Schlag ◽  
Nuriet K Khuageva ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3859 Poster Board III-795 The initial results of the pivotal, international, phase III VISTA trial demonstrated the superiority of bortezomib (Velcade®) plus melphalan–prednisone (VMP) versus MP alone across all efficacy end points, including overall survival (OS), in previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM) patients ineligible for high-dose therapy (San Miguel et al, N Engl J Med 2008). We conducted a planned updated survival analysis of VISTA after a median >3 years of follow-up and with the majority of patients having received subsequent therapy. We confirmed the previously demonstrated OS benefit of VMP versus MP, examined the use of subsequent therapy and its efficacy following VMP and MP, and evaluated the survival of patients who had received subsequent therapy. Patients were randomized to receive nine 6-week cycles of VMP (N=344; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, d 1, 4, 8, 11, 22, 25, 29, 32, cycles 1–4, d 1, 8, 22, 29, cycles 5–9; melphalan 9 mg/m2 d 1–4, prednisone 60 mg/m2, d 1–4, all cycles) or MP (N=338) alone. Response was assessed using EBMT criteria with central laboratory M-protein analysis. After disease progression, patients were followed for survival and subsequent therapy, including investigator-assessed best response to subsequent therapies. The median age of patients was 71 years, 30% were aged ≥75 years, 34% had ISS stage III MM, and 33% had β2-microglobulin >5.5 mg/L. After median follow-up of 36.7 months, there was a 35% reduced risk of death with VMP vs MP (hazard ratio [HR] 0.653, p=0.0008); median OS was not estimable vs 43.1 months, and 3-year OS rates were 68.5% vs 54.0% with VMP vs MP, respectively. This OS benefit was seen consistently across patient subgroups predefined by baseline characteristics. Within the VMP arm, OS was longer among patients aged <75 vs ≥75 years (HR 1.664, p=0.011; 3-year OS: 74.1% vs 55.5%); by contrast, there were no significant differences, although there were trends to longer OS among patients with creatinine clearance ≥60 versus <60 mL/min (HR 1.291, p=0.238; 3-year OS: 74.5% vs 63.1%) and patients with standard- vs high-risk cytogenetics (HR 1.346, p=0.399; 3-year OS 71.6% vs 56.1%). At data cut-off (16 March 2009), 178 (52%) VMP and 233 (69%) MP patients had received subsequent therapy; median time to subsequent therapy (28.1 vs 19.2 months, HR 0.527, p<0.0001) and median treatment-free interval (17.6 vs 8.4 months, HR 0.543, p<0.0001) were superior with VMP vs MP. Receipt of and response to subsequent bortezomib-, thalidomide-, and lenalidomide-based therapy are summarized in the Table. Median survival from start of subsequent therapy following VMP and MP was 30.2 vs 21.9 months (HR 0.815, p=0.21) among all patients receiving subsequent therapy. This updated analysis of VISTA confirms that VMP results in significantly longer OS compared with MP, despite 50% of MP patients being rescued with bortezomib-based therapy in the relapsed setting. VMP treatment used upfront appears more beneficial than treating with conventional agents and saving bortezomib- and other novel-agent-based treatment until relapse. Subsequent therapies appeared similarly effective in the VMP and MP arms, with our analysis also demonstrating the benefit of retreatment with bortezomib-based therapies following VMP. In addition, post-relapse survival among all patients receiving subsequent therapy appeared longer following VMP, indicating that frontline bortezomib use does not induce more resistant relapses. Table Response among patients who received subsequent therapy VMP (N=178) MP (N=233) Received subsequent therapy containing:*     Bortezomib, n (%) 43 (24) 116 (50)     Thalidomide, n (%) 81 (46) 110 (47)     Lenalidomide, n (%) 57 (32) 30 (13) Overall response rate (%) to subsequent therapy:     Bortezomib-based 47 59     Thalidomide-based 41 53     Lenalidomide-based 59 52 * Patients could have received >1 agent, either in combination or separately in different subsequent lines of therapy Disclosures: Mateos: Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Richardson:Millennium: 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. Dimopoulos:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria; Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria. Shpilberg:Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kropff:Ortho Biotech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Petrucci:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Palumbo:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Dmoszynska:Millennium: Research Funding. Schots:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Esseltine:Millennium: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cakana:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. van de Velde:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership. San Miguel:Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 452-452 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Saglio ◽  
Philipp D. LeCoutre ◽  
Ricardo Pasquini ◽  
Saengsuree Jootar ◽  
Hirohisa Nakamae ◽  
...  

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


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document