p53 Mutant Independently Impacts Risk: Analysis of Deletion 5q, Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) Patients Treated with Lenalidomide (LEN) in the MDS-004 Study

Abstract Introduction: Refined risk-classification of patients (pts) with MDS allows for improved treatment selection for individual pts. The Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) has recently been validated as a prognostic tool in lower-risk MDS pts with deletion 5q [del(5q)], who were treated with LEN in the MDS-004 study (Sekeres et al. Blood Cancer J 2014; in press). P53 nuclear protein expression, as assessed by immunohistochemistry (IHC), predicted overall survival (OS) and risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in lower-risk MDS pts with del(5q) (Saft et al. Haematologica 2014;99:1041-9). This analysis evaluated the prognostic value of adding p53 IHC to IPSS-R to predict OS and AML progression in pts with lower-risk MDS with del(5q). Methods: In a subset of 85 pts from MDS-004 with bone marrow (BM) biopsies available, p53+ staining (≥ 1% IHC+++ BM cells) was visualized by IHC. Twenty-four pts had missing IPSS-R scores; 1 due to lack of baseline cytogenetic data and 23 because of missing exact BM blast percentage. Thus, 61 pts (42 initially treated with LEN and 19 with placebo) had IPSS-R and p53 IHC data available; 89% of pts in the placebo group crossed over to LEN 5 mg at Week 16. The IPSS-R Very Low and Very High risk groups with < 5 pts were combined with the Low and High risk groups, respectively. AML-free survival (AFS), OS, and time to AML progression within p53 IHC status (p53+ vs p53−), and IPSS-R risk groups were characterized by the Kaplan-Meier method with differences evaluated by the log-rank test. Results: Of 61 pts, 38% were p53+. There was a linear increasing trend in the proportion of pts with p53+ across IPSS-R risk groups from Very Low/Low, Intermediate to High/Very High (29%, 47% and 63%, respectively; Cochran-Armitage trend test P = 0.050). The 3 IPSS-R risk groups significantly predicted AFS and OS (log-rank P < 0.001 for both AFS and OS), but not time to AML progression (P = 0.335). Overall, AFS, OS, and time to AML progression differed significantly between p53+ versus p53− pts (23.9 vs 47.9 months for median AFS, P = 0.003; 27.0 vs 50.6 months for median OS, P = 0.005; and 44.3 months vs not reached [NR] for median time to AML progression,P = 0.003). In the IPSS-R Very Low/Low risk group (n = 38), AFS, OS, and time to AML progression were significantly worse in p53+ versus p53− pts (20.1 vs 63.1 months for median AFS, P = 0.011; 28.4 vs 76.8 months for median OS, P = 0.031; and 65.2 months vs NR for median time to AML progression, P = 0.014). Results for all IPSS-R risk groups in pts with p53 and IPSS-R data are presented in the Figure. The lack of significant differences between p53+ versus p53− pts in the Intermediate and High/Very High risk groups is likely due to the small sample size of these groups. Conclusions: In this exploratory subset analysis of lower-risk MDS pts with del(5q), p53 IHC status in the IPSS-R Very Low/Low risk group significantly impacted AFS, OS, and AML progression. These data support the addition of p53 mutational analysis to prognostic risk assessment which should help inform the selection of appropriate treatment for individual MDS pts with del(5q). These results need to be validated in a large sample set, which will be accomplished as part of the ongoing efforts to include prognostic molecular mutations in future updates of IPSS-R Figure 1 AFS (A), OS (B), and time to AML progression (C) in pts with p53 and IPSS-R data (N = 61) Figure 1. AFS (A), OS (B), and time to AML progression (C) in pts with p53 and IPSS-R data (N = 61) Figure 2 Figure 2. Figure 3 Figure 3. Disclosures Shiansong Li: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Greenberg:Celgene: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; KaloBios: Research Funding. Sekeres:Amgen Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Boehringer-Ingelheim Corp.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dreyfus:Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Fenaux:Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Swern:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sugrue:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hellstrom-Lindberg:Celgene: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Pmd-107: Marizomib, Pomalidomide and Low Dose-Dexamethasone Combination Study in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (NCT02103335): Full Enrollment Results from a Phase-1 Multicenter, Open Label Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.3326.3326 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 3326-3326 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Andrew Spencer ◽

Simon Harrison ◽

Jacob P. Laubach ◽

Jeffrey Zonder ◽

Ashraf Z Badros ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Low Dose ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽

Heavily Pretreated ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Marizomib (MRZ) is a novel, irreversible, pan subunit proteasome inhibitor (PI) with preclinical evidence demonstrating in vitro and in vivo activity in multiple myeloma (MM). This study was designed to evaluate the safety and antimyeloma activity of pomalidomide (POM), MRZ and low dose dexamethasone (Lo-DEX) (PMD) in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Thirty-eight heavily pretreated patients with RRMM were enrolled [dose-escalation cohort (n=14); recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) cohort (n=24)]. IV MRZ (0.3 to 0.5 mg/m2) was administered on Days (D) 1, 4, 8, 11; POM (3 or 4 mg) on D1 through 21; and Lo-DEX (5 or 10 mg) on D1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12, 15, 16, 22, 23 of every 28-D cycle. Patients received a median of 4 (range 1-9) prior lines of therapy; 100% received prior lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BTZ), 34% carfilzomib (CFZ), and 50% thalidomide. 53% of patients were refractory to both LEN and BTZ and 21% were refractory to LEN, BTZ, and CFZ. There were no dose limiting toxicities during the study. The most common study treatment related ≥Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (11/38 pts: 29%), pneumonia (4/38 pts 11%), anemia (4/38 pts; 11%), thrombocytopenia (4/38 pts; 11%), and febrile neutropenia (2/38 pts; 5%), with two grade 4 AEs (neutropenia related to POM and viral infection related to DEX), and one grade 5 AE (cardio-respiratory arrest from a suspected PE related to POM). Overall, MRZ was well tolerated, did not add to the incidence or severity of POM/Lo-DEX AEs and the regimen may have fewer hematological and infectious AEs compared to that observed with POM/Lo-DEX. MRZ pharmacokinetic analysis revealed that it was rapidly cleared with a short T1/2 (6.2-11mins) and a large volume of distribution (41-86L) suggesting extensive tissue distribution. Pharmacodynamic analysis demonstrated rapid and robust inhibition of chymotrypsin-like activity in both packed whole blood (PWB) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PMBCs), reflecting the irreversible binding nature of MRZ. Evolving inhibition of trypsin-like and caspase-like proteasome activity was also observed in PWB and PBMC with continued dosing. The overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR) for the 36 response evaluable patients was 53% (19/36) and 64% (23/36), respectively (Table 1). Subpopulation analysis demonstrated an ORR of 50% (5/10) in high risk cytogenetic patients, 56% (10/18) in LEN/BTZ refractory patients, 71% (5/7) in LEN/BTZ/CFZ refractory patients and 80% (8/10) in CFZ refractory patients. These data compare favorably against POM/Lo-Dex with a near doubling of ORR in both the total patient population and the double refractory patients. Substantial activity in high-risk patients that are triple refractory and in patients that are refractory to CFZ in prior last regimen was observed. MRZ activity in RRMM patients exposed and/or refractory to multiple PIs is likely a consequence of its unique pan proteasome subunit inhibitory actions. In conclusion, MRZ in combination with POM and Lo-DEX was well tolerated and demonstrated promising activity in heavily pretreated, high-risk RRMM patients. Table 1 Table 1. Disclosures Harrison: Janssen-Cilag: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria. Zonder:Prothena: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Other: DSMC membership. Khot:Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Anderson:C4 Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Millennuim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncoprep: Equity Ownership; C4 Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acetylon: Equity Ownership; Acetylon: Equity Ownership; Oncoprep: Equity Ownership; Millennuim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. MacLaren:Triphase Accelerator: Employment, Equity Ownership. Reich:Triphase Accelerator: Consultancy. Trikha:Encycle Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Triphase Accelerator: Employment, Equity Ownership. Richardson:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Combining Information Regarding Chromosomal Aberrations t(4;14), Del(17p13) and the Copy Number of 1q21 with the International Staging System Classification Allows Stratification of Myeloma Patients Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation: Results From the HOVON-65/GMMG HD4 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.332.332 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 332-332

Author(s):

Kai Neben ◽

Henk M. Lokhorst ◽

Anna Jauch ◽

Uta Bertsch ◽

Thomas Hielscher ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Prognostic Value ◽

Risk Group ◽

Staging System ◽

Risk Groups ◽

Low Risk ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

International Staging System

Abstract Abstract 332 PURPOSE : In Multiple Myeloma (MM), the combination of serum beta-2-microglobulin level with serum albumin concentration has been proposed as an outcome predictor in the International Staging System (ISS). More recently, subgroups of MM defined by genetic and cytogenetic abnormalities have been associated with unique biologic, clinical, and prognostic features. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We analyzed the prognostic value of 12 chromosomal abnormalities by fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) in a series of 354 MM patients treated within the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial. Patients with newly diagnosed MM were randomized to receive either three cycles of VAD (arm A; vincristine, adriamycin, dexamethasone) or PAD (arm B; bortezomib, adriamycin, dexamethasone). All patients underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) followed by maintenance therapy with thalidomide 50 mg daily (arm A) or bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 once every 2 weeks (arm B), respectively. In addition, a second cohort of patients was analyzed as a control group (n=462), undergoing ASCT at the University of Heidelberg between September 1994 and December 2010. RESULTS: For the entire group of patients treated within the HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial, we identified 233 patients with 2 copies (67.7%), 95 patients with 3 copies (27.6%) and 16 patients (4.7%) with more than three copies of the chromosomal region 1q21. In addition to del(17p13) and t(4;14), we added +1q21 (>3 copies) to the group of high-risk aberrations, since the outcome of these patients was almost as poor as it was observed for patients with del(17p13). Subsequently, we analyzed whether combining the ISS score with information on the presence of high-risk aberrations could improve the prognostic value with regard to patients' outcome. A combination of the presence or absence of del(17p13), t(4;14), or +1q21 (>3 copies) with the ISS score allowed patients to be stratified into three distinct groups: low-risk [absence of del(17p13)/t(4;14)/+1q21 (>3 copies) and ISS I], high-risk [presence of del(17p13)/t(4;14)/+1q21 (>3 copies) and ISS II/III], and intermediate-risk (all remaining patients). Most of the patients belonged to the low- (33%) and intermediate-risk (49%) groups, whereas 18% were allocated to the high-risk group. The median PFS times for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 41.9 months, 31.1 months (HR=1.7; p=0.0018) and 18.7 months (HR=3.6; p<0.0001), respectively. The 3yr-overall survival (OS) decreased from 94% in the low-risk group to 80% (HR=4.6; p=0.0001) and 43% (HR=12.8; p<0.0001) in the intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively. These results were confirmed in the independent cohort of patients: From date of first ASCT, the median PFS times for the low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups were 43.3 months, 23.0 months (HR=1.5; p=0.015) and 13.8 months (HR=2.4; p=0.0003), respectively. The 4yr-OS decreased from 84% in the low-risk group to 71% (HR=2.1; p=0.0043) and 49% (HR=3.84; p<0.0001) in the intermediate- and high-risk groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: In our series, the ISS/FISH-based score/algorithm predicted PFS and OS much better than the ISS alone. Our results with molecular cytogenetic techniques may already have implications for the risk-adapted clinical management of patients with MM particularly in younger patients. Disclosures: van de Velde: Ortho Biotech Oncology Research & Development: Employment. Sonneveld:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: 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; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Imetelstat Treatment Leads to Durable Transfusion Independence (TI) in RBC Transfusion-Dependent (TD), Non-Del(5q) Lower Risk MDS Relapsed/Refractory to Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent (ESA) Who Are Lenalidomide (LEN) and HMA Naive

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-114877 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 463-463 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

David P. Steensma ◽

Uwe Platzbecker ◽

Koen Van Eygen ◽

Azra Raza ◽

Valeria Santini ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Lower Risk ◽

Research Funding ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Transfusion Independence ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Rbc Transfusion

Abstract BACKGROUND: Patients with TD lower-risk (LR)-MDS relapsed or refractory to ESA have limited treatment options. Imetelstat is a first-in-class telomerase inhibitor that targets cells with short telomere lengths and active telomerase, characteristics observed in some MDS patients. IMerge is an ongoing global study of imetelstat in RBC TD patients with LR-MDS (IPSS Low or Int-1). In the first 32 patients enrolled, 8-week TI rate was 34%, with 24-week TI of 16%, and HI-E of 59%. The most frequently reported adverse events were reversible grade ≥3 cytopenias (Fenaux et al EHA 2018 Abstr S1157). Higher response rates were observed in patients (n=13) who were LEN and HMA naïve without del(5q). We report here results in an additional 25 LEN and HMA naïve patients without del(5q), with longer term follow-up of the 13 initial patients meeting the same criteria. METHODS: IMerge is a phase 2/3 trial (NCT02598661) that includes LR-MDS patients with a high transfusion burden (≥4 units / 8 weeks) who are relapsed/refractory to ESA or have sEPO >500 mU/mL. The additional 25 were required to be LEN and HMA naïve and lack del(5q). Imetelstat 7.5 mg/kg was administered IV every 4 weeks. In addition to the key endpoints noted above, secondary endpoints include safety, time to and duration of TI. Biomarkers are also being explored, including telomerase activity, hTERT, telomere length, and genetic mutations. RESULTS: Overall, for the 38 LEN/HMA naïve and non-del(5q) patients, median age was 71.5 years and 66% were men. 63% of patients were IPSS Low and 37% Int-1. Median prior RBC transfusion burden was 8.0 (range 4-14) U, and 71% had WHO 2008 RARS or RCMD-RS. 9/37 (24%) patients with evaluable sEPO levels had baseline level >500 mU/mL. As of July 2018, with a median follow-up of 25.8 months for the initial 13 patients, and 5.2 months for the 25 recently included patients, the 8-week RBC-TI rate was 37% (14/38). Durability of 24-week TI responses was demonstrated, with a median duration of 10 months and the longest ongoing response now >2 years. Among the patients achieving durable TI, all showed a Hb rise of ≥3.0 g/dL compared to baseline during the transfusion-free interval. Response rates were similar in RARS/RCMD-RS (33% [9/27]) and other patients (27% [3/11]), and those with baseline EPO levels >500 mU/mL (33% [3/9]) and ≤500 mU/mL (32% [9/28]). Reversible grade ≥3 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were each reported in 58% of the patients. Liver function test (LFT) elevations were mostly grade 1/2. Reversible grade 3 LFTelevations were observed in 3 (8%) patients on study. An independent Hepatic Review Committee deemed the observed LFT elevations were not imetelstat-related hepatic toxicities. SUMMARY / CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort of 38 non-del(5q) LR-MDS patients with a high RBC transfusion burden who were ESA relapsed/refractory and naïve to LEN/HMA, single-agent imetelstat yielded a TI rate of 37%, with a median duration of 10 months and limited side effects. Durable responses were characterized by transfusion independence >24 weeks and accompanied by Hb rise. Updated data will be presented. Disclosures Steensma: Takeda: Consultancy; Syros: Research Funding; Otsuka: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onconova: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kura: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; H3 Biosciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Amphivena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Acceleron: Consultancy. Platzbecker:Celgene: Research Funding. Van Eygen:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Raza:Kura Oncology: Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Geoptix: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Syros: Research Funding. Santini:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Germing:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Font:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Samarina:Janssen: Research Funding. Díez-Campelo:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bussolari:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sherman:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sun:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Varsos:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rose:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:Roche: Honoraria; Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Crowdsourced High-Risk Classifiers for Multiple Myeloma Patients Commonly Identify PHF19 As a Robust Progression Biomarker

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-127362 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4370-4370

Author(s):

Michael J Mason ◽

Carolina D. Schinke ◽

Christine Eng ◽

Fadi Towfic ◽

Fred Gruber ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Gene Expression ◽

Multiple Myeloma ◽

High Risk ◽

Disease Progression ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Plasma Cells ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematological malignancy of terminally differentiated plasma cells residing within the bone marrow with 25,000-30,000 patients diagnosed in the United States each year. The disease's clinical course depends on a complex interplay chromosomal abnormalities and mutations within plasma cells and patient socio-demographic factors. Novel treatments extended the time to disease progression and overall survival for the majority of patients. However, a subset of 15%-20% of MM patients exhibit an aggressive disease course with rapid disease progression and poor overall survival regardless of treatment. Accurately predicting which patients are at high-risk is critical to designing studies with a better understanding of myeloma progression and enabling the discovery of novel therapeutics that extend the progression free period of these patients. To date, most MM risk models use patient demographic data, clinical laboratory results and cytogenetic assays to predict clinical outcome. High-risk associated cytogenetic alterations include deletion of 17p or gain of 1q as well as t(14;16), t(14;20), and most commonly t(4,14), which leads to juxtaposition of MMSET with the immunoglobulin heavy chain locus promoter, resulting in overexpression of the MMSET oncogene. While cytogenetic assays, in particular fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), are widely available, their risk prediction is sub-optimal and recently developed gene expression based classifiers predict more accurately rapid progression. To investigate possible improvements to models of myeloma risk, we organized the Multiple Myeloma DREAM Challenge, focusing on predicting high-risk, defined as disease progression or death prior to 18 months from diagnosis. This effort combined 4 discovery datasets providing participants with clinical, cytogenetic, demographic and gene expression data to facilitate model development while retaining 4 additional datasets, whose clinical outcome was not publicly available, in order to benchmark submitted models. This crowd-sourced effort resulted in the unbiased assessment of 171 predictive algorithms on the validation dataset (N = 823 unique patient samples). Analysis of top performing methods identified high expression of PHF19, a histone methyltransferase, as the gene most strongly associated with disease progression, showing greater predictive power than the expression level of the putative high-risk gene MMSET. We show that a simple 4 feature model composed of age, stage and the gene expression of PHF19 and MMSET is as accurate as much larger published models composed of over 50 genes combined with ISS and age. Results from this work suggest that combination of gene expression and clinical data increases accuracy of high risk models which would improve patient selection in the clinic. Disclosures Towfic: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dalton:MILLENNIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.: Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; John-Hopkins University: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Chugai: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Molecular Partners: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dietmar-Hopp-Stiftung: Research Funding; John-Hopkins University: Research Funding. Avet-Loiseau:takeda: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding. Ortiz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Trotter:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dervan:Celgene: Employment. Flynt:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dai:M2Gen: Employment. Bassett:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sonneveld:SkylineDx: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Shain:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi Genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy. Munshi:Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Oncopep: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Adaptive: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Morgan:Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation, Janssen: Research Funding; Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Celgene Corporation: Other: Travel expenses. Walker:Celgene: Research Funding. Thakurta:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Download Full-text

Real-World Risk Assessment and Treatment of Patients with Myelofibrosis at Community Oncology Practices in the United States

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-115294 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1765-1765

Author(s):

Srdan Verstovsek ◽

Jingbo Yu ◽

Jonathan K. Kish ◽

Dilan Chamikara Paranagama ◽

Jill Kaufman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Risk Assessment ◽

High Risk ◽

Risk Stratification ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Treatment Initiation ◽

Risk Classification ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction Myelofibrosis (MF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by marrow fibrosis, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and leukoerythroblastosis. Clinical manifestations include severe anemia, splenomegaly, and symptoms. Median survival in patients with primary MF ranges from 2 to 11 years, depending on risk categorization. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines recommend the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for risk stratification at diagnosis; other systems including the Dynamic IPSS (DIPSS) and the DIPSS-Plus are also cited in the Guidelines. Treatment recommendations are risk-adapted in the NCCN Guidelines. The objective of this study is to describe how patients are risk stratified at diagnosis by community hematologists/oncologists and the impact that risk stratification has on the initiation of MF-directed treatments. Methods Medical chart reviews were conducted at community hematology/oncology practices in the OPEN network. Adult patients diagnosed with primary MF, post-PV MF, or post-ET MF between 1/2012 and 12/2016 and receiving care for at least 6 months were included. Data were collected with an electronic case report form (eCRF) with questions on clinical characteristics (symptoms, Hgb, WBC, blast %, and PLT) and risk assessment method used at diagnosis (IPSS, DIPSS, or DIPSS-Plus), treatments, and outcomes. A data-derived IPSS risk score was calculated for each patient. To assess the accuracy of the assigned risk, a data-derived risk score, corresponding to the system used by the provider, was also calculated. Patients were classified as treated at diagnosis if they received MF-directed therapy (hydroxyurea, interferon, ruxolitinib, or clinical trial) or allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) within 120 days of diagnosis. The methods and rates of risk stratification, accuracy of the provider-assigned risk versus data-derived risk, and treatment administered were reported. Results A total of 338 patients with MF from 28 community hematology/oncology practices were included. Mean (SD) age at diagnosis was 65.3 (11.8) years, 51.8% were male, and 68.3% had primary MF. JAK2, MPL, and CALR mutations were tested in 86.1%, 70.1%, and 60.9% of patients at diagnosis, of these, 71.1%, 23.2%, and 14.6% were positive, respectively; 18.4% (38/206) were triple negative. Median follow-up from diagnosis was 27.5 months (IQR, 18.5-42.6). Approximately 32% of patients did not have a risk classification in their medical records at diagnosis. A scoring system was used for risk assignment in 45.3% of patients; DIPSS (23.0%) and IPSS (21.3%) were most commonly used. Of all 338 patients, the corresponding data-derived risk classifications were: 5.6% low, 20.1% int-1, 18.3% int-2, and 55.9% high risk. Among those patients who were not assigned risk by their treating physicians (n=108), most had int-1 (28.7%), int-2 (17.6%), or high risk (43.5%) disease based on the data-derived IPSS risk classification. Of those who received a risk classification from their treating physician, 47.4% (n=109) received an inaccurate risk classification; among these patients, the risk was under-estimated for most (82.6%) (Table 1). Overall, 55.8% of patients (63.2% low-risk, 55.9% int-1, 52.5% int-2, 56.1% high-risk) received MF-directed pharmacological treatment or HCT within 4 months of diagnosis. Among all patients receiving MF-directed treatment, the mean time from diagnosis to treatment initiation was 5.3 months (SD=1.8), and the most common first pharmacological treatments were ruxolitinib (49.8%) and hydroxyurea (46.7%). Splenomegaly (81.3%), symptoms (72.6%), and anemia (65.6%) were top cited indications for treatment initiation. The treatment initiation rate was higher among those patients correctly risk classified compared to those incorrectly classified (64.2% versus 49.5%, p=0.032). Conclusions Nearly one-third of patients with MF did not receive a risk classification at diagnosis. When risk was assigned, almost half were incorrectly classified. Just over half of patients received treatment within four months of diagnosis. Patients who were correctly risk classified at diagnosis were more likely to start treatment promptly upon diagnosis versus those incorrectly risk classified, which may be attributable to the under-estimation of risk. Disclosures Verstovsek: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yu:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kish:Cardinal Health: Employment. Paranagama:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kaufman:Cardinal Health: Employment. Chung:Cardinal Health: Employment. Grunwald:Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Research Funding; Alexion: 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; Medtronic: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cardinal Health: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding. Colucci:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mesa:UT Health San Antonio - Mays Cancer Center: Employment; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

A Pooled Overall Survival (OS) Analysis of 5-Year Data from the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II Trials of Ruxolitinib for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis (MF)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.3110.3110 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 3110-3110 ◽

Cited By ~ 6

Author(s):

Srdan Verstovsek ◽

Vikas Gupta ◽

Jason R. Gotlib ◽

Ruben A. Mesa ◽

Alessandro M. Vannucchi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Safety And Efficacy ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Background:The Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib has been evaluated for patients with MF in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. In both trials, ruxolitinib prolonged OS, reduced splenomegaly, and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life compared with controls. Here, we report the results of an exploratory pooled analysis of OS in the COMFORT studies at 5 years of follow-up. Methods: The double-blind COMFORT-I trial and the open-label COMFORT-II trial were randomized phase 3 studies that evaluated the safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate-2 (int-2) or high-risk primary MF (PMF), post-polycythemia vera MF (PPV-MF), or post-essential thrombocythemia MF (PET-MF). The comparator was placebo in COMFORT-I and best available therapy (BAT) in COMFORT-II. The ruxolitinib starting dose was 15 or 20 mg twice daily based on baseline platelet counts (100-200 and >200 × 109/L, respectively); dose modifications were permitted for safety and efficacy. Patients were allowed to cross over to ruxolitinib from the control arm for progressive splenomegaly, defined as a ≥25% increase in spleen volume from baseline (COMFORT-I) or study nadir (COMFORT-II), or select protocol-defined progression events; crossover was mandatory following treatment unblinding in COMFORT-I. OS was a secondary endpoint in both studies and was evaluated in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis using a Cox proportional hazard model that estimated the treatment effect stratified by clinical trial and International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk. The crossover-corrected treatment effect was estimated using a rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) method. Results: Overall, 528 patients were randomized: 301 to ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n=155; COMFORT-II, n=146) and 227 to placebo (n=154) or BAT (n=73). All ongoing patients in the control arms crossed over to ruxolitinib by the 3-year follow-up. Patient populations were similar between the two trials and their details were previously published. In the combined ruxolitinib group, 162 patients (53.8%) had high-risk MF and 139 (46.2%) had int-2 risk MF based on IPSS criteria. At the 5-year ITT analysis, 128 patients (42.5%) died in the ruxolitinib group compared with 117 (51.5%) in the control group. The risk of death was reduced by 30% with ruxolitinib compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 45.9 mo; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.91; P=0.0065; Figure A). After correcting for crossover using RPSFT, OS advantage was more pronounced for patients originally randomized to ruxolitinib (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 27 mo; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.23-0.59; Figure B). An analysis of OS censoring patients at the time of crossover also demonstrated that ruxolitinib prolonged survival compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 28.3 mo; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36−0.78; P=0.0013; Figure C). Among all patients treated with ruxolitinib, those with lower-risk disease had longer survival compared with those with high-risk disease (median OS: int-2, not reached [estimated, 102 mo]; high-risk, 50 mo; HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.95-4.20; P<0.0001; Figure D). In a subgroup analysis, OS favored ruxolitinib compared with placebo for patients with int-2 or high-risk MF (data not shown). At 5 years, median OS appeared to favor patients with int-2 (n=58) or high-risk (n=89) PMF who were originally randomized to ruxolitinib compared with historical (Cervantes et al; J Clin Oncol 30:2981-2987) controls (int-2 PMF, not reached [estimated, 70 mo] vs 48 mo; high-risk PMF, 34 vs 27 mo); OS was longer among patients with int-2 vs high-risk PMF (P=0.0003). Subgroup analyses showed that ruxolitinib provided an OS advantage regardless of age (>65 or ≤65 y), sex, disease type (PMF, PPV-MF, PET-MF), risk status (int-2 or high), JAK2V617F mutation status, baseline spleen volume (>10 or ≤10 cm), anemia, white blood cell count (>25 or ≤25 × 109L), or platelet count (>200 or ≤200 × 109/L). Conclusion: Long-term treatment with ruxolitinib up to 5 years prolonged survival in patients with MF compared with BAT or placebo. Corrections for patients who crossed over to ruxolitinib suggested that the separation between ruxolitinib and control OS curves was primarily caused by a delay in ruxolitinib treatment. The results suggest that earlier treatment with ruxolitinib may provide a greater survival advantage for patients with MF. Disclosures Gupta: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Cervantes:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: 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. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dong:Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

A Phase 2a Study of the LSD1 Inhibitor Img-7289 (bomedemstat) for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-123244 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 556-556 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Kristen Pettit ◽

Aaron T. Gerds ◽

Abdulraheem Yacoub ◽

Justin M. Watts ◽

Maciej Tartaczuch ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Platelet Count ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Spleen Volume ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Once Daily ◽

Equity Ownership

Ruxolitinib (Jakafi®) is the one approved therapy for myelofibrosis (MF) based on reduction of splenomegaly and symptoms but JAK inhibition has not proven to significantly modify disease progression. There remains the need for novel therapies with distinct modes of action that can improve the patient experience of MF and impact progression. Lysine-specific demethylase, LSD1, is an epigenetic enzyme critical for self-renewal of malignant myeloid cells and differentiation of myeloid progenitors. LSD1 bound to GFI1b permits maturation of progenitors to megakaryocytes and enables their normal function. IMG-7289 (bomedemstat) is an orally available LSD1 inhibitor. In mouse models of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), IMG-7289 reduced elevated peripheral cell counts, spleen size, inflammatory cytokines, mutant allele frequencies, and marrow fibrosis (Jutzi et al. 2018) supporting its clinical development. IMG-7289-CTP-102 is an ongoing, multi-center, open-label study that recently transitioned from a Phase 1/2a dose-range finding study to a Phase 2b study of IMG-7289 administered orally once-daily in adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF resistant to or intolerant of ruxolitinib. The key objectives are safety, PD, changes in spleen volume (MRI/CT) and total symptoms scores (TSS) using the MPN-SAF instrument. Inclusion criteria included a platelet count ≥100K/μL. Bone marrow (BM) biopsies and imaging studies (both centrally-read) were conducted at baseline and during washout (post-Day 84). The MPN-SAF was self-administered weekly. Phase 1/2a patients were treated for 84 days followed by a washout of up to 28 days. Patients demonstrating clinical benefit could resume treatment for additional 12 week cycles. Dosing was individually tailored using platelet count as a biomarker of effective thrombopoiesis. Patients were started at a presumed sub-therapeutic dose of 0.25 mg/kg/d and up-titrated weekly until the platelet count rested between 50 and 100K/μL. This preliminary analysis includes 20 patients; 18 enrolled in the Phase 1/2a study, 2 in the Phase 2b portion. 50% had PMF, 35% Post-ET-MF, 15% Post-PV-MF. The median age was 65 (48-89) with 70% males. The median baseline platelet count was 197 k/μL (102-1309k/μL). 12 patients (56%) were transfusion-dependent at baseline. Sixty percent were IPSS-classified as high risk, the remainder, intermediate risk-2. 71% had more than 1 mutation of the 261 AML/MPN genes sequenced of which 63% were high molecular risk (ASXL1, U2AF1, SRSF2) mutations; 31% had abnormal karyotypes. Sixteen patients completed the first 12 weeks; 4 patients withdrew, one due to fatigue (Day 33), one for progressive disease (Day 39), one due to physician decision (Day 76), one for an unrelated SAE of cellulitis (Day 83). All patients were up-titrated from the starting dose 0.25 mg/kg to an average daily dose of 0.89 mg/kg ± 0.20 mg/kg, the dose needed to achieve the target platelet count range; 17 achieved the target platelet range in a mean time of 45 days. Of patients evaluable for response after cycle 1 in Phase1/2a (N=14), 50% had a reduction in spleen volume from baseline (median SVR: -14%; -2% to -30%). Further, 79% (N=11) recorded a reduction in TSS (mean change -28%; -13% to -69%); for 21% of patients (N=3), the change was >-50%. Improved BM fibrosis scores at Day 84 were observed in 2/13 patients. Two patients had improvement in transfusion requirements. Plasma IL-8 levels were significantly elevated in 6/14 patients at baseline and dropped in a dose-dependent manner over 21 days in 5/6 patients. The mean duration of treatment is 166 days (14-539) at the census point in this ongoing study. Nineteen patients (95%) reported 358 AEs of which 22 were SAEs. Of the SAEs, 2 were deemed by investigators as possibly related: painful splenomegaly and heart failure. There have been no safety signals, DLTs, progression to AML, or deaths. This is the first clinical study of an LSD1 inhibitor in patients with MPNs. Once-daily IMG-7289 was well-tolerated in a heterogeneous population of patients with advanced MF and limited therapeutic options. Despite under-dosing and slow dose escalation, IMG-7289 improved symptom burdens in most patients and modestly reduced spleen volumes in a subset of patients. The Phase 2b 24-week expansion study with more aggressive dosing aimed at preserving safety and enhancing efficacy is open for enrollment in the US, UK and EU. Figure Disclosures Pettit: Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding. Gerds:Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy. Yacoub:Hylapharm: Equity Ownership; Agios: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ardelyx: Equity Ownership; Cara: Equity Ownership; Dynavax: Equity Ownership. Watts:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Bradley:AbbVie: Other: Advisory Board. Shortt:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Astex: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau. Natsoulis:Imago BioSciences: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Jones:Imago BioSciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Talpaz:Samus Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; Imago BioSciences: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding. Peppe:Imago BioSciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ross:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rienhoff:Imago Biosciences: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties.

Download Full-text

Phase 1b Dose-Escalation Study of Sonidegib (LDE225) in Combination with Ruxolitinib (INC424) in Patients with Myelofibrosis

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.712.712 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 712-712 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Vikas Gupta ◽

Steffen Koschmieder ◽

Claire N. Harrison ◽

Francisco Cervantes ◽

Florian H Heidel ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Dose Level ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 1B ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Level 2

Abstract Background: Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, has been shown to effectively reduce splenomegaly, manage myelofibrosis (MF)-related symptoms, and improve survival, but has limited anticlonal activity. Inhibition of hedgehog signaling via therapy with sonidegib, a selective inhibitor of smoothened (SMO), in combination with ruxolitinib reduced white blood cell (WBC) and platelet counts, JAK2 mutant allele burden, and bone marrow (BM) fibrosis in preclinical MF models more than ruxolitinib alone (Bhagwat, ASH 2013). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of sonidegib in combination with ruxolitinib for patients (pts) with MF is being assessed in the phase 1b portion of this phase 1b/2 study (NCT01787552). The safety-expansion cohort is currently ongoing; updated data will be presented. Methods: Adults with primary or secondary (post–polycythemia vera or –essential thrombocythemia) intermediate- or high-risk MF with palpable splenomegaly not previously treated with JAK or SMO inhibitors were eligible. Pts received oral doses of sonidegib once daily (QD) and ruxolitinib twice daily (BID). The first dose level enrolled was sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 10 mg BID. Dose escalations were guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model. In addition to safety and pharmacokinetics (PK), spleen length was assessed by palpation at screening, wk 1, every 2 wk until wk 13, monthly after wk 13, and at the end of treatment. BM fibrosis was assessed in biopsies collected every 24 wk. Results: As of March 26, 2014, 23 pts (16 male) with a median age of 67 y (range, 42-77 y) were treated at 3 dose levels (1: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 10 mg BID [n = 8]; 2: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 15 mg BID [n = 10]; 3: sonidegib 400 mg QD + ruxolitinib 20 mg BID [n = 5]). Median (range) levels for hemoglobin, platelet count, and WBC count at baseline (BL) were 102 g/L (64-142 g/L), 232 × 109/L (81-900 × 109/L) and 21 x 109/L (2-59 x 109/L), respectively. Median (range) palpable spleen size at BL was 13 cm (5-38 cm) below costal margin. According to the International Prognosis Scoring System, 5, 7, and 11 pts were intermediate-1, intermediate-2, and high-risk, respectively. At data cutoff, 4 pts had discontinued treatment due to an adverse event (AE), physician decision, progressive disease, or patient decision (n = 1 each). PK parameters and trough levels for both agents generally aligned with single-agent data. Fatigue was the most commonly reported AE regardless of causality (Table). Six serious AEs were reported, 4 at dose level 1 (face edema, hyponatremia, pyrexia, right ventricular failure; n = 1 each) and 2 at dose level 2 (blood creatine kinase [CK] increased; n = 2). Dose-limiting toxicities of grade 3 and 4 CK elevations were reported in 2 pts at dose level 2. At data cutoff, 65% of pts achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in palpable spleen length from BL and 9 pts had resolution of splenomegaly. Conclusions: The evaluated combination doses of sonidegib and ruxolitinib were generally well tolerated in pts with MF, and preliminary efficacy data appear promising. Sonidegib and ruxolitinib in combination did not appear to affect the PK of either agent. Once the MTD and/or RP2D are determined, the safety and efficacy of this combination will be further evaluated in the phase 2 study. Abstract 712. Table.Dose Level 1Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 10 mg BID(n = 8)Dose Level 2Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 15 mg BID(n = 10)Dose Level 3Sonidegib 400 mg QD +Ruxolitinib 20 mg BID(n = 5)All(N = 23)AEs of any cause reported in > 10% of all pts, n (%)AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4AllGrade 3/4Fatigue5 (63)1 (13)3 (30)0008 (35)1 (4)Anemia5 (63)5 (63)00005 (22)5 (22)Dysgeusia3 (38)02 (20)0005 (22)0Abdominal pain2 (25)02 (20)01 (20)05 (22)0Alopecia1 (13)04 (40)0005 (22)0Muscle spasms1 (13)04 (40)1 (10)005 (22)1 (4)Thrombocytopenia2 (25)1 (13)1 (10)01 (20)04 (17)1 (4)Diarrhea3 (38)01 (10)0004 (17)0Hyponatremia2 (25)2 (25)1 (10)1 (10)003 (13)3 (13)Blood CK increased1 (13)02 (20)2 (20)003 (13)2 (9)Muscular weakness1 (13)02 (20)1 (10)003 (13)1 (4)Aspartate aminotransferase increased002 (20)1 (10)1 (20)03 (13)1 (4)Decreased appetite3 (38)000003 (13)0Nausea2 (25)01 (10)0003 (13)0Constipation2 (25)01 (10)0003 (13)0Asthenia1 (13)02 (20)0003 (13)0Upper respiratory tract infection1 (13)02 (20)0003 (13)0Headache003 (30)0003 (13)0Myalgia003 (30)0003 (13)0Alanine aminotransferase increased002 (20)01 (20)03 (13)0 Disclosures Gupta: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Koschmieder:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Travel, Accomodation, Expenses Other; Novartis Foundation: Research Funding. Harrison:SBio: Consultancy; Gilead: Honoraria; CTI: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Cervantes:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Heidel:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Drummond:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Rey:Novartis: Consultancy. Hurh:Novartis NIBR: Employment. Bao:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Rampersad:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kalambakas:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Overall Survival in Older Patients with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) with >30% Bone Marrow Blasts Treated with Azacitidine By Cytogenetic Risk Status: Results of the AZA-AML-001 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.621.621 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 621-621 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Hartmut Döhner ◽

John F Seymour ◽

Aleksandra Butrym ◽

Agnieszka Wierzbowska ◽

Dominik Selleslag ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Bone Marrow ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Risk Groups ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Poor Risk ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: Overall survival (OS) in older patients (pts) with AML and poor-risk cytogenetics is only ~2-3 months (mos) (Burnett, Cancer, 2007). Often these pts receive only palliative treatment (Tx) with best supportive care (BSC). Low-dose Ara-C (LDAC) provides no OS benefit in pts with poor cytogenetics (Döhner, Blood, 2010). Typically, intensive chemotherapy (IC) is either not suitable for older AML pts with poor cytogenetics or, when it is used, provides no OS benefit (Kantarjian, Blood, 2010). The phase 3, multicenter, randomized, open-label AZA-AML-001 trial showed azacitidine (AZA) Tx in older pts with newly diagnosed AML (>30% bone marrow [BM] blasts) prolonged median OS by ~4 mos vs conventional care regimens (CCR) (10.4 vs 6.5 mos; p=0.1009) and improved 1-year survival (46.5% vs 34.2%) (Dombret, EHA, 2014). Cytogenetic risk is a prognostic indicator in elderly AML and a frequent determinant of Tx approach and outcomes. Objective: To determine the effect of Tx with AZA vs CCR on OS and 1-year survival in AZA-AML-001 pt subgroups based on cytogenetic risk classification. Methods: Pts aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed de novo or secondary AML who were ineligible for transplant, with intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics (pts with favorable cytogenetics were excluded from study), ECOG performance status 0-2, and WBC count ≤15x109/L, were eligible. Before randomization, each pt was preselected to receive 1 of 3 commonly used CCR for older pts with AML, per investigator choice: IC (standard 7+3 regimen), LDAC (20 mg SC BID x 10 days/28-day cycle), or BSC only. Pts were then randomized to AZA (75 mg/m2/day SC x 7 days/28-day cycle) or to CCR, in which case they received their preselected Tx. The primary endpoint was OS. Cytogenetic risk groups were assessed per NCCN criteria by central review: intermediate (INT; all cases), intermediate with normal karyotype (cytogenetic normal [CN]), and poor. Survival at 1 year was compared between Tx. Median OS for AZA vs CCR was calculated using Kaplan-Meier methods, hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined by unstratified Cox proportional hazards model, and p values by log-rank test. Results: In all, 488 pts were randomized, 241 to AZA and 247 to CCR. Cytogenetic risk was balanced between Tx groups: 315 pts had INT-risk cytogenetics (AZA n=155 [64%], CCR n=160 [65%]), including 218 who were CN (AZA n=113 [73%], CCR n=105 [66%]), and 170 pts had poor-risk cytogenetics (AZA n=85 [35%], CCR n=85 [34%]). Within each of the 3 cytogenetic risk subgroups, the distribution of pts receiving individual CCR was very consistent: ~18% of each cytogenetic risk subgroup received BSC, ~64% received LDAC, and ~18% received IC. Baseline characteristics were generally balanced among the AZA and CCR Tx arms and the 3 cytogenetic risk groups (Table). At baseline, proportionately more pts with poor-risk cytogenetics in the AZA group were aged ≥75 years (57.6% vs 47.1% with CCR) and more pts in the CCR group had AML with myelodysplastic changes (45.9% vs 37.6% with AZA). Median OS (95%CI) in poor-risk pts was significantly prolonged with AZA vs CCR: 6.4 mos (4.2, 8.1) vs 3.2 mos (2.2, 4.7), respectively; HR=0.68 (0.50, 0.94), p=0.019 (Figure). Median OS in INT-risk pts was 13.0 mos (11.2, 16.3) vs 10.1 mos (7.1, 13.3) with AZA vs CCR; HR=0.90 (0.70, 1.16), p=0.41. Median OS in the CN subgroup was 14.1 mos (12.6, 19.5) vs 10.0 mos (6.4, 13.3); HR=0.81 (0.59, 1.10), p=0.18. Estimated 1-year survival was higher with AZA vs CCR in all cytogenetic risk subgroups. Twice the proportion of AZA-treated pts in the poor-risk subgroup were alive at 1 year vs. CCR pts (30.9% vs 14.0%, respectively), a clinically meaningful difference of 16.9% (95%CI 4.4, 29.5). Similarly, in the CN subgroup, 60.7% vs 44.1% of pts were alive at 1 year in the AZA and CCR groups, a difference of 16.5% (3.2, 29.8). AZA effect on 1-year survival in the INT-risk subgroup was also favorable (55.2% vs 45.5% with CCR) (difference 9.7% [-1.4, 20.8]). Grade 3-4 hematologic adverse event rates with AZA were consistent with previous reports (Santini, Eur J Haematol, 2010), with no meaningful differences among all cytogenetic risk groups. Conclusions: Median OS in older pts with AML and poor-risk cytogenetics was meaningfully improved with AZA compared with the CCR currently used for AML, with those pts receiving AZA twice as likely to be alive at 1 year as those treated with CCR. Figure 1 Figure 1. Figure 2 Figure 2. Disclosures Döhner: Celgene: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Use of azacitidine in AML with blast count >30%. Seymour:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Wierzbowska:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Selleslag:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cavenagh:Celgene: Honoraria. Kumar:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schuh:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Candoni:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Récher:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sandhu:Celgene: Honoraria. Bernal del Castillo:Celgene: Consultancy. Al-Ali:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Martinelli:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy. Falantes:Celgene: Consultancy. Stone:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Minden:Celgene: Honoraria. McIntyre:Celgene: Employment. Songer:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lucy:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Beach:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dombret:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Results from Ongoing Phase 2 Trial of SL-401 As Consolidation Therapy in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) in Remission with High Relapse Risk Including Minimal Residual Disease (MRD)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.215.215 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 215-215 ◽

Cited By ~ 14

Author(s):

Andrew A. Lane ◽

Kendra L. Sweet ◽

Eunice S. Wang ◽

William B. Donnellan ◽

Roland B. Walter ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Residual Disease ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Trial ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Stage 1 ◽

Risk Of Relapse

Abstract Background: SL-401 is a novel targeted therapy directed to the interleukin-3 receptor (CD123), a target overexpressed on acute myeloid leukemia (AML) blasts and AML cancer stem cells (CSCs), and a variety of additional hematologic malignancies. While conventional chemotherapy can induce remission in a majority of treatment-naive AML patients, relapse rates remain high. Outcomes are particularly poor when minimal residual disease (MRD), as determined by genetic and/or flow cytometric analyses, remains after therapy, with high rates of relapse and short disease-free survival. Conceivably, a therapy directed at lowering MRD burden may improve long-term outcomes. Given the association of MRD with CD123+ AML CSCs, SL-401 is being evaluated in patients with AML in first or second complete remission (CR1 or CR2, respectively) with high risk of relapse including persistent MRD. Preliminary results are reported here. Methods & Results: This multicenter, single-arm Phase 2 trial of AML patients in CR1 or CR2 with high risk of relapse includes a lead-in (stage 1) and expansion (stage 2). In stage 1, patients (MRD+ or MRD-) receive SL-401 as a daily IV infusion at 7, 9, or 12 ug/kg/day for days 1- 5 of a 28 day cycle in a 3x3 design. In stage 2, patients (MRD+ only) receive SL-401 at the dose determined in stage 1. Presence of MRD for eligibility requires either molecular (by cytogenetics, FISH, PCR, or next-generation sequencing of AML-associated mutations) or multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) evidence of persistent abnormalities in the setting of morphologic CR. In stage 2, MRD assessment will include MFC of bone marrow aspirates conducted at a central laboratory for uniformity. Objectives include characterization of SL-401 safety with determination of the maximum tolerated or tested dose, and preliminary assessment of efficacy including changes in MRD burden and response duration. As of 7/27/16, stage 1 has been completed and stage 2 is open for enrollment. Nine patients (stage 1) received SL-401 (7 ug/kg, n=3; 9 ug/kg, n=3; 12ug/kg, n=3). The median age was 63 years (range: 51-78 years); 6 males and 3 females were treated; 8 patients were in CR1 and 1 patient was in CR2 at enrollment. The 12 ug/kg dose level was the highest tested dose with no DLTs; MTD was not reached. The most common treatment-related AEs, all grades, were thrombocytopenia (3/9; 33%) and hypoalbuminemia (3/9; 33%); the most common ≥ grade 3 treatment-related AE was thrombocytopenia (1/9; 11%); there was no DLT. Patients treated at all doses received 1+ to 5+ cycles (ongoing) of SL-401, including 3 MRD+ patients treated at 7 ug/kg (n=1) or 9 ug/kg (n=2) who received 1-5 cycles, and 1 MRD+ patient treated at 12 ug/kg who is receiving ongoing SL-401 for 4+ cycles. For all 3 patients treated at 12 ug/kg (MRD+, n=1; MRD-, n=2), 2 patients remain on SL-401 and have received 1+ and 4+ cycles (both ongoing); one other patient treated at 12 ug/kg discontinued the study because of infection unrelated to study drug. Notably, the one MRD+ patient treated at 12 ug/kg (ongoing at 4+ cycles) had marked MRD reduction as determined by MFC at the local institution; this patient is being considered for stem cell transplant (SCT). Conclusions: Stage 1 is complete without DLT or MTD, and stage 2 (expansion) is open to enroll AML patients in CR1 or CR2 who are MRD+ at the highest tested dose of 12 ug/kg. The safety profile has been similar to that observed in other SL-401 clinical studies, with no unexpected AEs. Targeting MRD with SL-401 has the potential to reduce this chemo-resistant cell population and offer improved long-term outcomes for AML patients in remission with high risk of relapse. Updated data will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02270463. Disclosures Lane: N-of-1: Consultancy; Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding. Sweet:Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Wang:Immunogen: Research Funding; Incyte: Speakers Bureau. Stein:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Stemline Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Argios: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Carraway:Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Speakers Bureau. Prebet:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Chen:Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lindsay:Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shemesh:Stemline Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Brooks:Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Stone:Novartis: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celator: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy. Jabbour:ARIAD: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Konopleva:Cellectis: Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding.

Download Full-text