scholarly journals Updated Results of a Phase II Randomized Study (ROMULUS) of Polatuzumab Vedotin or Pinatuzumab Vedotin Plus Rituximab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 4457-4457 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franck Morschhauser ◽  
Ian Flinn ◽  
Ranjana H Advani ◽  
Catherine S. Diefenbach ◽  
Kathryn Kolibaba ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Previously reported results from an ongoing study of polatuzumab vedotin (PoV) and pinatuzumab vedotin (PiV), antibody drug conjugates (ADC) containing the anti-mitotic MMAE targeting CD79b (PoV) and CD22 (PiV), showed clinical activity in combination with rituximab (R) in relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and follicular lymphoma (FL). Here we report updated results of ADC + R at the RP2D of 2.4 mg/kg and initial results of PoV + R in r/r FL at the PoV dose of 1.8 mg/kg. Methods: Pts were randomized to receive PoV or PiV + R (ADC 2.4 mg/kg + R 375 mg/m2). In a separate non-randomized cohort (Cohort C), r/r FL pts were treated with PoV (1.8 mg/kg) + R. ADC + R was given every 21 days. Tumor assessments were performed every 3 months. Results: As of 21 February 2014, 59 pts received PoV + R (39 DLBCL; 20 FL), 63 PiV + R (42 DLBCL; 21 FL); 20 r/r FL pts were treated in Cohort C. Median time of follow-up was 10 mo. for PoV + R, 9 mo. for PiV + R, and 5 mo. for Cohort C. Median prior therapies [DLBCL, 3 (1-10); FL, 2 (1-8)] were balanced among the randomized treatment (tx) arms, median prior therapies in Cohort C was 2 (1-13); overall 44% were R refractory. Median tx cycles in DLBCL: 6 PoV (range 1-16) and 7 PiV (1-15); FL: 10 PoV (3-17), 7 PiV (1-14), and 6 Cohort C (2-10). Overall safety profiles of both regimens in the randomized arms receiving 2.4 mg/kg ADC were similar. The most common tx-emergent adverse events (AE) ≥25%: fatigue (55%), diarrhea (43%), nausea (37%), peripheral neuropathy (PN) (39%), neutropenia (27%), constipation (26%), sensory PN (25%), and decreased appetite (25%). Grade ≥ 3 AE >3%: neutropenia (24%), diarrhea (6%), dyspnea (5%), febrile neutropenia (4%), hyperglycemia (4%), fatigue (3%), and thrombocytopenia (3%). Serious AEs were reported in 43% and 36% of PiV and PoV treated pts, respectively. Discontinuation of study treatment for AE was reported in 49% and 41% of PiV and PoV treated pts, respectively. Thirty-five pts discontinued treatment due to PN with a median time to discontinuation of 5.6 mo. PN reversibility was observed following treatment interruptions and ADC dose modifications. Two of 9 Grade 5 AEs (sepsis, urosepsis) were attributed to CD22 ADC; no Grade 5 AEs were attributed to CD79b ADC. In Cohort C the most common tx-emergent AE ≥ 25%: fatigue (55%), nausea (45%), neutropenia (40%), sensory PN (30%), diarrhea (25%), constipation (25%) and pyrexia (25%). Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was reported in 7 pts; no other Grade ≥ 3 AE was reported in >1 pt. Serious AE were reported in 5 pts. Two pts discontinued study treatment for AE. No Grade 5 AEs were reported. Overall response rate (ORR), complete (CR) and partial (PR) response rates, n (%) [95% CI], and median PFS in DLBCL (95% CI) are shown in the table. Median PFS in the FL cohorts are not reported due to insufficient follow-up duration. Table PoV (CD79b) + R PiV (CD22) + R PoV [1.8 mg/kg] + R (Cohort C) R/R DLBCL ORR CR PR mPFS (mo.) N=39 22 (56%) [41, 71] 6 (15%) [7, 30] 16 (41%) [26, 58] 5.4 (2.8-8.4) N=42 24 (57%) [41, 72] 10 (24%) [12, 39] 14 (33%) [20, 48] 5.2 (4.1-NR) N/A R/R FL ORR CR PR N=20 14 (70%) [47, 86] 8 (40%) [21, 64] 6 (30%) [14, 53] N=21 13 (62%) [40, 80] 2 (10%) [2, 30] 11 (52%) [30, 72] N=16 7 (44%) [20, 70] 0 7 (44%) [20, 70] Pharmacokinetic profiles were similar for both ADCs across DLBCL and FL with no free MMAE accumulation. Pts receiving PoV at 1.8 mg/kg had proportionately lower exposure of antibody conjugated MMAE compared to pts treated at the 2.4 mg/kg dose level. Conclusions: PoV and PiV + R were generally well-tolerated with similar toxicity profiles. Neutropenia, PN, and diarrhea were the principal toxicities. Similar efficacy was observed with both ADCs in heavily pretreated pts with DLBCL. The higher CR rate with PoV + R compared to PiV + R suggests greater clinical activity in r/r FL. Lower overall response rates were observed in r/r FL pts treated with a lower dose of PoV. Results based on longer follow-up to further assess differences in safety and tolerability between the two PoV doses in r/r FL will be presented. Additional data of pts who received crossover ADC + R treatment following documented disease progression on initial ADC + R treatment will also be presented. Combination studies of PoV + R with chemotherapy and with ADC schedules to reduce PN are ongoing or in planning. Disclosures Morschhauser: Genentech/roche: Honoraria, travel grants Other; Celgene: advisory boards, advisory boards Other, Honoraria. Off Label Use: obinutuzumab and lenlidomide in relapsed follicular lymphoma. Flinn:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Advani:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Diefenbach:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Press:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Chen:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salles:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Tilly:Genentech, inc.: Research Funding. Cheson:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Assouline:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hagenbeek:millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zinzani:Genentech, inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Yalamanchili:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Lu:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Jones:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Jones:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Chu:Genentech, inc.: Employment. Sharman:Gen: Research Funding.

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2979-2979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carla Casulo ◽  
Juan-Manuel Sancho ◽  
Koen Van Eygen ◽  
Sven de Vos ◽  
Santiago Mercadal ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Duvelisib is an oral, dual inhibitor of PI3K-d,γ, in development for the treatment of hematologic malignancies, including follicular lymphoma (FL). Duvelisib disrupts PI3K-d,γ-mediated signaling within tumor cells and their interactions with the tumor microenvironment, hindering hematologic tumor cell survival. Data from a Phase 1 study of duvelisib indicate the potential for duvelisib to be an effective treatment for FL, with an acceptable safety profile. CONTEMPO (NCT02391545), is designed to evaluate the safety and clinical activity of duvelisib in combination with rituximab (DR) or obinutuzumab (DO) in patients (pts) with previously-untreated CD20+ FL. Methods: In CONTEMPO, duvelisib is administered at 25 mg BID continuously in 28-day treatment cycles, combined either with rituximab (375 mg/m2 for 4 weekly doses, then 1 dose every 2 cycles) or obinutuzumab (1000 mg for 4 weekly doses, then 1 dose every 2 cycles). Pts are assigned 1:1 into the two parallel treatment arms. Key inclusion criteria include: diagnosis of previously-untreated CD20+ FL, Stage II with bulky disease (≥ 7 cm lesion), or Stage III-IV disease, at least 1 measurable disease lesion > 1.5 cm, adequate liver and renal function, and no clinical evidence of transformation to a more aggressive subtype of lymphoma or Grade 3B FL. Prophylaxis for herpes (HSV/VZV) is recommended. For pts with a history of CMV infection requiring treatment, prophylaxis and monitoring of reactivation is recommended. The original protocol mandated PJP prophylaxis when CD4 counts were ≤ 200 cells/mm3, and was subsequently amended to include all pts. Disease response assessments (CT scans and physical exams) occur on Day 1 of Cycle 4 (C4), C8, C12, C16, C20, and C26. Results: As of 19 July 2016 (data cut-off), 28 pts received DR and 27 received DO. For DR pts, the median age was 58 years, most were male (64%), 21% had Gr 1 and 64% Gr 2 disease at baseline, and 54% had bone marrow involvement. Median time from diagnosis was 2.3 months. For DO pts, the median age was 58 years, most were female (59%), 48% had Gr 1 and 30% Gr 2 disease at baseline, and 59% had bone marrow involvement. Median time from diagnosis was 2.6 months. DR pts were on treatment for a median of 3.9 months, DO pts for 4.5 months. The overall response rate (ORR) per IWG criteria for DR was 87% and for DO was 91% (see table) The rate of AEs for DR pts was 93%, with 50% having a ≥ Gr 3 AE. 64% of DR pts had an AE leading to duvelisib dose modification (reduction or hold), while 14% discontinued duvelisib due to an AE. The most common ≥ Gr 3 AEs on DR (> 2 pts) were ALT increased (21%) and rash (14%). The rate of ≥ Gr 3 infections was 11%, including PJP (n=2; no prophylaxis, pre-amendment), followed by lung infection and pneumococcal pneumonia (1 pt, each). One PJP case resolved and the pt continued on study. The second PJP case resolved, however the pt had a subsequent fatal event of acute respiratory distress, the only fatal AE on study. The rate of AEs for DO pts was 89%, with 70% of pts having a ≥ Gr 3 AE. 63% of DO pts had an AE leading to duvelisib dose modification (reduction or hold), while 7% discontinued duvelisib due to an AE. Most common ≥ Gr 3 AEs (> 2pts) on DO were neutropenia (19%), ALT increased (15%), and AST increased (11%). The rate of ≥ Gr 3 infections was 15%, including conjunctivitis, RSV pneumonia, pyelonephritis, and septic shock (1 pt, each). No pts on DO died due to an AE. Conclusions: Preliminary clinical activity with DR (87% ORR, 22% CR) and DO (91% ORR, 18% CR) supports the potential role of duvelisib in combination with an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody as initial treatment for pts with FL. The safety profile was manageable with appropriate risk mitigation measures, suggesting further investigation of these combinations may be warranted. Disclosures Casulo: Celgene: Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sancho:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gyan:Amgen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Fresenius Kabi: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding. Steelman:Infinity: Employment. Pearlberg:Infinity: Employment. Goy:Genentech: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Writing support, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4158-4158 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Le Gouill ◽  
Franck Morschhauser ◽  
Krimo Bouabdallah ◽  
Guillaume Cartron ◽  
Rene-Olivier Casasnovas ◽  
...  

Abstract Background. Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) drug resistance are highly dependent on B-cell-receptor signaling, Bcl-2 and the microenvironment. Ibrutinib inhibits both tumor cell proliferation and binding to the microenvironment. Venetoclax is a Bcl-2 inhibitor and Bcl-2 family members like Mcl-1 and Bcl-xL confers resistance to Venetoclax and are upregulated by the tumor microenvironment but downregulated by Ibrutinib (Touzeau, 2011, Chiron, 2015). Ibrutinib plus venetoclax has recently demonstrated high efficacy in relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL (Tam et al NEJM 2018). Preclinical investigations show that microenvironment-dependent long-term expansion and drug resistance to venetoclax are counteracted by obinutuzumab (type II glycoengineered humanized anti-CD20 antibody) and obinutuzumab/venetoclax/ibrutinib is highly active against primary MCL cells. (Chiron Blood 2016). All together these findings gave the rational to investigate Obinutuzumab/Ibrutinib (step A) and Obinutuzumab/Venetoclax/Ibrutinib (step B) combinations. The OAsIs trial (NCT02558816) has been designed to assess the safety, tolerability and efficacy of these two combos in R/R MCL. DLTs were assessed during the first 2 months (step A) and 3 months (step B) of treatment. Methods: Oasis is a multicenter, non-randomized, phase I study. Step A evaluates the safety of obinutuzumab (1000mg IV C1D1, 8,15, C2-6 D1 and every 2 months until C24) plus Ibrutinib (560mg/d until progression) (n=9). Step B primary objective is to determine the MTD of obinutuzumab/venetoclax/ibrutinib. Venetoclax is administered from C2 (C2W1 100mg/d, C2W2 200mg/d, C2W3 400mg/d and C2W4-C6: 400, 600 or 800mg/d). A continual reassessment method is used to allocate venetoclax doses (3 patients-pts- per dose-level). Enrolment in step A and B for R/R MCL started in November 2015 and October 2016, respectively. Results. Step A (Obinutuzumab/Ibrutinib) (n=9). Median age at inclusion was 64y (range 58-82) and median lines of treatment prior to inclusion is 1 (1-4), including ASCT in 7 patients and allo-SCT in one case. Median time from diagnosis to C1D1 is 46.5m (18.4-103). Two pts presented with blastoid variant. One of nine step A patients presented TP53 mutation. Median time from diagnosis to C1D1 is 46.5m (18.5-103). During the first 3 months of treatment, there was no clinically relevant non-hematological grade 3-4 AEs. Eight grade 3-4 hematological AEs were reported in 4 pts (lymphopenia 4 ; neutropenia 4 ; thrombocytopenia 1). One patient progressed at end of C2 and died few weeks later while 7 (87%) were in CR according to Lugano criteria at end of C6. MRD status was assessed by ASO qPCR targeted to clonal immunoglobulin rearrangements in 6 /9 step A pts (one progressed before C6, data missing = 2). Of these, 4 were MRD negative in both blood and bone marrow after C6 (one remained MRD pos with no clinical relapse and underwent allo-SCT, one was not evaluated in BM). At the 12 months time point, the 3 evaluated pts remained MRD negative. With a median follow-up of 23,5m (8,9-31.6), 8 pts are alive (6 completed the 2y treatment program and are in CR). Step B (Obinutuzumab/ Ibrutinib/Venetoclax; Ven 400mg (n=3); at Ven=600mg (n=3) and Ven=800mg (n=6)). Median age at inclusion is 64.5y (range 45-74). Median lines of treatment prior inclusion is 2 (1-3), including ASCT in 8 patients. Five pts presented with blastoid MCL. TP53 status was assessed in 3/10 pts (2 ongoing). Of these 10, 3 presented TP53 mutations. Median time from diagnosis to C1D1 is 50.2m (12.8-123). The median follow-up for living pts (n=8) is 6.5m (2.5-15). During the first three months of treatment, there was no clinically relevant non-hematological grade 3-4 AEs. Twenty-nine grade 3-4 hematological AEs were reported in 7 pts (febrile neutropenia 1, neutropenia 4 ; thombopenia 4, anemia 2 and lymphopenia 3). At end of C2 , 3 achieved CR, 5 PR and 4 pts had PD. Among 9 pts assessed after C6, 5 patients were in CR (MRD analysis ongoing) Conclusion. No DLT has been reported in both step A and B. Both combinations are well tolerated and provide high disease control including CR at the molecular level. Oasis step C (obinutuzumab/venetoclax/ibrutinib) for untreated MCL pts is now open for inclusion since July 2018. Disclosures Le Gouill: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria. Morschhauser:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Other: Scientific Lectures; Epizyme: Consultancy; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cartron:Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gastinne:Millennium/Takeda: Honoraria. Davies:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; ADC-Therapeutics: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Karyopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Herbaux:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rule:Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 352-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Masarova ◽  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Naveen Pemmaraju ◽  
Prithviraj Bose ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) abrogates symptoms and organomegaly in patients with myelofibrosis (MF). Combination with azacitidine (AZA) may further improve its efficacy. Methods: We initiated a single institutional, single arm, prospective, phase 2 study of RUX AZA combination in adult patients with MF and < 20% blasts. Previous therapy with RUX or AZA was not allowed. RUX 5 - 20 mg orally twice daily was given continuously since cycle 1. AZA 25 - 75 mg/m2 on days 1 - 5 of each 28-day cycle was added starting cycle 4. Responses were assessed per International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment 2013 criteria (IWG-MRT). Enrollment cut-off for this analysis was December 31st, 2017 to allow > 6 months of follow-up for all enrolled patients. We plan to present updated results with additional 5 months of enrollment at the meeting. Results: Fifty two pts were enrolled on study between 03/2013-12/2017, and were evaluable for responses. Forty seven pts (84%) were treated with both agents (RUX and AZA), with a median of 25 cycles (range, 1-55). Median age was 66 years (range, 48-87). Thirty four pts (65%) had int-2/high DIPSS score, 40 pts (77%) had spleen ≥5 cm. Thirty pts (58%) were JAK2V617F positive. Among 36 pts tested for non-driver mutations (28-gene panel); 7 pts had ASXL1, 6 had TET2, 3 had IDH1/2 and 2 had EZH2 and TP53. After a median follow-up of 22+ months (range, 1-59+); 21 pts (40%) are on therapy with a median overall follow-up of 30+ months. The most common reasons for therapy discontinuation were elective stem cell transplantation (n=12), and uncontrolled disease (n=8), including progression to acute leukemia (n=4). Four pts (8%) primarily discontinued therapy due to drug related toxicity (cytopenias). Three treatment unrelated deaths occurred on study; one each due to sepsis, meningitis and metastatic melanoma. Thirty eight pts (73%) had objective response on a study (Table). Median time to response was 1.8 months (range, 0.7-19). Seven responses (21% of responders) occurred after the addition of AZA with a median time to response of 2 months. These responses included spleen and symptom clinical improvements in 26% and 16% of pts, respectively. In total, 26 (65%), and 23 (58%) pts had palpable spleen reduction by > 50% at any time on study, and at week 24, respectively. JAK2V617F allele reduction was noted in 13 (81%) of 16 evaluable pts. Thirty one pts (60%) had available bone marrow for sequential evaluation. Nineteen pts (61%) had a documented improvement in bone marrow fibrosis, collagen or osteosclerosis, with a median time to first response of 12 months (range, 6-18). The most common grade ≥3 non-hematologic toxicity on a study was infection (34%), constipation (21%), and nausea (14%). New onset of grade ≥3 anemia, thrombocytopenia and neutropenia occurred in 33%, 30% and 16% of pts, respectively. Conclusion: Concomitant RUX with AZA was feasible with overall IWG-MRT response rate of 73%, including >50% spleen reduction in 65% of pts. Moreover, 61% of pts achieved improvement in bone marrow fibrosis, collagen or osteosclerosis. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01787487. Table. Disclosures Verstovsek: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy; Italfarmaco: 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, Speakers Bureau. Cortes:novartis: Research Funding. Pemmaraju:novartis: Research Funding; daiichi sankyo: Research Funding; Affymetrix: Research Funding; plexxikon: Research Funding; samus: Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; abbvie: Research Funding; cellectis: Research Funding; stemline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SagerStrong Foundation: Research Funding. Bose:Blueprint Medicines Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Constellation Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pfizer, Inc.: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Daver:Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Kiromic: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 248-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herve Tilly ◽  
Franck Morschhauser ◽  
Olivier Casasnovas ◽  
Thierry Jo Molina ◽  
Nicolas Mounier ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Single-agent studies of lenalidomide in relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) have demonstrated significant activity. Recent studies reported that the combination of lenalidomide and rituximab yields high response rates in patients with FL. Three recent phase 1 studies have shown that lenalidomide administered on 10 to 14 days of 21-day cycle of R-CHOP could be safe in the initial treatment of aggressive or indolent B-cell lymphomas. Two of these studies determined 25 mg of lenalidomide as the recommended daily dose. This multicenter, open label, phase 2 trial (NCT01393756) investigated the combination of lenalidomide with R-CHOP in patients (pts) with high burden FL. Methods Pts with previously untreated FL grade 1, 2 or 3a and a high tumor burden according to GELF criteria were eligible. Pts received an induction therapy with 6 cycles of R2-CHOP given every 3 weeks (25 mg oral lenalidomide on days 1-14) followed by two additional rituximab infusions. Pegfilgrastim was administered on day 4 and oral aspirin prophylaxis (100 mg) was given daily during the cycles. Lenalidomide dose was adapted to toxicities. Pts responding to induction therapy received rituximab maintenance every 8 weeks for 2 years. The primary endpoint was the complete remission (CR/CRu) rate, according to IWRC 99, at the end of induction treatment. Secondary endpoints were safety, progression free survival, duration of response and overall survival. Results Eighty pts were enrolled from 16 LYSA centres between December 2010 and January 2012. Median age was 57 y (range 29-71); 50% were male; 92% Ann Arbor stage III-IV; 28% B symptoms, 69% ECOG performance status = 0; 25% mass >10cm; 53% bone marrow involved; 40% LDH elevated; 63% FLIPI 3-5. Sixty-eight pts (85%) received the complete induction regimen. Median interval between R2-CHOP cycles remained 21 days during treatment. Thirty-three pts (41%) experienced at least one dose reduction of lenalidomide. The complete remission (CR/CRu) rate was 74% (CI 95%: 63%-83%) and ORR was 94% (CI95%: 86%-98%).Current median follow-up is 13 months. So far, 9 pts (11%) experienced a progression/relapse. Hematologic toxicity was in the range of that observed with R-CHOP regimen with 65% grade 4 neutropenia; 12.5% grade 4 thrombocytopenia; 7.5% febrile neutropenia and no toxic death. Grade 1-2 sensory neuropathy was observed in 28 pts (36%), one pt had a grade 3 neuropathy. Twenty-nine pts (36%; grade 1-2: 27; grade 3: 2) had reversible skin toxicity, usually during the course of the first cycle. Five episodes of thrombosis occurred during treatment or follow-up, 3 were related to venous access devices and only one required discontinuation of lenalidomide. Three cases of neoplasm were observed during follow-up. Conclusion The combination of 25mg of lenalidomide for 14 days with 21-day R-CHOP cycles is well tolerated and yields a high rate of complete remission in patients with high tumor burden follicular lymphoma. Disclosures: Tilly: Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: 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; Pfizer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Use of lenalidomide to enhance R-CHOP efficacy in follicular lymphoma. Morschhauser:Celgene: advisory boards Other, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Casasnovas:ROCHE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Molina:Merck: Honoraria. Salles:roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria. Haioun:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 801-801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Sonja Zweegman ◽  
Michele Cavo ◽  
Kazem Nasserinejad ◽  
Rosella Troia ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction and background The treatment of patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) with relapse or progressive disease after bortezomib, lenalidomide and high-dose therapy represents an important challenge. In the EMN02 collaborative trial newly diagnosed patients with symptomatic MM were randomized to receive VCD induction followed by HDM/ASCT or VMP, followed by a second randomization for VRD consolidation or no consolidation, followed by lenalidomide maintenance until progression (Cavo et al, ASH2017, abstract #397; Sonneveld et al, EHA2018, abstract #108). The present Phase 2 trial was designed for patients with refractory disease or first progression after inclusion in EMN02 in order to evaluate a salvage treatment with next generation proteasome inhibition and IMId, i.e., Carfilzomib, Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone. The primary endpoints were response and progression-free survival (PFS). This trial is registered at www.trialregister.nl as NTR5349 and EudraCT 2013-003265-34. Methods Patients who were included received four 28-days re-induction cycles of KPd, i.e. Carfilzomib (20/36mg/m2, days 1,2,8,9,15,16) with Pomalidomide (4 mg days 1-21) and Dexamethasone (20mg days 1,2,8,9,15,16). In patients who had not previously received HDM/ASCT, HDM(200 mg/m2) was administered followed by autologous stem cell transplantation with stem cells harvested during after induction therapy in the EMN02 trial. Consolidation consisted of 4 additional cycles of KPd, identical to the induction cycles. Patients with stable disease or better received Pomalidomide 4mg w/o Dexamethasone in 28 days cycles until progression. Results At the time of this first planned interim analysis 82 patients were registered and this analysis was performed in the first 60 patients. 48% were randomized prior HDM/ASCT and 42% VMP, and 10% were not randomized. Prior best responses in the EMN02 trial were 35% CR/sCR , 75% ≥VGPR, 97% ≥PR. The median follow-up from inclusion in EMN02 was 43 months (range 21 - 62 months). In 44 patients cytogenetic risk were known, 15 (34%) of them had high-risk FISH (del17p, t(14;16) or t(4;14)). 57 fifty-seven (95%) of patients had progressed during lenalidomide maintenance, 3 patient's data are not yet available. In the present trial 38 (63%) of patients achieved normal completion of treatment according to of the protocol. Twenty patients received their first HDM plus ASCT. Median time on therapy was 14 months. Full dose re-induction treatment according to protocol could be administered in 68% (for Carfilzomib) and 64% (for Pomalidomide) of patients respectively, while for consolidation this was 62% for both Carfilzomib and Best response on protocol was 31% CR/sCR, 65% ≥VGPR, 87% ≥PR, respectively, with no difference according to response on initial treatments. Median time to response (≥PR) was 2 months. At a median follow-up of 16.3 months (range 3 - 32 months) median PFS was 18 months with better outcome in standard risk cytogenetics (HR=0.27 (0.09, 0.83) 95% CIs vs NR) and in patients with prior VMP treatment (HR=0.49 (0.21, 1.16) 95% CIs vs NR). 48 (80%) of patients are alive and in follow-up. KPd-emerging non-hematologic grade 3 and 4 adverse events included cardiovascular (5%), respiratory (5%), infections (20%) and neuropathy (3%). There were 3 fatal SAEs not related to progression (1 patient cardiac failure, 2 patients pneumonia). KPd-emerging hematological toxicity grade 3 and 4 occurred in 30% of patients. Discussion This Phase 2 clinical trial demonstrates that KPd is a feasible, effective and safe triple drug regimen in RRMM patients who have been previously treated and/or are refractory to bortezomib and refractory to lenalidomide. A 87% overall response rate including 31% CR/sCR is clinically relevant in this population. Since median OS has not been reached, longer follow-up is needed. Acknowledgments This trial was conducted as an investigator sponsored trial in EMN and supported by independent grants and drug supply from Amgen and Celgene. Disclosures Sonneveld: BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Zweegman:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corp.: 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; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Corradini:Roche: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Sandoz: Other: Advisory Board; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Lecturer; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board & Lecturer. Patriarca:Janssen: Other: Advisory role; Celgene: Other: Advisory Role; Travel, accommodations, expenses; Jazz: Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses; MSD Italy: Other: Advisory Role; Medac: Other: Travel, accommodations, expenses. Minnema:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy. Costa:celgene: Employment. Iskander:amgen: Employment. Boccadoro:Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 36-37
Author(s):  
Gavin Hui ◽  
Abdullah Ladha ◽  
Edna Cheung ◽  
Caroline Berube ◽  
Steven Coutre ◽  
...  

Introduction: The addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin (GO) to 7+3 chemotherapy for newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) has been shown to significantly improve event-free survival (EFS) for cytogenetically favorable-risk AML, with marginal benefit for intermediate-risk AML, and no benefit for cytogenetically adverse-risk AML. Of note, with the exception of mutated FLT3-ITD, little is known about the impact of GO in ELN 2017-defined genotypically adverse-risk AML, and a recent randomized trial found no EFS benefit for 7+3+GO in patients (pts) with genotypically favorable-risk, NPM1-mutated AML. Since 2017, our institution incorporated GO into 7+3-based inductions for all "non-adverse" risk AML pts, as defined by wild-type FLT3 and no abnormalities on rapid FISH analysis for del(5q)/monosomy 5, del(7q)/monosomy 7, and del(20q). We report our experience treating all pts with "non-adverse" risk AML-as defined by this algorithm-with 7+3+GO. Methods: An institutional database was queried in order to identify all pts ≥18 years old who received 7+3-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed AML between 2017 and 2020; pts who received the FDA-approved fractionated dose of GO were included in the analysis. Data collection included demographic variables, karyotype/FISH, targeted PCR analyses, and multigene NGS panels for AML-related mutations including, but not limited to, mutations in FLT3, NPM1, CEBPA, TP53, RUNX1, and ASXL1. Outcome data included response to induction, relapse, and death, as well as hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) rates, conditioning regimens, and post-transplant complications. Results: Between January 2017 and July 2020, 96 pts received 7+3-based induction at our institution. Of these, 29 (30%) received 7+3 in combination with GO. Median age at diagnosis was 46 years (range 23-66), with 17 (59%) males. Sixteen (55%) pts had ELN favorable-risk AML (5 [31%] by cytogenetics and 11 [69%] by genotype), 6 (21%) pts had ELN intermediate-risk AML, and 7 (24%) pts had ELN adverse-risk AML (4 [57%] by cytogenetics and 3 [43%] by genotype). Median time from diagnosis to start of induction was 4 days (range 0-43). For cytogenetically adverse-risk pts, median time from diagnostic bone marrow biopsy to receipt of adverse karyotype results was 8 days (7-14). Median time from start of induction to receipt of multigene NGS results for all pts was 15 days (3-32). Overall, 22 (76%) pts achieved remission. All genotypically adverse-risk pts (1 with mutated TP53 and 2 with mutated RUNX1) were refractory to induction, while 3 of 4 (75%) cytogenetically adverse-risk pts (1 with t(6;9), 1 with monosomy 7, and 2 with 11q23 abnormalities) achieved remission. Eight of the 29 (28%) pts proceeded to HCT, including 4 adverse-risk pts. Of the adverse-risk pts, all received myeloablative conditioning prior to HCT and 3 (75%) developed veno-occlusive disease (VOD), with 2 (50%) requiring defibrotide therapy. In favorable/intermediate-risk pts, 4 (18%) proceeded to HCT (2 intermediate-risk pts in first remission and 2 favorable-risk pts in second remission). Of these, 2 (50%) received myeloablative conditioning and 1 (25%) developed VOD. At last follow-up, 23 of 29 pts (79%) remained alive, with a median overall survival not reached (range 1-29 months) and a median EFS of 20 months (9-31). The percentage of ELN favorable-, intermediate-, and adverse-risk pts who remained event-free at last follow-up was 75%, 33%, and 43%, respectively. Discussion: This single-center, retrospective cohort describes the outcomes of pts with "non-adverse" risk AML who received induction chemotherapy with 7+3+GO according to a pre-defined algorithm. Using this algorithm, 30% of all pts receiving 7+3-based inductions received GO. Of these, nearly 25% were ultimately found to have adverse-risk AML as defined by ELN 2017 criteria, largely driven by long turn-around times for karyotyping and NGS multigene panel results. No patient with genotypically adverse-risk AML by ELN criteria responded to induction chemotherapy, and 75% of cytogenetically adverse-risk pts who proceeded to HCT developed VOD. Routine use of 7+3+GO induction outside of the context of cytogenetically favorable-risk AML remains controversial, and further study is needed to define the role of GO, particularly for pts with ELN genotypically adverse-risk AML. Table Disclosures Gotlib: Blueprint Medicines Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Chair of the Response Adjudication Committee and Research Funding, Research Funding; Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: co-chair of the Study Steering Committee and Research Funding. Liedtke:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Muffly:Adaptive: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Research Funding. Mannis:AbbVie, Agios, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech: Consultancy; Glycomimetics, Forty Seven, Inc, Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.


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

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


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3866-3866 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽  
Igor W. Blau ◽  
Paolo Corradini ◽  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Johannes Drach ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3866 Poster Board III-802 Bortezomib (Velcade®) retreatment has been shown to be active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM) in a number of retrospective studies and a small prospective phase 4 study (EVEREST). This large, prospective, international, multi-center, open-label phase 2 study was conducted to confirm the efficacy and safety of retreatment with bortezomib in MM patients who had previously responded (at least partial response [PR]) to bortezomib-based therapy as their most recent prior treatment. Patients had to have previously tolerated bortezomib 1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2 alone or in combination and have had a treatment-free interval (TFI; time from last dose of initial bortezomib treatment to first dose of bortezomib retreatment) of ≥6 months. Additional eligibility criteria included progressive disease or relapse from complete response (CR) by EBMT criteria, no MM therapy (except maintenance with dexamethasone, thalidomide, or interferon) since the last dose of initial bortezomib treatment, KPS ≥60, and adequate renal, hepatic, and hematologic function; patients with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy or neuropathic pain (as defined by NCI CTCAE v3.0) were excluded. Patients received bortezomib at the last tolerated dose (1.0 or 1.3 mg/m2) during initial treatment on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 for up to eight 21-day cycles, either alone or in combination with dexamethasone at the investigator's discretion. Response was assessed by EBMT criteria every 6 weeks during treatment and then every 2 months until disease progression. Adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCI CTCAE v3.0. A total of 130 patients received at least 1 dose of bortezomib retreatment and were included in the safety population. Patients had a median age of 67 years, 57% were male, and 16% had KPS '70%. Median time from diagnosis of MM was 4.5 years (range 0–14 years); median number of prior therapies was 2; 15, 80, 23, and 12 patients had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib therapy). Best response by EBMT criteria to initial bortezomib treatment was CR in 26% and PR in 74% of patients; median time to progression and TFI after initial bortezomib treatment were 17.9 months and 14.3 months, respectively. Last tolerated dose of previous bortezomib therapy was 1.3 mg/m2 and 1.0 mg/m2 for 62% and 29% of patients, respectively; 9% received another dose. Patients received a median 7.0 (range 1–8) cycles of bortezomib retreatment (23% of patients completed all 8 cycles); 72% of patients received concomitant dexamethasone. A total of 126 patients were evaluable for response. In the 126 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate (ORR; CR+PR) by best confirmed response (EBMT criteria) was 40%; in addition, 18% of patients achieved minimal response (MR), to give a CR+PR+MR rate of 58%. After a planned secondary efficacy analysis, the ORR (CR+PR) by single best response was 55% (75% ≥MR). Median time to best confirmed response (≥MR) was 2.9 months; time to first response was 1.5 months. Analysis of ORR by patient subgroups showed comparable results in patients who did versus did not receive concomitant dexamethasone (42% vs 32%), in those who received ≤1.0 mg/m2 vs 1.3 mg/m2 bortezomib (35% vs 41%), and in those aged ≤65 years vs >65 years (45% vs 36%). ORR was 67%, 39%, 33%, and 25% in patients who had received 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 prior lines of therapy (excluding initial bortezomib), respectively. Analysis of best confirmed responses according to response to initial bortezomib showed that 63% and 52% of patients who achieved a CR or PR, respectively, to initial bortezomib treatment responded to retreatment. Most (98%) patients experienced a treatment-emergent AE; 60% experienced a grade 3/4 AE, and 32% experienced a serious AE; there were 8 deaths, 2 of which (due to sepsis and stroke) were possibly treatment-related. The most common grade 3/4 AEs were thrombocytopenia (35%), neutropenia (7%), diarrhea (7%), and pneumonia (5%). AEs leading to dose reductions or discontinuations were reported for 22% and 12% of patients, respectively. The incidence of neuropathy was 39%, including 9% grade 3; 4% of patients discontinued treatment due to PN; 61% of neuropathy events resolved or improved within a median 1.3 months. These results confirm that bortezomib retreatment is a well-tolerated, feasible, and active therapeutic option for heavily pretreated MM patients without evidence of cumulative toxicity. Disclosures: Petrucci: Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria. Drach:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Blade:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Johnson and Johnson: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, 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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document