scholarly journals 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 ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 621-621 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Döhner ◽  
John F Seymour ◽  
Aleksandra Butrym ◽  
Agnieszka Wierzbowska ◽  
Dominik Selleslag ◽  
...  

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.

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1638-1638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hartmut Döhner ◽  
Paresh Vyas ◽  
John F. Seymour ◽  
Valeria Santini ◽  
Richard M. Stone ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Karyotype is the strongest independent prognostic factor for survival in AML. The randomized phase 3 AZA-AML-001 study of older patients with AML showed AZA prolonged overall survival (OS) compared with CCR (10.4 vs 6.5 months, respectively; P=0.101) (Dombret et al, Blood, 2015). In a prospective subanalysis of the study, AZA was shown to meaningfully prolong OS by 3.2 months compared with CCR (P=0.0185) in the subgroup of patients with NCCN-defined poor-risk cytogenetics (Döhner et al, Blood, 2014: Abstract 621). Aim: This analysis evaluates treatment effects of AZA vs CCR on OS in subgroups of patients with specific cytogenetic abnormalities as well as in patient subgroups defined by cytogenetic risk per modified European LeukemiaNet (ELN) recommendations (not considering molecular markers) (Döhner et al, Blood, 2010). Methods: Patients aged ≥65 years with newly diagnosed AML (>30% bone marrow [BM] blasts), ECOG performance status score ≤2, intermediate- or poor-risk cytogenetics per NCCN 2009 criteria, and WBC count ≤15x109/L were randomized to receive AZA (75 mg/m2/day [d] x7d/28d) or CCR: intensive chemotherapy (cytarabine 100-200mg/m2IV x7d + anthracycline IV x3d induction), low-dose ara-C (20mg SC BID x10d/28d), or best supportive care only. Karyotypes obtained from BM were reviewed centrally by an independent cytogeneticist. OS was evaluated in subgroups of patients with frequent specific abnormalities, including -5/del(5q), -7, -7/del(7q), abnormal (17p) or complex karyotype (based on specific abnormalities, patients may have been evaluated in more than one category). OS was also assessed for patients in ELN-defined karyotype risk subgroups: Intermediate (Int)-I (normal karyotype), Int-II (all abnormalities not classified as Favorable or Adverse), and Adverse karyotype. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methods and compared using a weighted log-rank test. Results: Centrally reviewed cytogenetic data were available for 485/488 patients (99.4%). In all, 220 patients (45.4%; AZA n=114, CCR n=106) had Int-I karyotype, 111 patients (22.9%; AZA n=53, CCR n=58) had Int-II karyotype, and 154 patients (31.8%, AZA n=73, CCR n=81) had Adverse karyotype (Figure 1). OS was comparable between AZA and CCR in patients with Int-I karyotype (14.1 vs 10.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95%CI 0.60, 1.1; P=0.44) and patients with Int-II karyotype (8.9 vs 9.6 months; HR 1.19, 95%CI 0.79, 1.8; P=0.78). There was a significant 2.4-month median OS difference in favor of AZA in patients with Adverse karyotype (5.3 vs 2.9 months with CCR; HR 0.71, 95%CI 0.51, 0.99; P=0.046; Figure 2), with 1-year survival rates of 29.1% vs 14.7% for AZA and CCR, respectively. AZA was associated with longer median OS and higher 1-year survival compared with CCR for all subgroups of patients with the specific cytogenetic abnormalities under study: -5/del(5q), -7, -7/del(7q), abnormal (17p), and complex karyotype, with HRs ranging from 0.54 to 0.69(Table). Median OS in the CCR arm was less than 3 months for each of these subgroups. Similar to what has been reported in MDS (Ravandi et al, Cancer, 2009), AML patients with chromosome 7 abnormalities responded particularly well to AZA, with an improvement in median OS of 4.1 months over CCR. Patients with complex karyotypes also had meaningful improvements in OS, with ~15% more AZA-treated patients alive at 1 year than CCR patients. Conclusions: Prognosis is dismal for older AML patients with adverse karyotypes, and is especially poor for patients with complex karyotypes. Median OS and 1-year survival in patients with ELN-defined Adverse karyotype treated with AZA were almost double those of patients treated with CCR. AZA-treated patients with the specific cytogenetic abnormalities and/or complex karyotype in this analysis had a 31-46% reduction in risk of death vs CCR, and proportions of patients alive at 1 year were 11-22% greater with AZA. These data suggest AZA should be the preferred treatment for older patients with AML and adverse karyotypes. Disclosures Seymour: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Santini:Astex: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Onconova: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Stone:Celator: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Xenetic Biosciences: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Jansen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Sunesis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Al-Ali:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Morrill:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Songer:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Weaver:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Skikne:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Beach:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dombret:Agios: Honoraria; Ambit (Daiichi Sankyo): Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Menarini: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Karyopharm: Honoraria; Kite Pharma.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3129-3129
Author(s):  
Hans C. Lee ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Robert M. Rifkin ◽  
...  

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1528-1528
Author(s):  
Sebastian Stasik ◽  
Jan Moritz Middeke ◽  
Michael Kramer ◽  
Christoph Rollig ◽  
Alwin Krämer ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose: The enhancer of zeste homolog 2 (EZH2) is a histone methyltransferase and key epigenetic regulator involved in transcriptional repression and embryonic development. Loss of EZH2 activity by inactivating mutations is associated with poor prognosis in myeloid malignancies such as MDS. More recently, EZH2 inactivation was shown to induce chemoresistance in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) (Göllner et al., 2017). Data on the frequency and prognostic role of EZH2-mutations in AML are rare and mostly confined to smaller cohorts. To investigate the prevalence and prognostic impact of this alteration in more detail, we analyzed a large cohort of AML patients (n = 1604) for EZH2 mutations. Patients and Methods: All patients analyzed had newly diagnosed AML, were registered in clinical protocols of the Study Alliance Leukemia (SAL) (AML96, AML2003 or AML60+, SORAML) and had available material at diagnosis. Screening for EZH2 mutations and associated alterations was done using Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) (TruSight Myeloid Sequencing Panel, Illumina) on an Illumina MiSeq-system using bone marrow or peripheral blood. Detection was conducted with a defined cut-off of 5% variant allele frequency (VAF). All samples below the predefined threshold were classified as EZH2 wild type (wt). Patient clinical characteristics and co-mutations were analyzed according to the mutational status. Furthermore, multivariate analysis was used to identify the impact of EZH2 mutations on outcome. Results: EZH2-mutations were found in 63 of 1604 (4%) patients, with a median VAF of 44% (range 6-97%; median coverage 3077x). Mutations were detected within several exons (2-6; 8-12; 14-20) with highest frequencies in exons 17 and 18 (29%). The majority of detected mutations (71% missense and 29% nonsense/frameshift) were single nucleotide variants (SNVs) (87%), followed by small indel mutations. Descriptive statistics of clinical parameters and associated co-mutations revealed significant differences between EZH2-mut and -wt patients. At diagnosis, patients with EZH2 mutations were significantly older (median age 59 yrs) than EZH2-wt patients (median 56 yrs; p=0.044). In addition, significantly fewer EZH2-mut patients (71%) were diagnosed with de novo AML compared to EZH2-wt patients (84%; p=0.036). Accordingly, EZH2-mut patients had a higher rate of secondary acute myeloid leukemia (sAML) (21%), evolving from prior MDS or after prior chemotherapy (tAML) (8%; p=0.036). Also, bone marrow (and blood) blast counts differed between the two groups (EZH2-mut patients had significantly lower BM and PB blast counts; p=0.013). In contrast, no differences were observed for WBC counts, karyotype, ECOG performance status and ELN-2017 risk category compared to EZH2-wt patients. Based on cytogenetics according to the 2017 ELN criteria, 35% of EZH2-mut patients were categorized with favorable risk, 28% had intermediate and 37% adverse risk. No association was seen with -7/7q-. In the group of EZH2-mut AML patients, significantly higher rates of co-mutations were detected in RUNX1 (25%), ASXL1 (22%) and NRAS (25%) compared to EZH2-wt patients (with 10%; 8% and 15%, respectively). Vice versa, concomitant mutations in NPM1 were (non-significantly) more common in EZH2-wt patients (33%) vs EZH2-mut patients (21%). For other frequently mutated genes in AML there was no major difference between EZH2-mut and -wt patients, e.g. FLT3ITD (13%), FLT3TKD (10%) and CEBPA (24%), as well as genes encoding epigenetic modifiers, namely, DNMT3A (21%), IDH1/2 (11/14%), and TET2 (21%). The correlation of EZH2 mutational status with clinical outcomes showed no effect of EZH2 mutations on the rate of complete remission (CR), relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) (with a median OS of 18.4 and 17.1 months for EZH2-mut and -wt patients, respectively) in the univariate analyses. Likewise, the multivariate analysis with clinical variable such as age, cytogenetics and WBC using Cox proportional hazard regression, revealed that EZH2 mutations were not an independent risk factor for OS or RFS. Conclusion EZH mutations are recurrent alterations in patients with AML. The association with certain clinical factors and typical mutations such as RUNX1 and ASXL1 points to the fact that these mutations are associated with secondary AML. Our data do not indicate that EZH2 mutations represent an independent prognostic factor. Disclosures Middeke: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rollig:Bayer: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Scholl:Jazz Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbivie: Other: Travel support; Alexion: Other: Travel support; MDS: Other: Travel support; Novartis: Other: Travel support; Deutsche Krebshilfe: Research Funding; Carreras Foundation: Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hochhaus:Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Brümmendorf:Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Burchert:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Krause:Novartis: Research Funding. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Platzbecker:Celgene: Research Funding. Mayer:Eisai: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding. Serve:Bayer: Research Funding. Ehninger:Cellex Gesellschaft fuer Zellgewinnung mbH: Employment, Equity Ownership; Bayer: Research Funding; GEMoaB Monoclonals GmbH: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thiede:AgenDix: Other: Ownership; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 3279-3279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Janssens ◽  
Michael D. Tarantino ◽  
Robert Bird ◽  
Maria Gabriella Mazzucconi ◽  
Ralph Vincent V. Boccia ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3279 Background: ITP is an autoimmune disorder characterized by increased platelet destruction and suboptimal platelet production. Romiplostim stimulates platelet production via the TPO-receptor, and is recommended for second- and third-line treatment of chronic ITP in adults. We report final data from a large prospective study of romiplostim in adults with ITP of varying duration and severity. Methods: Eligibility criteria were broad: patients ≥18 years of age, who had received prior ITP therapies (final protocol amendment: ≥1, previous amendments: ≥3), with low platelet counts (final amendment: ≤ 30 × 109/L, previous amendments: ≤ 10, ≤ 20 × 109/L) or experiencing uncontrolled bleeding. The only excluded comorbidities were: hematological malignancy, myeloproliferative neoplasms, MDS and bone marrow stem cell disorder. Romiplostim was initiated at 1 (final amendment) or 3 (previous amendments) μg/kg/week, with dose adjustments allowed to maintain platelet counts ≥50 × 109/L. Patients could continue on study until they had access to commercially available romiplostim. Rescue medications were allowed at any time; concurrent ITP therapies could be reduced when platelet counts were > 50 × 109/L. Primary endpoint was incidence of adverse events (AEs) and antibody formation. Secondary endpoint was platelet response, defined as either (1) doubling of baseline count and ≥ 50 × 109/L or (2) ≥20 × 109/L increase from baseline. Results: A total of 407 patients received romiplostim, 60% of whom were female. Median (Q1, Q3) time since ITP diagnosis was 4.25 (1.20, 11.40) years (maximum 57.1 years), with 51% of patients splenectomised and 39% receiving baseline concurrent ITP therapies. Seventy-one percent of patients completed the study, with requirement for alternative therapy and withdrawn consent the most common reasons for discontinuation (5% each). Median (Q1, Q3) on-study treatment duration was 44.29 (20.43, 65.86) weeks (maximum 201 weeks), with a total of 20,201 subject-weeks on study. Incidence and type of AEs were consistent with previous studies. The most common serious treatment-related AEs were cerebrovascular accident, headache, bone marrow reticulin fibrosis (with no evidence of positive trichrome staining for collagen and no evidence suggesting primary idiopathic myelofibrosis), nausea, deep vein thrombosis, hemorrhage and pulmonary embolism, with each reported in 2 of 407 (0.5%) patients. All other serious treatment-related AEs were each reported in one patient. Eighteen patients died; 3 deaths (hemolysis, intestinal ischaema, aplastic anemia) were considered treatment-related. No neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim or TPO were reported. Approximately 90% of patients achieved each of the platelet response definitions, regardless of splenectomy status. Overall, median (Q1, Q3) time to response was 2 (1, 4) weeks for response definition 1, and 1 (1, 3) week for response definition 2. Median (Q1, Q3) baseline platelet count was 14 (8, 21) × 109/L. After 1 week of treatment median (Q1, Q3) platelet count had increased to 42 (18, 101) × 109/L. From week 8 onwards, and excluding counts within 8 weeks of rescue medication use, median platelet counts were consistently above 100 × 109/L (range 101.0–269.5 × 109/L). Median (Q1, Q3) average weekly romiplostim dose was 3.62 (1.99, 6.08) μg/kg. Summary/conclusions: This is the largest prospective study in adult ITP reported to date. The data reported here are similar to those reported for previous romiplostim studies, with romiplostim able to safely induce a rapid platelet response in adult ITP patients with low platelet counts or bleeding symptoms. Romiplostim is an important, well-tolerated, treatment option for adult ITP patients, which significantly increases and maintains platelet counts. Adverse Event Subject Incidence Platelet Response Disclosures: Janssens: Amgen: Consultancy; Roche: Speakers Bureau; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tarantino:Cangene corporation: Research Funding; Baxter: Research Funding; Talecris: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Up-to-date: Patents & Royalties; The Bleeding and Clotting Disorders Institute: Board Member. Bird:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Boccia:Amgen: Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Lopez-Fernandez:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kozak:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Steurer:Amgen: Honoraria. Dillingham:Amgen Limited: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lizambri:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership.


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

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


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1882-1882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel A Danziger ◽  
Mark McConnell ◽  
Jake Gockley ◽  
Mary Young ◽  
Adam Rosenthal ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The multiple myeloma (MM) tumor microenvironment (TME) strongly influences patient outcomes as evidenced by the success of immunomodulatory therapies. To develop precision immunotherapeutic approaches, it is essential to identify and enumerate TME cell types and understand their dynamics. Methods We estimated the population of immune and other non-tumor cell types during the course of MM treatment at a single institution using gene expression of paired CD138-selected bone marrow aspirates and whole bone marrow (WBM) core biopsies from 867 samples of 436 newly diagnosed MM patients collected at 5 time points: pre-treatment (N=354), post-induction (N=245), post-transplant (N=83), post-consolidation (N=51), and post-maintenance (N=134). Expression profiles from the aspirates were used to infer the transcriptome contribution of immune and stromal cells in the WBM array data. Unsupervised clustering of these non-tumor gene expression profiles across all time points was performed using the R package ConsensusClusterPlus with Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) to select the number of clusters. Individual cell types in these TMEs were estimated using the DCQ algorithm and a gene expression signature matrix based on the published LM22 leukocyte matrix (Newman et al., 2015) augmented with 5 bone marrow- and myeloma-specific cell types. Results Our deconvolution approach accurately estimated percent tumor cells in the paired samples compared to estimates from microscopy and flow cytometry (PCC = 0.63, RMSE = 9.99%). TME clusters built on gene expression data from all 867 samples resulted in 5 unsupervised clusters covering 91% of samples. While the fraction of patients in each cluster changed during treatment, no new TME clusters emerged as treatment progressed. These clusters were associated with progression free survival (PFS) (p-Val = 0.020) and overall survival (OS) (p-Val = 0.067) when measured in pre-transplant samples. The most striking outcomes were represented by Cluster 5 (N = 106) characterized by a low innate to adaptive cell ratio and shortened patient survival (Figure 1, 2). This cluster had worse outcomes than others (estimated mean PFS = 58 months compared to 71+ months for other clusters, p-Val = 0.002; estimate mean OS = 105 months compared with 113+ months for other clusters, p-Val = 0.040). Compared to other immune clusters, the adaptive-skewed TME of Cluster 5 is characterized by low granulocyte populations and high antigen-presenting, CD8 T, and B cell populations. As might be expected, this cluster was also significantly enriched for ISS3 and GEP70 high risk patients, as well as Del1p, Del1q, t12;14, and t14:16. Importantly, this TME persisted even when the induction therapy significantly reduced the tumor load (Table 1). At post-induction, outcomes for the 69 / 245 patients in Cluster 5 remain significantly worse (estimate mean PFS = 56 months compared to 71+ months for other clusters, p-Val = 0.004; estimate mean OS = 100 months compared to 121+ months for other clusters, p-Val = 0.002). The analysis of on-treatment samples showed that the number of patients in Cluster 5 decreases from 30% before treatment to 12% after transplant, and of the 63 patients for whom we have both pre-treatment and post-transplant samples, 18/20 of the Cluster 5 patients moved into other immune clusters; 13 into Cluster 4. The non-5 clusters (with better PFS and OS overall) had higher amounts of granulocytes and lower amounts of CD8 T cells. Some clusters (1 and 4) had increased natural killer (NK) cells and decreased dendritic cells, while other clusters (2 and 3) had increased adipocytes and increases in M2 macrophages (Cluster 2) or NK cells (Cluster 3). Taken together, the gain of granulocytes and adipocytes was associated with improved outcome, while increases in the adaptive immune compartment was associated with poorer outcome. Conclusions We identified distinct clusters of patient TMEs from bulk transcriptome profiles by computationally estimating the CD138- fraction of TMEs. Our findings identified differential immune and stromal compositions in patient clusters with opposing clinical outcomes and tracked membership in those clusters during treatment. Adding this layer of TME to the analysis of myeloma patient baseline and on-treatment samples enables us to formulate biological hypotheses and may eventually guide therapeutic interventions to improve outcomes for patients. Disclosures Danziger: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. McConnell:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Gockley:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Young:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schmitz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Reiss:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Davies:MMRF: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; TRM Oncology: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy; ASH: Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Copeland:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fox:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fitch:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Newhall:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Barlogie:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Dana Farber Cancer Institute: Other: travel stipend; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Other: travel stipend; International Workshop on Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia: Other: travel stipend; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; European School of Haematology- International Conference on Multiple Myeloma: Other: travel stipend; ComtecMed- World Congress on Controversies in Hematology: Other: travel stipend; Myeloma Health, LLC: Patents & Royalties: : Co-inventor of patents and patent applications related to use of GEP in cancer medicine licensed to Myeloma Health, LLC. Trotter:Celgene Research SL (Spain), part of Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hershberg:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Dervan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ratushny:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morgan:Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 690-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Alessandro M. Vannucchi ◽  
Alessandro Rambaldi ◽  
Jason R. Gotlib ◽  
Adam J. Mead ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms (MLNs) with rearrangement of FGFR1 on chromosome band 8p11 are rare but aggressive neoplasms characterized by heterogeneous presentation with myeloid and/or lymphoid proliferation, extramedullary involvement, and rapid progression to blast phase (Strati P, et al., Leuk Lymphoma. 2018;59:1672-1676). FGFR1 gets constitutively activated through fusion genes involving various partner genes, most frequently ZMYM2-FGFR1 or BCR-FGFR1 as consequence of a t(8;13)(p11;q12) or a t(8;22)(p11;q11), respectively. Chemotherapy is usually ineffective, effective targeted treatment has not been described, and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) is the only potentially curative option. Pemigatinib, a selective, potent, oral inhibitor of FGFR1, 2, and 3, has shown efficacy in patients with FGF/FGFR-activated tumors, including cholangiocarcinoma and urothelial carcinoma. We report interim results from the ongoing fight-203 study (NCT03011372) of pemigatinib in patients with FGFR1-rearranged MLNs. Methods: Fight-203 is a phase 2, open-label study enrolling patients ≥ 18 years of age with FGFR1-rearranged MLN. Patients enrolled in the study must have progressed on ≥ 1 prior treatment and be ineligible for alloHSCT. Patients receive a daily oral dose of pemigatinib 13.5 mg on a 21-day cycle (2 weeks on, 1 week off) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint is overall clinical benefit rate, which includes complete clinical (CR) or partial clinical response (PR), and either complete or partial cytogenetic response (CCyR, PCyR). Secondary endpoints include duration of response/benefit, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety/tolerability. Efficacy is assessed by evaluation of bone marrow histomorphology changes, standard cytogenetic and FISH evaluation of the FGFR1 rearrangement, and PET/CT scan. Results: At data cutoff (July 23, 2018), 14 patients were enrolled. Ten patients who had ≥ 1 response assessment were included in the analysis (Table). Patients received an average of 6.9 cycles of pemigatinib (range, 2-12 cycles). Median number of prior lines of therapy was 3 (range, 0-5), including 2 patients who received alloHSCT. Eight patients (80%) had a major CyR, including 6 patients with CCyR and 2 with PCyR. Eight patients (80%) had a CR or PR in bone marrow, peripheral blood, and extramedullary disease. One patient died of progression to myeloid blast crisis, 2 patients were bridged to alloHSCT, and 7 patients are ongoing. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were hyperphosphatemia (n=7 [70%]), diarrhea (n=5 [50%]) and anemia (n=5 [50%]); hyperphosphatemia was managed with diet and phosphate binders. Nine events in 4 patients (40%) were grade 3/4; 2 of these events (diarrhea and leukopenia) in 2 patients were related to pemigatinib. There were no drug-related AEs leading to dose interruption, dose reduction, or discontinuation. Conclusions: Pemigatinib showed promising efficacy, with an 80% major CyR rate accompanied by complete or partial remission, and was generally well tolerated by patients with FGFR1-rearranged MLN. The protocol was amended to allow continuous dosing, and the study is currently enrolling. Disclosures Verstovsek: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Italfarmaco: 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. Gotlib:Blueprint Medicines: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Deciphera: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mead:Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Evotek: Research Funding; ARIAD: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Elstar: Research Funding. Hochhaus:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: 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; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hernandez Boluda:Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Asatiani:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lihou:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhen:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Reiter:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1266-1266 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tomasz Knurowski ◽  
Karen Clegg ◽  
Nigel Brooks ◽  
Fay Ashby ◽  
Neil A Pegg ◽  
...  

Background CCS1477 is a first in class potent, selective and orally bioavailable inhibitor of the bromodomains of p300 and CBP, two closely related histone acetyl transferases with oncogenic roles in haematological malignancies. In pre-clinical studies, CCS1477 was found to be a potent inhibitor of cell proliferation in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) multiple myeloma (MM) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) cell lines. In primary patient AML blast cells CCS1477 inhibited proliferation through a combination of cell cycle arrest at the G1/S transition and an induction of differentiation (up-regulation of CD11b and CD86). CCS1477 has significant anti-tumour activity, inducing tumour regressions in xenograft models of AML and MM. These effects were accompanied by significant reductions in tumour MYC and IRF4 expression. Additionally, there are molecular features of certain haematological malignancies that are likely to increase the sensitivity to p300/CBP inhibition with CCS1477. For example, in B-cell lymphomas there are frequent loss of function mutations in CBP that are associated with heightened sensitivity to pre-clinical inhibition of corresponding non-mutated p300. CCS1477 represents a novel and differentiated approach to inhibiting cell proliferation and survival and offers a potential new therapeutic option for patients who have relapsed or are refractory to current standard of care therapies in AML, MM or NHL. Study Design and Methods This study is the first time that CCS1477 is being dosed in patients with haematological malignancies. The Phase I/IIa study aims to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) and schedule(s) of CCS1477 and investigate clinical activity of CCS1477 monotherapy in patients with haematological malignancies. This study will also characterise the pharmacokinetics (PK) of CCS1477 and explore potential biological activity by assessing pharmacodynamic and exploratory biomarkers. The trial aims to enrol approximately 90 patients and is currently recruiting in the UK with plans to open additional sites in the USA. Key inclusion criteria include patients with confirmed (per standard disease specific diagnostic criteria), relapsed or refractory haematological malignancies (AML, MM and NHL). Patients must have received standard therapy which for the majority of therapeutic indications is at least 2 prior lines of therapy. Single dose and steady state pharmacokinetics will be determined in all patients. AML response will be measured in bone marrow samples. Myeloma response will be evaluated according to the 'International Myeloma Working Group Response Criteria' based on changes in M protein in blood and/or urine, changes in serum free light chains if measurable, and changes on imaging and/or bone marrow if applicable and according to the guidelines. In NHL patients, tumour assessments will be done for measurable disease, non-measurable disease, and new lesions on CT (or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) and/or combined with visual assessment of [18F]2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) for response assessment per recent International Working Group consensus criteria (RECIL 2017), until progression The study will begin with two parallel monotherapy dose-escalation arms; Arm 1: Relapsed or refractory NHL and MM; Arm2: Relapsed or refractory AML/high-risk MDS. Once a recommended phase 2 dose/schedule is reached, three monotherapy expansion arms will be opened in AML/high-risk MDS (15 patients), MM (15 patients) and NHL (30 patients). Blood samples along with bone marrow biopsies and aspirates will be collected for exploratory biomarker analysis to understand mechanisms of response to treatment or disease progression. This will include the analysis of tumour-specific and circulating biomarkers, such as tumour DNA, mRNA, proteins or metabolites. In NHL patients, analysis of CBP (and p300) mutations will be undertaken to allow retrospective correlation with tumour response and to determine if loss of function mutations in the genes for either proteins can be utilised as response predictive biomarkers in future studies. Disclosures Clegg: CellCentric Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Brooks:CellCentric Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ashby:CellCentric Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pegg:CellCentric Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. West:CellCentric Ltd: Employment, Equity Ownership. Somervaille:Novartis: Consultancy. Knapper:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Tolero: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Davies:ADCT Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; MorphoSys AG: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BioInvent: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Karyopharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2509-2509
Author(s):  
Gretchen Johnston ◽  
Haley E. Ramsey ◽  
Kristy Stengel ◽  
Shilpa Sampathi ◽  
Pankaj Acharya ◽  
...  

Drugs targeting chromatin-modifying enzymes have entered clinical trials for myeloid malignancies, including INCB059872, a selective irreversible inhibitor of Lysine-Specific Demethylase 1 (LSD1). LSD1 is a component of the CoREST complex, in which it associates with histone deacetylases 1 and 2, the transcriptional co-repressor, mSin3A or mSin3B, and the REST corepressor (RCOR1), so a role in gene expression was expected. While initial studies of LSD1 inhibitors have suggested these compounds may be used to induce differentiation of acute myeloid leukemia, the mechanisms underlying this effect and dose-limiting toxicities are not well understood. Here, we have used precision nuclear run-on sequencing (PROseq) and single-cell RNA-sequencing (scRNAseq) to show that INCB059872 de-represses GFI1/GFI1B-regulated genes to promote a myeloid differentiation gene signature in AML cells while stalling maturation of megakaryocyte progenitor cells. Within 3 days of treatment with INCB059872, the majority of THP-1, which contain an the MLL-translocation, undergo myeloid differentiation. RNAseq analysis indicated that 24h drug treatment upregulated genes involved in hematopoietic cell lineage, which is consistent with the differentiation. In addition, PROseq was used to measure the effects of INCB059872 on nascent transcription at genes and enhancers, as this is one of the best methods to define enhancer activity. In THP-1 cells after 24h treatment, there were 203 genes with at least a 1.5-fold increase in transcription, while there are nearly 1300 enhancers meeting this threshold. Upregulated genes include those associated with myeloid cell differentiation, such as CSF1R and CD86. Given that LSD1 catalyzes the removal of mono- and di-methyl marks from histone H3, we expected that INCB059872 would cause a buildup of histone methylation. Surprisingly, ChIPseq for H3K4me2 and H3K4me1 showed only subtle changes in these marks after 48h drug treatment in THP-1. Only a handful of LSD1i-induced enhancers overlapped with detectable changes in H3K4 methylation. However, our PROseq data is consistent with the increases in H3K27 acetylation seen with OG86 (a compound that disrupts the LSD1:GFI1 interaction) at GFI1 binding sites (PMID: 29590629). Indeed, motif analysis of INCB059872-upregulated enhancers identified the GFI1 recognition sequence as the most highly enriched. Moreover, siRNA inhibition of key components of LSD1-containing chromatin remodeling complexes pinpointed the CoREST complex as mediating the THP-1 myeloid differentiation effects of INCB059872. To investigate on-target thrombocytopenia seen with LSD1 inhibitors in preclinical studies, we analyzed the bone marrow of wild-type mice treated daily with INCB059872 for 0, 4, or 6 days before harvesting and sorting lin-bone marrow cells for scRNA-seq. Notably, one of the most highly upregulated genes in treated cells was Gfi1b. Unsupervised clustering identified 22 clusters, corresponding to unique subpopulations (Fig. 1A). While the distribution of cells into different progenitor populations was mostly unaffected by drug treatment, these data revealed a striking increase in the proportion of cells from treated mice assigned to a megakaryocyte stem/progenitor cluster. Cells within this expanded cluster expressed stem cell markers such as MYCN and PBX1, but also expressed VWF (Fig. 1B). Thus, LSD1 inhibition caused accumulation of megakaryopoiesis-biased stem cells that failed to mature into efficient platelet producers. Finally, we used scRNAseq to analyze bone marrow from an AML patient who responded to treatment with INCB059872 plus azacytidine (AZA). A pre-treatment bone marrow sample was divided into separate cultures to study the effects of INCB059872, AZA, or the combination. Remarkably, unsupervised clustering of patient cells assigned the majority of INCB059872 and combination-treated cells to clusters that were not found in control- or AZA-treated samples. Cells exposed to INCB059872 had upregulated GFI1 and GFI1B, as well as differentiation-related genes that were also observed in AML cell lines. Overall, these data indicate that INCB059872 affects gene expression with kinetics consistent with a loss of CoREST activity to stimulate differentiation of AML blasts, but the inactivation of GFI1/GFI1B impairs megakaryocyte maturation likely explaining thrombocytopenia seen in preclinical models. Disclosures Stubbs: Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Burn:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hiebert:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Savona:Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Boehringer Ingelheim: Patents & Royalties; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3492-3492
Author(s):  
Anne Shah ◽  
Allison Petrilla ◽  
Mayvis Rebeira ◽  
Joseph Feliciano ◽  
Thomas W. LeBlanc ◽  
...  

Background: Peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCL) are a rare and heterogeneous group of lymphoid malignancies characterized by a clinically aggressive course with poor prognosis. A majority of PTCL patients are ≥60 years of age and typically present with advanced stage disease and multiple comorbidities. There remains no consensus standard of care for patients with most PTCL subtypes. Multi-agent chemotherapy, consisting of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) or CHOP with etoposide (CHOEP), are guideline recommended options for nodal subtypes. Limited contemporary real-world data exist on the treatment patterns and overall survival (OS) of PTCL patients treated with CHOP or non-CHOP regimens in the United States before the FDA approval of brentuximab vedotin in combination with chemotherapy in November 2018 based on the ECHELON-2 trial. Objective: To evaluate treatment patterns and OS prior to the approval of brentuximab vedotin among Medicare Fee-for-Service (FFS) beneficiaries newly diagnosed with PTCL. Methods: The 100% sample of Medicare FFS claims (Parts A/B/D) was used to identify patients aged ≥65 years with ≥1 inpatient or ≥2 distinct outpatient diagnosis claims for PTCL (index event) from January 2011 to December 2017. Patients were required to have a least 6 months prior and 12 months post-index continuous Medicare enrollment, and were followed until disenrollment, death, or the end of the study period, whichever occurred first. OS, defined as the time from initial episode or treatment start date to the validated date of death, was measured using the Kaplan-Meier method; patients without a death date were assumed to be alive at the time of analysis and were censored. Results: A total of 2551 Medicare FFS beneficiaries with a PTCL diagnosis met study criteria and were included for analysis. The majority of patients were white (86.9%), over half were male (52.9%), and mean age was 75 years. Patients had multiple comorbidities at diagnosis (Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score 4.47), including hypertension (77.3%), diabetes (32.9%), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (28.1%). Among the 2551 patients in the study cohort, 62.4% (n=1593 of 2551) received at least one identifiable drug regimen; 25.5% of treated patients received CHOP (n=407), 3.1% CHOEP (n=50) and 71.2% (n=1134) other regimens. Of patients treated with other regimens, 37.7% (n=427) received steroids only, 22.4% (n=254) steroids with unidentifiable chemotherapy, 6.9% (n=78) cyclophosphamide, 6.2% (n=70) methotrexate, 4.6% (n=52) brentuximab vedotin, 3.6% (n=41) bendamustine, 3.5% (n=40) romidepsin, and 15.2% (n=172) other therapy combinations. Among patients who were treated with CHOP, 16.6% (n=66) received an identifiable second line of therapy (LoT), 48.7% (n=194) an unidentifiable second LoT, and the remainder (34.7%, n=138) had no evidence of further anti-cancer treatment. The median time from CHOP initiation to a subsequent LoT was 5.6 months. The mean baseline CCI score for patients treated with CHOP was 4.33 (±2.93) compared with 4.76 (±2.97) for patients treated with other therapies (p=0.0118). In patients receiving an identifiable first LoT, median OS among CHOP and non-CHOP recipients was 4.8 years (95% CI 3.0-6.1) and 4.4 years (95% CI 3.0-4.9), respectively (Table). The 5-year OS estimate was 49% in patients receiving CHOP compared with 46% for non-CHOP recipients. Conclusions: Fewer than 30% of Medicare beneficiaries newly diagnosed with PTCL were treated with intensive chemotherapy as first LoT. Acknowledging a possible selection bias for more fit PTCL patients receiving CHOP, this group had increased OS compared with patients receiving non-CHOP therapy. However, the 5-year OS across all cohorts was less than 50%. New therapies such as brentuximab vedotin may fill the need for PTCL Medicare beneficiaries who may not be able to tolerate CHOP or CHOP-based regimens. Disclosures Shah: Avalere Health, An Inovalon Company: Employment. Petrilla:Avalere Health, An Inovalon Company: Employment. Rebeira:Seattle Genetics: Employment. Feliciano:Seattle Genetics: Employment, Equity Ownership. LeBlanc:Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Duke University: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Helsinn: Consultancy; Agios: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; NINR/NIH: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; CareVive: Consultancy; Celgene: Honoraria; Flatiron: Consultancy; American Cancer Society: Research Funding; Heron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Medtronic: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer Inc: Consultancy. Lisano:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document