Lymphoma Symptoms: Data from a Phase 3, International, Randomized, Open-Label, Multicenter Study in Patients with Previously Treated Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) Treated with Ibrutinib Vs. Temsirolimus

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1542-1542
Author(s):  
Georg Hess ◽  
Simon Rule ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
Mats Jerkeman ◽  
Rodrigo Santucci ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction MCL is an incurable aggressive B-cell lymphoma with a poor overall prognosis. For patients with MCL who fail initial therapy (ie, with relapsed or refractory [R/R] disease), treatment options historically have been limited. While remission duration is generally short, the goal of therapy has been to achieve remission while balancing treatment-related toxicities. Consequently, a substantial proportion of patients continuously suffer from lymphoma symptoms and other disease signs, such as itching and trouble sleeping or concentrating. Additionally, worries and high emotional sensitivity lead to reduced functional status and well-being. Therefore, it is crucial to any treatment to maintain and improve the functional status and well-being of patients with R/R MCL for as long as possible throughout the treatment period. Methods RAY (MCL3001) is a phase 3, randomized, open-label, multicenter study in patients with R/R MCL. Patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive ibrutinib (560 mg once daily) or temsirolimus (175 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1; 75 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of subsequent cycles). Stratification factors were the number of prior lines of therapy (1-2 vs ³3) and simplified MCL international prognostic index risk (low [0-3] vs intermediate [4-5] vs high [6-11]). Patients in both arms received treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), as assessed by an independent review committee. Lymphoma symptoms were assessed using the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) questionnaire lymphoma subscale. The FACT-Lym was administered before any tests, procedures, or other consultations, and was used until disease progression, death, or the clinical cutoff, whichever came first. Median time to worsening (TTW), a prespecified secondary end point, and time to clinically meaningful improvement (TTI) on the lymphoma subscale were estimated. Worsening was defined as a ≥ 5-point decrease from baseline and clinically meaningful improvement as a ≥ 5-point increase from baseline. TTW and TTI on the lymphoma subscale were examined using Kaplan-Meier methods. Results In total, 280 patients were randomized to ibrutinib (n = 139) or temsirolimus (n = 141); 253 patients (ibrutinib, n = 130; temsirolimus, n = 123) provided FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale responses at baseline. Patients were compliant to therapy, and attrition was balanced between treatment arms. Disease characteristics and demographics at baseline (including FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale scores) were also generally well balanced. The study met its primary end point with a statistically significant 57% reduction in disease progression or death (PFS) with ibrutinib versus temsirolimus (hazard ratio [HR], 0.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.58; p < 0.0001). The median PFS was 14.6 months for the ibrutinib arm and 6.2 months for the temsirolimus arm. When adjusted for exposure, incidence of TEAEs was lower for the ibrutinib arm than the temsirolimus arm. The proportion of patients with worsening from baseline on the FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale was lower for ibrutinib compared with temsirolimus (26.6% vs 51.8%, respectively). Median TTW was not reached with ibrutinib versus 9.7 weeks with temsirolimus, with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of worsening of 73% (p < 0.0001; Figure 1). The proportion of patients with a clinically meaningful improvement from baseline on the FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale was higher for ibrutinib compared with temsirolimus (61.9% vs 35.5%, respectively). Median TTI was shorter for ibrutinib compared with temsirolimus (6.3 weeks vs 57.3 weeks, respectively; HR, 2.19; p < 0.0001; Figure 2). Conclusions RAY (MCL3001) is the first trial comparing different targeted approaches in R/R MCL. The presented data indicate that ibrutinib is associated with greater improvements and less worsening in lymphoma symptoms compared with temsirolimus, as measured by the lymphoma subscale of the FACT-Lym. These results suggest that the superior efficacy results and favorable safety profile of ibrutinib are accompanied by better lymphoma symptom outcomes, indicating significant clinical benefit for the majority of patients with R/R MCL. Disclosures Hess: Pfizer, Janssen, Roche, Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Roche, Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy. Rule:J&J: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; Gilead: Research Funding. Jurczak:CELLTRION, Inc,: Research Funding. Rusconi:Roche: Honoraria. Witzens-Harig:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Bandyopadhyay:Janssen: Employment. Goldberg:Janssen: Employment. Bothos:Janssen: Employment. Enny:Janssen: Employment. Vermeulen:Janssen: Employment. Traina:Janssen: Employment.

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5554-5554
Author(s):  
Carlos Sérgio Chiattone ◽  
Nelson Hamerschlak ◽  
Laura Fogliatto ◽  
Phillip Scheinberg ◽  
Ricardo Bigni ◽  
...  

Abstract Background:Treatment options for patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) are limited. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class small-molecule inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase. These extended access programs (EAP) provided patient access to ibrutinib in Brazil and real-world safety data was collected, at a time when the medication was not commercially available in Brazil. Methods:These two prospective, multicenter, open-label EAPs of single-agent ibrutinib were conducted between April 2013 and August 2017, and enrolled Brazilian patients with relapsed/refractory CLL or MCL. Eligible patients must have progressive disease after at least one prior therapy and not suitable for retreatment with purine analogue therapy. After a 30-day screening, eligible patients received once-daily oral ibrutinib 420 mg (CLL) or 560 mg (MCL) continuously until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, absence of clinical benefit, or end of EAP, whichever occurred first. Doses could be withheld or reduced based on toxicity. Patients were monitored for safety and disease evaluations were conducted per routine local standard of care practices. Results:Of 33 CLL patients enrolled, 32 received one dose of drug or more and were included in the safety analysis. Median age was 62.5 years, and most patients were male (n=24; 75%) and white (n=27; 84.4%). The median time from CLL diagnosis to study inclusion was 83.8 months and from diagnosis to relapsed/refractory state, 42.0 months. The median number of ibrutinib cycles was 12.0 (1.0-16.0) with a median treatment duration of 11.1 (0.9-11.6) months. Eight patients discontinued due to adverse event (AE; n = 4; 12.5%), consent withdrawal (n = 2; 6.3%), death (n = 1; 3.1%), or disease progression (n = 1; 3.1%). AEs leading to treatment discontinuation were intestinal bleeding, neutropenia, infection, and gastric tumor (one patient each). Three (9.4%) patients had dose reductions: one (3.1%) for neutropenia, febrile neutropenia with pneumonia, or worsening fatigue. 21 patients (65.6%) had at least one Grade ≥3 (G3) AE or serious AE (SAE). The most frequent G3 or SAEs included neutropenia in 8 (25.0%), fatigue (1), leukocytosis (1), and pneumonia (3). No atrial fibrillation or bleeding AEs were reported. Among the 47 G3 or SAEs, 17 (36.2%) were serious, 38 (80.9%) were suspected to be related to ibrutinib, and 39 (83.0%) were resolved without sequelae. All 13 MCL patients enrolled in the study were included in the safety analysis. The median age was 60.0 years, and most patients were male (n=9; 69.2%) and white (n=9; 69.2%). The median number of prior treatment regimens were 3. The median time from diagnosis to the first dose of ibrutinib was 20.4 months. The median number of ibrutinib cycles was 19 (4.0-34.0) with a median treatment duration of 16.8 (3.6-30.5) months. Eight patients discontinued because of either death (n=3; 23.1%) or disease progression (n=5; 38.5%). The three patients died with treatment-emergent G4 or higher AEs, including pneumonia (G5; probably treatment-related [TR]), sepsis (G5; not TR), and dyspnea (G4; doubtful TR); 8 patients (61.5%) had at least one G3 or higher treatment-emergent AE. The most frequent AE was diarrhea (n=3; 23.1%), and other AEs were reported in one patient each (i.e. abdominal hernia, anemia, appendicitis, dyspnea, febrile neutropenia, influenza, leukocytosis, neutropenia, pneumonia, productive cough, renal failure/insufficiency, retroperitoneal abscess, thrombocytopenia). Three (23.1%) patients had ibrutinib dose modifications: one (7.7%) each because of appendicitis/tuberculosis, thrombocytopenia, and diarrhea/retroperitoneal abscess/dyspnea. No atrial fibrillation or bleeding AEs were reported. Among the 20 G3 or higher treatment-emergent AEs, 14 (70%) were suspected to be related to ibrutinib and 15 (75%) were resolved. Conclusions: This is the first real-world experience with ibrutinib monotherapy for CLL and MCL in Brazil. Overall, treatment was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities. No atrial fibrillation or bleeding AEs were reported. Of 32 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL, 24 (80%) remained on therapy, 4 (12.5%) discontinued due to AEs, 1 (3.1%) each died or experienced disease progression. Among 13 patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, 5 (38.5%) remained on the therapy, 3 (23.1%) died and 5 (38.5%) experienced disease progression. Disclosures Chiattone: Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Fogliatto:Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Scheinberg:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau. Bigni:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Rodrigues:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Garicochea:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Pimenta:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Boechat:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Musacchio:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Goncalves:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Vieira:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Santos:Janssen: Employment. Grings:Janssen: Employment. Parisi:Janssen: Employment. Barreyro:Janssen: Employment.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 469-469 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Rule ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
Mats Jerkeman ◽  
Rodrigo Santucci ◽  
Chiara Rusconi ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction MCL is an aggressive B-cell lymphoma with a poor overall prognosis. For patients who fail initial therapy, conventional chemotherapy achieves only short-term remissions. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class, once-daily, oral, covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase that has been shown to be highly active for previously treated MCL patients (overall response rate [ORR] ~65%; complete response [CR] ~20%) in single-arm phase 2 studies. Temsirolimus has demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) vs investigator's choice. In this phase 3, randomized, open-label study (MCL3001 [RAY]), ibrutinib was compared with temsirolimus in patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) MCL who had received ≥1 prior rituximab-containing therapy. Methods Patients were randomized at a 1:1 ratio to receive oral ibrutinib (560 mg once-daily) or intravenous temsirolimus (175 mg: Days 1, 8, and 15 of Cycle 1; 75 mg: Days 1, 8, and 15 of subsequent cycles). Stratification factors were number of prior lines of therapy (1-2 vs ³3) and simplified MCL international prognostic index (sMIPI) risk (low [0-3] vs intermediate [4-5] vs high [6-11]). Patients in both arms received treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end point of the study was PFS, as assessed by an independent review committee (IRC). Secondary end points included ORR, overall survival (OS), time to next treatment (TTNT), time to worsening of lymphoma symptoms (measured by FACT-Lym lymphoma subscale), and safety. Results Overall, 280 patients were randomized to ibrutinib (n = 139) or temsirolimus (n = 141). Baseline disease characteristics and demographics were generally well balanced. Median age (range) was 68 years (34-88) and median number (range) of prior lines of therapy was 2 (1-9). Approximately two-thirds of the patients had intermediate- or high-risk disease. At the time of this analysis, median follow-up was 20.0 months. Ibrutinib was superior to temsirolimus for the primary end point of IRC-assessed PFS, with a statistically significant 57% reduction in the risk of progression or death (Figure 1). The median PFS was 14.6 months for the ibrutinib arm and 6.2 months for the temsirolimus arm, respectively. At a landmark of 2 years, the PFS rate is 41% in the ibrutinib arm vs 7% in the temsirolimus arm. PFS results were consistent across most assessed subgroups. Investigator-assessed PFS was consistent with the IRC results. IRC-assessed ORR was significantly higher for ibrutinib vs temsirolimus (71.9% vs 40.4%; p < 0.0001) with a CR rate of 18.7% vs 1.4%, respectively. Median OS was not reached with ibrutinib vs 21.3 months with temsirolimus, showing a positive trend toward patients in the ibrutinib arm (reduced risk of death by 24% [HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.53-1.09]). However, these results may have been confounded by 23% of patients that initially received temsirolimus crossing over to receive ibrutinib. A greater proportion of patients treated with ibrutinib vs temsirolimus avoided worsening of lymphoma symptoms throughout the study; 27% of ibrutinib patients had worsening vs 52% of temsirolimus patients. Median TTNT was not reached with ibrutinib vs 11.6 months with temsirolimus. Median treatment duration was 14.4 months for ibrutinib and 3.0 months for temsirolimus. Overall, 6.5% of subjects discontinued treatment due to AEs in the ibrutinib arm and 25.5% of subjects discontinued treatment due to AEs in the temsirolimus arm. The most common TEAEs with ibrutinib were diarrhea, fatigue, and cough, whereas with temsirolimus, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and diarrhea were most commonly observed (Table 1). Grade ³3 TEAEs were reported for 67.6% of ibrutinib patients vs 87.1% of temsirolimus patients; most frequent were thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia. When adjusted for exposure, TEAE incidence was consistently lower for the ibrutinib arm vs the temsirolimus arm. Conclusions Ibrutinib is superior to temsirolimus for PFS and ORR, and showed preferable tolerability. The results of this phase 3 trial confirm the efficacy and favorable safety profile of ibrutinib shown in phase 2 studies. Future concepts will investigate ibrutinib-based combination approaches for patients with R/R MCL. Disclosures Rule: Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement; J&J: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel reimbursement. Rusconi:Roche: Honoraria. Joao:Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy; Janssen, Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzens-Harig:Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Hess:Pfizer, Janssen, Roche, Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen, Roche, , Celgene, Novartis: Consultancy. Balasubramanian:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Equity Ownership. Bandyopadhyay:Janssen: Employment. Sun:Janssen/J&J: Employment, Equity Ownership. Goldberg:Janssen: Employment. Bothos:Janssen: Employment. Traina:Janssen: Employment. Enny:Janssen: Employment. Rizo:Janssen: Employment. Vermeulen:Janssen: Employment.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3089-3089
Author(s):  
Kristie A. Blum ◽  
Kami Maddocks ◽  
Zsolt Nagy ◽  
Pier Luigi Zinzani ◽  
Andre Goy ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: A number of second-generation monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) that target the antigens CD20 and CD19 have been evaluated across a range of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL) subtypes combined with chemotherapy, as a single agent, or as maintenance therapy. Although these agents are usually well tolerated and have demonstrated clinical activity in patients (pts) with NHL, there is still a high unmet medical need for pts with refractory or relapsed NHL. MOR00208 is an Fc-engineered humanized mAb that targets the antigen CD19 and possesses significantly enhanced antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity, a key mechanism for tumor cell killing. Methods: This non-randomized, phase IIa, open-label, multicenter study (NCT01685008) was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of single-agent MOR00208 in pts ≥18 years with relapsed or refractory NHL previously treated with rituximab, who were not candidates for high-dose therapy with stem cell support. Pts with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and other indolent NHL (iNHL), who had received at least one prior rituximab-containing therapy, were eligible. Additional eligibility criteria included European Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) 0-2, measurable disease ≥1.5 cm, adequate bone marrow function, renal and liver function test. Pts were treated with MOR00208 12 mg/kg IV weekly for a total of 8 doses. Those with at least stable disease according to International Response Criteria (Cheson, JCO 2007), were to continue MOR00208 treatment for an additional 4 weeks. After completion of these 12 weekly doses of treatment, responding pts (complete or partial remission [CR or PR]) received maintenance MOR00208 every 2 weeks until progression. The study utilized a 2-stage design. In stage 1, ≥10 pts were to be enrolled in each of the 4 NHL disease cohorts. Cohorts with ≥2 responses (CR or PR) in stage 1 were expanded by an additional 20 patients in stage 2. Disease cohorts with <2 responses in stage 1 were stopped for futility. Enrollment of a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 120 pts was planned. Results: Herein we report the efficacy results for the 51 pts enrolled in stage 1 and the safety for 85 pts enrolled to date in stages 1 and 2 of this trial. The median age for all 51 stage 1 pts was 70 (35–90) years, 46 had stage III-IV disease, and the median number of prior therapies was 3 (2-4). Treatment cohorts consisted of DLBCL (n=14), FL (n=14), MCL (n=12) and iNHL (n=11). The investigator assessed overall response rate in stage 1 over all NHL subtypes was 24% (12/51), with responses observed in the DLBCL, FL, and iNHL cohorts (Table). As of February 2014, 62/85 (72.9%) stage 1 and stage 2 pts had developed treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most frequently reported TEAEs of any grade were thrombocytopenia (11.8%), anemia and headache (10.6% each), and neutropenia (9.4%). Infusion-related toxicities were all grade 1-2 (except for one case of dyspnea of grade 4). There have been no treatment-related deaths. Most of the TEAEs occurred in pts with DLBCL (30/36 [83.3%]). In pts with DLBCL, the most frequently reported grade ≥3 TEAEs were neutropenia (13.9%), thrombocytopenia and anemia (8.3% each). Conclusion: The Fc-engineered humanized anti-CD19 antibody, M0R00208, is well tolerated without significant infusional toxicity and demonstrates preliminary efficacy in pts with relapsed/refractory DLBCL, FL, and iNHL. Accrual to stage 2 for pts with DLBCL and FL is ongoing. Disclosures Blum: MorphoSys: Research Funding. Maddocks:MorphoSys: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other. Nagy:AMGEN: Consultancy. Zinzani:MorphoSys: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Robak:MorphoSys AG: Research Funding. Korolkiewicz:MorphoSys AG: Employment. Winderlich:MorphoSys: Employment, Patents & Royalties. Jurczak:Celgene: Research Funding; Eisai: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Sandoz-Novartis: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Mundipgharma: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Sanoz-Novartis: Consultancy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document