Minimal Residual Disease Detection By Multiparametric Flow Cytometry in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: A Preliminary Analysis of the EMN02/HO95 MM Study

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 1760-1760
Author(s):  
Stefania Oliva ◽  
Manuela Gambella ◽  
Milena Gilestro ◽  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Depth Of Response ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is still an incurable disease and patients may relapse despite achievement of complete remission (CR). Minimal residual disease (MRD) assessment by multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) on bone marrow (BM) is a sensitive diagnostic tool to measure response and is highly predictive of outcome in MM as previously reported. The aim of this study is to evaluate the role of MRD monitoring by MFC in MM patients receiving novel agents with or without autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and to investigate the efficacy of treatments by using MRD-negativity as a deeper response criteria. Methods: The RV-MM-COOP-0556 (EMN02/HO95 MM) study is a phase III, randomized, trial including newly diagnosed MM patients ≤ 65 years. All subjects received 4 cycles of Bortezomib-Cyclophosphamide-Dexamethasone (VCD) induction, followed by Cyclophosphamide chemotherapy and subsequent stem cell mobilization and collection. Afterward, patients were randomized to receive 4 cycles of Bortezomib-Melphalan-Prednisone (VMP) vs one or two cycles of High-Dose-Melphalan (HDM) followed by ASCT. After intensification patients were secondly randomized to receive two cycles of consolidation with Bortezomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (VRD) vs no consolidation, followed by Lenalidomide maintenance in both arms. Patients who achieved CR/sCR according to IMWG criteria (Rajkumar et al. Blood 2011) after intensification/consolidation treatment, were eligible for the MRD sub-study. MRD analysis by MFC was performed on BM samples after intensification/consolidation, after 6 courses of maintenance, and thereafter every 6 months until progression, to detect monoclonal plasma cells (PCs). Here, we used a double antibody combination (CD138Fitc/CD20PerCp-Cy5.5/CD117APC/CD45APC-H7/CD38PE-Cy7; cyKappaFitc/cyLambdaPE/CD19PerCp-Cy5.5/CD56APC/CD45APC-H7/CD38 PE-Cy7): one tube was employed to obtain PCs quantification, the other one to validate PCs clonality. MRD-negativity was defined when <20 clonal PCs were detected among ≥2.000.000 leukocytes (<0.001%). Results: One hundred-eleven Italian patients (58 male/53 female) with a median age of 56 years (IQR 52-62) entered MRD sub-study. Sixteen (14%) were ISS stage III, 24 (22%) had high-risk cytogenetic profile and 10 (9%) had LDH levels higher than the upper normal limit. Forty-five patients (40%) received VMP as intensification and 66 (60%) underwent ASCT, thereafter 65 (58%) received VRD consolidation, 24 after VMP and 41 after ASCT. The median follow-up were 28.7 and 17 months from starting treatment and from MRD enrollment, respectively. After intensification/consolidation, 4 patients were not evaluable for MRD due to unsuitable samples, MRD negativity rate was 79% (85 out of 107 evaluable patients) and was independent from the intensification therapy: actually 50/63 patients who received ASCT and 35/44 patients who received VMP achieved MRD negativity. Within MRD-negative patients, 48/85 (56%) received VRD consolidation without major differences between VMP and ASCT. With the limitation related to the shorter follow-up, depth of response further improved during maintenance: 11/22 (50%) of MRD-positive patients became MRD-negative, independently from previous intensification therapy. Conclusions: MRD detection by MFC is a feasible technique in MM and allows to detect residual tumor cells among CR and sCR patients. Preliminary MRD results show that, in patients achieving CR, intensification with VMP or ASCT induced comparable rates of MRD-negativity and maintenance with Lenalidomide further improved depth of response in both arms. Longer follow-up is needed to correlate MRD status to prognosis and clinical outcome and to evaluate the role of maintenance therapy in increasing the quality of response. Disclosures Off Label Use: Use off-label of drugs for the dose and/or schedule and/or association . Gay:Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Larocca:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria. Gamberi:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rossi:Celgene: Research Funding. Offidani:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Sanofi, Amgen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Boccadoro:Sanofi: 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; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Onyx, Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; novartis: Honoraria. Palumbo:Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.

scholarly journals Improving the Definition of Response Assessment: Prognostic Value of Minimal Residual Disease Combined with PET/CT at Day 100 Post Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 33-34
Author(s):  
Miguel Gonzalez-Velez ◽  
Mariano Arribas ◽  
Heidi E. Kosiorek ◽  
Richard Butterfield ◽  
Carlo Guerrero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
High Sensitivity ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Pet Ct ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Minimal Residual

Introduction: Response assessment at day 100 post Autologous Stem Cell Transplant (ASCT) is associated with long-term relapsed free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in multiple myeloma (MM). The International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) are the preferred criteria to define best response to treatment and define relapse. In the last years, response assessment has incorporated minimal residual disease (MRD) status -associated with improved RFS and OS (Munshi et al); and PET/CT combined with clinical characteristics -also associated with favorable outcomes (Zamagni et al. NCT01910987; MMY3033). The 2016 IMWG MRD criteria, combined imaging (PET/CT) plus next-generation sequencing (NGS) MRD-negative to define complete response (CR). To our knowledge, there is limited data examining the correlation and prognostic value of MRD and FDG-PET/CT at day 100 post ASCT in MM. IN this study, we aimed to determine the prognostic valued of MRD by NGS combined with PET/CT in RFS and OS status after high dose chemotherapy and ASCT in MM. Methods: Patients who underwent ASCT for MM at Mayo Clinic Arizona and had MRD and PET/CT data were included in the study. Clinical data was obtained via retrospective chart review. Cytogenetic risk (CyR) was classified using the mSMART criteria . Disease and ASCT related characteristics were compared by MRD status. MRD was measured by NGS on bone marrow aspirates using the previosly validated clonoSEQ ® Assay (Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation, Seattle, USA) tracking the IgH, IgK and IgL rearrangements at a minimum sensitivity level of 10-5. MRD was defined by residual clonal cells per million nucleated cells as: negative= 0, borderline= 1-5, positive &gt;5. PET/CT scans were performed locally at baseline and at day 100. Comparisons were performed using the chi-square test for categorical variables, Wilcoxon rank-sum test for continuos variables, McNemar's test and Cohens's Kappa for agreement measures. Results: A total of 103 patients had matched MRD and PET/CT assessment around day 100 (+/-9 days) and were included in the analysis. Median age at diagnosis was 62 years (range, 54-66 years), 71 patients (68.9%) were men. CyR was standard risk in 49 (47.6%), high-risk in 39 (37.9%) and unknown in 15 (14.6%) patients. Most 75 (72.8%) patients were MRD positive, 16 (15.5%) were MRD negative, and 12 (11.7%) borderline. The median main MRD clone detected was 64 (range 0-91,874). 70 patients (68%) and 33 (32%) had a negative and positive PET/CT respectively. The median follow-up time was 18 months (range, 13-31 months). At the time of data analysis, 10 patients (9.7%) had relapsed and only 4 (3.9%) had died. There was a high-correlation between MRD status and PET/CT, 31 patients (93.9%) with positive PET/CT were also MRD positive (p=0.0027). There were no statistical differences between PET/CT and CyR (p=0.95). We analyzed the correlation using the FREQ procedure (McNemars's test); there was a strong association between positive PET/CT and positive MRD in 31/33 patients (93.9%, high sensitivity), and low association for negative PET/CT the negative/borderline MRD in 26/70 (37.1%, low specificity; p&lt;0.001). The agreement measure between the PET/CT and MRD using negative/borderline combined had a kappa of 0.23 (95% CI 0.11, 0.35) indicating a fair agreement beyond chance (Figure 1). PET/CT-CT was a statistically significant predictor of worse RFS (HR 3.53, 95%CI: 1.02-12.24, p&lt;0.0337) and OS (HR 11.38, 95%CI: 1.18-109.56, p&lt;0.0078) (Figure 2-3, respectively). MRD was not predictive of neither RFS (HR 1.72, 95%CI: 0.36-8.14, p&lt;0.49) or OS (p&lt;0.16). Conclusions: In conclusion, we demonstrate that the combination of MRD by NGS (clonoSEQ ®) and PET/CT at day 100 are complementary and have a high sensitivity (true positive rate) and fair correlation of agreement but low specificity (true negative rate). PET/CT was the best most sensitive technique to prognosticate RFS and OS. We did not find prognostic correlation of MRD with RFS and OS. However, our findings might be confounded by the low risk of relapse and death, a longer follow-up may demonstrate clinically important differences. Our results add evidence that MRD plus PET/CT improve the definition of CR in MM patients post ASCT. Prospective studies are needed to elucidate the optimal timing and role of combined MRD, PET/CT with other prognostic markers of clinical outcomes. Disclosures Larsen: Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fonseca:Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy; Aduro: Consultancy; OncoTracker: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Oncopeptides: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy.

Switching to Nilotinib Is Associated with Continued Deeper Molecular Responses in CML-CP Patients with Minimal Residual Disease After ≥ 2 Years On Imatinib: Enestcmr 2-Year Follow-up Results

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 694-694 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy P. Hughes ◽  
Jeffrey H. Lipton ◽  
Nelson Spector ◽  
Brian Leber ◽  
Ricardo Pasquini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Minimal Residual Disease ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Molecular Response ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Molecular Responses ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Abstract 694 Background: Superior rates of deeper molecular responses were achieved with nilotinib vs imatinib in patients newly diagnosed with Philadelphia chromosome–positive (Ph+) chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) in the Evaluating Nilotinib Efficacy and Safety in Clinical Trials—newly diagnosed patients (ENESTnd) trial. In addition, the 12-month (mo) analysis of the ENEST—complete molecular response (ENESTcmr) study demonstrated that switching to nilotinib after a minimum of 2 years on imatinib led to increased rates of major molecular response (MMR) and deeper molecular responses vs remaining on imatinib. Results from ENESTcmr are presented here with minimum 24 mo of patient follow-up. Methods: Patients with Ph+ CML-CP who had achieved complete cytogenetic responses but still had persistent BCR-ABL positivity by real-time quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RQ-PCR) after ≥ 2 years on imatinib were eligible. Patients (n = 207) were randomized to switch to nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID; n = 104) or to continue on the same dose of imatinib (400 or 600 mg once daily [QD]; n = 103). Rates of MMR, MR4 (BCR-ABL ≤ 0.01% according to the International Scale [IS], corresponding to a 4-log reduction), MR4.5 (BCR-ABL ≤ 0.0032%IS, corresponding to 4.5-log reduction), and undetectable BCR-ABL via RQ-PCR with ≥ 4.5-log sensitivity were measured. Results: Among all randomized patients (intent-to-treat population), significantly more patients treated with nilotinib continued to achieve undetectable BCR-ABL by 24 mo (32.7% on nilotinib vs 16.5% on imatinib; P =.005; Table).The difference between the arms in achievement of this endpoint increased between 1 and 2 years (from 12.4% to 16.2%). The median time to MR4.5 and undetectable BCR-ABL was also significantly faster on nilotinib than on imatinib (P = .005 and .003, respectively). Cumulative rates of MR4.5 and undetectable BCR-ABL continued to be higher with nilotinib in patients without those responses at baseline, and the difference between arms appeared to increase over time. The safety profiles for nilotinib and imatinib were consistent with prior studies. By 24 mo, no patients in either arm progressed to accelerated phase/blast crisis. No patients on nilotinib died since the 12-mo analysis; 1 patient on imatinib died from metastatic prostate cancer in follow-up after discontinuation from the study. Conclusions: Switching to nilotinib led to significantly faster, deeper molecular responses in patients with minimal residual disease on long-term imatinib therapy. Since the 12-mo analysis, rates of deep molecular response (MR4.5 and undetectable BCR-ABL) have remained significantly higher in patients who did not have the response at baseline and were switched to nilotinib (vs those remaining on imatinib). In fact, the difference in favor of nilotinib increased between 1 and 2 years. These results suggest that switching to the more potent, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor nilotinib is beneficial in patients with minimal residual disease after long-term imatinib therapy. Achievement of these deeper molecular responses (MR4.5 and undetectable BCR-ABL) after switching to nilotinib may enable a greater proportion of CML-CP patients to be eligible for future discontinuation studies. Cumulative rates of confirmed undetectable BCR-ABL by 24 mo will be presented as the confirmation assessments for several responders were not available at the time of this analysis. Disclosures: Hughes: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; CSL: Research Funding. Lipton:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Spector:Novarits: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Leber:Novartis: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Schwarer:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: 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. Etienne:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Branford:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding. Purkayastha:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment. Collins:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment. Szczudlo:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp: Employment. Cervantes:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi-Aventis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients Treated With Lenalidomide Induction and Maintenance Show a Low Incidence Of Second Primary Malignancies (SPMs)

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2074-2074
Author(s):  
Annamaria Brioli ◽  
Charlotte Pawlyn ◽  
Walter Gregory ◽  
Samantha Hinsley ◽  
Samantha Marshall ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Incidence Rate ◽  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
New Drugs ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Introduction New drugs have significantly improved the outcome of MM patients (pts) increasing both progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Among new drugs lenalidomide (LEN) due to its oral availability and favourable toxicity profile is an attractive option both as an induction and as a maintenance treatment, with different studies demonstrating its effectiveness. Long term therapy with LEN, however, has been associated with an increased risk of developing SPMs. Aims We are conducting a large phase III study to evaluate the use of LEN as induction and/or as maintenance therapy. The primary end points of the study are OS and PFS. Secondary end points are response and toxicity. Methods Pts are treated following an intensive or a non intensive pathway based on their eligibility for high dose Melphalan (HDM) and stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and are randomised to receive induction therapy with cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone combined with either LEN (CRD) or thalidomide (CTD). Pts failing to achieve an optimal response are randomised to receive additional therapy with cyclophosphamide, dexamethasone and bortezomib (CVD) or no extra therapy. Pts with minimal or no response will automatically receive further therapy with CVD. A randomisation between LEN maintenance and no maintenance is also performed. Data on the occurrence of SPMs are being routinely collected as part of safety assessment during all protocol phases and follow up. Analyses were performed on treatment actually received. Results As per cut off of the 23rd July, 2371 pts have undergone the induction randomisation, of which 2368 are eligible for the safety analysis; 794 pts entered maintenance randomisation. The median follow up is 1.36 years from initiation of the study and 1.06 years from maintenance randomisation. Localised skin cancer other than melanoma were considered as non-invasive SPMs. At the time of the present analysis 17 SPMs have been reported with a cumulative incidence rate of 0.7% (cumulative rate of 0.6% for invasive SPMs and 0.1% for non-invasive SPMs); four additional patients, reported as having a SPM, were excluded, after central review of the data, either due to a previous history of malignancy or because of the evidence of a pre-existing tumour other than MM at the time of study entry. The median age at the time of SPMs development is 72 years (range 61-92), and the median time from trial entry to development of SPMs is 11 months (range 2.1-27.0). The most common SPMs reported were squamous cell carcinoma (4 pts, 2 invasive and 2 non invasive), breast cancer (3 pts), colon cancer (2 pts) and prostate cancer (2 pts). No haematological SPM has so far been reported. One patient, treated according to the intensive arm with LEN both as induction and maintenance, was reported as having a suspect myelodysplasia (MDS) due to anaemia and thrombocytopenia 2.7 months after entering the maintenance randomisation. No clear histological sign of MDS was found and the values improved after stopping maintenance treatment; these data fit with treatment related toxicity and not with the development of a MDS, and the patient was excluded from this analysis. Ten out of 17 SPMs developed during maintenance treatment or follow up phase, with 7 patients having received LEN maintenance. Median time from maintenance randomisation to SPMs development is 7 months (range 2-20.6 months). The remaining 7 were diagnosed during or immediately after induction. About half of the patients (8/17) were randomised to receive LEN induction; 3 patients received LEN both as induction and as maintenance. Interestingly only one of those 3 pts had been treated according to the intensive arm. With a median follow up of 1.36 years the estimated incidence rate at 1 and 2 years are 0.70% (95% CI .40-1.22)and 1.17% (95% CI .70-1.96) respectively (Figure 1). Conclusions Our data do not confirm previous findings of an excess risk of SPMs in association with the use of LEN and HDM in presenting patients, with 12/17 pts developing SPMs treated on the non intensive pathway that does not contain HDM. Most importantly only 0.4% of the patients enrolled within the intensive pathway developed a SPM, with only 2 of them receiving LEN maintenance. Longer follow up will help to further elucidate the risk of LEN associated SPMs. On behalf of the NCRI Haemato-Oncology subgroup Disclosures: Brioli: Celgene: Honoraria. Off Label Use: The presentation include the use of Lenalidomide as induction and as maintenance treatment for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Cook:Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cavo:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Meyer Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Morgan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

A Phase III Study Of ASCT Vs Cyclophosphamide-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone and Lenalidomide-Prednisone Maintenance Vs Lenalidomide Alone In Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 763-763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Francesca Gay ◽  
Andrew Spencer ◽  
Francesco Di Raimondo ◽  
Adam Zdenek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Study Endpoint ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Background High-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) improves survival in multiple myeloma (MM). The introduction of novel agents challenged the role of ASCT at diagnosis. We conducted a multicenter 2X2 randomized trial comparing conventional chemotherapy plus lenalidomide with ASCT followed by maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone (RP) or lenalidomide (R) alone in newly diagnosed young MM (NDMM) patients. Methods Eligible patients with NDMM ≤ 65 years were enrolled. All patients received Rd induction (four 28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg day 1–21 and low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg day 1,8,15,22) followed by stem cell mobilization. Patients were randomized to receive consolidation with CRD [six 28-day cycles of cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 day 1,8,15), dexamethasone (40 mg days 1,8,15,22) and lenalidomide (25 mg days 1–21)] or MEL200-ASCT (melphalan 200 mg/m2 with stem-cell support). Patients were randomly assigned to receive subsequent maintenance with RP (28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg days 1–21 plus prednisone 50 mg every other day) or R alone (28-day cycles of lenalidomide 25 mg days 1–21). Primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included safety, responses and overall survival (OS). Data cut off was May 30th, 2013. Results Three-hundred and eighty-nine patients were enrolled in the trial. Patient characteristics were well balanced between CRD (n=194) and MEL200-ASCT (n=195), and between R (n=195) and RP (n=194) arms. Median follow-up was 31 months. In the intent to treat (ITT) analysis, the median PFS was not reached with MEL200-ASCT and 28 months with CRD (the respective 3-year PFS was 60% vs. 38%, HR=0.62, 95%CI: 0.49-0.85, P=0.003). Median time from enrolment to maintenance was 14 months. In the population of patients eligible for maintenance, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 73% for RP and 56% for R patients (HR= 0.57, 95%CI: 0.34-0.93; P=0.03). In the subgroup of patients who received MEL200-ASCT, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 83% for patients who received RP and 64% for those who received R alone (HR=0.36 95%CI: 0.15-0.87, P=0.02). In the subgroup of patients who received CRD, 2-year PFS from the start of maintenance was 64% for patients who received RP and 47% for those who received R alone (HR=0.75, 95%CI: 0.40-1.39, P=0.36). At present, no differences in OS were noticed between patients randomised to received CRD or MEL200-ASCT, and between patients who received RP or R maintenance. As expected, the rates of grade 3-4 hematologic (85% vs. 26%, P<0.001) and non-hematologic (35% vs. 19%, P=0.003) adverse events (AEs) were higher in the MEL200-ASCT arm compared with the CRD arm. The main non-hematologic AEs were infections (18% vs. 5%, P=0.001) and gastrointestinal AEs (18% vs. 3%, P<0.001). Rates of grade 3-4 hematologic (8% vs. 7%, P=0.85) and non-hematologic (12% vs. 13%, P=0.88). AEs were similar in the RP and R arms. The main non-hematologic AEs in both RP and R groups were infections (3% vs. 3%). At present, 6 second primary malignancies and 3 cases of cutaneous basalioma have been reported. Conclusions MEL200-ASCT significantly prolonged PFS in comparison with CRD. At present no difference in OS was reported, this may be due to the low number of events and to the length of follow-up. The increase in toxicity with MEL200-ASCT did not adversely impact on efficacy. The addition of prednisone to lenalidomide maintenance significantly reduced the risk of progression in comparison with lenalidomide alone, without increasing the toxicity. Updated data with longer follow-up will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Palumbo: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria. Gay:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Larocca:Celgene: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Celgene: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy. Boccadoro:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Updated Follow-Up In The CLL2007FMP Trial Supports The Non Superiority Of The Association Fludarabine-Cyclophosphamide (FC) Plus Campath Compared To FC Plus Rituximab and Points Out The Importance Of Minimal Residual Disease, By 6-Color Flow Cytometry Technique, On Progression Free Survival

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2870-2870
Author(s):  
Pierre Feugier ◽  
Remi Letestu ◽  
Sylvie Chevret ◽  
Thérèse Aurran ◽  
Beatrice Mahe ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Limit Of Detection ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Evaluation ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Color Flow ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Introduction CLL2007FMP (fit medically patients) is a Randomized Phase-III Trial conducted by the French Cooperative Group on CLL and WM (FCGCLL/WM) and the “Groupe Ouest-Est d'Etude des Leucémies et Autres Maladies du Sang” (GOELAMS), comparing FC plus Rituximab (FCR) to FC plus Campath (FCCam) in previously untreated fit patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Early results showed that the FCCam regimen was associated with an unfavourable safety profile limiting significantly its use in this indication (Blood 2012). We present here the results of the extended follow up of the CLLFMP2007 trial, with particular emphasis on survival data, minimal residual disease (MRD) and late adverse events. Methods In this trial, 178 younger (<65) fit patients (pts) (cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS) score of up to 6), were enrolled between November 2007 and January 2009. Cases with del(17p) were excluded. Pts were randomly assigned to receive 6 oral courses of FCR (n=83) or FCCam arm (n=82). The primary endpoint of the study was 3-year progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were safety, response to treatment, overall survival (OS) and MRD. MRD evaluation was performed by 6-color flow cytometry in an oligocentric manner. MRD testing was scheduled before therapy initiation and at final evaluation, (i.e. 3 months after completion of immunochemotherapy) where it was to be assessed for all responding patients in both peripheral blood (PB) and bone marrow (BM). Recruitment was interrupted in January 2009 after 165 pts had been randomized due to an excess of mortality in the FCCam arm. Results PFS and OS were not significantly different between the two arms. With a median follow-up of 55.5 months (interquartile range, 50-60), 57 pts in the FCCam arm were free of disease progression compared with 50 in the FCR arm, with a 3-year estimated PFS at 81% in both arms (p=0.80). Fourteen pts died in the FCCam arm (7 from progression and 7 from toxicity) and 9 died in the FCR arm (all from progression), with a 3-year estimated survival at 90% vs. 88% (p=0.85). PFS was significantly impacted by IGHV mutational status (p=0.001), Binet stage (p=0.0002) and MRD level. At final evaluation, MRD was established using the result in PB samples (available for 120 patients) and was determined in 103 pts by combining the results from blood and BM samples. Interpretation was based firstly on the use of the classical 10-4 threshold as reference and secondly on the limit of detection of the technique (0.7x10-5). In MRD-positive patients, the median PFS was 44.7 months (PB) whereas it was not reached in the group with MRD lower than 10-4 (p<0.0001, figure 1) ; similar data were found in MRD-positive PB+BM patients with a median PFS of 46 months whereas it was not reached in the group with MRD lower than 10-4 (p=0.002). No significant difference was found regarding OS but follow-up is still short for this evaluation. Similar results were observed when considering the limit of detection of the MRD technique (data not shown). Late toxicities (occurring after the final evaluation at 3 months after the end of treatment or at the ninth month when treatment was prematurely stopped) included : 1 bile duct cancer, 1 myelodysplastic syndrome, 1 transient ischemic attack, 1 lung adenocarcinoma and one prostate cancer in the FCR arm and 3 febrile neutropenia, 3 pneumonia (1 due to legionella), 1 pneumococcal sepsis, 1 bronchitis, 1 toxoplasma eye infection, 1 pyelonephritis, 2 herpes zoster, 1 acrodermatitis, 1 subdural hematoma, 1 autoimmune thrombocytopenia, 1 agranulocytosis, 1 autoimmune haemolytic anaemia in the FCCam arm. Conclusion Results of this extended follow-up of the CLL2007FMP trial confirm the absence of superiority of the FCCam regimen on OS and PFS. Interestingly, longer follow-up did not reveal a higher rate of late toxicity in FCCam arm, notably in terms of secondary malignancies; Similarly to early toxicity, late was adverse events were mainly infectious. Finally, MRD status determined by 6-color technique in PB and/or BM at post-treatment evaluation was predictive of PFS whatever the treatment arm. This finding is in line with recent reports in other studies pointing out to the powerful value of MRD as prognostic factor, supporting its use as PFS surrogate primary endpoint in clinical trials. Disclosures: Feugier: roche: Honoraria. Cazin:roche: meeting invitation Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: meeting invitation, meeting invitation Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Highly Sensitive Droplet Digital PCR for MYD88L265P Mutation Detection and Minimal Residual Disease Monitoring in Waldenström Macroglobulinemia

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2645-2645
Author(s):  
Daniela Drandi ◽  
Elisa Genuardi ◽  
Paola Ghione ◽  
Daniele Grimaldi ◽  
Barbara Mantoan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Mutation Detection ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Digital Pcr ◽  
Droplet Digital Pcr ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Highly Sensitive ◽  
Sensitive Tool ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Background. Recently, the somatic MYD88L265P mutation has been found as the hallmark of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM), being detectable in nearly 90% of cases, as well as in up to 50% of IgM MGUS, rarely in other non-Hodgkin lymphomas and never in multiple myeloma (MM). Beyond its potential diagnostic role, this mutation has been associated with tumor growth and therapy resistance. Moreover, MYD88L265P might represent an ideal marker for minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring in a disease whose therapeutic scenario has been rapidly changing, with many new available and highly effective drugs (nucleoside analogues, proteasome and BTK-inhibitors). However, the current MYD88L265P allele-specific quantitative PCR (ASqPCR) diagnostic tool lacks sensitivity (1.00E-03) and thus is not suitable for MRD. Moreover, is not useful to test peripheral blood (PB), that harbors low concentrations of circulating tumor cells (especially after immunochemotherapy), neither to assess cell-free DNA (cfDNA), usually present at very low amount in plasma. Therefore, our study aims: 1) to assess whether a highly sensitive tool as droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) might be helpful in MYD88L265P screening; 2) to evaluate whether MYD88L265P might be a suitable marker for MRD monitoring in WM. Methods. Bone marrow (BM) and PB samples were collected at diagnosis and during follow-up from a local series of patients affected by WM, IgM MGUS and IgG-secreting lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma (LPL), as well as samples from healthy subjects and MM were used as negative controls. Genomic (gDNA) and cell-free DNA (cfDNA) were extracted as recommended (Qiagen). MYD88L265P was assessed on 100 ng of gDNA by ASqPCR as previously described [Xu 2013] and by ddPCR, using a custom dual labelled probe assay (Bio-Rad). When available, 50 ng of cfDNA were tested for MYD88L265P, only by ddPCR. ddPCR was performed on 20 µl of reaction at 55°C for 40 cycles, run on QX100 droplet reader and analyzed by QuantaSoft v1.6.6 (Bio-Rad). MYD88L265P ASqPCR level was estimated as described [Treon 2012]. ΔCT<8.4 identified a MYD88L265P positive sample. Similarly, MYD88L265P ddPCR cut-off was settled on the highest healthy samples level. IGH rearrangements identification and IGH-based MRD analysis were performed as previously described [van der Velden 2007]. Results. Once the ddPCR assay was optimized, the sensitivity of MYD88L265P ddPCR was compared to ASqPCR on a ten-fold serial dilution standard curves built with a 70% MYD88L265P mutated WM sample, previously identified by Sanger sequencing [Treon 2012]. Whereas ASqPCR confirmed the reported sensitivity of 1.00E−03, ddPCR reached a sensitivity of 5.00E−05. Thereafter, overall 105 samples (48 BM, 57 PB, 52 diagnosis and 53 follow up) from 58 patients (49 WM, 5 IgM MGUS and 4 LPL) as well as 20 controls (15 healthy subjects and 5 MM) were tested by both methods. 32/33 (97%) diagnostic BM scored positive for MYD88L265P by both ddPCR and ASqPCR (being the only one negative a WM), while ddPCR, was able to detect more mutated cases, than ASqPCR, among diagnostic PB samples: 15/19 (79%) vs 9/19 (47%) (Table1). Moreover, to investigate whether the MYD88L265P ddPCR tool could be used for MRD detection we compared it to the standardized IGH-based MRD. An IGH-based MRD marker was found in 40/53 (75%) patients (37 WM and 3 LPL). Five Patients, so far analyzed, with baseline and follow up samples (18 BM, 5 PB) showed highly superimposable results between the two methods. Finally, pivotal results on cfDNA from 10 patients showed higher median levels of MYD88L265P mutation in plasma if compared to PB. Conclusions. We developed a new tool for diagnosis and MRD monitoring in WM, showing that: 1) ddPCR is a highly sensitive tool for MYD88L265P detection, especially useful in low infiltrated samples, like PB; 2) MYD88L265P can be effectively and easily used for MRD monitoring in WM, achieving similar results to standardized IGH-based MRD; 3) cfDNA recovered from plasma might be an attractive alternative for MYD88L265P detection, deserving further investigation. Methodological validation against IgH-based MRD detection and Flow cytometry and correlations with clinical impact are currently ongoing on external samples series. Table 1.PATIENTSWM (45)LPL (2)IgM MGUS (5)TISSUEBMPBBMPBBMPBSAMPLES31141114MYD88L265P ddPCR/ASqPCR30/3011/71/10/01/14/2 TABLE 1. MYD88L265P mutation detection in diagnostic samples: ddPCR vs ASqPCR Disclosures Boccadoro: Sanofi: 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; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Interim Analysis of Lenalidomide Consolidation on Minimal Residual Disease in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Following Initial FCR Chemotherapy - CLL6 Residuum Study of the Australian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group (ALLG) and the French Innovative Leukemia Organization (FILO)

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2053-2053 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gottlieb ◽  
Thérèse Aurran ◽  
Constantine S. Tam ◽  
Mary Sartor ◽  
Rémi Letestu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
Front Line ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Introduction Patients with residual disease following initial treatment of chronic lymphocyticleukemia(CLL) withfludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) chemotherapy have reduced progression free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). The CLL6 RESIDUUM trial is a joint trial of the Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group (ALLG) and the French CLL branch of the French InnovativeLeukemiaOrganization (FILO) thatanalyzesthe role oflenalidomide(LEN) as consolidation therapy in patients following front-line treatment for CLL who do not enter minimal residual disease (MRD) negative complete remission. Methods CLL patients with CIRS score <6 requiring treatment according to iwCLLcriteria receive 6 cycles of FCR. Following completion of treatment, those with clinical, radiological and/or multiparameterflow cytometry (MFC) evidence of residual CLL in blood or bone marrow are randomized 1:1 to receive 2 years of maintenance treatment with LEN 10 mg daily or observation (OBS). Patients are reviewed for evidence of clinical progression, and peripheral blood and bone marrow are sampled regularly for evidence of MRD. CT scans are performed until resolution of lymphadenopathy and splenomegaly. Flow analysis for MRD is performed at two central laboratories using ERIC accredited methodology to achieve a sensitivity of 10-4. The primary end point of the study is time to progression or death. Results As of end of July 2016, data from 79 patients randomized on the study were analyzedfor the effects of consolidation treatment on blood and marrow MRD. Median duration from randomization was 488 days. There were 63 males and 16 females. Median age was 62 years (range 29 to 81). 37 patients were randomized to receive LEN, 42 to OBS .On the LEN arm 13, 3 and 21 patientsvs 12, 9 and 21 on the OBS arm were in CR, nodular PR and PR respectively at the time of randomization. There were 26 serious adverse events (SAEs) reported in 22 patients. 12 SAEs in 11 patients were attributed to LEN including pneumonia/chest infection (n=4), pulmonary infiltrate (1), prostatitis (1) second primary malignancy (SPM) (1), vomiting (1), neutropenia (1), tumorflare (1), acute kidney injury (1) and anal warts (1). There were 5 SAEs in the OBS arm comprising SPM (2), neutropenia (1), gout (1) and GuillainBarre syndrome(1). Peripheral blood samples were analyzedprior to consolidation and at 3, 6 and 12 months and every 6 months thereafter. MRD levels during consolidation were compared with pre-consolidation levels and categorized as increasing, decreasing, stable detectable or stable undetectable (Fig 1). MRD increased over the period of observation in 38% of patient on the LEN arm and in 62% of patients on the OBS arm (p = 0.032, Χ2). 10 patients (27%) in the LEN arm and 2 patients (5%) in the control arm had decreasing levels of MRD in the blood (p = 0.006, Χ2). There was no difference between consolidation treatments in the percentage of patients with stable blood MRD measurements, whether in the detectable or the undetectable range. The effect of LEN was most apparent in patients in PR at randomization where 5 patients (24%) taking LEN had increasing MRD in the blood compared to 15 patients (71%) on the OBS arm (p = 0.002, Χ2). Bone marrow MRD levels were assessed prior to consolidation and after 12 months in 9 patients in each arm of the study (LEN arm 2 CR, 1 nPR, 6 PR; OBS arm 4 CR, 1 nPR, 4 PR at randomization). Eight patients in the LEN arm and 2 patients in the OBS arm were observed to have a reduction in marrow MRD. There was a significant reduction between the 2 time points in the LEN arm (p=0.022 paired Wilcoxon test) but not in the OBS arm. Four of 9 patients in the LEN arm and 1 patient in the OBS arm achieved marrow MRD values below 10-4 after 1 year on trial. Conclusion LEN consolidation therapy for residual disease after FCR front-line therapy for CLL is associated with improved control of MRD in both blood and bone marrow. A large group of recently randomized patients will provide more data to determine whether these encouraging results will translate into improved progression free and overall survival. Figure 1 Percentage of patients on LEN and OBS arms with increasing, decreasing, stable detectable or stable undetectable MRD. Figure 1. Percentage of patients on LEN and OBS arms with increasing, decreasing, stable detectable or stable undetectable MRD. Disclosures Gottlieb: Indee: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Aurran:Janssen: Honoraria. Tam:Gilead: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Letestu:Roche: Honoraria; Alexion: Honoraria. Levy:Roche: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Abbive: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Leblond:Roche: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Mulligan:GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cymbalista:Abbvie: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria.

scholarly journals Heavy and Light Chain Monitoring in High Risk Smoldering Multiple Myeloma Patients Included in the GEM-CESAR Trial: Comparison with Conventional and Minimal Residual Disease IMWG Response Assessment

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1852-1852
Author(s):  
Noemi Puig ◽  
Teresa Contreras ◽  
Bruno Paiva ◽  
María Teresa Cedena ◽  
José J Pérez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Bone Marrow ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Response Assessment ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Minimal Residual

Introduction: The GEM-CESAR trial is a potentially curative strategy for high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma (HRsMM) patients (pts) in which the primary endpoint is the achievement of bone marrow minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. However, other methods of disease evaluation in serum such as heavy+light chain (HLC) assessment, with a potential complementary value to the IMWG response criteria, have also been tested. Aim: To evaluate the performance of HLC assay in HRsMM pts at diagnosis and after consolidation, comparing the results with standard serological methods and Next Generation Flow (NGF) for the assessment of bone marrow MRD. Patients and Methods: Ninety HRsMM pts included in the GEM-CESAR trial received six 4-weeks cycles of carfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone followed by high dose melphalan and 2 further cycles of consolidation with the same regimen. All pts received maintenance treatment with lenalidomide for up to 2 years. SPEP and IFE were performed using standard procedures. Serum IgGk, IgGl, IgAk and IgAl HLC concentrations were measured using Hevylite (The Binding Site Group Ltd, Birmingham, UK) on a SPA PLUS turbidimeter. HLC concentrations and ratios were considered abnormal if they were outside the 95% reference ranges provided by the manufacturer. MRD was analyzed by flow cytometry following EuroFlow recommendations (sensitivity, 2x10-6). Standard response assignment was carried out as per the IMWG guidelines. Hevylite responses were assigned and HLC-pair suppression was defined as in Michalet et al (Leukemia 2018). Results: Out of 90 HRsMM pts, 75 had monoclonal intact immunoglobulin and samples available at diagnosis (50 IgG and 25 IgA). HLC ratio was abnormal in 98% of IgG pts and in 100% of IgA pts. Response assessment by Hevylite and standard IMWG criteria were available in 62 pts post-consolidation (Table 1). A good agreement was found between the two methods (kappa quadratic weighting = 0,6327 (0,4016 - 0,8638)). Among 46 pts with assigned CR as per the IMWG response criteria, there were 3 and 8 pts in PR and VGPR according to the Hevylite method, respectively. In 62 cases, paired Hevylite and MRD assessment data were available. Concordant results were found in 72.5% of cases (45/62; HLC+/NGF+ in 15 and HLC-/NGF- in 30 cases) while in the remaining 27.4% of cases results were discordant (17/62; HLC-/NGF+ in 6 and HLC+/NGF- in 11 cases). Post-consolidation, 24, 25.8 and 42.3% of the 62 samples were positive by SPEP, NGF and Hevylite, respectively. HLC-pair suppression was identified in 13/62 pts; 10 had severe HLC-pair suppression at the end of consolidation. After a median follow-up of 32 months (8-128), 93% of pts remain alive and progression-free. Three patients that have already progressed had their responses assessed post-consolidation. The first pt was assigned VGPR by the standard IMWG criteria and PR by Hevylite and was MRD positive by NGF; the second pt was assigned CR by IMWG criteria and Hevylite but had severe HLC-pair immunosuppression and was MRD positive by NGF; the third pt was in CR by IMWG and HLC criteria and was MRD positive by MFC. Conclusions: Moderate agreement was found between response assessment by Hevylite and the standard IMWG methods as well as between Hevylite and MRD assessment by NGF. Most discordances were a result of Hevylite detecting disease in samples negative by the standard methods, but longer follow-up is needed to ascertain its clinical value. HLC assessment could have anticipated the progression noted in 2 (out of 3) patients. Disclosures Puig: Takeda, Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; The Binding Site: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Paiva:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Roche and Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, Janssen, Sanofi and Takeda: Consultancy. Rodriguez Otero:Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy. Oriol:Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, Jansse: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rios:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de la Rubia:Amgen: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy. De Arriba:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria. Ocio:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bladé:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Irctures: Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Doublet Vs Triplet Lenalidomide-Containing Regimens in Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Patients, Younger or Older Than 75 Years: Subgroup Analysis of a Phase III Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2110-2110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Anna Marina Liberati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Off Label ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
To Receive

Abstract Introduction : a formal comparison between Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (Rd) and Lenalidomide-Prednisone plus Melphalan (MPR) or Cyclophosphamide (CPR) has not been performed yet. We compared Rd vs. MPR vs. CPR in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients ≥65 years old in a multicenter phase III trial. Per protocol, upfront dose reductions of Dexamethasone, Melphalan and Cyclophosphamide were performed, according to patients age ( ≤75 years vs. >75 years). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Methods : 662 patients with NDMM were randomized to receive nine 28-day cycles of Rd (n=222), MPR (n=218) or CPR (n=222). Rd: lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15,22 in patients 65-75 years old and 20 mg in those >75 years; MPR: lenalidomide 10 mg/day for 21 days; melphalan orally 0.18 mg/Kg for 4 days in patients 65-75 years old and 0.13 mg/Kg in patients >75 years; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days; CPR: lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in patients 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day in patients >75 years; prednisone 25 mg every other day. After induction, patients were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (R) or with prednisone (RP). Results : Patients characteristics were well balanced. Eighty-three (37%) patients in the Rd, 86 (39%) in the MPR and 80 (36%) in the CPR groups were older than 75 years. In intention to treat analysis, after a median follow-up of 31 months, no difference in PFS and overall survival (OS) was observed. Median PFS was 23 months in Rd, 27 months in MPR and 23 months in CPR (Rd vs MPR p=0.216; Rd vs CPR p=0.872; MPR vs CPR p=0.148). Median OS was not reached and was 73% in Rd, 67% in MPR and 72% in CPR at 3 years (Rd vs MPR p=0.663; Rd vs CPR p=0.754; MPR vs CPR p=0.448). A subgroup analysis, according to age was performed. No difference in response rate was observed. In patients ≤75 years, median PFS was 23 in Rd, 30 in MPR and 23 months in CPR (Rd vs MPR, p<0.04; Rd vs CPR p=0.897; MPR vs CPR, p<0.05). Median OS was not reached and was 75% in Rd, 76% in MPR, 77% in CPR at 3 years (Rd vs MPR p=0.251; Rd vs CPR p=0.280; MPR vs CPR p=0.975). In patients >75 years, no PFS difference was noticed: median PFS was 22 in Rd, 18 in MPR, 21 months in CPR (Rd vs MPR p=0.572; Rd vs CPR p=0.699; MPR vs CPR p=0.914). An OS advantage was reported with Rd: median OS was not reached in Rd patients, and was 37 and 43 months in the MPR and CPR groups, respectively (Rd vs MPR p=0.04; Rd vs CPR p=0.430; MPR vs CPR p=0.323). The rate of at least one hematologic grade 3-4 adverse event was 29% in Rd, 66% in MPR, 33% in CPR patients ≤ 75 years and 29% in Rd, 70% in MPR, 33% in CPR patients > 75 years (MPR vs Rd/CPR p< 0.0001). No difference was observed in extra-hematologic adverse events: 25% in Rd, 24% in MPR and 25% in CPR patients ≤75 years; 29% in Rd, 35% in MPR, 34% in CPR patients >75 years. Conclusion : this trial compared for the first time Rd, MPR and CPR in elderly NDMM. In all patients, the addition of alkylating agent to Lenalidomide-steroid combination did not show any advantage on PFS and OS. In a subgroup analysis, safety and efficacy data suggest that triplet regimens may be indicated in patients ≤75 years, while a doublet regimens for those >75 years. The MPR combination showed a PFS advantage in patients ≤75 years, with a higher incidence of hematologic toxicity and SPM. In patients >75 years an OS advantage was reported with Rd, mainly due to a higher efficacy of salvage treatments. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Off Label Use: Use of Lenalidomide as off label. Bringhen:Onyx: Consultancy; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen and Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Offidani:Mundipharma: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Janssen and Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Patriarca:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria; Janssen and Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Onyx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen and Cilag: 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. Palumbo:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Diagnostic Tumor Mirna Profiling Predicts Molecular Relapse in Mantle Cell Lymphoma Patients Prospectively Followed for Minimal Residual Disease. Results from the Nordic MCL2-3 Trials

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2994-2994
Author(s):  
Simon Husby ◽  
Lone Bredo Pedersen ◽  
Ulrik Ralfkiær ◽  
Christian Garde ◽  
Sara Ek ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Risk Patients ◽  
Minimal Residual

Abstract Background Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is a subtype of non-Hodgkin`s lymphoma (NHL) with a variable but often aggressive clinical course. The majority of MCL patients ≤65 years will experience clinical relapse during a 10-year period (Geisler et al. Br J Haematol 2012). Risk-stratification is therefore of great importance in order to identify patients who are eligible for novel or alternative treatment regimens. Minimal residual disease (MRD) monitoring can predict clinical progression in MCL and guide pre-emptive treatment with rituximab as single agent. It has thus far not been possible to predict post-treatment molecular relapse (MRD-positivity). Although some recent studies have shown that aberrant miRNA expression delineate pathogenic molecular pathways and predict survival in MCL patients, miRNA profiling has not been performed in the context of MRD and molecular relapse. Aims We assessed MCL miRNA expression, in a large, prospective, uniformly treated patient cohort followed with molecular markers for MRD to determine if miRNAs could predict molecular relapse. Methods Diagnostic MCL tumor samples from 114 patients in the Nordic MCL2 and MCL3 clinical trials were retrieved. All patients had confirmed CyclinD1 overexpression and 96 patients had Ki-67 expression measurement for use in the MIPI-B predictive score. All patients received almost identical induction treatment with six alternating cycles of maxi-CHOP and high-dose Ara-C in combination with rituximab. Patients in remission were consolidated with high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell transplantation. All patients had a molecular marker (PCR detectable t(11;14) or clonal IgH rearrangement) for MRD. The median follow-up was 6.4 years for the MCL2 cohort and 3.7 years for the MCL3 cohort. 19 miRNAs, previously found to have prognostic significance in MCL (Husby et al EHA 2014), were measured by qRT-PCR and analyzed in concordance with MRD-data. The main endpoint was first event of molecular relapse (MRD-positive sample). Results Of the 114 patients in the study, 71 (62%) patients became MRD-positive in the follow-up period. Of the 19 examined miRNAs, 10 miRNAs showed unique qPCR melting curves and were analyzed with respect to MRD. Four miRNAs (miR-92a, miR-3687, miR-486-5p and miR-185-5p) were significantly up-regulated in patients who had molecular relapse (t-test; respectively p = 0.010, p = 0.019, p = 0.048, p = 0.043). However miR-18b, previously identified as prognostic marker regarding survival, was not significantly overexpressed. We hereafter investigated if a newly derived prognostic score, the MIPI-B-miR, which incorporates miR-18b with the MIPI-B, could predict molecular relapse. The MIPI-B-miR high-risk patients had significantly shorter time to first molecular relapse than MIPI-B high-risk patients (Figure 1). Functional studies of these aberrantly expressed miRs are ongoing. Conclusion Patients with molecular relapse had significantly increased levels of miR-92a, miR-3687, miR-486-5p and miR-185-5p, and MIPI-B-miR improved MRD prediction compared to MIPI-B. Aberrant miRNA profiles may be able to predict molecular relapse, and may already at diagnosis identify patients eligible to anti-CD20 antibody maintenance or alternative regimens. However validation in other cohorts is needed. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Kolstad: Nordic Nanovector: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Räty:GlaxoSmithKline Ltd: Honoraria; Roche Ltd: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document