Phase I/II Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Lenalidomide/Bortezomib/Dexamethasone (RVD) and Panobinostat in Transplant-Eligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Abstract Background: Induction therapy prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) continues to improve with the use of multi-drug combination regimens. Panobinostat (pano), a deacetylase inhibitor, was recently approved in combination with bortezomib/dexamethasone for relapsed myeloma based on the phase III PANORMA I trial for RRMM. The addition of pano in PANORAMA demonstrated a near doubling in CR rate from 15 to 27%. We previously reported phase I trial data of RVD + pano in newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM) and demonstrated the pano can be safely combined with RVD. Based on the encouraging preliminary data we pursued a phase II dose expansion to further explore the potential improvement in depth of response with RVD + pano in NDMM. Methods: The primary objective was to determine the safety/tolerability of pano and RVD in NDMM. Secondary objectives were to determine efficacy as measured by the CR/nCR rate after 4 cycles, ORR, tolerability/toxicity, and progression free survival. Patients had to have NDMM with indication for therapy and be eligible for ASCT with adequate organ function. Panobinostat 10 mg was administered on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 was administered subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, 11; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-14; dexamethasone 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 on a 21 day cycle. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4 and responses were assessed by the modified International Uniform Response Criteria. Results: 42 patients (pts) were enrolled; 12 in the dose escalation and 30 in the dose expansion. The median age was 60 (range 44-79); male (n=30); ISS stage I (n=28); ISS stage II (n=10); ISS stage III (n=4); 14/42 pts had high risk myeloma (1 pt with t(4:14) and del17p; 1 pt with del 17p and 1q21; and 12 pts with only 1q21 amplification). Among 42 pts, 2 completed only 1-2 cycles and 1 pt was inevaluable for response. Among the 39 pts who completed 4 cycles and were evaluable for efficacy the ORR (≥PR) after 4 cycles was 93% (36/39) including nCR/CR in 17/39 (44%), VGPR in 10/39 (26%), PR in 9/39 (23%), and SD in 3/39 (8%) pts. In 12 of 14 pts with high risk disease, who were evaluable for response, the ORR was 100% (12/12); the nCR/CR in 6/12 pts; VGPR in 4/12 pts; and 2/12 pts achieved a PR. 25/42 (59%) pts completed induction therapy and underwent consolidation with ASCT; 5 pts completed induction therapy, came off study and did not proceed to ASCT. 8 pts choose a delayed transplant approach, completed induction therapy and stem cell collection. 6 of those 8 pts remain on trial with maintenance therapy (len/dex/pano) per protocol. 2 pts, neither with high risk disease, progressed after cycles 10 and 11 with extramedullary disease and plasma cell leukemia/central nervous system involvement, respectively. 4 additional patients have completed 2, 3, and 5 cycles of therapy and are pending ASCT. Grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events included anemia (5); neutropenia (10); thrombocytopenia (16). Grade 3-4 nonhematologic toxicities included ALT elevation (1); AST elevation (1); constipation (2); diarrhea (4); dyspnea (2); fatigue/muscle weakness (5); syncope (2); MI (1); nausea (3); peripheral neuropathy (2); rash (1); DVT/VTE (3). Infectious complications included grade 2 (G2) urinary tract infection (2); G2 upper respiratory tract infection (5); pneumonia (5); osteomyelitis/musculoskeletal (3); infection (3). Treatment emergent serious adverse events related to therapy observed were: G3 pneumonia (9); G2 fever (5), G3-4 venous thromboembolic events (2); G3 diarrhea (2); atrial fibrillation (2). Other events included 1 pt each with G3 cellulitis, G3 myocardial infarction (MI), G3 febrile neutropenia, G2 diarrhea, G2 seizure, G3 hypotension and G3 sinusitis. 1 pt had a second primary malignancy - a newly diagnosed breast cancer during cycle 9 of therapy. Conclusions: Panobinostat 10 mg can be safely combined with full dose RVD in NDMM. The side effect profile with use of subcutaneous bortezomib demonstrated minimal gastrointestinal toxicity/diarrhea and was a well-tolerated combination. The combination of RVD+ pano lead to rapid disease control with high response rate after 4 cycles of therapy and ORR of 93% and significant depth of response with a 4 cycle nCR/CR rate of 44%. Enrollment in dose expansion is near completion and full data will be presented at ASH and supports the study of panobinostat in a randomized trial for NDMM. Disclosures Shah: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Thomas:Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Orlowski:Genentech: Consultancy; Acetylon: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; BioTheryX, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

A Phase II Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide, Subcutaneous Bortezomib and Dexamethasone (RVD) Combination Therapy for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Promising Activity and Manageable Toxicity, Including in High Risk Disease

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-116280 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1981-1981

Author(s):

Jacob Laubach ◽

Andrew J Yee ◽

Jacalyn Rosenblatt ◽

Jeffrey V Matous ◽

Charles M. Farber ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rate ◽

Median Number ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Induction Cycle

Abstract Introduction: Patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) are commonly treated with the standard of care combination of lenalidomide (Len), bortezomib (Bz), and dexamethasone (Dex), also known as RVD. A recent randomized phase 3 study found that the addition of Bz to Len and Dex significantly increased median overall and progression free survival as well as response rate (Durie et al. Lancet 2017). Mild to moderate peripheral neuropathy (PN) is commonly reported with Bz use, although lower rates of PN have been reported with subcutaneous (SC) administration of single agent Bz compared with IV Bz (Moreau et al. Lancet Oncol 2011). Here we present preliminary results of a multi-center, open-label, single arm phase II trial of Len, SC Bz, and Dex in pts with newly diagnosed MM. Maintenance was risk-stratified, with high risk patients (defined as those with high risk cytogenetics (del17p, t(4:14), t(14;16)) or ISS stage II or III) receiving Bz in addition to Len. Primary endpoints included 1) overall response rate (ORR) after 4 induction cycles, 2) best response to induction therapy, and 3) rate and severity of PN during induction therapy. Methods: Patients enrolled in this study were newly diagnosed with active MM as defined by the revised IMWG criteria (Rajkumar et al. Lancet Oncol 2014). Protocol specified induction treatment consisted of 21-day cycles with Len 25 mg on days 1-14, SQ Bz 1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, and 11, and Dex 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12. Stem cell mobilization followed induction cycle 4 and patients subsequently proceeded to either high dose melphalan and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or 4 additional cycles of induction therapy based on patient preference with provider input. Following ASCT or completion of the 8th induction cycle pts proceeded to risk-stratified maintenance therapy. Maintenance consisted of 28-day cycles of therapy with Len on days 1-21 for all patients, while those pts defined as high-risk also received SC bortezomib Bz on days 1 and 15. Patients remained on maintenance therapy until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from protocol-directed treatment. Response was based on the IMWG uniform criteria (Rajkumar et al. Lancet Oncol 2011) and toxicities were graded based on the NCI-CTCAE V4. Correlative samples of blood and bone marrow for genomics and proteomics were collected from baseline and then throughout the study, and are currently being analyzed. Results: Forty-five pts were enrolled across 8 US sites between December 2015 and June 2017. Median age at enrollment was 61 years (range: 43 to 79) and 60% of the patients were male, 40% female. FISH cytogenetics found del 17p in 8% of pts tested, t(14;16) in 9%, and t(4;14) in 14%. At baseline, 60% of pts were ISS II/III. High risk pts comprised 62% of the study population overall. 80% of pts (36/45) collected stem cells and 31% of pts (14/45) continued to ASCT. The median number of CD34+ stem cells collected was 9.67 x 10^6. The median number of induction cycles completed was 8 (1 to 8 cycles) and 43 of 45 pts were evaluable for the primary endpoint of response after 4 induction cycles, with preliminary results indicating an ORR of 91% (39/43). Three pts did not reach the end of cycle 4 and 1 patient had stable disease. ORR at any point up to the beginning of maintenance was 98% (42/43). Any grade PN was reported by 80% of patients, including 38% with grade 1 and 36% with grade 2 PN. There were two cases of Grade 3 PN and one case of Grade 4 PN. Among the three patients with Grade ≥ 3 PN, symptoms improved to Grade ≤ 2 with dose reduction, modification of treatment schedule, or discontinuation of Bz. Importantly, given the higher than expected rate of all and high-grade PN, hydration with IV normal saline 500-1000 ccs prior to Bz administration as part of supportive care in selected patients was instituted and a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of this intervention on PN is in process. Conclusions: The combination of RVD with SC Bz is a highly effective treatment regimen for patients with newly diagnosed MM, including high risk pts. However, rates of all- and high-grade PN were greater than expected despite the use of SC Bz. Prompt dose reduction and/or change in schedule of Bz administration to weekly administration is recommended, with careful attention to supportive care in order to further improve tolerability. Disclosures Rosenblatt: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Matous:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Farber:Charles M. Farber, MD, PhD, LLC-Medical legal consulting: Consultancy; Gilead: Honoraria; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; ummit Medical Group-MD Anderson Cancer Center: Employment; BeiGene: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding. Ghobrial:Celgene: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Richardson:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase I/Ib Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Combination Therapy with Lenalidomide/Bortezomib/Dexamethasone (RVD) and Panobinostat in Transplant-Eligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.33.33 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 33-33 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Jatin J. Shah ◽

Lei Feng ◽

Elisabet E. Manasanch ◽

Donna M. Weber ◽

Sheeba K. Thomas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Depth Of Response

Abstract Background: Induction therapy prior to consolidation with autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) continues to improve with the use of proteasome inhibitors and imids and combination regimens such as RVD. Bortezomib-based induction therapy has improved overall response rates (ORR) prior to transplant, which has translated to improvements in ORR and progression free survival post ASCT. However, complete remission (CR) rates with RVD remain low (10-15%) after 4 cycles of induction therapy. Panobinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, in combination with bortezomib/dexamethasone, has demonstrated a significant improvement in depth of response and progression free survival in patients (pts) with relapsed myeloma as seen in PANORMA I. Preclinical data demonstrate synergy between the combination of bortezomib and panobinostat. We undertook a phase I/Ib trial in pts with newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM) of RVD + Panobinostat to establish the safety of the combination and goal of improving the depth of response with induction therapy prior to ASCT. Methods: The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety/tolerability of RVD + panobinostat in NDMM. Secondary objectives were to determine efficacy as measured by the CR/nCR rate after 4 cycles, ORR, tolerability/toxicity, and progression free survival. Pts had to have NDMM with indication for therapy, candidates for ASCT with and had adequate organ function. Panobinostat was administered on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12; bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 was administered subcutaneously on days 1, 4, 8, 11; lenalidomide 25 mg on days 1-14; dexamethasone 20 mg on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 on a 21 day cycle. Dose-escalation of panobinostat used a standard 3+3 schema with dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) assessed during cycle 1. Three dose levels were studied with Panobinostat escalated from 10 to 20 mg. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4, while responses were assessed by the modified International Uniform Response Criteria. Results: 22 pts were enrolled; 12 pts in the completed phase 1 dose escalation portion of the study and 10/20 in the ongoing dose expansion. The median age was 61 (range 53-79); ISS stage I 12; stage II 7/20; stage III in 3/20 pts. No DLTs were observed in 3 pts dosed in cohort 1, with Panobinostat at 10 mg. In cohort 2, panobinostat was dosed at 15 mg, 2/6 pts encountered a DLT. One patient experienced Grade 4 (G4) thrombocytopenia, and the second patient had G3 diarrhea without supportive measures, for <12 hours and resolved with supportive measures. In cohort 1, 3 additional patients were enrolled and no DLTs were encountered in the remaining 3 pts. The final recommended dose was Panobinostat 10 mg in combination with RVD in NDMM. Treatment emergent SAEs related to therapy observed in 5 pts with 2 incidences of G3 diarrhea; 2 pts with atrial fibrillation; and other events included G4 thrombocytopenia; G3 bacteremia, G3 cellulitis, G3 myocardial infarction (MI), G3 pulmonary emboli; G3 pneumonia. Hematologic adverse events G3/4 included anemia 3/22; neutropenia 4/22; thrombocytopenia 7/22. G3/4 nonhematologic toxicities included ALT elevation (n=2); AST elevation (n=1); constipation (n=2); diarrhea (n=2); fatigue/muscle weakness (n=2); MI (n=1); pneumonia (n=3). Among 18/22 pts who have completed 4 cycles of therapy and are evaluable for efficacy, the ORR (≥PR) was 100%: including nCR/CR in 5/18 (28%), VGPR in 5/18 (28%), PR in 8/18 (44%). Conclusions: MTD has been established at level 1, with panobinostat 10 mg and full dose RVD in NDMM. The DLTs were diarrhea (irrespective of supportive care) and thrombocytopenia. This is the first experience with panobinostat and subcutaneous bortezomib and first experience in combination with RVD. The combination is well tolerated with limited toxicity and side effects can be managed with supportive care. The preliminary activity after 4 cycles of therapy demonstrated a high ORR of 100% and a promising depth of response with a nCR/CR of 27%. Enrollment in a dose expansion cohort is near completion and full data will be presented at ASH. Disclosures Shah: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array: Consultancy, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Carfilzomib for use in front-line tx of multiple myeloma . Weber:OncPep: Research Funding. Thomas:Novartis, Celgene, Millenium, Idera Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Orlowski:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

PreVent-ACaLL Short-term combined acalabrutinib and venetoclax treatment of newly diagnosed patients with CLL at high risk of infection and/or early treatment, who do not fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria for treatment. A randomized study with extensive immune phenotyping

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-121907 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 4304-4304

Author(s):

Caspar Da Cunha-Bang ◽

Rudy Agius ◽

Arnon P. Kater ◽

Mark-David Levin ◽

Anders Österborg ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Severe Infection ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Risk Of Infection ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Educational Grant ◽

Travel Grant ◽

Grade 3

Background Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) have an increased risk of infections both prior to and upon treatment. Infections are the major cause of death for these patients, the 5-year incidence of severe infection prior to treatment is approximately 32 % with a 30-day mortality of 10 % (Andersen et al., Haematologica, 2018). Chemoimmunotherapy is still 1st line standard of treatment for patients without del17p or TP53 mutation despite association with neutropenia, immunesuppression and infections. The combination of BTK inhibitors and the bcl-2 inhibitor venetoclax has demonstrated synergy in vitro and in vivo, while translational data indicate that the CLL-related immune dysfunction can be improved on treatment with reduced risk of infections. Employing the Machine-Learning based CLL treatment infection model (CLL-TIM) that we have developed, patients with a high (>65%) risk of infection and/or need of CLL treatment within 2 years of diagnosis can be identified (CLL-TIM.org). The significant morbidity and mortality due to infections in treatment-naïve CLL warrants trials that challenge the dogma of only treating symptomatic CLL. Thus, we initiated the randomized phase 2 PreVent-ACall trial of 12 weeks acalabrutinib + venetoclax to reduce risk of infections. Methods Design and statistics A phase 2, randomized, open label, multi-center clinical trial for newly diagnosed patients with CLL. Based on the CLL-TIM algorithm, patients with high risk of severe infection and/or treatment within 2 years from diagnosis can be identified. Approximately 20% of newly diagnosed CLL patients will fall into this high-risk group. First patient in trial planned for September 2019, primary outcome expected in 2021. Only patients identified as at high risk, who do not currently fulfil IWCLL treatment criteria are eligible. Patients will be randomized between observation in terms of watch&wait according to IWCLL guidelines or treatment. Primary endpoint Grade ≥3-Infection-free survival in the treatment arm compared to the observation arm after 24 weeks (12 weeks after end of treatment). Study treatment Acalabrutinib 100 mg BID from cycle 1 day 1 for 12 weeks. Venetoclax, ramp up during the first five weeks starting cycle 1 day 1, thereafter 400 mg once daily for a total of 12 weeks counted from cycle 1 day 1. Patients A sample size of 25 patients in each arm, 50 patients in total. Major inclusion criteria CLL according to IWCLL criteria ≤1 year prior to randomizationHigh risk of infection and/or progressive treatment within 2 years according to CLL-TIM algorithmIWCLL treatment indication not fulfilledAdequate bone marrow functionCreatinine clearance above 30 mL/min.ECOG performance status 0-2. Major exclusion criteria Prior CLL treatmentRichter's transformationPrevious autoimmune disease treated with immune suppressionMalignancies other than CLL requiring systemic therapies or considered to impact survivalRequirement of therapy with strong CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 inhibitors/inducers or anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonistsHistory of bleeding disorders, current platelet inhibitors / anticoagulant therapyHistory of stroke or intracranial hemorrhage within 6 months Trial registry number EUDRACT NUMBER: 2019-000270-29 Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT03868722 Perspectives: As infections is a major cause of morbidity and mortality for patients with CLL prior to any treatment, we aim at changing the natural history of immune dysfunction in CLL. The PreVent-ACaLL trial includes an optional extension into a phase 3 part with the primary outcome of grade ≥3 infection-free, CLL treatment-free survival two years after enrollment to address the unmet need of improved immune function in CLL for the first time. Figure Disclosures Da Cunha-Bang: AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel Grant; Roche: Other: Travel Grant. Levin:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational Grant; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant ; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Educational grant . Österborg:BeiGene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Kancera AB: Research Funding. Niemann:Novo Nordisk Foundation: Research Funding; Gilead: Other: Travel grant; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel grant; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Acerta: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: Travel grant, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: acalabrutinib and venetoclax in combination for CLL.

Download Full-text

A Phase 1/2 Study of G-CSF, Cladribine, Cytarabine, and Dose-Escalated Mitoxantrone (G-CLAM) in Adults with Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) or High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.1068.1068 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 1068-1068 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Anna B. Halpern ◽

Megan Othus ◽

Emily M Huebner ◽

Kaysey F. Orlowski ◽

Bart L. Scott ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Chemotherapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 1 ◽

Hematologic Toxicity ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Dose Levels

Abstract Introduction:"7+3" with standard doses of cytarabine and an anthracycline has remained the mainstay of induction chemotherapy for newly diagnosed AML. Since some studies have shown improved outcomes with high-dose cytarabine, cladribine, or escalated doses of anthracyclines, we conducted a phase 1/2 study (NCT02044796) of G-CLAM using escalated doses of mitoxantrone for newly diagnosed AML or high-risk MDS (>10% blasts). Methods: Patients≥18 years were eligible if they had treatment-related mortality (TRM) scores of ≤6.9 (corresponding to a predicted risk of early death with standard induction chemotherapy of ≤6.9%) and adequate organ function (LVEF ≥45%, creatinine ≤2.0 mg/dL, bilirubin ≤2.5 times upper limit of normal). Excluded were patients with uncontrolled infection or concomitant illness with expected survival <1 year. In phase 1, cohorts of 6-12 patients were assigned to 1 of 4 total dose levels of mitoxantrone (12, 14, 16, or 18 mg/m2/day, days 1-3, compared to 10 mg/m2/day used in standard dose G-CLAM previously established in relapsed/refractory AML). Other drug doses were G-CSF 300 or 480 μg/day (for weight </≥76 kg; days 0-5), cladribine 5 mg/m2/day (days 1-5), and cytarabine 2 g/m2/day (days 1-5). In phase 2, patients were treated at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of mitoxantrone. A second identical course of G-CLAM was given if complete remission (CR) was not achieved with cycle 1. Up to 4 cycles of consolidation with G-CLA (mitoxantrone omitted) were allowed if CR or CR with incomplete platelet or blood count recovery (CRp/i) was achieved with 1-2 cycles of induction therapy. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were: 1) grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity lasting >48 hours that resulted in >7-day delay of the subsequent treatment cycle; 2) grade ≥4 non-hematologic toxicity if recovery to grade ≤2 within 14 days, both excluding febrile neutropenia, infection or constitutional symptoms. Results: Among 33 patients (median age of 57.3 [range: 26-77], median TRM score 2.31 [0.16-5.90]) treated in phase 1, one DLT occurred at dose levels 3 and 4 (respiratory failure in both cases), establishing G-CLAM with mitoxantrone at 18 mg/m2/day as the MTD. Sixty-two patients, including 6 treated in phase 1, received G-CLAM at MTD. Patient characteristics were as follows: median age 58 (21-81) years, median TRM score 2.85 (0.06-6.73), with AML (n=52) or high-risk MDS (n=10). Cytogenetics were favorable in 6, intermediate in 44, and adverse in 12 (MRC criteria); 11 patients had NPM1 and 6 had FLT3 mutations. Fifty-two patients (83.9%, 95% confidence interval: 72.3-92.0%) achieved a CR (n=48 [77.4%: 65.0-87.1%]), or CRp/i (n=4 [6.5%: 1.8-15.7%]) with 1-2 cycles of therapy. Only 3 patients required 2 cycles to best response. Among the 48 CR patients, 43 (89.6%) were negative for measurable residual disease (MRDneg) by flow cytometry. Four patients had morphologic leukemia free state, 1 patient with myeloid sarcoma had a partial remission, 4 had resistant disease, and 1 died from indeterminate cause. One patient died within 28 days of treatment initiation (septic shock). Median times to an absolute neutrophil count ≥500/μL and a platelet count of ≥50,000/μL were 26 and 23 days. Besides infections and neutropenic fever, maculopapular rash, and hypoxia (fluid overload/infection-related) were the most common grade ≥3 adverse events. In addition to the phase 1/2 MTD cohort, there were 15 patients treated in an expansion cohort and 3 eligible patients treated off protocol with mitoxantrone at 18 mg/m2. For these 80 patients combined treated at MTD, the CR and CR/CRp/i rates were 76.3% and 81.2%. After multivariable adjustment, compared to 300 patients treated with 7+3 on the SWOG S0106 trial, G-CLAM with mitoxantrone 18mg/ m2 was associated with an increased probability of CR (odds ratio [OR]= 3.08, p=.02), CR/CRp/i (OR=2.96, p=.03), a trend towards improved MRDnegCR (OR= 3.70, p=.06), and a trend towards improved overall survival ([OS]; hazard ratio=0.34, p=.07). For the entire study cohort, the 6 and 12-month relapse-free survival were 73% (64-83%) and 62% (42-74%) and the 6 and 12-month OS were 89% (82- 96%) and 77% (67-88%). Conclusions: G-CLAM with mitoxantrone up to 18 mg/m2/day is well tolerated and has potent anti-leukemia activity. This regimen may warrant further randomized comparison with 7+3. We also plan to examine the addition of sorafenib to G-CLAM in newly diagnosed AML patients regardless of FLT3 status. Disclosures Othus: Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Scott:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Becker:GlycoMimetics: Research Funding. Erba:Ariad: Consultancy; Gylcomimetics: Other: DSMB; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sunesis: Consultancy; Jannsen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Agios: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, DSMB, Speakers Bureau; Celator: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

A Phase 1a/b Dose Escalation Study of the MYC Repressor Apto-253 in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory AML or High-Risk MDS

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-150049 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3411-3411

Author(s):

Maro Ohanian ◽

Martha L. Arellano ◽

Moshe Y. Levy ◽

Kristen O'Dwyer ◽

Hani Babiker ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Trial ◽

High Risk ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Grade 3 ◽

Refractory Aml

Abstract INTRODUCTION: APTO-253 represses expression of the MYC oncogene by targeting a conserved G-quadruplex structure in its promoter, down-regulates MYC mRNA and protein levels and induces apoptosis in AML cell lines and marrow samples from patients with AML, MDS, and MPN in vitro. After injection, a large fraction of APTO-253 binds iron and transforms to the Fe(253) 3 complex which retains full activity. APTO-253 has been granted orphan drug designation for AML by the US FDA and is being studied in a Phase 1a/b clinical trial in patients with relapsed or refractory AML (R/R AML) or high-risk myelodysplasias (high-risk MDS) (NCT02267863). AIMS: Primary objectives are to determine the safety and tolerability of APTO-253, MTD, dose limiting toxicities (DLT), and the RP2D. Key secondary objectives are to assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, pharmacodynamic (PD) activity, and preliminary evidence of antitumor activity. METHODS: Eligible patients have R/R AML or high-risk MDS for which either standard treatment has failed, is no longer effective, or can no longer be administered safely. Treatment- emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and tumor responses are evaluated using International Working Group criteria. APTO-253 is administered by IV infusion once weekly on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each 28-day cycle; ascending dose cohorts were enrolled at a starting dose of 20 mg/m 2 with planned escalation to 403 mg/m 2. RESULTS: As of June 7, 2021, a total of 18 patients (median age 64.0 years, 16 AML and 2 high-risk MDS) with a median of 2.5 prior treatments (range of 1 - 9) have been treated with APTO-253 at doses of 20 (n=1), 40 (n=1), 66 (n=4), 100 (n=4) and 150 mg/m 2 (n=8). Most patients were RBC (87.5% of AML and 100% of MDS) and/or platelet (75% of AML and 50% MDS) transfusion-dependent. No DLTs or drug-related serious adverse events have been reported. Only 1 patient had a drug-related TEAE of grade 3 or greater (fatigue, Grade 3, probably related). Preliminary PK analysis (Figure 1) showed that serum levels of APTO-253 were dose proportional. C max and AUC 0-72h for C1D1 dosing were 0.06, 0.02, 0.36 ± 0.37, 0.44 ± 0.41 and 0.72 ± 0.70 µM and 0.11, 0.15, 3.98 ± 1.77, 4.79 ± 0.87 and 2.51 ± 1.73 µM*h for dose levels of 20, 40, 66, 100 and 150 mg/m 2, respectively. Plasma levels for Fe(253) 3 were significantly higher than those for the APTO-253 monomer. For example, C max and AUC 0-72h of Fe(253) 3 for C1D1 dosing of patients in Cohort 150 mg/m 2 were 2- and 20- fold higher than the ATPO-253 monomer at 15.09 ± 0.42 µM and 51.52 ± 28.26 µM*h, respectively. Following dosing at 150 mg/m 2, serum concentrations of Fe(253) 3 were above 0.5 µM for > 48 h, which approaches the therapeutic range based on in vitro studies. CONCLUSIONS: APTO-253 has been well-tolerated at doses of 20, 40, 66, 100 and 150 mg/m 2 over multiple cycles and escalated to 210 mg/m 2 (Cohort 6). PK analysis revealed that APTO-253 is rapidly transformed to and co-exists with the Fe(253) 3 in serum from R/R AML and high-risk MDS patients. Enrollment of patients at the 210 mg/m 2 dose level is ongoing and updated clinical data will be presented at the meeting. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Arellano: KITE Pharma, Inc: Consultancy; Syndax Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy. Levy: AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Epizyme: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Dova: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: Promotional speaker; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Beigene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Promotional speaker, Speakers Bureau. Mahadevan: caris: Speakers Bureau; Guardanthealt: Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Other: Clinical trial Adverse events committee; TG Therapeuticals: Other: Clinical trial Adverse events committee. Zhang: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment. Rastgoo: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment. Jin: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment. Marango: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Howell: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Rice: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Patents & Royalties; Oncolytics Biotech Inc.: Current equity holder in publicly-traded company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bejar: Aptose Biosciences, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; Takeda: Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Astex: Consultancy; Silence Therapeutics: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Dasatinib Versus Imatinib In Patients with Newly Diagnosed Chronic Myeloid Leukemia In Chronic Phase (CML-CP) In the DASISION Trial: 18-Month Follow-up

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.206.206 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 206-206 ◽

Cited By ~ 17

Author(s):

Neil Shah ◽

Hagop Kantarjian ◽

Andreas Hochhaus ◽

Jorge E. Cortes ◽

M. Brigid Bradley-Garelik ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Initial Treatment ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Analysis ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Once Daily ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 206 Background: Dasatinib is 325-fold more potent than imatinib in vitro against unmutated BCR-ABL, and is an established second-line treatment for patients (pts) with CML-CP who are resistant, intolerant or have a suboptimal response to imatinib. The Phase 3 DASISION study compares dasatinib with imatinib as initial treatment for pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP. After a minimum of 12 months (mos) of follow-up, dasatinib 100 mg once daily demonstrated significantly higher and faster rates of complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) and major molecular response (MMR) compared to imatinib 400 mg once daily (Kantarjian, H, et al. N Engl J Med 2010;362:2260). Eighteen-mo follow-up data are presented here. Methods: 519 pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP (median disease duration of 1 mo) stratified by Hasford risk were randomized to either dasatinib 100 mg once daily (n=259), or imatinib 400 mg once daily (n=260). The study design and endpoints have been described previously. All analyses were based on intention-to-treat pts. Results: Median treatment duration at the present analysis was 18 mos for each drug, with 81% of pts in the dasatinib arm and 80% in the imatinib arm still remaining on study drug. Median dose intensity was 99 mg/d for dasatinib and 400 mg/d for imatinib. Efficacy and safety results in the present analysis were consistent with those reported previously after 12 mos of follow-up. The rate of confirmed CCyR (cCCyR, CCyR on consecutive analyses at least 1 mo apart) by 18 mos continued to be higher for dasatinib than for imatinib (78% vs 70%); P=0.0366). Based on time-in-cCCyR (a measure of durability) analysis involving all randomized pts, dasatinib-treated pts were 28% less likely to experience a progression event (as defined by European LeukemiaNet 2006) after achieving a cCCyR or never achieving a cCCyR compared to those on imatinib. The MMR rate at any time was superior for dasatinib compared to imatinib (57% vs 41%, P=0.0002). Based on time-to-response analysis, pts on dasatinib were 1.84-fold more likely to achieve a MMR than those on imatinib (HR=1.84, P <0.0001). Rates of cCCyR in dasatinib-treated pts with low, intermediate and high risk were 92, 71 and 73%, respectively. The corresponding rates in the imatinib arm were 72, 71 and 64%. Rates of MMR in dasatinib-treated pts with low, intermediate and high risk were 63, 56 and 51%, respectively. The corresponding rates in the imatinib arm were 48, 40 and 30%. A BCR-ABL transcript level of ≤ 0.0032% was achieved in 13% dasatinib-treated and 7% imatinib-treated pts. Rates of progression-free survival at 18 mos were 94.9% for dasatinib and 93.7% for imatinib; the corresponding overall survival rates were 96.0% and 97.9%, respectively. Six pts (2.3%) in the dasatinib arm and 11 (4.3%) in the imatinib arm discontinued due to treatment failure as defined by 2006 European LeukemiaNet criteria. Six pts (2.3%) on dasatinib and 9 (3.5%) on imatinib had a transformation to accelerated or blast phase. Discontinuation of treatment due to drug-related adverse events (AEs) was infrequent for both dasatinib (6%) and imatinib (4%). Non-hematologic AEs (all grades) in ≥10% of pts (dasatinib vs imatinib) were fluid retention (23% vs 43%), diarrhea (18% vs 19%), nausea (9% vs 21%), vomiting (5% vs 10%), muscle inflammation (4% vs 19%), myalgia (6% vs 12%), musculoskeletal pain (12% vs 16%), fatigue (8% vs 11%) and rash (11% vs 17%). While superficial edema was less frequent with dasatinib than with imatinib (10% vs 36%), pleural effusion was seen only with dasatinib (12% vs 0%: grade 1, 2%; grade 2, 9%; grade 3, <1%), and did not impact the efficacy. Non-hematologic grade 3/4 AEs were infrequent in either arm (≤1%). Grade 3/4 cytopenias (dasatinib vs imatinib) were anemia (11% vs 7%), neutropenia (22% vs 20%) and thrombocytopenia (19% vs 10%). Two pts (0.8%) on dasatinib and 3 (1.2%) on imatinib had grade 3/4 bleeding. Cytopenia was the reason for discontinuation in 6 pts on the dasatinib arm (2.3%) and 3 on the imatinib arm (1.2%). Conclusions: After 18 mos of follow-up, dasatinib 100 mg once daily continues to demonstrate superior efficacy compared to imatinib. Dasatinib also continues to be generally well tolerated. These results support the potential use of dasatinib as initial treatment for pts with newly diagnosed CML-CP. Disclosures: Shah: Bristol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Ariad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kantarjian:BMS, Pfizer and Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy. Hochhaus:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding. Cortes:Brostol-Myers Squibb, Novartis and Wyeth: Honoraria. Bradley-Garelik:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhu:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Employment. Baccarani:Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Nelarabine May Be Safely Incorporated Into a Phase III Study for Newly Diagnosed T-Lineage Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Report From the Children's Oncology Group

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.865.865 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 865-865 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Stuart S. Winter ◽

Meenakshi Devidas ◽

Brent Wood ◽

Michael J. Borowitz ◽

Mignon L. Loh ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Adverse Events ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Motor Neuropathy ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Multi Agent

Abstract Abstract 865 With dose-intensified, multi-agent therapy, 80 to 85% of patients with T-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) are cured. Nelarabine (Compound 506U78; IND# 52611) has shown impressive single agent clinical activity in relapsed T-ALL, but has been associated with significant neurotoxicity. We previously showed that Nelarabine could be added safely to an intensive multi-agent chemotherapy backbone in the COG AALL00P2 pilot study without excess neurotoxicity. The Phase III AALL0434 T-ALL study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of adding Nelarabine to a COG-augmented BFM chemotherapy regimen. In the Safety Phase of the study, 600 patients with newly-diagnosed T-ALL were accrued from January 2007 to June 2010. Patients with high-risk T-ALL, defined by bone marrow (BM) minimal residual disease (MRD) level >1% or >5% BM blasts at day 29 of Induction, were randomized to receive backbone chemotherapy +/− five 5-day courses of Nelarabine 650 mg/m2/day once in Consolidation, once in Delayed Intensification and at the start of the first three Maintenance cycles. Patients were also randomly assigned to treatment arms that contained either high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX) plus leucovorin rescue or Capizzi style escalating intravenous MTX without rescue during Interim Maintenance. Fifty-seven patients were assigned to the High-risk arm and were equally randomized to each of the MTX regimens +/− Nelarabine; their progress was followed for at least 8 weeks after receiving cranial radiation in the Delayed Intensification Phase (week 34) to assess for neurotoxicities. Toxicities were compared between patients who were randomized to regimens with Nelarabine (n= 28) and without Nelarabine (n= 29). There were no differences in the incidence of pre-defined targeted neurotoxicities of peripheral motor neuropathy (10 Nelarabine vs 6 no Nelarabine p= 0.38), sensory neuropathy (10 Nelarabine vs 7 no Nelarabine p = 0.78) and central neurotoxicity (0 Nelarabine vs 3 no Nelarabine; p=0.11 [two-tailed Fisher's Exact Test]). Additional toxicities including febrile neutropenia (24 vs 29 p= 0.058), and AST/ALT elevations (24 vs 20; p=0.36) were similar in the regimens with/without Nelarabine. The only difference in toxicities between the regimens was increased AST and ALT (unrelated to Nelarabine) within the escalating MTX treatment arms, as compared to arms containing HD-MTX (34 vs 10 p=0.003). Adverse events were reported for 8 of 28 patients on Nelarabine-containing and 7 of 29 patients on the non-Nelarabine containing treatment arms. There were two CNS adverse events reported for the 29 patients treated without Nelarabine. There were no CNS adverse events on the Nelarabine treatment arms. There were 3 PNS adverse events reported among the 28 patients that received Nelarabine: two events in the same patient included abdominal pain and constipation, and one patient had a transient Grade 2 motor neuropathy following a course of Nelarabine. These results show that the addition of Nelarabine to the backbone chemotherapy is safe and feasible. The AALL0434 Efficacy phase has now opened, and both intermediate and high-risk patients will be randomly assigned to all four treatment arms. The COG experience with Nelarabine demonstrates that this agent may have significant toxicity in heavily pre-treated T-ALL patients, but may be well-tolerated in newly diagnosed patients. AALL0434 will determine whether or not Nelarabine treatment improves outcome of children, adolescents and young adults with newly diagnosed T-ALL. Disclosures: Borowitz: genzyme: Research Funding; becton-dickinson: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy; beckman-coulter: Research Funding. Hunger:bristol myers squibb: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; eisai: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Induction Thearapy with Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (RVD) in 1000 Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-119895 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3294-3294 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Nisha Joseph ◽

Vikas A. Gupta ◽

Craig C Hofmeister ◽

Charise Gleason ◽

Leonard Heffner ◽

...

Keyword(s):

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Response Rates ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Entire Cohort ◽

Risk Patients ◽

Standard Risk

Abstract Background : Lenalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (RVD) has been shown to be a well-tolerated and efficacious induction regimen in newly diagnosed myeloma patients. Two large randomized phase III trials show an overall response rate (ORR) >95% (Durie et al, Attal et al) supporting this combination regimen. We have conducted a retrospective analysis utilizing our institutional data of 1000 patients treated with RVD induction therapy at the Winship Cancer Institute of Emory University. Methods: 1000 newly diagnosed MM patients were treated with RVD induction therapy [R - 25 mg/day (days 1-14), V - 1.3 mg/m2 (days 1, 4 8, 11) and D - 40 mg once/twice weekly as tolerated every 21 days] from January 1st 2005 until August 31st 2016. Dose-adjustments were made based on the treating physician's discretion and patient tolerability. Demographic and outcomes data for the patients were obtained from our IRB approved myeloma database and responses were evaluated per IMWG Uniform Response Criteria. Results: The median age of this cohort was 61 years (range 16-83). Other notable patient characteristics include: M/F 54.3%/45.6%; W/AA 56.4%/34%; ISS I and II/III 54%/17%; Isotype IgG/IgA/FLC 59.1%/19%/15.8%; standard risk/high risk 72%/28%. High risk disease was defined as the presence of t(4;14), t(14;16), del(17p), and/or complex karyotype. A total of 835 patients (83.5%) underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) upfront after attaining at least a partial response with induction therapy, and 165 patients (16.5%) were offered deferred transplant. Among the patients that opted for deferred transplant, 56 of these patients (33.9%) underwent ASCT at first relapse with a median time to transplant of 30 months (3-96). 755 (75.5%) of patients received risk-stratified maintenance therapy following transplant. Evaluation of responses to induction therapy for the entire cohort show an ORR 97.3% with ≥VGPR of 68% post-induction therapy. Response rates 100 days post-transplant show an ORR 98% with 30.7% of patients achieving a sCR. Response rates are summarized in table 1. Median PFS was 63 months for the entire cohort, and 72 months for standard risk patients (61.75-82.25) versus 37 months for the high-risk patients (30.84-43.16), p<0.001. Median OS has not been reached at median of 38 months follow up (Figure 1). Conclusions: This is the largest reported cohort of myeloma patients treated with RVD induction. These results illustrate both the activity of this induction regimen with impressive response rates and long-term outcomes in both standard and high risk patients. Disclosures Hofmeister: Adaptive biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Heffner:ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Boise:AstraZeneca: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy. Kaufman:BMS: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Other: data monitoring committee; Abbvie: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Lonial:Amgen: Research Funding. Nooka:GSK: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive technologies: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Cybord-Dara Is a Highly Effective Upfront Treatment for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma. Initial Efficacy Results of the 16-Bcni-001/Ctrial-IE (ICORG) 16-02 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-112375 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3242-3242

Author(s):

Robert Henderson ◽

Mary R Cahill ◽

Philip Murphy ◽

Vitaliy Mykytiv ◽

John Quinn ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Stem Cell ◽

High Risk ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Induction Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Liver Toxicity ◽

Consolidation Therapy ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Advisory Committees

Abstract Introduction : Daratumumab (DARA), a human IgG1k monoclonal antibody with single activity in multiple myeloma (MM) shows strong synergy in combination with other anti-MM agents, including immunomodulatory drug (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PI). This has led to the exploration of DARA in combination with front line regimens. Triplets including a PI and an IMiD are considered an ideal backbone with which to combine DARA prior to Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT). However, based on the ability of Cyclophosphamide (Cy) to enhance DARA mediated antibody dependent cellular phagocytosis, we hypothesized that CyBorD may provide an alternative option (Naicker, ASH 2017). We are currently exploring the preliminary safety and efficacy of CyBorD and DARA as part of an ongoing phase 1b study in newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) pts eligible for ASCT. Last year we reported on the safety of this combination with an absence of dose limiting toxicity (DLT) with weekly subcutaneous (SQ) Bortezomib (Bor) 1.5mg/m2, Cy 300mg/m2 and DARA 16mg/kg (McEllistrim, ASH 2017). We now report on the efficacy of this regimen as pre-transplant induction, including the rate of CR post ASCT. Methods : Pts received 4 cycles of induction therapy with weekly CyBorD and DARA 16mg/kg weekly for cycles 1 and 2 and every 2 weeks for cycles 3 and 4. Following induction therapy, pts proceeded to stem cell mobilization and ASCT followed by 2 cycles of consolidation therapy with weekly CyBorD plus DARA 16mg/kg on days 1 and 15. Following completion of consolidation therapy, all pts receive DARA maintenance every 28-days for 2 yrs or until progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. Pts with high-risk features receive Bor on days 1 and 15 during maintenance phase. The primary endpoints were the incidence of DLT within the first cycle of combination at each dose level and CR rate post ASCT. Secondary endpoints included: safety, CR rate at the end of induction, consolidation and maintenance, best overall response, minimal residual disease (MRD) negative rate, progression-free survival, clinical benefit rate and overall survival. Responses were investigator-assessed as per IMWG criteria. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02955810. Results : Eighteen pts were enrolled between Nov 2016 and Dec 2017 and received at least 1 dose of treatment. Baseline characteristics were: median age = 56 y (range 32-66); M (61%), F (39%), ISS stage I, II, III in 78%, 17% and 6% of pts, respectively. 28% patients were identified with high risk genetic features [17p deletion and/or t(4;14) by FISH and/or SKY92 (SkylineDx)]. Three patients discontinued therapy early (primary refractory, persistent liver toxicity, death, respectively). Overall, treatment was well tolerated. The most common grade (gr) 3/4 hematologic treatment emergent adverse events (TEAE) were lymphopenia (44%), neutropenia (11%) and anemia (11%). The most common gr 3/4 non-hematologic TEAE were diarrhea (11%) and infection (61%). One patient died from gr 5 diffuse alveolar damage 7 weeks post ASCT. A single patient developed gr 3 liver toxicity. DARA-associated infusion reactions were ≤ gr 2 (11%). On an intent to treat (ITT) basis 94% achieved ≥ very good partial response (VGPR) with ≥ complete response (CR) in 44% pts (Figure). Among the sixteen patients completing 4 cycles of induction ORR was 100%, ≥ VGPR (69%), ≥ CR (13%). Informative NGS data (Adaptive Biotech) are available on 11/16 patients post induction, of whom 100% are MRD negative post induction at a level of ≥ 10e4. Following the induction phase 15/16 patients readily mobilized sufficient CD34 positive progenitors and proceeded to ASCT, one patient failed repeated mobilization. One patient died prior to post ASCT response assessment and data on the last patient is pending. Thus 13/15 patients are currently evaluable for response post ASCT. Responses deepened post ASCT with 100% achieving ≥ VGPR and 62% achieving ≥ CR. Based on EBMT criteria the CR/nCR rate post ASCT was 92%. Post ASCT PET-CT scans were consistent with complete metabolic response in all 13 patients. Updated results, including MRD status post ASCT will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: CyBorD-DARA is a highly active, well tolerated induction therapy for NDMM patients undergoing ASCT. These data support the further development of this combination as a convenient, cost effective alternative to PI-IMiD-DARA based combinations. Disclosures Quinn: Janssen: Honoraria. O'Dwyer:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Onkimmune: Equity Ownership, 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; BMS: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Long Term Outcome of Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (Rd) Vs Melphalan-Lenalidomide-Prednisone (MPR) Vs Cyclophosphamide-Prednisone-Lenalidomide (CPR) As Induction Followed By Lenalidomide-Prednisone (RP) Vs Lenalidomide (R) As Maintenance in a Community-Based Newly Diagnosed Myeloma Population: Updated Analysis of EMN01 Phase III Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v130.suppl_1.901.901 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽

pp. 901-901

Author(s):

Sara Bringhen ◽

Massimo Offidani ◽

Pellegrino Musto ◽

Anna Marina Liberati ◽

Giulia Benevolo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase Iii ◽

Cell Transplant ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Community Based ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Risk Of Death ◽

Grade 3 ◽

To Receive

Abstract Introduction : Rd and MPR showed to be effective combinations in elderly newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients (pts). Cyclophosphamide is a less toxic alkylating alternative agent. EMN01 is the first trial to formally compare these three different Lenalidomide-based combinations. Maintenance with Lenalidomide has been recently approved in patients eligible for autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Few data are available about the best combination as maintenance in patients not eligible for ASCT. Methods : 662 pts with NDMM were randomized to receive 9 28-day cycles of Rd (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1,8,15 and 22 in pts 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 pts 65-75 years old and 0.13 mg/Kg in >75 years pts; prednisone 1.5 mg/Kg for 4 days) or CPR (lenalidomide 25 mg/day for 21 days; cyclophosphamide orally 50 mg/day for 21 days in pts 65-75 years old and 50 mg every other day in >75 years pts; prednisone 25 mg every other day). After induction, pts were randomized to receive maintenance with lenalidomide alone (R; 10 mg/day for 21 days) or with prednisone (RP; R, 10 mg/day for 21 days and P, 25 mg every other day), until disease progression. Results : Pts characteristics were well balanced in all groups; 217 pts in Rd, 217 in MPR and 220 in CPR arms could be evaluated. After a median follow-up of 63.7 months, median PFS was 23.2 months in MPR, 18.9 months in CPR and 18.6 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.02; MPR vs Rd p=0.08). Median overall survival (OS) was 79.9 months in MPR, 69.4 months in CPR and 68.1 months in Rd (MPR vs CPR p=0.98; MPR vs Rd p=0.64). The most common grade ≥3 adverse event (AEs) was neutropenia: 64% in MPR, 29% in CPR and 25% in Rd pts (p<0.0001). Grade ≥3 non hematologic AEs were similar among arms. At the end of induction, 402 pts were eligible for maintenance, 198 in the RP and 204 in the R groups. PFS from start of maintenance was 22.2 months in the RP group and 17.6 in the R group, with 20% reduced the risk of death/progression for pts receiving RP maintenance (HR 0.81, p=0.07; Figure 1). A subgroup analysis was performed to determine the consistency of RP vs R treatment effect in different subgroups using interaction terms between treatment and cytogenetic abnormalities, ISS, age, sex, induction treatment and response before maintenance (Figure 1). No difference in OS was observed (HR 1.02, p=0.93) but the OS analysis was limited by the low number of events. Median duration of maintenance was 23.0 months in RP pts and 20.5 months in R pts, 14% and 13% of pts discontinued due to AEs, in RP and R groups, respectively. Conclusion : This phase III trial compared 2 different Lenalidomide-containing induction regimens and 2 different Lenalidomide-containing maintenance regimens in an elderly community-based NDMM population. MPR prolonged PFS by approximately 5 months, yet the higher incidence of hematologic toxicity should be carefully considered. The addition of low-dose prednisone to standard lenalidomide maintenance reduced the risk of death/progression by 20%, with a good safety profile. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Bringhen: Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Karyipharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Offidani: celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Musto: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Gaidano: Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria. De Sabbata: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo: Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Binding Site: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Honoraria, Research Funding. Hájek: Amgen, Takeda, BMS, Celgene, Novartis, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text