Comparison of Efficacy and Safety Results in 103 Treatment-Naïve Acute Myeloid Leukemia (TN-AML) Patients Not Candidates for Intensive Chemotherapy Using 5-Day and 10-Day Regimens of Guadecitabine (SGI-110), a Novel Hypomethylating Agent (HMA)

Abstract Introduction: Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a novel next-generation HMA administered as a small volume subcutaneous (SC) injection which results in extended decitabine exposure. Phase 2 studies have been conducted in TN-AML patients who were not candidates for intensive chemotherapy using two different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. We report here a comparative efficacy and safety analysis of the 5-day and 10-day regimens. Methods: TN-AML patients who were not candidates for intensive chemotherapy based on age (≥ 65 y), poor performance status (PS 2), comorbidities, or poor risk cytogenetics were enrolled in 2 separate treatment cohorts in the Phase 2 study. In the first cohort, patients were randomized (1:1) to either 60 mg/m2/d or 90 mg/m2/d on Days 1-5 (5-day regimen). In the second cohort, patients were treated with 60 mg/m2/d on Days 1-5 and Days 8-12 (10-day regimen) for up to 4 cycles, followed by 60 mg/m2/d Days 1-5 in subsequent cycles. Cycles were scheduled every 28 days for both regimes with dose reductions/delays allowed based on response and tolerability. Patients remained on treatment as long as they continued to benefit with no unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was the composite Complete Response (CRc): Complete Response (CR) + CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) + CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery (CRi) using modified International Working Group (IWG) criteria (Cheson et al, 2003). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: There was no difference in efficacy or safety between 60 and 90 mg/m2/d on the 5-day regimen (Yee et al, European Hematology Association meeting 2014, S647), so data are reported here for the two doses combined on the 5-day cohort. There were 51 patients treated in the 5-day regimen cohort and 52 treated with the 10-day regimen. There was no statistically significant difference in patient characteristics between the 2 regimens; median age 77.9 vs. 77.3 years ; male 59% vs. 65%; PS 2 or higher 35% vs. 40%; median BM blasts 40.0% vs. 49.5%; poor risk cytogenetics 46% vs. 43% for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively. Follow up of the 10-day cohort patients was shorter as it started after completion of enrolment of the 5-day cohort. The median follow up was 25.7 and 12.4 months and median number of cycles was 5 (range 1-26) and 3 (range 1-13) for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively. There was no significant difference in the primary efficacy endpoint, CRc, between the 2 regimens (p=0.43). CRc was achieved in 29/51 patients (57%) on the 5-day regimen (19 CR, 3 CRp, and 7 CRi) and in 25/52 patients (48%) on the 10-day regimen (16 CR, 5 CRp, and 4 CRi). Median OS was 10.5 and 8.7 months for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts, respectively (p=0.89). The 30, 60, and 90-day all-cause mortality rates were not statistically significant between the two cohorts: 5.9%, 15.7%, and 21.6% on the 5-day regimen and 1.9%, 17.3%, and 28.8% on the 10-day regimen. The most common Grade ≥3 AEs regardless of relationship to guadecitabine were: febrile neutropenia 59% vs. 60%, thrombocytopenia 47% vs. 38%, neutropenia 39% vs. 33%, anemia 27% vs. 19%, pneumonia 24% vs. 27%; and sepsis 12% vs. 19%, for the 5-day and 10-day cohorts respectively, none of which was statistically significant. Fifteen patients remain on treatment (5 from the 5-day cohort and 10 from the 10-day cohort). Conclusions: Guadecitabine is clinically active with a good safety profile in TN-AML patients not candidates for intensive chemotherapy. Unlike in relapsed/refractory AML, where the 10-day regimen of guadecitabine showed a trend toward improved efficacy (Roboz et al, Annals of Oncology 25 Supplement 4, 2014), there was no significant difference in either efficacy or safety between the 5-day and 10-day regimens in newly diagnosed AML patients. Guadecitabine 60 mg/m2/d SC Days 1-5 is currently being investigated in an 800-patient multicenter randomized phase 3 study in TN-AML patients unfit to receive intensive chemotherapy (ASTRAL-1 Phase 3 clinical trial: ClinicalTrials.gov reference NCT02348489). Disclosures Kropf: Teva Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. O'Connell:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Griffiths:Astex: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Rizzieri:Teva: Other: ad board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: ad board, Speakers Bureau. Stock:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Savona:Karyopharm: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenblat:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Research Funding. Berdeja:Celgene: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Wilson:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Lowder:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Taverna:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Hao:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Azab:Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment. Issa:Janssen: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Ibrutinib in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Leukemia with 17p Deletion: Results from the Phase II RESONATE™-17 Trial

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.327.327 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 327-327 ◽

Cited By ~ 27

Author(s):

Susan O'Brien ◽

Jeffrey A. Jones ◽

Steven Coutre ◽

Anthony R. Mato ◽

Peter Hillmen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Complete Response ◽

Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Previously Treated ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with deletion of the short arm of chromosome 17 (del 17p) follow an aggressive clinical course and demonstrate a median survival of less than 2 years in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Ibrutinib (ImbruvicaTM), a first-in-class Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibitor, has been approved for previously treated patients with CLL and for patients with del 17p CLL. We report results from the primary analysis of the Phase II RESONATETM-17 (PCYC-1117-CA) study, designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of single-agent ibrutinib for treatment of patients with R/R del 17p CLL or small lymphocytic leukemia (SLL). Methods: Patients with del 17p CLL or SLL who failed at least one therapy were enrolled to receive 420 mg oral ibrutinib once daily until progression. All patients receiving at least one dose of ibrutinib were included in the analysis. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per an independent review committee (IRC). Other endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety of ibrutinib. Results: Among 144 treated patients (137 with CLL, 7 with SLL), the median age was 64 (48% 65 years or older) and all had del 17p. Baseline characteristics included 63% of patients with Rai Stage III or IV disease, 49% with bulky lymphadenopathy of at least 5 cm, and 10% with lymphadenopathy of least 10 cm. The median baseline absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) was 32.9 x 109/L with 57% of patients with a baseline ALC at least 25.0 x 109/L. Baseline beta-2 microglobulin levels were at least 3.5 mg/L in 78% of patients (range 1.8-19.8 mg/L), and lactate dehydrogenase levels were at least 350 U/L in 24% of patients (range 127-1979 U/L). A median of 2 prior therapies (range 1-7) was reported. Investigator-assessed ORR was 82.6% including 17.4% partial response with lymphocytosis (PR-L). Complete response (CR)/complete response with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi) were reported in 3 patients. IRC-assessed ORR is pending. At a median follow up of 13.0 months (range 0.5-16.7 months), the median PFS (Figure 1) and DOR by investigator determination had not been reached. At 12 months, 79.3% were alive and progression-free, and 88.3% of responders were progression-free. Progressive disease was reported in 20 patients (13.9%). Richter transformation was reported in 11 of these patients (7.6%), 7 of the cases occurring within the first 24 weeks of treatment. Prolymphocytic leukemia was reported in 1 patient. The most frequently reported adverse events (AE) of any grade were diarrhea (36%; 2% Grade 3-4), fatigue (30%; 1% Grade 3-4), cough (24%; 1% Grade 3-4), and arthralgia (22%; 1% Grade 3-4). Atrial fibrillation of any grade was reported in 11 patients (7.6%; 3.5% Grade 3-4). Seven patients reported basal or squamous cell skin cancer and 1 patient had plasma cell myeloma. Most frequently reported Grade 3-4 AEs were neutropenia (14%), anemia (8%), pneumonia (8%), and hypertension (8%). Major hemorrhage was reported in 7 patients (4.9%, all Grade 2 or 3). Study treatment was discontinued in 16 patients (11.1%) due to AEs with 8 eventually having fatal events (pneumonia, sepsis, myocardial or renal infarction, health deterioration). At the time of data cut, the median treatment duration was 11.1 months, and 101 of 144 patients (70%) continued treatment with ibrutinib. Conclusions: In the largest prospective trial dedicated to the study of del 17p CLL/SLL, ibrutinib demonstrated marked efficacy in terms of ORR, DOR, and PFS, with a favorable risk-benefit profile. At a median follow up of 13 months, the median DOR had not yet been reached; 79.3% of patients remained progression-free at 12 months, consistent with efficacy observed in earlier studies (Byrd, NEJM 2013;369:32-42). The PFS in this previously treated population compares favorably to that of treatment-naïve del 17p CLL patients receiving fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR) (Hallek, Lancet 2010;376:1164-74) or alemtuzumab (Hillmen, J Clin Oncol 2007;10:5616-23) with median PFS of 11 months. The AEs are consistent with those previously reported for ibrutinib (Byrd, NEJM 2014;371:213-23). These results support ibrutinib as an effective therapy for patients with del 17p CLL/SLL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures O'Brien: Amgen, Celgene, GSK: Consultancy; CLL Global Research Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Emergent, Genentech, Gilead, Infinity, Pharmacyclics, Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; MorphoSys, Acerta, TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Jones:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Coutre:Janssen, Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mato:Pharamcyclics, Genentech, Celegene, Millennium : Speakers Bureau. Hillmen:Pharmacyclics, Janssen, Gilead, Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tam:Pharmacyclics and Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Siddiqi:Janssen: Speakers Bureau. Furman:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Brown:Sanofi, Onyx, Vertex, Novartis, Boehringer, GSK, Roche/Genentech, Emergent, Morphosys, Celgene, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Gilead: Consultancy. Stevens-Brogan:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Li:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Fardis:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Clow:Pharmacyclics: Employment. James:Pharmacyclics: Employment. Chu:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hallek:Janssen, Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:Pharmacyclics, Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide (LEN) Versus Placebo (PBO) in RBC-Transfusion Dependent (TD) Patients (Pts) with IPSS Low/Intermediate (Int-1)-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) without Del(5q) and Unresponsive or Refractory to Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs): Results from a Randomized Phase 3 Study (CC-5013-MDS-005)

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v124.21.409.409 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 124 (21) ◽

pp. 409-409 ◽

Cited By ~ 8

Author(s):

Valeria Santini ◽

Antonio Almeida ◽

Aristoteles Giagounidis ◽

Stephanie Gröpper ◽

Anna Jonasova ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Employment Equity ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Double Blind ◽

Equity Ownership ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Background: Treatment options for RBC-TD pts with lower-risk MDS without del(5q) who are unresponsive or refractory to ESAs are very limited. In a previous phase 2 study, MDS-002 (CC-5013-MDS-002), LEN was associated with achievement of RBC-transfusion independence (TI) ≥ 56 days in 26% of pts with IPSS Low/Int-1-risk MDS without del(5q) (Raza et al. Blood 2008;111:86-93). This international phase 3 study (CC-5013-MDS-005) compared the efficacy and safety of LEN versus PBO in RBC-TD pts with IPSS Low/Int-1-risk MDS without del(5q) unresponsive or refractory to ESAs. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group phase 3 study included RBC-TD pts (≥ 2 units packed RBCs [pRBCs]/28 days in the 112 days immediately prior to randomization) with IPSS Low/Int-1-risk MDS without del(5q), who were unresponsive or refractory to ESAs (RBC-TD despite ESA treatment with adequate dose and duration, or serum erythropoietin [EPO] > 500 mU/mL). Pts were randomized 2:1 to oral LEN 10 mg once daily (5 mg for pts with creatinine clearance 40–60 mL/min) or PBO. Pts with RBC-TI ≥ 56 days or erythroid response by Day 168 continued double-blind treatment until erythroid relapse, disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was RBC-TI ≥ 56 days (defined as absence of any RBC transfusions during any 56 consecutive days). Secondary endpoints included time to RBC-TI, duration of RBC-TI, RBC-TI ≥ 168 days, progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML; WHO criteria), overall survival (OS), and safety. Baseline bone marrow gene expression profiles were evaluated according to the Ebert signature (PloS Med 2008;5:e35) identified as predictive of LEN response. Clinical trial identifier: CT01029262. Results: The intent-to-treat population comprises 239 pts (LEN, n = 160; PBO, n = 79). Baseline characteristics were comparable across treatment groups; median age 71 years (range 43–87), 67.8% male, and median time from diagnosis 2.6 years (range 0.1–29.6). Pts received a median of 3.0 pRBC units/28 days (range 1.5–9.8) and 83.7% received prior therapy, including ESAs (78.7%). Significantly more LEN pts achieved RBC-TI ≥ 56 days versus PBO (26.9% vs 2.5%; P < 0.001; Table). The majority (90%) of pts with RBC-TI ≥ 56 days responded within 16 weeks of treatment. Median duration of RBC-TI ≥ 56 days was 8.2 months (range 5.2–17.8). Baseline factors significantly associated with achievement of RBC-TI ≥ 56 days with LEN were: prior ESAs (vs no ESAs; P = 0.005), serum EPO ≤ 500 mU/mL (vs > 500 mU/mL; P = 0.015), < 4 pRBC units/28 days (vs ≥ 4 pRBC units/28 days; P = 0.036), and female sex (vs male; P = 0.035). RBC-TI ≥ 168 days was achieved in 17.5% and 0% of pts in the LEN and PBO groups, respectively. The incidence of AML progression (per 100 person-years) was 1.91 (95% CI 0.80–4.59) and 2.46 (95% CI 0.79–7.64) for LEN and PBO pts, respectively, with median follow-up 1.6 and 1.3 years. Death on treatment occurred in 2.5% of pts on either LEN or PBO. The follow-up period was insufficient to permit OS comparison between the 2 groups. Myelosuppression was the main adverse event (AE); in the LEN versus PBO groups, respectively, grade 3–4 neutropenia occurred in 61.9% versus 11.4% of pts, and grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia in 35.6% versus 3.8% of pts. Discontinuations due to AEs were reported in 31.9% LEN and 11.4% PBO pts; among the 51 LEN pts who discontinued due to AEs, 14 discontinuations were due to thrombocytopenia and 8 due to neutropenia. In the subset of pts evaluated for the Ebert signature (n = 203), the predictive power of the signature was not confirmed. Conclusions: LEN therapy was associated with a significant achievement of RBC-TI ≥ 56 days in 26.9% of pts with a median duration of RBC-TI of 8.2 months; 90% of pts responded within 16 weeks of treatment. These data were consistent with response rates seen in the MDS-002 trial. The overall safety profile was consistent with the known safety profile of LEN and these data suggest LEN can be safely and effectively used in this patient population. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Santini: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Glaxo Smith Kline: Honoraria. Off Label Use: Trial of Lenalidomide in non-del5q MDS. Almeida:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Giagounidis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vey:Celgene: Honoraria. Mufti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Buckstein:Celgene: Research Funding. Mittelman:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Platzbecker:Celgene: Research Funding. Shpilberg:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. del Canizo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gattermann:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ozawa:Celgene: Consultancy, not specified Other. Zhong:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Séguy:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hoenekopp:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Beach:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Similar Efficacy and Safety of CT-P10 and Reference Rituximab in Patients with Advanced Stage Follicular Lymphoma: Updated Phase III Study Results

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-112716 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1616-1616

Author(s):

Won-Seog Kim ◽

Christian Buske ◽

Larry W Kwak ◽

Michinori Ogura ◽

Bertrand Coiffier ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Safety Profile ◽

Research Funding ◽

Complete Response ◽

P Value ◽

Maintenance Period ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Duration Of Response

Abstract Background: CT-P10 is an approved biosimilar to the innovator rituximab (RTX) from many countries including European Union based in part on the pharmacokinetics (PK) equivalence and comparable efficacy in patients with previously untreated advanced follicular lymphoma (FL) when treated with rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone (R-CVP) as an induction therapy (Coiffier B et al. ASH 2016; Kim WS et al. ASCO 2017). Objective: We report here the updated efficacy outcomes including progression free survival (PFS), duration of response, overall survival (OS), as well as updated safety profile of CT-P10 compared to RTX in advanced FL patients with median follow-up duration of 23 months including the Maintenance Period with rituximab monotherapy. Methods: These results were derived from an ongoing randomized and double-blind study in patients with previously untreated advanced FL (NCT02162771). A total of 140 patients were randomized in a 1:1 ratio and 124 patients completed 8 cycles of R-CVP induction therapy. One-hundred twenty two patients (62 patients in CT-P10 group and 60 patients in RTX group), who showed response during the Induction Period, entered the Maintenance Period where a total of 12 cycles of rituximab monotherapy was to be administered every 2 months. The study was planned to continue until death or up to 3 years from the randomized date of the last patient. Kaplan Meier (KM) method was used to estimate PFS, duration of response, and OS. Results: Both groups had similar baseline characteristics; overall median age of 58 years, 55% female, 57% with FLIPI score ≥3, 100% with Stage III/IV, 18% with bulky disease (≥7cm) and 26% with B-Symptom. As of the cut-off date for investigator-assessed PFS, duration of response and OS, median follow-up was 23 months (range, 0.5-34) in the CT-P10 group and 22 months (range, 0.2-33) in the RTX group. The proportion of patients who had experienced relapse, disease progression or death from any cause was 22.9% (16/70) and 24.3% (17/70) for the CT-P10 and RTX groups, respectively. There was no significant difference between CT-P10 and RTX groups in PFS (log rank, p-value: 0.806) with 2-year PFS of 75.2% and 73.5%, respectively (Figure 1). In terms of sustained response, the proportions of patient who showed relapse or disease progression after achieving overall response (Complete Response, unconfirmed Complete Response, or Partial Response) were 19.4% (13/67) in CT-P10 group and 21.3% (13/61) in RTX group, and the KM curves showed no statistically significant difference between CT-P10 and RTX (log rank, p-value: 0.997) (Figure 2). Death from any cause were 5.7% (4/70) and 2.9% (2/70) in the CT-P10 and RTX groups, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in OS (log rank, p-value: 0.464) between the CT-P10 and RTX groups with 2-year OS of 93.2% and 95.3%, respectively. Overall safety profile of CT-P10 was consistent with that of RTX (Table 1). A similar number of patients in each treatment group experienced at least 1 Treatment Emergent Adverse Events (TEAE) considered to be related to the study drug, infusion-related reaction, and infection. The proportion of patients with positive anti-drug antibody was also similar in both groups (4.3% [3/70] vs 5.7% [4/70] in the CT-P10 and RTX groups). Neither progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy nor Hepatitis B virus reactivation was reported in either group. Conclusion: At the median follow-up duration of 23 months, the updated efficacy data in advanced FL patients demonstrated comparable PFS, sustained response and OS between CT-P10 and RTX. CT-P10 was also well tolerated and its safety profile was similar to that of RTX. The updated safety results did not reveal any trends or new signals noted in the patients treated with CT-P10. Disclosures Kim: Mundipharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kyowa-Kirin: Research Funding; Celltrion: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; J&J: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Buske:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ogura:MeijiSeika Pharma: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy, Research Funding; Mundi Pharma: Consultancy; SymBio: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria; Cellgene: Honoraria. Coiffier:CELGENE: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MUNDIPHARMA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CELLTRION: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MORPHOSYS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NOVARTIS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lee:Celltrion, Inc: Employment. Kim:Celltrion, Inc: Employment.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Pomalidomide in Combination with Prednisone in Patients with Myelofibrosis and Anemia — Final Results of a Prospective Phase 2 Study

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-120203 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1764-1764

Author(s):

Lucia Masarova ◽

Naval G. Daver ◽

Tapan M. Kadia ◽

Naveen Pemmaraju ◽

Elias J. Jabbour ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Hemorrhagic Stroke ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Prospective Phase

Abstract INTRODUCTION: Pomalidomide (POM) is a potent second-generation immunomodulatory agent that has been suggested to have a better toxicity and safety profile than thalidomide and lenalidomide. In patients with myelofibrosis (MF) and anemia, the combination of POM plus prednisone showed up to 36% responses per International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment criteria (IWG-MRT). OBJECTIVE: We present an efficacy and safety data of a prospective phase 2 study of POM in MF patients with anemia after a median follow up of 37.5 months (range, 2-98 months). This report substantiate on previously published results (Daver et al., Leuk Res, 2014; Daver et al., Leuk Res, 2013) and represents final analysis of the study. METHODS: Newly diagnosed or previously treated patients ≥ 18 years with MF and anemia (hemoglobin < 10 g/dL or transfusion [PRBC] dependency) in a need for therapy were eligible. Patients were treated with single POM 3 mg / daily (3 weeks on / 1 week off) or POM 0.5 mg daily continuously with prednisone taper for first 3 months. Responses were re-assessed according to IWG-MRT 2013 criteria. RESULTS: Seventy patients with MF (primary MF, n = 64) of median age of 68 years were enrolled between 07/2009 - 03/2013. Cohort with POM 3 mg (n=21) was closed after 3 months due to excessive toxicity (Daver et al, Leuk Res, 2013). Nine patients who remained on the therapy continued on POM 0.5 mg daily along with 49 additionally enrolled patients, accounting for 58 patients included in this analysis (Table 1). The median time on therapy was 7 months (range, 2-97 months); with 19 patients (33%) treated with more than 12 cycles. Median follow-up from enrollment to data cut-off (May 2018) was 32.5 months (range, 1-99). In total, IWG-MRT responses were identified in 9 patients (16%); only one of them was originally treated with POM 3 mg. The median time on study for responding patients was 16 months (range, 8-71 months). Responses included Clinical Improvement (CI) in hemoglobin in 3 patients (5%); PRBC independence in 6 (10% all, 26% of PRBC dependent patients), and CI spleen in 2 patients (3% all, 20% of patients with splenomegaly). Two patients achieved combined responses; CI spleen with CI hemoglobin and CI spleen with PRBC independence (1 each). Overall median response duration was 8.4 months (range, 3.7-30.3); and it was longer for PRBC independence (30.3 months; range, 8-30.3), and CI spleen (14 months; range, 13-15). Additional 13 patients (without achievement of IWG-MRT response) derived clinical benefit while on study and continued on therapy for a median of 24.5 months (range, 12-93). Observed benefit in these patients included improvement of thrombocytopenia [1], improvement of performance status and/or reduced frequency of PRBC [11], and disease stabilization [1]. One patient progressed to acute leukemia (AML) on a study after 7 cycles of therapy. The treatment was well tolerated with 26 patients (45%) experiencing at least one adverse event (AE) regardless of causality. The most frequent AE were neutropenia (12%); rash (10%); fatigue (10%); and gastrointestinal symptoms (diarrhea/constipation, nausea; 9%). Grade 3/4 AE occurred in 12 patients (21%). All enrolled patients discontinued study due to the following reasons: no response / loss of response [42]; progression to AML [1]; toxicity [4]; stem cell transplantation (SCT) [2]; patient's preference [4]; death [2]; unrelated medical conditions [3]. Reasons for treatment discontinuation due to drug related AE were thrombocytopenia in 2 patients, pneumonitis in 1 patient and allergic reaction in 1 patient. By the time of data cut-off, 43 patients (74%) died with 20 known causes of death: MF progression [4]; AML [2], other medical conditions [7], sepsis [3], myocardial infarction and hemorrhagic stroke [2 each], SCT complications and mesenteric artery ischemia [1 each]). Two of these deaths occurred while on a study; one due to hemorrhagic stroke and one of unknown cause after 31 and 42 months on study, respectively. CONCLUSION: Pomalidomide with prednisone is safe therapy with good anti-anemia activity in patients with MF. It could lead to transfusion independence in one third of patients for a median duration of about 30 months. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00946270. Table 1. Disclosures Daver: Alexion: Consultancy; ImmunoGen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; ARIAD: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Sunesis: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Kiromic: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding. Kadia:BMS: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding. Pemmaraju:plexxikon: Research Funding; Affymetrix: Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; SagerStrong Foundation: Research Funding; samus: Research Funding; stemline: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; abbvie: Research Funding; cellectis: Research Funding; novartis: Research Funding; daiichi sankyo: Research Funding. Cortes:novartis: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

A Phase 2 Study of Elotuzumab (Elo) in Combination with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (Ld) in Patients (pts) with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (R/R MM): Updated Results

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.202.202 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 202-202 ◽

Cited By ~ 12

Author(s):

Paul G. Richardson ◽

Sundar Jagannath ◽

Philippe Moreau ◽

Andrzej Jakubowiak ◽

Marc S Raab ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Disease Progression ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Objective Response ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Infusion Reactions ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 202 Background: Elotuzumab (Elo) is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody targeting CS1, a cell surface glycoprotein highly expressed on >95% of MM cells, with lower expression on natural killer (NK) cells and little to no expression on normal tissues. The mechanism of action of Elo is primarily NK cell-mediated antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against MM cells. In the Phase 1 portion of this 1703 study, Elo escalated from 5 to 20 mg/kg intravenously (IV) plus Ld resulted in an 82% objective response rate (ORR) in pts with R/R MM (Lonial, J Clin Oncol 2012). Historically, lenalidomide plus high dose dexamethasone provided a 61% ORR and a median 11.1 months (mos) progression free survival (PFS) in a similar pt population (Dimopoulos, Weber, N Engl J Med 2007). At the time of previous presentation (Moreau, ASCO 2012), median PFS in the Phase 2 portion the 1703 study of Elo + Ld was not reached (NR) with 10 mg/kg after a median follow-up of 17.2 mo and was 18.6 mo with 20 mg/kg. Methods: Pts with R/R MM previously treated with 1–3 prior therapies were randomized to Elo 10 or 20 mg/kg IV (days 1, 8, 15, 22 every 28 days in cycles 1–2 and days 1, 15 in cycles ≥3) plus lenalidomide 25 mg (PO) (days 1–21) and dexamethasone 40 mg PO weekly or 28 mg PO plus 8 mg IV on Elo dosing days. All pts received a premedication regimen of methylprednisolone or dexamethasone, diphenhydramine, ranitidine, and acetaminophen prior to elo dosing to minimize infusion reactions. Treatment continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. Pts were monitored for PFS until 60 days post-treatment follow-up. The primary objective was efficacy (ORR ≥partial response) according to the International Myeloma Working Group criteria. Results: 73 pts were treated (10 mg/kg, n=36; 20 mg/kg, n=37). Median age was 63 (range, 39–82) years, 55% received ≥2 prior therapies, 60% prior bortezomib, and 62% prior thalidomide. Median (range) duration of treatment was 20.5 (3.0–31.0) and 16.0 (1.0–32.0) cycles with 10 and 20 mg/kg, respectively. At the data cutoff (July 10 2012), 27 pts (10 mg/kg, n=15; 20 mg/kg, n=12) were ongoing and 46 pts discontinued (disease progression, n=26; adverse events, n=11; investigator/pt decision, n=9). ORR was 84% overall; 92% with 10 mg/kg (chosen as the Phase 3 dose) and 76% with 20 mg/kg (see Table). Overall median time to objective response was 1 month (range, 0.7–19.2). After a median follow-up of 18.1 mos, median PFS in the 10 mg/kg cohort was 26.9 mos (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.9–NR); however, 15 pts are still ongoing with a median follow-up of 23.9 mos, and the PFS data will likely mature further with longer follow up. Median PFS in the 20 mg/kg cohort was 18.6 mos (95% CI: 12.9–NR). In subgroup analyses combining 10 and 20 mg/kg cohorts, ORRs for pts with 1 (n=33) or ≥2 prior therapies (n=40) were 91% and 78%, respectively, and overall median PFS were 25.0 (95% CI: 15.7–NR) and 21.3 mos (95% CI: 14.0–NR), respectively. Pts with prior thalidomide (n=45) had an ORR of 82% and median PFS of 26.9 mos (95% CI: 14.9–NR). Fifty-six (78%) pts experienced ≥1 treatment emergent grade ≥3 event. Most common were lymphopenia (19%), neutropenia (18%), thrombocytopenia (16%), anemia (12%), leukopenia (10%), hyperglycemia (10%), pneumonia (7%), diarrhea (7%), fatigue (7%), and hypokalemia (6%). Two deaths occurred on study (multiple adverse events [n=1; pneumonia, multiple organ failure and sepsis]; disease progression [n=1]). Investigator-designated (any grade) infusion reactions were reported in 12% of pts; 1 pt had a grade 3 event (rash). There were 4 cases of second primary malignancies (prostate; bladder; myelodysplastic syndrome; nasal squamous cell); all were deemed unrelated to Elo. Conclusions: In pts with R/R MM, Elo + Ld was generally well tolerated. Elo at 10mg/kg (the phase 3 dose) + Ld resulted in a high ORR and an encouraging median PFS of 26.9 mos after 18.1 mos of median follow-up. Phase 3 trials of Elo 10 mg/kg ± Ld are ongoing in newly diagnosed MM (ELOQUENT-1; CA204-006; NCT01335399) and R/R MM (ELOQUENT-2; CA204-004; NCT01239797). Disclosures: Richardson: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Elotuzumab in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Elotuzumab is not currently approved for any indication. Jagannath:Onyx Pharm: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharm: 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. Jakubowiak:Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Facon:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding. White:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Reece:Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Zonder:Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Deng:Abbott Biotherapeutics Corp: Employment. Kroog:BMS: Employment. Singhal:Abbott Biotherapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lonial:Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy.

Download Full-text

A Phase 3 Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Combined with Melphalan and Prednisone In Patients ≥ 65 Years with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM): Continuous Use of Lenalidomide Vs Fixed-Duration Regimens

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v116.21.622.622 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (21) ◽

pp. 622-622 ◽

Cited By ~ 20

Author(s):

Antonio Palumbo ◽

Michel Delforge ◽

John Catalano ◽

Roman Hajek ◽

Martin Kropff ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Fixed Duration ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Risk Of Progression ◽

Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 622 Background: Lenalidomide is an oral IMiD® compound with a dual mechanism of action, namely tumoricidal and immunomodulatory activity, and has proven efficacy in patients with MM. The current study (MM-015) is a prospective, randomized phase 3 trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of continuous lenalidomide treatment (MPR-R: melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance) vs fixed-duration regimens of melphalan and prednisone (MP) or melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide (MPR) in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Methods: 459 patients aged ≥ 65 years with NDMM, stratified by age and International Staging System (ISS) stage were randomized to receive MPR-R, MPR, or MP. During double-blind treatment, patients received melphalan 0.18 mg/kg (D1-4), prednisone 2 mg/kg (D1-4), with or without lenalidomide 10 mg/day (D1-21) for nine 28-day cycles. Following 9 cycles of MPR, patients received maintenance lenalidomide (10 mg/day; D1-21) or placebo until progression; MP patients received placebo until progression. Patients with progressive disease (PD) could enroll in the open-label extension phase (OLEP) and receive lenalidomide at 25 mg/day (D1-21) with or without dexamethasone at 40 mg/day (D1-4, 9–12, and 17–20). The primary comparison for this trial was MPR-R vs MP. Updated data from a pre-planned interim analysis at 70% of events (median follow-up of 21 months) are presented. Results: MPR-R compared with MP resulted in a higher overall response rate (ORR; 77% vs 50%, P <.001) as well as higher rates of complete response (16% vs 4%, P < .001) and very good partial response (VGPR) or better (32% vs 12%, P < .001). Responses were more rapid in patients receiving MPR-R compared with MP (median 2 vs 3 months, P < .001), and improved over time. Overall, MPR-R reduced the risk of disease progression by 58% compared with MP (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.423, P < .001) with a higher 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate (55% vs 16%). PFS was extended in patients receiving continuous lenalidomide therapy vs fixed-duration MP regardless of gender, ISS stage (stage I/II vs III), kidney function (creatinine clearance ≥ 60 vs < 60 mL/min), or baseline β2-microglobulin (≤ 5.5 vs > 5.5 mg/L). A landmark analysis comparing MPR-R and MPR initiated at the beginning of cycle 10 demonstrated that maintenance lenalidomide resulted in a 69% reduced risk of progression compared with placebo (HR = 0.314, P < .001). In addition, regardless of induction response (≥ VGPR or PR), patients who received maintenance lenalidomide had longer PFS compared with placebo. Importantly, patients relapsing during MPR-R had similar second-line treatment duration (median 55 weeks) compared with those relapsing while on placebo following MPR or MP (median 68 and 54 weeks, respectively). Additionally, PD rates during the OLEP were similar across all treatments (13% for each). Thus, outcomes of patients who relapse following continuous lenalidomide are similar to those who relapse following fixed-duration regimens, suggesting maintenance lenalidomide is not associated with more aggressive relapse. Follow-up remains too short to identify significant overall survival differences between the 3 groups. MPR-R had a manageable safety profile with minimal cumulative toxicities. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) for patients treated with MPR-R and MP were 20% and 8%, respectively. Grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia occurred in 71%, 38%, and 24% of patients receiving MPR-R and 30%, 14%, and 17% of those receiving MP; no grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy was observed. Importantly, maintenance lenalidomide was as well tolerated as placebo, with few grade 3/4 AEs. During maintenance, low rates of thrombocytopenia (3% vs 2%, respectively), neutropenia (2% vs 0%), deep vein thrombosis (1% vs 0%), and fatigue (1% vs 0%) were observed. Conclusions: MPR-R achieved a higher ORR, as well as better quality and more rapid responses vs MP. Furthermore, MPR-R compared with fixed-duration regimens of MP and MPR resulted in an unprecedented reduction in the risk of progression with a manageable safety profile, and similar rates of PD in subsequent OLEP treatment. These data suggest that continuous lenalidomide therapy with MPR-R is superior to regimens of limited duration by providing sustained disease control in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Disclosures: Palumbo: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide is not approved for first line use in multiple myeloma. Delforge:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Catalano:Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Grants. Hajek:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Kropff:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Yu:Celgene: Employment. Herbein:Celgene: Employment. Mei:Celgene: Employment. Jacques:Celgene: Employment. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Ravulizumab in Older Patients Aged >65 Years with Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria in the 301 and 302 Phase 3 Extension Studies

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2020-140777 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 42-43

Author(s):

Regis Peffault De Latour ◽

Jeffrey Szer ◽

Austin Kulasekararaj ◽

Jin Seok Kim ◽

Caroline I. Piatek ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Older Patients ◽

Research Funding ◽

Paroxysmal Nocturnal Hemoglobinuria ◽

Complement Inhibitor ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Treatment Naïve ◽

Secondary Endpoints

Background: In the two largest phase 3 studies in patients with paroxysmal nocturnal hemoglobinuria (PNH), ravulizumab given every 8 weeks was noninferior to eculizumab given every 2 weeks across all efficacy endpoints. Data on efficacy and safety of ravulizumab in patients aged >65 years with PNH are limited. Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of ravulizumab in patients with PNH aged >65 years with those aged ≤65 years. Methods: The population included patients from two phase 3 studies that assessed ravulizumab vs eculizumab in complement-inhibitor-naïve (301; NCT02946463) and -experienced (302; NCT03056040) adults with PNH. In study 301, patients were aged ≥18 years with a confirmed PNH diagnosis by flow cytometry and had a lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level ≥1.5x upper limit of normal (ULN; 246U/L). In study 302, patients were aged ≥18 years with a confirmed PNH diagnosis by flow cytometry, were clinically stable on eculizumab having received ≥6 months of treatment and had a LDH level ≤1.5x ULN. Patients were randomized to either ravulizumab or eculizumab for 26 weeks after which all received ravulizumab up to 52 weeks. This prespecified analysis stratified patients by age: ≤65 or >65 years. Primary endpoints included percentage change in LDH from baseline to weeks 26 and 52, percentage of patients achieving LDH-normalization (LDH-N; LDH levels: ≤1x ULN) at weeks 26 and 52 and transfusion avoidance (TA) from baseline to weeks 26 and 52. Breakthrough hemolysis (BTH), hemoglobin (Hgb) stabilization and FACIT-fatigue score were secondary endpoints. Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed as an indicator of safety. Results: A total of 58 patients aged >65 years and 383 patients aged ≤65 years were included. Disposition and medical history were similar among subgroups at baseline (Table 1). Results for primary and secondary endpoints for the two subgroups were comparable across studies and efficacy was maintained through 52 weeks. A higher proportion of treatment-experienced patients (>65 years) achieved all endpoints vs -naïve patients (Table 2). The percentage change in LDH levels from baseline to 26 and 52 weeks was similar between subgroups in study 301 (-66.5 to -80.0%) whereas in study 302, LDH levels remained stable in all subgroups up to 52 weeks (-3.7 to 22%). The percentage of patients achieving LDH-N in both studies at 26 and 52 weeks differed; 43.8-63.9% of patients aged ≤65 years achieved LDH-N compared with 21.4-77.8% of patients aged >65 years. A higher proportion of older treatment-experienced patients (57.1‒77.8%) achieved LDH-N compared with older treatment-naive patients (21.4‒50.0%) at 26 and 52 weeks. In patients aged ≤65 years in both studies, 63.7‒89.4% achieved TA. In the >65 years subgroup, 14.3‒50.0% of treatment-naive patients achieved TA whereas in study 302, 54.5‒72.7% of patients achieved TA. The number of BTH events was low, with no events reported in older patients to date. Hgb stabilization was consistent in the ≤65 year subgroup between the studies; a higher proportion of older patients in study 302 (45.5‒71.4%) achieved stabilized Hgb compared with older patients in study 301 (14.3‒35.3%). A clinically significant 3-point change was seen in FACIT-fatigue scores (indicating improvements in fatigue), with higher scores observed for ravulizumab in both subgroups (Figure 1). One patient discontinued the extension of study 301 due to lung cancer onset during the 26-week period and died following discontinuation. Headache was the most frequent TEAE. The incidence of TEAEs reported during ravulizumab treatment up to 52 weeks did not increase vs the 26-week period, with few events (Table 3) and no difference between subgroups. Conclusions: We present clinical outcomes in the largest cohort of patients with PNH (>65 years) on ravulizumab in a clinical trial setting to date. Ravulizumab was associated with similar efficacy and safety in both age subgroups and showed consistent and durable efficacy through 52 weeks of treatment. A higher proportion of patients in study 302 achieved all efficacy endpoints than in study 301, which can be due to patients' prior complement inhibitor experience. This observation was more evident in older patients. There were no BTH events in the older patients to date, and the number of infections in both subgroups was low. Ravulizumab was well tolerated in older patients with no additional safety concerns compared to younger patients. Disclosures Peffault De Latour: Apellis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Szer:Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Apellis: Consultancy; Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Prevail Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kulasekararaj:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kim:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Piatek:Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kulagin:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hill:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Wang:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Yu:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Ogawa:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Current Employment. Schrezenmeier:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lee:Alexion Pharmaceuticals Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Efficacy and Safety of Retreatment with Bortezomib in Patients with Multiple Myeloma: Interim Results From RETRIEVE, a Prospective International Phase 2 Study.

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v114.22.3866.3866 ◽

2009 ◽

Vol 114 (22) ◽

pp. 3866-3866 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Maria Teresa Petrucci ◽

Igor W. Blau ◽

Paolo Corradini ◽

Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽

Johannes Drach ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Median Time ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Bortezomib Treatment ◽

Best Response ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

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

Download Full-text

Nilotinib in Imatinib-Resistant or -Intolerant Patients (pts) with Chronic Myeloid Leukemia in Chronic Phase (CML-CP): 48-Month Follow-up Results of a Phase 2 Study,

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v118.21.3770.3770 ◽

2011 ◽

Vol 118 (21) ◽

pp. 3770-3770 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Philipp D. le Coutre ◽

Francis J. Giles ◽

Javier Pinilla-Ibarz ◽

Richard A. Larson ◽

Norbert Gattermann ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Lung Neoplasm ◽

Chronic Phase ◽

Dose Intensity ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Imatinib Resistance ◽

Imatinib Resistant ◽

Significant Difference

Abstract Abstract 3770 Background: Nilotinib is a selective and potent BCR-ABL TKI approved for the treatment of pts with newly diagnosed Ph+ CML-CP, and for pts with CML-CP or CML-AP resistant to or intolerant of imatinib. Here, we present the 48-mo follow-up data from the 2101 trial for pts with imatinib resistance or intolerance. Methods: Pts were treated with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID). Key endpoints included PFS (defined as progression to AP/BC or discontinuation due to disease progression as assessed by investigator or death from any cause) and OS (includes deaths during treatment or follow-up after discontinuation). Results: 321 pts were enrolled (70% imatinib resistant; 30% imatinib intolerant with resistance). At baseline (BL), 36% of pts were in CHR. At the time of data cutoff, 224/321 pts (70%) discontinued nilotinib therapy (Table), and 31% of all pts had at least 48 mo of treatment. The median nilotinib dose intensity was 789 mg/day (range, 151–1110) and 62% of pts received ≥ 400 mg BID nilotinib as their last dose available. Pts with BL CHR had a significantly higher PFS rate at 48 mo vs pts without BL CHR (71% vs 49%, respectively; P =.001). Only 11 (3%) pts progressed to advanced disease (AP/BC) during study. Estimated 48-mo OS rate was 78% (95% CI 74%-83%). Among resistant pts, those without BL mutations (n = 92) had a significantly higher OS rate at 48 mo vs pts with sensitive mutations at BL (n = 78) (84% vs 74%, respectively, P =.029); however, there was no significant difference in OS among pts with sensitive and insensitive mutations (Y253H, E255K/V or F359C/V, n = 27) at BL (74% vs 71%, respectively, P =.804). No new safety signals were observed, and few additional AEs were reported since 24 mo follow-up (Table). Biochemical lab abnormalities were generally mild, transient, and easily managed; grade 3/4 lipase elevation (19%), hypophosphatemia (18%), and hyperglycemia (13%) were most common. Reports of any-grade pleural effusions remained low (1%), and no new cases were reported with longer follow-up. No new cases of QTcF >500 ms and 3 new cases of QTcF increases > 60 ms from BL were reported. Nine pts died during treatment or within 28 days of discontinuation: 8 deaths were previously reported and occurred in the first 24 mo of follow-up; 1 additional death due to lung neoplasm occurred between 24 and 48 mo (35 mo). Conclusions: With longer follow up, nilotinib continues to be effective and well tolerated in pts with Ph+ CML-CP resistant to or intolerant of imatinib therapy. Nilotinib prevented progression to AP/BC in the majority of pts on treatment and was associated with high OS rates. No cumulative toxicity was observed. Data demonstrating the higher rate of PFS in pts who entered the study with a BL CHR suggest that switching pts to nilotinib prior to hematologic failure on imatinib, and according to current treatment guidelines, may maximize the efficacy of nilotinib therapy. Disclosures: le Coutre: Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria. Giles:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Pinilla-Ibarz:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Larson:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Gattermann:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Ottmann:Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hochhaus:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Radich:BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding. Saglio:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Hughes:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinelli:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy. Kim:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Branford:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding. Müller:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Shou:Novartis: Employment. Novick:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fan:Novartis: Employment. Cortes:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Research Funding. Baccarani:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kantarjian:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Consolidation with Vtd Significantly Improves the Complete Remission (CR) Rate Following Vtd Induction and Single Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (auto) in Multiple Myeloma (MM).

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v120.21.3096.3096 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 120 (21) ◽

pp. 3096-3096

Author(s):

Xavier Leleu ◽

Benjamin Hebraud ◽

Guillemette Fouquet ◽

Murielle Roussel ◽

Denis Caillot ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Incidence Rate ◽

Relapse Rate ◽

Research Funding ◽

The Other ◽

Newly Diagnosed ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Induction Regimen

Abstract Abstract 3096 Background. Several studies have demonstrated the impact of VTd on response rates and PFS either as induction or consolidation regimen. However there are limitations to these studies, especially that no data is available regarding the role of VTd consolidation in the context of bortezomib-triple based VTd induction regimen followed by a single auto. At completion of therapy, the response rate (ORR, PR and better) was 89%, VGPR+CR rate 74%, CR rate 29%, relapse rate and median PFS was 53% and 26 months (median F-up 32 months) in the VTd arm of the phase 3 IFM2007-02 trial conducted for newly diagnosed MM (Moreau et al, Blood 2012). In this study, only a minority of patients had received a consolidation or maintenance. On the other hand, Cavo et al. (Blood 2012) reported 97.5%, 92%, 61%, 39% 3-year progression and 62% estimated 5-year PFS (F-up 43 months) respectively in the VTd arm. VTd was given as induction before and consolidation after double auto in this upfront GIMEMA phase 3 trial (Cavo et al, Lancet 2010). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of VTd as consolidation therapy in the context of VTd as induction regimen followed by a single auto (VTd-auto-VTd regimen). Method. This study has included a first group of 121 newly diagnosed MM from 2009 to 2011 across 9 IFM centers. Patients were to be eligible for auto upfront, aged less than 65 and treated with VTd-auto-VTd regimen. The second cohort included MM treated with VTd-auto without consolidation from the IFM2007-02 trial (n=76). A third cohort comprised MM that received upfront a triplet Vd-based combination induction (VCd, VRd) -auto without consolidation (n = 40). Results. In the whole study, the median age was 56 years, the sex ratio was 1,49, 50% had ISS 2 and 3, 22% had adverse FISH [t(4;14); del17p] (similar in the 3 groups). Overall, the ORR was identical in the 3 cohorts at completion of therapy, 104 (86%), 72 (94%) and 32 (80%) for the cohort 1 to 3, respectively. Nevertheless, the CR rate was significantly greater in patients that received a consolidation (cohort 1), as compared to the cohorts 2 and 3 that did not receive any consolidation, 59 (53%) vs. 26 (34%) and 13 (32.5%), respectively (p=0.0001). Interestingly, the CR rates were identical at the end of the induction in the 3 cohorts, 13%, 15% and 22.5%, respectively. With a median follow-up of 25 months, the incidence rate of relapse was significantly greater in the cohort 2 and 3 versus 1, further demonstrating the importance of the consolidation, 25 (21%), 42 (55%) and 13 (32.5%) patients (p=0.0001), respectively; and 9 (8%), 6 (8%) and 8 (20%) had died in cohorts 1 to 3 (p=0.07). The median (95%CI) PFS was not reached in cohort 1, and was 32 (28;36) months and 30 (26;33) months in cohort 2 and 3, respectively. Importantly, 54.5%, 32% and 32% of patients were free of relapse at 32 months in the 3 cohorts, respectively. Similar data were obtained for TTP. The median (95%CI) OS was not significantly different in cohorts 1 to 3, although not reached for the first 2 cohorts and 38 (33;43) months for the 3rdcohort. The 3-year survival was 84%, 91% and 76%, respectively (p=ns). A longer follow up will certainly demonstrate greater survival end points benefit in favor for consolidation. The safety profile of the cohort that contained a consolidation was superimposable to that of the remaining 2 cohorts without consolidation. The incidence rate of hematological EIs of grade 3 and 4 was 4%, 6% and 8% in the 3 cohorts (p=ns), respectively. The incidence rate of neuropathy grade 1–2 and 3–4 was 5% and 2% in the cohort 1 with consolidation, but only 1% occurred during the consolidation. This data compares favorably to the 3% reported in the cohort 2 (Moreau et al. Blood 2012). We have also observed 9 (9%) thromboembolic events (TE), 8 of venous type and 1 arterial. None of them happened during the consolidation, and again, this incidence rate if superimposable to that reported in the IFM2007-02 vTd cohort. Conclusion. This study showed an impressive increase in CR rate in relation to the consolidation that translated into a lower relapse rate. This study also demonstrated that the VTd regimen, used both as induction and consolidation, in the context of a single auto upfront in MM, significantly contributed to improve clinical outcomes with an acceptable toxicity profile. VTd-auto-VTd compared very favorably to the other upfront protocols, and may become in the near future a standard of care in newly diagnosed patients with Myeloma. Disclosures: Leleu: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; LeoPharma: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide. Roussel:celgene: Honoraria; janssen: Honoraria. Facon:onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Attal:celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text