Interim or End of Treatment FGD-PET Complete Response Does Not Have Adequate Predictive Value in Mature T/NK Cell Lymphoma

Abstract Introduction: Cure rate of Mature T/NK cell lymphoma (TCL) is rather low and multiple trials are being conducted to improve frontline therapy outcomes. Consolidation with autologous stem cell transplant is becoming widely used as a mean of improving survival (SCT). Based on data from several retrospective trials, pts who achieve CR may not benefit from consolidative SCT. There is no data available on the role of PET-CR as defined by using Deauville criteria (which became standard in response assessment of NHL (The Lugano Classification 2014)). We performed retrospective analysis of 59 pts with TCL examining the correlation between PFS/OS and iPET and eotPET. Methods: 59 pts newly diagnosed pts with TCL treated between 2008-2016 for whom interim and eotPET scan were available. It was our routine practice to obtain baseline, interim (after 3 cycles of chemotherapy) and eotPET. Pathology slides of outside cases were centrally evaluated by a hematopathologist to confirm diagnosis. Baseline, interim and eotPET were centrally reviewed by a nuclear medicine radiologist blinded to clinical outcomes who assigned Deauville score (DS) to every PET. Responses were recorded according to the Lugano classification 2014. Descriptive statistics and Kaplan Meier method was used to calculate the Progression-free survival (PFS) and Overall survival (OS), two-sided Log-rank test was used to compare OS and PFS between PET groups. Results: Detailed demographic is presented in Table1. Median age at diagnosis is 59, sixty two percent males, 37% female; ALCL 34%, PTCLnos 22%, AITL 19%, and ATLL 10%; most of pts were advanced stage. Most common chemotherapy regimens used were CHOP/CHOEP, HCVAD, and CODOX, SMILE. Median follow up time for the entire cohort was 22.7mo. Forty nine percent of pts progressed and 29% of pts died during follow up. Cause of death for majority of pts was disease progression. Following Deauville scores were assigned on iPET and eotPET respectively: DS1 in 37% and 39%, DS2 in 30% and 35%, DS3 in 15% and 6%, DS4 in 9% and 4%, DS5 in 9% and 16%. We analyzed mPFS and mOS for PET-CR using DS1-2 or DS1-3 to define it. Sixty seven percent and 82% were considered in PET-CR on iPET based on DS 1-2 and DS 1-3 respectively. PET-CR went up to 77% and 83% respectively on eotPET. For final analysis, DS1-2 was used to define PET-CR as no statistically significant difference in mPFS and mOS was noted between DS1-2 and DS1-3. With median follow up of 22.7mo, two-year mPFS and mOS for the cohort were 50% and 74% respectively. Two- year mPFS for iPET-CR and eotPET-CR were 62%. Two-year mOS for iPET-CR and eotPET-CR were 86%% and 83%. Two-year mPFS for iPET-PR and eotPET-PR were 37% and 67%. Two-year mOS for iPET-PR and eotPET-PR were 70% and 100 % (not statistically significant difference with PET-CR mPFS and mOS). None of the pts with PD on iPET were alive at two year. Two-year mOS for eotPET-SD and eotPET-PD are 40%. Negative predictive value of iPET and eotPET is 61%, positive predictive value is 65% and 72% respectively. Conclusion: While PET-SD and PD is quite predictive of poor survivorship, significant number of PET-CR pts will relapse. Even though PET-CR rate to frontline therapy is high, it does not translate into durable responses for significant number of pts with TCL. Thus, PET-CR is not a sensitive enough measure to be considered as a predictor of long-term remission in TCL. It is important to develop response assessment tools which will correlate better with long term survivorship of TCL patients. Figure 1 Overall survival stratified on PET response Figure 1. Overall survival stratified on PET response Figure 2 Progression free survival stratified on PET response Figure 2. Progression free survival stratified on PET response Disclosures Feldman: Pharmacyclics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Leslie:Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Skarbnik:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Mato:Theradex: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; ProNAi: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Chow:Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Protomastro:COTA: Employment. Leslie:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Goy:Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Writing support, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Updated Analysis of Overall Survival in Randomized Phase III Study of Idelalisib in Combination with Bendamustine and Rituximab in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory CLL

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.231.231 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 231-231 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Andrew D. Zelenetz ◽

Jennifer R. Brown ◽

Julio Delgado ◽

Herbert Eradat ◽

Paolo Ghia ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Opportunistic Infections ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Prior Therapy ◽

Equity Ownership

Abstract Introduction: Therapies able to improve overall survival in patients with relapsed/refractory (RR) CLL are needed. We have previously reported that idelalisib (IDELA), a selective PI3K delta inhibitor, administered in combination withbendamustine/rituximab (BR) improves progression-free survival compared with BR alone after a medianfollowup of 12 months. This study (NCT01569295) was unblinded by the independent data monitoring committee at first interim analysis for efficacy. We now present updated data on overall survival (OS). Methods: Between June 2012 and August 2014, 416 patients (pts) with RR CLL were enrolled in the study across 19 countries. The current analysis data cutoff date of May 2016 represents a median follow-up of 21 months. Progression-free survival based on independent review committee assessment was the primary endpoint of this study, with OS as a secondary endpoint. All pts had completed study treatment with BR. Key eligibility criteria included pts with RR CLL requiring therapy, having received previous purine analog or bendamustine (ineligible if refractory to bendamustine); and anti-CD20 antibody; relapsing or progressing within 36 months of the completion of the last therapy. Patients were randomized to BR for 6 cycles Q 28 days (B = 70 mg/m2 D1, D2 of each cycle; R = 375 mg/m2 C1 and 500 mg/m2 C2-6) and IDELA 150 mg BID or placebo (administered until IRC-confirmed PD), death, intolerable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. Stratification was based on presence/absence ofdel(17p) and/or p53 mutation (mut), immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IGHV) mutated/unmutated (analysis performed by a central lab), and disease status refractory (CLL progression <6 months from completion of prior therapy) vs relapsed (CLL progression ≥6 months from completion of prior therapy). Crossover was not permitted at the time of PD or unblinding. Results: The ITT population reflects 207/209 pts in the IDELA + BR/BR + placebo arm: 76% male; 42% ≥65 years; Rai stage III/IV 46%; median time since completion of last prior therapy 16 months; pts with high-risk features (del[17p]/p53mut 32.9%, unmutated IGHV 83.2%, refractory 29.8%); median number of prior therapies: 2 (range 1-13); and median follow-up 21 months. All pts have completed study treatment with BR. A total of 65 pts remain on study treatment: 64 on IDELA monotherapy and 1 pt on placebo. Overall by ITT and IRC, 260/416 pts (IDELA/placebo 95/165) have met the primary endpoint of PD or death. Median OS (mo) of IDELA + BR vs BR + placebo was not reached vs 41 (HR = 0.67; p value 0.036; 95% CI 0.47, 0.96) (Figure 1). The safety findings were similar to what we previously reported: Serious AEs occurred in 147 (71%)/94 (5%) IDELA/placebo arms, respectively. The commonly occurring SAEs by system organ class were infections and infestations (41%/23%) and by MEDRA-preferred terms febrile neutropenia 43 (21%)/10 (5%) and pneumonia 35 (17%)/16 (8%) in the IDELA/placebo arms respectively. The total number of pts with opportunistic infections (Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia [PJP]/cytomegalovirus [CMV]) in the IDELA arm was 5/13 vs 0/3 in the placebo arm. Conclusion: IDELA in combination with BR is superior to BR alone with regard to OS in RR CLL. The improvement in OS was observed across risk categories. Opportunistic infections (PJP, CMV) and SAEs were more frequent in the IDELA vs placebo arm. Results of IDELA-containing regimens may be further improved with implementation of adequate PJP prophylaxis and CMV monitoring measures. This regimen represents an important new option for pts with RR CLL. Figure 1. Kaplan-MeierCurve: Overall Survival. Figure 1. Kaplan-MeierCurve: Overall Survival. Disclosures Zelenetz: Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Brown:Celgene: Consultancy; Sun BioPharma: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Delgado:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; GSK/Novartis: Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy. Eradat:Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ghia:Adaptive: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jurczak:Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Loscertales:Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. MacDonald:Gilead Sciences: Speakers Bureau. Morschhauser:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. De la Serna:Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Shadman:Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Research Funding. Pocock:Gilead Sciences: Other: Sponsorship to attend the EHA 2016 Meeting; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria. Adewoye:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Simpson:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Stilgenbauer:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Hoffmann-La Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants , Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel grants, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Follow-up Analysis of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone Versus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone in Routine Clinical Practice

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-148836 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 2716-2716

Author(s):

Jiri Minarik ◽

Jakub Radocha ◽

Alexandra Jungova ◽

Jan Straub ◽

Tomas Jelinek ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Practice ◽

Research Funding ◽

Previous Analysis ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Routine Clinical Practice ◽

Toxicity Profile ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Significant Difference

Abstract Background: The addition of ixazomib to the doublet lenalidomide and dexamethasone (RD) in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has shown significant benefit in progression free survival (PFS) in the TOURMALINE-MM1 study. Several real-world data including our previous analysis confirmed that the combination IRD is feasible and with fair outcomes even outside the clinical trial. Here we report an updated analysis which is aimed at overall survival (OS) and the PFS2 interval which is defined as the time from the date of treatment initiation to the date of first documentation of progressive disease after initiation of further anti-myeloma treatment or death from any cause. Methods: We analyzed a cohort of 344 patients with RRMM, 127 being treated by IRD and 217 by RD combination. The group characteristics and study design are described elsewhere. 1 The median follow-up of the whole cohort was 28.5 months. The primary endpoint was OS, OS in patients with relapse 1-3, progression free survival (PFS), and PFS2. Secondary endpoints were response rates and toxicity profile. For statistical analysis we used Fisher's exact test or Mann-Whitney U test. Survival measures were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier methodology, and statistical significance was assessed using the log-rank test at a significance level of α = 0.05 (all tests two-sided). Results: The outcomes of OS in the whole cohort were already published before, with significantly longer median OS in the IRD vs RD cohort (mOS 36.6 months vs 26.0 months, p = 0.008).1 In the follow-up analysis, the medians were slightly improved, maintaining a significant difference (mOS 40.9 vs 27.1 months, p = 0.001). In patients treated within relapse 1-3, the results outcomes were even more pronounced (mOS 51.7 vs 27.8 months, p ˂ 0.001). The median PFS was also better in the IRD cohort (mPFS 17.5 vs 12.5 months, p = 0.013) but the results did not substantially differ from our previous analysis. The median PFS2 in the IRD vs RD cohort was significantly longer in the IRD cohort (mPFS2 29.8 vs 21.6 months, p = 0.016). The subsequent therapy included mostly pomalidomide (27.5% vs 30.8%), bortezomib (28.8% vs 28.2%) or thalidomide (10.0% vs 16.2%). Monoclonal antibodies (daratumumab, isatuximab) were more frequently used after IRD combination (21.3% vs 4.3%). The response rates in the IRD vs RD cohort were similar as in our primary analysis: overall response rate (ORR) 73.0% vs 66.8%, with significant difference in very good partial response and better (VGPR+) 38.1% vs 26.3%. The toxicity profile did not reveal any additional safety concerns. Majority of grade 3+ toxicities included hematological toxicity (anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia) and infections, with similar distribution in the cohorts. Conclusion: The treatment of RRMM using the full oral IRD regimen in routine clinical practice is easy, safe and with significantly improved outcomes in comparison to RD doublet. Our follow-up analysis confirmed the impact on OS in patients in the whole cohort including relapse 1-3. The median PFS2 was also longer in the IRD cohort, possibly affected by more frequent use of monoclonal antibodies in the next treatment. With support of AZV 17-29343A, NV18-03-00500, MH CZ - DRO (FNOl, 00098892), IGA-LF-2021-001. 1) Minarik J, Pika T, Radocha J. et al. Survival benefit of ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRD) over lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in routine clinical practice. BMC Cancer 2021; 21: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-020-07732-1 Disclosures Minarik: Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hajek: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharma MAR: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Safety and Efficacy of Venetoclax-Based Treatment in Elderly CLL Patients: A Retrospective Study from the Filo Group

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-149640 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3747-3747

Author(s):

Charlotte Doublet ◽

Marie-Sarah Dilhuydy ◽

Emmanuelle Ferrant ◽

Pierre Feugier ◽

Alexandra Fayault ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Retrospective Study ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Oncology Nurses ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Daily Dose ◽

History Of

Abstract Median age at diagnosis of chronic lymphocytic leukemia is 72 years. However, only few patients over 80 years of age are included in clinical trials, even in those devoted to unfit patients. In order to evaluate both efficiency and safety of venetoclax in this category of patients, we conducted a multicentric retrospective study and collected data from 77 CLL patients from 19 FILO centers who started venetoclax after 80 years of age. Median age at venetoclax initiation was 86 years old (81-97). 63% of patients had a history of heart disease, 62% had renal failure (moderate 59% and severe 3%) and 29% had a history of severe infections. Despite their comorbidities and a CIRS greater than 6 in 70% of cases, their autonomy was preserved with a median performans status of 1 (0-4). In this comorbid geriatric population, pretherapeutic geriatric assessment was only performed in a single patient. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (0-6) with an exposure to a BCR inhibitor in 56% of cases. 11q and 17p deletion were found in 39% and 30% of cases respectively, 39% of patients had a complex karyotype and 30% harbored a TP53 mutation. However, in this real life population, these prognostic factors were only performed in half of patients. IGHV mutational status was only available in 11 patients, and 83% of them had unmutated IGHV. At the time of venetoclax initiation, the tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) risk was moderate in 57% of cases and high in 8% of cases. Venetoclax was administered as a single agent (42%) or in association with rituximab (58%). In total, half of the patients were hospitalized at each dose ramp-up, and only 3 patients were treated on outpatient basis. 82% of the cohort was able to reach the daily dose of 400mg. Half of the patients were included in a phone call monitoring program with oncology nurses to pre-emptively manage side effects and foster therapy adherence. The safety study reported 14% of TLS, with 2 discontinuations of treatment within the first month: one of which led to dialysis and the other to death. As in the previously published studies, 25% of patients had infectious complications, and grade 3 haematological and digestive toxicities were reported in 42% and 22% of cases, respectively. The reduction of the daily dose of venetoclax was necessary for 33%. Permanent discontinuation of venetoclax occurred in 40% of subjects, including 29% of early withdrawal (within the first 3 months). Main reasons for discontinuation were intolerance (21%), CLL progression (21%), death (21%) and scheduled treatment discontinuation (10%). The overall response rate was 86%, consisting of 49% of complete response (unconfirmed by bone marrow biopsy) and 37% of partial response. With a median follow-up of 21months, estimated progression free survival and overall survival were 29 and 38 months respectively. Prior exposure to a BCR inhibitor had no impact on progression free survival. To conclude, venetoclax has a manageable safety profile in elderly patients with comorbidities and can induce prolonged responses. Finally, if additional follow-up by oncology nurses seems to be more and more implemented, the pre-therapeutic onco-geriatric evaluation remains underexploited in this population. Disclosures Ferrant: AstraZeneca: Honoraria; AbbVie: Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses; Janssen: Other: Travel, Accommodations, Expenses. Feugier: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Astrazeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria. Laribi: AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees; Le Mans Hospital: Research Funding; AbbVie: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; Jansen: Research Funding; Novartis: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding; IQONE: Other: Personal Fees; Astellas Phama, Inc.: Other: Personal Fees; BeiGene: Other: Personal Fees; Takeda: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding. Tchernonog: JANSSEN: Consultancy; ABBVIE: Consultancy; ASTRAZENECA: Consultancy. Dartigeas: Astra-Zeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel grants/Congress. Quinquenel: Abbvie: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Honoraria.

Download Full-text

Progression-Free Survival and Overall Survival Among a Patient Cohort of Relapsed/Refractory Mycosis Fungoides in France, Germany, Italy, Spain and the United Kingdom

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2019-126246 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. 5879-5879

Author(s):

Martine Bagot ◽

Timothy Illidge ◽

Nicola Pimpinelli ◽

Mehul Dalal ◽

Athanasios Zomas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Mycosis Fungoides ◽

Systemic Therapy ◽

Research Funding ◽

Index Date ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

High Rate ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival

Background and Aim: Mycosis fungoides (MF) is the most common subtype of cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) wherein those with advanced stage have a poor prognosis. The objective of this study was to describe clinical characteristics and survival in MF patients who were refractory or had relapsed after a first systemic therapy. Methods: A retrospective chart review study was conducted at 27 sites in Europe. Patients enrolled had a diagnosis of MF and proved to be relapsed/refractory (R/R) prior to 1-Jan-2016 after a first systemic therapy. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated from the date of R/R event (defined as the index date) using Kaplan-Meier estimates. PFS was defined as death, progression, second relapse or refractory, or presence of subsequent treatment after index date. Results: This study included 104 advanced R/R MF patients with a median age of 54.5 years (range: 21-82). The median follow-up was 3.5 years (range: 0-20.7) after index date. In total 80% of patients experienced a second R/R, with a median time to second R/R of 15.8 months (range: 0.6-174.6). The median age at death was 65 years (range: 42-85). In total 39 deaths (37.5%) were observed. Among those patients who had a known cause of death (N=35), 18 died of CTCL progression, 11 of CTCL complication or drug toxicity and 7 of other causes. The estimated median OS was 11.5 years (95% CI: 6.5 - not reached). The median PFS was 1.3 years (95% CI: 1.0-2.1). Conclusions: The high rate of R/R and low PFS suggest that the clinical burden of R/R MF is significant in five European countries, and recently approved targeted therapies have the potential of improving outcomes. Disclosures Bagot: Innate Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Illidge:Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Div of Cancer Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, Univ of Manchester, National Institutes of Health and Research Biomedical Research Center, Manchester Academic Health Sciences, Christie Hospital National Health Service Foundation Trust: Employment. Dalal:Takeda: Employment. Zomas:Takeda: Employment. Trinchese:Takeda: Employment. Little:Takeda: Employment. Bent-Ennakhil:Takeda Pharmaceuticals International AG: Employment. Ortiz-Romero:Actelion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; 4SC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; miRagen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PLCG1: Patents & Royalties; Kyowa: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Innate Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEDA: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Phase 2 Study of Nilotinib 400 Mg Twice Daily in Newly Diagnosed Patients with Accelerated Phase of Chronic Myeloid Leukemia, Results after 5.7 Years of Follow-up

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-120155 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3011-3011 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Lucia Masarova ◽

Jorge E. Cortes ◽

Keyur P. Patel ◽

Susan M. O'Brien ◽

Graciela M. Nogueras González ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Phase 2 ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Genetics Research ◽

Phase 2 Study ◽

Grade 3

Abstract OBJECTIVES Nilotinib is a potent, second generation inhibitor of BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase (TKI) and represent a standard of care for patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), including accelerated phase (AP-CML). In 2005, we initiated a phase 2 study of nilotinib 400 mg twice daily as a frontline therapy in patients with AP-CML, and herein present the efficacy and safety data after a median follow-up of 68.4 months (range, 0.3-124.8). METHODS This was a prospective, single institution, phase 2 study in patients of age ≥18 years with a newly diagnosed, untreated AP-CML (except for <1 month of previous imatinib) defined according to MD Anderson criteria (Kantarjian, 1988). Patients were treated with nilotinib 400 mg twice daily (BID). Data are presented on an intention to treat analysis with a cutoff date of June 30st, 2018. Response criteria are standard. Fisher exact test and χ2 were used for analysis of categorical variables; and survival probabilities were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Time to events (e.g., overall survival, event free survival) was calculated from the date of treatment to the date of an event or to last follow-up as previously reported (Cortes et al, 2010). RESULTS Twenty two patients of a median age of 53.7 years (range, 26-79.7) were enrolled. Table 1 summarizes clinical characteristics of all patients. The median treatment duration was 47.3 months (range; 0.3-124.4), and the median follow-up 68.4 months (range, 0.3-124.8). All patients discontinued study as of January 2017 due to planned study closure; but 11 patients (50%) continued on nilotinib off protocol at data cut-off (400 mg BID [3]; 300 mg BID [2]; and 200 mg BID [6]). Median time to treatment discontinuation in the remaining 11 patients was 12.9 months (range, 0.3-112); reason for discontinuation was: inadequate response [3], toxicity [2], non-compliance/financial [4]; elective discontinuation after sustained MR4.5 >2 years [1]; and death due to stroke [1]. Sixteen patients (73%) achieved complete hematologic response (CHR). Overall rates of CCyR, MMR, MR4.5 and CMR (undetectable transcripts with at least 100,000 ABL copies) were 73%, 73%, 55%, and 41%, respectively. Median times to CCyR, MMR, and MR4.5 were 2.9 months (range, 2.7-6.4), 5.7 months (range, 2.7-99.2) and 6.0 months (range, 2.7-36), respectively. Seven patients (32%) achieved sustained MR4.5 >2 years. In total, 4 patients lost their best achieved response (CHR [1], CCyR [2] and MR4.5 [1]) while on study. All events were associated with acquired ABL domain mutation; Y253H [2], T315I [1], and F359I [1] with a median time to detection of 16.7 months (range, 7-40). During the study conduct, one patient progressed to blast phase after 2 months on nilotinib. Two patients died while on study, one due to stroke and one due to unrelated medical condition, after being on therapy for 3 and 0.4 months, respectively. One patient electively discontinued nilotinib after being in sustained MR4.5 for 107 months, and remains in MR4.5 after 6 months off therapy. Estimated overall survival and event free survival at 5 years were 84% and 70%, respectively (Figures 1a & 1b). On univariate analysis, age >55 years was associated with lower rate of MMR (p = 0.034; HR 0.34; 95% CI 0.12-0.92); MR4 (p = 0.013; HR 0.25; 95% CI 0.08-0.75); and MR4.5 (p = 0.01; HR 0.15; 95% CI 0.04-0.63). Overall survival was inferior in patients older than 55 years (p = 0.014; HR 2.4; 95% CI 2.36-not estimated); and in those with > 1 AP-CML defining abnormality (p = 0.018; HR 9.53; 95% CI 0.98-92). The most frequent non-hematologic adverse events (AEs) were hyperbilirubinemia (63% of patients), rash (63%), hypertension (59%), and transaminitis (50%). Grade ≥3 AEs observed in more than one patient were hyperbilirubinemia (n=2), and transaminitis (=2). Two patients developed arterio-thrombotic AEs: stroke and myocardial infarction (one each). Hematologic AEs included (all grades; grade ≥3): anemia (36%; 9%), thrombocytopenia (32%; 14%) and neutropenia (14%; 9%). Two patients (9%) discontinued therapy due to nilotinib related AE, one for G3 peripheral neuropathy and one for G3 hyperbilirubinemia with G2 thrombocytopenia. CONCLUSION Nilotinib is safe and highly effective in patients with AP-CML, and induces fast and durable responses. More than 50% of patients can achieve MR4.5. Clinical trial.gov: NCT00129740. Disclosures Cortes: novartis: Research Funding. O'Brien:Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Aptose Biosciences Inc.: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Regeneron: Research Funding; Vaniam Group LLC: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy; Acerta: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Konopleva:Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding; Immunogen: Research Funding; abbvie: Research Funding; cellectis: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kadia:Celgene: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; BMS: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ravandi:Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Orsenix: Honoraria; Orsenix: Honoraria; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Sunesis: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Abbvie: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Macrogenix: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Jazz: Honoraria; Sunesis: Honoraria; Xencor: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Daratumumab, Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone Versus Lenalidomide and Dexamethasone Alone for Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma Among Patients with 1 to 3 Prior Lines of Therapy Based on Previous Treatment Exposure: Updated Analysis of Pollux

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v128.22.489.489 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 128 (22) ◽

pp. 489-489 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Philippe Moreau ◽

Jonathan L. Kaufman ◽

Heather J. Sutherland ◽

Marc Lalancette ◽

Hila Magen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Multiple Myeloma ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Statistical Significance ◽

Previous Treatment ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Abstract Introduction: Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 IgGκ monoclonal antibody that has been combined successfully with lenalidomide and dexamethasone. The combination of daratumumab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) has been compared with lenalidomide and dexamethasone alone (Rd) in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in a randomized phase 3 study (Dimopoulos MA, et al. N Engl J Med 2016; in press). In a pre-specified interim analysis, the DRd combination demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) in addition to deep and durable responses compared with the Rd arm. We performed subgroup analyses to further examine these efficacy data according to prior treatment exposure. Methods: Pts who received ≥1 prior line of therapy were randomized (1:1) to Rd (lenalidomide: 25 mg PO on Days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle; dexamethasone: 40 mg PO weekly) with or without daratumumab (16 mg/kg IV qw for 8 weeks, q2w for 16 weeks, then q4w until progression). The primary endpoint was PFS. Pts who were refractory to lenalidomide were not eligible. All analyses were performed in pts who received 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy. Results: Median follow-up was 13.5 months. Pts who were lenalidomide-naive prior to the start of study treatment (DRd, n=226; Rd, n=219) demonstrated significantly longer PFS with DRd vs Rd (median: not reached [NR] vs 18.4 months; HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.52; P<0.0001), with estimated 12-month PFS rates of 83.0% vs 59.9%, respectively. ORR was significantly higher with DRd vs Rd (96% vs 79%), with ≥VGPR rates of 76% vs 47% and ≥CR rates of 44% vs 21%, respectively (P<0.0001 for all). In the lenalidomide-exposed subgroup (DRd, n=46; Rd, n=45), median PFS was NR in both treatment groups (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.22-1.12; P=0.0826); estimated 12-month PFS rates were 84.1% vs 63.1%, respectively. ORR was higher with DRd vs Rd but did not reach statistical significance (87% vs 71%; P=0.0729); however, rates of ≥VGPR (78% vs 38%; P=0.0001) and ≥CR (44% vs 12%; P=0.0011) were significantly improved with DRd vs Rd, respectively. For bortezomib-naive pts (DRd, n=44; Rd, n=45), PFS was significantly longer with DRd vs Rd (median: NR vs 15.8 months; HR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.13-0.86; P=0.0170), with estimated 12-month PFS rates of 85.4% vs 69.2%, respectively. ORR was significantly higher with DRd vs Rd (98% vs 82%; P=0.0158), with trends toward increased rates of ≥VGPR (74% vs 55%; P=0.0544) and ≥CR (42% vs 23%; P=0.0576). In the bortezomib-exposed pts (DRd, n=228; Rd, n=219), median PFS was NR in DRd vs 18.4 months in Rd (HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.24-0.50 P<0.0001); estimated 12-month PFS rates were 82.8% vs 58.7%, respectively. Significant differences in ORR (93% vs 77%), rate of ≥VGPR (77% vs 43%) and rate of ≥CR (44% vs 19%) were observed with DRd vs Rd, respectively (P<0.0001 for all). Among bortezomib-refractory patients (DRd, n=54; Rd, n=49), the PFS benefit of DRd compared with Rd was maintained (median: NR vs 10.3 mo, respectively; HR, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.25-0.85; P=0.0117; Figure). The estimated 12-month PFS rates were 70.8% vs 44.4%, respectively. Similar to bortezomib-exposed pts, ORR (92% vs 68%; P=0.0024), rate of ≥VGPR (75% vs 36%; P=0.0001), and rate of ≥CR (46% vs 13%; P=0.0003) were all significantly higher with DRd vs Rd for bortezomib-refractory pts. Updated data will be presented at the meeting. Conclusions: Among pts who received 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy, significantly longer PFS and higher ORR were observed with DRd vs Rd among pts who previously received bortezomib or were refractory to bortezomib or were lenalidomide-naive. Higher rates of deeper responses were observed in pts who previously received lenalidomide or bortezomib. Follow-up is ongoing to assess PFS in pts who received 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy and previously received lenalidomide. These results further strengthen the significant benefit of combining daratumumab with Rd for RRMM. Figure Progression-free Survival in Bortezomib-refractory Patients who Received 1 to 3 Prior Lines of Therapy Figure. Progression-free Survival in Bortezomib-refractory Patients who Received 1 to 3 Prior Lines of Therapy Disclosures Moreau: Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Kaufman:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sutherland:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lalancette:Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria. Iida:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Research Funding. Prince:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cochrane:BMS: Other: Received sponsorship to attend international meetings; Novartis: Other: Received sponsorship to attend international meetings; Celgene: Other: Received sponsorship to attend international meetings; Takeda: Other: Received sponsorship to attend international meetings. Khokhar:Janssen: Employment. Guckert:Johnson & Johnson: Equity Ownership; Janssen: Employment. Qin:Janssen: Employment. Oriol:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Download Full-text

Updated 6 Year Follow-Up Of The PRIMA Study Confirms The Benefit Of 2-Year Rituximab Maintenance In Follicular Lymphoma Patients Responding To Frontline Immunochemotherapy

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood.v122.21.509.509 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 122 (21) ◽

pp. 509-509 ◽

Cited By ~ 56

Author(s):

Gilles Andre Salles ◽

John Francis Seymour ◽

Pierre Feugier ◽

Fritz Offner ◽

Armando Lopez-Guillermo ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Second Line ◽

Second Line Therapy ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Rituximab Maintenance ◽

Line Therapy

Abstract The intergroup PRIMA Phase III study was designed to investigate the potential benefit of 2-years of rituximab maintenance in patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) responding to one of three non-randomised first line immunochemotherapy treatments. The results of the final analysis with 36 months follow-up (Salles et al., Lancet 2011) demonstrated a significant reduction of the risk of progression or death with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.55 in favour of patients randomized to rituximab maintenance. We present here the updated results with 3 additional years of follow-up. From December 2004 until April 2007, 1217 patients were enrolled from 223 centres and complete data were available for 1193 patients who had the following pre-induction treatment characteristics: median age 56 years [range 22–87]; 52% male; 90% Ann Arbor stage III-IV; 33% B symptoms; 56% bone marrow involvement; 4% ECOG performance status >1; 34% elevated LDH; 32% β2-microglobulin >3mg/L; FLIPI score 0-1 (21%), FLIPI 2 (36%), FLIPI 3-5 (43%). Most patients (75%) received R-CHOP induction (22% R-CVP, 3% R-FCM). Patients responding to induction therapy were stratified based on their immunochemotherapy regimen and response [CR/CRu versus PR] and randomized to observation or rituximab maintenance, 1 infusion (375 mg/m2) every 8 weeks for 2 years. A total of 1018 randomised patients were analyzed according to the ITT principle (513 observation / 505 rituximab maintenance). All initial pre-treatment characteristics were well balanced between arms and the response status at time of randomization was CR=39%; CRu=32% and PR=28% (others 1%). With a median follow-up of 73 months from randomization, 6-year progression free survival estimate was 42.7% (95% CI 38 – 46.9%) in the observation arm (284 events, median=48 months) and 59.2% (95% CI 54.7 – 63.7%) in the rituximab maintenance arm (194 events, median not reached), respectively (stratified Log-Rank, P<. 0001; HR = 0.58 ; 95% CI 0.48 - 0.69). In pre-planned analyses of patients subgroups categorized by age, sex, FLIPI score category, induction chemotherapy and response to induction, the effect of rituximab maintenance was examined and found to be consistent among these different subgroups. In a Cox regression multivariate analysis, rituximab maintenance (HR=0.57; P<.0001) as well as older age (HR=0.79; P=.015), female sex (HR=0.72; P=.0003) and low or intermediate FLIPI groups (HR=0.67; P<.0001) were all significant variables associated with superior progression free survival. A significant reduction in the risk of starting a new anti-lymphoma treatment (HR=0.63, 95% CI 0.52 - 0.76) or starting a new chemotherapy (HR=0.70, 95% CI 0.57 - 0.86) were also observed for rituximab maintenance. The rate of histological transformation did not appear to differ between the 2 treatment arms: in the observation arm, transformation was documented in 24 patients (114 cases with morphological documentation out of 278 progressions) versus 16 patients in the rituximab maintenance arm (80 out of 186) respectively. Overall response rate to second-line therapy was reported by investigators to be 180/227 (79%) in patients from the observation arm (CR/CRu=61%; PR=19%) versus 109/144 (76%) in patients from the rituximab maintenance arm (CR/CRu =51%; PR=22%) (P=NS). At the time of the data cut-off, overall survival (OS) remains favourable in both study arms: 58 patients (11.3%) have died in the observation arm (6-years OS estimate 88.7%) compared to 59 patients (11.7%) in the rituximab maintenance arm (6-year OS estimate 87,4%). Main causes documented for death in the observation and rituximab maintenance arm respectively were lymphoma (28 ; 28), other malignancy (19 ; 5) and infections (4 ; 7). No new significant safety data were captured with this additional follow-up period. In conclusion, with 3 additional years of follow-up, these data demonstrate a sustained and persistent benefit of 2 years of rituximab maintenance therapy after immunochemotherapy, resulting in improved progression free survival. No additional or unexpected long term toxicities were observed and second line therapy efficacy results did not significantly differ between the 2 study arms. Overall survival appears very favourable for these randomized patients. Disclosures: Salles: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Seymour:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau, Travel support Other; Genetech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Feugier:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Offner:Lilly: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lopez-Guillermo:Roche: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Belada:Roche: Consultancy. Catalano:Roche: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Haioun:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Simpson:Janssen Research & Development: Honoraria. Leppa:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel support Other. Soubeyran:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hagenbeek:Takeda/Millennium: Consultancy. Casasnovas:ROCHE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Coiffier:Millennium Pharmaceuticals : Consultancy. Tilly:Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, 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; Pfizer: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding.

Download Full-text

Progression-Free Survival Outcomes By Response Status for Bortezomib, Melphalan, and Prednisone with or without Daratumumab in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Pooled Subgroup Analysis of Octans and Alcyone

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-148937 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1648-1648

Author(s):

Jianxiang Wang ◽

Weijun Fu ◽

Soo-Mee Bang ◽

Honghui Huang ◽

Kihyun Kim ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Publicly Traded ◽

Primary Analysis ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Once Daily ◽

Free Survival ◽

Asian Patients

Abstract Introduction: Daratumumab is a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38 with a direct on-tumor and immunomodulatory mechanism of action. In the primary analysis (median follow-up, 16.5 months) of the global phase 3 ALCYONE trial, daratumumab in combination with bortezomib, melphalan, and prednisone (D-VMP) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus VMP alone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who were ineligible for transplant (median PFS, not reached vs 18.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.65; P<0.001). In the primary analysis (median follow-up, 12.3 months) of the phase 3 OCTANS trial, D-VMP significantly prolonged PFS versus VMP in transplant-ineligible Asian patients with NDMM (median PFS, not reached vs 18.2 months; HR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24-0.77; P=0.0033). Here, we present a pooled subgroup analysis of PFS stratified by best response in Asian and global patients from the OCTANS and ALCYONE studies, respectively. Methods: Eligible patients in OCTANS and ALCYONE were ≥18 years of age, were diagnosed with NDMM, and were not eligible for autologous stem cell transplant due to age (≥65 years) or comorbidities. All patients received up to 9 cycles (42-days) of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m 2; subcutaneous) twice weekly on Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5 of Cycle 1 and once weekly on Weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5 of Cycles 2 to 9; melphalan (9 mg/m 2; oral) once daily on Days 1 to 4 of each cycle; prednisone (60 mg/m 2; oral) once daily on Days 1 to 4 of each cycle. For patients in the D-VMP group, daratumumab (16 mg/kg, intravenous) was administered once weekly in Cycle 1, once every 3 weeks in Cycles 2 to 9, and once every 4 weeks thereafter until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Response over time (at 6, 12, 18, 24, 54 weeks) and disease progression were assessed by a validated computer algorithm in accordance with the IMWG criteria. Minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity (10 -5) was assessed by multi-parameter flow cytometry in OCTANS and by next-generation sequencing in ALCYONE. Results: In the OCTANS study, 220 Asian patients were randomized (D-VMP, n=146; VMP, n=74); in the ALCYONE study, 706 global patients were randomized (D-VMP, n=350; VMP, n=356). Median age in OCTANS was 69 (range, 57-84) years and 71 (range 40-93) years in ALCYONE. Patients were pooled from both studies (D-VMP, n=496; VMP, n=430). D-VMP increased the rate of complete response or better (≥CR; 10.2% vs 5.6%) and the rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR; 58.5% vs 38.1%) versus VMP after 18 weeks of treatment (Figure A). Responses deepened over time among patients in both the D-VMP and VMP groups, as shown by the ≥CR rate (D-VMP, 38.8%; VMP, 21.6%) and the ≥VGPR rate (D-VMP, 74.0%; VMP, 50.7%) at 54 weeks. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months for OCTANS and 16.5 months for ALCYONE, among patients who achieved a VGPR (D-VMP: n=145 [29.2%]; VMP: n=109 [25.3%]), the median PFS was not reached in the D-VMP group versus 19.9 months in the VMP group (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.36-1.00; P=0.0499; Figure B). All patients who achieved ≥CR with or without MRD negativity (10 -5) demonstrated prolonged PFS, regardless of treatment (≥CR: HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 0.65-3.65; P=0.3210; ≥CR+MRD negativity: HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.13-3.40; P=0.6225; Figure B); however, more patients treated with D-VMP achieved this level of response (≥CR: D-VMP , n=212 [42.7%]; VMP, n=100 [23.3%]; ≥CR+MRD negativity: D-VMP, n=116 [23.4%]; VMP, n=27 [6.3%]; Figure B). Conclusion: In a pooled analysis of OCTANS and ALCYONE, more patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM achieved deeper responses with D-VMP versus VMP. More patients treated with D-VMP achieved ≥CR with or without MRD negativity compared with those treated with VMP alone, leading to prolonged PFS regardless of treatment. These results support the use of daratumumab in addition to VMP in transplant-ineligible Asian patients with NDMM. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wang: AbbVie: Consultancy; Astellas Pharma, Inc.: Research Funding. Kim: BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Li: Suzhou Zelgen Biopharmaceuticals Co.,Ltd.: Honoraria. Chim: Janssen, Takeda & Amgen: Other: received sponsorship for overseas meetings. Rodriguez-Otero: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene-BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Regeneron: Honoraria; Clínica Universidad de Navarra: Current Employment. Liberati: abbvie, amgen, archigen, beigene, BMS, celgene, DR REDDY'S LABORATORIES SPA, fibrogen, glaxo, Janssen, Karyopharm, Morphosys, Novartis, Onconova, Oncopeptides ab, Roche, Sanophi, Secura Bio, Takeda, Verastem,: Research Funding. Takamatsu: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; SRL: Consultancy; Adaptive Biotechnologies, Eisai: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dimopoulos: BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Beigene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Wroblewski: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Carson: Janssen: Current Employment. Qi: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Wang: Janssen: Current Employment. Song: Janssen: Current Employment. Jia: Janssen: Current Employment. Yang: Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Liu: Janssen: Ended employment in the past 24 months. Li: Janssen: Current Employment. Zhang: Janssen: Current Employment.

Download Full-text

High-Dose Melphalan in 1 Day Versus over 2 Days Followed By Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation As Consolidation Treatment in Patients with Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2021-147860 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 3944-3944

Author(s):

Mesire Aydin ◽

Man Wai Tang ◽

Marielle Wondergem ◽

David C. de Leeuw ◽

Jurgen J. Wegman ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

High Dose ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

Consolidation Treatment ◽

Cell Counts ◽

High Dose Melphalan

Abstract Background High-dose melphalan (HDM) at 200 mg/m2 is a myeloablative consolidation treatment prior to autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) and is administered in 1-day or divided over 2-days. Although the 1-day regimen (lower AUC) has been shown to result in significantly less gastro-intestinal toxicity, it is not completely clear whether this administration strategy has any deleterious effects on efficacy, compared to the 2-day regimen. In this retrospective cohort study, we aimed to evaluate the effects of 1- or 2-day dosing of HDM on disease remission, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with MM. Methods Data from two academic centers in Amsterdam that have recently merged were used for the analysis, with one of the centers using the 1-day regimen and the other the 2-days regimen. A total of 265 patients with MM divided over the 1-day group (n=174) and 2-day group (n=91) treated between July 2017 and February 2020, were included in the study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with at least very good partial remission (≥VGPR) at day ±90 post-ASCT. Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of hospitalization post-ASCT, engraftment period of neutrophils and platelets, and complications (other than mucositis) during hospitalization. Results Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 1. Remission status of ≥VGPR was comparable between the 1-day and 2-day groups (84% vs. 80% respectively). After a median follow-up of 21 months, OS (92% vs. 91%) and PFS (80% vs. 81%) were comparable in the 1-day and 2-day group respectively. There were no differences in the incidence of hematologic adverse events between the 1-day and 2-day groups (neutropenia; 98% vs. 100%, thrombocytopenia; 90% vs. 96% respectively). Median time to neutrophil engraftment (ANC >0.5 x10 9 L -1) was significantly shorter in the 2-day group than in the 1-day group (14 days vs. 18 days, p = 0.002). Median time to platelet engraftment (platelets >20 x10 9 L -1) was comparable between the groups. Lower CD34+ cell counts were administered in the 1-day group compared to the 2-day group (2.6 vs. 3.4 x10 6/kg, p <0.0001). A significant negative correlation between the reinfused CD34+ cell counts and time to neutrophil engraftment was found (R= - 0.244). Table 2 shows the number of hospitalization days after ASCT. The median number was 18 days in the 1-day group and 15 days in the 2-day group (OR 1.22, 95% C.I. (1.10-1.35), p <0.0001). Incidences of infectious complications, febrile neutropenia and intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were not different between the groups. Conclusion The use of 1-day HDM as consolidation treatment in MM patients resulted in equal disease response, progression-free survival and overall survival as compared to 2-day HDM. Based on the results of this study showing comparable efficacy and earlier findings of reduced toxicity with the 1-day HDM administration, we recommend the 1-day protocol for HDM. Interestingly, our results also confirmed that patients might benefit from higher counts of reinfused CD34+/enucleated cells. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Wondergem: Novartis: Honoraria. de Leeuw: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Biemond: Sanquin: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria; CSL Behring: Honoraria; Novo Nordisk: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Global Blood Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. van de Donk: Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: 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; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cellectis: Research Funding. Zweegman: Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Nur: Roche: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.

Download Full-text

Telomere Length Predicts for Outcome to FCR Chemoimmunotherapy in CLL

Blood ◽

10.1182/blood-2018-99-114448 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽

pp. 1854-1854

Author(s):

Kevin Norris ◽

Peter Hillmen ◽

Andy Rawstron ◽

Robert K. Hills ◽

Duncan M Baird ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Overall Survival ◽

Telomere Length ◽

Board Of Directors ◽

Genomic Instability ◽

Research Funding ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Advisory Committees ◽

Free Survival ◽

University Patents ◽

The Mean

Abstract Telomeres are structures that cap the ends of chromosomes and play a critical role in maintaining genomic integrity. Telomere length is a key determinant of telomere function, with short telomeres being subjected to aberrant DNA repair activity that leads to telomere fusion and large scale genomic rearrangements. Single telomere length analysis (STELA) is a high-resolution approach to determine telomere length and is capable of detecting telomeres within the length range at which fusions can occur. Using STELA, we have previously shown a link between short telomeres, telomere fusion and genomic instability in CLL. We went on to define the telomere length threshold at which the chromosome end-capping function is lost resulting in telomere fusion events and genomic instability, the so-called 'fusogenic' range. We have shown that dividing patients with CLL into those with telomeres inside the fusogenic range (IFR) and outside the fusogenic range (OFR) is powerful prognostic tool. Consequently, we developed a high-throughput version of the assay (HT-STELA) to allow for rapid evaluation of large numbers of clinical samples. In this study, we used HT-STELA to evaluate whether telomere length could predict for outcome following fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, rituximab (FCR)-based treatment using samples collected from two concurrent phase II studies, ARCTIC and ADMIRE (n = 275). Patients with a mean telomere length IFR had significantly shorter progression-free survival (P<0.0001; HR=2.17) and shorter overall survival (P=0.0002; HR=2.44) when compared to patients with a mean telomere length OFR. In contrast, CD38 expression and β2-microglobulin were not informative and IGHV mutation status was only predictive of progression-free survival (P=0.0016; HR=1.9). Bifurcation of the IGHV-mutated and unmutated subsets according to telomere length revealed that patients with short, dysfunctional telomeres in each subset had shorter progression-free survival (HR = 4.35 and HR = 1.48 respectively) and shorter overall survival (HR = 3.81 and HR = 2.18 respectively). Although the mean telomere length of the IGHV-unmutated group was significantly shorter than the IGHV-mutated group (P<0.0001), patients with long (OFR) telomeres in both subsets has a significantly better overall survival (P = 0.025; 79% at 5 years and P = 0.006; 83% at 5 years respectively). Indeed, the overall survival of the OFR and IFR subsets were not significantly different regardless of IGHVmutation status (P = 0.61; HR = 1.24 and P = 0.41; HR = 1.47 respectively). In multivariate modelling using Cox proportional hazards with forward selection, telomere length was the dominant co-variable for progression-free survival (P=0.0002; HR=1.85) and overall survival (P=0.05; HR=1.61); when telomere length was added into the model no other parameter retained independent significance in the presence of telomere length. Taken together our data suggest that telomere length is a powerful predictor of outcome to FCR-based treatment and could be used to inform the design of future risk-adapted clinical trials. Figure 1. Stratification of patients by telomere length predicts for progression-free and overall survival following FCR-based treatment. Bifurcation of the patient cohort according to the previously defined telomere length threshold for telomere dysfunction was predictive of (A)PFSand (B) OS. Patients whose telomere length were ≤ the mean of the fusogenic range (IFR) showed shorter PFS and OS than those patients with mean telomere length outside of the fusogenic range (OFR). (C) In terms of OS, the short telomere subsets in both (C)IGHV-mutated and (D)IGHV-unmutated groups showed significantly reduced survival. It is of particular interest that the OS of patients with (E)long telomeres (OFR) and (F) short telomeres (IFR) were not significantly different in IGHV-mutated and IGHV-unmutated groups. Disclosures Norris: Cardiff University: Patents & Royalties: Telomere measurement patent. Hillmen:Abbvie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Acerta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Hills:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria. Baird:Cardiff University: Patents & Royalties: Telomere measurement patents. Pepper:Cardiff University: Patents & Royalties: Telomere measurement patents. Fegan:Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Napp: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria.

Download Full-text