scholarly journals Effects of Long-Term Ruxolitinib (RUX) on Bone Marrow (BM) Morphology in Patients with Myelofibrosis (MF) Enrolled in the COMFORT-I Study

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1949-1949 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans Michael Kvasnicka ◽  
Juergen Thiele ◽  
Carlos E. Bueso-Ramos ◽  
William Sun ◽  
Ahmad Naim ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: MF is a life-shortening complication of myeloproliferative neoplasms associated with ineffective hematopoiesis, splenomegaly, cytopenias, debilitating symptoms, and progressive BM fibrosis The 2 phase 3 COMFORT studies have shown that RUX, an oral Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor, improves splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, and overall survival in patients with MF. Accumulating evidence suggests that RUX may also modulate the BM microenvironment. Aims: We evaluated the effects of long-term RUX treatment on changes in BM fibrosis in patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary MF, post-polycythemia vera MF, or post-essential thrombocythemia MF who were enrolled in the phase 3 COMFORT-I study. Methods: BM biopsies were obtained at baseline (BL), Weeks 48 and 72, and approximately every 48 weeks thereafter for up to 5 years of RUX treatment. Biopsies were reviewed independently in a blinded fashion (blinded for patient and treatment) by 3 hematopathologists (HMK, JT, and CEB-R). The final grading was based on consensus; no disagreements were recorded. The WHO grading system was used to grade BM fibrosis density based on a scale of 0-3 (Thiele et al, Haematologica 2005;90). Other details on the patient population and study design for the COMFORT-I study have been published previously (Verstovsek et al, N Engl J Med 2012;366). Biopsies from 59 patients were included in this exploratory analysis; patients who failed screening or received only 1 BM measurement were excluded. Three subgroups were defined for the analysis: 1) originally randomized to RUX (n=36); 2) randomized to placebo with BM measurements at BL and Week 48 (n=15); and 3) crossover to RUX with BM measurements at BL and ≥1 post-BL measurement after crossover (n=21). Changes from BL in BM fibrosis grades at various time points were categorized for each patient as improvement (-1 to -3), stabilization (0), or worsening (1 to 3). Patients with a BL score of 0 for improvement and 3 for worsening were excluded from the analysis. Patients who received placebo for ≥36 weeks were included in the crossover group, with Week 48 used as the BL BM measurement. RUX and crossover groups were combined for evaluation of RUX effect. Placebo effect in the crossover group was assessed by analyzing change from BL to Week 48. Change from BL was evaluated using a signed rank test. Change from BL to last grade, and time to the first occurrence of a ≥1 grade improvement from BL was assessed for RUX and crossover groups. KM analysis was used to estimate time to improvement in BM fibrosis for a subgroup of patients who had a BM fibrosis grade of ≥1 at BL. Results: BL characteristics for age, gender, International Prognostic Scoring System risk, spleen volume, hemoglobin, and platelet counts were similar between the 3 groups. At BL, of 36 patients originally randomized to RUX, 17% (n=6) presented with WHO-defined fibrosis grade 1, 39% (n=14) with grade 2, and 36% (n=13) with grade 3 (3 patients were grade 0). Of the 15 patients randomized to placebo, 20% (n=3) presented with grade 1, 40% (n=6) with grade 2, and 27% (n=4) with grade 3 WHO-defined fibrosis at BL (2 patients were grade 0). Mean exposure to RUX in the RUX and crossover groups was 136.0 (SD, 67.4) weeks and 129.1 (SD, 67.7) weeks, respectively. The proportion of evaluable patients with an improvement in BM fibrosis from BL to Week 48 was 26% (n=27) in the RUX group and 15.4% (n=13) in the placebo group. When evaluating all patients who received RUX (including placebo crossover), a significant shift was observed from BL to the last change in BM fibrosis grade (P=0.0119; signed rank test). For all RUX-treated patients (n=57), 33% (grade -1, n=11; -2, n=7; -3, n=1) had an improvement, 49% had no change or stabilization, and 18% had a worsening in BM fibrosis from BL to the last grade (Figure). At the final grading, 82% (n=47) of patients had improvement or stabilization while on RUX. Median time to a ≥1 grade improvement in BM fibrosis grade was approximately 3.5 years (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.5; n=51). Conclusions: This analysis from the COMFORT-I study showed that treatment with RUX was associated with improvement and stabilization in WHO-defined BM fibrosis in the majority of patients with MF in this study cohort. These results support evidence from other studies, suggesting that RUX treatment may contribute to disease-modifying effects in MF. The clinical effect of improvement and stabilization in BM fibrosis requires further study. Disclosures Kvasnicka: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; AOP Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria. Thiele:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Svaraman:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Dao:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Talpaz:Incyte Corporation: Other: Travel expense reimbursement, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Expense reimbursement, travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding. Winton:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Verstovsek:AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Lilly Oncology: Research Funding; Galena BioPharma: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding.

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 4163-4163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan O'Brien ◽  
Richard R. Furman ◽  
Nathan Fowler ◽  
Steven E. Coutre ◽  
Jeff P. Sharman ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Bruton’s Tyrosine Kinase (BTK) plays a critical role in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cell survival by modulating B-cell receptor signaling. Ibrutinib (PCI-32765), a first-in-class oral inhibitor of BTK, inhibits proliferation, migration and adhesion in CLL cells. A total of 148 patients with CLL/SLL received ibrutinib monotherapy in a Phase 1 multiple ascending dose study (PCYC-04753) or Phase 1b/2 continuous dosing study (PCYC-1102-CA), after which a long-term extension study was available for continued follow-up for safety and efficacy with daily orally-administered ibrutinib monotherapy. The studies included patients with treatment-naïve (TN) and relapsed or refractory (RR) CLL/SLL. The aims of the present analysis were to evaluate safety based on time on ibrutinib therapy (≤ 1 year and > 1 year), summarize safety findings in the TN and RR patient populations, and assess duration of response (DOR). Methods Demographics and baseline characteristics were summarized according to parent study, comprising either TN patients or RR CLL/SLL patients who had received at least one dose of ibrutinib monotherapy. Patient disposition, treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), best response, overall response rate (ORR), and DOR were determined for the time treated (beginning in the parent studies and extending into the long-term extension study). Results At a median treatment duration of 21.5 months, 109 out of 148 patients continued treatment with ibrutinib for over a year. The percentage of patients who had a grade 3 or higher serious adverse event (SAE) declined over time from 43% within the first year of study treatment to 32% after the first year of treatment. With respect to side effects determined to be related to study drug, the number of grade 3 AEs and SAEs also declined from within the first year of treatment (24% and 8%, respectively) to after the first year of treatment (7% and 0%, respectively). AEs leading to ibrutinib discontinuation occurred in 12 patients within the first year of treatment for all 148 patients and in 6 out of 109 patients after the first year of treatment. Overall, the most frequent AEs grade 3 or higher were pneumonia (16.9%), hypertension (13.5%), neutropenia (11.5%), thrombocytopenia (7.4%), and diarrhea (5.4%), regardless of relationship to study drug. Grade 3 or higher SAEs were reported in RR patients at 62% compared to TN patients at 29%. Pneumonia was reported in TN patients at 6.5% and in RR patients at 19.7%. Within the efficacy population (n = 140), the ORR was 86.2% for TN patients and 88.3% for RR patients who achieved a partial response (PR) or better. The ORR combined with PR with lymphocytosis suggests that 93.1% of TN patients and 93.7% of RR patients achieved an objective response to ibrutinib therapy based on Cheson JCO 2012. After a median follow up of 27.2 months (range 1.9-42 months) for TN and RR responders who achieved PR or better, the median DOR has not been reached. At landmark 30 months, 76.1% of the responders were alive without progression. Conclusions Ibrutinib as a single agent demonstrates long-term safety, tolerability, and durability of response in patients with TN and RR CLL/SLL. Indeed, a decrease in the number of patients experiencing SAEs or AEs grade 3 or higher after 1 year of treatment with ibrutinib resulted in low rates of treatment-related discontinuation after that time point. Grade 3 or higher SAEs were reported at a two-fold higher rate in patients who had received prior therapies, which may be reflective of disease state rather than relationship to ibrutinib. A majority of patients remain on ibrutinib monotherapy with the median DOR not yet reached in the ongoing extension study. Disclosures: O'Brien: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Furman:Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Fowler:Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Coutre:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Burger:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Jones:Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Wierda:Abbott Laboratories: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech/Roche: Consultancy, DSMB, DSMB Other, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Tragara: Research Funding. Flinn:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Advani:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Kolibaba:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding. Shaw:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Clow:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. James:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chu:Pharmacyclics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Byrd:Celgene: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 800-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Ruben A. Mesa ◽  
Jason Gotlib ◽  
Richard S. Levy ◽  
Vikas Gupta ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 800 Background: Ruxolitinib (RUX), an oral JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, reduced spleen volume (SV), improved myelofibrosis (MF)-associated symptoms and quality of life (QoL), and appeared to exhibit a survival advantage over placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with MF regardless of JAK2V617F mutation status in the phase III COMFORT-I study. We describe long-term efficacy and safety of RUX from COMFORT-I, with 1 year of additional follow up beyond previously published data. Methods: Eligible pts (N=309) were randomized (1:1) to RUX or PBO. The primary analysis occurred when all pts completed 24 weeks (wks) and when half the pts completed 36 wks of treatment. All pts receiving PBO were eligible for crossover to RUX after the primary analysis; crossover before wk 24 was permitted if pts met protocol-defined criteria for worsening splenomegaly. The proportion of pts with ≥35% SV reduction at 24 wks (primary endpoint) and durability of SV response were assessed. Although symptom burden (measured daily using the modified MF Symptom Assessment Form v2.0) was only measured up to wk 24, QoL continued to be evaluated beyond wk 24 (every 24 wks) using the EORTC QoL Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30). Overall survival (OS) was assessed according to original randomized treatment. Results: In this updated analysis, median follow-up of pts randomized to RUX was 102 wks. All pts receiving PBO completed crossover or discontinued within 3 months of the primary analysis. Of 134 pts randomized to RUX who remained on treatment after the primary data analysis, 100 continue on study. Mean SV reduction in pts randomized to RUX was 31.6% at wk 24 and has remained stable with additional follow up through wk 96 (Table). In pts who achieved a ≥35% SV reduction, response was durable, with a median response duration of 108 wks. RUX treatment was also associated with durable improvements in the Global Health Status/QoL (Table) and the 5 functional domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30. Twenty-seven (27) pts randomized to RUX and 41 pts randomized to PBO died, representing a continued OS benefit in favor of RUX (HR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.36, 0.95; P = 0.028; Fig 1) similar in magnitude to that previously reported. OS favored RUX across subgroups including starting dose as well as baseline risk status and hemoglobin (Hgb). Of 34 pts randomized to RUX who discontinued after the primary analysis, 4 discontinued for an adverse event (AE). In pts who continued on RUX, anemia and thrombocytopenia remained the most frequently reported AEs. New onset of grade 3 or 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia was reported in only 12 and 5 pts, respectively. One pt discontinued for anemia. Overall, among all pts randomized to RUX, Grade 3 and 4 anemia regardless of baseline Hgb was reported in 37.4% and 14.8% of pts, respectively. Similarly, Grade 3 and 4 thrombocytopenia was reported in 11.0% and 5.2% of pts, respectively. These rates were similar to those reported in the primary analysis. By wk 36, the proportion of pts receiving red blood cell transfusions decreased to the level seen with PBO and remained stable thereafter (Fig 2). Rates of nonhematologic AEs adjusted for increased follow-up duration remain similar to those seen at the time of the primary data analysis. No additional cases of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in pts randomized to RUX were reported. Two pts originally randomized to PBO developed AML, 21 and 178 days after crossover to RUX. There continued to be no reports of a withdrawal syndrome after RUX discontinuation. Conclusions: RUX provides durable reductions in SV and improvements in QoL. Although all pts randomized to PBO crossed over to RUX shortly after the primary analysis, with 1 year of additional follow up, RUX continues to be associated with a survival advantage over PBO. RUX continues to be well tolerated; the AE profile with long-term treatment is consistent with that previously reported. The proportion of pts receiving transfusions decreased over time to rates similar to PBO, and there were no reports of a specific withdrawal syndrome or cytokine rebound phenomenon after RUX discontinuation. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte: Consultancy, travel to congress Other. Levy:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gupta:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; YM Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofiå]Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Catalano:Incyte: Consultancy. Deininger:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy. Miller:Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, development of educational presentations Other; Incyte: development of educational presentations, development of educational presentations Other. Talpaz:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; B.M.S.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Research Funding; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Winton:Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria. Arcasoy:Incyte: Research Funding. Lyons:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Telik: Research Funding. Paquette:Incyte: Consultancy. Vaddi:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kantarjian:Incyte: grant support Other.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 390-390 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Schroeder ◽  
H. Jean Khoury ◽  
Madan Jagasia ◽  
Haris Ali ◽  
Gary J. Schiller ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Corticosteroids are considered standard first-line systemic therapy for patients with aGVHD, but this approach is effective in only approximately half of all cases. For patients who progress or do not respond to corticosteroids, no specific agent has been identified as standard, and regimens are typically selected based on investigator experience and patient co-morbidities. In preclinical models, JAK inhibition has been shown to impair production of cytokines as well as the differentiation and trafficking of T cells implicated in the pathogenesis of aGVHD. Retrospective studies have suggested that JAK1/JAK2 inhibition with ruxolitinib treatment provides clinical benefit in patients with steroid-refractory GVHD (Zeiser et al, Leukemia 2015;29:2062-2068). Herein, we report preliminary safety results from a prospective randomized, parallel-cohort, open-label phase 1 trial evaluating the potent and selective JAK 1 inhibitor INCB039110 in patients with aGVHD. Methods: Male or female patients 18 years or older who underwent their first allo-hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) from any donor source and developed grades IIB-IVD aGVHD were eligible for the study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to either a 200 or 300 mg oral daily dose of INCB039110 in combination with corticosteroids, and were stratified based on prior treatment status (treatment-naive [TN] versus steroid-refractory [SR]). The primary endpoint of the study was safety and tolerability; secondary endpoints included overall response rate at Days 14, 28, 56, and 100, non-relapse mortality, and pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluations. Patients were assessed through Day 28 for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and response. A Bayesian approach was used for continuous monitoring of DLTs from Days 1-28. Treatment continued until GVHD progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. Acute GVHD was graded according to MN-CIBMTR criteria; adverse events (AEs) were graded according to NCICTCAE v 4.03. Results: Between January and June 2016, 31 patients (TN, n=14; SR, n= 17) were randomized. As of July 25, 2016, data were available from 30 patients who received an oral daily dose of 200 mg (n=14) or 300 mg (n=16) INCB039110 in combination with 2 mg/kg methylprednisolone (or equivalent dose of prednisone). The median durations of treatment were 60.8 days and 56.5 days for patients receiving a daily dose of 200 mg and 300 mg INCB039110, respectively. One DLT of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia was reported. The most frequently reported AEs included thrombocytopenia/platelet count decrease (26.7%), diarrhea (23.3%), peripheral edema (20%), fatigue (16.7%), and hyperglycemia (16.7%). Grade 3 or 4 AEs occurred in 77% of patients and with similar frequency across dose groups and included cytomegalovirus infections (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), and sepsis (n=3). Five patients had AEs leading to a fatal outcome, including multi-organ failure (n=2), sepsis (n=1), disease progression (n=1), and bibasilar atelectasis, cardiopulmonary arrest, and respiratory distress (n=1); none of the fatal events was attributed to INCB039110. Efficacy and PK evaluations are ongoing and will be updated at the time of presentation. Conclusion: The oral, selective JAK1 inhibitor INCB039110 can be given safely to steroid-naive or steroid-refractory aGVHD patients. The safety profile was generally consistent in both dose groups. Biomarker evaluation, PK, and cellular phenotyping studies are ongoing. The recommended phase 2 dose will be selected and reported based on PK studies and final safety data. Disclosures Schroeder: Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Khoury:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Jagasia:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Therakos: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Arbushites:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delaite:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yan:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rhein:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Perales:Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chen:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. DiPersio:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3512-3512
Author(s):  
Rachael F. Grace ◽  
D. Mark Layton ◽  
Frédéric Galactéros ◽  
Wilma Barcellini ◽  
Eduard J. van Beers ◽  
...  

Background: Pyruvate kinase (PK) deficiency is a congenital hemolytic anemia caused by mutations in the PKLR gene, leading to a deficiency of the glycolytic enzyme red cell PK (PK-R). Current treatments for PK deficiency are supportive only. Mitapivat (AG-348) is an oral, small-molecule, allosteric PK-R activator in clinical trials for PK deficiency. We previously described results from DRIVE PK, a phase 2, randomized, open-label, dose-ranging study in adults with PK deficiency (N=52) treated with mitapivat for a median of 6 months. Aim: To report long-term safety and efficacy of mitapivat in patients who continue treatment in the ongoing Extension period of the DRIVE PK study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02476916). Methods: Patients were eligible to participate if ≥18 years of age with a confirmed diagnosis of PK deficiency (enzyme and molecular testing); baseline hemoglobin (Hb) levels ≤12.0 g/dL (males) or ≤11.0 g/dL (females); and if they had not received more than 3 units of red blood cells in the prior 12 months, with no transfusions in the prior 4 months. Patients were initially randomized 1:1 to receive mitapivat 50 mg twice daily (BID) or 300 mg BID for a 6-month Core period. Dose adjustment was allowed during the Core period based on safety and efficacy. Patients experiencing clinical benefit without concerning safety issues related to mitapivat (investigator discretion) could opt to enter the Extension period, with follow-up visits every 3 months. Safety (adverse events [AEs]) and efficacy (hematologic parameters including Hb) were assessed. Protocol amendments during the Extension period required that (1) patients who did not have an increase from baseline Hb of ≥1.0 g/dL for ≥3 of the prior 4 measurements withdraw from the study, and (2) patients treated with mitapivat doses >25 mg BID undergo a dose taper and continue on the dose that maintained their Hb level no lower than 1.0 g/dL below their pre-taper Hb level. Results: Fifty-two patients enrolled in this study and were treated in the 24-week Core period; 43 (83%) patients completed the Core period and 36 (69%) entered the Extension period. Eighteen patients discontinued from the Extension period: investigator decision (n=8), AEs (n=1), consent withdrawal (n=1), noncompliance (n=1), or other (n=7). Thus, 18 patients, all of whom received ≥29 months of treatment with mitapivat (median 35.6, range 28.7-41.9) have continued treatment. Ten of these 18 patients were male, 11 had a prior splenectomy, and 5 had a history of iron chelation. Median age was 33.5 (range 19-61) years; mean baseline Hb was 9.7 (range 7.9-12.0) g/dL. All patients had ≥1 missense PKLR mutation. The doses (post-taper) at which treatment was continued were (BID): ≤25 mg (n=12), 50 mg (n=5), and 200 mg (n=1). Improvements in Hb levels and markers of hemolysis (reticulocytes, indirect bilirubin, haptoglobin) were sustained (Figure). Among the 18 patients, headache was the most commonly reported AE during both the Extension (n=7, 38.9%) and Core (n=10, 55.6%) periods. Reports of insomnia and fatigue during the Extension period (n=5, 27.8% each) were the same as or similar to those during the Core period. There were fewer reports of nausea (2 vs 6) and hot flush (0 vs 5) in the Extension period. Nasopharyngitis was reported in 5 patients in the Extension period vs 1 patient in the Core period. These data are consistent with the AE profile for the 52 patients treated overall in the Core period, in that headache (44%), insomnia (40%), and nausea (38%) were the most commonly reported AEs and were transient (generally resolved within 7 days without intervention). Conclusion: Chronic daily dosing with mitapivat for a median of 3 years was well tolerated, with no new safety signals reported. Increased Hb levels and improvements in hemolysis markers were sustained at the optimized individual doses. These long-term data support the potential of mitapivat as the first disease-altering therapy for PK deficiency. Two phase 3 trials are underway to further study the effect of mitapivat in patients with PK deficiency. Disclosures Grace: Novartis: Research Funding; Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Layton:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cerus Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Galactéros:Addmedica: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barcellini:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Apellis: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board; Agios: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board; Bioverativ: Consultancy, Other: Advisory board. van Beers:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; RR Mechatronics: Research Funding. Ravindranath:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: I am site PI on several Agios-sponsored studies, Research Funding. Kuo:Agios: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Apellis: Consultancy; Bioverativ: Other: Data Safety Monitoring Board; Bluebird Bio: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy. Sheth:Apopharma: Other: Clinical trial DSMB; CRSPR/Vertex: Other: Clinical Trial Steering committee; Celgene: Consultancy. Kwiatkowski:bluebird bio, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Apopharma: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Terumo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Imara: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy. Hua:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hawkins:Bristol Myers Squibb: Equity Ownership; Infinity Pharma: Equity Ownership; Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership. Mix:Agios: Employment, Equity Ownership. Glader:Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 814-814 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Melissa Alsina ◽  
Donna M. Weber ◽  
Steven E. Coutre ◽  
Sagar Lonial ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 814FN2 Background: Patients with refractory multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and an extremely poor prognosis. A recent study of patients who were refractory to bortezomib and were relapsed following, refractory to or ineligible to receive an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD, thalidomide or lenalidomide) demonstrated a median event-free survival of only 5 months (Kumar S et al, Leukemia, 2011). Panobinostat is an oral pan-deacetylase inhibitor (pan-DACi) that increases acetylation of proteins involved in multiple oncogenic pathways. Preclinical studies have demonstrated synergistic anti-myeloma activity of the combination of panobinostat and bortezomib through dual inhibition of the aggresome and proteasome pathways. In a phase I study (B2207) of patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory MM treated with panobinostat + bortezomib, clinical responses (≥ minimal response [MR]) were observed in 65% of patients, including in patients with bortezomib-refractory disease. PANORAMA 2 seeks to expand upon these preliminary results and seeks to determine whether panobinostat can sensitize resistant patients to a bortezomib-containing therapeutic regimen. Methods: PANORAMA 2 is a single arm, phase II study of panobinostat + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. Patients with relapsed and bortezomib-refractory MM (≥ 2 prior lines of therapy including an IMiD and who had progressed on or within 60 days of the last bortezomib-based therapy) are treated in 2 phases. Treatment phase 1 consists of 8 three-week cycles of oral panobinostat (20 mg days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12) + intravenous bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 4, 8, 11) + oral dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). Patients demonstrating clinical benefit (≥ stable disease) can proceed to treatment phase 2, consisting of 4 six-week cycles of panobinostat (20 mg TIW 2 weeks on 1 week off, and repeat) + bortezomib (1.3 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 22, 29) + dexamethasone (20 mg on day of and after bortezomib). The primary endpoint is overall response (≥ partial response [PR]), as defined by the European Group of Blood and Marrow Transplantation 1998 criteria, in the first 8 cycles of treatment phase 1. A Simon 2-stage design is used to test the primary endpoint where ≥ 4 responses (≥ PR) in 24 patients are needed in stage 1 in order to proceed to stage 2, where ≥ 9 responses in all patients (N = 47) are required to reject the null hypothesis (overall response rate ≤ 10%). Results: A sufficient number of responses ≥ PR were observed in stage 1 to allow for enrollment to continue to stage 2. As of 15 July 2011, 53 patients with bortezomib-refractory MM were enrolled. Safety and demographic data were available for 48 patients. The median age was 61 (41–88) years. Patients were heavily pretreated, with a median of 4 (2–14) prior regimens, and most patients (69%) received prior autologous stem cell transplant. Efficacy data were available for 44 patients. At the time of this analysis, 9 patients achieved ≥ PR (2 near CR [nCR] and 7 PR) as best overall response, and an additional 7 patients achieved an MR. Responders exhibited a long duration on therapy, and, to date, 8 patients have proceeded to treatment phase 2. The 2 patients with nCR have received ≥ 10 cycles of treatment (duration of therapy 190 and 253 days). Four patients who achieved PR have received ≥ 9 cycles (duration of therapy 155–225 days). Updated response data will be presented. Common adverse events (AEs) of any grade included, fatigue (52%), diarrhea (41%), thrombocytopenia (38%), nausea (38%), and anemia (21%). Gastrointestinal AEs were generally mild, with a relatively low incidence of grade 3/4 events. Grade 3/4 AEs were generally hematologic in nature, with grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia reported in 38%, 12%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Other common nonhematologic grade 3/4 AEs included fatigue (10%) and pneumonia (10%). Of note, to date, a relatively low rate of peripheral neuropathy (17%) has been observed. No grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy has been observed. Conclusions: The combination of panobinostat and bortezomib is a promising treatment for patients with bortezomib-refractory MM. These data, along with forthcoming data from the phase III study of panobinostat/placebo + bortezomib + dexamethasone in patients with relapsed MM (PANORAMA 1), will further define the potential role of panobinostat in the treatment of patients with MM. Disclosures: Richardson: Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Alsina:Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Ortho Biotech: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding. Weber:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Gasparetto:Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Warsi:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ondovik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mukhopadhyay:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Snodgrass:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 4070-4070 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Vij ◽  
Craig C. Hofmeister ◽  
Paul G. Richardson ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David S. Siegel ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 4070 Background: There are currently limited effective treatment options for patients (pts) with RRMM with prior exposure to lenalidomide (LEN), bortezomib (BORT) and chemotherapy. In a multicenter, randomized phase 2 study, POM with or without LoDEX (n=221) was active in RRMM pts who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT (Richardson PG, et al. Blood 2011;118:abs 634); activity was also observed in those with disease refractory to LEN, BORT, or both (Vij R, et al. J Clin Oncol 2012;30:abs 8016). Here we characterize outcomes in the POM+LoDEX group (n=113) according to the prior treatment exposure. Methods: Pts with RRMM who had received ≥2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT, and had progressive disease (PD) within 60 days of their last treatment were randomized (1:1 ratio) to POM+LoDEX (POM, 4 mg/day for days 1–21 of a 28-day cycle; LoDex, 40 mg/week) or POM alone. At randomization, pts were stratified by age, prior number of treatments, and prior thalidomide exposure. At progression, pts receiving POM alone could receive POM+LoDEX at investigator's discretion. All pts received thromboprophylaxis (daily low-dose aspirin). The endpoints in this study were progression-free survival (PFS), response rates (using European Bone Marrow Transplantation [EBMT] criteria), duration of response, time to response, overall survival (OS), and safety. Response data according to prior therapy were assessed by investigator assessment. Results: All 113 pts assigned to POM+LoDEX had prior exposure to LEN (100%), BORT (100%), and steroids (100%). Most pts had also received prior alkylator therapy (93%), stem cell transplant (SCT) (73%), and thalidomide (THAL) (68%); 49% had received prior anthracyclines. Regimens immediately prior to study entry included BORT (50%), LEN (39%), cyclophosphamide (13%), THAL (8%), vorinostat (8%), carfilzomib (5%), and melphalan (5%). The median number of exposures to LEN and BORT in prior lines was once (range 1–4) and twice (range 1–6), respectively. The majority of pts (80%) had received >3 prior therapies. The overall response rate (ORR) was 48% and 30% in pts who had received ≤3 and >3 prior therapies, respectively. Of the pts who had ≤3 vs > 3 prior therapies, 9% vs 1% pts achieved complete response (CR), 39% vs 29% pts achieved partial response (PR), 9% vs 12% pts achieved minimal response (MR) and 44% vs 36 % pts achieved stable disease (SD), respectively. ORR was 34% and appeared similar regardless of prior exposure to alkylators (33%), anthracyclines (35%), SCT (35%), or THAL (35%). Median duration of response was also similar in pts who had received prior alkylators (8.4 mos), anthracyclines (10.1 mos), SCT (7.7 mos), and THAL (7.7 mos). Of the 69 pts who had a best response of SD or PD to their last prior antimyeloma therapy, 21 pts (12 SD and 9 PD) achieved a PR and 3 pts (1 SD and 2 PD) achieved a CR with POM+LoDEX treatment. Responding pts had longer time to progression (TTP; 11.1 mos) with POM+LoDex compared with the TTP (4.4 mos) observed with their last antimyeloma regimen prior to study. The most common grade 3–4 adverse events in the POM+LoDEX group were neutropenia (41%), anemia (22%), pneumonia (22%), thrombocytopenia (19%), and fatigue (14%). The incidence of at least 1 grade 3–4 adverse event was 100% in pts with ≤ 3 prior therapies, and 88% in pts with >3 therapies. Conclusions: The combination of POM+LoDEX has demonstrated an ORR of 34% in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM who have been previously exposed to LEN, BORT, steroids, and other treatments. Early treatment of POM+LoDEX (≤3 prior therapies) achieved better ORR (48%) compared with pts who received POM+LoDex later (>3 prior therapies; ORR, 30%). Disclosures: Vij: Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide is an investigational drug and is not approved for the treatment of patients with any condition. Hofmeister:Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria. Richardson:Celgene, Millennium, Johnson & Johnson: Advisory Board Other. Jagannath:Onyx Pharma: 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 Pharma: 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. Siegel:Onyx: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Pharma: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Baz:Celgene, Millennium, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Acetylon, Oncopep: Scientific Founder, Scientific Founder Other; Celgene, Millennium, BMS, Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.


Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 801-801 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco Cervantes ◽  
Jean-Jacques Kiladjian ◽  
Dietger Niederwieser ◽  
Andres Sirulnik ◽  
Viktoriya Stalbovskaya ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 801 Background: Ruxolitinib is a potent JAK1 & 2 inhibitor that has demonstrated superiority over traditional therapies for the treatment of MF. In the two phase 3 COMFORT studies, ruxolitinib demonstrated rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life. COMFORT-II is a randomized, open-label study evaluating ruxolitinib versus BAT in patients (pts) with MF. The primary and key secondary endpoints were both met: the proportion of pts achieving a response (defined as a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume) at wk 48 (ruxolitinib, 28.5%; BAT, 0%; P < .0001) and 24 (31.9% and 0%; P < .0001), respectively. The present analyses update the efficacy and safety findings of COMFORT-II (median follow-up, 112 wk). Methods: In COMFORT-II, 219 pts with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF and splenomegaly were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib (15 or 20 mg bid, based on baseline platelet count [100-200 × 109/L or > 200 × 109/L, respectively]) or BAT. Efficacy results are based on an intention-to-treat analysis; a loss of spleen response was defined as a > 25% increase in spleen volume over on-study nadir that is no longer a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median follow-up was 112 wk (ruxolitinib, 113; BAT, 108), and the median duration of exposure 83.3 wk (ruxolitinib, 111.4 [randomized and extension phases]; BAT, 45.1 [randomized treatment only]). Because the core study has completed, all pts have either entered the extension phase or discontinued from the study. The primary reasons for discontinuation were adverse events (AEs; ruxolitinib, 11.6%; BAT, 6.8%), consent withdrawal (4.1% and 12.3%), and disease progression (2.7% and 5.5%). Overall, 72.6% of pts (106/146) in the ruxolitinib arm and 61.6% (45/73) in the BAT arm entered the extension phase to receive ruxolitinib, and 55.5% (81/146) of those originally randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment at the time of this analysis. The primary reasons for discontinuation from the extension phase were progressive disease (8.2%), AEs (2.1%), and other (4.1%). Overall, 70 pts (48.3%) treated with ruxolitinib achieved a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume at any time during the study, and 97.1% of pts (132/136) with postbaseline assessments experienced a clinical benefit with some degree of reduction in spleen volume. Spleen reductions of ≥ 35% were sustained with continued ruxolitinib therapy (median duration not yet reached); the probabilities of maintaining the spleen response at wk 48 and 84 are 75% (95% CI, 61%-84%) and 58% (95% CI, 35%-76%), respectively (Figure). Since the last report (median 61.1 wk), an additional 9 and 12 deaths were reported in the ruxolitinib and BAT arms, respectively, resulting in a total of 20 (14%) and 16 (22%) deaths overall. Although there was no inferential statistical testing at this unplanned analysis, pts randomized to ruxolitinib showed longer survival than those randomized to BAT (HR = 0.52; 95% CI, 0.27–1.00). As expected, given the mechanism of action of ruxolitinib as a JAK1 & 2 inhibitor, the most common new or worsened grade 3/4 hematologic abnormalities during randomized treatment were anemia (ruxolitinib, 40.4%; BAT, 23.3%), lymphopenia (22.6%; 31.5%), and thrombocytopenia (9.6%; 9.6%). In the ruxolitinib arm, mean hemoglobin levels decreased over the first 12 wk of treatment and then recovered to levels similar to BAT from wk 24 onward; there was no difference in the mean monthly red blood cell transfusion rate among the ruxolitinib and BAT groups (0.834 vs 0.956 units, respectively). Nonhematologic AEs were primarily grade 1/2. Including the extension phase, there were no new nonhematologic AEs in the ruxolitinib group that were not observed previously (in ≥ 10% of pts), and only 1 pt had a new grade 3/4 AE (epistaxis). Conclusion: In COMFORT-II, ruxolitinib provided rapid and durable reductions in splenomegaly; this analysis demonstrates that these reductions are sustained over 2 years of treatment in the majority of pts. Ruxolitinib-treated pts showed longer survival than those receiving BAT, consistent with the survival advantage observed in previous (Verstovsek et al. NEJM. 2012) and current analyses of COMFORT-I, as well as with the comparison of pts of the phase 1/2 study with matched historical controls (Verstovsek et al. Blood. 2012). Disclosures: Cervantes: Sanofi-Aventis: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Celgene: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Pfizer: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Advisory Board, Advisory Board Other; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: AdvisoryBoard Other, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:Shire: 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; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding. Niederwieser:Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sirulnik:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stalbovskaya:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. McQuity:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hunter:Incyte: Employment. Levy:Incyte: Employment, stock options Other. Passamonti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Barbui:Novartis: Honoraria. Gisslinger:AOP Orphan Pharma AG: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Knoops:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Harrison:Shire: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria; YM Bioscience: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.


Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1538-1538
Author(s):  
Aristoteles Giagounidis ◽  
Alan List ◽  
Eva Hellström-Lindberg ◽  
Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽  
Ghulam J. Mufti ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction The proportion of aberrant metaphases is prognostic for overall survival (OS) in MDS patients with trisomy 8 (Mallo M, et al. Leuk Res. 2011;35:834-6). The impact of the proportion of metaphases with del(5q) on clinical outcomes, including OS, disease progression and response to therapy with LEN in MDS remains undefined. In two large multicenter studies of LEN (MDS-003 and MDS-004) in RBC transfusion-dependent patients with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) Low- or Intermediate (Int)-1-risk del(5q) MDS, RBC transfusion independence (TI) ≥ 8 weeks was achieved in 51–67% of patients (List A, et al. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1456-65; Fenaux P, et al. Blood. 2011;118:3765-76). This retrospective analysis evaluated response to treatment, progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and OS by proportion of del(5q) metaphases in patients with isolated del(5q) from the MDS-003 and 004 studies. Methods In order to allow sufficient patient numbers for analysis, ≥ 16 metaphases were evaluated for del(5q) by standard karyotyping (MDS-003 and MDS-004) and 200 interphase nuclei were evaluated by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH; MDS-004 only) using a probe for the commonly deleted region 5q31 (LSI EGR1/D5S721, Abbott, Wiesbaden, Germany). Patients received LEN on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle (10 mg) or continuously (5 mg or 10 mg), or placebo. In MDS-004, patients randomized to placebo could cross over to LEN 5 mg by week 16. RBC-TI ≥ 26 weeks, time to AML progression and OS were analyzed by the proportion of del(5q) metaphases or interphases (≤ 60% vs > 60%) using standard karyotyping and FISH, respectively. Results Of the 353 patients from MDS-003 and MDS-004, 194 had isolated del(5q) by standard karyotyping; median proportion of del(5q) metaphases was 96% (range 4–100). Baseline characteristics including age, time from diagnosis, RBC transfusion burden, hemoglobin level, platelet and absolute neutrophil counts were comparable among patients with ≤ 60% (n = 21) and > 60% (n = 173) del(5q) metaphases. Rates of RBC-TI ≥ 26 weeks were similar across patients in the ≤ 60% and > 60% groups (P = 0.6515). Time to AML progression was comparable for patients in the ≤ 60% group versus the > 60% group (log-rank test P = 0.9802); 2-year rates were 22.2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.7–54.5%) and 14.6% (95% CI: 9.9–21.2%), respectively. Time to AML progression was similar when analyzed with death without AML as competing risk (Gray’s test P = 0.5514). OS was longer in the > 60% versus the ≤ 60% group (log-rank test P = 0.0436); median OS was 3.7 years (95% CI: 3.0–4.2) and 2.4 years (95% CI: 1.5–4.9), respectively. In MDS-004, the proportion of del(5q) interphases was analyzed using FISH in 106 patients, including 46 with ≤ 60% and 60 with > 60%. When analyzed by FISH, rates of RBC-TI ≥ 26 weeks were similar across patients in the ≤ 60% and > 60% groups (P = 1.000). Time to AML progression and OS were similar across these groups (log-rank test P = 0.7311 and P = 0.8639, respectively) when analyzed by FISH. In the ≤ 60% and > 60% groups respectively, 2-year AML progression rates were 14.8% (95% CI: 6.9–30.1%) and 18.6% (95% CI: 10.4–32.0%), and median OS was 3.1 years (95% CI: 2.3–4.8) and 2.9 years (95% CI: 2.3–4.4). Time to AML progression was similar when analyzed with death without AML as competing risk (Gray’s test P = 0.8631). Conclusions In IPSS Low- or Int-1-risk MDS patients with isolated del(5q) treated with LEN in MDS-003 and MDS-004 studies, baseline characteristics, RBC-TI ≥ 26 weeks and AML progression were comparable in patients with > 60% versus ≤ 60% del(5q) metaphases. Although similar across groups when analyzed by FISH in a subset of patients, surprisingly, OS was longer in patients with > 60% del(5q) metaphases than in those with ≤ 60% del(5q) metaphases by standard karyotyping. However, the number of patients with ≤ 60% del(5q) metaphases was limited and no adjustment was made for multiple testing. These findings suggest that the number of cells with the isolated del(5q) abnormality measured by FISH does not impact clinical outcome in this RBC transfusion-dependent study population, but this finding could not be confirmed for OS by standard karyotyping. Disclosures: Giagounidis: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. List:Celgene: Serve on Celgene Data Safety & Monitoring Committee Other. Hellström-Lindberg:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mufti:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Schlegelberger:Celgene: Consultancy. Morrill:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wu:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Skikne:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fenaux:Celgene: Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 1413-1413
Author(s):  
Barbara Konkle ◽  
K John Pasi ◽  
David J Perry ◽  
Johnny Mahlangu ◽  
Savita Rangarajan ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Prophylactic replacement of coagulation factor VIII (FVIII) is the standard of care for patients with hemophilia A; however, prophylaxis with conventional FVIII products usually requires frequent intravenous injections (3-4 times/week). The safety, efficacy, and prolonged half-life of rFVIIIFc in previously treated adults and adolescents (≥12 y) with severe hemophilia A were demonstrated in the phase 3 A-LONG study (NCT01181128, completed) and ASPIRE extension study (NCT01454739, ongoing). Here, we report cumulative long-term data on the safety and efficacy of rFVIIIFc in study participants as of the second interim data cut (8 Dec 2014). Methods: This longitudinal analysis includes cumulative data from A-LONG and ASPIRE (as of the second interim data cut 8 Dec 2014) for subjects treated with ≥1 dose of rFVIIIFc. A-LONG evaluated 2 prophylaxis regimens-individualized (IP): 25 IU/kg on Day 1 and 50 IU/kg on Day 4 to start, then 25-65 IU/kg every 3-5 days, to target a 1-3 IU/dL FVIII trough level, and weekly (WP): 65 IU/kg dosed once weekly-as well as episodic (on-demand) treatment (ET). Subjects completing A-LONG and meeting enrollment criteria for ASPIRE could participate in the IP, WP, or ET groups, or, if optimal dosing could not be achieved with IP or WP, in an additional modified prophylaxis (MP) group. Subjects could change treatment groups at any point during ASPIRE. Efficacy analyses were performed using data summarized according to the treatment group in which each subject participated, for the time period they were in that treatment group; thus, subjects may be included in the analysis of more than one group. Outcomes evaluated included: incidence of inhibitors (neutralizing antibody value ≥0.6 BU/mL identified and confirmed on 2 separate samples drawn approximately 2-4 weeks apart and performed by the central laboratory as measured by the Nijmegen-modified Bethesda assay), adverse events (AEs), annualized bleeding rate (ABR), treatment of acute bleeds, and prophylactic consumption and dosing interval compared to pre-A-LONG (prestudy). Results: Of 164 subjects dosed with rFVIIIFc during A-LONG, 153 completed the study and 150 enrolled in ASPIRE; at the time of this second interim data cut, 97 subjects were ongoing in ASPIRE, 40 subjects had completed the study, and 13 subjects withdrew. Cumulatively, subjects had 38,662 rFVIIIFc exposure days (EDs), inclusive of surgery. As of this second interim data cut (8 Dec 2014), no inhibitors were observed; the type and incidence of adverse events (AEs) observed were typical of previous hemophilia A populations studied. There were no reports of anaphylaxis or serious hypersensitivity events, and no serious vascular thrombotic events. Median ABRs for subjects on IP and WP (MP was not an option during A-LONG) were lower with rFVIIIFc compared with prestudy FVIII for subjects on prestudy prophylaxis or ET (Figure). In the IP group, the median (interquartile range [IQR]) spontaneous ABRs in Years 1, 2, and 3 on-study were 0.0 (0.0, 2.0), 0.0 (0.0, 1.0), and 0.0 (0.0, 1.0), respectively. In the WP treatment group, the median (IQR) spontaneous ABRs in Years 1, 2, and 3 on-study were 1.0 (0.5, 3.0), 0.5 (0.0, 2.1), and 0.0 (0.0, 1.0), respectively. Overall, 88.5% and 97.0% of bleeding episodes were controlled with 1 or ≤2 intervenous injections, respectively. Among subjects treated with FVIII prophylaxis prestudy (n = 79), 86% were dosed at least 3 times/week prestudy. Compared with prestudy dosing intervals, dosing intervals with rFVIIIFc were extended in 96.2% of subjects, were shortened in 2.5% of subjects, and were unchanged in 1.3% of subjects. The median (IQR) total weekly prophylactic consumption was comparable (prestudy FVIII: 78.0 [60.0, 102.0] IU/kg; on-study rFVIIIFc: 75.0 [70.0, 113.8] IU/kg). Conclusions: Longitudinal data from patients with severe hemophilia A treated with rFVIIIFc in A-LONG and ASPIRE confirm long-term safety, with no inhibitors observed in any subject. Low median ABRs were maintained, and rFVIIIFc demonstrated efficacy in the prevention and treatment of bleeding episodes. Prophylactic dosing intervals were extended, without an increase in median prophylactic factor consumption. This research was funded by Biogen and Sobi. Biogen and Sobi reviewed and provided feedback on the abstract. The authors had full editorial control of the abstract and provided their final approval of all content. Disclosures Pasi: Biogen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; SOBI: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Octapharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria. Perry:Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biogen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Mahlangu:Bayer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CSL: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Biotest: Speakers Bureau; Biogen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy. Rangarajan:Baxter: Research Funding; Baxalta, now part of Shire: Other: Investigator Clinical Studies, Research Funding; Biogen: Consultancy; Biotest: Research Funding; Grifols: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding. Brown:Baxter: Consultancy; Biogen: Consultancy; Novo Nordisk: Consultancy. Hanabusa:Novo Nordisk: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; KaketsuKen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bayer: Honoraria; Biogen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pabinger:Biotest: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CSL Behring: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cristiano:Biogen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Tsao:Biogen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Winding:Sobi: Employment. Glazebrook:Biogen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lethagen:Sobi: Employment. Jackson:Biogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Baxalta/Shire: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Baxter: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 679-679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Martinelli ◽  
Hervé Dombret ◽  
Patrice Chevallier ◽  
Oliver G. Ottmann ◽  
Nicola Goekbuget ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction. Prognosis of patients (pts) with R/R Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) ALL is dismal despite the introduction of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) which may be used as single agents or in combination regimens. Blinatumomab is a bispecific T-cell engaging (BiTE®) antibody construct that has shown antileukemic activity. Among adults with R/R Ph-negative ALL receiving blinatumomab, 43% achieved complete remission (CR) or CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) during the first two cycles (Topp MS et al. Lancet Oncol 2015;16:57). We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of blinatumomab in pts with R/R Ph+ ALL who progressed after or were intolerant to a 2nd or later (2+) generation TKI. Methods. Eligible adult pts (≥18 years) had Ph+ B-precursor ALL and had relapsed after or were refractory to at least one 2+ generation TKI; or were intolerant to 2+ generation TKI and intolerant or refractory to imatinib. All pts had to have >5% blasts in the bone marrow and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2. Blinatumomab was dosed by continuous IV infusion (4 weeks on/2 weeks off) for up to 5 cycles (9 μg/d on days 1-7 in cycle 1, and 28 μg/d thereafter). The primary endpoint was CR or CRh during the first two cycles; minimal residual disease (MRD) response based on RT-PCR amplification of BCR-ABL per central laboratory, relapse-free survival (RFS), overall survival (OS), and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (alloHSCT) rate were key secondary endpoints. Complete MRD response was defined as no RT-PCR amplification of BCR-ABL at a sensitivity of 10-5. Results. Of 45 treated pts, 44 were resistant to 2+ generation TKI; one patient was resistant to imatinib and never exposed to 2+ generation TKI (protocol deviation). 53% of pts were men. Median (range) age was 55 (23-78) years (≥65 years, 27%). Ten pts (22%) had a BCR-ABL gene with T315I mutation. All pts had received prior TKI (dasatinib, 87%; ponatinib, 51%; imatinib, 56%; nilotinib, 36%; bosutinib, 2%), with 60% having received ≥ 2 prior 2+ generation TKI; most pts (96%) had received prior chemotherapy. 38% of pts had ≥ 2 prior relapses and 44% had prior alloHSCT. Efficacy outcomes for key endpoints are shown in the table. 16 pts achieved CR/CRh during the first two cycles for a response rate of 36% (95% CI: 22%, 51%); of those, 14 pts achieved CR, most of them (10/14, 71%) in cycle 1. The patient who never received 2+ generation TKI did not respond to treatment. 12 of the 14 pts (86%) with CR and two of the two pts with CRh achieved a complete MRD response. Among the 10 pts with T315I mutation, four achieved CR/CRh; all four also achieved a complete MRD response. Eight CR/CRh responders (50%) relapsed, three during treatment (including two with CR who did not achieve complete MRD response). One patient died in CR post alloHSCT. Median (95% CI) RFS was 6.7 (4.4, not estimable) months (median follow-up, 9.0 months); median OS was 7.1 (5.6, not estimable) months (median follow-up, 8.8 months). Patient incidence of grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) was 82%, most commonly febrile neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (22%), anemia (16%), and pyrexia (11%). Five pts had fatal AEs; one (septic shock) was considered treatment-related by the investigator. Three pts discontinued because of AEs. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) occurred in three pts (all grade 1 or 2). 21 pts (47%) had neurologic events (paraesthesia, 13%; confusional state, 11%; dizziness, 9%; tremor, 9%); three pts had grade 3 neurologic events (aphasia, hemiplegia; and depressed level of consciousness and nervous system disorder), one of which (aphasia) required treatment interruption. Conclusion. In this population of pts with R/R Ph+ ALL who have very poor prognosis after failure of 2+ generation TKI therapy, treatment with CD19-targeted immunotherapy blinatumomab as single agent showed antileukemic activity. AEs were consistent with those previously reported for pts with R/R Ph-negative ALL treated with blinatumomab. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Martinelli: Novartis: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy. Dombret:Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Ottmann:Astra Zeneca: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Goekbuget:Bayer: Equity Ownership; Eusapharma/Jazz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Erytech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medac: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SigmaTau: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Sanofi: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Topp:Astra: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Affimed: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support; Jazz: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support. Fielding:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Sterling:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Benjamin:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Stein:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document