scholarly journals Bortezomib, Dexamethasone and Rituximab in Newly Diagnosed Patients with WaldenströM's Macroglobulinemia: Final Analysis of a Phase 2 Study after a Minimum Follow up of 6 Years

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2957-2957 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Gavriatopoulou ◽  
Ramon Garcia-Sanz ◽  
Efstathios Kastritis ◽  
Pierre Morel ◽  
Marie-Christine Kyrtsonis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Death Rate ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Primary Therapy ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare low grade lymphoma, with a prolonged course. With a median survival exceeding 7 years, prolonged follow up is needed in order to evaluate the outcomes of patients with WM after a specific primary therapy. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies, such as rituximab, remain cornerstones of WM therapy, usually in combination with alkylating agents. Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor which has shown activity in myeloma but also has shown significant activity, especially in terms of rapid IgM reduction, in patients with relapsed/refractory or treatment naïve WM. Clinical and preclinical data have indicated potential synergistic activity for the combination of bortezomib and rituximab. Thus, in a large phase 2 trial we evaluated the activity of the chemotherapy free combination of bortezomib with dexamethasone and rituximab (BDR) in 59 newly diagnosed patients with WM fulfilling the contemporary criteria for diagnosis and treatment initiation. Here we present the results from the long term follow up of this study, focusing on long term outcomes and long term toxicity, after a minimum follow up of 6 years. A total of 5 cycles of therapy with BDR were planned. In order to manage complications that are associated with high IgM levels, reduce the need for plasmapheresis and the risk and severity of rituximab-associated "IgM flare", single-agent intravenous (iv) bortezomib at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 was administered on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of the first 21-day cycle. On cycles 2 to 5, bortezomib was administered IV weekly at a dose of 1.6 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in four 35-day consecutive cycles. On cycles 2 and 5, IV dexamethasone 40 mg and IV rituximab at a dose of 375 mg/m2 were given on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (total of 8 infusions of rituximab). Fifty-nine patients were treated with BDR from March 2007 until June 2010. The characteristics of the patients, response rates and toxicity have been published previously (Dimopoulos MA, et al Blood. 2013 Nov 7;122(19):3276-82). Briefly, most patients had advanced age (61% were >65 years) and advanced disease with adverse prognostic factors such as, anemia (hemoglobin <11.5 g/dL in 82%) and elevated β2-microglobulin (≥3 mg/dL in 64%), so that 45.5% and 40% were rated as high and intermediate risk per the International Prognostic Scoring System for WM. On intent to treat, 85% of the patients responded [3% complete response (CR), 7% very good partial response (VGPR), 58% partial response (PR), 17% minor response (MR)] for a major response rate (≥PR) of 68%. Median follow up is86 months (range 0.6- 112). At 7 years 40 patients (68%) had disease progression or died due to WM, while 9 patients (15%) died due to unrelated causes without progression. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 43 months (95% CI 23-63) and 10 patients (17%) still remain in remission after a median of 90 months (range 73.5-112). As per ISSWM stage PFS at 7-years was 62.5%, 42% and 15% for patients with low, intermediate and high risk disease respectively. Median duration of response for patients who achieved at least PR was 64.5 months. Among the 40 (68%) patients with disease progression or relapse, 21 (35.5%) received second line treatment. Up to the date of data cutoff (June 2016), 20 patients (34%) have died and accounting for WM-unrelated death as a competing event, WM-related death rate at 7 years was 18.5% and unrelated death rate was 15.5%. Overall survival (OS) rate at 7-years was 66% and OS rate was 87.5% for low, 68.2% for intermediate and 48% for high risk patients per ISSWM. No patient has developed secondary MDS and transformation to DLBCL occurred in 2 (3.3%) patients, who had received chemo-immunotherapy after BDR. In conclusion, BDR is a very active regimen, well tolerated and, importantly, with favorable long term toxicity profile. Primary therapy with this chemotherapy- free regimen, which was completed in 23 weeks, induced durable responses in newly diagnosed symptomatic WM patients with approximately 17% of patients still remaining in response after 7 years. Our data support the use of BDR as one of the recommended regimens for the treatment of this disease WM. Disclosures Kastritis: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kyrtsonis:Genesis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Leleu:Novartis: Honoraria; LeoPharma: Honoraria; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; TEVA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palladini:Prothena: Honoraria. Merlini:Takeda and Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: 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; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Rituximab Plus Bendamustine and Cytarabine (R-BAC) in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Long Term Follow-up and Mrd Results of a Phase 2 Study from the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 384-384
Author(s):  
Maria Chiara Tisi ◽  
Luca Nassi ◽  
Caterina Patti ◽  
Michele Spina ◽  
Simone Ferrero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell

Abstract The activity of the combination of rituximab, bendamustine, and low dose cytarabine (R-BAC) was evaluated in a phase 2 multicentre trial from the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL RBAC500) in previously untreated patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who were not eligible to stem cell transplant. Maintenance treatment was not planned after induction therapy, and no patient in the study received rituximab maintenance. Fifty-seven patients (median age 71 years, range 61-79) were recruited and treated with 4 to 6 cycles between 2012 and 2014. Despite some concern in terms of hematological toxicity, the R-BAC regimen was associated with high complete remission (CR) rate (91%), 2-years overall survival (OS) of 86% (74-93), and 2-years progression free survival (PFS) of 81% (68-89). Here, we present long-term survival outcomes. After 7 years of median follow-up (86 months, range 57-107), the median OS and PFS for all patients were not reached (Figure 1A and 1B). The 7-years PFS and OS rates were 56% (95%CI 41-67) and 63% (95%CI 46-72), respectively. Patients who achieved CR (n=53) had a 7 years PFS of 59% (95% CI 44-71), with the curve that appears to plateau after 6 years. Adverse predictive factors affecting PFS were blastoid morphology (p&lt;0.05), elevated Ki67 &gt; 30% (p&lt;0.05), and failure to achieve CR after 2 cycles (p=0.03). Early-progression of disease (&lt;24 months from start of R-BAC) was associated with impaired overall survival (p&lt;0.05). Eight patients (14%) developed a secondary neoplasia: 1 parotid heteroplasia, 1 parotid nodular hyperplasia, 1 prostate cancer, 1 bladder cancer, 1 larynx, 1 thyroid cancer, 1 lung cancer and 1 secondary acute myeloid leukemia. Among the 25 relapsed patients, 8 did not receive any other treatment. Six had Ibrutinib monotherapy as second line, of whom 4 responded (3 are still in CR), 4 had CHOP or CHOP-like regimens with only partial responses. As per protocol, 31 patients with molecular marker at diagnosis and available samples were followed-up for minimal residual disease (MRD) with ASO-droplet digital polymerase chain reaction (D-PCR). Patients with MRD persistence at the end of induction, either in peripheral blood or bone marrow, had significantly worse 7 years-PFS (p&lt;0.05 for them both). In conclusion, in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MCL, R-BAC showed sustained efficacy over time, which compared favorably with any other reported immuno-chemotherapy regimen (with or without maintenance) in similar populations. With a median OS exceeding 60% after 7-years this regimen has significantly impacted on the life-expectancy of elderly patients with MCL. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Tisi: Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BWS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Nassi: Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Kyowa Kirin: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Ferrero: Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Clinigen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zilioli: Takeda: Other: travel expenses, accommodation; MSD, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations; Roche, Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gentili, Takeda, Gilead, Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Merli: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; EUSA Pharma: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses.

scholarly journals High Efficacy of Lenalidomide Plus R-CHOP (R2CHOP) Combination in First Line Treatment of Activated B-Cell (ABC) DLBCL Defined Using Gene-Expression Prophyling: A Combined Analysis from Two Phase 2 Trials

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2962-2962 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessia Castellino ◽  
Annalisa Chiappella ◽  
Betsy Laplant ◽  
Levy D. Pederson ◽  
Giorgio Inghirami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
B Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
International Prognostic Index ◽  
Prognostic Index ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Introduction: Lenalidomide (Len) in association with standard Rituximab-CHOP (R2CHOP21) has been shown to be safe and effective in newly diagnosed Diffuse Large B-cell Lymphomas (DLBCL) [Nowakowski et al. JCO 2014, Vitolo et al. Lancet Oncol 2014]. The addition of lenalidomide appears to benefit primarily patients with non-Germinal Center B-cell (non-GCB) phenotype as determined by immunohistochemistry (IHC). These early results led to currently ongoing randomized trial in ABC subtype of DLBCL, however efficacy of R2CHOP in ABC DLBCL as defined by Gene Expression Prophyling (GEP) has not been reported. In the present combined analysis of two independent phase 2 studies, we report the long-term follow-up (FU) outcome in DLBCL patients treated with R2CHOP, comparing GCB and ABC according to Nanostring Platform. Methods: We included all newly diagnosed histologically-confirmed de-novo DLBCL patients enrolled in two R2CHOP21 phase 2 trials, conducted by Mayo Clinic (MC) and Italian Lymphoma Foundation (FIL). Inclusion criteria in the two trials were similar, main differences included: all age and all International Prognostic Index (IPI) vs age between 60 and 80 years old and IPI >1, in MC vs FIL study, respectively. All pts received R-CHOP21 plus Len at 25 mg/day for 10 days/cycle and 15 mg/day for 14 days/cycle in MC and FIL trial, respectively. Cell of origin (COO) was determined by IHC, according to Hans algorithm, and retrospectively, in patients with available pathological material, by Nanostring, performed according to Scott algorithm and Masque-Soler signature in MC and FIL study, respectively. We analyzed the long-term FU outcome in terms of progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), overall survival (OS), comparing between GCB and ABC phenotypes according to GEP. Results: A total of 112 DLBCL pts (63 MC, 49 FIL) were included. Main characteristics were: median age 69 years (y) (range 22-87), male 65 (58%) pts, advanced stage III-IV in 94 (84%), B symptoms in 38 (34%), International Prognostic Index (IPI) intermediate-high/high in 71 (63%). At a median follow-up of 5.1 years (y), 5y-PFS was 63.5%, 5y-TTP 70.1% and 5y-OS 75.4%. A total of 32 relapses were observed, with only 2 cases of Central Nervous System (CNS) relapse. Late relapse occurring beyond 3 years was observed in 4 cases (3 cases with GCB phenotype and one case with missing COO data). In a subgroup analysis by IPI 0-2 vs 3-5 were: 5y-PFS, 5y-TTP and 5y-OS were: 69.0% vs 59.0% (p=0.100), 73.2% vs 67.4% (p=0.285) and 82.3% vs 70.2% (p=0.059), respectively. Regarding for COO defined by IHC, GCB phenotype vs non-GCB were 45 (40%) vs 41 (37%) patients respectively; 26 (23%) patients were not evaluable. 5y-PFS, 5y-TTP and 5y-OS were: 52.8% vs 64.5% (p=0.198), 61.6% vs 69.6% (p=0.444) and 68.6% vs 74.1% (p=0.238) in GCB vs non-GCB, defined by IHC, respectively. Regarding Nanostring analysis, GCB vs ABC vs Unclassified (Uncl) were 31 (46%) vs 22 (32%) vs 15 (22%) respectively; 44 pts were not evaluable. 5y-PFS, 5y-TTP and 5y-OS were: 62.3% vs 70.8% vs 64.2% (p=0.645), 68.1% vs 79.8% vs 64.2% (p=0.662) and 76.0% vs 74.8% vs 79.0% (p=0.658) in GCB vs ABC vs Uncl, defined by Nanostring, respectively (Table1, Fig1). Conclusions: The association of Len with R-CHOP21 appears to overcome the negative prognostic impact of ABC phenotype determined by GEP, with high PFS, TTP and OS rate, maintained at a long-term FU analysis. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Chiappella: Teva: Other: lecture fees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Nanostring: Other: lecture fees; Roche: Other: lecture fees; Amgen: Other: lecture fees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees. Gaidano:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria. Witzig:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Vitolo:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Conventional Immunochemotherapy (R-CHOEP) Vs High-Dose Immunochemotherapy (R-MegaCHOEP) in Younger Patients with High-Risk Aggressive B-Cell Lymphoma: 10-Year Long-Term Follow-up of a German Lymphoma Alliance (GLA) Study

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1589-1589
Author(s):  
Fabian Frontzek ◽  
Marita Ziepert ◽  
Maike Nickelsen ◽  
Bettina Altmann ◽  
Bertram Glass ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Scientific Advisory Board ◽  
Scientific Advisory

Introduction: The R-MegaCHOEP trial showed that dose-escalation of conventional chemotherapy necessitating autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) does not confer a survival benefit for younger patients (pts) with high-risk aggressive B-cell lymphoma in the Rituximab era (Schmitz et al., Lancet Oncology 2012; 13, 1250-1259). To describe efficacy and toxicity over time and document the long-term risks of relapse and secondary malignancy we present the 10-year follow-up of this study. Methods: In the randomized, prospective phase 3 trial R-MegaCHOEP younger pts aged 18-60 years with newly diagnosed, high-risk (aaIPI 2-3) aggressive B-cell lymphoma were assigned to 8 cycles of CHOEP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubcine, vincristine, etoposide, prednisone) or 4 cycles of dose-escalated high-dose therapy (HDT) necessitating repetitive ASCT both combined with Rituximab. Both arms were stratified according to aaIPI, bulky disease, and center. Primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS). All analyses were calculated for the intention-to-treat population. This follow-up report includes molecular data based on immunohistochemistry (IHC) and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) for MYC (IHC: 31/92 positive [40-100%], FISH: 14/103 positive), BCL2 (IHC: 65/89 positive [50-100%], FISH: 23/111 positive) and BCL6 (IHC: 52/86 positive [30-100%], FISH: 34/110 positive) and data on cell of origin (COO) classification according to the Lymph2CX assay (GCB: 53/88; ABC: 24/88; unclassified: 11/88). Results: 130 pts had been assigned to R-CHOEP and 132 to R-MegaCHOEP. DLBCL was the most common lymphoma subtype (~80%). 73% of pts scored an aaIPI of 2 and 27% an aaIPI of 3. 60% of pts had an initial lymphoma bulk and in 40% more than 1 extranodal site was involved. After a median observation time of 111 months, EFS at 10 years was 57% (95% CI 47-67%) in the R-CHOEP vs. 51% in the R-MegaCHOEP arm (42-61%) (hazard ratio 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.8, p=0.228), overall survival (OS) after 10 years was 72% (63-81%) vs. 66% (57-76%) respectively (p=0.249). With regard to molecular characterization, we were unable to detect a significant benefit for HDT/ASCT in any subgroup analyzed. In total, 16% of pts (30 pts) relapsed after having achieved a complete remission (CR). 23% of all relapses (7 pts) showed an indolent histology (follicular lymphoma grade 1-3a) and 6 of these pts survived long-term. In contrast, of 23 pts (77%) relapsing with aggressive DLBCL or unknown histology 18 pts died due to lymphoma or related therapy. The majority of relapses occurred during the first 3 years after randomization (median time: 22 months) while after 5 years we detected relapses only in 5 pts (3% of all 190 pts prior CR). 11% of pts were initially progressive (28 pts) among whom 71% (20 pts) died rapidly due to lymphoma. Interestingly, the remaining 29% (8 pts) showed a long-term survival after salvage therapy (+/- ASCT); only 1 pt received allogeneic transplantation. The frequency of secondary malignancies was very similar in both treatment arms (9% vs. 8%) despite the very high dose of etoposide (total 4g/m2)in the R-MegaCHOEP arm. We observed 2 cases of AML and 1 case of MDS per arm. In total 70 pts (28%) have died: 30 pts due to lymphoma (12%), 22 pts therapy-related (11 pts due to salvage therapy) (9%), 8 pts of secondary neoplasia (3%), 5 pts due to concomitant disease (2%) and 5 pts for unknown reasons. Conclusions: This 10-year long-term follow-up of the R-MegaCHOEP trial confirms the very encouraging outcome of young high-risk pts following conventional chemotherapy with R-CHOEP. High-dose therapy did not improve outcome in any subgroup analysis including molecular high-risk groups. Relapse rate was generally low. Pts with aggressive relapse showed a very poor long-term outcome while pts with indolent histology at relapse survived long-term. Secondary malignancies occurred; however, they were rare with no excess leukemias/MDS following treatment with very high doses of etoposide and other cytotoxic agents. Supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Figure Disclosures Nickelsen: Roche Pharma AG: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grants; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Grant; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hänel:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: advisory board; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Other: advisory board; Roche: Honoraria. Truemper:Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding. Held:Roche: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Acrotech: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: Travel support, Research Funding. Dreyling:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Other: scientific advisory board; Sandoz: Other: scientific advisory board; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: scientific advisory board, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Other: scientific advisory board. Viardot:Kite/Gilead: 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; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rosenwald:MorphoSys: Consultancy. Lenz:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Employment, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy. Schmitz:Novartis: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Riemser: Consultancy, Honoraria.

ABVD Versus Escalated Beacopp in Advanced Stage Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Results from a Retrospective, Multicenter European Study

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1565-1565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Mondello ◽  
Irene Dogliotti ◽  
Jan-Paul Bohn ◽  
Federica Cavallo ◽  
Simone Ferrero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
High Risk Patients ◽  
Risk Patients

Purpose: Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) is a highly curable disease even in advanced-stage, with &gt;90% of long-term survivors. Currently, the standard of care is ABVD (doxorubicin, etoposide, vinblastine and dacarbazine), as it is less toxic and as effective as other more intensive chemotherapy regimens. Alternatively, BEACOPP (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine and prednisone) has been proposed as front-line intensified regimen with a better initial disease control and prolonged time to relapse when compared to ABVD. However, this advantage is associated with higher rates of severe hematologic toxicity, treatment-related deaths, secondary neoplasms and infertility. To date, the debate regarding which regimen should be preferred as first line for advanced-stage HL is still ongoing. To shed some light on this open question we compared efficacy and safety of both regimens in clinical practice. Patients and Methods: From October 2009 to October 2018, patients with HL stage III-IV treated with either ABVD or BEACOPP escalated (BEACOPPesc) were retrospectively assessed in 7 European cancer centers. Results: A total of 372 consecutive patients were included in the study. One-hundred and ten patients were treated with BEACOPPesc and 262 with ABVD. The baseline characteristics of the two groups did not differ significantly, except for a higher rate of high-risk patients in the BEACOPPesc group in contrast to the ABVD one (47% vs 18%; p= 0.003). Complete response rate (CR) assessed by PET imaging at the end of the second cycle was 67% and 78% for the ABVD and BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.003), respectively. Thirteen patients of the ABVD group achieved stable disease (SD) and 6 had a progression disease (PD). On the other hand, 4 of the patients in the BEACOPPesc group progressed, another 2 interrupted therapy because life-threatening toxicity. At the end of the therapy, CR was 76% in the ABVD group and 85% in the BEACOPPesc group (p= 0.01). A total of 20% patients in the ABVD group and 14% patients in the BEACOPPesc group received consolidation radiotherapy on the mediastinal mass at the dose of 30Gy. After radiotherapy, the number of patients with CR increased to 79% and 87% in the two groups (p= 0.041), respectively. Thirty-nine patients (35%) in the BEACOPPesc group required dose reduction of chemotherapy due to toxicity compared to 12 patients (5%; p= &lt;0.001) in the ABVD group. Overall, the rate of severe toxicities was higher in the BEACOPPesc group in comparison with the ABVD cohort. In particular, there was a significant increased frequency of acute grade 3-4 hematologic adverse events (neutropenia 61% vs 24%; anemia 29% vs 4%; thrombocytopenia 29% vs 3%), febrile neutropenia (29% vs 3%), severe infections (18% vs 3%). Myeloid growth factors were administered to 85% and 59% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD group. Blood transfusions were required in 51% and 6% of patients in the BEACOPPesc group compared to the ABVD cohort. Progression during or shortly after treatment occurred in 5 patients in the BEACOPPesc group (4%) and in 16 patients in the ABVD group (6%; p= 0.62). Among the 96 patients who achieved a CR after BEACOPPesc and radiotherapy, 8 relapsed (8%), compared to 29 of 208 patients in the ABVD group (14%; p= 0.04). At a median follow-up period of 5 years, no statistical difference in progression free survival (PFS; p=0.11) and event-free survival (EFS; p=0.22) was observed between the BEACOPPesc and ABVD cohorts. Similarly, overall survival (OS) did not differ between the two groups (p=0.14). The baseline international prognostic score (IPS &lt;3 vs ≥ 3) significantly influenced the EFS with an advantage for the high-risk group treated with BEACOPPesc (Figure 1A; p=0.03), but not the PFS (Figure 1B; p=0.06) and OS (Figure 1C; p=0.14). During the follow-up period, in the BEACOPPesc group one patient developed myelodysplasia and one acute leukemia. Second solid tumors developed in one patient in the ABVD group (lung cancer) and one in BEACOPPesc group (breast cancer). Conclusion: We confirm that the ABVD regimen is an effective and less toxic therapeutic option for advanced-stage HL. Although BEACOPP results in better initial tumor control especially in high-risk patients, the long-term outcome remains similar between the two regimens. Disclosures Ferrero: EUSA Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Martinelli:BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Willenbacher:European Commission: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Myelom- und Lymphomselbsthilfe Österreich: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead Science: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; IQVIA: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; oncotyrol: Employment, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Fujimoto: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tirol Program: Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sandoz: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Curing Multiple Myeloma (MM) with Total Therapy (TT)

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 195-195 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bart Barlogie ◽  
Alan Mitchell ◽  
Frits van Rhee ◽  
Joshua Epstein ◽  
Shmuel Yaccoby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cure Fraction ◽  
Metronomic Therapy ◽  
Age And Sex

Abstract Intra-tumoral heterogeneity is a hindrance to curing malignant disease. By employing all MM-active drugs upfront, TT was designed to overcome such obstacle by targeting all potential MM sub-clones broadly. We are reporting on long-term results of phase-2 TT1, phase-3 TT2 and phase-2 TT3a trials, with median follow-up times of 21yr, 12yr and 9yr, respectively. Five year estimates of OS, PFS and CR duration (CRD) increased from 58%, 28% and 40% with TT1 to 65%, 42% and 50% with TT2’s control arm (TT2-), to 68%, 56% and 58% with TT2’s thalidomide arm (TT2+), and to 74%, 65% and 74% with TT3a (all p<0.0001). The 5-yr estimates of time to progression (TTP)/time to relapse (TTR) from CR decreased from 59%/58% in TT1 to 43%/42% in TT2-, to 28%/34% in TT2+, and to 22%/18% in TT3a (all p<0.0001). When examined in the era of gene expression profiling (GEP) of purified plasma cells, 5-yr estimates of TTP/TTR in GEP70 low-risk MM were 47%/46% with TT2-, 26%%/36% with TT2+, and 18%/16% with TT3a (all p<0.0001); the corresponding data for the 15% with high-risk MM were 60%/50% with TT2-, 62%/64% in TT2+, and 48%/35% in TT3a (NS). Relative survival (RS) was computed per year in relationship to age- and sex-matched controls. RS ratios approached 1 at 10–15 years for TT1 and TT2-, but earlier, at 5-10 years, for TT2+ and TT3a. A parametric mixture cure model was used to estimate PFS and CR duration for each protocol, from baseline and from a 5-year landmark. The cure model fits the data well and provides cure-fraction estimates that increase with later protocols (Figure 1). Importantly, when comparing data from GEP-defined low-risk and high-risk MM, plateaus for both PFS- and CRD-based cure fractions emerged at 10 years in the former and earlier, at 5 years, in the latter (data not shown). PFS-based cure-fraction estimates increasedsignificantly with successive TT trials: 9% in TT1, 16% in TT2-, 25% in TT2+, and 33% in TT3a (p=0.04). CRD-based cure-fraction estimates were 18%, 28%, 36%, and 49%, respectively (p=0.17) (Table 1). When a 5-year landmark was applied to exclude early myeloma-related events, PFS-based cure fraction estimates were 28% in TT1, 39% in TT2-, 51% in TT2+, and 70% in TT3a (p<0.001); in this setting, CRD-based cure fraction estimates were 32%, 47%, 56%, and 75%, respectively (p=0.007). MRD flow cytometry was available in 83 of 175 TT2 PFS patients, of whom 78% were MRD-. Our TT results are consistent with curability of MM. Solely novel agent-based trials without transplant lack the long-term follow-up to determine their cure potential. As MM usurps the bone marrow micro-environment (ME) for its growth and survival, we reasoned that ME alterations reflecting an angiogenic switch may persist beyond the state of clinical CR and even MRD. We therefore performed GEP analyses of bone marrow biopsies in CR and compared findings with age- and sex-matched controls. Indeed, biopsy “normalization” was linked to superior CR duration and is being developed as an early “cure surrogate” marker to help define the length of maintenance therapy in future trials. Although about 50% of CR patients treated with TT3a can be considered cured, the median PFS in high-risk MM of 2yr has not improved with successive TT trials. Reasoning that cytokine storms emanating after myelosuppressive therapies to restore normal hematopoiesis may be growth-stimulatory to MM cells, we applied non-myelotoxic metronomic therapy (Papanikolaou, Haematologica, 2014). Six newly diagnosed transplant-ineligible high-risk patients were offered an extended 28-day course of low-dose metronomic therapy with bortezomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone and continuous infusions of doxorubicin and cisplatin, to which were added arsenic trioxide and vincristine infusions. Remarkably, 5 of 6 achieved CR status after a single course and remain disease-free without further therapy 6-8 months later. Our results attest to the curability of MM with TT and, given the short PFS of 2yr in high-risk MM, such patients should be the focus of future novel interventions that yield information in a timely manner. Table 1 Cure fraction estimates Protocol PFS CR duration N Cure Fraction N Cure Fraction From start of therapy TT1 231 8.8% 79 17.9% TT2 -Thal 345 15.5% 146 28.2% TT2 +Thal 323 25.1% 200 35.6% TT3a 303 32.9% 189 48.8% From 5-yr landmark TT1 65 28.4% 33 32.3% TT2 -Thal 145 39.2% 84 47.4% TT2 +Thal 150 51.1% 134 55.9% TT3a 197 69.8% 148 74.7% PFS CR duration Figure 1 Cure fraction estimates from baseline Figure 1. Cure fraction estimates from baseline Disclosures van Rhee: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Heuck:Celgene: Honoraria; Foundation Medicine: Honoraria; Millennium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals EARLY Results of TOTAL Therapy 7 (TT7): High Response Rates of NEWLY Diagnosed High Risk Myeloma to Daratumumab

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4569-4569 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frits van Rhee ◽  
Sharmilan Thanendrarajan ◽  
Carolina D. Schinke ◽  
Jeffery R. Sawyer ◽  
Adam Rosenthal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Early Results ◽  
Research Grant

Background. The TT approach has significantly improved the outcome of multiple myeloma (MM) by combining new drugs with a regimen that comprises induction, tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), consolidation and maintenance. However, a group of 15% of patients with high risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) have derived little benefit despite similar response rates to induction chemotherapy and ASCT when compared to low risk MM. The poor outcome of HRMM is explained by early relapse post ASCT resulting in a short progression free survival (PFS) with only 15-20% of patients surviving long-term. Daratumumab (Dara) is a human IgG1k anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody that has shown favorable results in early single-arm studies and more recently in phase III studies for relapsed/refractory and newly diagnosed MM. In TT7, we introduced Dara during all phases of therapy, including immune consolidation early post ASCT, to improve responses rate and PFS in HRMM. Methods. Patients had newly diagnosed HRMM as defined by high risk cytogenetic abnormalities, presence of extramedullary disease, >3 focal lesions on CT-PET, elevated LDH due to MM, or ISS II/III with cytogenetic abnormality. Dara (16mg/kgx1) was added to induction with KTD-PACE (carfilzomib, thalidomide, dexamethasone; and four-day continuous infusions of cisplatin, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, etoposide). Conditioning for tandem autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) was with fractionated melphalan (50mg/m2x4) (fMEL) based on prior observations that patients with adverse cytogenetics fare better with fMEL rather than single high dose MEL200mg/m2.In the inter tandem ASCT period immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/kg) alone for 2 doses was followed by Dara (16mg/kg) on day 1 combined with K (36mg/m2) and D (20mg) weekly for 2 cycles. DaraKD was administered to avoid treatment free periods allowing for myeloma regrowth. The 2nd ASCT was followed by further immunological consolidation with Dara (16mg/k) for 2 doses, and maintenance therapy for 3 yrs with 3-months block of alternating Dara-KD (dara 16mg/kg day 1; K 36mg/m2 and dex 20mg weekly) and Dara-lenalidomide (R)D (dara 16mg/kg day 1; R 15mg day 1-21 q28 and D 20mg weekly). Results. TT7 enrolled 43 patients thus far. The median follow-up was 11 months (range: 1-22). The median age was 61 yrs (range 44-73). Sixteen patients were ≥65 yrs (37.2%). A mean of 29.4x106 CD34+ cells/kg (range: 4.6-86.4) were collected. 36 patients completed ASCT #1 (83.7%) and 18 (41.9%) ASCT #2, whilst 14 patients have proceeded to the maintenance phase. R-ISS II/III or metaphase cytogenetic abnormalities were present in 85.1 and 58.1% of patients, respectively. Elevated LDH or >3FL on CT-PET were noted in 30 and 41.8%. The 1-yr cumulative incidence estimates for reaching VGPR and PR were 87 and 83%, respectively. A CR or sCR was achieved in 68 and 46%. The 1-yr estimates of PFS and OS were 91.6 and 87.2%. 40 subjects are alive, whilst 5 progressed on study therapy and 3 subsequently died. 38 patients are progression free at the time of reporting. Dara was well-tolerated and no subjects discontinued therapy due to dara-related side effects. The CR and sCR rates compared favorably to the predecessor HRMM TT5 protocol where CR and sCR rates were 59 and 27%. Conclusion. The early results of TT7 point to increased response rates of HRMM to a dara-based TT regimen with especially higher rates of CR and sCR. Longer follow-up is required to determine if these early results translate into superior PFS and OS. Figure Disclosures van Rhee: Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Adicet Bio: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy; Castleman Disease Collaborative Network: Consultancy; EUSA: Consultancy. Walker:Celgene: Research Funding. Morgan:Amgen, Roche, Abbvie, Takeda, Celgene, Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Other: research grant, Research Funding. Davies:Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Oncopeptides, Roche, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Consultant/Advisor; Janssen, Celgene: Other: Research Grant, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Phase 2 Trial of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone and Daratumumab in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 304-304 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaji K. Kumar ◽  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
Betsy Laplant ◽  
Eli Muchtar ◽  
Francis K. Buadi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stem Cells ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Mayo Clinic ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Early Results ◽  
Dose Modifications

Abstract Background: The combination of a proteasome inhibitor (PI), an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), and dexamethasone is the current standard induction therapy for myeloma. Daratumumab, a monoclonal antibody directed against CD38, is highly effective in treating myeloma and improves response rates and progression free survival (PFS) when added to PI or IMiD. Ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) is an effective, all oral, induction regimen that has been studied in phase 2 and 3 trials. We designed this trial to examine the feasibility and efficacy of adding daratumumab to the IRd regimen. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated MM, with measurable disease and adequate organ function were enrolled irrespective of their transplant eligibility. The primary objective was to determine the rate of complete response to the IRD-Dara combination in patients with NDMM. Treatment consisted of Ixazomib 4mg days 1, 8, 15; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21, dexamethasone 40 mg, weekly and daratumumab 16 mg/kg, weekly for two cycles, every other week during cycles 3-6 and then every 4 weeks after that. Overall, 40 patients were accrued; data on 38 patients were available for analysis as of July 02, 2018 (Table 1). Results: The median age was 62 (41-81); 52.6% female. All patients were alive and progression free at last assessment with a median follow up of 5.2 (2.0-12.9) months (median 5 cycles, range 2-13). One patient had gone off for alternate therapy. Responses were rapid with 90% partial response or better (32% VGPR) after 2 cycles, and 100% PR or better (50% VGPR) for 32 patients who have completed 4 cycles. The overall best confirmed response rate among the 38 patients was 95% including 11% CR and 47% VGPR. Overall, 231 cycles have been administered across the study, with dose modifications/ hold required for ixazomib, lenalidomide, daratumumab and dexamethasone in 3 (8%), 11 (29%), 2 (5%), and 8 (21%) patients respectively, the most common reasons being hematologic and skin rash. A grade 3 or higher adverse event at least possibly attributed to the study drugs was seen in 42% of patients, hematologic in 37% and non-hematologic in 11% (Figure). 11 patients have so far proceeded to stem cell collection, all have collected adequate numbers of stem cells for one or two intended transplants(median CD34+ collected 8.4 million/kg; range 3.8-12.3). Updated results with additional 6 months of follow up and MRD testing will be presented at the meeting. Conclusion: This represents the first reported results of this combination for treatment of newly diagnosed myeloma. The early results from the use of IRd-Dara in newly diagnosed myeloma suggests excellent efficacy with rapid responses that deepen quickly over the initial cycles of therapy. The regimen was well tolerated with limited dose modifications and no discontinuation for toxicity and no influence on the ability to collect stem cells. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; KITE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Kapoor:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Other: Participates in the International PNH Registry (for Mayo Clinic, Rochester) for Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dispenzieri:Celgene, Takeda, Prothena, Jannsen, Pfizer, Alnylam, GSK: Research Funding. Gertz:Prothena: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Teva: Consultancy; annexon: Consultancy; janssen: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Alnylam: Honoraria; Medscape: Consultancy; Apellis: Consultancy; spectrum: Consultancy, Honoraria; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Ionis: Honoraria; Research to Practice: Consultancy.

Rituximab Combined With Three Cycles Of High Dose Dexamethasone Provides a Long Term Response Rate Similar To That Of Splenectomy In Patients With Immune Thrombocytopenia (ITP) Of Duration Less Than 2 Years

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 2310-2310 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina S Lee ◽  
Allison Imahiyerobo ◽  
Micha Thompson ◽  
Marina Izak Karaev ◽  
Waleed Ghanima ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Platelet Counts ◽  
Best Response

Abstract Background Adults with newly-diagnosed and persistent ITP usually respond to steroid based treatments such as prednisone but relapse with tapering. One 4-day cycle of Dexamethasone (dex) at 40 mg/day in newly diagnosed ITP resulted in a lasting effect in 50% of patients (pts) in 1 study. An Italian study showed that 3 cycles of dex are better than 1 cycle. Approximately 50% of pts with chronic ITP experience a complete or partial response (CR & PR) to rituximab, yet only 20% of pts have a lasting, unmaintained response after 3 years. Mechanistically, rituximab (which depletes B cells but not plasma cells) and dexamethasone (which may be the most potent anti-plasma cell agent) are a logical combination in treatment of antibody-mediated diseases such as ITP. In 2 studies of newly-diagnosed pts, dex 40mg/day x 4 followed by rituximab was more effective than dex alone (one study added more dex half way through). In our pilot study, pts at Weill Cornell Medical College (WCMC) with all stages of ITP were treated with a combination of rituximab (R) and usually 3 cycles of dex. The outcome of this combination was retrospectively analyzed. Methods Combination of standard-dose rituximab (weekly x 4) and usually 3 4-day cycles of 28mg/m2 (max. 40mg) dex at 2-week intervals (R+3Dex) was explored in 67 pediatric and adult pts with ITP at WCMC. Patients were monitored with CBCs obtained weekly and then at less frequent intervals if a response was achieved. Best response (after 8 weeks to avoid transient effects of dex) was determined. Patients were categorized as CR (platelet count≥100x109/L) or PR (50-100x109/L). Relapse was defined as either two consecutive platelet counts <50x109/L and/or need for additional therapy. The duration of response was calculated from date of first rituximab administration to relapse or latest follow-up as of July 31st 2013. Results Overall, 50 of 67 pts treated with R+3Dex achieved a best response of either a CR (n=43) or a PR (n=7) at 8 weeks or later from start of therapy for an overall response rate of 75%. Seventy-three percent of pts received R+3Dex; variations were primarily in the timing and amount of dex given. Fifteen responders, 9 CRs and 6 PRs, relapsed at a median of 9 months. Seventy percent of the responders (or 52% of all pts treated) maintain a continuous response with platelet counts ≥ 50 x 109/L as of their last visit at a median f/u of 20 months. Kaplan Meier Analysis estimates 44% of all pts treated (Figure) and 59% of responders (Figure) maintained a best response without relapse at 67 months after initiating treatment. If only those with ITP ≤ 24 months are included, the estimated long term response rate is 59% (p=0.0017) versus only 19% for those with a duration of ITP > 24 months (Figure). Of 36 responding children and adults who had ITP ≤ 24 months, 29 continued to respond as of last follow up. Adults initially responded better than children (p=0.0019) but the long-term responses were not different (Figure). Pts achieving a CR had longer response than those achieving a PR. Adverse events related to R+Dex were usually mild-moderate, although 3 pts had serum sickness and 2 had transient colitis. IgG levels fell to below the lower limit of normal for age in 14 of 67 pts, 10 of whom had their IgG levels return to normal. In 6 of 14, IgG levels were < 400 mg/dl, some of whom received IVIG. Fifteen patients had serial BK/JC levels without ever detecting virus. Conclusions R+3Dex provides clearly superior results to rituximab alone. Notably, there was a 75% response rate overall (50/67 pts) compared to 50% with R alone. The 5 year response rate was almost 50% of all patients and 3/5 of responders. In patients who had had ITP for ≤ 2 years, the response is comparable to what has been reported with splenectomy. Specifically the results in the ≤ 2 year group suggest that R+3Dex is an effective way to induce indefinitely normal platelet counts in pts with a “short” duration of ITP. R+3Dex was tolerable although patients had difficulty with 3 cycles of dex. The 21% rate of hypogammaglobulinemia, higher than that seen with R alone, is also evidence of the mechanism of R+3Dex affecting both B cells and plasma cells. The lasting, long-lived, unmaintained responses observed in this study suggest that this combination therapeutic strategy should be further tested in a controlled trial in patients with newly diagnosed, persistent, and early chronic ITP, whether or not they have been previously treated with other agents. Disclosures: Bussel: Sysmex: Research Funding; Cangene: Research Funding; Symphogen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shionogi: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Eisai: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ligand: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; IgG of America: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

Sustained Overall Survival Benefit with Lenalidomide Plus Dexamethasone Versus No Treatment in Patients with Smoldering Myeloma at High Risk of Progression to Myeloma: Long Term Analysis

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3308-3308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Miguel-T Hernandez ◽  
Pilar Giraldo ◽  
Javier De La Rubia ◽  
Felipe De Arriba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Early Treatment ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Background: For patients with smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), the standard of care is observation. However, high-risk patients may benefit from early intervention. Methods: In this phase 3 trial, 119 patients with high-risk SMM were randomized to treatment or observation. The high risk populationwas defined by the presence of both PC_ 10% and MC_ 3g/dl or ifonly one criterion was present, patients must have a proportionof aPC within the total PCBM compartment by immunophenotypingof 95% plus immunoparesis. Patients in the treatment group received nine 4-week induction cycles (lenalidomide at a dose of 25 mg per day on days 1 to 21, plus dexamethasone at a dose of 20 mg per day on days 1 to 4 and days 12 to 15), followed by maintenance (lenalidomide at a dose of 10 mg per day on days 1 to 21 of each 28-day cycle) up to 2 years. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP) to myeloma. Secondary end points were overall survival (OS), response rate and safety. Results: After a median follow-up of 75 months (range: 57-100), there was a 57% reduction in the risk of death for the early treatment with lenalidomide-dexamethasone versus not treatment (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.2 to 0.9; P=0.02). Median overall survival has not been reached in either group, but 86% and 62% of patients are alive at 6 years in the early treatment and observation arms, respectively (Figure 1). The benefit in TTP is also highly sustained (hazard ratio: 0.24 (95% confidence interval, 0.14 to 0.41; P<0.0001). Progression to MM occurred in 53 out of the 62 patients (86%) in the abstention arm while only 22 out of 57 patients (38%) in the len-dex arm. At the time of progression patients received optimized treatments: bortezomib-based combinations were administered to thirteen out of 22 patients (59%) in the len-dex arm and to 23 out of 53 patients (43%) in the observation arm; lenalidomide-based combinations to 3 out of 22 patients (14%) in the experimental and to 8 out of 53 patients (15%) in the control arm; two out of 22 patients in the len-dex arm (9%) received bortezomib plus immunomodulatory agents whilst 16 out of 53 patients (30%) in the observation group received this combination; four out of 22 patients (18%) and six out of 53 patients (11%) in the len-dex and observation groups, respectively, were treated with chemotherapy; four patients (18%) in the experimental arm and 15 (28%) in the observation groups received an ASCT. Most patients responded to rescue therapies in both arms, resulting in overall response rates of 78% (17/22) and 86% (45/53) in the experimental and control arm, respectively. We compared survival from start of subsequent therapy in the patients population who progressed to active disease; the outcome was similar in both arms: at 6 years, 62% (16/22) of the patients in the len-dex arm remain alive and 49% (31/53) in the observation arm (P=0.50; Fig. 2C). The survival benefit observed was independent of the classification model used for defining high risk SMM ( Mayo Clinic and Spanish model) Conclusion: This long term follow-up analysis confirms that early treatment with lenalidomide-dexamethasone for high-risk SMM translates into a significant benefit in TTP but also in a sustained significant prolongation of the OS. The early exposure to lenalidomide-dexamethasone does not induce more resistant relapses. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Mateos: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. De La Rubia:Amgen, Bristol Myers, Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy. Paiva:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; EngMab: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Binding Site: Research Funding. Oriol:Amgen: 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; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Impact of Bortezomib- or Lenalidomide-Based Induction Treatment on High Risk Cytogenetic Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Enrolled in the Gimema-MM-03-05 and EMN01 Trials

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 744-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Massimo Offidani ◽  
Pellegrino Musto ◽  
Francesca Patriarca ◽  
Lorenzo De Paoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Reduced Risk

Abstract Introduction : Cytogenetic abnormalities by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are clinically relevant prognostic factors in MM. Data in transplant ineligible patients treated with bortezomib or lenalidomide in first-line therapy for high-risk (HiR) patients is limited. Careful analysis of cytogenetic subgroups in trials comparing different treatments remains an important goal. This sub-analysis evaluates the impact of cytogenetics on outcomes in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) treated with bortezomib-based induction (BORT) or lenalidomide-based (LEN) treatment. Methods : In the GIMEMA-MM-03-05-trial, patients were randomized to bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide for 9 cycles followed by maintenance with bortezomib-thalidomide (VMPT-VT) vs VMP for 9 cycles, without maintenance. In the EMN01-trial, patients were randomized to melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or cyclophosphamide-prednisone-lenalidomide (CPR) or lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) for 9 cycles, followed by maintenance with lenalidomide alone or plus prednisone continuously. Results of these studies have previously been reported (Palumbo A et al JCO 2010 and 2014; Magarotto V et al Blood 2016 127(9)). Cytogenetics were assessed using FISH. Patients were categorized into cytogenetic risk groups according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria. HiR cytogenetics included del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16); all other patients were categorized as standard risk (StR). Subgroup analyses were performed to determine the consistency of treatment effects of BOR vs LEN in the different subgroups using interaction terms between treatment and FISH, ISS, age, sex, Karnofsky PS and LDH. The different effect of BORT vs LEN in cytogenetic subgroups was confirmed by one sensitivity analysis where the follow-up of the BORT study was reduced to make the follow-up times similar; and by another sensitivity analysis with multiple imputation method for missing cytogenetic value. Results : 902 of 1165 patients from the intent-to-treat population had available cytogenetic profiles, with 243 (27%) patients in the HiR group and 659 (73%) in the StR group. In the BORT vs LEN groups, median age was 71 vs 73 years (p&lt;0.001), ISS3 20% vs 27% (P=0.65), HiR patients were 29% vs 26%, StR patients were 71% vs 74% (p=0.32) and the median follow-up was 72.3 and 63.6 months, respectively. In the subgroup analysis, a significant difference was found in the cytogenetic subgroup with a superior advantage of BORT versus LEN in HiR group, whereas no significant difference was found between BORT and LEN in the other subgroups analyzed (ISS, age, sex, Karnofsky PS and LDH) (interaction-p=0.01) (Fig. 1 B). BORT treatment resulted in a reduced risk of death or progression compared with LEN in patients with HiR. In HiR patients, median PFS was 30.8 with BORT compared with 14.8 months with LEN (HR: 0.54; 95% CI: 0.41-0.72); in StR, median PFS was 29.1 with BORT compared with 22.1 months with LEN (HR: 0.87; 95%; CI: 0.72-1.05) (Fig. 1 A). Considering the standard of care VMP and Rd, in the HiR group (n=95) VMP resulted in a 48% reduced risk of death or progression compared with Rd (HR: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.34-0.83), whereas no significant difference in PFS was found in the StR group (n=273) (HR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.75-1.33), interaction-p=0.02. BORT treatment resulted in a reduced risk of death in patients with HiR cytogenetics: median OS was 62.4 months with BORT compared with 43.2 months with LEN (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.47-0.96); in StR, median OS was 78.1 months with BORT and was not reached with LEN (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 0.82-1.36), interaction-p=0.04 (Fig. 1 A). In patients with del(17p) (n=131) median PFS was 18.0 vs 12.9 months for BORT vs LEN (HR: 0.71; 95% CI: 0.49-1.04), interaction-p=0.73. In patients with t(4;14) (n=118) median PFS was 31.5 vs 15.2 months for BORT vs LEN (HR: 0.41; 95% CI: 0.27-0.62) interaction-p=0.002. In patients with t(14;16) (n=31) median PFS was 36.2 vs 9.8 months for BORT vs LEN treated patients (HR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.16-0.76), interaction-p=0.045. Conclusions : BORT treatment resulted in a PFS and OS benefit vs LEN in patients with HiR cytogenetics. Treatment with VMP led to a significant reduction of the risk of death or progression vs Rd in HiR patients. These results support VMP induction as a standard treatment option for patients with NDMM who are ineligible for transplant with HiR cytogenetics. Disclosures Larocca: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Offidani: celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Musto: Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Patriarca: MSD Italia: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Corradini: Gilead: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Bosi: Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Petrucci: Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Boccadoro: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document