scholarly journals Temsirolimus in Combination with Three Different Immuno-Chemotherapy Regimens in Relapse and Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma, Final Results of the T3 Phase IB Trial of the Lysa Group

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2987-2987 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steven Le Gouill ◽  
Krimo Bouabdallah ◽  
Barbara Burroni ◽  
Thierry Lamy ◽  
Remy Gressin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Phase Ib ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Temsirolimus has shown clinical activity in heavily pretreated patients with mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) leading to evaluate tolerability and efficacy of combinations regimens. The T3 trial is a multicenter, Phase IB, dose escalation study (3+3) of Temsirolimus administered in combination with three chemotherapy regimens in relapse or refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). DLT was assessed during the first two cycles. Study design: Temsirolimus was added for 6 cycles to R-CHOP (R-CHOP-T) administered every 3 weeks or to or R-FC (R-FC-T) and R plus high dose cytarabine and dexamethasone (R-DHA-T) administered every 4 weeks. Temsirolimus was administered IV at day 2, 8 and 15. Three dose levels of Temsirolimus was tested: 15 mg, 25 mg (starting dose) and 50 mg. Patients were treated with one of these 3 chemotherapy regimens according to the choice of local investigator and no randomization was performed. LYSARC was the sponsor and the trial was conducted with a financial support of Pfizer Results: forty-one patients (R-CHOP-T n=10; R-FC-T n=14 and R-DHA-T, n=17)were enrolled. At time of inclusion, median age of patients was 68y (56-79), 32 patients were male, median time from last therapy to inclusion was 23,1m (2-143), MIPI score was low in 8, intermediate in 13 and high in 19 cases (missing=1). Previous lines of treatment included autologous stem cell transplantation in 18 patients. Among patients treated in the R-CHOP-T arm, all patients (n=4) presented grade 3 toxicities at the 25mg dose level. At the 15mg dose level (n=6), one DLT occurs (Thrombopenia). Consequently, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Temsirolimus in the R-CHOP-T was 15 mg. Among patients of the R-FC-T arm (n=14) and R-DHA-T, the recommended dose of Temsirolimus has not been found because of toxicities that occurred at all Temsirolimus doses (25 and 15mg). Hematologic grade 3/4 toxicities were the most frequent, mainly thrombocytopenia (n=28). In term of efficacy, ORR (CR/CRu/PR) during treatment period was 40% for R-CHOP-T including 2 patients who reached CR, 35,7% for R-FC-T including 3 patients who reached CR and 47,1% for R-DHA-T including 6 patients who reached CR. For all patients, mFU is 30.5 m (23-39). The mPFS and mOS according to treatment arms and for all patients (n=41) are as followed: 15,1m and not reached for R-CHOP-T (n= 10); 8.6m and 17.8 m for R-FC-T (n=14) ; 11.9m and 24.2m for R-DHA-T (n=17). In conclusion, the recommended dose of Temsirolimus for R-CHOP-T is 15mg D1,8,15. We are not able to recommend a dose of Temisrolimus for both R-DHA-T and R-FC-T. Hematologic toxicity was the main concern in all arms. A good efficacy in term of response rates PFS and OS was observed in all arms suggesting that Temsirolimus-based chemotherapy regimen should be further investigated in prospective trials but dose of Temsirolimus should be carefully investigated. Disclosures Cartron: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria; Jansen: Honoraria. Thieblemont:Roche: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Haioun:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: 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; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Casasnovas:ROCHE: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hermine:AB science: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Alexion: Research Funding.

Alternating Courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP Plus Rituximab Followed by a High Dose ARA-C Containing Myeloablative Regimen and Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT) Is Superior to 6 Courses CHOP Plus Rituximab Followed by Myeloablative Radiochemotherapy and ASCT In Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Results of the MCL Younger Trial of the European Mantle Cell Lymphoma Network (MCL net)

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 110-110 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olivier Hermine ◽  
Eva Hoster ◽  
Jan Walewski ◽  
Vincent Ribrag ◽  
Nicole Brousse ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 110 Background: Mantle Cell Lymphoma (MCL) has been characterized by poor long term prognosis with a median survival of only 3 to 4 years. However, outcome has improved during the last decades. In its first randomized trial, the MCL net demonstrated that myeloablative consolidation followed by ASCT resulted in a significant prolongation of PFS in advanced stage MCL (Dreyling et al Blood 2005). Recent phase II studies suggested that the addition of rituximab to CHOP like chemotherapy and/or high dose ARA-C may significantly improve remission rates and PFS. A French phase II trial using sequential R-CHOP/R-DHAP followed by ASCT showed an overall response rate of 95% with a CR rate of 61% translating into a median EFS of 83 months and a 75% survival rate at 5 years (Delarue et al ASH 2008). Methods: To evaluate the potential superiority of a high dose ARA-C containing regimen, the MCL net initiated a randomized trial comparing 6 courses of CHOP plus Rituximab followed by myeloablative radiochemotherapy (12 Gray TBI, 2×60mg/kg Cyclophosphamide) and ASCT (control arm A) versus alternating courses of 3x CHOP and 3x DHAP plus Rituximab followed by a high dose ARA-C containing myeloablative regimen (10 Gray TBI, 4×1,5 g/m2 Ara-C, 140mg/m2 melphalan) and ASCT (experimental arm B). Patient eligibility criteria included previously untreated MCL stage II-IV up to the age of 65 years. Histological diagnosis was confirmed by a central pathology review board. The primary end point time to treatment failure (TTF) was monitored continuously by a sequential procedure based on a one sided triangular test. Stable disease after induction, progression or death from any causes, were considered as treatment failure. Sample size was calculated to detect a hazard ratio of 52% for arm B with a power of 95%. Randomization was stopped as soon as a significant difference was observed between the two arms. Results: From July 2004 to May 2010, 497 patients were randomized in 4 countries (Germany, France, Poland, Belgium). The 391 patients evaluable for the primary analysis (19 no MCL, 87 not yet documented) displayed similar characteristics in both treatment arms: median age 55 vs 56 years, male 78% vs 79%, stage IV 85% vs 79%, B symptoms 43% vs 33%, ECOG >2 5% vs 5%, elevated LDH 37% vs 38%, and MIPI low/int/high risk 61%/25%/14% vs 62%/23%/15%, respectively. After induction overall response was similarly high in both arms (A: 90% vs B: 94%; p=0.19) and CR rate and combined CR/CRu rate were significantly higher in arm B (26% vs 39%; p=0.012 and 41% vs 60%; p=0.0003). The number of patients transplanted was similar in both arms (72% vs 73%) and after transplantation overall response and CR rates were comparable in both arms (97% vs 97% and 63% vs 65%, respectively). After a median follow up of 27 months, patients in arm B experienced a significantly longer TTF (49 months vs NR; p=0.0384, hazard ratio 0.68) mainly due to a lower number of relapses after CR/CRu/PR (20% vs 10%), whereas the rate of ASCT-related deaths in remission was similar in both arms (3% vs 4%). Although CR rate after ASCT was comparable in both arms, remission duration (RD) after ASCT was superior in Arm B (48m vs NR; p=0.047). Interestingly, for patients in CR after ASCT, RD after ASCT was also presumably superior in arm B (51 months vs NR; p=0.077). At the time of analysis overall survival was similar in both arms with medians not reached and 79% vs. 80% survival rates at 3 years (p=0.74). Safety after induction was comparable in both arms except for an increased grade 3/4 hematological toxicity (Hb 8% vs 28%, WBC 48% vs 75%, platelets 9% vs 74%, respectively), an excess of renal toxicity (creatinine grade 1/2: 8% vs 38%, grade 3/4: none vs 2%), and more frequent grade 1/2 nausea and vomiting in arm B. Toxicities of both conditioning regimen were similar, except for higher grade 3/4 mucositis (43% vs. 61%) in Arm B, and higher grade 1/2 liver toxicity and constipation in Arm A. Conclusions: High dose ARA-C in addition to R-CHOP+ASCT increases significantly complete response rates and TTF without clinically relevant increase of toxicity. Therefore, induction regimen containing high dose ARA-C followed by ASCT should become the new standard of care of MCL patients up to 65 years. Disclosures: Walewski: Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stilgenbauer:Amgen: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genzyme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Sanofi Aventis: Research Funding. Feugier:roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bosly:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gisselbrecht:Roche: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Radioimmunotherapy for Mantle Cell Lymphoma: 5-Year Follow-up of 90 Patients from the International RIT-Registry

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5263-5263
Author(s):  
Karin Hohloch ◽  
Christine Windemuth-Kieselbach ◽  
Pier Luigi Zinzani ◽  
Roberto E. Cacchione ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Follicular Lymphoma ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Primary Therapy ◽  
First Line ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell

To assess the efficacy of radioimmunotherapy (RIT) with 90yttrium-ibrutinib-tiuxetan (90Y-IT) in mantle cell lymphoma, data from 90 patients registered in the RIT Network with a median follow-up (FU) of 5.5 years after RIT were evaluated. 90Y-IT was given as first-line therapy in 45 (50%) (consolidation 44 pts., primary therapy 1 pt.) and at relapse in 45 (50%) patients (consolidation 24 pts., recurrence 12 pts., therapy refractory 3 pts., conditioning 2 pts., other 4 pts.). As a first-line treatment, 30 patients (pts.) (67%) achieved CR, 10 pts. (22%) PR%., 1 pt. (2%) PD, and for 4 pts. (9%) no response data was available. At relapse, CR was achieved in 17 pts. (38%), PR in 6 pts. (13%), SD in 2 pts. (4%), and 6 pts. (13%) had PD, while the response was not documented for 14 pts. (31%). After a median FU of 5.5 years, median PFS for all patients was 2.11 (95%CI: 1.03-2.32) years, and median OS was 4.05 (95%CI 2.79-7.21) years. Eleven pts. (12.2%) developed second malignancy. In conclusion, this is the largest report of MCL pts. treated with 90Y-IT to date. 90Y-IT was most often used as consolidation after first- and second-line chemotherapy and may improve the results achieved using chemoimmunotherapy alone. However, the results are less encouraging compared to treatment with small molecules such as ibrutinib. Disclosures Zinzani: TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa Kirin: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: 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, Speakers Bureau; Immune Design: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Eusapharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy. Jurczak:Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Truemper:Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Janssen Oncology: Consultancy. Scholz:Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Hexal: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy; GILEAD: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankio: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Yttrium 90 (90Y) Ibritumomab Tiuxetan (Zevalin) is approved for treatment of patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma and as consolidation therapy after chemo(immuno)therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma.

Phase II Randomized, Multicenter Study of Lenalidomide Vs Best Investigator’s Choice in Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma: Results of the MCL-002 (SPRINT) Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 626-626 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marek Trneny ◽  
Thierry Lamy ◽  
Jan Walewski ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
David Belada ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Tumor Burden ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
First Response ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Prognostic Profile

Abstract Introduction: Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an aggressive non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma with poor outcome, especially after failure of first-line treatment. Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug with antineoplastic and antiproliferative effects, has shown activity in single-arm phase II studies of patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MCL. The present controlled randomized study compared the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide vs investigator’s choice (IC) in patients with R/R MCL. Methods: MCL-002 (SPRINT), a European multicenter, open-label, phase II study enrolled patients with up to 3 relapses or who failed prior therapy and were ineligible for intensified treatment or stem cell transplantation (NCT00875667). Oral lenalidomide was given at 25 mg/day on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle until progressive disease (PD) or intolerability. The IC treatment consisted of single-agent therapy with cytarabine, rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, or chlorambucil. Patients who progressed on IC per investigator judgment were allowed to crossover to lenalidomide. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), time to first response, duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and safety. Response assessments were centrally reviewed using the modified IWG criteria. Results: 254 patients with R/R MCL were randomized 2:1 to lenalidomide (n=170) or IC (n=84). Patients had median age 68.5 years, were predominantly male (73%), and had received a median of 2 prior therapies. 91% had stage III/IV disease at diagnosis, with 34% high-risk MIPI, 43% high tumor burden, and 20% bulky disease at baseline. Overall, patients on the lenalidomide arm had a worse prognostic profile than the IC arm due to higher tumor burden and disease risk (>5 percentage points for a number of parameters). After a median time of 2.9 months, 39 patients (46%) from the IC arm crossed over to lenalidomide due to PD. Overall, 84 patients remain on lenalidomide (15 having crossed over from IC) and 11 patients on IC without PD. At a median follow-up time on study of 15.9 months, the risk reduction for PFS was 39% (HR=0.61 [95% CI, 0.44-0.84]; P=0.004; Table) in favor of lenalidomide (median PFS: 8.7 months lenalidomide vs 5.2 months IC). ORR was significantly improved for lenalidomide vs IC (40% vs 11%; CR/CRu 5% vs 0%). Median time to first response was 4.3 months for lenalidomide (not reached for IC). Median DOR (16.1 vs 10.4 months) and OS on mature data (27.9 vs 21.2 months) were longer for lenalidomide vs IC. Efficacy results were consistent among subgroups. Safety data in 250 patients receiving ≥1 dose showed more dose reductions in lenalidomide-treated patients (41%) vs IC (17%), due in part to a longer median duration of lenalidomide treatment vs IC, and to strict dose modification rules for lenalidomide. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (lenalidomide 44% vs IC 34% [without increased risk of infection]), thrombocytopenia (18% vs 28%), and leukopenia (8% vs 11%). Tumor flare reaction occurred in lenalidomide patients only (10%; 2% grade ≥3); 1 patient in each arm experienced tumor lysis syndrome. Invasive second primary malignancies were identified in 4% and 5% of lenalidomide and IC treated patients, respectively. Conclusions: The MCL-002 study demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS for lenalidomide over best IC monotherapy in patients with advanced R/R MCL despite a worse prognostic profile in the lenalidomide arm at baseline. In addition, ORR and CR rates, TTR, DOR, and OS were improved for lenalidomide over IC. The DOR has been remarkably consistent in various studies with lenalidomide in MCL patients. The safety profile for lenalidomide was as expected and no new safety signals were identified. The results of this first randomized, controlled study of lenalidomide showed superior efficacy compared to IC in patients with R/R MCL with a manageable toxicity profile. Table Efficacy of lenalidomide vs IC in R/R MCL Efficacy Lenalidomide (n=170) IC (n=84) P PFS (Lenalidomide vs IC)  Median PFS, mo (95% CI) 8.7 (5.54-12.14) 5.2 (3.67-6.95)  Sequential HR (95% CI) 0.61 (0.44-0.84)  Sequential log-rank test p-value 0.004 ORR, n (%) 68 (40) 9 (11) <0.001 CR/CRu, n (%) 8 (5) 0 (0) 0.043 Median DOR, mo 16.1 10.4 0.421 Median OS, mo 27.9 21.2 0.52 Disclosures Trneny: Celgene, Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding. Walewski:Celgene: Consultancy, Other, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Mundipharma : Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other, Research Funding. Jurczak:Celgene, Eisai, Gilead, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Pfizer, Roche, Novartis, Spectrum, Takeda, Teva: Research Funding. Belada:Celgene: Research Funding. Mayer:Janssen Research & Development: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Biyukov:Celgene: Employment. Patturajan:Celgene: Employment. Casadebaig Bravo:Celgene: Employment. Arcaini:Celgene, Roche, Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Pharmacogenomics Drives Lenalidomide Efficacy and MRD Kinetics in Mantle Cell Lymphoma after Autologous Transplantation: Results from the MCL0208 Multicenter, Phase III, Randomized Clinical Trial from the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL)

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 16-17
Author(s):  
Simone Ferrero ◽  
Daniele Grimaldi ◽  
Elena Arrigoni ◽  
Gian Maria Zaccaria ◽  
Beatrice Alessandria ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Treatment Efficacy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Autologous Transplantation ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Strong Linkage Disequilibrium ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell

Background and Aims. Prediction of treatment efficacy is an active and growing field of pharmacology. In the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL) MCL0208 phase III trial (NCT02354313), a 24 months lenalidomide maintenance (LM, 15 mg days 1-21 every 28 days) after high-dose immuno-chemotherapy followed by autologous transplantation (ASCT) in 300 frontline mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients showed substantial clinical activity in terms of Progression-Free Survival (PFS) vs observation (OBS). However, this benefit seemed not uniform across patient series. To deeper investigate the differential pattern of response to lenalidomide, a wide analysis of the host pharmacogenomics (PG) background was planned, in order to dissect whether specific germline polymorphisms of transmembrane transporters, metabolic enzymes or cell surface receptors (ABCB1, ABCG2, VEGFA, FCGR2A, NCF4, GSTP1, CRBN) might predict the drug efficacy. Actually, several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of ABCB1 exert an effect on substrate affinity of lenalidomide for the transmembrane transporter. Moreover, VEGFA is involved in the anti-angiogenic activity of lenalidomide and might eventually upregulate ABCB1 expression, too. Patients and methods. Genotypes for SNPs were obtained through allele-specific (ASO) probes on germline DNA from peripheral blood. Minor allele frequencies (MAFs) were obtained and the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (HWE) was checked. Genotypes were used to infer individual haplotypes by Arlequin and Haploview softwares. Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed with ASO primers on either IGH or BCL-1/IGH rearrangements by RQ-PCR in bone marrow samples. TP53 disruption was identified by NGS targeting resequencing and copy number variation analysis. Clinical-biological correlations were screened by automated machine learning methods and validated by both Kaplan-Meier at univariate level and Cox models for multivariate analysis (MV). A logistic regression was implemented to investigate correlations between polymorphisms and MRD kinetics. Results. 278 out of 300 patients (93%) were fully genotyped. The MAF values of the SNPs were very similar to published data and the HWE was confirmed. Most notably, ABCB1 c.2677G>T/A(W) and VEGFA c.2055A>C were significantly associated to outcome and are thus described in this abstract. In the case of ABCB1, the three loci were in strong linkage disequilibrium (p<0.001). 31% of patients were homozygous for ABCB1 wild type alleles (GG, "WT"), 53% heterozygous (GW, "HET") and 16% polymorphic on both chromosomes (WW, "POL"). 20% were VEGFA WT (AA), 47% HET (AC) and 33% POL (CC). PG did not impact on induction therapy and randomization rates of this trial, as superimposable polymorphism frequencies were described between the enrolled and randomized population. Conversely, both ABCB1 HET and POL and VEGFA HET/POL associated with higher MRD clearance rates vs WT after 6 months of LM (93% vs 71% and 91% vs 67%, respectively). Interestingly, the risk of MRD reappearance during LM was 86% lower for patients harboring either polymorphism vs WT (odds ratio 0.14, 95% CI 0.02-0.99; p<0.05). Actually, ABCB1 HET/POL predicted for a more favorable PFS vs WT in LM (3yPFS 85% vs 69% p<0.05, Fig.1A), as well as VEGFA HET/POL (3yPFS 85% vs 59% p<0.01, Fig.1B). The two polymorphisms co-occurred in 57% of patients, being 12% ABCB1 HET/POL only, 23% VEGFA HET/POL and 8% ABCB1/VEGFA WT. Interestingly, patients with either polymorphism had superimposable outcome to patients in whom both co-occurred (Fig.1C). Finally, MV showed that either polymorphism was protective for PFS among randomized patients (HR=0.42; 95% CI 0.20-0.85; p<0.05). According to this hypothesis, among the 17 ABCB1/VEGFA WT patients LM did not improved PFS vs OBS (Fig.1D), independently from TP53 disruption. Conclusions. The first PG data on LM after ASCT in MCL suggested that: 1) ABCB1 and VEGFA polymorphisms did not impact on the chemotherapeutic efficacy of FIL-MCL0208 trial; 2) both polymorphisms favored sustained MRD clearance during LM; 3) either polymorphism conferred a survival advantage during LM. Taken together, these observations hint that a variable excretion of lenalidomide through ABCB1 (heralded by SNPs), as well as an altered VEGFA pathway, could predict treatment efficacy. This observation might be very useful in the future to tailor lenalidomide therapy to MCL patients. Disclosures Ferrero: Servier: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; EUSA Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Boccomini:SC Ematologia, ASOU Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, Turin, Italy: Current Employment. Maria:Roche: Consultancy, Other: travel, accomodations, expenses; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other: travel, accomodations, expenses; BMS: Consultancy; MSD: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: travel, accomodations, expenses; Gilead: Consultancy, Other: travel, accomodations, expenses, Research Funding. Ferreri:Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Hutchinson: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Palumbo:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Galimberti:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Lenalidomide maintenance in mantle cell lymphoma

scholarly journals Phase I Trial of Rituximab, Cladribine and Temsirolimus (RCT) for Initial Therapy of Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3661-3661 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Inwards ◽  
Paul Fishkin ◽  
Betsy R. LaPlant ◽  
Matthew T. Drake ◽  
Paul Kurtin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Dose Levels

Abstract Abstract 3661 Objective: We conducted this trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and schedule of temsirolimus added to an established regimen comprised of rituximab and cladribine for the initial treatment of mantle cell lymphoma and to generate preliminary information on the toxicity and efficacy of this combination. Methods: A standard phase I cohort of 3 study design was utilized. MTD was defined as the dose level below the lowest dose that induces dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in at least one-third of patients (at least 2 of a maximum of 6 new patients). DLT was defined as grade 4 ANC (<500) for ≥5 days, grade 4 ANC (<500) associated with fever (>100.5 F) and/or active infection, PLT <25,000, grade 4 infection, or ≥grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity during the first cycle of therapy as per NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0. The fixed doses of rituximab and cladribine were 375 mg/m2 IV day 1 and 5 mg/m2/d IV days 1–5 of a 28 day cycle, respectively, as previously published. There were 5 planned temsirolimus IV dose levels: 15 mg day 1; 25 mg day 1; 25 mg days 1 and 15; 25 mg days 1,8 and 15; and 25 mg days 1,8,15, and 22. The fifth dose level is as previously published in combination with rituximab. Results: A total of 17 patients were treated: 3 each at dose levels 1–4 and 5 at dose level 5 (25 mg temsirolimus days 1,8,15, and 22). The median age was 75 years (52–86). There were 11 males and 6 females. At presentation 88% had stage IV disease, and 94% had extranodal disease. MIPI scores were low in 6% (1 patient), intermediate in 59% (10 patients), and high in 35% (6 patients). There was a single DLT recorded at dose level 3 based on the initial DLT criteria, though this cytokine release syndrome was clearly rituximab related, and occurred prior to the first dose of temsirolimus. Five patients were treated at the highest planned temsirolimus dose level (25 mg days 1,8,15, and 22) with no DLT observed. No further dose escalation was planned, and this level was determined to be tolerated, though higher levels may be tolerable. All patients were evaluable for adverse events. Hematologic toxicity was frequent, with grade 3 anemia in 12% of patients, grade 3 thrombocytopenia in 35%, grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 30%, grade 4 lymphopenia in 47%, grade 3 neutropenia in 24%, and grade 4 neutropenia in 18% of patients. There were 3 thrombotic episodes, 2 of which were attributed to therapy, and 3 episodes of pneumonitis. The overall response rate was 94% with 53% CR and 41% PR. The median progression free survival was 18.7 months. Conclusions: Temsirolimus 25 mg IV weekly may be safely added to rituximab and cladribine at 375 mg/m2 IV day 1 and 5 mg/m2/d IV days 1–5 of a 28 day cycle, respectively. This regimen had promising preliminary activity in an elderly cohort of patients with mantle cell lymphoma. Disclosures: Off Label Use: Temsirolimus for mantle cell lymphoma.

scholarly journals Weekly Carfilzomib, Cyclophosphamide and Dexamethasone (wCCd) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: A Phase I- II Study

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 175-175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Davide Rossi ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
Alessandra Larocca ◽  
Fabiana Gentilini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Response ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Carfilzomib is a novel second generation proteasome-inhibitor with significant anti MM activity and favorable toxicity profile, including very limited neurotoxicity and neutropenia. This Phase I/II study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of once weekly carfilzomib combined with cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (wCCd) and to assess safety and efficacy of this combination in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM. Here we report the first findings from the Phase I dose-escalation and expansion portions. Enrolment in the phase II portion is ongoing. Methods In the Phase I, the standard 3+3 dose-escalation scheme was adopted, with Carfilzomib as the only escalating agent starting at 45 mg/m2 (level 0), maximal planned dose 70 mg/m2 (level 2), and 36 mg/m2, if needed (level -1), given IV on days 1, 8, 15 in 28-day cycles. Oral cyclophosphamide was administered at 300 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 and oral dexamethasone at 40 mg on days 1, 8, 15, 22 for all dose levels. Dose escalation of Carfilzomib was based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurring in cycle 1. After completion of 9 cycles, patients receive 28-day maintenance cycles with Carfilzomib (days 1, 8, 15) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) defined by the Phase I study until disease progression or intolerance. The objectives were to determine the MTD and assess activity and safety. Results As of June 15, 2014, 28 newly diagnosed MM patients were enrolled. Median age was 74 years, 29% of patients were older than 75 years, 36% had ISS stage III, 24% had unfavorable FISH profile [t(4;14) or t (14;16) or del17p]. Twelve patients were enrolled in the Phase I portion of the study. At dose level 0 (Carfilzomib 45 mg/m2) no DLT was reported; at dose level 1 (Carfilzomib 56 mg/m2), 1 of 6 patients experienced DLT, consisting of grade 3 creatinine increase; at dose level 2 (Carfilzomib 70 mg/m2) no DLT occurred. The MTD of weekly Carfilzomib was thus established as 70 mg/m2. Toxicity and response data are available for 25 patients, who have completed at least the first cycle; 3 patients are currently receiving their first cycle of treatment. Grade 3-4 drug-related adverse events occurred in less than 15% of patients and included neutropenia (12%, 3 patients), anemia (12%, 3 patients), acute pulmonary edema (8%, 2 patients), pulmonary embolism (4%, 1 patient), creatinine increase (4%, 1 patient), nausea (4%, 1 patient), and fatigue (4%, 1 patient). No peripheral neuropathy was observed. Overall, the wCCd regimen was well tolerated, 3 patients (12%) required Carfilzomib dose reduction (grade 3 creatinine increase, grade 3 transaminase increase and grade 2 fever) and 3 patients (12%) required drug discontinuation due to adverse events (2 acute pulmonary edemas and 1 creatinine increase). Patients received a median of 5 cycles (range 1-9). After 4 induction cycles, 83% of patients achieved at least partial response, 39% at least very good partial response, and 22% complete response. Responses improved over time, as shown in table 1. During the study, only 2 patients progressed and 1 patient died, due to acute pulmonary edema considered probably related to treatment. Conclusions This is the first prospective study evaluating once weekly carfilzomib in treatment-naïve MM. wCCd therapy appears safe and effective in newly diagnosed MM patients. Responses became deeper with subsequent cycles and toxicities were manageable. The response rate observed with weekly carfilzomib compares favorably with similar studies with standard twice weekly carfilzomib infusion. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Table 1 2nd cycle 4th cycle 6th cycle Complete Response 5% 22% 27% At least Very Good Partial Response 9% 39% 63% At least Partial Response 73% 83% 91% Disclosures Palumbo: Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Use off-label of Carfilzomib (proteasome inhibitor).. Bringhen:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen and Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy. Larocca:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Cavallo:Onyx: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Gaidano:Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:Millenium: Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding.

Temsirolimus in Combination with Bendamustine and Rituximab for the Treatment of Relapsed Mantle Cell and Follicular Lymphoma: Report on An Ongoing Phase I/II Trial

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 2697-2697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Hess ◽  
Ulrich Keller ◽  
Johannes Atta ◽  
Christian Buske ◽  
Peter Borchmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Entire Treatment ◽  
Ongoing Phase

Abstract Abstract 2697 Background: mTOR inhibition has been shown to be effective in various subtypes of malignant lymphomas. Based on a phase III trial in relapsed MCL which proved superiority of temsirolimus to standard options, the drug is approved for this indication in the EU. Additionally, promising response rates could be observed in patients with follicular and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (Smith et al, JCO 2010). Whereas combination to single agent rituximab seems feasible and with improved efficacy (Ansell et al, Lancet Oncology 2011), there is limited information on the feasibility and efficacy in combination with chemotherapy. Bendamustine has been shown to be effective in indolent lymphoma and has a beneficial side effect profile (Rummel et al, JCO, 2005). To evaluate the potential of the combination of temsirolimus with bendamustine and rituximab an ongoing phase I/II trial was initiated. Methods: This is a multicenter, national, prospective trial, approved by the centralized EC. Patients were eligible if they had histologically proven follicular (FL) or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), the latter with Cyclin D1 positivity or detectable t(11;14), 1–3 prior treatment lines, no curative option available, no refractoriness to bendamustine, measurable disease, ECOG < 3, sufficient bone marrow reserve, no severe concomitant diseases and given informed consent. Treatment consisted of bendamustine 90mg/m2 day 1–2, rituximab 375mg/m2 day 1 and temsirolimus day 2, 8, 15 of a 28d cycle. A total of 4 cycles was planned with interim staging after 2 cycles. In the ongoing phase I part (3+3 design) the following dose cohorts for temsirolimus were planed: A 25mg, B 50mg, C 75mg. Currently cohort C is ongoing. Toxicity was evaluated throughout the treatment and analysis for DLT was performed after 2 cycles. An independent data safety monitoring board decided on the escalation to the next dose level. Results: Overall 9 patients have been included until now (6 pts cohort A, 3 patients cohort B) and 4 patients are in the prescreening period (cohort C). Median age 64; Histology: 8MCL/1FL; sex 2F/7M, median number of pretreatments 2 (1–3). Adverse events: overall the treatment was well tolerated. Toxicity was predominant hematologic with mostly leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. In 29 evaluable cycles of chemotherapy the following grade 3/4 toxicities were noted: Thrombocytopenia in 3 (all grade 3); leukopenia in 11 (9 grade 3; 2 grade 4), and increase in triglycerides, hyperglycemia and hypertension in one patient each (all grade 3). Importantly, one case of pneumonitis occurred, which resolved after steroid treatment and study treatment could be resumed w/o further problems. In addition, one reaction to contrast agent, an allergic reaction to berries and a transient parasthesia during the study phase were noted, leading to hospitalization. All of these events occurred several days after the last application of study drug and were considered not to be associated to the study treatment. As the episode of hypertension led to hospital admission, it was considered to be potentially a DLT, and cohort A was escalated to 6 patients w/o further DLT. In cohort B no DLT were observed in 3 patients and cohort C has been opened for inclusion. 5 patients have completed the entire treatment, in one patient treatment was stopped after cycle 3 due to delayed recovery of platelets, and treatment is ongoing in 3 patients. At interim staging all 9 patients evaluable achieved a partial remission (ORR 100%). After completion of the entire treatment ORR was 100% with 1 CR and 5 PR in 6 evaluable patients. Summary: In this ongoing phase I/II trial the combination of temsirolimus with bendamustine and Rituximab was feasible applying 3 weekly doses of up to 50mg temsirolimus in a 4 week cycle. Until now promising response rates have been noticed. Cohort C is currently recruiting patients (Temsirolimus 75mg), updated results of the phase I part of the trial will be presented at the meeting. If no dose limiting toxicities are observed, the extended phase II part of the trial will be initiated with patients stratified according to lymphoma subtype (30 patients each with FL and MCL). Disclosures: Hess: Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria. Keller:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Witzens-Harig:Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy. Dreyling:Pfizer: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau, scientific advisory.

scholarly journals Mutations Affecting RNA Binding Proteins Are a Novel Feature of Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1478-1478
Author(s):  
Krysta M Coyle ◽  
Prasath Pararajalingam ◽  
Sarah E Arthur ◽  
Nicole Thomas ◽  
Miguel Alcaide ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Alternative Splicing ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Rna Binding ◽  
Rna Binding Proteins ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell

Objectives Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an uncommon B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma that is incurable with standard therapies. The genetic drivers of this cancer have not been firmly established and the features known to contribute to differences in clinical course remain limited. We sought to extend our understanding of the molecular etiology of this malignancy using an integrative genomic analysis of diagnostic biopsies. Methods We performed exome sequencing on 51 frozen MCL tumors and analyzed these alongside previously published exome cohorts. We sequenced tumour genomes and matched constitutional DNA from 34 frozen MCLs, along with matched constitutional DNA, to more broadly identify the pattern of non-coding mutations. Based on mutations identified in this discovery cohort, we re-sequenced 18 recurrently-mutated genes in 212 archival MCLs, each having clinical follow-up data. We also performed RNA-seq on 110 of these cases and analyzed these data for alternative splicing and differential expression, including the differential splicing of HNRNPH1 in the context of recurrent intronic mutations. We investigated the functional and phenotypic effect of mutations and deregulated HNRNPH1 protein through ectopic expression of full-length HNRNPH1 and a mini-gene containing the exons and introns affected by mutations. Using custom droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) assays, we validated alternative splicing patterns in HNRNPH1 itself and other targets identified through re-analysis of available CLIP-seq data. Results In addition to confirming the prognostic association of TP53 and NOTCH1 mutations in MCL, we identified two additional genes associated with outcome: EWSR1 with poor outcome (HR = 5.6) and MEF2B with good outcome (HR = 0.2). By comparing mutation patterns to diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), we identified an MCL-specific missense hot spot in MEF2B, non-specific truncating mutations in EWSR1, and truncating mutations affecting the DAZAP1 C-terminus in both MCL and DLBCL. The DAZAP1 mutations are predicted to alter protein sub-cellular localization and disrupt protein-protein interactions. We also identified the focal recurrence of non-coding mutations surrounding a single exon of the HNRNPH1 gene that were largely restricted to MCL. These mutations affected a region bound by HNRNPH1 protein and disrupted the preferred binding motif of this protein. Intronic mutations were significantly associated with alternative splicing of the HNRNPH1 mRNA and appear to disrupt a negative regulatory loop that normally limits the level of HNRNPH1. Using cell-based assays, we have evaluated the role of HNRNPH1 in cell survival and proliferation. Our interrogation of alternative splicing events in downstream targets implicate HNRNPH1 as a master splicing regulator which may broadly perturb the transcriptome and proteome to favor lymphomagenesis in MCL. Conclusions We discovered three novel MCL-related genes with roles in RNA trafficking or splicing, namely EWSR1, DAZAP1, and HNRNPH1. Mutations in these RNA-binding proteins were identified in 49 of 291 (17%) samples analyzed. Our results improve the current understanding of the MCL mutational landscape, highlight the similarities and differences between MCL and DLBCL, and strongly implicate a role for aberrant regulation of RNA metabolism in MCL pathobiology. We elucidated a functional role for recurrent non-coding HNRNPH1 mutations specific to MCL and identified multiple downstream targets. We continue to explore putative trans targets of HNRNPH1, a novel oncoprotein in MCL. Disclosures Steidl: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; Nanostring: Patents & Royalties: Filed patent on behalf of BC Cancer; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy; Tioma: Research Funding. Connors:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria. Villa:Roche, Abbvie, Celgene, Seattle Genetics, Lundbeck, AstraZeneca, Nanostring, Janssen, Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria. Johnson:Roche: Consultancy, Employment, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel fees, gifts, and others, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Employment, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; BD Biosciences: Other: Provided a significant proportion of the antibodies used in this project free of cost.; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Lundbeck: Employment, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel fees, gifts, and others, Research Funding. Scott:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution], Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding.

scholarly journals A Phase I/II Study of Ibrutinib and Ixazomib in Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma: PrE0404

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1541-1541
Author(s):  
Jonathon B. Cohen ◽  
Craig A. Portell ◽  
Mehdi Hamadani ◽  
Opeyemi Jegede ◽  
Catherine Diefenbach ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Duration Of Response

Background: The Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib is highly effective as a monotherapy in relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) with an overall response rate of 68% (Wang et al, NEJM 2013), but the duration of response is shorter than what is seen in chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and the survival of patients who progress after receiving ibrutinib is as short as 3 months (Martin et al, Blood, 2016). In addition, the complete response (CR) rate is only 21%. Ibrutinib-containing combinations may improve depth and duration of response in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL. While use of the proteasome inhibitor, bortezomib, can be limited due to the development of peripheral neuropathy, it has an ORR of 33% (CR rate 8%) in MCL, and preclinical models suggest a synergism between proteasome inhibitors and ibrutinib in MCL cell lines (Axelrod et al, Leukemia 2014). We developed a phase 1/2 trial of ibrutinib combined with the oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL. Methods: PrE0404 will be open at 18 sites nationwide and is registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03323151). It is currently enrolling patients with relapsed/refractory MCL who have received at least 1 prior line of combination therapy. Patients receiving prior BTK or proteasome inhibitors are eligible, and patients may have received prior autologous or allogeneic transplantation as long as they do not have active graft versus host disease. Patients must have ≤ grade 1 peripheral neuropathy. For phase 1, patients are required to have been off of a BTK inhibitor for 3 months. Starting dose of ibrutinib for all patients is 560mg daily, and dose levels of ixazomib for the phase 1 trial range from 3mg to 4mg days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28 day cycle. Patients continued therapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. For the phase 1 portion of the study, patients are monitored for a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) during cycle 1, defined as grade 3 thrombocytopenia with significant bleeding, select grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, grade 4 febrile neutropenia, grade 4 non-hematologic toxicity, or any grade 5 toxicity. In addition, any toxicity-related dose delay &gt; 7 days of ibrutinib or ixazomib or an inability to receive all 3 doses of ixazomib during cycle 1 are considered DLT's. The maximum tolerated dose/recommended phase 2 dose will be the dose at which fewer than 1/6 patients experience a DLT, with the maximum dose of ixazomib will be 4mg. The primary endpoint for the phase 2 portion of the study is CR rate, and patients will be assigned to one of two cohorts based on prior BTK-inhibitor exposure. For ibrutinib-naïve patients, we will target a CR rate of 40% (based on a historical CR rate of 21% for ibrutinib), and for ibrutinib-pretreated patients, we will target a CR rate of 23% (based on a historical CR rate of 8% for bortezomib). There is 86% statistical power & a one-sided 10% alpha to test each hypothesis. We will accrue 31 patients to each cohort in order to detect this difference. Secondary and exploratory endpoints will include progression-free and overall survival, overall response, toxicity, frequency of BTK mutations, and response based on molecular risk stratification. As of July 2019 the study is open to accrual at 14 sites and is expected to move to phase 2 in fall 2019, at which time it will be expanded to 18 sites. Disclosures Cohen: Hutchison: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Meyers Squibb Company: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; Lymphoma Research Foundation: Research Funding; ASH: Research Funding; UNUM: Research Funding; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.: Research Funding. Portell:Infinity: Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Xencor: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acerta/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Kite: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hamadani:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Sanofi Genzyme: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Otsuka: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Research Funding; Medimmune: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Diefenbach:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Denovo: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LAM Therapeutics: Research Funding; MEI: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium/Takeda: Research Funding; Trillium: Research Funding. Landsburg:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Triphase: Research Funding; Triphase: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Curis, INC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Curis, INC: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Speakers Bureau. Kahl:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Ixazomib is not currently approved for mantle cell lymphoma.

scholarly journals T-Cell Clonal Expansion and Activation Associated with Durable Clinical Response to Dual BTK and CDK4/6 Inhibitor Therapy in Mantle Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3973-3973
Author(s):  
Christina Y. Lee ◽  
Maurizio Di Liberto ◽  
Yang Hu ◽  
Xiangao Huang ◽  
Nancy L Bartlett ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
T Cells ◽  
T Cell ◽  
Mantle Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Mantle Cell ◽  
Progression Of Disease

Mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) is an incurable B-cell lymphoma characterized by the chromosomal translocation (11;14)(q13;q32), resulting in aberrant expression of cyclin D1 and dysregulated cell cycle progression. In a phase I clinical trial in patients with previously treated MCL, the combination of the cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (CDK4)/CDK6 inhibitor palbociclib and the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib was safe and active. We hypothesized that clinical responses are in part attributed to dynamic changes in the immune landscape and tumor-immune interaction, given accumulating evidence that inhibition of CDK4/6 augments anti-tumor immunity. In a patient (Pt 17) treated with palbociclib and ibrutinib for over 3 years and experiencing a complete response (CR), there was an over 4-fold increase in circulating CD3+ T cells over time. For the first 19 treatment cycles, the absolute CD3+ T cell count was 862 ± 322 compared to 4,027 ± 253 between cycles 31 and 40, with no clinical suspicion of infection for at least 3 months prior. To investigate the T-cell receptor (TCR) repertoire over the course of treatment, high-throughput sequencing of the TCRB CDR3 region was performed, revealing a more oligoclonal repertoire in the peripheral blood over time. The cumulative frequency of the top 10 TCR clones during cycles 3, 7, and 31 were 3.9%, 6.5%, and 25.8%, respectively. These clones were mapped to single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) data and determined to be CD8+ effector and central memory T cells. Furthermore, there appears to not only be increased numbers of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells but also enhanced activation as evidenced by scRNA-seq expression of CD69. These findings suggest a predominant cytotoxic T-cell response, which is consistent with recent preclinical studies using CDK4/6 inhibitors. A similar, less dramatic, pattern of T cell expansion was observed in three additional responding patients, including one with non-leukemic MCL (Pt 25) who achieved a CR with subsequent progression of disease at cycle 25. This patient had a 2-fold increase in the absolute number of circulating CD3+ T cells with a baseline count of 442 ± 168 during cycles 1 to 2 compared to 915 ± 104 between cycles 4 and 23, prior to a substantial decrease to 452 during cycle 24 and further to 114 during cycle 25. There was no evidence of clonal T cell expansion in the peripheral blood samples from cycles 4, 20, and 24. Whether this is related to a lack of circulating tumor cells remains to be determined. Interestingly, scRNA-seq analysis revealed a remarkable increase in PDCD1 (encoding PD-1) expression upon disease progression (abstract by Di Liberto et al.). Our findings offer potential new insights into the tumor-immune interaction associated with a durable treatment responses and drug resistance in targeting CDK4/6 and BTK in MCL. In preclinical models, CDK4/6 inhibition has been linked to changes in the tumor microenvironment to enhance the immune response, and here we present the first longitudinal data obtained from patients within the context of a clinical trial. Expansion of the cohort from the ongoing phase II trial, cytokine profiling, and functional assays are underway to further characterize the oligoclonal CD8+ T cell and other immune populations as well as to explore the potential therapeutic role of combinations with immune checkpoint blockade in lymphoma. Figure 1. Differential T-cell responses in relapsed/refractory MCL patients on palbociclib and ibrutinib combination therapy, including a leukemic MCL patient with a CR (Pt 17) and a non-leukemic MCL patient with a CR and subsequent progression of disease (Pt 25). A, Absolute B-cell and T-cell counts during various treatment cycles for Pt 17 (top) and Pt 25 (bottom). B, Cumulative productive frequency of the top 10 clonal TCR rearrangements in a given treatment cycle. C, Change in abundance of the top 10 TCR clones across a given treatment cycle. D, Differential abundance of productive TCR clones that have significantly increased or decreased in frequency between treatment cycles. Abbreviations: CR, complete response. MCL, mantle cell lymphoma. PD, progression of disease. Pt, patient. TCR, T-cell receptor. Figure 1 Disclosures Bartlett: Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Immune Design: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding; Autolus: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Forty Seven: Research Funding. Maddocks:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding. Leonard:MorphoSys: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Galluzzi:Luke Heller TECPR2 Foundation: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Inzen: Consultancy; OmniSEQ: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martin:I-MAB: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Teneobio: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy. OffLabel Disclosure: Palbociclib, a CDK4/6 inhibitor, was used off-label in combination with ibrutinib in a phase I clinical trial in patients with relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document