The Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on Subsequent Survival of Patients Receiving Ibrutinib As Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): An International Study

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3242-3242 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip A Thompson ◽  
Vincent Levy ◽  
Constantine S. Tam ◽  
Chadi al Nawakil ◽  
Francois Xavier Goudot ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in 5-9% of patients treated with ibrutinib for CLL. We previously reported on the clinical characteristics and management outcomes of 56 patients with ibrutinib-associated AF (n=52) or atrial flutter (n=4) retrospectively identified from centers of the FILO group (French Innovative Leukemia Organization, France/Belgium, n=29), MD Anderson Cancer Center (USA, n=21), and Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (Australia, n=6) (Thompson et al BJH 2016). We found that (1) the median time from the initiation of ibrutinib to AF was 3.8 months (range: 6 - 1410 days); (2) AF recurred or became persistent in 63% despite medical management; (3) AF and its management was associated with serious sequelae including severe cardiac failure (n=3, 1 fatal), ischemic stroke (n=3) and severe bleeding events (n=8); (4) immediate cessation of ibrutinib therapy was required in 22/56 (39%). Given the reported poor outcomes for patients who discontinue ibrutinib for toxicity, we update the results of this cohort with respect to CLL outcomes and survival. Aim To describe long term overall and disease-specific outcomes in patients who develop ibrutinib-associated AF. Methods This is an update of an international, retrospective cohort of patients who developed ibrutinib-associated AF. Patients are managed according to local best standard practice. The median follow-up from onset of AF is 21 months. Results The median overall survival after development of AF is 43 months. Twenty-two (39%) patients stopped ibrutinib at the time of AF. Among these patients, 7 (32%) eventually died from CLL progression (n=3), infection (1), cardiac failure (1), pulmonary hemorrhage (1) and colon cancer (1). Of the 34 patients who initially continued ibrutinib, 5 (15%) died; causes of death were: Richter transformation (RT) (n=2), septic shock (1), CLL progression (1), and stroke in the context of AF (1). In order to gain insight into disease control in relationship to AF and its management, we examined PFS from the time of AF onset. The following features had no impact on PFS: single AF episode vs paroxysmal/permanent AF or time from ibrutinib initiation to onset of AF. However, patients who had ibrutinib interrupted at the time of AF onset (n=22) had a significantly inferior PFS (median 19 months) compared with those who had dose reduction without interruption (n=13) or those who continued full dose ibrutinib (n=21, median 27 months, p=0.023, Figure 1). There was a trend toward inferior overall survival in those who interrupted ibrutinib (62% at 3 years) compared with those who continued without interruption (74% at 3 years, p=0.10), but this did not reach statistical significance at the time of analysis. Only 3 of 22 (14%) patients who had initial interruption of ibrutinib successfully restarted ibrutinib following control of AF; all 3 remain in continuous partial remission. Four other patients restarted ibrutinib, but subsequently discontinued due to pulmonary hemorrhage (n=1), stroke (1), CLL progression (1) and RT (1). Among patients who discontinued Ibrutinib permanently, only 9 did so solely because of uncomplicated AF. The others discontinued because of: (a) complications of AF or its management such as cardiac failure (n=1), recurrent AF (n=5) and bleeding events (n=4; one each of hemopericardium, pulmonary hemorrhage, subdural hematoma and gastrointestinal hemorrhage); (b) complications related to CLL such as CLL progression (n=1) and RT (n=2); or (c) other causes such as lung cancer (n=1) or unknown reasons (n=2). Altogether, 21 patients were still on Ibrutinib among 44 patients alive at last follow-up. Conclusion Occurrence of AF at any time during ibrutinib treatment was associated with an initial discontinuation rate of 39%, and only 37.5% of patients remain alive and on drug after a median of 21 months follow-up. Patients who interrupted ibrutinib at the time of AF onset have an inferior PFS compared to those who continued ibrutinib or were managed with dose reductions. This inferior outcome in CLL control is likely related to the low rate of patients (14%) who subsequently successfully restarted ibrutinib. Development of AF was associated with serious complications, including hemorrhage, ischemic stroke and cardiac failure. Management of ibrutinib-associated AF is complex and requires international consensus guidelines and a multidisciplinary approach. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Thompson: Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria. Levy:Abbive: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria. Tam:janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: 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. Quinquenel:janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Dupuis:ABBVIE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; janssen: Honoraria. Cymbalista:Roche: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 2149-2149
Author(s):  
Romil Patel ◽  
Neeraj Y Saini ◽  
Ankur Varma ◽  
Omar Hasan ◽  
Qaiser Bashir ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The role of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (auto-HCT) in the management of patients with Waldenström Macroglobulinemia (WM), a rare, indolent lymphoma, has not been established. We had previously published our experience with auto-HCT in a small cohort of WM patients1. Here, we present an updated analysis of auto-HCT with a larger cohort of WM patients. Methods and study population: The study cohort was comprised of 29 patients who underwent high-dose chemotherapy and auto-HCT at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to create survival curves. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the duration from date of transplant to death or last date of follow-up in living patients. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the duration from date of transplant to either progressive disease or death, whichever occurred first. Results: Median age at auto-HCT was 60 (range, 43-75 years). Eight patients (28%) had concurrent light chain amyloidosis (AL). Of the five patients who had MYD88 testing completed, 3 were positive for the MYD88 mutation. Additionally, of these 3 patients, 2 were also positive for CXCR4 mutation. Patients received a median of 2 lines (range 1-6) of therapy prior to auto-HCT; 3(10%) patients had primary refractory disease, 8(28%) were in first remission, and 18 (62%) had relapsed disease. Median time from transplant to last follow-up for the surviving patients was 5.3 years. Preparative regimens received by the patients were: Melphalan (n=20), BEAM-R (n=2), Busulfan/Melphalan (n=1), Cyclophosphomaide/Etoposide/total body irradiation (n=1), Thiotepa/Busulfan/Cyclophosphamide (n=1), and Carmustine/Thiotepa (n=1). Three patients further went on to receive allogeneic transplant either after relapse from auto-HCT or due to disease transformation to aggressive lymphoma. Twenty-eight patients achieved engraftment with a median time to neutrophil engraftment of 11 days (range, 10-15 days). One patient suffered primary graft failure due to progression of disease and died 84 days after transplant. Non-relapse mortality was 3.4% at 1 year. All patients were eligible for response evaluation. The median OS from diagnosis was 12.2 years. Overall response rate was 96%: complete response (n=8, 27.6%), very good partial response (n=5, 17.3%), partial response (n=15, 51.7%), and progressive disease (n=1, 3.4%). PFS and OS at 5 years were 43.3% and 62.9%, respectively. Median PFS and OS from auto-HCT were 4.1 and 7.3 years (Fig. 1A). The median OS from auto-HCT in first remission + primary refractory and relapsed disease was 8.2 years and 4.1 years, respectively.16 patients were alive at the time of censoring while 13 patients had died. Causes of death include relapsed disease (n=6), secondary malignancy (n=2), infection (n=1), chronic graft-versus-host disease (n=1), and unknown (n=3). 8 patients (28%) were positive for concurrent AL amyloidosis. The sites of amyloid involvement were kidneys (n=2), lungs (n=1), bone marrow (n=1), heart(n=1), lymph nodes(n=1), gastrointestinal tract (n=1) and subcutaneous fat aspirate(n=5). The median overall survival for patients with amyloid involvement (n=8) was 12 years. On univariate analyses, the number of chemotherapy regimens prior to transplant (≤ 2 vs >2 lines) was the strongest predictor of overall survival (p=0.03, HR 0.3, CI: 0.09-0.9, log-rank) and PFS (p=0.001, HR 0.24, CI: 0.07-0.85, log-rank). The median PFS in patients with ≤ 2 lines and > 2 lines of therapy was 71 months versus 19 months, respectively (Fig. 1B). Conclusion: Auto-HCT is safe and feasible in selected patients with WM, with a high response rate and durable remission even in patients with relapsed or refractory disease. References: Krina Patel et.al. Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia. Blood 2012 120:4533; Disclosures Thomas: Celgene: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb Inc.: Research Funding; Acerta Pharma: Research Funding; Array Pharma: Research Funding; Amgen Inc: Research Funding. Lee:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Chugai Biopharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Orlowski:Takeda: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Spectrum Pharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Kite Pharma: Consultancy; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy; BioTheryX: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy. Champlin:Otsuka: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Patel:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 12-14
Author(s):  
Alexander Coltoff ◽  
Joseph G. Jurcic ◽  
Peter Campbell ◽  
Daniel J. Lee ◽  
Mark L Heaney ◽  
...  

Introduction The combination of the BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax with an HMA (HMA/Ven) has improved outcomes in previously untreated patients with AML not eligible for intensive induction therapy. In a phase Ib study, 67% of patients achieved a complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete recovery of blood counts (CRi) with a median overall survival (OS) of 17.5 months (DiNardo CD et al. Blood 2019; 133(1):7-17). HMA/Ven has also demonstrated efficacy in a heavily pretreated population with relapsed or refractory (R/R) AML, the majority of whom had prior HMA exposure (DiNardo CD et al. Am J Hematol 2018; 93(3):401-7). Measurable residual disease (MRD) is recognized as an independent prognostic indicator important for risk stratification and treatment planning (Schuurhuis GJ et al. Blood 2018; 131(12):1275-91). To date, however, there have been few reports on the effect of HMA/Ven on MRD. Methods This is a retrospective case series of patients with AML at a single-center tertiary-care institution. Patients ≥ 18 years of age who were treated with HMA/Ven between January 2017 and June 2020, either in the upfront or salvage setting, for AML were included. Outcomes included CR/CRi rate, MRD response, relapse free survival (RFS), and OS. MRD was assessed via multicolor flow cytometry with a sensitivity of 10-3 (0.1%). Results Nineteen patients were identified, 12 (63%) of whom were female. The median age at the time of HMA/Ven initiation was 71 years (range, 21 - 87 years). Ten (53%) patients had de novo AML and 9 had secondary or therapy-related AML. By 2017 ELN criteria, 3 (16%) patients had favorable-risk, 9 (47%) had intermediate-risk, and 7 (37%) had adverse-risk AML. Nine (47%) patients had R/R AML; 5 received HMA/Ven as first salvage therapy, and 4 as 2nd or greater salvage. Three (16%) patients had prior HMA exposure. No patient had prior venetoclax exposure. Median follow-up was 9.1 months (range, 1-21.1 months). Ten (53%) patients received azacitidine and 9 (47%) were given decitabine. Venetoclax doses ranged from 50 to 400 mg daily, depending on participation in a clinical trial and concomitant medications. Eight patients achieved a CR and 7 patients achieved a CRi for a combined CR/CRi rate of 79%. The CR/CRi rate was 90% (9/10) in the upfront setting, and 66% (6/9) in the salvage setting. The median time and number of cycles to best clinical response was 2.3 months (range, 0.9-3.9 months) and 2 (range, 1-3 cycles), respectively. Eleven (73%) of the 15 responders achieved MRD clearance after a median of 2 cycles (range, 1-3 cycles) (Table 1). Two of 4 (50%) MRD-positive patients relapsed, while 4 (36%) of 11 MRD-negative patients relapsed (Figure 1). Relapse occurred at a median of 2.0 months (range, 1.3-2.7 months) in the MRD positive group and 11.0 months (range, 2.8-14 months) in the MRD negative group. One patient died of infectious complications while MRD negative. Three patients, all of whom were treated for R/R disease, proceeded to an allogeneic stem cell transplant (HSCT). Two were MRD negative at the time of HSCT and all remained in remission. At the time of data cutoff, 7 (64%) of 11 MRD-negative patients were alive, and all 4 MRD-positive patients were alive. Causes of death in the MRD-negative group included disease relapse (3 patients) and infection (1 patient). Median overall survival in the entire cohort (range, 32 days-NR) was not reached. Conclusions HMA/Ven was highly effective as both upfront and salvage therapy. Surprisingly, the salvage CR/CRi rate in this series was 66%, allowing half of the responders to proceed to HSCT. The majority (73%) of responders achieved MRD negativity. While MRD status influenced RFS, 36% of MRD-negative patients relapsed. Additionally, the same percentage of MRD-negative patients died during follow-up, versus none of the patients with MRD-positivity. This indicates the need for more sensitive methods to assess MRD and for novel therapeutic strategies to eliminate MRD, thereby improving long-term outcomes. Larger prospective studies are needed to define the role of MRD assessment with venetoclax-containing regimens. Disclosures Jurcic: AbbVie:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Celgene:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;Syros Pharmaceuticals:Research Funding;PTC Therapeutics:Research Funding;Arog Pharmaceuticals:Research Funding;Kura Oncology:Research Funding;Forma Therapeutics:Research Funding;Astellas:Research Funding;Genentech:Research Funding;Novartis:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Daiichi-Sankyo:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding;BMS:Consultancy, Research Funding.Campbell:AstraZeneca:Consultancy.Lee:Genentech:Research Funding;Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Oncology, Inc.:Research Funding;AbbVie:Research Funding;Novartis:Research Funding;Bayer:Research Funding;Celgene:Consultancy;Forty Seven:Research Funding.Heaney:Blueprint Medicines Corporation:Research Funding;BMS:Research Funding;CTI Biopharma:Consultancy, Research Funding;Deciphera:Research Funding;Incyte:Research Funding;Novartis:Consultancy, Research Funding;Sierra Oncology:Research Funding;AbbVie:Consultancy;Partner Therapeutics:Consultancy.Lamanna:Janssen:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Octapharma:Research Funding;Juno:Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Gilead:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Astra Zeneca:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Pharmacyclics:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Genentech:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Bei-Gene:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Abbvie:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Oncternal, Verastem, TG Therapeutics:Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;MingSight:Other: Institutional research grants, Research Funding;Loxo:Research Funding;Celgene:Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees;Columbia University Medical Center:Current Employment.


Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 278-278 ◽  
Author(s):  
Srdan Verstovsek ◽  
Ruben A. Mesa ◽  
Jason Gotlib ◽  
Richard S. Levy ◽  
Vikas Gupta ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 278 Background: Overactive JAK-STAT signaling as a result of gain-of-function mutations (eg, JAK2V617F) and/or high circulating levels of inflammatory cytokines is considered to play a key role in the pathogenesis of myeloproliferative neoplasms. Ruxolitinib, a selective oral inhibitor of JAK1 and JAK2, demonstrated a significant reduction in spleen volume (SV) and improvements in myelofibrosis (MF)-related symptoms in a double-blind placebo-controlled trial (COMFORT-I). The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of ruxolitinib across patient (pt) subgroups in COMFORT-I. Methods: Pts with MF were randomized to start placebo or ruxolitinib at a dose of 15 mg or 20 mg PO BID depending on baseline platelet count (100–200 ×109/L or >200 ×109/L, respectively). The dose was optimized for efficacy and safety during treatment. SV change was measured by MRI; MF symptoms were assessed using a daily diary (modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form [MFSAF] v2.0) over 1 wk prior to dosing and throughout the 24 wks of dosing. The percent changes from baseline to wk 24 in SV and MFSAF Total Symptom Score (TSS, a measure of combined scores for abdominal discomfort, pain under ribs on left side, early satiety, itching, night sweats, and bone/muscle pain) were compared for ruxolitinib and placebo pts across the following subgroups: MF disease subtype, age, International Prognosis Scoring System (IPSS) risk group, presence/absence of JAK2V617F mutation, baseline hemoglobin, baseline spleen size (palpable spleen length), and baseline TSS. Survival was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. Changes in SV and TSS Across Subgroups: 309 pts were randomized: 155 to ruxolitinib and 154 to placebo. Ruxolitinib demonstrated consistent benefit compared with placebo in both SV and TSS across all subgroups evaluated (Table). The impact of symptom severity on response was evaluated by baseline TSS quartiles (maximum score for TSS = 60). Ruxolitinib pts with baseline TSS of <8.5, 8.5-<16.5, 16.5-<25.5 and ≥25.5 had mean percent changes in SV of −28.0, −31.4, −31.7 and −34.8, respectively, vs +8.1 for all placebo pts combined. The mean percent change in TSS for these same subgroups was −40.5, −47.2, −48.1 and −48.2 vs +41.8 for all placebo pts combined. These data indicate that pts with modest to marked symptoms all benefit from ruxolitinib therapy in terms of both SV and TSS. Survival Analysis: 13 ruxolitinib and 24 placebo pts died during the study or during extended follow-up (median follow-up of 52 and 51 wks, respectively), representing a hazard ratio (95% CI) of 0.499 (0.254, 0.98) (p=0.0395). For ruxolitinib- and placebo-treated pts, respectively, the probability of survival (95% CI) >48 wks was 0.98 (0.92, 0.99) and 0.90 (0.81, 0.95) for pts with baseline hemoglobin values ≥10 g/dL and 0.84 (0.72, 0.91) and 0.77 (0.63, 0.86) for pts with baseline hemoglobin <10 g/dL. Conclusions: Pts receiving ruxolitinib had higher response rates than placebo based on reductions in SV and improvements in TSS at wk 24 regardless of baseline subgroup: MF disease subtype, age (≤65 or >65 y), IPSS risk group (intermediate-2 or high-risk), presence or absence of JAK2V617F mutation, hemoglobin level (≥10 g/dL or <10 g/dL), palpable spleen length (≤10 cm or >10 cm), and symptom severity (TSS quartile). In addition, the overall survival analysis suggested a benefit with ruxolitinib therapy over placebo. Disclosures: Verstovsek: Incyte: Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; SBio: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Gotlib:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Levy:Incyte: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gupta:Incyte: 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. Catalano:Incyte: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Deininger:BMS: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding. Miller:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Winton:Incyte: Consultancy. Arcasoy:Incyte: Research Funding. Lyons:Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria; Telik: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Vaddi:Incyte: Employment. Erickson-Viitanen:Incyte: Employment. Sun:Incyte: Employment. Sandor:Incyte: Employment. Kantarjian:Incyte: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.


Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2000-2000
Author(s):  
Hagop Kantarjian ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽  
Jeffrey Szer ◽  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Thrombocytopenia occurs in ~50% of patients with low/int-1 risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and is associated with reduced survival. In a placebo (PBO)-controlled study, 250 patients with MDS were randomized 2:1 to receive weekly romiplostim or PBO. In the original June 2011 analysis, romiplostim reduced clinically significant bleeding events [hazard ratio (HR) romiplostim vs PBO 0.83, 95% CI: 0.66−1.05, P = 0.13] and platelet transfusions (relative risk 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66−0.88, P<0.001) and increased IWG hematologic improvement platelets (HI-P) incidence (odds ratio 15.6, 95% CI: 4.7−51.8, P<0.001). Peripheral blast count increases >10% were more frequent with romiplostim (25/167, 15%) than PBO (3/83, 3.6%) and resolved after discontinuation in most cases. In February 2011, the DMC recommended that treatment with study drug be discontinued as the potential benefit seen in the reduction of bleeding did not outweigh the potential risk for disease progression to AML, and that transient increases in blast cell counts might put patients at risk for diagnosis of and treatment for AML. Patients were moved into long-term follow-up (LTFU). Previously reported (Giagounidis et al, Cancer 2014) 58-week incidence of AML was 6.0% (N = 10) for romiplostim and 4.9% for PBO (N = 4); HR 1.20 (95% CI: 0.38−3.84). This report provides final 5-year LTFU data. Methods: Eligible patients were receiving only supportive care and had IPSS low/int-1 risk MDS and platelets 1) ≤20 × 109/L or 2) ≤50 × 109/L with a history of bleeding. Disease progression to AML was defined as 1) ≥20% blasts in bone marrow or peripheral blood after 4 weeks following discontinuation of romiplostim; 2) pathology consistent with leukemia; or 3) antileukemic treatment. Results are presented by treatment group. Results: At baseline, median (Q1, Q3) age was 70 (61, 77) years, the majority (59%) of patients were male; 27.6% were IPSS low risk and 72.4% were int-1 risk. WHO classifications were RCMD: 67.6%, RAEB-1: 13.2%, MDS-U: 11.2%, RA: 4.4%, RCMD-RS: 2.4%, RARS: 0.8%, and RAEB-2: 0.4%. Of 250 patients in the study, 210 entered LTFU and 66 completed the 5 years of LTFU; median (Q1, Q3) follow-up was 27.5 (10.8, 58.7) months. Reasons for discontinuation (death, lost to follow-up, and consent withdrawal) during LTFU were similar in both groups. During the active study period and LTFU, death was reported in 93 (55.7%) patients in the romiplostim group and 45 (54.2%) patients in the PBO group (HR romiplostim vs PBO 1.03, 95% CI: 0.72−1.47) (Figure); mortality rates were greater in those with IPSS int-1 vs low risk for both groups (Table). AML was reported in 20 (11.9%) patients in the romiplostim group and 9 (11.0%) patients in the PBO group (HR 1.06, 95% CI: 0.48−2.33). The proportions of patients who either died or developed AML were 56.9% (N = 95) in the romiplostim group and 55.4% (N = 46) in the PBO group (HR for AML-free survival 1.04, 95% CI: 0.73−1.48) (Figure). Nearly half (N = 14, 48%) of the 29 AML cases occurred in patients who were RAEB-1 at screening (none RAEB-2), and 6 cases were diagnosed because of anti-AML treatment use alone (Table). In LTFU, patient-reported use of MDS therapy (eg, azacitidine or cyclosporine) was 42.8% (N = 59, 95% CI: 34.4%−51.5%) in the romiplostim group and 31.4% (N = 22, 95% CI: 20.9%−43.6%) in the PBO group. AML therapy (eg, chemotherapy) was used in 14 (10.2%) patients in the romiplostim group and 7 (10.0%) patients in the PBO group. Conclusions: Following the decision in 2011 to stop study drug secondary to increased AML rates at that time and transient blasts increases, final 5-year LTFU HRs (romiplostim vs placebo) for death or progression to AML, respectively, are 1.03 (95% CI: 0.72−1.47) and 1.06 (95% CI: 0.48−2.33). In conclusion, romiplostim reduced bleeding events and platelet transfusions, with no increase in AML incidence or impact on survival. Disclosures Kantarjian: Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Fenaux:Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Szer:Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion Australia: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen Inc.: 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; Shire: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Platzbecker:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; TEVA Pharmaceutical Industries: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kuendgen:Celgene: Research Funding. Gaidano:Morphosys: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: 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; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wiktor-Jedrzejczak:Angelini: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Sandoz: Consultancy; Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Carpenter:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mehta:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Franklin:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Giagounidis:Amgen Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3448-3448
Author(s):  
Robert Z. Orlowski ◽  
Arnon Nagler ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Joan Bladé ◽  
Roman Hajek ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Previous results of an open-label, randomized, controlled, multicenter phase III study (DOXIL-MMY-3001) demonstrated that bortezomib+pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) was superior to bortezomib monotherapy in treating subjects with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM) whose disease had failed one or more lines of prior therapy. The risk of developing disease progression was significantly reduced by 45% with bortezomib+PLD (median time to progression (TTP) with bortezomib+PLD: 9.3 months, bortezomib: 6.5 months; HR=1.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) [1.41, 2.35]; p=0.000004). In the interim analysis, the 15-month overall survival (OS) rate for bortezomib+PLD was 76% (95% CI [70%, 83%]) compared with 65% (95% CI [58%, 73%]) for bortezomib alone (p=0.03)(Orlowski et al JCO 25: 3892-3901, 2007). A protocol-defined analysis of the final survival data of this study is provided here. Methods Subjects with confirmed MM, ECOG status 0 to 1, platelets ≥75,000/mm3, hemoglobin ≥8.0 g/dL, absolute neutrophils ≥1,000/mm3, and creatinine clearance ≥30 mL/min were randomized to bortezomib (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2, intravenous, days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of an every 21-day cycle), or bortezomib+PLD (same bortezomib+PLD 30 mg/m2 intravenous on day 4). Randomization was stratified according to serum β2-microglobulin levels (≤2.5, >2.5 and ≤5.5, or >5.5 mg/L) and response to prior treatment (response followed by progression, or primary refractory). The primary endpoint was TTP; secondary efficacy endpoints included overall survival, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR]). Results A total of 646 subjects (bortezomib+PLD: 324; bortezomib: 322) were randomized between December 2004 and March 2006. In the pre-planned interim analysis, the study met its primary and other secondary end points. The study continued for long-term survival follow-up. At the clinical cutoff of 16 May, 2014, for the final survival analysis with a median follow-up of 103 months, 79% of subjects were dead (bortezomib+PLD: 253 [78%]; bortezomib: 257 [80%]), 6% withdrew consent, 4% were lost to follow-up, and 11% were still alive. Median OS in bortezomib+PLD–treated subjects was 33.0 months (95% CI [28.9, 37.1]) versus 30.8 months (95% CI [25.2, 36.5]) in bortezomib-treated subjects (HR=1.05, 95% CI [0.88, 1.25]; p=0.6068). The types of salvage therapies utilized included dexamethasone (49.1%), thalidomide (31.0%), cyclophosphamide (28.5%), melphalan (22.9%), lenalidomide (21.8%), bortezomib (20.4%) and doxorubicin (8.0%), which were well-balanced between the two treatment groups. Conclusion Despite inducing a superior TTP, long-term follow-up revealed that PLD+bortezomib-treatment did not improve the OS compared with bortezomib alone in subjects with relapsed or refractory MM. The inability to confirm the early survival advantage may be due to the effects of subsequent lines of therapy, and underscores the need for long-term follow-up of phase III trials. Disclosures Orlowski: Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Sonneveld:Orthobiotech;: Consultancy. Bladé:Celgene: Grant support, Grant support Other, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Grant support Other, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hajek:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spencer:Hospira: Research Funding. Robak:MorphoSys AG: Research Funding. Dmoszynska:Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development: Research Funding. Horvath:Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sutherland:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy. Xiu:Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership. Parekh:Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development: Employment, Equity Ownership. Miguel:Janssen Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria.


Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3011-3011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucia Masarova ◽  
Jorge E. Cortes ◽  
Keyur P. Patel ◽  
Susan M. O'Brien ◽  
Graciela M. Nogueras González ◽  
...  

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


Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1620-1620
Author(s):  
Katharine L Lewis ◽  
Kate Manos ◽  
John Casey ◽  
Julie Crawford ◽  
Shir-Jing Ho ◽  
...  

Background Primary and secondary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL/SCNSL) are rare brain malignancies with an aggressive clinical course and dismal outcomes. The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib has activity in a range of B-cell lymphomas. Phase I and II studies of ibrutinib monotherapy in relapsed/refractory PCNSL have demonstrated promising results, with response rates of up to 81%. Response rates of up to 69% have also been seen in SCNSL. Ibrutinib has been combined with other systemic agents (e.g. rituximab and methotrexate) in phase 1 trials with promising results (Grommes et al Blood 2019); combination with more intensive combination chemotherapy regimens also appears efficacious but has exhibited a potentially limiting toxicity profile, in particular invasive fungal infections. (Lionakis et al Cancer Cell 2017). However, data for ibrutinib in PCNSL and SCNSL outside the clinical trial setting are scarce. Methods We performed a national, multicentre, retrospective study of the clinical outcomes and safety of patients (pts) with PCNSL and SCNSL who received ibrutinib between December 2015 and June 2019. Results The baseline characteristics of the 16 eligible pts are summarised in the table (Figure 1a). 88% (n=14) had relapsed/refractory disease, with two patients receiving ibrutinib as a component of multiagent frontline therapy. The most common target daily dose was 560mg (range 420-840mg); this was reached in all pts. Among all pts, the objective response rate (ORR) was 69%, with a complete remission (CR) rate of 63%. Both patients receiving ibrutinib in combination frontline therapy achieved a CR. ORR in PCNSL pts was 50% (n=4) and SCNSL pts was 88% (n=7), (P=0.28). ORR was 80% (n=4) when ibrutinib was administered as monotherapy, 80% (n=4) when administered with chemotherapy and 75% (n=3) when administered concomitant with whole brain radiotherapy. MYD88L265P mutation at time of starting ibrutinib was only tested in two patients with PCNSL and none with SCNSL. The mutation was detected in both PCNSL cases, and both later attained a CR. With a median follow up of 14 months, calculated using median observation period among patients alive at last follow-up, median progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached. 12 month PFS was 56% for the entire cohort (95% confidence interval [CI] 29-76); 50% for PCNSL (95% CI 15-77) and 60% for SCNSL (95% CI 20-85%) (Figure 1b). 12 month OS was 66% for the entire cohort (95% CI 36-85) ; 50% for PCNSL (95% CI 15-77) and 80% for SCNSL (95% CI 20-97%) (Figure 1c). Ten pts had PFS >6 months (longest 41.3 months), and 11 pts (69%) remained alive, with 9/11 being free from disease progression. Seven pts remain on ibrutinib at time of data analysis, 3 with PCNSL and 4 with SCNSL. Nine pts (56%) have discontinued therapy; 6 due to progressive disease (PD), 1 due to atrial fibrillation with hypotension requiring inotropic support and 2 in remission, one of whom subsequently underwent autologous stem cell transplant. Dose interruptions or reductions were required in 6 pts (37%), due to bleeding (n=2), infection (n=3) and neutropenia (n=1). Grade 3/4 adverse events were infection (31%, n=5), neutropenia (25%, n=4), febrile neutropenia (12%, n=2) and one each (6%, n=1) of atrial fibrillation, thrombocytopenia, and anaemia. No invasive fungal infections were observed, despite use of 8-16mg daily dexamethasone immediately prior to or during ibrutinib therapy in 10 pts (62%). Conclusions In this small real-world, majority methotrexate-refractory population, ibrutinib demonstrates encouraging efficacy and durable responses despite doses lower than used in clinical trials. No unexpected adverse events were observed. Invasive fungal infections were not seen, despite most patients receiving concurrent dexamethasone and/or chemotherapy. We observed substantial variety in additional therapy during ibrutinib treatment, and the optimal way to use ibrutinib in this heterogenous patient group remains unclear. Disclosures Manos: NovoNordisk Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel; Janssen: Honoraria. Ho:Celgene: Consultancy, Other: Advisory role. Grigg:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Other: Travel. Gandhi:Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: 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; Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hawkes:Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Mundi pharma: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck KgA: Research Funding; Merck Sharpe & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche/Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel Expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cheah:Roche: Other: Travel expenses; Roche, Janssen, MSD, Gilead, Loxo Oncology, AstraZeneca, TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene, Roche, Abbvie: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib is not currently approved for use in DLBCL/CNS lymphoma.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 594-594 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Hagenbeek ◽  
John Radford ◽  
Achiel Van Hoof ◽  
Umberto Vitolo ◽  
Ama Z.S. Rohatiner ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 594 The FIT trial was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of 90Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan (0.4 mCi/kg; maximum dose 32 mCi) when used as consolidation of first complete or partial remission in patients with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL). Patients were randomly assigned to either 90Y-ibritumomab treatment (n = 207) or observation (n = 202) within 3 months (mo) of completing initial induction therapy (chemotherapy only: 86%; rituximab in combination with chemotherapy: 14%). Response status prior to randomization did not differ between the groups: 52% complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) to induction therapy and 48% partial response (PR) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 53% CR/CRu and 44% PR in the control arm. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results from the first extended follow-up after a median of 3.5 years revealed a significant improvement in PFS from the time of randomization with 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation compared with control (36.5 vs 13.3 mo, respectively; P < 0.0001; Morschhauser et al. JCO. 2008; 26:5156-5164). Here we report a median follow-up of 66.2 mo (5.5 years). Five-year PFS was 47% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 29% in the control group (hazard ratio (HR) = 0.51, 95% CI 0.39–0.65; P < 0.0001). Median PFS in the 90Y-ibritumomab group was 49 mo vs 14 mo in the control group. In patients achieving a CR/CRu after induction, 5-year PFS was 57% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group, and the median had not yet been reached at 92 months, compared with a 43% 5-year PFS in the control group and a median of 31 mo (HR = 0.61, 95% CI 0.42–0.89). For patients in PR after induction, the 5-year PFS was 38% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group with a median PFS of 30 mo vs 14% in the control group with a median PFS of 6 mo (HR = 0.38, 95% CI 0.27–0.53). Patients who had received rituximab as part of induction treatment had a 5-year PFS of 64% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 48% in the control group (HR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.30–1.47). For all patients, time to next treatment (as calculated from the date of randomization) differed significantly between both groups; median not reached at 99 mo in the 90Y-ibritumomab group vs 35 mo in the control group (P < 0.0001). The majority of patients received rituximab-containing regimens when treated after progression (63/82 [77%] in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 102/122 [84%] in the control group). Overall response rate to second-line treatment was 79% in the 90Y-ibritumomab group (57% CR/CRu and 22% PR) vs 78% in the control arm (59% CR/CRu, 19% PR). Five-year overall survival was not significantly different between the groups; 93% and 89% in the 90Y-ibritumomab and control groups, respectively (P = 0.561). To date, 40 patients have died; 18 in the 90Y-ibritumomab group and 22 in the control group. Secondary malignancies were diagnosed in 16 patients in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 9 patients in the control arm (P = 0.19). There were 6 (3%) cases of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS)/acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) in the 90Y-ibritumomab arm vs 1 MDS in the control arm (P = 0.063). In conclusion, this extended follow-up of the FIT trial confirms the benefit of 90Y-ibritumomab consolidation with a nearly 3 year advantage in median PFS. A significant 5-year PFS improvement was confirmed for patients with a CR/CRu or a PR after induction. Effective rescue treatment with rituximab-containing regimens may explain the observed no difference in overall survival between both patient groups who were – for the greater part – rituximab-naïve. Disclosures: Hagenbeek: Roche Global Advisory Board: Consultancy. Radford:Schering (May 2009): Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Vitolo:Roche Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Italy: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Soubeyran:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cephalon: Research Funding. Bischof Delaloye:Expert Statement (questions of reimbursement in Switzerland): Honoraria. Morschhauser:Roche: Honoraria, Paid expert testimony within the past 2 years; Bayer: Honoraria.


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 ◽  
...  

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.


Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3468-3468
Author(s):  
Cindy Varga ◽  
Jacob P. Laubach ◽  
Irene M. Ghobrial ◽  
Matthew Weinstock ◽  
Claudia E. Paba-Prada ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction: The introduction of proteasome inhibitors (PI) and immunomodulatory derivatives (IMIDs) has been associated with substantial improvement in overall survival of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). In the era of novel agents, there have also been concerns of an increased incidence of extramedullary disease (EMD), and of a hypothetical risk that combined use of PIs and IMIDs for frontline treatment might select more rapidly for aggressive clones that could precipitate EMD. It is difficult to determine the true frequency of treatment-emergent EMD, as incidence rates may be influenced by the impact of specific therapies, as well as confounded by changes in overall survival, and the increased use of sensitive imaging modalities. Objective: The primary objective of our study was to evaluate whether the addition of lenalidomide (Len) to bortezomib (Bort)-based front-line regimens precipitated the more rapid development of treatment-emergent EMD, either in the form of extraosseous or osseous extramedullary plasmacytomas. Potential risk factors for and the prognostic impact of EMD development were also examined. Patients-Methods: We performed an IRB-approved retrospective comprehensive medical chart review of 117 MM patients enrolled in 8 clinical trials of first-line treatment with Bort-based regimens with Len (Bort-Len-Dexamethasone [known as RVD], its combination with cyclophosphamide [Cy], vorinostat or liposomal doxorubicin) or without Len (specifically, Bort monotherapy; MPV; CyBorDex; MPV-CNT0328). In these 2 treatment groups, the development of EMD was assessed in the form of extraosseous (soft-tissue mass distant from bone) or osseous (mass originating from cortical bone) plasmacytomas. The primary endpoint was time from diagnosis until development of plasmacytoma (osseous; extraosseous; or any of the 2), based on radiologic imaging, biopsy and/or physical examination, with censoring at last disease follow-up date for patients who did not develop EMD. We compared the rates of EMD in these 2 patient cohorts through sensitivity analyses at truncated follow-up times of 5- and 7-years, to control for any potential confounding effects of shorter follow-up in patients receiving combined Bort-based therapy with vs. without Len. Results: The median follow-up time from diagnosis was 6.1 years (range 0.1-10.2 years) for the entire cohort; and 5.6 years (range 1.5-7.4) vs. 8.9 (range 0.1-10.2), respectively, for Bort-based treatment with vs. without Len. Treatment-emergent EMD was observed in the form of osseous (n=32, 27.4%), extraosseous (n=19, 16.2%) or any osseous or extraosseous plasmacytoma (n=40, 34.2%). Stage III ISS or low Hb (<12 g/dL) at diagnosis was associated with shorter time to development of extraosseous plasmacytomas (univariate analyses, p=0.02, for both parameters). After development of extraosseous plasmacytomas, the median OS was 0.9 years (range 0.1-4.8 years). In sensitivity analyses with follow-up times truncated at 5 years (rates of EMD and 95% CI summarized in Table 1) or 7 years (data not shown), the rates of any form of EMD showed no statistically significant difference between the 2 treatment groups (log-rank tests p>0.1 for all comparisons). Conclusion: Based on these results, there is no evidence to suggest that combination Bort- Len-based front-line therapy precipitates more rapid development of EMD. Conversely, the development of extra osseous plasmacytoma was associated with poor OS regardless of prior treatment. Further confirmation with extended follow-up, as well as studies of treatment effect, correlatives (incorporating both genotypic and phenotypic features), and the incidence as well as outcome of EMD are warranted. Table 1: Sensitivity analyses (follow-up times truncated at 5 years) Bort-Len based treatment (N=69 patients) Bort-based treatment without Len (N=48 patients) P-value (Log-rank tests) Hazard ratio Osseous Plasmacytoma (%, 95% CI) 0.5428 0.78(0.36,1.73) At 2 years 7 (3-7) 11 (5,25) At 4 years 17 (10,29) 25 (14,41) At 5 years 24 (15,38) 27 (16,44) Total cases 14 11 Extraosseous Plasmacytoma (%, 95% CI) 0.1691 0.51(0.19,1.36) At 2 years 4(1,13) 5(1,17) At 4 years 8(3,18) 15(7,30) At 6 years 12(6,25) 23(13,40) Total cases 7 9 Any Osseous or Extraosseous Plasmacytoma (%, 95% CI) 0.4236 0.76(0.38,1.50) At 2 years 10(5,20) 16(8,30) At 4 years 24(15,36) 29(17,45) At 6 years 30(20,44) 37(24,53) Total cases 18 15 Disclosures Laubach: Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Ghobrial:Millennium/Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mitsiades:Millennium Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen : Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document