Single-Agent Rituximab as First-Line and Maintenance Treatment for Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma: A Phase II Trial of the Minnie Pearl Cancer Research Network

2003 ◽  
Vol 21 (9) ◽  
pp. 1746-1751 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Hainsworth ◽  
Sharlene Litchy ◽  
John H. Barton ◽  
Gerry Ann Houston ◽  
Robert C. Hermann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Impact

Purpose: To assess the efficacy and toxicity of first-line single-agent rituximab, followed by re-treatment with rituximab at 6-month intervals, in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Patients and Methods: Forty-four previously untreated patients with CLL/SLL received rituximab 375 mg/m2 weekly for 4 consecutive weeks. All patients were required to have one or more indications for treatment. Patients with objective response or stable disease continued to receive identical 4-week rituximab courses at 6-month intervals, for a total of four courses. Results: The objective response rate after the first course of rituximab was 51% (4% complete responses). Twenty-eight patients received one or more additional courses of rituximab. At present, the overall response rate is 58%, with 9% complete responses. After a median follow-up of 20 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) time was 18.6 months, and the 1- and 2-year PFS rates were 62% and 49%, respectively. Treatment was well tolerated, with only two episodes of grade 3 to 4 infusion-related toxicity. No cumulative toxicity or opportunistic infections occurred. Conclusion: Single-agent rituximab, used at a standard dose and schedule, is active in the first-line treatment of patients with CLL/SLL, producing substantially higher response rates than previously reported in relapsed or refractory patients (51% v 13%, respectively). Re-treatment with rituximab at 6-month intervals is well tolerated. The PFS time of 18.6 months in patients with CLL/SLL seems shorter than the 36- to 40-month median PFSs previously reported with first-line plus maintenance rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma. Additional follow-up is required to fully assess the impact of this treatment strategy.

scholarly journals Role of Ibrutinib Based Regimen in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 5563-5563
Author(s):  
Muhammad Sardar ◽  
Saad Ullah Malik ◽  
Ali Younas Khan ◽  
Chaudhry Saad Sohail ◽  
Malik Qistas Ahmad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Combination Regimen ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Phase 2 Trial

Abstract Background: Treatment of Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) depends on stage of disease, age, functional status, comorbidities and presence of cytogenetic abnormalities such as (del17p mutation). Ibrutinib was initially approved in CLL given its better response in del17p patients as compared to the standard chemo immunotherapy. Since initial approval, Ibrutinib has also been evaluated in del17p negative CLL patients. Aim of our study is to discuss the efficacy of ibrutinib based regimen in CLL. Methods: Seven databases (Pub Med/Medline, Elsevier/Embase, Elsevier/Scopus, Wiley/Cochrane Library, and Thomas Reuters/Web of Science, EBSCO/CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov.) were searched in accordance with PRISMA statement guidelines using the following keywords: chronic lymphocytic leukemia, CLL, Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor, BTK inhibitor, ibrutinib, and PCI32765. Inclusion criteria included prospective clinical trials using Ibrutinib in CLL patients with outcome data available. We excluded systematic reviews, met analysis, case reports and case series. Aim of our review was to evaluate overall response rate (ORR), complete response rate (CR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: Treatment naïve (TN)patientIn the extended 5-year median follow up of a phase 1/2b trial (n=31), the ORR with single agent Ibr was 87% (CR-29%). The 5-year PFS and OS was 92%. In phase 3 trial by Burger et al (2015), ORR with Ibr was 92% (CR18%) in 136 patients. 2-year PFS and OS was 89% and 95% respectively. Del17p patients were excluded. Recent phase 2 trial by Jain et al (2017), combination of ibr with fludarabine (flu), cyclophosphamide (cyclo) and obinutuzumab (G) achieved ORR of 100% (CR 46%) in 32 del17p negative patients. In the phase 2 trial by Davids et al (2017) in 49 patients (< 65 years) the ORR was 100% (CR 63%). Phase 1b/2 trial by Migouel, ORR was 96% (CR 52%) with a combination regimen of Ibr + G + venetoclax. Relapsed/refractory (R/R) patient :In a phase 3 trial by Byrd et al (2014), in 195 patients (median age: 67; del17p: 32%; median prior therapies: 3) the ORR was 63%(CR-O). Median follow up was 9.4 months with 6-month PFS of 88% and 12 months OS of 90%. Phase 2 trial by Burger et al (2014), the ORR was 95% (CR 8%) in 40 patients (median age:63%; del17p:50%; median prior therapies:2). The 18-month PFS and OS was 78% and 84% respectively. In the phase 3 trial by Chanan et al (2016), in 289 (median age 64) del17p negative patients with 2 median prior therapies treated with combination of Ibr + bendamustine + R, the ORR was 83% (CR 10%). The 18-month PFS was 79%. In the phase 3 trial by Sharman et al (2017), in the Ibr + ublituximab arm (n=64) the ORR was 78% (CR 7%) which was higher than in Ibr arm (n= 62) i.e 45% (CR 0). Median age was 67 and each arm received 3 median prior therapies. Del17p was positive in 64% and 66% respectively. Del17p patients: In the phase 2 trial of by Susan et al (2017), in 145 del17p positive patients (median age: 64) treated with Ibr, the ORR was 64% (CR 0). The median prior number of therapies was 2. Patients were followed for a median of 11.5 months and the 2-year PFS and OS was 63% and 75% respectively. Farooqui et al (2014) evaluated Ibr in del17p patients. In 35 TN patients the ORR was 97% (CR -0) with a 2 year PFS and OS of 82% and 84% respectively. In 16 R/R patients, ORR was 80% (CR 0) and the 2 year PFS and OS were 82% and 74% respectively. Median age was 62 Conclusion: Ibrutinib is the treatment of choice for patients with del17p mutation and has good efficacy in RR/TN patients without del17p mutation. Ibrutinib is being evaluated in combination with rituximab for del17p mutations. Future prospects include combination of Ibrutinib with frontline chemotherapy and other novel agents for TN and RR del17p negative patients. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Phase 1/2 study of cirmtuzumab and ibrutinib in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7556-7556
Author(s):  
Hun Ju Lee ◽  
Michael Y. Choi ◽  
Tanya Siddiqi ◽  
Jacqueline Claudia Barrientos ◽  
William G. Wierda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Synergistic Activity ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Car T ◽  
Treatment Naïve

7556 Background: Cirmtuzumab (Cirm) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits the tumor promoting activity of ROR1 and had demonstrated additive/synergistic activity with many anti-cancer agents including ibrutinib (Ibr). Methods: Patients (Pts) with relapsed or refractory (RR) MCL or treatment naïve (TN) or RR CLL were enrolled. In Part 1 (Dose Escalation), doses of Cirm IV q2wks x5 then q4wks of 2-16 mg/kg and 300 or 600 mg were examined. Safety of Cirm alone was assessed during the first 28 days, then Ibr was started at approved doses for each indication. Cirm 600 mg IV q2wks x3 then q4wks in combination with Ibr starting day 0 was chosen as the recommended dosing regimen for use in Part 2 (Expansion) and Part 3 (CLL only, Cirm/Ibr vs. Ibr alone). Results: Twelve evaluable MCL pts were enrolled into Part 1, and 5 into Part 2. Median number of prior regimens was 2 (1-5), including pts relapsing after Ibr (4), auto-SCT (3), auto-SCT/ allo-SCT (1), auto-SCT/CAR-T (1). In CLL, 34 evaluable pts (12 TN and 22 RR) enrolled into Part 1 (18) or Part 2 (16). At least 74% of CLL pts in Parts 1 and 2 were high risk as determined by unmutated IGHV, del17p, and/or del11q. In Part 3, 22 evaluable pts received Cirm/Ibr (15) or Ibr (7). As of the 30OCT2020 safety cut-off for MCL and CLL, common TEAEs (all grades) included diarrhea (41%), contusion (39%), fatigue (39%), URI (31%), hypertension (25%) arthralgia (23%). Grade ≥3 neutropenia was 13% and thrombocytopenia 1%. There were no Cirm dose reductions or discontinuations for toxicity. Overall, Cirm did not appear to negatively impact the safety of Ibr. Efficacy (MCL): As of the 02FEB2021 efficacy cutoff, the best response of 17 evaluable pts in Parts 1 and 2 included an objective response rate (ORR) of 82%, 41% CR/CMR, 41% PR, 12% SD, and 6% PD. CR/CMR remain durable from 8-28+ mos. Most responses occurred rapidly after ̃3 mos of Cirm/Ibr. Notably, responses were achieved in all pts who received prior SCT+/- CAR-T (4CR, 1PR) or prior Ibr (2CR, 2PR). At a median follow-up of 14.6 mos, the median PFS (mPFS) had not been reached (NR) (95% CI: 17.5, NA). Efficacy (CLL): The best response of 34 evaluable pts in Parts 1 and 2 included 91% ORR, 3% CR, 88% PR/PR-L, 9% SD, 0% PD. In Part 3, both arms achieved 100% ORR (all PRs). At a median follow-up of 20.2 mos, the mPFS was NR (95% CI: NA, NA), and the PFS estimate at 24 months was 95% for R/R, and 87% for TN, respectively, for evaluable CLL pts receiving Cirm/Ibr. Conclusions: Cirm/Ibr is a well-tolerated, active regimen in both MCL and CLL. For MCL, the mPFS of NR (95% CI: 17.5, NA) and CRR (41%), with all CRs remaining without PD, compare favorably to mPFS of 12.8 mos (95% CI 8.5-16.6) and CRR (20%) reported for single agent Ibr (Rule 2017). For CLL, the high ORR and PFS are encouraging, particularly for RR CLL. The study is ongoing, with MCL enrollment expanded to study Cirm + Ibr in pts who have had a suboptimal response to an Ibr regimen, or who have failed other approved BTKi agents. Clinical trial information: NCT03088878.

Tailored immunotherapy approach with nivolumab in advanced transitional cell carcinoma (TITAN-TCC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 446-446
Author(s):  
Marc-Oliver Grimm ◽  
Bernd Schmitz-Dräger ◽  
Uwe Zimmermann ◽  
Barbara Grün ◽  
Gustavo Bruno Baretton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Checkpoint ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Transitional Cell ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Third Line

446 Background: Several PD-1 immune-checkpoint inhibitors including Nivolumab (Nivo) are approved in urothelial cancer. Recently, in the front line setting, improved activity of combined PD-L1 and CTLA4 immune-checkpoint inhibition has been reported and a phase III trial with Nivolumab + Ipilimumab (Nivo+Ipi) is ongoing. Here we report a response-based tailored approach starting treatment with Nivo monotherapy using Nivo+Ipi as immunotherapeutic “boost”. Methods: Between July 2017 and April 2019 86 patients were enrolled and treated according to protocol version 3 (cohort 1). Patients started with Nivo 240 mg Q2W induction. After 4 dosings and tumor assessment at week 8 (i) responders (PR/CR) to Nivo monotherapy continued with maintenance while (ii) patients with stable (SD) or progressive disease (PD) received 2 cycles Nivo3+Ipi1 followed by another 2 cycles Nivo1+Ipi3 if not responding. Median follow-up is 8.7 months. The primary endpoint is confirmed investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST1.1. Secondary endpoints include activity of Nivo monotherapy at week 8, remission rate with Nivo+Ipi “boosts”, safety, overall survival and quality of life. Results: Of the patients 42, 39 and 5 were first, second and third line, respectively. Median age was 67 years (range 45-84), 61 patients (71 %) were male and 25 female. ORR with Nivo monotherapy at first assessment (week 8) was 29 % and 23 % in first and second/third line, respectively. Of the patients 41 received Nivo+Ipi “boosts” after week 8 while 12 received later “boosts”. Best overall response (BOR) rate with Nivo induction ± Nivo+Ipi “boosts” was 48 % and 27 % in first and second/third line, respectively. In first line 7/17 (41 %) patients receiving Nivo+Ipi after week 8 had an improved response compared to 2/24 (8.3 %) in second/third line. Of the patients who continued with Nivo maintenance after week 8 and received later “boosts” 2/12 (17 %) had a PR and 2/12 (17 %) improved to SD. Treatment-related AEs will be presented. Conclusions: TITAN–TCC explores a response-driven use of Nivo+Ipi as an immunotherapeutic “boost”. In first line, this significantly improved ORR compared to the expected response rate of Nivo monotherapy, providing further evidence to the added value of Ipi in combination with Nivo. Further follow-up is ongoing to characterize duration and depth of response. Clinical trial information: NCT03219775 . Research Sponsor: Bristol-Myers Squibb[Table: see text]

scholarly journals First-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia with ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab: final analysis of the randomized, phase 3 iLLUMINATE trial

Haematologica ◽  
2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Moreno ◽  
Richard Greil ◽  
Fatih Demirkan ◽  
Alessandra Tedeschi ◽  
Bertrand Anz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Open Label Phase

iLLUMINATE is a randomized, open-label phase 3 study of ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (n=113) versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (n=116) as first-line therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma. Eligible patients were aged ≥65 years, or

scholarly journals Lenalidomide and Rituximab Maintenance Therapy after Front-Line Induction Chemoimmunotherapy in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 5470-5470
Author(s):  
Julie E Chang ◽  
Vaishalee P. Kenkre ◽  
Christopher D. Fletcher ◽  
Aric C. Hall ◽  
Natalie Scott Callander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Second Malignancies ◽  
Front Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
11Q Deletion ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

Introduction: Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is incurable with standard therapy. With first-line chemotherapy, some patients (pts) may achieve durable remissions of many months/years. Lenalidomide (LEN) has improved progression-free survival (PFS) when given as maintenance (MNT) therapy after front-line chemotherapy (CALGB10404, CLLM1). The combination of LEN + rituximab (LR) has activity in relapsed CLL, hypothesizing benefit as MNT therapy after first-line chemotherapy. Methods: Adult pts ≥18 years with previously untreated CLL received induction bendamustine (B) 90 mg/m2 IV days 1 & 2 and rituximab (R) IV day 1 (375 mg/m2 cycle 1, then 500 mg/m2 cycles 2-6) for 6 treatment cycles (as few as 4 cycles allowed). MNT therapy with LR was initiated within 12 weeks after cycle 6, day 1 of BR. Criteria to start LR MNT included: neutrophils ≥1000/microliter (uL), platelets ≥75 K/uL, and creatinine clearance ≥40 mL/min. LEN was administered in 28-day cycles for 24 cycles, initially 5-10 mg daily continuous dosing, later modified to 5-10 mg on days 1-21 of each 28-day cycle in 6/2018 due to neutropenia and second malignancy risk. LEN was reduced to 5 mg every other day for toxicities at 5 mg/day. R 375 mg/m2 IV was given every odd cycle (total of 12 doses). Patients discontinuing LEN for any reason were allowed to continue R MNT per protocol. The primary endpoint is PFS with LR MNT therapy, calculated from the first day of MNT therapy until progressive disease (PD), death, or start of a new therapy. Secondary endpoints are response rate and overall survival. Results: Thirty-four pts have enrolled beginning 11/2013, with follow-up through 6/2019. Median age is 64 years, with 8 pts ≥70 years; 8 women and 26 men. CLL FISH panel is available on all pts: 14 with 13q (as sole abnormality), 9 with 11q deletion, 6 with trisomy 12, 4 with normal FISH panel and 1 with 17p deletion. Heavy chain mutation analysis is available on 11 pts: 8 unmutated, 2 mutated, 1 indeterminate. Thirty-one pts completed 4 (n=2) or 6 cycles of induction BR; 3 pts are receiving induction BR. Twenty-four pts have received MNT LR; 7 did not receive LR for reasons of PD during induction (n=2), infection (n=1), pt preference (n=2), renal insufficiency (n=1), and new carcinoma (n=1). MNT LR was completed in 7 pts; 9 pts are still receiving LR. Fourteen subjects have discontinued protocol therapy, 3 during induction due to PD (n=2) and infection (n=1), and 8 during MNT. Toxicities that led to discontinuation of LR were recurrent infections in 7 pts, including 2 events of PJP pneumonia; 4 pts had recurrent neutropenia with infections; 1 pt had neutropenia without infections. Response is assessable in 31 patients using the International Working Group Consensus Criteria. Best responses to treatment were: partial response 65% (22/34), complete response (CR)/unconfirmed CR 24% (8/34). The median number of MNT cycles received is 16. The dose intensity of LEN across total cycles received (n=278): 5 mg every other day (52.5%), 5 mg/day (43.9%), and 10 mg/day (3.6%). The most common reason for dose reduction or dose holding was neutropenia. Most common Gr 3/4 toxicities (reported as events Gr3/Gr4) during MNT therapy were: neutropenia (20/20), leukopenia (19/4), febrile neutropenia (3/1), and infections (11/-). The majority of Gr3 infections were pneumonia/respiratory (n=5). One event of disseminated herpes zoster occurred. Second malignancies during MNT included: basal cell CA (n=1), squamous cell carcinoma (n=5), and colon cancer (n=1). No unexpected second malignancies were observed in pts receiving LR. Two-year PFS (defined from day 1 of MNT therapy) is 90% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1), and the median follow-up for 24 patient who started maintenance therapy is 1.79 years (95% CI 1.53-2.7). There have been no deaths. Conclusion: The combination of LR is effective in sustaining remissions after a BR induction in previously untreated CLL, but with frequent neutropenia and infections even at low doses of LEN. Most patients discontinuing MNT did so due to neutropenia and/or infections. A shorter planned interval of MNT LR (i.e., 6-12 months) may confer similar benefit to extended dosing that is more tolerable. Pts at high risk for short remissions after front-line chemotherapy (e.g., unmutated heavy chain status, 11q deletion and/or failure to achieve minimal residual disease after induction) may be the populations for which LR MNT therapy is most appropriate. Disclosures Chang: Genentech: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Lenalidomide administered as maintenance therapy for first treatment of CLL/SLL.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document