CALGB 50401:  A randomized trial of lenalidomide alone versus lenalidomide plus rituximab in patients with recurrent follicular lymphoma.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8000-8000 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Leonard ◽  
Sin-Ho Jung ◽  
Jeffrey L. Johnson ◽  
Nancy Bartlett ◽  
Kristie A. Blum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Combination Strategies ◽  
Thrombosis Risk ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
L 14

8000 Background: Lenalidomide (L) and rituximab (R) are active as single agents in follicular (FL) and other B-cell lymphomas, although combination strategies have not been previously assessed in a randomized fashion. Methods: CALGB 50401 is a randomized phase II study, initially designed to evaluate 3 regimens: R alone (375 mg/m2 weekly x 4), L alone (15 mg cycle 1, then escalated to 20 mg cycles 2-12, administered days 1-21 q 28 days x 12 cycles) or the combination of L+ R (other 2 arms combined). The R alone arm was discontinued due to slow accrual with 3 enrolled subjects. Eligibility included recurrent FL, prior therapy with rituximab alone or in combination, and TTP of ≥ 6 months from last rituximab dose. Prophylactic ASA or LMW heparin was recommended for patients at high risk for thrombosis. Results: Of 94 pts registered to L or LR, 89 (45 L and 44 LR) received at least one dose and had adequate data for analysis. Baseline characteristics include median age 63 (range 34-85) and 60% with intermediate- or high-risk FLIPI. Grade 3-4 adverse events (AE) were most commonly neutropenia (16% L,19% LR), fatigue (9% L, 14% LR) and thrombosis (16% - 7 pts L, 4% - 2 pts LR, p=0.158), and overall were seen in 49% (L) and 52% (LR) with 9% grade 4 in each arm. The full regimen was completed in 33% (L) and 59% (LR) of patients, with the difference due to more progressions or non-responders in the L group. In both arms about 19% of subjects discontinued therapy early due to AEs and dose intensity was over 80%. Objective response rates are L - 49% (13% CR) and LR - 75% (32% CR). With a median follow-up of 1.5 years (range 0.1- 3.6 years), median EFS is 1.2 years (L) and 2.0 years (LR), p=0.0063, log-rank test. Conclusions: Lenalidomide + rituximab is more active than lenalidomide alone in patients with recurrent FL with similar toxicity. A trend toward lower thrombosis risk with LR may relate to greater anti-tumor efficacy. The LR regimen warrants further study in FL including as a backbone for addition of novel agents in relapsed and frontline settings.

Treatment of patients with advanced colorectal carcinomas with fluorouracil alone, high-dose leucovorin plus fluorouracil, or sequential methotrexate, fluorouracil, and leucovorin: a randomized trial of the Northern California Oncology Group.

1989 ◽  
Vol 7 (10) ◽  
pp. 1427-1436 ◽  
Author(s):  
F H Valone ◽  
M A Friedman ◽  
P S Wittlinger ◽  
T Drakes ◽  
P D Eisenberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Time To Failure ◽  
Colorectal Carcinomas ◽  
Log Rank Test ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Sequential Methotrexate

We compared the effectiveness of fluorouracil (5-FU) alone (arm A), high-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU (arm B), and sequential methotrexate, 5-FU, and leucovorin (arm C) for treatment of patients with advanced colorectal carcinomas who had not received prior chemotherapy. Arm A consisted of infusions of 5-FU at 12 mg/kg/d intravenously (IV) for 5 days followed by weekly infusions of 5-FU at 15 mg/kg; arm B consisted of leucovorin infusions at 200 mg/m2/d IV plus infusions of 5-FU at 400 mg/m2/d IV on days 1 through 5 of a 28-day cycle; arm C consisted of methotrexate at 50 mg/m2 orally every 6 hours for five doses followed by infusions of 5-FU, 500 mg/m2 IV, and leucovorin, 10 mg/m2 orally, every 6 hours for five doses every other week. A total of 265 patients were entered into the trial, of whom 249 (94%) were fully evaluable. The objective response rate (complete [CR] plus partial [PR] responses) was 17.3% on arm A, 18.8% on arm B, and 19.8% on arm C (log-rank test, P greater than .4). The median time to failure was 138 days on arm A, 166 days on arm B, and 182 days on arm C (log-rank test, P values of arm A v B = .06; arm A v arm C = .04). Median survival was 345 days on arm A, 324 days on arm B, and 356 days on arm C (log-rank test, P greater than .4). Treatment with 5-FU alone was significantly more dose intensive and more toxic than either of the experimental combinations. The rates of grade 3 or greater nonhematologic toxicity were 42.3% on arm A, 24.3% on arm B, and 14.3% on arm C. Hematologic toxicity was milder but had the same pattern. This study indicates that these regimens of high-dose leucovorin plus 5-FU and sequential methotrexate, 5-FU, and leucovorin are not more effective than is 5-FU alone for treatment of patients with colorectal carcinomas when 5-FU is administered at high-dose intensity.

scholarly journals ACTR-32. NRG ONCOLOGY RTOG 1205: RANDOMIZED PHASE II TRIAL OF CONCURRENT BEVACIZUMAB AND RE-IRRADIATION VS. BEVACIZUMAB ALONE AS TREATMENT FOR RECURRENT GLIOBLASTOMA

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi20-vi20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Tsien ◽  
Stephanie Pugh ◽  
adam Dicker ◽  
Jeffrey Raizer ◽  
Martha Matuszak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Recurrent Glioblastoma ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Log Rank Test ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Recurrent Gbm

Abstract This study sought to determine whether re-irradiation (ReRT) and concurrent bevacizumab (BEV) improves overall survival (OS) compared to BEV alone in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). Patients (pts) were randomized 1:1 to ReRT (35 Gy/10 fractions) plus BEV (IV 10 mg/kg q2 wks) vs. BEV alone. With 160 pts, there was 80% power to detect a 31% reduction in death hazard for BEV+RT at a one-sided significance level of 0.10 using a log rank test. OS and PFS were estimated by Kaplan-Meier and HRs estimated by exact binomial distribution. Objective response was assessed using MacDonald and RANO criteria. From 11/2012 to 4/2016, 182 pts were randomized, with 170 eligible, analyzable pts. 11 pts did not receive protocol treatment. Patient characteristics (age, KPS, re-resection rates) were balanced between arms. Median f/u for censored pts was 12.8 months (mos; min-max, 0.03–52.8). BEV+ReRT did not improve OS vs BEV alone, with median OS of 10.1 vs 9.7 mos, (HR=0.98, 95% CI=0.70–1.38, p=0.46). Median PFS for BEV+RT and BEV was 7.1 vs. 3.8 mos, respectively (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.53–1.0, p=0.051). BEV+ReRT improved 6-mo PFS rate (PFS6): 54 vs. 29%, (HR=0.42, 95% CI=0.34–0.5, p=0.001). Overall, treatment was well tolerated: 5% acute and 0% delayed grade 3+ treatment-related AE. Most patients died from recurrent GBM. CONCLUSION: RTOG 1205 is the first, prospective, randomized multi-institutional study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ReRT in recurrent GBM using modern RT techniques. Overall, ReRT was shown to be safe and well tolerated. BEV+ReRT did not demonstrate a benefit in OS but an improved PFS6, and clinically meaningful PFS improvement. Molecular correlates of response analyses are ongoing. Funded by U10CA180868, U10CA180822 from the National Cancer Institute.

Phase II Study of Pemetrexed Plus Carboplatin in Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (9) ◽  
pp. 1443-1448 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni L. Ceresoli ◽  
Paolo A. Zucali ◽  
Adolfo G. Favaretto ◽  
Francesco Grossi ◽  
Paolo Bidoli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Pleural Mesothelioma ◽  
Standard Regimen ◽  
Time Curve ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose This multicenter, phase II clinical study was conducted to evaluate the activity of the combination of pemetrexed and carboplatin in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). Patients and Methods Chemotherapy-naive patients with measurable disease and adequate organ function, who were not eligible for curative surgery, received pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 and carboplatin area under the plasma concentration-time curve of 5 mg/mL/min, administered intravenously every 21 days. All patients received folic acid and vitamin B12 supplementation. Pemetrexed was provided within the Expanded Access Program. Results A total of 102 patients were enrolled. An objective response was achieved in 19 patients (two complete and 17 partial responses), for a response rate of 18.6% (95% CI, 11.6% to 27.5%). Forty-eight patients (47.0%; 95% CI, 37.1% to 57.2%) had stable disease after treatment. Overall, 67 patients (65.7%) achieved disease control (95% CI, 55.6% to 74.8%). Median time to progression was 6.5 months; median overall survival time was 12.7 months. Compliance to treatment was excellent, with a relative dose-intensity of 97% for pemetrexed and 98% for carboplatin. Toxicity was mild, with grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurring in 9.7% of total cycles and grade 3 or 4 anemia occurring in 3.5% of total cycles. Nonhematologic toxicity was negligible. Conclusion Treatment with pemetrexed and carboplatin was active and well tolerated in patients with MPM. Disease control rate, time to disease progression, and overall survival were similar to the results achieved with the standard regimen of pemetrexed and cisplatin, suggesting that the carboplatin combination could be an alternative option for these patients.

Low Dose Decitabine Versus Best Supportive Care in Elderly Patients with Intermediate or High Risk MDS Not Eligible for Intensive Chemotherapy: Final Results of the Randomized Phase III Study (06011) of the EORTC Leukemia and German MDS Study Groups

Blood ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 112 (11) ◽  
pp. 226-226 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pierre WijerMans ◽  
Stefan Suciu ◽  
Liliana Baila ◽  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
Aristoteles Giagounidis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Risk ◽  
Supportive Care ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Introduction: In 2002 the EORTC and the German MDS Study Group initiated a randomized phase III study comparing low dose Decitabine to supportive care in patients (pts) of 60 years or older with primary or secondary MDS or CMML. MDS patients with either 11–20% BM blasts or ≤ 10% blasts and poor cytogenetics could be included. Pts with a BM blast count between 21–30% without signs of disease progression for at least one month were also candidates for the study. Methods: Patients were centrally randomized; stratification factors were cytogenetics risk group, IPSS, MDS (primary vs secondary) and study centre, The treatment schedule was 15 mg/m2 Decitabine i.v. over 4 hours every 8 hours for the first 3 three consecutive days, of every 6 week-cycle, for a maximum of 8 cycles. Results were evaluated every 2nd cycle. When a complete remission was reached at least another 2 courses were given. The primary endpoint of the study was Overall Survival. AML free survival, Progression Free Survival (PFS), response rate, toxicity and QoL were secondary endpoints. A total of 185 deaths were required to detect a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.66 (alpha=5%, beta=20%). Intent-to-treat analysis was used. Results: Between 10.2002 and 5.2007 a total of 233 pts (149 male and 84 female) were recruited from 40 centres. The median age was 70 (60–90 years); RAEB-t was diagnosed in 32% of the pts. Most pts had an IPSS Intermediate-2 (55%) or high risk (38%). Poor risk cytogenetics was found in 46% of the patients. Prior therapy for MDS (not being intensive chemotherapy) was given in 20% of pts. The randomized groups were well balanced regarding stratification factors, age and FAB classification. The median follow up was 2.5 years. Time to Off Study was 180 (Decitabine) vs 112 days (SC arm). The median number of cycles given to the patients was 4 with 40%getting no more than 2 cycles. In a significant number of pts, subsequent treatment, consisting of transplant (10%) or induction chemotherapy (11%), was given. The distribution of best response in Decitabine vs SC arm was CR (13% vs 0%), PR (6% vs 0%), HI (15% vs 2%), SD (14% vs 22%), PD (29% vs 68%), hypoplasia (14% vs 0%), inevaluable (8% vs 8%). The 18 pts on Decitabine with a HI showed the following responses: 3-lineage (n=7), 2-lineage (n=5) and 1-lineage (n=6). The median time to response (CR/PR/HI) was 0.32 yrs and the response duration was 0.72 years. Median OS was 0.84 (Decitabine) vs 0.71 years (SC arm), estimated HR was 0.88, 95% CI 0.66–1.17, p=0.38 (logrank 2-sided). The PFS was significantly (p=0.004) longer in Decitabine vs SC arm: median was 0.55 vs 0.25 years, HR=0.68 (95% CI 0.52–0.88). Time to AML or Death was not significantly improved (p=0.24): median was 0.73 vs 0.51 years (HR=0.85, 95% CI 0.64–1.12). Toxicity. The toxicity was mainly cytopenia related toxicity that was either disease related or hematotoxicity; CTC grade 3–4 febrile neutropenia was 26% (Decitabine) vs 7% (SC arm) and Grade 3–4 infection was 59% vs 47%. Differences in non hematologic toxicities were mainly gastrointestinal: grade 1–2 nausea (28% vs 16%) and grade 1–2 vomiting (16% vs 9%). During the study period, 29 (Decitabine) vs 25 (SC arm) patients died: due to either progression to MDS/AML (7 vs 20), toxicity (9 vs 0), progression and/or toxicity (10 vs 1), other reasons (3 vs 4). Conclusions. Decitabine was found to be an effective drug in these high risk MDS patients with a overall RR of 34%, (similar to earlier studies), leading to a significant PFS improvement as compared to SC arm. The difference Decitabine vs SC arm regarding time to AML or Death was not significant. Due to shorter treatment duration (not being continued beyond 8 cycles) and maybe also due to subsequent treatments administered after disease progression, the difference regarding OS was lower (HR=0.88) and not statistically significant.

Phase I-II Trial of Oral Cyclophosphamide, Prednisone and Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) (CPR) for the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 3055-3055
Author(s):  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
Esther Masih-Khan ◽  
Arooj Khan ◽  
Saima Dean ◽  
Sharon Fung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3055 Lenalidomide (Revlimid®) and dexamethasone is an effective regimen for relapsed/refractory (rel/ref) multiple myeloma (MM) patients (pts) with an overall response rate of 60% and median time to progression of 13.4 months (Dimopoulos ME, et al. Leukemia 2009; 23: 2147-52). We combined lenalidomide with the alkylating agent combination of cyclophosphamide and prednisone—an older regimen with minimal cumulative myelosuppression and good activity as second or third line therapy (Trieu Y, et al, Mayo Clin Proc 2005; 80: 1582). The CPR regimen consisted of cyclophosphamide (CY) on days 1, 8, and 15, lenalidomide on days 1–21 and prednisone 100 mg q 2 days in a 28-day cycle. ASA 81 mg/day was given as DVT prophylaxis. Three dose levels were evaluated using a 3 × 3 dose escalation design. Thirty-two pts were entered between 11/2007-06/2009; median age was 64 (42-80) yrs, 60% were male, and immunoglobulin isotype was IgG in 19 (62%), IgA in 8 (25%) and light chain in 4 (13%) pts. Median β2-microglobulin level was 257 (92-767) nm/L, albumin 39 (34-48) g/L, creatinine 83 (50-126) μmol/L, platelet count 355 (75-479) × 109/L and ANC 2.5 (1.1-6.1) × 109/L. The median number of prior regimens was 2 (1-5). Prior therapy included: ASCT (single in 91%; double in 19%), thalidomide (28%) and bortezomib (50%). FISH cytogenetics were available in 13 pts; 1 had del 13q but none had t(4;14) or del p53. Table 1 summarizes protocol treatment delivered. Table 1. Dose level N Cyclophosphamide dose (mg/m2) Lenalidomide dose (mg) Prednisone dose (mg) Median # cycles given 1 3 150 15 100 12 (12–34+) 2 3 150 25 100 10 (9–23) 3 26 300 25 100 17 (5–28+) 1–3 (All) 32 150–300 15–25 100 19 (5–34+) Dose limiting toxicity was not observed during cycle 1 at any dose level. Grade 3–4 toxicities during the trial included: thrombocytopenia in 7 (22%) and neutropenia in 9 (29%), managed with dose reduction and/or growth factors; five episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred, all at dose level 3. In cohort 3, other grade 3–4 non-hematologic toxicities included 1 episode each of abdominal pain/bacteremia, hypokalemia, fatigue, sick sinus syndrome, cardiac amyloidosis, perforated diverticulum and 2 episodes of DVT. Two heavily pretreated pts developed 2° MDS, including 1 previously treated for lymphoma, 43 and 190 mos after the diagnosis of MM. The best response using modified EBMT criteria was documented at a median of 7 (1-26) cycles and included the following: dose level 1 (1 CR, 2 PR); dose level 2 (1 VGPR, 2 PR); dose level 3 (4 CR, 14 VGPR, 11 PR, 1 MR and 1 stable disease). At a median F/U of 16 (5-34) months, 13 pts remain on study and 18 have progressed at a median of 10 (2-23) mos; 1 was lost to F/U and 9 have died of progressive MM. The 1-year actuarial OS and PFS rates are 93% (95% CI 76–98%) and 78% (95% CI 60–89%), respectively. We conclude: 1) the combination of full doses of the agents in CPR can be given in a 28 day cycle with an acceptable safety profile; 2) the objective response rate (CR + PR + MR) in all 32 pts to date is 94%; 3) the 1-year OS of 93% and PFS of 78% compare favorably with other 3-drug combinations in rel/ref MM pts; 4) further evaluation of this regimen in newly diagnosed pts would be of interest. Disclosures: Reece: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: Combination of lenalidomide and cyclophosphamide and prednisone in relapsed and refractory myeloma patients. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria.

Lenalidomide (Revlimid), Bortezomib (Velcade) and Dexamethasone (RVD) for Heavily Pretreated Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 2936-2936
Author(s):  
Victor H Jimenez-Zepeda ◽  
Donna E. Reece ◽  
Suzanne Trudel ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
Vishal Kukreti
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Clinical Characteristics ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Prior Exposure ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Continuous Variables ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 2936 Almost all patients (pts) with multiple myeloma eventually relapse and remission duration decreases with each regimen. The median Progression Free Survival (PFS) and Overall Survival (OS) in pts with relapsed myeloma refractory to lenalidomide (len) and bortezomib (btz) is poor at 5 and 9 months respectively. A phase 1 study of len plus btz in pts with relapsed or relapsed, refractory MM (RRMM) demonstrated favorable toxicity and promising response and survival further confirmed in a phase 2 study with len, btz and dexamethasone (dex) [RVD]. In this retrospective study, we assessed the efficacy and toxicity profile of RVD therapy for pts with advanced RRMM. We retrospectively reviewed the records of all pts with RRMM treated with RVD at Princess Margaret Hospital between 03/09 and 05/11. Relapse was defined according to the Uniform International Criteria. Pts were given RVD therapy as previous described by Anderson et al and must have completed at least one cycle of RVD therapy. Primary endpoints were response rate (RR), PFS, OS, and toxicity. Pts discontinued therapy if they experienced PD, no additional benefit or unacceptable toxicity. Definitions of response and progression were used according to the EBMT modified criteria with a category of very good partial response (VGPR). To examine variables independently prognostic for PFS and OS, multivariate Cox analysis was performed. Differences in continuous variables between groups were compared using Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis tests. Survival curves were constructed according to the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the log rank test. Thirty pts with RRMM received RVD therapy. Clinical characteristics are seen in Table 1. Median age at RVD initiation was 57 yrs (37–76 yrs), and 46.7% were male. Pts received a median of 3 prior therapies (1–6). In many instances, pts previously treated with len had len added to btz + dex at progression (n=6), or pts previously treated with btz had btz added to len + dex, at progression (n=5). Thalidomide (thal), len and btz containing regimens were previously used in 60%, 73.3% and 80% of pts respectively. PR or better was observed in 46.6%. After a median of 4.6 cycles (1–14), VGPR was seen in 4.8%, PR in 33% and SD in 14%. Pts who achieved PR or better experienced a significant improvement in PFS. There was no difference in terms of RR between those pts according to prior exposure to either btz or len (p=0.7 and 0.9 respectively). Eight pts experienced non-hematological grade 3/4 adverse events (26%), including muscle weakness, sepsis and pneumonia but there was no worsening of peripheral neuropathy. Grade 3–4 neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia were commonly seen in 70% of pts (n=21). Disease progression was seen in 19 pts at a median of 3.9 months. Median PFS for pts previously exposed to len was 2.3 months vs 2.9 months for those with no prior exposure (p=0.75). On the other hand, median PFS for pts previously exposed to btz was 2.1 months vs 3.4 months for those with no prior exposure (p=0.9) In addition, median PFS for pts who achieved at least PR was significantly better at 5.9 vs 2.0 months for those who did not (p<0.005). (Figure 1) FISH cytogenetics studies were available in 19 out of 30 patients at relapse: 5 -normal, 4–13q deletion, 3-p53 deletion and 2 - t(4, 14). High-risk MM pts had a median PFS significantly lower of 0.6 months (CI 95%, 0–1.99) vs 4.7 months for those without high-risk features (CI 2.5–7.0) (p=0.008) (Figure 2) At the time of submission, 13 pts are alive (43.3%) and 7 pts (23%) continue on RVD therapy.Table 1.Clinical characteristics of patients with RRMM treated with RVDClinical characteristic N=30MedianRange%Age5737-76Male46.7%Female53.3%Hemoglobin (g/L)10571-155Creatinine (mmol/L)99.936-383Beta-2 microglobulin (mmol/L)280119-1440Lactate dehydrogenase (U/L)18189-255IgG56.6% (17)IgA23.3% (7)IgM3.3% (1)Light Chain16.6% (5)Kappa (mg/L)4005.3-346063.3% (19)Lambda (mg/L)5145.1-530036.7% (11)KappaLambda*BMPC57%6-95%M-spike serum (g/L)300-77M-spike urine (g/d)0.890-7.9Prior therapies31-6ASCT83.3% (25)Thal60% (18)Len73.3% (22)Btz80% (24)*BMPC, Bone marrow plasma cells In conclusion, RVD is active and well tolerated in pts with RRMM, including pts who have received prior len, btz, thal and ASCT but PFS is short at 3.9 months in this highly advanced disease group of patients. We question whether response is dependent on recognized risk factors such as adverse cytogenetics. Disclosures: Jimenez-Zepeda: J & J: Honoraria. Reece:Bristol, Meyers, Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson&Johnson: Research Funding; Merck: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria. Kukreti:Celgene: Honoraria.

Pembrolizumab in Combination with Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 490-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ashraf Z Badros ◽  
Elizabeth Hyjek ◽  
Ning Ma ◽  
Alexander M. Lesokhin ◽  
Aaron P. Rapoport ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Cell Function ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Upper Respiratory Tract ◽  
T Cell Therapy ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Tract Infections

Abstract BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy in MM is emerging as an effective modality in therapy of MM with the approval of several monoclonal antibodies and encouraging results for vaccines and T cell therapy. Programmed death 1 (PD-1) receptor and its ligand (PD-L1) is one mechanism of immune evasion by MM to suppress T cell function. In this trial, we hypothesized that pembrolizumab, a PD-1-blocking antibody, would enhance immune modulatory properties of pomalidomide in RRMM pts. METHODS: In this single center, phase II study, 48 patients with RRMM received 28-day cycles of pembrolizumab (at a dose of 200 mg IV) every 2 weeks (in a run in phase, first 6 patients received 200 mg IV every 4 weeks) plus pomalidomide (4 mg daily x 21 days) and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. Study objectives were measurements of safety & efficacy and correlation of the CD3/PD-1 on T cells and PD-L1 on plasma cells with response. RESULTS: The median age was 64 years (range: 35-82); 38% were black and 65% were men, Patients had a median of 3 lines of prior therapy (range: 2-6); All patients had received both IMids and Proteosome inhibitors; 70% had prior auto-SCT. 80% were double refractory to both IMids (lenalidomide) and Proteosome inhibitors [bortezomib (n=18) or carfilzomib (n=20)] and an additional 20% were refractory to lenalidomide. The median time from MM diagnosis to study entry was 4 years (range: 1-25). Most common cytogenetic abnormalities were 1q+ (60%), hyperdiploidy (15%) and high-risk FISH [del 17p, t(4:14) and/or t(14:16)] in 38%. Six patients had soft tissue extramedullary plasmacytomas. There were no infusion-related reactions. Hematologic toxicities (≥ grade 3) were anemia (21%), neutropenia (40%), lymphopenia (15%) and thrombocytopenia (8%). Non-hematologic events Grade ≥3 were fatigue (15%), hyperglycemia (25%), upper respiratory tract infections (21%), rash (10%); and most frequent grade ≥2 were dyspnea (54%), dizziness (44%), increased creatinine 38%, edema (35%), rash (30%), constipation 30%) and arrhythmias (19%). Events of clinical significance, autoimmune mediated, included interstitial pneumonitis (13%), hypothyroidism (10%), transaminitis(6%), adrenal insufficiency (4%) and vitiligo (2%). Nine pts had pomalidomide dose reductions due to rash, neutropenia, palpitations and fatigue; one pt reduced pembrolizumab for pneumonitis. At a median follow up of 10 months (range: 2-18): 25 pts continue on the study and 23 pts discontinued therapy due to disease progression (n= 15), side effects (n=7) and protocol violation (n=1). Five pts died while on study due to progressive disease (n=3), sepsis (n=1, sAE), and one from a cardiac event. Three additional pts died off therapy. On intent to treat analysis; the overall response rate (ORR) with ≥ Partial response were observed in of 27 of 48 pts (56%) including: sCR (n=4, 8%), nCR (n=3, 6%), VGPR (n=6, 13%), PR (n=14, 29%). Additionally, 7 pts (15%) had minimal response, 9 (19%) had stable disease, 2 progressed and 3 were not evaluable for response. Of 38 double refractory pts ORR was 55% including, sCR (n=2, 5%), nCR (n=2, 5%), VGPR (n=4, 10%) and PR (n=13, 27%). Of 18 high-risk pts ORR was 33% including VGPR (n=2, 11%) and PR (n=4, 22%). Median duration of response for responding pts was 8.8 months and for pts ≥ VGPR, DOR was 10.7 months. Correlation of PD-1 and PD-L1 expression and response will be presented. CONCLUSION: Pembrolizumab, pomalidomide and dexamethasone shows promising durable therapeutic activity and an acceptable safety profile in RRMM pts. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02289222 Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

E4201: Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine in combination with radiation therapy versus gemcitabine alone in patients with locally advanced, unresectable, pancreatic cancer (LAPC): Quality-of-life (QOL) analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4627-4627
Author(s):  
H. R. Cardenes ◽  
M. Powell ◽  
P. J. Loehrer ◽  
L. I. Wagner ◽  
D. F. Cella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Subscale Score ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Overall Survival Benefit

4627 Background: E4201 compared radiation and gemcitabine (RT+Gem) versus Gem alone in LAPC. The primary endpoint was overall survival; secondary objectives included: objective response rate (RR), progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity and QOL. We previously reported that RT+Gem was associated with improved overall survival compared with Gem alone [median survival time, 11 months and 9.2 months, respectively; p=0.034], without impact in RR or PFS. (ASCO 2008, abstract # 4506). We now report on QOL as measured by the Hep subscale from the FACT-Hepatobiliary [FACT-Hep] between both arms. Methods: Eligible patients had LAPC adenocarcinoma, PS <2, without prior therapy. They were randomized to Arm A: Gem alone (1,000 mg/m2/week x 3, every 4 weeks, 7 cycles), or Arm B: RT (50.4Gy/28 fractions) plus Gem (600 mg/m2/weekly x 6) followed by 5 cycles of Gem alone (1,000 mg/m2/weekly x 3 every 4 wks). The FACT-Hep was administered at baseline (before starting induction), 6 weeks (immediately after completing induction), week 16 (Arm A) or week 15 (Arm B) mid-consolidation, and at 9 months. Results: From April, 2003 to December, 2005, 74 patients were enrolled, 71 were eligible [37 Arm A; 34 Arm B]. Grade ≥3 was reported in 80% and 82.4% in ARM A and B, respectively (p=1.00). Grade IV toxicities, mainly gastrointestinal and hematologic, were more common in ARM B (41.2% vs 5.7%, p=<0.0001). QOL compliance declined over time, most commonly attributable to either patients or staff choosing not to complete or administer the instrument due to declining health (96%, 69%, 60%, and 40% at baseline, week 6, 15/16 weeks and 9 months, respectively). Within Arm B, QoL scores dropped significantly from baseline to 6 weeks. By week 15, QoL scores for patients on Arm B rebounded to levels similar to baseline. Two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum tests failed to suggest differences in median FACT-Hep subscale score between treatment arms at any of the four time-points (alpha = 0.10). Conclusions: RT+Gem is associated with an overall survival benefit without apparent long term adverse impact on QOL when compared with Gem alone. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

An international, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase III study (MONET1) of motesanib plus carboplatin/paclitaxel (C/P) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA7512-LBA7512 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Scagliotti ◽  
I. Vynnychenko ◽  
Y. Ichinose ◽  
K. Park ◽  
K. Kubota ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cox Model ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
High Rate ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Nonsquamous Nsclc

LBA7512 Background: This study evaluated whether motesanib (a selective oral inhibitor of VEGFR 1, 2 and 3; PDGFR and Kit) plus C/P improved overall survival (OS) compared with placebo + C/P in patients (pts) with nonsquamous NSCLC and in a subset of pts with adenocarcinoma. Methods: Pts had stage IIIB/IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC and no prior systemic therapy for advanced NSCLC. The study initially enrolled all histologies but was amended to exclude pts with squamous NSCLC owing to a high rate of hemoptysis. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive up to six 3-wk cycles of C (AUC 6 mg/mL·min) and P (200 mg/m2) with either motesanib 125 mg QD (Arm A) or placebo QD (Arm B) orally continuously. The primary endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), objective response rate (ORR) and association between placental growth factor (PLGF) change and OS. OS was evaluated using a stratified Cox model and 2-sided log-rank test (α=0.03 for nonsquamous pts and α=0.02 for adenocarcinoma pts). Results: 1090 pts with nonsquamous NSCLC were randomized (Arm A/B, n=541/549); 890 had adenocarcinoma (n=448/442). 61% were men; median age was 60 years (range 21–87); 83% had stage IV disease. At the time of analysis, 753 pts had died (608 pts with adenocarcinoma). Median follow-up was 10.6 mo. OS was not significantly improved in Arm A compared with Arm B (Table). In Arm A, PLGF analysis did not show an association with OS. The incidence of grade ≥3 AEs in Arms A/B was 73/59%. Grade ≥3 AEs occurring more frequently in Arm A than B included neutropenia (22/15%), diarrhea (9/1%), hypertension (7/1%) and cholecystitis (3/0%). The incidence of grade 5 AEs was 14/9% in Arms A/B. Conclusions: In pts with advanced nonsquamous NSCLC, treatment with motesanib + C/P did not significantly improve OS compared with C/P alone. [Table: see text]

Sorafenib versus cytotoxic chemotherapy for patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: A retrospective, single-institution study.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 339-339
Author(s):  
S. Lee ◽  
S. Yoon ◽  
S. Shin ◽  
H. Choi
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Cytotoxic Chemotherapy ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Chemotherapy Group ◽  
Sorafenib Group ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Novel Target

339 Background: Prior to the sorafenib era, most of the advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients had to rely only on conventional cytotoxic chemotherapy. But the introduction of sorafenib in 2008 had given HCC patients additional option for their treatment. However, given that sorafenib has been a nonreimbursable drug under the Korea public health system, most of treatment strategy has largely been determined by patients' affordability of the drug rather than by difference in efficacy and toxicity of the two treatments. Therefore, we compared the efficacy and toxicity of the two treatments by observing HCC patients. Methods: From January 2002 to December 2009, 173 patients with unresectable HCC had been retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 44 (25.4%) had been treated with sorafenib and the remaining had received cytotoxic chemotherapy. We evaluated objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and toxicity profiles. Results: The median OS of sorafenib group was 23.0 weeks (95% CI, 8.1-37.9) vs. 43.6 weeks (95% CI, 34.0-37.9) for cytotoxic chemotherapy group. The median PFS for sorafenib group was 11.1 weeks (95% CI, 6.5-15.8) versus 12.4 weeks (95% CI, 8.1-16.7) for cytotoxic chemotherapy group. However, the difference in both findings had not been statistically significant (p=0.105 and p=0.496, respectively). ORR and DCR for sorafenib group were 2.3% and 52.3% versus 6.2% and 43.4% for cytotoxic chemotherapy group, respectively. Patients treated with chemotherapy had shown higher frequencies of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia, 19.7%, (vs. 0% for sorafenib). However, the group with sorafenib had reported a higher rate of all grade dermatologic toxicities such as hand-foot skin reaction, rash and pruritus. Conclusions: Our analysis indicates that efficacy of conventional chemotherapy is not inferior to that of sorafenib. Further research including novel target agent and cytotoxic chemotherapy is needed to improve clinical outcomes for advanced HCC. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document