Phase I study of s-1 plus fractional cisplatin as adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer in an outpatient setting (KOGC-03).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 157-157
Author(s):  
Taiki Ono ◽  
Tsunehiro Takahashi ◽  
Rieko Nakamura ◽  
Norihito Wada ◽  
Hirofumi Kawakubo ◽  
...  

157 Background: The aim of this phase I study is to confirm the dose of cisplatin as adjuvant combination chemotherapy with S-1 in gastric cancer patients in an outpatient setting. Methods: The first course was initiated with S-1 monotherapy on days 1-28. From the second to sixth course, S-1 was administered on days 1-28 and cisplatin was added on days 1, 15, and 29. Dose level of cisplatin was escalated as follows: 20 mg/m2 (level 1); 25 mg/m2 (level 2); 30 mg/m2 (level 3). Results: Between Sep. 2010 and Feb. 2014, 13 patients were entered into this study. The median age was 65 years. All patients had a performance status of 0. Final stages were: Stage IIIA, 4; Stage IIIB, 8; and Stage IIIC, 1. The first three patients enrolled at level 1 and none of the three patients experienced Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). However, one patient at level 2 could not complete administration of cisplatin. Therefore, an additional three patients were entered into level 2. Since these patients did not experience any severe adverse events, level 2 was completed. The first patient enrolled at level 3 had experienced leukocytopenia and elevated bilirubin. These toxicities did not resolve to the level of the starting criteria for the next course within 21 days. In the next patient, the third course could not be started within 21 days because of fatigue and anorexia. Based on these results, the Maximum Tolerated Dose and Recommended Dose were confirmed as level 3 and level 2, respectively. The DLT was >21-day delay of starting the next course. Three patients at level 1 completed combination adjuvant chemotherapy between the second and sixth course based on the protocol. During these treatments, no grade >2 hematological or non-hematological toxicities were experienced. At level 2, two out of six patients completed 5 courses of combination chemotherapy without experiencing severe adverse events. Three out of six patients at level 2 had received 4 courses of combination chemotherapy. Conclusions: Although further clinical trials are recommended to evaluate efficacy, this combination S-1 plus cisplatin regimen is expected to become a standard adjuvant treatment for gastric cancer in the outpatient setting. Clinical trial information: 601995.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 144-144
Author(s):  
Hiroki Yukami ◽  
Masahiro Goto ◽  
Takayuki Kii ◽  
Tetsuji Terazawa ◽  
Toshifumi Yamaguchi ◽  
...  

144 Background: In Japan, S-1 plus cisplatin is regarded as one of the standard first line treatment of advanced gastric cancer (AGC). However, the prognosis of AGC remains dismal. The development of more effective chemotherapeutic regimen is thus warranted. A combination of irinotecan, cisplatin, and S-1 (IPS) can be a promising triplet therapy for advanced gastric cancer. We conducted a phase I study of IPS to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended dose (RD), and to assess its safety and antitumor activity in patients with AGC. Methods: This phase I study was designed and conducted in a 3 + 3 manner to determine the recommended dose (RD) of IPS for the subsequent phase II study. Patients received an escalating dose of intravenous irinotecan (level 1: 100/level 2: 125/level 3: 150 mg/m²) on day 1, a fixed dose of intravenous cisplatin (60 mg/m²) on day 1, a fixed dose of S-1 (80 mg/m² b.i.d.) orally on days 1-14, every 4 weeks. Results: Twelve patients were enrolled between June 2013 and February 2017. During the first cycle, one of the six patients in level 1 and two of six patients in level 2 developed the DLT (grade 4 leucocytopenia and grade 3 febrile neutropenia). The MTD of irinotecan was 125 mg/m 2 (level 2) and the RD of irinotecan was considered to be 100 mg/m² (level 1). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included neutropenia 75 % (9/12), anemia 25% (3/12), anorexia 8% (1/12), and febrile neutropenia 17% (2/12). Among six patients with measurable lesions, the response rate was 66.7% (4/6) [95% CI, 33.3-90.7%]. Two patients were performed R0 resection after IPS, with one patient achieved pathological complete response. The median survival time is under analysis. Conclusions: RD of IPS was determined to be 100 mg/m² of irinotecan, 60 mg/m² of cisplatin, and 80 mg/m² of S-1. Our data showed that this regimen provided acceptable antitumor activity and a favorable toxicity profile. Further evaluation of this regimen is warranted. Clinical trial information: UMIN000006864.


2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4559-4559
Author(s):  
C. Kim ◽  
J. Lee ◽  
Y. Choi ◽  
B. Kang ◽  
M. Ryu ◽  
...  

4559 Background: We conducted a phase I dose-finding study of sorafenib (S) in combination with capecitabine (X) and cisplatin (P) in patients with previously untreated metastatic or inoperable advanced gastric cancer. Methods: Four dose levels of S, X, and P combination were tested. The doses of S (p.o. daily), X (p.o. on days 1–14), and P (i.v. on day 1) were escalated at the following schedule; level 1: S 400 mg/d, X 1,600 mg/m2/d, P 80 mg/m2; level 2: S 800 mg/d, X 1,600 mg/m2/d, P 80 mg/m2; level 3: S 800 mg/d, X 2,000 mg/m2/d, P 80 mg/m2; level 1A: S 800 mg/d, X 1,600 mg/m2/d, P 60 mg/m2. The cycle was repeated every 3 weeks. Dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated only in the first cycles and a standard 3+3 dose escalation design was implemented. Results: A total 21 pts were enrolled in the study. No DLTs were observed at dose level 1 (n=3). One DLT (grade 3 diarrhea) was noted at dose level 2 (n=6), and 2 DLTs (two grade 4 neutropenias longer than 5 days in duration) were observed at dose level 3 (n=6), which made the level 3 dose the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). However, at cycle 2 and thereafter at dose level 2, the relative dose intensity (RDI) of S and X could not be maintained (mostly below 80%) due to the frequent dose reductions and cycle delays. So, we explored a new dose level (1A) between dose level 1 and 2. Since no DLTs were found in 6 patients at level 1A with RDI mostly above 80% throughout the treatment period, level 1A was determined as recommended dose (RD). Most frequent grade 3 and 4 hematologic toxicities were neutropenia (25.0% of cycles), and most frequent grade 2 and 3 non-hematologic toxicities were hand-foot syndrome (9.4%), asthenia (7.0%), and anorexia (5.5%). The objective responses were confirmed in 10 out of 16 patients with measurable lesions (62.5%; 95% CI, 38.8–86.2%). With a median follow-up of 8.1 months, estimated median progression-free survival was 10.0 months (95% CI, 1.6–18.4 months) and median overall survival has not been reached. Conclusions: Diarrhea and neutropenia were DLTs in this S, X, and P combination. The dose schedule of sorafenib 400 mg po bid daily with capecitabine 800 mg/m2 po bid on days 1–14, and cisplatin 60 mg/m2 iv on day 1 in every 3 weeks is recommended for further development in AGC. [Table: see text]


2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 475-475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hironari Sueyoshi ◽  
Tatsuya Ioka ◽  
Takeshi Tamura ◽  
Ryoji Takada ◽  
Nobuyasu Fukutake ◽  
...  

475 Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most difficult cancers to treat. Over 90% of cases, they are UR-LAPC or metastatic PC (mPC) at the first time of diagnosis. To prolong survival time, radiation therapy is considered to be promising with strong local control. Some papers reported that RT with 5-FU is effective to LAPC, but they are far from standard regimen. Gemcitabine (Gem) has enhancing effect of sensibility to RT. Gem and nab-paclitaxel (G+NP) showed priority compared with Gem monotherapy in mPC patients with Phase III study. So, we performed Phase I study to decide recommended dose of G+NP when we administer for concurrent CRT in URPC patients. Methods: From Aug 2013, we have registered patients who were examined as UR-LAPC because of cancer invasion to major artery. Dose of G+NP are classified by each level. At Level 1, Gem 600mg/m2 and NP 50mg/m2. At Level 2, Gem 600mg/m2 and NP 75mg/m2. At Level 3, Gem 600mg/m2 and NP 100mg/m2. At each level, patients accepted RT (50.4Gy/28fr). During performing RT period, we prescribed G + NP weekly. So, G+NP are prescribed 4-5 times if pts accomplish the study.We evaluate effectiveness and side effect of the regimen, and try to decide maximum tolerated dose. Results: Until July 2014, 14 pts (11 males and 3 females) have been registered in this trial. 6 cases were performed at Level 1, 7cases at Level 2, 1 cases at Level 3. 13 cases accomplish the prescription. 1 case at Level 1 dropped out because the patient suffered liver abscess. Effectiveness of the regimen is as follows; 4cases are PD (progressive disease), 6cases are SD (stable disease), and 2cases are PR (partial response). Conclusions: Now we prescribe the regimen at Level 3. We have not yet decided MDT. But, CRT with G + NP may be promising regimen for LAPC. When we accumulate more cases, and decide MDT, we will report later. Clinical trial information: UMIN000012254.


2012 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 364-368
Author(s):  
Chikara Kunisaki ◽  
Hidetaka A Ono ◽  
Shinichi Hasegawa ◽  
Takashi Oshima ◽  
Shoichi Fujii ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 503-503
Author(s):  
Masafumi Noda ◽  
Takeo Sato ◽  
Kazushige Hayakawa ◽  
Naohiro Tomita ◽  
Norihiko Kamikonya ◽  
...  

503 Background: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy with 5-FU is a standard therapy for locally advanced lower rectal cancer. This therapy is useful for increasing local control rates and maintaining anal functions, but there is no evidence indicating that this therapy can extend survival. We performed a phase I study with the objective of developing a new chemoradiotherapy with irinotecan (CPT-11) and S-1, containing gimeracil, a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor with radiosensitizing effect. Methods: Patients with locally advanced lower rectal cancer (T3-4, N0-2) of which the inferior border was located closer to the anal verge than to the peritoneal reflection were used for analysis. The radiation dose was 45 Gy in 25 fractions. The radiation field included the internal iliac, pararectal, and obturator lymph nodes in addition to the primary tumor and enlarged lymph nodes. S-1 was administered for five consecutive days and withdrawn for two consecutive days (administration: Days 1-5, 8-12, 22-26, and 29-33). The dose of S-1 (80, 100, 120 mg/day) was controlled in accordance with the body surface area. CPT-11 was administered on days 1, 8, 22, and 29. The initial dose of CPT-11 was 60 mg/m2 (Level 1), and the dose was increased gradually. Total mesorectal excision was performed 6-10 weeks after completion of the chemoradiotherapy. Results: 20 patients were enrolled. Excluding 2 patients who discontinued the study, 18 patients were subject to analysis. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was not seen in 3 patients treated with CPT-11 at 80 mg/m2 (Level 2), but was seen in 3 of the 6 patients treated with CPT-11 at 90 mg/m2 (Level 3). DLT was seen in 3 other patients administered a Level 2 dose. At Level 2 or Level 3, DLTs, namely neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and diarrhea were seen. Level 2 was regarded as a maximum tolerated dose, and Level 1 as a recommended dose (RD). The pathological complete response rate was 28%, and the downstaging rate 56%. Conclusions: The results of the study suggest that the RD of CPT-11 is 60 mg/m2. We plan to perform a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of chemoradiotherapy with S-1 and CPT-11. Clinical trial information: UMIN000001639.


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 101-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Min-Hee Ryu ◽  
Baek-Yeol Ryoo ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Sung-Bae Kim ◽  
Hyeong-Seok Lim ◽  
...  

101 Background: Paclitaxel has been proven to be effective and widely used in various types of cancers. DHP107 is a novel oral paclitaxel formulation. In the previous first-in-human study, DHP107 showed no DLTs at a single dose-escalating schedule and was reported safe and feasible in patients with advanced malignancies. This study was conducted to determine 1) recommended dose (RD) for multiple dosing of DHP107 in patients with metastatic solid tumor and 2) efficacy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Methods: In phase I study, standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme was used, and the planned dose of DHP107 was 150 mg/m2 bid at level 1, 200 mg/m2 bid at level 2, and 250 mg/m2 bid at level 3 on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks. In phase II study planned by Simon’s optimal two stage design (P0=0.05, P1=0.25, α=0.05, and β=0.2), DHP107 was administered at the RD in patients with AGC refractory to first-line chemotherapy containing fluoropyrimidine and platinum. Results: In the phase I study, no dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed at level 1 (n=3) and at level 2 (n=6). At level 3, 2 out of 4 patients showed a DLT (one grade 4 neutropenia over 7 days and one febrile neutropenia). At additional dose level 2A (225 mg/m2 bid), 2 out of 4 patients experienced febrile neutropenia. Finally, the RD of DHP107 was determined as level 2 (200 mg/m2 bid). In PK analysis, 200 mg/m2 bid of DHP107 showed similar AUC, Cmax and half-life to i.v. paclitaxel at 80 mg/m2. Out of the 11 patients enrolled in the phase II study, 3 patients achieved a confirmed partial response (27%; 95% C.I. 0-59%). Grade 3/4 adverse events with frequency > 5% included neutropenia (27.3%), stomatitis (18.2%), anemia (9.1%), and febrile neutropenia (9.1%). There was no treatment-related death. Conclusions: RD of DHP107 was determined as 200 mg/m2 bid. At the RD, DHP107 was generally well tolerated and showed anti-tumor activity comparable to i.v. paclitaxel as a second-line chemotherapy in AGC. Based on these results, a phase III study to compare DHP107 with i.v. paclitaxel is currently ongoing in AGC. This study was supported by DAEHWA Pharmaceutical Co. and Gangwon Institute for Regional Program Evaluation by Korean government.


1997 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
P J Hesketh ◽  
M G Kris ◽  
S M Grunberg ◽  
T Beck ◽  
J D Hainsworth ◽  
...  

PURPOSE To propose a classification of the acute emetogenicity of antineoplastic chemotherapy agents, and to develop an algorithm to define the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens. METHODS A Medline search was conducted to identify (1) clinical trials that used chemotherapy as single-agent therapy, and (2) major reviews of antiemetic therapy. The search was limited to patients who received commonly used doses of chemotherapy agents, primarily by short (< 3 hours) intravenous infusions. Based on review of this information and our collective clinical experience, we assigned chemotherapy agents to one of five emetogenic levels by consensus. A preliminary algorithm to determine the emetogenicity of combination chemotherapy regimens was then designed by consensus. A final algorithm was developed after we analyzed a data base composed of patients treated on the placebo arms of four randomized antiemetic trials. RESULTS Chemotherapy agents were divided into five levels: level 1 (< 10% of patients experience acute [< or = 24 hours after chemotherapy] emesis without antiemetic prophylaxis); level 2 (10% to 30%); level 3 (30% to 60%); level 4 (60% to 90%); and level 5 (> 90%). For combinations, the emetogenic level was determined by identifying the most emetogenic agent in the combination and then assessing the relative contribution of the other agents. The following rules apply: (1) level 1 agents do not contribute to the emetogenic level of a combination; (2) adding > or = one level 2 agent increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level greater than the most emetogenic agent in the combination; and (3) adding level 3 or 4 agents increases the emetogenicity of the combination by one level per agent. CONCLUSION The proposed classification schema provides a practical means to determine the emetogenic potential of individual chemotherapy agents and combination regimens during the 24 hours after administration. This system can serve as a framework for the development of antiemetic guidelines.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 3443-3443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Apostolia-Maria Tsimberidou ◽  
William Wierda ◽  
William Plunkett ◽  
Susan O'Brien ◽  
Thomas J. Kipps ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 3443 Poster Board III-331 Introduction The first Phase I-II clinical trial of oxaliplatin, fluradabine, cytarabine (Ara-C), and rituximab (OFAR1) demonstrated significant activity in refractory CLL and RS (Tsimberidou et al, J Clin Oncol, 2008;26:196). To enhance the response rate and decrease myelosuppression, the dose of oxaliplatin was increased to 30mg daily, the dose of Ara-C was decreased to 0.5g/m2 daily and the optimal number of days of fluradabine and Ara-C administration was explored (OFAR2). Methods In a Phase I-II study of OFAR2, patients were treated with oxaliplatin 30mg/m2, D1-4; fludarabine 30mg/m2, Ara-C 0.5g/m2; rituximab 375mg/m2, D3; and pelfigrastim 6mg, D6. Fludarabine and Ara-C were given on D2-3 (dose level 1) D2-4 (dose level 2) or D2-5 (dose level 3); courses were repeated every 4 weeks. Patients received prophylaxis for tumor lysis, DNA viruses, and PCP. A “3+3” design was used and the planned number of patients in the Phase II was 90 (CLL, 60; RS, 30). Results Ninety-one patients (CLL, 67; RS, 24) have been treated to date: Phase I, 12 patients (by dose level: 1, n=3; 2, n=6; and 3, n=3). DLTs were noted in 2 of 3 patients on dose level 3 (G4 diarrhea, 1; G4 neutropenic sepsis, 1); thus, dose level 2 was the MTD. Seventy-nine patients (relapsed CLL, 58; RS, 19) have been treated in the Phase II portion of the study. Patient characteristics were as follows: age > 60 years, 65%; 17p deletion, 38%; 11q deletion, 13%; 13q deletion, 16%; trisomy 12, 21%; no findings, 12%; unmutated IgVH, 80%; ZAP70-positive, 75%; and CD38 ≥30%, 58%. Response in patients treated in the Phase II recommended dose is shown in Table (evaluable, 67). The overall response rates in patients with 17p and 11q deletions were 48% and 55%, respectively. The median survival duration was 21 months (CLL, 21 months; RS, 9.5 months). At 18 months, the survival rates in patients with 17p and 11q deletions were 66% and 76%, respectively. Twelve patients underwent stem cell transplantation after OFAR2 (as post-remission therapy, n=10; as salvage, n=2). Overall, 196 cycles were administered. Grade 3-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia were noted in 63%, 72%, and 39% of patients and in 57%, 70%, and 25% of cycles and Grade 3-4 infections in 19% of patients. Conclusion Preliminary results demonstrated that OFAR2 induced response in 40% of patients with RS and 63% of patients with relapsed/refractory CLL. OFAR2 had antileukemic activity in patients with 17p deletion. Clinical outcomes appeared to be superior to those of OFAR1 in refractory CLL, whereas results of OFAR1 appeared to be superior to those of OFAR2 in RS. Accrual is ongoing. Disclosures Tsimberidou: ASCO: ASCO Career Development Award; Sanofi: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Oxaliplatin is used off-label. Wierda:Genentech: Honoraria; Bayer, Sanofi-Aventis, Abbott, GSK: Research Funding; GSK, Trubion, Ligand, Genentech, Medimmune, Abbot: Consultancy; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Plunkett:Sanofi-Aventis: Research Funding. O'Brien:Genentech: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy. Kipps:NCI: Grant P01CA-81534.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 528-528
Author(s):  
Mark Kirschbaum ◽  
Anthony Selwyn Stein ◽  
Paul Frankel ◽  
Leslie Popplewell ◽  
Robert w Chen ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 528 Background: Allogeneic Stem Cell transplantation remains the only curative treatment modality for hematologic malignancies such as AML, ALL, and MDS. Reduced intensity regimens were designed which replaced the alkylating agent cyclophosphamide with the purine nucleoside antimetabolite, fludarabine, a potent immunosuppressive with a substantially milder toxicity profile. Clofarabine is a purine nucleoside analogue designed to exploit a double halogen strategy which confers resistance to adenosine deaminase, increases stability and bioavailability and makes the drug more efficient than fludarabine at inhibiting ribonucleotide reductase (RNR) and disrupting mitochondrial function, leading to apoptosis. Clofarabine is potentially a superior antileukemic agent as compared with fludarabine, thus enhancing the activity of the conditioning regimen. Aims: To evaluate a novel clofarabine containing regimen as conditioning for adult fully matched allogeneic stem cell transplant. Methods: phase I dose escalation: clofarabine (dose level 1 = 30 mg/m2, dose level 2 and 3 =40 mg/m2) IV daily days –7 to day –3 infused over 30 minutes IV, plus Melphalan (dose level 1 and 2, 100mg/m2, dose level 3, 140 mg/m2) administered over 30 minutes IV on day –2. Related or unrelated allogeneic stem cells were infused on day 0. GVHD prophylaxis: initially cyclosporine plus mycophenolate, then tacrolimus plus sirolimus was adopted as per City of Hope standard of care. Patients (pts) age ≥ 18 years with AML, ALL, MDS in either CR1, CR2 or in relapse (up to 50% marrow blasts), not deemed eligible for standard transplant regimens by the attending physician, or at high risk for relapse, are eligible. Results: 16 eligible pts, all with AML, have been treated thus far, 7,males, 9 females, with a median age of 63 years (30 – 66). Seven pts were in CR1, 2 pts were in CR2, 4 pts where induction failures, and 3 pts were in first relapse. Grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities included elevation of transaminases, diarrhea, and hyponatremia. No dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were seen in the 3 pts treated at dose level 1. One patient in dose level 2 died prior to engraftment due to hepatic, renal, and infectious toxicities; that dose level has been expanded to 12 patients and no further DLTs were seen. The first patient treated at dose level 3 developed multiorgan failure and died prior to engraftment. Given the excellent results seen in the two previous cohorts we opted not to dose escalate any further patients beyond clofarabine 40 mg/m2 and melphalan 100 mg/m2. Three patients with primary induction failure received an unrelated donor graft and had complete engraftment and obtained remission. The median time to ANC recovery is 14 days and to platelet recovery is 16 days (see table). Mild acute skin graft versus host disease (GvHD) was seen in five patients, mild chronic GvHD in four patients, one patient developed severe chronic GVHD of the liver and died at day 201 from CNS bleed due to tacrolimus-sirolimus related TTP-HUS. Of the 14 patients that successfully completed transplant (no DLT or engraftment difficulty), only one patient has relapsed, with median follow-up of 10.5 months (range 4–24). Conclusion: The combination of clofarabine and melphalan is a well tolerated reduced intensity conditioning regimen with enhanced anti-leukemia activity leading to complete engraftment of related and unrelated fully matched allogeneic stem cells. Complete engraftment with prolonged disease free survival was seen at both dose levels 1 and 2. Disclosures: Off Label Use: clofarabine as a component of the conditioning regimen for allogeneic transplant.


Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 862-862 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrzej J Jakubowiak ◽  
Dominik Dytfeld ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
David H. Vesole ◽  
Tara B. Anderson ◽  
...  

Abstract Abstract 862 Background: Carfilzomib (Cfz) is a novel, irreversible proteasome inhibitor that has demonstrated promising single-agent activity and favorable toxicity profile, including very low rates of peripheral neuropathy and neutropenia in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Combining Cfz with Lenalidomide (Revlimid®, Len), and Dexamethasone (Dex) into CRd shows an additive anti-MM effect in preclinical studies and lack of overlapping toxicity allowing for the use of these agents at full doses and for extended duration of time in relapsed/refractory MM (Niesvizky et al, ASH, 2009). This Phase I/II study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of CRd and to assess safety and evaluate efficacy of this combination in newly diagnosed MM. Methods: In Phase I, dose escalation follows the TITE-CRM algorithm, with Cfz as the only escalating agent starting at 20 mg/m2 (level 1), maximal planned dose 27 mg/m2 (level 2), and 15 mg/m2, if needed (level -1), given IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 in 28-day cycles. Len is used at 25 mg PO (days 1–21), and Dex at 40/20 mg PO weekly (cycles 1–4/5-8) for all dose levels. Based on toxicity assessment, the study was amended to add dose level 3 with Cfz at 36 mg/m2 and the number of pts in the Phase I was increased to 35. A total of 36 pts are planned to be treated at the MTD in Phase I/II. Pts who achieve ≥ PR can proceed to stem cell collection (SCC) and autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) after ≥ 4 cycles, although per protocol design, ASCT candidates are offered to continue CRd treatment after SCC. After completion of 8 cycles, pts receive 28-day maintenance cycles with Cfz (days 1, 2 15, 16), Len days 1–21, and Dex weekly at the doses tolerated at the end of 8 cycles. Responses are assessed by IMWG criteria with the addition of nCR. Results: The study has enrolled 24 pts to date, 4 pts at level 1 (Cfz 20), 14 at level 2 (Cfz 27) and at 6 at level 3 (Cfz 36). Toxicity data are available for 21 pts, of which 19 have completed at least the first cycle required for DLT assessment; 2 pts were removed during the first cycle for events unrelated to study therapy (1 at level 1 and 1 at level 2), and 3 are currently within their first cycle of treatment. There was a single DLT event at dose level 2 (non-febrile neutropenia requiring dose reduction of Len per protocol) and the MTD has not been reached. Hematologic toxicities were reversible and included Grade (G) 3/4 neutropenia in 3 pts, G3/4 thrombocytopenia in 3, and G3 anemia in 2. There have been additional G3 non-hematologic AEs including 1 case of DVT while on ASA prophylaxis, 1 fatigue, 1 mood alteration, and 5 glucose elevations; the last 2 AEs were related to Dex. There was no emergence of peripheral neuropathy (PN), even after prolonged treatment, except in 2 pts who developed G1 sensory PN. Twenty-three pts continue on treatment, most (20 pts) without need for any dose modifications. After a median of 4 (range 1–8) months of treatment, preliminary response rates by IMWG in 19 evaluable pts who completed at least 1 cycle are: 100% ≥ PR, 63% ≥ VGPR, 37% CR/nCR, including 3 pts with sCR. Responses were rapid with 17 of 19 pts achieving PR after 1 cycle and improving responses with continuing therapy in all pts. To date, 7 pts proceeded to SCC using growth factors only, with a median 6.3 × 106 CD34+ cells/kg collected (range 4.1–8.2), after a median of 4 cycles of CRd (range 4–8); all resumed CRd treatment after SCC. After a median of 4 months of follow-up, none of evaluable pts progressed and all are alive. Conclusion: CRd is well tolerated and highly active in newly diagnosed MM with ≥ PR of 100%, including 63% ≥VGPR and 37% CR/nCR. Accrual is ongoing, with updated toxicity and efficacy data to be presented at the meeting. The results of this study represent the first report of treatment of frontline myeloma with Cfz to date, and provide additional support to recently initiated Phase 3 trial of CRd vs. Rd in relapsed MM. Disclosures: Jakubowiak: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Exelixis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Centocor OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; OrthoBiotech (Canada): Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Merck: Honoraria; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Proteolix, Inc: Honoraria; Imedex: Speakers Bureau; Medicom World Wide: Speakers Bureau; Optum Health Education: Speakers Bureau; PER Group: Speakers Bureau. Vesole:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Anderson:Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Stockerl-Goldstein:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Speakers Bureau. Barrickman:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kauffman:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Employment, Equity Ownership. Vij:Proteolix: Consultancy; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document