scholarly journals Partnering bevacizumab with irinotecan as first line-therapy of metastatic colorectal cancer improves progression free survival-A retrospective analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0248922
Author(s):  
Calin Cainap ◽  
Rodica Ana Ungur ◽  
Ovidiu-Vasile Bochis ◽  
Patriciu Achimas ◽  
Catalin Vlad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Time To Treatment ◽  
Time To Treatment Failure

Colorectal cancer remains one of the most frequent malignancies (third place at both genders) worldwide in the last decade, owing to significant changes in modern dietary habits. Approximately half of the patients develop metastases during the course of their disease. The available therapeutic armamentarium is constantly evolving, raising questions regarding the best approach for improving survival. Bevacizumab remains one of the most widely used therapies for treating metastatic colorectal cancer and can be used after progression. This study aimed to identify the best chemotherapy partner for bevacizumab after progression. We performed a retrospective analysis of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who were treated with bevacizumab as first- and second-line chemotherapy. Data were collected for 151 patients, 40 of whom were treated with double-dose bevacizumab after the first progression. The two standard chemotherapy regimens combined with bevacizumab were FOLFIRI/CAPIRI and FOLFOX4/CAPEOX. The initiation of first-line treatment with irinotecan-based chemotherapy improved progression-free survival and time to treatment failure but not overall survival. After the first progression, retreatment with the same regimen as that used in the induction phase was the best approach for improving overall survival (median overall survival: 46.5 vs. 27.0 months for the same vs. switched strategy, respectively). No correlations were observed between the dose intensity of irinotecan, oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, or bevacizumab and the overall survival, progression-free survival in the first-/second-line treatment, and time to treatment failure. Interaction between an irinotecan-based regimen as a second-line treatment and double-dose bevacizumab after progression was associated with an improved overall survival (p = 0.06). Initiating systemic treatment with an irinotecan-based regimen in combination with bevacizumab improved the progression-free survival in the first-line treatment and time to treatment failure. In terms of overall survival, bevacizumab treatment after the first progression is better partnered with the same regimen as that used in the induction phase.

Efficacy and prognostic significance of triflurodine/tipiracil beyond oxaliplatin and irinotecan based chemotherapy in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: An observational multicenter study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15586-e15586
Author(s):  
Mohamed Alghamdi ◽  
Shouki Bazarbashi ◽  
Elsamany Shereef ◽  
Mervat Mahrous ◽  
Omar Al shaer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Saudi Arabia ◽  
Neutrophil Count ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
P Value ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival

e15586 Background: In Saudi Arabia, the incidence of colorectal cancer has been increased over the past few years. The optimal treatment beyond the second line is not fully understood. To the best of our knowledge, the efficacy and disease outcomes of triflurodine/tipiracil in Saudi patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC) has not been studied yet. Our study is a real-life practice evaluation of the efficacy of triflurodine/tipiracil in patients with refractory mCRC. Moreover, the prognosis and the prognostic significance of the different clinical variables have been analyzed. Methods: A retrospective, multi-centers ( 5 centers representative of Saudi Arabia )observational study in patients with mCRC who have received triflurodine/tipiracil beyond oxaliplatin & Irinotecan-based chemotherapy between December 2018-December 2020.We aimed to assess the response to triflurodine/tipiracil, to evaluate the progression-free survival (PFS ), the overall survival (OS), and the associated factors of prognostic significance. Results:The data of 100 patients with refractory mCRC who has received triflurodine/tipiracil have been analyzed. The mean age was 55.2 +11.8 years. Forty-two patients were (42%) females and 58 (58%) were male patients. Sigmoid was the most common primary site of cancer in 35 (35%) patients, followed by rectum 29 (29%). Peritoneal metastasis was present in 17 (23.3%) patients ,liver in 51(56.6%) and lung in 39 (50.7%). Metastatic sites were ≥ 2 in 45 (45%) patients. Metastatic lesions were ≥ 5 in 65 (65%) patients. Xelox chemotherapy regimen was the most commonly used first-line chemotherapy which represents 43%, while Folfiri or Xeliri combination was the most used second line in 57 (60%). For the third line, Folfox or Xelox was used in 81 (83.5%) patients. The fourth line was given to 49 (67.1%). For first-line biological agents, Cetuximab was used most frequently 31 (46.3%).Evaluation of the response to treatment with triflurodine/tipiracil revealed one patient (1%) with a complete response,3 patients (3%) with partial response, 28 (28%) patients with stable disease, and 66 (66%) showed progressive disease. The estimated median progression-free survival was 5 months ( 3.839 - 6.161) and the median overall survival was 12 months (9.732-14.268). The log-rank analysis showed that the baseline neutrophils ≤ 75 % ( P-value= 0.0092) and low hemoglobin level (P-value= 0.0245) were strongly associated with a higher survival. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, the neutrophil count ≤ 75 % was the only independent predictor for survival. Conclusions: Trifluridine/tipiracil is effective in patients with refractory mCRC. The low neutrophil count might predict a better overall survival.

Effect of the addition of bevacizumab to first-line FOLFOX on efficacy, including response rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival, in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 588-588
Author(s):  
M. Suenaga ◽  
N. Mizunuma ◽  
S. Matsusaka ◽  
E. Shinozaki ◽  
M. Ogura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

588 Background: Bevacizumab (BV) is a recombinant, humanized monoclonal antibody against vascular endothelial growth factor. Used in combination with chemotherapy, BV has been shown to improve survival in both first- and second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). However, it was reported that addition of BV to FOLFOX conferred only little survival benefit (Saltz et al. JCO2008). The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of addition of BV to FOLFOX in first-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Methods: Bevacizumab was approved for mCRC in July 2007 in Japan. This study was conducted at a single institution and comprised 217 consecutive patients receiving first-line treatment for mCRC between 2005 and 2009. The primary objective was to compare survival benefit in patients treated with FOLFOX4 (FF) between 2005 and 2007 with that in patients receiving FOLFOX4+BV 5 mg/kg (FF+BV) between 2007 and 2009. Results: Total number of patients in the FF and FF+BV groups was 132 and 85, respectively. Characteristics of patients were as follows (FF vs. FF+B): median age, 62 yrs (range 28-76 yrs) vs. 60 yrs (range16-74 yrs); ECOG PS0, 98.8% vs. 81.8%; and median follow-up time, 20.8 months vs. 24.4 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) in the FF and FF+BV groups was 10 months (95% CI, 8.7-11.3) and 17 months (95% CI, 10.2-14.1), while median overall survival (OS) was 21 months (95% CI, 17.9-24.1) and not reached, respectively. Response rate was 46% (95% CI, 37- 54) in FF, and 62% (95% CI, 51-73) in FF+BV. Addition of BV to FOLFOX4 significantly improved PFS (p=0.002) and OS (p<0.001). Conclusions: The additive effect of BV for first-line FOLFOX was reconfirmed. These data indicate potential survival benefits from the addition of BV to FOLFOX in first-line treatment of mCRC. In addition, PFS may be a sensitive indicator of outcome prior to post-treatment. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Addition of bevacizumab to first-line FOLFOX4 and overall survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 610-610 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mitsukuni Suenaga ◽  
Satoshi Matsusaka ◽  
Nobuyuki Mizunuma ◽  
Eiji Shinozaki ◽  
Mariko Ogura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Treatment

610 Background: In our previous report, addition of bevacizumab (BV) to the FOLFOX4 regimen appeared to significantly improve response rate, progression-free survival and overall survival in first-line treatment for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) (Suenaga M, et al. ASCO-GI 2011 [abstr 588]). Update results met median overall survival, and statistical analysis of survival was performed. Methods: An observational cohort study was carried out on all eligible patients scheduled to receive FOLFOX4 (n = 128) or FOLFOX4+BV (n = 85) between 2005 and 2007, 2007 and 2009, with a median follow-up time of 20.4 months vs. 30.2 months, respectively. Predefined efficacy endpoints were treatment characteristics, response rates, progression-free survival, and overall survival in the periods of time observed. Results: Median progression-free survival was 9.9 months (95% CI, 8.4-11.4) in the FOLFOX4- and 17 months (95% CI, 11.8-22.3) in the FOLFOX4+BV-treated patients (p=0.002). Median overall survival times were 20.5 months (95% CI, 16.9-24) and 38.8 months (95% CI, 32.9-44.8) in the two groups, respectively (p<0.001). In the ECOG PS 0 population, progression-free survival in the FOLFOX4 and FOLFOX4+BV groups was 11 months and 17 months with a hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% CI, 0.44-0.89) in favour of FOLFOX4+BV, similarly in OS with a hazard ratio of 0.53 (95% CI, 0.36-0.77). Subgroup population received 5-FU plus leucovorin (FL) as maintenance during oxaliplatin discontinuation due to adverse events had longer PFS or OS in both groups, though no significance. PFS were 14.7 and 21.6 months, and OS were 29 and 45.9 months, respectively. Secondary resection was performed more in FOLFOX4+BV (11.8%) than FOLFOX4 (3.9%) patients. Conclusions: These data indicate potential survival benefits from the addition of BV to the FOLFOX4 regimen as first-line treatment for mCRC. Maintenance using FL after discontinuation of oxaliplatin due to adverse events appeared to be an essential factor for better survival.

Phase II trial of irinotecan, S-1, and bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) combination chemotherapy as second line for advanced colorectal cancer (NCCSG04).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 496-496
Author(s):  
Yasumasa Takii ◽  
Kouichi Hurukawa ◽  
Satoshi Maruyama ◽  
Toshiyuki Yamazaki ◽  
Jun Nishimura ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Phase Ii Trial ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Therapy

496 Background: The FIRIS study (Muro K et al. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:853-860) previously demonstrated the non-inferiority of Irinotecan plus S-1 (IRIS) to FOLFIRI for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), with progression-free survival as the primary endpoint. IRIS plus bevacizumab (IRIS/Bev) was reported an active and generally well-tolerated first-line treatment for mCRC (Yuki et al. ASCO 2012 #3593). We planned a Phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IRIS/Bev as second-line therapy for patients with mCRC. Methods: The study design was multicenter, single-arm, open-label phase II study. Eligible patients had to have mCRC with confirmed diagnosis of adenocarcinoma, history of oxaliplatin containing regimen as first-line therapy, an age from 20 to 80 years, ECOG performance status (PS) of 0-1. S-1 65 mg/m2 daily p.o. was given on days 1-14 and Irinotecan 75mg/m2 and Bevacizumab 10mg/kg i.v. were given on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included overall response rate (OR), overall survival (OS), time to treatment failure (TTF) and safety. Results: From 08/12 until 11/06, 35 patients were enrolled. One patient did not start therapy. Thirty-four patients were investigated. Median age was 63 years (range, 38 to 82). Twenty-five patients were male. The mean of relative dose intensity of TS-1/Irinotecan/Bev were respectively 92.1%/87.0%/86.2%. The OR was 21.1% (7/33) and disease control rate was 84.8% (28/33). Median PFS was 9.3 months, median TTF was 8.2 month and median survival time 23.1 month. On safety analysis, the incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse reactions were as follows: neutropenia, 14.7%; fatigue, 14.7%; white blood cell decreased, 11.8%; anorexia, 8.8%; anemia, 8.8%; diarrhea, 2.9%; proteinuria, 5.9%; thromboembolic event, 2.9%. Conclusions: IRIS/Bev is an active and well-tollarated second-line treatment for patients with mCRC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000001631.

scholarly journals CALGB 80403 (Alliance)/E1206: A Randomized Phase II Study of Three Chemotherapy Regimens Plus Cetuximab in Metastatic Esophageal and Gastroesophageal Junction Cancers

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (23) ◽  
pp. 2736-2742 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter C. Enzinger ◽  
Barbara Ann Burtness ◽  
Donna Niedzwiecki ◽  
Xing Ye ◽  
Kathe Douglas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Treatment Failure ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Similar Efficacy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Time To Treatment ◽  
Time To Treatment Failure ◽  
One To One

Purpose To determine the optimal chemotherapy backbone for testing in future US cooperative group studies for metastatic esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancers. Cetuximab was added to each treatment arm based on promising preclinical data. Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated metastatic esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer were randomly assigned at a one-to-one-to-one ratio to epirubicin, cisplatin, and continuous-infusion fluorouracil (ECF), irinotecan plus cisplatin (IC), or FOLFOX (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and bolus and infusional fluorouracil). All treatment programs included cetuximab once per week. The primary end point was response rate. Secondary outcomes included overall survival, progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, and safety. As prespecified, primary and secondary analyses were conducted only among patients with adenocarcinoma. Results This study randomly assigned 245 patients, including 222 with adenocarcinoma. Among patients with adenocarcinoma, response rate was 60.9% (95% CI, 47.9 to 72.8) for ECF plus cetuximab, 45.0% (95% CI, 33.0 to 57.0) for IC plus cetuximab, and 54.3% (95% CI, 42.0 to 66.2) for FOLFOX plus cetuximab. Median overall survival was 11.6, 8.6, and 11.8 months; median progression-free survival was 7.1, 4.9, and 6.8 months; and median time to treatment failure was 5.6, 4.3, and 6.7 months for each of these arms, respectively. FOLFOX plus cetuximab required fewer treatment modifications compared with ECF plus cetuximab and IC plus cetuximab (P = .013), and fewer patients were removed from treatment because of an adverse event or experienced treatment-related death. Conclusion In combination with cetuximab, ECF and FOLFOX had similar efficacy, but FOLFOX was better tolerated. Although differences were nonsignificant, IC plus cetuximab seemed to be the least effective and most toxic of the three regimens tested.

scholarly journals TheraSphere Yttrium-90 Glass Microspheres Combined With Chemotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone in Second-Line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma of the Liver: Protocol for the EPOCH Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial (Preprint)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikhil Chauhan ◽  
Mary F Mulcahy ◽  
Riad Salem ◽  
Al B Benson III ◽  
Eveline Boucher ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND Colorectal cancer is one of the most common cancers and causes of cancer-related death. Up to approximately 70% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) have metastases to the liver at initial diagnosis. Second-line systemic treatment in mCRC can prolong survival after development of disease progression during or after first-line treatment and in those who are intolerant to first-line treatment. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of transarterial radioembolization (TARE) with TheraSphere yttrium-90 (90Y) glass microspheres combined with second-line therapy in patients with mCRC of the liver who had disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy. METHODS EPOCH is an open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 trial being conducted at up to 100 sites in the United States, Canada, Europe, and Asia. Eligible patients have mCRC of the liver and disease progression after first-line chemotherapy with either an oxaliplatin-based or irinotecan-based regimen and are eligible for second-line chemotherapy with the alternate regimen. Patients were randomized 1:1 to the TARE group (chemotherapy with TARE in place of the second chemotherapy infusion and subsequent resumption of chemotherapy) or the control group (chemotherapy alone). The addition of targeted agents is permitted. The primary end points are progression-free survival and hepatic progression-free survival. The study objective will be considered achieved if at least one primary end point is statistically significant. Secondary end points are overall survival, time to symptomatic progression defined as Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status score of 2 or higher, objective response rate, disease control rate, quality-of-life assessment by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Colorectal Cancer questionnaire, and adverse events. The study is an adaptive trial, comprising a group sequential design with 2 interim analyses with a planned maximum of 420 patients. The study is designed to detect a 2.5-month increase in median progression-free survival, from 6 months in the control group to 8.5 months in the TARE group (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71), and a 3.5-month increase in median hepatic progression-free survival time, from 6.5 months in the control group to 10 months in the TARE group (HR 0.65). On the basis of simulations, the power to detect the target difference in either progression-free survival or hepatic progression-free survival is >90%, and the power to detect the target difference in each end point alone is >80%. RESULTS Patient enrollment ended in October 2018. The first interim analysis in June 2018 resulted in continuation of the study without any changes. CONCLUSIONS The EPOCH study may contribute toward the establishment of the role of combination therapy with TARE and oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based chemotherapy in the second-line treatment of mCRC of the liver. CLINICALTRIAL ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01483027; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01483027 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/734A6PAYW) INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPOR RR1-10.2196/11545

Sequence Therapy with FOLFIRINOX and Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer – a Monocenter Retrospective Cohort Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Queck ◽  
Sharra Elango ◽  
Christine Koch ◽  
Dirk Walter ◽  
Jennifer Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Control ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Response To Chemotherapy

Background & aims: While irresectable pancreatic cancer has still a dismal overall prognosis, evidence about the optimal chemotherapy sequence is scarce. After treatment with FOLFIRINOX in first-line, Gemcitabine-monotherapy was established for years. As a potential treatment alternative after failure of FOLFIRINOX therapy, combination of Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel is used. However, this combination has formally not yet been approved for second-line treatment and investigation of efficiency and treatment tolerance is the aim of this trial. Methods: Therefore, we investigated 225 patients with histologically confirmed local advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer in this retrospective mono-centre study (November 2010 – July 2019). Of this, 44 patients received FOLFIRINOX therapy and outcome was further analysed. The primary end point of this cohort was overall survival, secondary end points included progression free survival, response rate, and safety. Results: In most of the patients FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment of irresectable pancreatic cancer resulted in temporary cancer control (partial response (PR): 50% and stable disease (SD): 18%), whereas tumor progression was observed in 23% of the patients. The median progression-free survival (PFS) time for FOLFIRINOX treatment was 7.3 months and median overall survival 10.3 months. Seven (16%) patients received additional local radio chemotherapy of the pancreatic tumor. During first-line therapy 8 (18%) patients had laparotomy for proof of resectability. Hereby, in three patients R0-, in three patients R1 resection, and irresectability in another 2 patients were achieved. Twenty-five of the 44 patients (57%) received second line therapy, namely 24 patients Gemcitabine/ Nab-Paclitaxel and 1 patient Gemcitabine and Erlotinib. Hereby, Gemcitabine/ Nab-Paclitaxel led again to temporary tumor control in 46% of the patients (PR: 21%, SD: 25%), while in 29% of the patient’s disease progression was observed. Corresponding median PFS for Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel treatment was 3.5 months. Patients who received second-line treatment with Nab-Paclitaxel and Gemcitabine had a more favorable prognosis (median OS: 17.4 versus 9.2 months; HR 0.32 [0.14 – 0.70], p<0.001) than patients who were not eligible for second-line treatment. Moreover, in multivariate analyses association with patients’ survival and tumor response to chemotherapy in both therapeutic lines and µGT below 100 IU/L in first-line FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy were observed. Conclusion: These real-world data suggest that Gemcitabine / Nab-Paclitaxel may be feasible after FOLFIRINOX therapy in patients with irresectable pancreatic cancer. However, prospective randomized data about the superiority to Gemcitabine monotherapy are needed.

Activity of Idelalisib in High-Risk Follicular Lymphoma with Early Relapse Following Front Line Immunochemotherapy

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2744-2744 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay K Gopal ◽  
Brad S Kahl ◽  
Christopher Flowers ◽  
Peter Martin ◽  
Brian K Link ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

Abstract Background: Follicular lymphoma (FL) is the most common indolent NHL with a heterogenous natural history of disease and a median survival of 8 to 12 y, albeit ranging between 1 to 20 y. Casulo et al. (2015) identified a high-risk FL cohort of patients with progression of disease (POD) at ≤24 months following initiation of immunochemotherapy with R-CHOP. Idelalisib (Zydelig) is a first-in-class, highly selective, oral inhibitor of PI3Kd which is indicated for relapsed FL or SLL following receipt of at least two lines of systemic chemotherapy. Retrospective subgroup analysis of the idelalisib registrational trial NCT01282424 (101-09) of a cohort with early POD following immunochemotherapy was performed to assess possible activity of idelalisib in this population. Methods: A subset of 46 patients enrolled in study 101-09 were identified as having been diagnosed with FL and having received first-line immunochemotherapy, of which 37 experienced early POD, defined as starting second-line treatment within 24 months of initial first-line treatment. For the latter group, descriptive statistics of demographic and baseline characteristics and inter-treatment intervals in months as well as Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) following initiation of immunochemotherapy and idelalisib were calculated. Population: Demographic characteristics of these 37 patients included median (range) age at initiation of idelalisib of 64 (33-84) y and 18 (48.6%) females. Histologic grade at diagnosis included 33 (89.2%) with grades 1 or 2 as well as 4 (10.8%) with grade 3A, while 21 (56.8%) patients had a FLIPI score ≥3. The mean (s.d.) number of prior therapies was 3.4±1.4, with a range of 2 to 8, while first-line therapies included 21 (56.8%) patients who received R-CHOP-based regimens, 7 (18.9%) who received BR, and 5 (13.5%) who received R-CVP. Mean (s.d.) inter-treatment intervals included 12.5±6.1 months between first- and second-line for all patients, 9.7±9.3 months between second- and third-line for all patients, 11.9±12.0 months between third- and fourth-line for 24 (64.9%) patients, and 11.8±7.6 months between fourth- and fifth-line for 15 (40.5%) patients. Median (range) time from first-line therapy to idelalisib initiation was 30.3 (8.9-94.7) months; no patient received idelalisib as second-line therapy. Results: Best responses included 5 (13.5%) patients with CR, 16 (43.2%) with PR, 2 (5.4%) with SD, and 1 (2.7%) with PD; median duration of response for those with CR or PR was 11.8 months (95% CI: 3.8 months, not evaluable). There were 7 (18.9%) deaths and 21 (56.8%) PFS events in this group. Estimated probabilities of survival (s.e.) and progression-free status at 2 y following initiation of idelalisib were 79%±7% and 29%±10%, respectively. Median PFS was 11.1 months (95% CI: 5.5, 19.3 months). Estimated probability of survival (s.e.) at 5 years following initiation of first-line treatment was 79%±8%. Median overall survival from both initiation of first-line immunochemotherapy as well as with idelalisib was not reached during the course of this study. Conclusions: Idelalisib may have significant clinical activity in high-risk and doubly-refractive FL following early relapse status post first-line immunochemotherapy. Given the small size of the studied subset population which may not be representative, further characterization in additional patients is warranted to ensure the generalizability of this finding, including consideration of further investigational protocols featuring targeted therapies employed both as single agents and in combination. Figure 1. Overall Survival From Initiation of First-line Treatment Figure 1. Overall Survival From Initiation of First-line Treatment Figure 2. Overall Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 2. Overall Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 3. Progression-Free Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Figure 3. Progression-Free Survival From Initiation of Idelalisib Disclosures Gopal: Gilead, Spectrum, Pfizer, Janssen, Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum, Pfizer, BioMarin, Cephalon/Teva, Emergent/Abbott. Gilead, Janssen., Merck, Milennium, Piramal, Seattle Genetics, Giogen Idec, BMS: Research Funding; Millennium, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria. Kahl:Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy; Cell Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy. Flowers:Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Martin:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy. Link:Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Research Funding. Ansell:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding. Ye:Gilead: Employment. Koh:Gilead: Employment. Abella:Gilead: Employment. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy. Salles:Calistoga Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Celgene Corporation; Genentech, Inc.; Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, L.P.; Roche: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation; Roche and Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation; Roche: Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document