scholarly journals Association of Bleeding Severity with Mortality with Extended Thromboprophylaxis in the Medically Ill in the Mariner Trial

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3669-3669
Author(s):  
Alex C. Spyropoulos ◽  
Walter Ageno ◽  
Gregory W. Albers ◽  
C. Gregory Elliott ◽  
Jonathan L. Halperin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Medical Patients ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Bayer Healthcare ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Prevention Center

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common after hospitalization in acutely ill medical patients, yet extended thromboprophylaxis has not been widely implemented due to concerns about bleeding. The MARINER study (NCT02111564) compared thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban (10mg daily or 7.5mg daily in subjects with creatinine clearance 30-<50ml/min at baseline) vs placebo for 45 days beyond hospital discharge to prevent symptomatic VTE in acutely ill medical patients while reducing bleeding events through patient selection (Spyropoulos AC et al NEJM 2018). Rivaroxaban did not significantly lower the composite of symptomatic VTE and VTE-related death but reduced symptomatic VTE (0.18% vs 0.42%, p=0.023). While major bleeding (MB) was infrequent in both study groups (0.28% vs 0.15% with rivaroxaban vs. placebo, p=0.124), there was more non-major clinically relevant bleeding (NMCRB) with rivaroxaban (1.42% vs 0.85%, HR 1.66, 95%CI 1.17-2.35, p=0.004). Although MB has been associated with increased mortality, the relationship between NMCRB and all-cause mortality (ACM) is not established. We hypothesized that subjects in the MARINER trial with MB but not those with NMCRB would be at an increased risk of ACM irrespective of treatment group. Methods: We evaluated all bleeding events in subjects taking at least one dose of study drug from randomization until 2 days after the last dose (safety population) and their association with ACM through the Day 75 visit in 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) subjects with no MB or NMCRB; (2) subjects whose first event was NMCRB; and (3) subjects whose first event was MB. Subjects only developing minimal or trivial bleeding were grouped with those who had no bleeding. Using a Cox proportional hazards model that included the bleeding group variable and baseline covariates that were significantly associated with ACM at p<0.05 (age, sex, history of VTE, history of anemia), we compared the risk of ACM in subjects with and without bleeding events. Results: The incidence of ACM among subjects who had a NMCRB was not increased over that in subjects without bleeding (2/136, 1.5% vs 218/11800, 1.8%, HR 0.41 95%CI 0.10, 1.67, p=0.213), while those experiencing MB had a higher incidence of death (4/26, 15.4% vs 218/11800, 1.8%, HR 3.43 95%CI 1.23, 9.54, p=0.018). Results of landmark analyses from the first bleeding event or end of treatment + 2 days to ACM for the three groups are displayed (Figure). Limitations: This analysis was post hoc and the MARINER trial excluded subjects at a high risk of bleeding. Conclusion: Although few subjects had MB events, those who did had an increased risk of ACM, while those who had NMCRB events did not. This suggests that the modest increase in NMCRB in trials of extended thromboprophylaxis may be an acceptable tradeoff to prevent VTE. Disclosures Spyropoulos: Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy; ATLAS (Colorado Prevention Center): Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy; Portola: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy. Ageno:Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: research support,travel support ; BMS Pfizer: Other: travel support; Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference and travel support; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Aspen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support. Albers:Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy. Elliott:Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy; University of Cincinnati: Honoraria; Spectrum Health: Honoraria; Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy. Halperin:Ortho-McNeil-Janssen: Consultancy; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; ATLAS (Colorado Prevention Center): Consultancy; NIH: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy. Hiatt:Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy; NIH: Research Funding; Janssen R&D, LLD: Consultancy. Maynard:Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy. Steg:Novartis: Consultancy; Regeneron: Consultancy; Lilly: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amarin: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy, Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy. Weitz:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Portola: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spiro:Bayer U.S. LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lu:Janssen R&D, LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sugarmann:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lipardi:Janssen Research and Develompent: Employment, Equity Ownership. Raskob:Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Tetherex: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Anthos: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy, Honoraria; Portola: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Honoraria. Barnathan:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. OffLabel Disclosure: Rivaroxaban is a Factor Xa inhibitor. The study evaluated the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban post-hospitalization in subjects with an acute medical illness as thromboprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism.

scholarly journals Association of Bleeding Severity with Mortality with in-Hospital and Extended Thromboprophylaxis in the Medically Ill in the Magellan Trial

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2441-2441
Author(s):  
Alex C. Spyropoulos ◽  
Gary E. Raskob ◽  
Alexander T Cohen ◽  
Walter Ageno ◽  
Jeffrey I. Weitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Venous Thromboembolism ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Major Bleeding ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Bayer Healthcare ◽  
Equity Ownership

Background: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is common after hospitalization in acutely ill medical patients, yet extended thromboprophylaxis has not been widely implemented due to concerns about bleeding. The MAGELLAN study (NCT00571649) evaluated whether rivaroxaban (10 mg QD for 35±4 days) compared with enoxaparin (40 mg QD for 10±4 days) followed by placebo could prevent asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis, symptomatic VTE, and VTE-related death. Through Day 35, rivaroxaban was superior to enoxaparin/placebo in the modified intent-to-treat population (4.4% vs 5.7%, RR 0.77, 95%CI, 0.62 to 0.96, p=0.02), but there was an increase in clinically relevant bleeding, the composite of major and non-major clinically relevant (NMCR) bleeding (4.1% vs 1,7%, RR 2.5, 95%CI 1.85-3.25, p<0.001). Although major bleeding has been associated with increased mortality, the relationship between NMCR bleeding and all-cause mortality (ACM) is not established. We hypothesized that subjects in the MAGELLAN trial with major bleeding but not those with NMCR bleeding, would be at an increased risk of ACM irrespective of treatment group. Methods: We evaluated all bleeding events in subjects taking at least one dose of study drug from randomization until 2 days after the last dose (safety population) and their association with ACM through the Day 90 visit in 3 mutually exclusive groups: (1) subjects with no major or NMCR bleeding; (2) subjects whose first event was NMCR bleeding; and (3) subjects whose first event was major bleeding. Subjects only developing minimal or trivial bleeding were grouped with those who had no clinically relevant bleeding. Using a Cox proportional hazards model that included the bleeding group variable and baseline covariates significantly associated with ACM at p<0.05 (age, BMI, history of cancer, history of anemia, inflammatory disease, acute ischemic stroke, and acute respiratory insufficiency), we compared the risk of ACM in subjects with and without bleeding events. Results: The incidence of ACM for subjects who had NMCR bleeding was numerically higher but not significantly increased compared with subjects with no bleeding (20/176, 11.4% vs 468/7763, 6.0%, HR 1.41 95%CI 0.88, 2.25, p=0.151), while subjects with major bleeding were at a significantly increased risk of death (28/59, 47.5% vs 468/7763, 6.0%, HR 7.74 95%CI 5.16, 11.59, p<0.0001). Results of landmark analyses from the first bleeding event or end of treatment + 2 days to ACM for the three groups are displayed (Figure). Limitations: This analysis was post hoc and may have been underpowered to detect differences in ACM associated with NMCR bleeding. Conclusion: Major bleeding was associated with a significantly increased risk of ACM but NMCR bleeding was not. This suggests that a modest increase in NMCR bleeding associated with extended thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban may be acceptable to prevent VTE. Strategies to better select patients at lower risk of bleeding may improve the benefit risk profile of extended thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban. Disclosures Spyropoulos: Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Research Funding; Portola: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy; ATLAS (Colorado Prevention Center): Consultancy; Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy. Raskob:Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy; Tetherex: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Anthos: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Portola: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eli Lilly: Consultancy. Cohen:Boston Scientific: Consultancy; CSL Behring: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; GLG: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; ACI Clinical: Consultancy; Aspen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Guidepoint Global: Consultancy; Johnson and Johnson: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Leo Pharma: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; McKinsey: Consultancy; Navigant: Consultancy; ONO: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Portola: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy; Temasek Capital: Consultancy; TRN: Consultancy; UK Government Health Select Committee: Other: advised the UK Government Health Select Committee, the all-party working group on thrombosis, the Department of Health, and the NHS, on the prevention of VTE; Lifeblood: Other: advisor to Lifeblood: the thrombosis charity and is the founder of the European educational charity the Coalition to Prevent Venous Thromboembolism. Ageno:Boehringer Ingelheim: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: conference and travel support; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: research support,travel support ; BMS Pfizer: Other: travel support; Aspen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Portola: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Daiichi Sankyo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel support. Weitz:Janssen R&D, LLC: Consultancy; Bayer Healthcare: Consultancy, Honoraria; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Ionis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Portola: Consultancy, Honoraria. Spiro:Bayer U.S. LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lu:Janssen R&D, LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lipardi:Janssen Research and Develompent: Employment, Equity Ownership. Barnathan:Janssen Research and Development LLC: Employment, Equity Ownership. OffLabel Disclosure: Rivaroxaban is a Factor Xa inhibitor. It is currently under review by FDA for approval as thromboprophylaxis in acutely ill medical patients at risk for venous thromboembolism.

Romiplostim in Thrombocytopenic Patients with Low- or Int-1- Risk MDS Results in Reduced Bleeding without Impacting Leukemic Progression: Final Follow-up Results from a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2000-2000
Author(s):  
Hagop Kantarjian ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽  
Jeffrey Szer ◽  
Uwe Platzbecker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Progression ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

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

Baseline Laboratory Parameters Potentially Associated with Thrombophilia in Patients with Chronic ITP.

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 2191-2191
Author(s):  
Raymond S.M. Wong ◽  
Kalpana Bakshi ◽  
Andres Brainsky
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Protein S ◽  
Coagulation Cascade ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
History Of ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 2191 Background: The concept that chronic immune thrombocytopenia (cITP) may be pro-thrombotic has progressively gained acceptance as reports show an increased risk of thromboembolism (TEE) among cITP patients. A report from the Danish National Patient Registry showed an incidence of venous TEE of 5.32/1000 patient years (PYs) among cITP patients and 2.04/1000 PYs in a reference cohort (Severinsen 2010). Similar results were found in a US claims database study (Bennett 2008). ITP experts have gradually acknowledged this higher risk, but the reason for it is not understood. Many hematologic markers have been shown to be indicators of thrombophilia or activation of the clotting cascade (Jenkins 2012; De Stefano 2002; Tsai 2002); to our knowledge they have not been systematically and prospectively studied in cITP patients. Aim: Describe the frequency of potential laboratory predictors of thrombophilia in cITP. Methods: Adults with cITP were enrolled in an ongoing study to evaluate effects of eltrombopag on the bone marrow. A “thrombophilia panel” of suspected/known indicators of a thrombophilic state or activation of the coagulation cascade was collected at baseline. Patients could not have been treated with thrombopoietin receptor (TPO-R) agonists 6 months prior to enrollment. Patients with history of TEE and ≥2 risk factors for thrombosis were not eligible for enrollment. Results: Baseline thrombophilia panels were available for all 167 patients. Median age was 41 years; 108 (65%) patients were female. Approximately half of the patients were Caucasians (48.5%), while 31.1% and 19.2% had Central South and East Asian heritage. Median time since ITP diagnosis was 3.9 years (range, 0.2–45.7). Thirteen (8%) patients reported prior exposure to TPO-R agonists. Most patients (95%) had no family history of TEE and no patient had a history of TEE. Most patients (81%; Table 1) had abnormal levels of at least one well-known or suspected predictor of thrombosis or marker of activation of the coagulation cascade, and 93 (56%) had >1 abnormality. The most frequent abnormalities were elevated Factor VIII (48%), elevated d-dimer (32%), lupus anticoagulant (26%), and deficient protein S (22%; Table 2). Discussion: To our knowledge this is the only published prospective study of a thrombophilia profile in a cohort of cITP patients. Recently published data suggest that patients with cITP have a higher risk of TEE but no adequate explanation for this has been furnished. The fact that a high proportion of patients in this study had markers of thrombophilia or activation of clotting provides a working hypothesis that may at least partially elucidate this trait. Summary/conclusions: The multiple baseline abnormalities in possible predictors of thrombophilia may support the theory that ITP is pro-thrombotic, but they need to be assessed in and compared to the general population to allow proper understanding of their implications. The potential correlation of these abnormalities with TEE in this cohort will be reported upon study conclusion. Disclosures: Wong: GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Biogen-Idec: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Bakshi:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership. Brainsky:GlaxoSmithKline: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.

Outcomes Following Lenalidomide for Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma Patients at Risk of Bleeding Events Because of Multiple Comorbidities or Treatment: A Post-Hoc Subgroup Analysis of the SPRINT (MCL-002) Trial

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2978-2978
Author(s):  
Marek Trneny ◽  
Thierry Lamy ◽  
Jan Walewski ◽  
David Belada ◽  
Jiri Mayer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Bleeding Risk ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Background: Patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) have limited treatment options, especially those receiving multiple prior therapies. Patients with MCL are mostly an elderly population with various comorbidities who receive multiple medications that may lead to an increased risk of toxicity from underlying disease, as well as drug interactions. These multiple, concomitant conditions introduce complexity into the evaluation of the risk-benefit ratio of available therapies. In the relapsed setting, there is increasing use of new treatment options, such as lenalidomide, which is an immunomodulatory agent with direct and immune-mediated mechanisms of action. Lenalidomide has shown efficacy and a tolerable safety profile in multiple studies of R/R MCL, including the randomized MCL-002 (SPRINT) study comparing lenalidomide vs. investigator's choice (IC) of monotherapy. The objective of this post hoc subgroup analysis from the MCL-002 study was to examine the effect and safety of lenalidomide in patients who are at risk of bleeding events because of multiple comorbidities or treatments (i.e., polymedication) denoted as LEN-CM compared with those not at risk (LEN), LEN-CM being a population with a limited choice of treatment options. Methods: The multicenter MCL-002 study randomized patients 2:1 to lenalidomide vs. single-agent IC of monotherapy (rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil, or cytarabine; NCT00875667). Patients had 1-3 relapses or had failed prior therapy, and were ineligible for intensified chemotherapy or stem cell transplantation. Oral lenalidomide was initiated at 25 mg/day on days 1-21 of 28-day cycles until disease progression or as tolerated. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary endpoint (per modified 1999 IWG criteria); secondary endpoints included response rates, duration of response (DOR), overall survival (OS), and safety. The current analyses were based on investigator's assessment. Specific patient groups with or without increased bleeding risk due to comorbidities and/or treatment were identified for the subgroup analysis based on pre-existing characteristics at study initiation. Patients in the LEN-CM group included those with hemorrhages (or predispositions to such), concomitant anticoagulant therapy with vitamin K antagonists or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and/or current or preexisting atrial fibrillation requiring anticoagulants. Results: Of 170 patients originally randomized to lenalidomide treatment, there were 60 (35%) LEN-CM vs. 110 (65%) LEN patients included in this subanalysis. At baseline, patients in both groups generally had a similar baseline patient profile and prior treatment history, although there were some differences between groups: more patients in the LEN-CM group (vs. LEN) were >=65 years of age (78% vs. 62%) and had more high-risk MIPI score at baseline (47% vs. 29%), whereas fewer had positive bone marrow (7% vs. 15%), high tumor burden (37% vs. 54%), or bulky disease (15% vs. 25%). Median PFS by investigator assessment was 10.7 months (95% CI, 4.3-14.0) for LEN-CM and 7.0 months (95% CI, 5.3-14.6) for LEN (Table 1). Overall response rates (ORR) in the LEN-CM vs. LEN patients were 29/60 (48%) and 49/110 (45%) with complete response (CR)/CR unconfirmed (CRu) rates of 6/60 (10%) and 13/110 (12%), respectively. Median DOR and OS were also similar in both groups of lenalidomide-treated patients. The safety profiles were similar for these subgroups, with similar rates of AEs leading to discontinuations and dose reductions/interruptions. Most common any grade treatment-emergent AEs (>=20%) for LEN-CM vs. LEN groups respectively were 48% vs. 52% neutropenia, 33% vs. 38% thrombocytopenia, 32% vs. 27% anemia, 25% vs. 19% fatigue, 23% vs. 22% diarrhea, and 5% vs. 23% pyrexia. Conclusions: For patients with R/R MCL, there is a high, unmet medical need for effectivetherapy with acceptable toxicity. Overall, the LEN-CM and LEN subgroups showed similar efficacy and safety outcomes. Results from this subgroup analysis of the MCL-002 study show that lenalidomide leads to clinically meaningful PFS and other efficacy outcomes irrespective of the presence or absence of bleeding risk due to comorbidities and/or treatment. Disclosures Walewski: Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Belada:Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Radford:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Equity Ownership; Astra-Zeneca: Equity Ownership; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jurczak:Morphosys: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celtron: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sandoz-Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Morschhauser:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria. Kaplanov:State Budgetary Healthcare Institution "Volgograd Regional Clinical Oncology Dispensary #1: Employment. Thyss:Takeda: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding. Kuzmin:Republican Clinical Oncology Dispensary: Employment. Stelitano:Azienda Ospedaliera: Employment. Marks:Pfizer: Honoraria. Trümper:Roche: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Hexal: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Biyukov:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Barnett:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casadebaig Bravo:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Arcaini:Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Research Funding.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 1/2 Study to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of Romiplostim in Children with Chronic Immune (Idiopathic) Thrombocytopenic Purpura (ITP).

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 680-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
George R. Buchanan ◽  
Lisa Bomgaars ◽  
James B. Bussel ◽  
Diane J. Nugent ◽  
David J. Gnarra ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Platelet Count ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Treatment Period ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Platelet Counts ◽  
Chronic Itp ◽  
Equity Ownership

Abstract Abstract 680 Introduction: ITP is an autoimmune disorder characterized by thrombocytopenia due to accelerated destruction as well as suboptimal platelet production. Childhood ITP is most commonly an acute illness; however, chronic ITP (duration > 6 months) develops in 20%–30% of ITP cases. Romiplostim, a peptibody protein designed to increase platelet production, is approved for treating chronic ITP in adults. The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of romiplostim in the treatment of thrombocytopenia in children with chronic ITP. Patients and Methods: ITP patients aged 12 months to <18 years with persistent severe thrombocytopenia for at least six months before enrollment (mean of 2 platelet counts ≥ 30 × 109/L at baseline) were included in this study. Patients were randomized (3:1) to receive romiplostim or placebo and stratified by age: 12 months - <3 years (N=4), 3 - <12 years (N=8), and 12 - <18 years (N=8). Treatment for a 12 week period was followed by a 4 week pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment period for responding patients (those who achieved a platelet count of >20 × 109/L above baseline for 2 consecutive weeks without rescue therapy at any point during the treatment period). Treatment was initiated at 1 μg/kg once weekly by subcutaneous injection. The dose was adjusted in 2 μg/kg increments every two weeks, to a maximum dose of 10 μg/kg/week based on weekly platelet counts. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) during the 12-week treatment period and the number of patients achieving platelet counts >50 × 109/L for 2 consecutive weeks during the treatment period, or achieving an increase in platelet count >20 × 109/L above baseline for 2 consecutive weeks during the treatment period was recorded. Results: A total of 22 (romiplostim, 17; placebo, 5) patients were randomized; 16 (73%) were boys and 6 (27%) were girls. Eight patients had undergone splenectomy. The mean age was 9.5 (SD: 5.1) years, with 4 subjects aged 12 months - <3 years, 10 aged 3 - <12 years, and 8 aged 12 - <18 years. The median baseline platelet count was 13 × 109/L (range 2 to 29 × 109/L) and the median duration of ITP was 2.4 years (range 0.6 to 14 years). All patients completed the study. Sixteen of 17 patients in the romiplostim arm (94%) and 5/5 in the placebo arm (100%) had at least 1 AE during the treatment period. The most common AEs were (romiplostim, placebo, respectively) headache (35%, 40%), epistaxis (35%, 20%), cough (12%, 40%), and vomiting (12%, 40%). Serious AEs were experienced by 1 patient in the romiplostim arm (moderate influenza and sepsis) and none in the placebo arm. AEs considered to be treatment related were reported for 3 (18%) and 1 (20%) subjects in the romiplostim and placebo arms, respectively; none of the treatment-related AEs were serious or of ≥3 grade severity. No patients died during the study and none tested positive for neutralizing antibodies to romiplostim or thrombopoietin. The same group of patients in the romiplostim-treated arm (15/17, 88.2%, 95% CI: 63.6%, 98.5%) achieved both efficacy endpoints during the treatment period. The median platelet count in the romiplostim-treated arm after 6 weeks of treatment was ≥50 × 109/L. The median weekly platelet count in the placebo arm remained stable at approximately 10 × 109/L. None of the placebo-treated patients achieved either platelet count endpoint. Rescue medication was administered to 2/17 (12%) of romiplostim- and 2/5 (40%) of placebo-treated patients during the 12 week treatment period. Twelve (71%) and 2 (40%) subjects in the romiplostim and placebo arms, respectively, experienced bleeding events. The majority of bleeding events (15/17) in the romiplostim arm occurred in the first 6 weeks of treatment. Most bleeding events (14/17) in the romiplostim arm and all bleeding events in the placebo arm occurred when the platelet count was < 30 × 109/L. A total of 14 patients treated with romiplostim entered the PK assessment period. The romiplostim serum concentration results were not different among the 3 age cohorts. The mean weekly dose of romiplostim in the treatment period was 3.4 (SD: 1.6) μg/kg. Conclusion: Treatment with romiplostim appeared to be well tolerated in pediatric ITP patients, with no new safety concerns observed in this study as compared to adults with chronic ITP. Romiplostim was effective in treating thrombocytopenia in children with chronic ITP. Disclosures: Buchanan: Amgen Inc.: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Use of romiplostim, a thrombopoietin mimetic, in treatment of thrombocytopenia in pediatric ITP patients. . Bomgaars:Novartis: Research Funding. Bussel:Eisai, Inc: Research Funding; Sysmex: Research Funding; Shionogi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ligand: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Immunomedics: Research Funding; Amgen: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cangene: Research Funding; Genzyme: Research Funding; Scienta: Speakers Bureau. Nie:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Eisen:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Berger:Amgen Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership.

A Retrospective Analysis of Pneumocystis Jirovecii Pneumonia Infection in Patients Receiving Idelalisib in Clinical Trials

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3705-3705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurie H Sehn ◽  
Michael Hallek ◽  
Wojciech Jurczak ◽  
Jennifer R. Brown ◽  
Paul M. Barr ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Pneumocystis Jirovecii Pneumonia ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Increased Risk ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Cd20 Antibody ◽  
Anti Cd20 ◽  
Support Research

Abstract Introduction: Opportunistic infections such as Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP) occur commonly in immunocompromised hosts such as patients (pts) with cancer (especially hematological malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia [CLL] and indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma [iNHL]) or those receiving immunosuppressive therapies (such as steroids, chemotherapy). Recently, an increased risk of PJP infection was identified in 3 ongoing phase 3 studies evaluating idelalisib, administered in combination with the standard regimens rituximab (R) or bendamustine and rituximab (BR), in front-line CLL and early-line iNHL. Subsequently, a comprehensive analysis evaluating PJP infection across the clinical development program was performed to identify possible risk factors for developing PJP infection, including age, concomitant therapy (co-therapy) administered, geographic distribution of PJP infection, and regional use of prophylaxis. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 2198 pts receiving study treatment with idelalisib alone or in combination with co-therapy (anti-CD20 antibody or BR) and pts receiving only co-therapy (anti-CD20 ± bendamustine) (n = 1391 and 807, respectively) across 8 studies (frontline/relapsed CLL and relapsed iNHL) between 2010 and 2016 was performed. PJP infection was defined based on MedDRA high-level term of pneumocystis infections. In this analysis, other parameters were included for evaluation of risk of developing PJP infection-prophylaxis for PJP, geographic region, age, and CD4 count. Results: The overall incidence of PJP infection was 2.5% in pts on idelalisib ± co-therapy vs 0.2% in pts receiving only anti-CD20 antibody alone or BR alone (relative risk = 12.5). The median time to PJP event was 141 days since initiation of IDELA or co-therapy. The incidence of PJP infection was similar, irrespective of pt age. In the pt population receiving IDELA ± co-therapy - prophylaxis for PJP reduced the incidence of infection to 1.3% (from 3.4% in pts not receiving prophylaxis). Additionally, analysis by type of co-therapy received - the incidence of PJP infection was 2.2% vs 3.1% with IDELA + BR and IDELA + anti-CD20 alone respectively. A correlation between CD4 count (<200 cells/mcL) and an increased risk of PJP infection was not observed. Additional data are provided in Table 1. Conclusion: There is a small but increased risk of PJP infection during treatment with idelalisib within the clinical trial program. These data suggest that prophylaxis for PJP may reduce the risk of infection by as much as 60%. Administration of PJP prophylaxis is now recommended in all pts receiving treatment with idelalisib. Disclosures Sehn: roche/genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria; amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; seattle genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; TG therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; lundbeck: Consultancy, Honoraria; janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Hallek:Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-LaRoche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jurczak:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celltrion, Inc: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Brown:Infinity: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Sun BioPharma: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy. Barr:Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy. Catalano:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Coutre:Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Research Funding. Furman:Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Lamanna:Gilead Sciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zelenetz:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Sharman:Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding. Adewoye:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kim:Gilead Sciences: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flinn:Janssen: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; RainTree Oncology Services: Equity Ownership. Salles:Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Treatment with the Thrombopoietin (TPO)-Receptor Agonist Romiplostim in Thrombocytopenic Patients (Pts) with Low or Intermediate-1 (Int-1) Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS): Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo(PBO)-Controlled Study

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 117-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aristoteles Giagounidis ◽  
Ghulam J. Mufti ◽  
Hagop M. Kantarjian ◽  
Pierre Fenaux ◽  
Mikkael A. Sekeres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Supportive Care ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Bleeding Events ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Clinically Significant

Abstract Abstract 117 Background: There are few therapies for thrombocytopenia in MDS, which is found in ∼50% of pts with low/int-1 MDS and is associated with shortened survival. Methods: IPSS low/int-1 MDS pts receiving supportive care, with platelets 1) ≤20×109/L or 2) ≤ 50×109/L with a history of bleeding, were randomized 2:1 to 750 μg romiplostim:PBO for 26 wk with MDS supportive care, and a 4-wk washout followed by bone marrow (BM) biopsy. Pts continued as randomized, with any MDS therapy, for 24 wk with another 4-wk washout followed by a BM biopsy. The 1° endpoint was the number of clinically significant bleeding events (CSBE, grade ≥2 per modified WHO scale); other endpoints included protocol-defined platelet transfusion events (PTE), platelet response per IWG 2006 (HI-P), survival, and safety, including progression to AML, defined conservatively as: 1) ≥20% blasts in the BM or peripheral blood after 4 wk off romiplostim, or 2) pathology consistent with leukemia (eg, chloroma or leukemia cutis), or 3) anti-leukemic treatment initiation. Results: Of 250 pts enrolled (romiplostim 167, PBO 83): 59% were male, median (Q1, Q3) age was 70 (61, 77) year, WHO classes RCMD (68%), RAEB-1 (13%), MDS-U (11%), RA (4.4%), RCMD-RS (2.4%), RARS (0.8%), RAEB-2 (1%), IPSS status low (25%), int-1 (71%), int-2 (0.4%), and IPSS cytogenetics good (78%), intermediate (18%), poor (1.6%). There were more pts who were RAEB-1 (14% vs 11%) and RAEB-2 (1% vs 0%) and fewer who were MDS-U (10% vs 15%) with romiplostim (all NS). Due to DMC concerns regarding the potential for transient increases in blast cell counts and the risk for progression to or treatment for AML, study drug was discontinued in Feb 2011, affecting 28% of pts. Also leading to withdrawal were consent withdrawn (romiplostim 13%, PBO 15%), adverse events (AE) (12%, 5%), and alternative therapy (7%, 11%). The mean number of CSBE/pt was romiplostim 1.47, PBO 1.94 (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.66, 1.05, p = 0.13); rates were romiplostim 18.6%, PBO 26.5%. The overall number of bleeding events was reduced with romiplostim (RR 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86, 0.99, p = 0.026). PTE rates/100 pt-year were romiplostim 748.9, PBO 1013.5 (RR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.66, 0.88, p<0.001). HI-P rates were romiplostim 36.5% (61 pts), PBO 3.6% (3 pts) (OR 15.6, 95% CI: 4.7, 51.8, p<0.001). From wk 4 on, median platelets with romiplostim were consistently higher than with PBO (p<0.001). The overall 1-year K-M survival was romiplostim 80%, PBO 78% (HR 1.03, 95% CI: 0.54, 1.95) (Figure 1), with 28 deaths (17%), none (0%) hemorrhagic and 5 (3%) from AML and MDS disease progression, with romiplostim and 14 deaths (17%), including 4 (4.8%) hemorrhagic and 3 (3.6%) from AML and MDS disease progression, with PBO. Median time on romiplostim was 21.5 wk (range: 1, 50). SAE rates were romiplostim 40%, PBO 27%; those frequent (≥5%) SAE occurring ≥2x more with romiplostim were pneumonia, pyrexia, thrombocytopenia, and atrial fibrillation; those occurring ≥2x more with PBO were diarrhea, dyspnea, and cerebral hemorrhage. Peripheral blast increases are described below (Table). AML rates through 58 wk were romiplostim 6.0%, PBO 2.4% (HR 2.51, 95% CI: 0.55, 11.47). Of the 13 AML cases, 9 (69%) were in pts who were initially RAEB-1 and 4 (31%) were diagnosed by anti-leukemic therapy initiation, which could include hypomethylating agents. Of pts who were RAEB-1 at baseline, 2/9 (22%) PBO pts developed AML vs 7/24 (29%) of romiplostim pts. AML-free survival rates were similar (HR 1.13, 95% CI: 0.60, 2.13). Conclusion: Romiplostim treatment in low/int-1 MDS pts resulted in a 15-fold increase in achieving HI-P. Although there were more platelet transfusions with PBO (p <0.001), there still was a trend for more clinically significant bleeding events with PBO (p = 0.13) than romiplostim. The AE profile of romiplostim was generally comparable with PBO, with no hemorrhagic deaths with romiplostim. Increases in peripheral blasts >10% occurred more frequently with romiplostim but generally resolved after romiplostim discontinuation. AML was defined conservatively; cases are pending central pathology review. AML occurred primarily in pts who were initially RAEB-1 and in more pts with romiplostim. Overall and AML-free survival rates were similar. Disclosures: Giagounidis: Amgen: Consultancy; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Off Label Use: This trial examined the use of romiplostim, which is indicated for use in ITP, in MDS. Mufti:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Kantarjian:Amgen: Research Funding. Fenaux:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Janssen Cilag: Research Funding. Sekeres:Celgene Corp: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Kuendgen:Celgene: Honoraria. Platzbecker:Amgen: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria. Gaidano:Amgen: Honoraria. Jedrzejczak:Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Hu:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yang:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jun:Amgen: Employment, Equity Ownership.

scholarly journals Rapid and Robust Mobilization of CD34+ HSCs without G-CSF Following Administration of Mgta-145 Alone or in Combination with Plerixafor

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1961-1961
Author(s):  
John F. DiPersio ◽  
Jonathan Hoggatt ◽  
Steven Devine ◽  
Lukasz Biernat ◽  
Haley Howell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Dose ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Preliminary Data ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Fold Change ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Cd34 Cells ◽  
Equity Ownership

Background Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is the standard of care for mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs). G-CSF requires 4-7 days of injections and often multiple aphereses to acquire sufficient CD34+ cells for transplant. The number of CD34+ HSCs mobilized can be variable and patients who fail to mobilize enough CD34+ cells are treated with the combination of G-CSF plus plerixafor. G-CSF use is associated with bone pain, nausea, headaches, fatigue, rare episodes of splenic rupture, and is contraindicated for patients with autoimmune and sickle cell disease. MGTA-145 (GroβT) is a CXCR2 agonist. MGTA-145, in combination with plerixafor, a CXCR4 inhibitor, has the potential to rapidly and reliably mobilize robust numbers of HSCs with a single dose and same-day apheresis for transplant that is free from G-CSF. MGTA-145 plus plerixafor work synergistically to rapidly mobilize HSCs in both mice and non-human primates (Hoggatt, Cell 2018; Goncalves, Blood 2018). Based on these data, Magenta initiated a Phase 1 dose-escalating study to evaluate the safety, PK and PD of MGTA-145 as a single agent and in combination with plerixafor. Methods This study consists of four parts. In Part A, healthy volunteers were dosed with MGTA-145 (0.0075 - 0.3 mg/kg) or placebo. In Part B, MGTA-145 dose levels from Part A were selected for use in combination with a clinically approved dose of plerixafor. In Part C, a single dose MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered on day 1 and day 2. In Part D, MGTA-145 plus plerixafor will be administered followed by apheresis. Results MGTA-145 monotherapy was well tolerated in all subjects dosed (Table 1) with no significant adverse events. Some subjects experienced mild (Grade 1) transient lower back pain that dissipated within minutes. In the ongoing study, the combination of MGTA-145 with plerixafor was well tolerated, with some donors experiencing Grade 1 and 2 gastrointestinal adverse events commonly observed with plerixafor alone. Pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure and maximum plasma concentrations increased dose proportionally and were not affected by plerixafor (Fig 1A). Monotherapy of MGTA-145 resulted in an immediate increase in neutrophils (Fig 1B) and release of plasma MMP-9 (Fig 1C). Neutrophil mobilization plateaued within 1-hour post MGTA-145 at doses greater than 0.03 mg/kg. This plateau was followed by a rebound of neutrophil mobilization which correlated with re-expression of CXCR2 and presence of MGTA-145 at pharmacologically active levels. Markers of neutrophil activation were relatively unchanged (<2-fold vs baseline). A rapid and statistically significant increase in CD34+ cells occurred @ 0.03 and 0.075 mg/kg of MGTA-145 (p < 0.01) relative to placebo with peak mobilization (Fig 1D) 30 minutes post MGTA-145 (7-fold above baseline @ 0.03 mg/kg). To date, the combination of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor mobilized >20/µl CD34s in 92% (11/12) subjects compared to 50% (2/4) subjects receiving plerixafor alone. Preliminary data show that there was a significant increase in fold change relative to baseline in CD34+ cells (27x vs 13x) and phenotypic CD34+CD90+CD45RA- HSCs (38x vs 22x) mobilized by MGTA-145 with plerixafor. Mobilized CD34+ cells were detectable at 15 minutes with peak mobilization shifted 2 - 4 hours earlier for the combination vs plerixafor alone (4 - 6h vs 8 - 12h). Detailed results of single dose administration of MGTA-145 and plerixafor given on one day as well as also on two sequential days will be presented along with fully characterized graft analysis post apheresis from subjects given MGTA-145 and plerixafor. Conclusions MGTA-145 is safe and well tolerated, as a monotherapy and in combination with plerixafor and induced rapid and robust mobilization of significant numbers of HSCs with a single dose in all subjects to date. Kinetics of CD34+ cell mobilization for the combination was immediate (4x increase vs no change for plerixafor alone @ 15 min) suggesting the mechanism of action of MGTA-145 plus plerixafor is different from plerixafor alone. Preliminary data demonstrate that MGTA-145 when combined with plerixafor results in a significant increase in CD34+ fold change relative to plerixafor alone. Magenta Therapeutics intends to develop MGTA-145 as a first line mobilization product for blood cancers, autoimmune and genetic diseases and plans a Phase 2 study in multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkin lymphoma in 2020. Disclosures DiPersio: Magenta Therapeutics: Equity Ownership; NeoImmune Tech: Research Funding; Cellworks Group, Inc.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; RiverVest Venture Partners Arch Oncology: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; WUGEN: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Macrogenics: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bioline Rx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy; Amphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding. Hoggatt:Magenta Therapeutics: Consultancy, Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Devine:Kiadis Pharma: Other: Protocol development (via institution); Bristol Myers: Other: Grant for monitoring support & travel support; Magenta Therapeutics: Other: Travel support for advisory board; My employer (National Marrow Donor Program) has equity interest in Magenta. Biernat:Medpace, Inc.: Employment. Howell:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Schmelmer:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Neale:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boitano:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Cooke:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Goncalves:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Raffel:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Falahee:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Morrow:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Davis:Magenta Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership.

scholarly journals Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Results from the Connect® MM Registry

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3129-3129
Author(s):  
Hans C. Lee ◽  
Sikander Ailawadhi ◽  
Cristina Gasparetto ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Robert M. Rifkin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Causes Of Death ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Equity Ownership

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is common among the elderly, with 35% of patients (pts) diagnosed being aged ≥75 years (y). With increasing overall life expectancy, the incidence and prevalence of newly diagnosed and previously treated MM patients ≥80 y is expected to increase over time. Because elderly pts are often excluded from clinical trials, data focused on their treatment patterns and clinical outcomes are lacking. The Connect® MM Registry (NCT01081028) is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM) designed to examine real-world diagnostic patterns, treatment patterns, clinical outcomes, and health-related quality of life patient-reported outcomes. This analysis reviews treatment patterns and outcomes in elderly pts from the Connect MM Registry. Methods: Pts enrolled in the Connect MM registry at 250 community, academic, and government sites were included in this analysis. Eligible pts were adults aged ≥18 y with symptomatic MM diagnosed ≤2 months before enrollment, as defined by International Myeloma Working Group criteria; no exclusion criteria were applied. For this analysis, pts were categorized into 4 age groups: <65, 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and ≥85 y. Pts were followed from time of enrollment to the earliest of disease progression (or death), loss to follow-up, or data cutoff date of February 7, 2019. Descriptive statistics were used for baseline characteristics and treatment regimens. Survival outcomes were analyzed using Cox regression. Time to progression (TTP) analysis excluded causes of death not related to MM. Results: Of 3011 pts enrolled (median age 67 y), 132 (4%) were aged ≥85 y, and 615 (20%) were aged 75-84 y at baseline. More pts aged ≥85 y had poor prognostic factors such as ISS stage III disease and reduced hemoglobin (<10 g/dL or >2 g/dL <LLN) compared with other age groups, although no notable differences between creatinine and calcium levels were observed across age groups (Table). A lower proportion of elderly pts (75-84 and ≥85 y) received triplet regimens as frontline therapy. More elderly pts received a single novel agent, whereas use of 2 novel agents was more common in younger pts (Table). The most common frontline regimens among elderly pts were bortezomib (V) + dexamethasone (D), followed by lenalidomide (R) + D, whereas those among younger pts included RVD, followed by VD and CyBorD (Table). No pt aged ≥85 y, and 4% of pts aged 75-84 y received high-dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplant (vs 61% in the <65 y and 37% in the 65-74 y age group). The most common maintenance therapy was RD in pts ≥85 y (although the use was low) and R alone in other age groups (Table). In the ≥85 y group, 27%, 10%, and 4% of pts entered 2L, 3L, and 4L treatments respectively, vs 43%, 23%, and 13% in the <65 y group. Progression-free survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y age group vs the 75-84 y age group (P=0.003), 65-74 y age group (P<0.001), and <65 y age group (P<0.001; Fig.1). TTP was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the <65 y group (P=0.020); however, TTP was similar among the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts (Fig. 2). Overall survival was significantly shorter in the ≥85 y group vs the 75-84 y, 65-74 y, and <65 y groups (all P<0.001; Fig. 3). The mortality rate was lowest (46%) during first-line treatment (1L) in pts aged ≥85 y (mainly attributed to MM progression) and increased in 2L and 3L (47% and 54%, respectively); a similar trend was observed in the younger age groups. The main cause of death was MM progression (29% in the ≥85 y vs 16% in the <65 y group). Other notable causes of death in the ≥85 y group included cardiac failure (5% vs 2% in <65 y group) and pneumonia (5% vs 1% in <65 y group). Conclusions: In this analysis, elderly pts received similar types of frontline and maintenance regimens as younger pts, although proportions varied with decreased use of triplet regimens with age. Considering similarities in TTP across the 65-74 y, 75-84 y, and ≥85 y cohorts, these real-world data support active treatment and aggressive supportive care of elderly symptomatic pts, including with novel agents. Additionally, further clinical studies specific to elderly patients with MM should be explored. Disclosures Lee: Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline plc: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Ailawadhi:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Cellectar: Research Funding. Gasparetto:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed ; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations, or other expenses paid or reimbursed . Jagannath:AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Rifkin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Durie:Amgen, Celgene, Johnson & Johnson, and Takeda: Consultancy. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Celgene: Honoraria; Jannsen: Speakers Bureau; Newland Medical Asociates: Employment. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Wagner:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; American Cancer Society: Other: Section editor, Cancer journal. Omel:Celgene, Takeda, Janssen: Other: Patient Advisory Committees. Srinivasan:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Liu:TechData: Consultancy. Dhalla:Celgene: Employment. Agarwal:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Abonour:BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Impact of Modified Thalidomide Dosing in Bortezomib/Thalidomide/Dexamethasone for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Transplant-Eligible: A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4739-4739
Author(s):  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Maria-Victoria Mateos ◽  
Adrián Alegre ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peripheral Neuropathy ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Indirect Comparison ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Post Transplant ◽  
Post Induction ◽  
Adjusted Indirect Comparison ◽  
Equity Ownership

Introduction: For patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who are transplant-eligible, bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTd) is a standard of care (SoC) for induction and consolidation therapy. Clinical practice has evolved to use a modified VTd dose (VTd-mod; 100 mg thalidomide daily), which is reflected in recent treatment guidelines. As VTd-mod has become a real-world SoC, a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) of the VTd-mod dose from recent clinical trials versus the dose included in the label (VTd-label; ramp up to 200 mg thalidomide daily) was performed to understand the effect on efficacy of modified VTd dosing for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. Methods: For each outcome (overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS], overall response rates [ORR] post-induction and post-transplant, and rate of peripheral neuropathy), a naïve comparison and a MAIC were performed. Data for VTd-label were obtained from the phase 3 PETHEMA/GEM study (Rosiñol L, et al. Blood. 2012;120[8]:1589-1596). Data for VTd-mod were pooled from the phase 3 CASSIOPEIA study (Moreau P, et al. Lancet. 2019;394[10192]:29-38) and the phase 2 NCT00531453 study (Ludwig H, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31[2]:247-255). Patient-level data for PETHEMA/GEM and CASSIOPEIA were used to generate outcomes of interest and were validated against their respective clinical study reports; aggregate data for NCT00531453 were extracted from the primary publication. Matched baseline characteristics were age, sex, ECOG performance status, myeloma type, International Staging System (ISS) stage, baseline creatinine clearance, hemoglobin level, and platelet count. Results: Patients received VTd-mod (n = 591) or VTd-label (n = 130). After matching, baseline characteristics were similar across groups. For OS, the naïve comparison and the MAIC showed that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC HR, 0.640 [95% CI: 0.363-1.129], P = 0.121; Figure 1A). VTd-mod significantly improved PFS versus VTd-label in the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC HR, 0.672 [95% CI: 0.467-0.966], P = 0.031; Figure 1B). Post-induction ORR was non-inferior for VTd-mod versus VTd-label (MAIC odds ratio, 1.781 [95% CI: 1.004-3.16], P = 0.065). Post-transplant, VTd-mod demonstrated superior ORR in both the naïve comparison and MAIC (MAIC odds ratio, 2.661 [95% CI: 1.579-4.484], P = 0.001). For rates of grade 3 or 4 peripheral neuropathy, the naïve comparison and MAIC both demonstrated that VTd-mod was non-inferior to VTd-label (MAIC rate difference, 2.4 [⁻1.7-6.49], P = 0.409). Conclusions: As naïve, indirect comparisons are prone to bias due to patient heterogeneity between studies, a MAIC can provide useful insights for clinicians and reimbursement decision-makers regarding the relative efficacy and safety of different treatments. In this MAIC, non-inferiority of VTd-mod versus VTd-label was demonstrated for OS, post-induction ORR, and peripheral neuropathy. This analysis also showed that VTd-mod significantly improved PFS and ORR post-transplant compared with VTd-label for patients with NDMM who are transplant-eligible. A limitation of this analysis is that unreported or unobserved confounding factors could not be adjusted for. Disclosures Sonneveld: Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; SkylineDx: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mateos:Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, Adaptive: Honoraria; AbbVie Inc, Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Biotech Inc, Mundipharma EDO, PharmaMar, Roche Laboratories Inc, Takeda Oncology: Other: Advisory Committee; Janssen, Celgene, Takeda, Amgen, GSK, Abbvie, EDO, Pharmar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen Inc, Celgene Corporation, Janssen Biotech Inc, Takeda Oncology.: Speakers Bureau; Amgen Inc, Janssen Biotech Inc: Other: Data and Monitoring Committee. Alegre:Celgene, Amgen, Janssen, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Facon:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Hulin:celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen, AbbVie, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria. Hashim:Ingress-Health: Employment. Vincken:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kampfenkel:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cote:Janssen: Employment, Equity Ownership. Moreau:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document