A Multicenter, Phase IV Observational Study Of Ofatumumab In Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): A European Research Initiative On CLL (ERIC) Study

Blood ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 122 (21) ◽  
pp. 1645-1645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Moreno ◽  
Marco Montillo ◽  
Panayiotidis Panayiotis ◽  
Adrian Bloor ◽  
Jehan Dupuis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Phase Ii Trials ◽  
Advisory Committees

Abstract Background Ofatumumab was given a conditional approval in the EU on April 2010 for the treatment of CLL refractory to fludarabine (F-ref) and alemtuzumab (A-ref), encouraging the retrieval of further data in patients treated in a “daily life” setting and to investigate treatment safety. Aims The main objective of this study was to obtain information on the safety profile of ofatumumab given outside clinical trials in patients with previously treated CLL. The secondary endpoints were efficacy, progression-free-survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Methods This was an observational, retrospective study. Patients were eligible regardless of prior treatments or disease status and provided they had not been included in ofatumumab clinical trials. Data on patients’ characteristics at diagnosis, prior treatment, adverse events response rate, PFS and OS were recorded. Results One-hundred and twenty patients were screened of which 103 from 25 centers in 10 European countries were eventually eligible for the study. There were 71 males; median age at initiation of ofatumumab was 64 years (range, 38-84); 66% patients were in advanced clinical stage (Rai III-IV/Binet C) and 33 patients presented bulky lymphadenopathy. Number of prior lines of therapy was 4 (range, 1-13). 94% had received prior F-based therapy, 54% received A-based therapy and 51% received both. Eighty-one percent had been previously exposed to rituximab-combination regimens. Fifty-four percent were F-ref, 70% A-ref and 41% were both F- and A-refractory. Cytogenetics within 3 months prior therapy was available in 52 patients of which 34 presented abnormalities (11 patients: 17p-; 9 patients: 11q-; 2 patients: 13q-; 1 patient: trisomy 12; 11 patients: two or more abnormalities including 17p- or 11q-). Forty-two of 50 patients showed unmutated IGHV genes. The median number of cycles of ofatumumab given was 9 (range, 0-16) and the median percentage of given/planned cycles was 83.3% (range, 0-133). In most patients the treatment dose and schedule were as follows: 300 mg 1st infusion followed by 2000 mg for subsequent infusions (8 weekly followed by 4 doses monthly). One hundred and sixty-one adverse events were reported in 68 patients, with 28 (17%) of them being considered as ofatumumab-related. Infusion related-reactions occurred in 19 (28%) patients (III-IV: 6%). Neutropenia was reported in 26% (III-IV: 19%), thrombocytopenia in 15% (III-IV: 12%) and anemia in 15% (III-IV: 7%). The non-hematological adverse events, included infection 44% (III-IV: 36%), fatigue 10% (III-IV: 4%), fever 10% (III-IV: 6%), rash 10% (III-IV: 3%), cough 7% (III-IV: 1%), diarrhea 6% (grade III-IV: 0%) and nausea 1% (III-IV: 0%). Hematologic toxicity correlated with the number of prior lines of therapy. Autoimmune hemolytic anemia and Richter syndrome were reported in one patient each. Two heavily pre-treated patients (5 and 6 prior lines of therapy, respectively) developed progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. The overall response rate (ORR) was 23% and the median PFS and OS were 5 and 12 months, respectively. The main causes of death were disease progression (61%) and infection (28%). Conclusions The safety profile of ofatumumab given outside clinical trials to patients with poor-prognosis and heavily pre-treated CLL was consistent with that observed in clinical trials. Although not unexpectedly the ORR was lower in this study, PFS and OS were in line with those reported in phase II trials. Disclosures: Montillo: Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Bloor:GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Paid speaker Other. Schuh:GSK: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Mundipharma: Honoraria. Geisler:Roche: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy. Hillmen:GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stilgenbauer:GSK: Honoraria, support Other. Smolej:GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, travel grants Other. Jaeger:GSK: Honoraria, Research Funding. Leblond:Roche : Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kimby:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Teva: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Emergent BioSolutions: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jansen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Bortezomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (VRD) Consolidation and Lenalidomide Maintenance in Frontline Multiple Myeloma Patients: Updated Results of the IFM 2008 Phase II VRD Intensive Program

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 1872-1872 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murielle Roussel ◽  
Nelly Robillard ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 1872 Background: Introduction of new drugs in the intensive pathway have markedly increased survival rates for MM patients within the last 10 years. Efforts to further improve response and survival are still needed, mainly by increasing the depth of tumor reduction and the duration of response. Bortezomib (Bor), Lenalidomide (Len) and Dexamethasone (Dex) combination demonstrated substantial activity in frontline MM (Richardson P et al., Blood 2010); the IFM reported primary results of the VRD regimen as induction and consolidation therapy in the transplant setting (Roussel M et al. ASH 2010). We currently present updated data of the IFM 2008 trial. Methods: This phase II study was conducted at 10 transplant centers in France, with enrollment between Sept. 7 and Dec. 15, 2009. Pts with symptomatic upfront MM were enrolled to receive three 21-day induction cycles of VRD= Bor 1.3 mg/m2 (D1, 4, 8, 11), Len 25 mg/day (D1–14), and Dex 40 mg/day once a week (D1, 8 and 15). Stem cell collection (STC) was planned after high dose cyclophosphamide (3g/m2). All pts then proceeded to melphalan 200 mg/m2 followed by ASCT. Two months after hematological recovery, pts received two 21-day consolidation cycles of VRD (same schedule) followed by 1 year of maintenance with Len at 15 mg/day. All pts received, unless contraindicated, anticoagulation for prevention of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT), and anti-viral therapy. Pts with grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (PNY) were excluded. The primary endpoint was the best response achieved after consolidation. The secondary endpoints were: response rate after 3 cycles of VRD as induction, after ASCT and after maintenance; safety profile of the program; feasibility and quality of STC; duration of response, PFS, and OS. Response was assessed according to International Uniform Response Criteria including stringent Complete Response (sCR). Flow cytometric analysis of bone marrow plasma cells for minimal residual disease (MRD) was performed before and after ASCT, after consolidation and after maintenance. Adverse events (AEs) were graded using the CTC for Adverse Events (AE) v4. Patients: Thirty-one pts were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were: median age= 58 (range 33–65); women= 55%; 55%/32%/13% had IgG/IgA/light chain MM; ISS= 1 in 52%, 2 in 32% and 3 in 16% of pts; chromosome 17p del in 18% and t(4;14) translocation in 11% among 27 assessable pts. Results: All pts but 7 remain on study program at data cut-off (01/08/11). One pt discontinued treatment due to mobilization failure, 5 pts stopped maintenance because of serious AE (1 extensive DVT unless efficient anticoagulation) or AEs ( 3 grade 3/4 neutropenia and/or thrombocytopenia, 1 grade 3 hypothyroidism) and 1 pt went off study because of progressive disease. Currently, Len maintenance is on going for 6 pts and 4 pts just completed their last cycle. Therefore, 30 pts are evaluable for response after consolidation, and 20 after maintenance. All results are summarized in table 1. In ITT analysis, the overall response rate (ORR) after consolidation is 94%, including 36% VGPR, 48% RC or better (9% CR, 39% sCR). Consolidation therapy with 2 VRD cycles upgraded response in 26% of pts but only 1 pt achieved MRD negative (among 24 assessed). At time of reporting, Len maintenance did not improve response rate but 1 pt get MRD negative. One pt progressed during maintenance phase and 2 pts turned into MRD positive again without evidence of relapse. Considering the safety profile, 18 serious AEs were reported. There was no treatment-related mortality. The most common toxicities during consolidation therapy were: emergent PNY (23%), including 10% grade 1 and 13% grade 2; grade 3/4 neutropenia (17%), and thrombocytopenia (10%). The most common toxicities during Len maintenance were: grade 3/4 neutropenia (43%), and thrombocytopenia (10%); fatigue (13%); erythrodermia (10%); zona (10%). One extensive DVT and one pulmonary embolism were reported. There was no evidence of secondary malignancy. Conclusions: VRD consolidation plus Len maintenance after VRD induction and HDT produce high quality responses with 38% of sCR and is well tolerated in de novo MM pts. Updated efficacy and safety data will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures: Roussel: Janssen: Honoraria; Celgène: Honoraria. Off Label Use: bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone as induction and consolidation therapy lenalidomide maintenance. Moreau:Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Advisory board, Honoraria; Janssen: Advisory board, Honoraria. Hulin:Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Leleu:celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Facon:celgene: 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. Avet-Loiseau:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Attal:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Final Results of Phase 1/1b Study of Tenalisib, Dual PI3K δ/γ Inhibitor in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory T-Cell Lymphoma

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 2831-2831 ◽  
Author(s):  
Swaminathan P. Iyer ◽  
Brad M. Haverkos ◽  
Jasmine Zain ◽  
Radhakrishnan Ramchandren ◽  
Mary Jo Lechowicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Advisory Committees

Introduction: Tenalisib (RP6530) is a novel, highly specific, dual PI3K δ/γ inhibitor with nano-molar inhibitory potency at the enzyme and cellular level. PI3K plays a critical role in T-cell development and activation and several studies have validated the PI3K-AKT pathway as a potential therapeutic target in T cell lymphomas. Preliminary results of the ongoing Phase 1/1b T-cell lymphoma (TCL) study demonstrated an acceptable safety profile with encouraging clinical activity in relapsed/refractory TCL (Oki, ASCO 2018 and Iyer, ASH 2018). We now present the final results of the study (NCT02567656). Methods: This study comprised of four-dose escalation cohorts, followed by two dose expansion cohorts at MTD enrolling 20 patients each in PTCL and CTCL cohorts. Patients had histologically confirmed TCL, ECOG PS ≤2, and had received ≥1 prior therapy. Patients received Tenalisib [200 mg BID-800 mg BID (fasting), 800 mg (fed only)] orally until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objectives were to determine the MTD and pharmacokinetic profile. The secondary objective was to evaluate overall response rate (ORR) and duration of response. Responses were evaluated for PTCL and CTCL based on IWG criteria (Cheson 2007) and mSWAT respectively. Adverse events were graded according to CTCAE v4.03. Results: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled in study, 19 in dose escalation and 39 in dose expansion (28 PTCL and 30 CTCL). Median number of prior therapies was 4 (range, 1-15). Safety assessment of 58 patients receiving at least one dose of Tenalisib demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. Treatment related Grade≥3 AEs were elevated ALT/AST (21%), rash (5%), and hypophosphatemia (3%). These events were reversible and managed by withholding study drug. Additionally, in few patients (N=9), steroids were used to manage elevated ALT/AST. There were six treatment related serious adverse events, none of these led to fatal outcome. At end of the study, four (3 CTCL; 1 PTCL) patients who completed minimum 8 cycles of therapy were rolled over to a compassionate use study (NCT03711604) and were followed up. Efficacy assessments demonstrated an ORR of 46% (3 CR and 13 PR) and clinical benefit rate (CR+PR+SD) of 77%. Subset efficacy analysis showed an ORR in PTCL of 47% (3 CR; 4 PR) and in CTCL of 45% (9 PR). The median time to initial response was 1.8 months and was similar in both sub-types. The overall median DOR was 4.91 months (range 0.9-26.6); in PTCL patients the DOR was 6.53 months, (range: 0.97-21.0) and 3.8 months (range: 1.67-25.67) in CTCL patients. In 3 PTCL patients who achieved CR, the median DOR was 19.5 months (range 7.5-21). Conclusion: Tenalisib demonstrated promising clinical activity and an improved safety profile in patients with relapsed/ refractory TCL. Currently, a phase I/II combination study to further evaluate safety and efficacy with romidepsin is ongoing in this target population. Disclosures Iyer: Arog: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics, Inc.: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Zain:Spectrum: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Korman:Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Glaxo: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Immune Pharma: 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; Kyowa: Research Funding; Leo: Research Funding; Menlo: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Research Funding; Principia: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Prothena: Research Funding; Regeneron: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Rhizen: Research Funding; Sun: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syntimmune: Research Funding; UCB: Research Funding; Valeant: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eli Lilly: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Dermira: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Routhu:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Barde:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Nair:Rhizen Pharmaceuticals S.A.: Employment. Huen:Galderma Inc: Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline Inc: Research Funding; Rhizen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Innate Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding.

Preliminary Safety Results from the Phase IIIb GREEN Study of Obinutuzumab (GA101) Alone or in Combination with Chemotherapy for Previously Untreated or Relapsed/Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3345-3345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francesc Bosch ◽  
Thomas Illmer ◽  
Mehmet Turgut ◽  
Agostino Cortelezzi ◽  
Susan F. Lasserre ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Phase Iiib ◽  
Unfit Patients ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: The novel, glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, obinutuzumab (GA101) has demonstrated superior efficacy to chlorambucil (Clb) monotherapy and to Clb in combination with rituximab (R-Clb) with an acceptable safety profile in CLL. However, an increased rate of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) has been observed with the obinutuzumab(G)-Clb combination compared with R-Clb during the first cycle of treatment. The GREEN study (NCT01905943) is an ongoing phase IIIb, multicenter, open-label trial investigating the safety and efficacy of obinutuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL. We report safety data from cohort 1, which aimed to reduce IRRs on the first day of obinutuzumab administration in previously untreated patients using a lower dose and slower infusion rate than in previous studies. Methods: Subjects aged ≥18 years withdocumented CLL, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0–2 and adequate hematologic function are enrolled. Treatment includes obinutuzumab (1000mg) administered intravenously on days (D) 1 (25mg) and 2 (975mg), D8, and D15 of cycle (C) 1, and on D1 of C2–6, alone (any patient: n=18) or in combination with 28-day cycles of chemotherapy: fludarabine plus cyclophosphamide (FC; n=46) for fit patients (cumulative illness rating scale [CIRS] ≤6 and creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥70mL/min), Clb (n=8) for unfit patients (CIRS >6 and/or CrCl <70mL/min) or bendamustine (B; n=86) for fit/unfit patients. The primary outcome is safety, including the frequency, type and severity of adverse events (AEs). The present analysis focuses on IRRs, defined as treatment-related AEs occurring during or within 24 hours of infusion. Results were assessed to determine if a low obinutuzumab dose (25mg) and slow infusion rate (12.5mg/hour) on D1 (the current recommended C1D1 regimen is 100mg at 25mg/hour) could reduce IRRs. Analysis was based on a data cut-off of 28 April 2014, planned for when the first 150 previously untreated patients had completed cohort 1. Results: Of 158 subjects eligible for the IRR analysis (Table), median age was 65.0 (34.0–83.0) years and the majority were males (65.2%) with Binet stage B (52.5%) or C (31.0%) CLL. Median observation time was 2.09 (0.2–6.0) months and median exposure time was 1.0 (0.0–4.8) month. IRRs occurring in ≥10% of patients were chills (14.6%) and pyrexia (15.2%). Serious IRRs in ≥1% of patients were tumor lysis syndrome (TLS; 3.8%) and pyrexia (1.3%). Grade ≥3 IRRs experienced by ≥1% of patients were TLS (5.7%), hypertension (1.3%) and hypotension (1.3%). IRRs were most frequent in C1D1 (Fig). In the overall safety population (n=172; previously untreated patients) the most frequently reported serious AEs of special interest included IRR (8.1%) and neutropenia (11.0%). AEs of particular interest, thrombocytopenia, cardiac, and hemorrhagic events, were experienced by 16.3%, 3.5% and 3.5% of patients, respectively. Table. Table. Conclusions: Preliminary safety data from the GREEN study, assessing the use of obinutuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy (B, FC or Clb) in subjects with untreated CLL, are in line with the known safety profile of obinutuzumab in similar populations. Although there is limited exposure time available for subjects in GREEN, IRRs seemed to be more manageable and a lower proportion of subjects with IRRs grade ≥3 was observed compared with previous studies. No new safety signals were reported. However, since the number of discontinuations during C1 was comparable with previous obinutuzumab studies, the decision was taken to further improve IRR rates by assessing additional dexamethasone premedication in cohort 2. Final safety data from the study will be presented at a later timepoint. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Bosch: Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Off Label Use: GAZYVA (obinutuzumab) is a CD20-directed cytolytic antibody and is indicated, in combination with chlorambucil, for the treatment of patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This abstract reports on obinutuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy for previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL.. Lasserre:F. Hoffmann–La Roche: Employment. Truppel-Hartmann:F. Hoffmann–La Roche: Employment. Leblond:Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Roche-Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Stilgenbauer:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Efficacy of Melflufen, a Peptidase Targeted Therapy, and Dexamethasone in an Ongoing Open-Label Phase 2a Study in Patients with Relapsed and Relapsed-Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) Including an Initial Report on Progression Free Survival

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 3029-3029
Author(s):  
Peter M. Voorhees ◽  
Valeria Magarotto ◽  
Pieter Sonneveld ◽  
Torben Plesner ◽  
Ulf-Henrik Mellqvist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Free Survival

Abstract Background: Melflufen is a highly potent anti-angiogenic compound that triggers rapid, robust and irreversible DNA damage and exerts its cytotoxicity through alkylation of DNA. The lipophilicity of melflufen leads to rapid and extensive distribution into tissues and cells where it binds directly to DNA or is readily metabolized by intracellular peptidases into hydrophilic alkylating metabolites. With targeted delivery of alkylating metabolites to tumor cells in vitro (such as multiple myeloma that are rich in activating peptidase), melflufen exerts a 20-100 fold higher anti-tumor potency and produces a 20 fold higher intracellular concentration of alkylating moieties compared with melphalan. Methods: Melflufen is evaluated in combination with dexamethasone (dex) 40 mg weekly in an ongoing Phase 1/2a study. RRMM patients with measurable disease and at least 2 prior lines of therapy are eligible (NCT01897714). Phase 1 established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of melflufen to be 40 mg every 3 weeks in combination with low dose dex. The primary objective of Phase 2a is the overall response rate and safety of the MTD in a total of 55 patients. Response was investigator assessed at the end of each cycle by IMWG criteria. Here we present the Phase 2 data as of 14 July 2015 data-cut. Results: Thirty-one patients were dosed at the MTD. The median time from initial diagnosis to first dose of melflufen was 6 years (1-15). The median number of prior therapies was 4 (2-9). 97% of patients were exposed to immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), 90% to proteasome inhibitors (PIs), 77% to melphalan, and 71% had received prior autologous stem cell transplant. 58% were double refractory (IMiDs and PIs) and 42% were triple refractory (IMiDs, PIs and alkylators). In total, 121 doses of melflufen have been given (1-11 cycles). Median treatment duration was 13 weeks with 9 patients still ongoing. One patient completed therapy as planned, 15 patients discontinued due to AEs (48%) and 6 due to progression (19%). Twenty-three patients were evaluable for response (protocol defined as ≥2 doses of melflufen with baseline and follow-up response assessments). One patient achieved a very good partial response and 10 patients achieved partial response (PR) (1 unconfirmed, still ongoing) for an overall response rate (ORR) of 48%. Three additional patients achieved minimal response (MR) for a clinical benefit rate (CBR) of 61%. Time to clinical benefit and response was rapid with 93% of patients achieving ≥ MR after 1-3 cycles and 64% achieving PR after only 1-3 cycles. Eight patients maintained stable disease and 1 patient had early progressive disease. Similar ORRs were seen in PI-refractory (43%), IMiD-refractory (40%), alkylator-refractory (62%), double-refractory (38%) and triple-refractory (50%) patients. The median progression free survival (PFS) is currently at 7.6 months (95% confidence interval: 3.4 - ∞) based on 14 events in 30 patients. The most frequent adverse events (AE), all grades, occurring in >10% of patients, regardless of relationship to study drug were thrombocytopenia (94%), anemia (84%), neutropenia (61%), leukopenia (42%), pyrexia (36%), asthenia (32%), fatigue and nausea (26%), bone pain (19%), cough, diarrhea, dyspnea, mucosal inflammation and upper respiratory infection (16%) and constipation and epistaxis (13%). Treatment-related Grade 3 or 4 AEs were reported in 27 patients (87%). Those occurring in >5% of patients were thrombocytopenia (68%), neutropenia (55%), anemia (42%), leukopenia (32%) and febrile neutropenia, fatigue, pyrexia, asthenia and hyperglycemia each occurred in 6% of patients. Serious AEs occurred in 9 patients (29%), but were only assessed as related to study drug in 5 patients (16%) including 3 febrile neutropenia, 1 fever and 1 pneumonia. Cycle length has recently been increased to 28 days to improve tolerability with respect to hematologic toxicity. Conclusion: Melflufen has promising activity in heavily pretreated RRMM patients where conventional therapies have failed. The current ORR is 48% and CBR is 61%. Similar results were seen across patient populations regardless of refractory status. The median PFS is encouraging at 7.6 months. Hematologic toxicity was common, but non-hematologic AEs were infrequent. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Voorhees: Millennium/Takeda and Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array BioPharma, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, and Oncopeptides: Consultancy; Janssen, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline,Onyx Pharmaceuticals and Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sonneveld:Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene and Onyx: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Plesner:Roche and Novartis: Research Funding; Janssen and Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genmab: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mellqvist:Celgene, Amgen, Mundipharma and Novartis: Honoraria. Byrne:Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Harmenberg:Oncopeptides: Consultancy. Nordstrom:Oncopeptides: Employment. Palumbo:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Array BioPharma: Honoraria; Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Genmab A/S: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi-Aventis: Honoraria. Richardson:Oncopeptides, Celgene and Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Development and Testing of a Lymphoma Clinical Trials Specific Frailty Index: A Secondary Analysis of the LY.12 Clinical Trial

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4076-4076
Author(s):  
Abi Vijenthira ◽  
Xinzhi Li ◽  
Michael Crump ◽  
Annette E. Hay ◽  
Lois E. Shepherd ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Frailty Index ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Frail Patients ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Frailty is common in older patients with lymphoma. However, it remains unknown whether frailty is prevalent in patients included in clinical trials of lymphoma, as those with frailty may meet inclusion criteria of a trial which do not include functional information beyond performance status (PS). Understanding the prevalence and impact of frailty in clinical trials is important to direct future stratification criteria, as well as to have robust data to counsel frail patients on their potential outcomes. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis using data from the phase III LY.12 clinical trial in which patients with relapsed aggressive non-Hodgkin lymphoma were randomized to gemcitabine-dexamethasone-cisplatin or dexamethasone-high dose cytarabine-cisplatin chemotherapy prior to autologous stem cell transplant. The primary objective of our study was to construct a lymphoma clinical trials specific frailty index (FI) using previously described methods (Searle. BMC Geriatr. 2008;8:24). Secondary objectives were to describe the association of frailty (binary variable) with overall survival (OS), event-free survival (EFS), hospitalization, adverse events (AE), serious adverse events (SAE), and proceeding to transplant, and to describe the association of frailty with these outcomes, controlling for important covariates (age, sex, immunophenotype, revised international prognostic index score (rIPI), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) PS, stage, and response to previous chemotherapy). Results: 619 patients in the LY12 trial were used to construct the frailty index (Table 1). Using a binary cut-off for frailty (&lt;0.2), 15% (N=93) of patients were classified as frail. There were no differences in age or sex between frail and non-frail patients; however they differed in terms of other lymphoma-related characteristics (Table 2). Frailty was strongly associated with OS (HR 2.012, 95% CI 1.57-2.58), EFS (HR 1.94, 95% CI 1.53-2.46), frequency of the worst overall Grade &gt;3 AE (OR 2.65 (15% vs. 6%), p=0.003), and likelihood of proceeding to ASCT (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.15-0.43), but not hospitalization (OR 1.52, 95% CI 0.97-2.40) or SAE (6% vs. 4%, p=0.3). In multivariable analysis, frailty was not significantly associated with OS, EFS, likelihood of proceeding to ASCT, nor hospitalization (Table 3), though there was a trend to significance for ASCT. However, rIPI remained significantly associated with OS and EFS, ECOG remained significantly associated with OS (Table 3) Conclusion: A potentially broadly applicable lymphoma clinical trials specific FI was constructed through secondary analysis of LY12 data. 15% of patients were classified as frail. Frailty was significantly associated with OS, EFS, frequency of grade &gt;3 AE and likelihood of proceeding to transplant. However, this relationship no longer was significant when controlling for lymphoma-related prognostic variables, suggesting that the impact of poor prognostic features of lymphoma supersede the impact of frailty alone in this younger clinical trial population. Interestingly, rIPI and ECOG demonstrated their value as simple predictors that are highly associated with OS and/or EFS even when controlling for other important covariates including frailty. These findings require further testing in an external data set, and would be particularly valuable to test in an older population. Calibration of the FI against clinical frailty assessment (e.g. Clinical Frailty Scale, Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment) would also be meaningful to confirm its ability to classify frail versus non-frail patients. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Crump: Epizyme: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Kyte/Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Hay: Merck: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding. Prica: Astra-Zeneca: Honoraria; Kite Gilead: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Preliminary Results of Ibrutinib Followed By Ofatumumab Consolidation in Previously Untreated Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL): GELLC7 Trials from the Spanish Group of CLL (GELLC)

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4296-4296
Author(s):  
Pau Abrisqueta ◽  
Eva González-Barca ◽  
Christelle M Ferra ◽  
Eduardo Ríos Herranz ◽  
Margarita Fernandez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pleural Effusion ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Induction Phase ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Preliminary Results

Introduction. Despite the high proportion of prolonged remissions obtained with ibrutinib in patients with CLL, complete responses (CR) are rarely observed. For the purpose of increasing the deepness of response, ibrutinib has been tested in combination with other drugs that exert a different mechanism of action. Thus, monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) have been concomitantly combined with ibrutinib in untreated or R/R CLLs. Nonetheless, several data derived from both in vitro and clinical studies do not support a synergistic effect of the concomitant administration of ibrutinib with anti-CD20 mAbs. Herein, we present the preliminary results of a multi-center, non-randomized phase 2 study aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of the sequential treatment of CLL patients with ibrutinib followed, in those not attaining CR, by a consolidation phase with ofatumumab (GELLC-7, EudraCT number 2016-004937-26). Patients and methods. Patients aged ≥18 years, physically fit (CIRS score < 6) with treatment-naïve CLL were enrolled in this study. Patients received an induction phase consisting of 12 cycles (28-day) of ibrutinib in monotherapy at 420 mg once daily. Patients attaining a CR after this induction phase were kept on ibrutinib until progression. In contrast, patients not obtaining a CR also continued on ibrutinib but received a consolidation treatment with 7 doses of ofatumumab (300 mg D1 and 1000mg D8 of C13, 1000 mg D1 of C14-C18). The primary endpoint of the study was the CR rate assessed after 20 cycles of treatment (2 months after completing ofatumumab consolidation). Results. 84 patients with a median age 69 years (range 38-84 yrs), 71% male, were included in this study. At inclusion, 83.3% had Binet stage B/C, 61% unmutated IGHV status, and 19% high risk genetic aberrations (7.6% 17p deletion and/or TP53mut, and 11.4% 11q deletion). At the interim data cut-off (June 2019), 7 patients had discontinued the study (progression to Richter transformation, n=1; patient withdrawal, n=3; adverse events [AE], n=3, including one G5 AE), 5 of them during the first 12 cycles of treatment. Sixty-seven patients received the induction phase with 12 cycles of ibrutinib, whereas 22 patients completed 20 cycles of treatment and were evaluable for the primary endpoint of the study. After 12 cycles of ibrutinib, 3 patients (4.5%) were in CR, 54 patients (80.5%) in PR, 6 patients (9%) in PR with lymphocytosis, and 4 patients (6%) in SD. In 20 patients receiving the consolidation with ofatumumab an improvement in response was observed, with 8/20 patients (40%) attaining a CR (7 patients converted PR to CR, and one patient SD to CR), whereas the remaining 12 patients were classified as PR. Two patients that were already in CR at cycle 12 maintained the CR under ibrutinib monotherapy. MRD was undetectable in blood (<10-4 by flow cytometry) only in one of the 22 patients. With a median follow-up of 15 months (2 - 20.2 months), the estimated 12-months PFS and OS was 98%. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 26 patients (31%), whilst 22 serious AEs were observed in 16 patients (19%) (14 infections, 1 febrile neutropenia, 3 dyspnoea, 1 anemia, 1 edema/pleural effusion, 1 renal insufficiency, 1 squamous carcinoma). The most common G3/4 AEs were hematological toxicity (neutropenia [7.1%], anemia [4.5%], thrombocytopenia [2.4%]) and infections (8.5%). The Gr 5 AE consisted of a severe peripheral edema and pleural effusion leading to death. The great majority of SAEs (67%) and G3/4 AEs (66%) were observed during the first 12 cycles of treatment with ibrutinib monotherapy. Conclusions. The preliminary analysis of the GELLC7 trial showed that the addition of consolidation with ofatumumab after 12 cycles of prior treatment with ibrutinib was well tolerated and elicited a deeper response. These results support the potential role of a sequential therapeutic strategy in CLL, where the addition of a consolidation with mAbs in patients with low tumor burden might improve the quality of the response. Finally, more mature results will be further presented at the meeting. Disclosures Abrisqueta: Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, Accommodations, expenses, Speakers Bureau. González-Barca:Kiowa: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celtrion: Consultancy. Terol:Roche: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy; Astra Zeneca: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding. Baltasar Tello:GILEAD: Honoraria; JANSSEN: Consultancy, Honoraria; ABBVIE: Honoraria; ROCHE: Honoraria. de la Serna:Roche, AbbVie, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, AbbVie, Janssen, Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Ramirez Payer:GILEAD SCIENCES: Research Funding. Cordoba:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Kyowa-Kirin: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; FUNDACION JIMENEZ DIAZ UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL: Employment; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy. Bosch:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Acerta: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd/Genentech, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Ibrutinib followed by Ofatumumab Consolidation

scholarly journals Evaluating the Efficacy, Safety, and Dose Dependent Activities of Entospletinib in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 130 (Suppl_1) ◽  
pp. 832-832
Author(s):  
Jeffrey P. Sharman ◽  
Kathryn S. Kolibaba ◽  
Jose Azar ◽  
Rama Balaraman ◽  
Roger M. Lyons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Initial Report

Abstract Introduction: Despite recent therapeutic advances for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), a need remains for novel treatment strategies. Entospletinib (ENTO) is an orally bioavailable, selective inhibitor of spleen tyrosine kinase (Syk). Syk is a mediator of B-cell receptor signaling in normal and transformed B cells. Following our initial report of clinical activity of ENTO in CLL, a new formulation of spray-dried dispersion (SDD) of ENTO was made to optimize pharmacokinetic aspects of the medication such as lesser drug-drug interactions. We present results based on a data cutoff of June 8, 2017. Methods: Eligible patients with relapsed and refractory (R/R) CLL were randomized at 1:1:1 ratio to 3 treatment groups receiving 100 mg, 200 mg, and 400 mg of the SDD form of ENTO, twice daily (BID) in a phase 2 trial (NCT01799889). Tumor response was assessed based on the modified International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia criteria, with imaging (CT/MRI) planned at weeks 8, 16, 24, and then every 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) at week 24. All efficacy data were assessed by an Independent Review Committee. Results: A cohort of 61 patients with R/R CLL was enrolled, and 60 received ≥1 dose of ENTO (100 mg: n=19; 200 mg: n=22; 400 mg: n=19). Two patients (3.3%, 1 each in the 100 mg and 200 mg groups) discontinued prior to initial tumor assessment. One patient at 400 mg was not included in the response evaluation due to pending scan review. Demographics of the 100 mg, 200 mg, and 400 mg ENTO groups were men (47%, 68%, and 63%, respectively) with median ages of 71, 75, and 65 years, respectively. Most had previously received rituximab (68% to 95% across groups), and median prior therapies were 1-2 (across groups). The median duration of ENTO exposure was highest in the 400 mg group (67 weeks) compared to the 100 mg and 200 mg groups (36 and 28 weeks, respectively). The PFS rates at week 24 were as follows: 100 mg: 66% (95% CI: 36% to 85%); 200 mg: 83% (95% CI: 54% to 94%), and 400 mg: 82% (95%CI: 55% to 94%). The median PFS for each group was: 100 mg: 16.6 mo (95% CI: 5.4 mo, not reached (NR)); 200 mg: 16.8 mo (95% CI: 8.1 mo, NR), and 400 mg: 16.4 mo (95% CI: 5.6 mo, NR). The objective response rate (ORR) was 28% (90% CI: 12% to 50%), 43% (90% CI: 25% to 63%), and 61% (90% CI: 39% to 80%) for 100 mg, 200 mg, and 400 mg groups, respectively. One patient in the 400 mg group achieved a complete response. Figure 1 shows individual patients' changes in tumor size. Highest lymph node response rate of 67% (90% CI: 45% to 84%) was observed in the 400 mg group compared to 33% (90% CI: 16% to 55%) and 38% (90% CI: 21% to 58%) for the 100 mg and 200 mg groups, respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TEAEs; any grade/≥grade 3, independent of causality) and common lab abnormalities are summarized in Table 1. There were 10 TEAEs in 9 patients that led to study drug discontinuation. Two deaths were reported for the 400 mg group, but neither was related to study drug. Overall safety and efficacy results for the ENTO SDD formulation were comparable with those reported for CLL patients enrolled in the original cohort taking the 800 mg mono-mesylate formulation BID. As of this data cutoff point, 32% (n=6) of the 100 mg ENTO group, 32% (n=7) of the 200 mg ENTO group, and 53% (n=10) of the 400 mg ENTO group were continuing ENTO treatment. Discontinuations were primarily for disease progression (21% to 27%) or AEs (5% to 21%). Conclusions: ENTO in SDD formulation was well tolerated among the 3 different doses tested. There is no evidence of increased clinically significant toxicity associated with ENTO administered at 400 mg. Moreover, there were increases in ORR, PFS rate at 24 weeks, and median duration of exposure in 400 mg compared to the 200 mg and 100 mg groups. Median PFS was comparable between the 3 different dose groups evaluated. These results support the rationale for 400 mg BID of ENTO SDD to be the starting dose for future phase 2 trials in CLL. Further development of ENTO in CLL will focus on its role in combination therapies. Disclosures Sharman: Novartis: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kolibaba: Novartis: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences, Inc: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Cell Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding. Balaraman: Eli Lilly: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Smith: Kite Pharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Morphosys: Consultancy. Abella-Dominicis: Gilead Sciences, Inc: Employment. Ye: Gilead Sciences, Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shi: Gilead Sciences, Inc: Employment. Forero-Torres: 47 Pharmaceutical: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Affimed: Research Funding.

scholarly journals Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone (IRd) Consolidation Following Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Large Multi-Center Phase II Trial

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 123-123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ravi Vij ◽  
Nitya Nathwani ◽  
Thomas G. Martin ◽  
Mark A. Fiala ◽  
Abhinav Deol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Consolidation Therapy ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Oral Regimen ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background: Maintenance therapy post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has shown to improve progression-free and overall survival in multiple myeloma (MM) and has largely become the standard of care. Consolidation therapy, a brief duration of more-intensive chemotherapy administered prior to maintenance, has been shown to further deepen responses and may improve long-term outcomes. Ixazomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) is an all oral regimen that has been shown to be active in newly diagnosed MM as well as relapsed disease. In this study, we are analyzing the safety and efficacy of IRd as consolidation therapy after ASCT (NCT02253316). Methods: Eligible patients, age 18-70 with newly diagnosed MM undergoing ASCT during first-line treatment, are being consented prior to ASCT. Approximately 4 months following ASCT, patients receive 4 cycles of consolidation therapy with IRd [ixazomib 4 mg on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle, lenalidomide 15 mg on days 1 through 21, and dexamethasone 40 mg on days 1, 8 and 15]. The primary end point is minimal residual disease (MRD) status. MRD is being assessed by ClonoSEQ where possible and by multi-color flow where not. Toxicity, IMWG response rate, PFS, and OS are secondary end points. One month after the last consolidation cycle, patients are randomized (1:1) to maintenance therapy with single-agent ixazomib (4 mg on days 1, 8 and 15) or lenalidomide (15 mg daily). In total, 240 patients will be enrolled on the trial. This presentation coincides with planned interim analysis 2 which included data from the consolidation phase only. Results: As of July 2018, 172 patients with NDMM have been enrolled from 10 centers within the US. The median age was 57 (range 28-70) and 67% were male. 76% were white, 10% African-American/Black, and 13% were another race. 39% were ISS Stage I, 30% were Stage II, and 20% were Stage III. All patients received proteasome inhibitors and/or IMIDs as front-line induction and melphalan as conditioning for ASCT. IRd consolidation started at a median of 110 days post-ASCT (range 80-138). IRd has been well tolerated. Only 4% (6/154) of patients have been unable to complete the 4 cycles of consolidation to date due to toxicity. Grade 3 hematologic toxicity has been uncommon; 4% neutropenia, 3% thrombocytopenia, and 2% anemia. There has been no grade 4 hematologic toxicity. Non-hematologic grade 3-4 toxicities have included: infection (8%), nausea/vomiting/diarrhea (3%), and transaminitis (1%). No grade 3-4 peripheral neuropathy has been reported. One case of grade 5 pneumonia was reported but was not considered related to study treatment. Following ASCT, the MRD-negative rate was 26% and this improved to 37% following consolidation. In the subset of patients with Clonoseq results available, the MRD negative rate improved from 19% to 27%. Clinical response rate improved similarly; prior to consolidation the VGPR or better rate was 76% including 39% CR/sCR. Following consolidation, the VGPR or better rate was 85% including 56% CR/sCR. 137 patients went on to receive maintenance with either ixazomib (n = 71) or lenalidomide (n = 66). At time of submission, the median follow-up from start of IRd is 14 months and 28 patients have relapsed/progressed and 6 have expired. An interim analysis is planned for 2019, representing the first comparison of ixazomib and lenalidomide maintenance. Conclusion: IRd consolidation following ASCT appears to be safe and effective. The all oral regimen is convenient for patients which greatly simplifies follow-up in the peri-transplant period. Study enrollment is scheduled to complete in Q1 of 2019. Disclosures Vij: Karyopharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, 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; Jansson: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martin:Amgen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy. Deol:Kite Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Kaufman:Janssen: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Other: data monitoring committee; BMS: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy. Hofmeister:Oncopeptides: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive biotechnologies: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Gregory:Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding. Berdeja:Amgen: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Poseida Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Bluebird: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Glenmark: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding. Chari:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: 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; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Array Biopharma: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnology: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; The Binding Site: Consultancy.

scholarly journals A Phase Ib/IIa Trial of the Combination of Romidepsin, Lenalidomide and Carfilzomib in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Lymphoma Shows Complete Responses in Relapsed and Refractory T-Cell Lymphomas

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 2991-2991 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neha Mehta-Shah ◽  
Alison J Moskowitz ◽  
Matthew Lunning ◽  
Peggy Lynch ◽  
Mark Scheuerman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
T Cell ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Cell Lymphoma ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
T Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background:Epigenetic manipulation and immunomodulation are therapeutic strategies in hematologic malignancies. In our previous study, the combination of romidepsin and lenalidomide demonstrated a 58% overall response rate, complete response rate of 11% and median event free survival was 16 weeks in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory T-cell lymphoma. Given the potential synergy of proteasome inhibitors with histone deacetylase inhibitors and lenalidomide, we conducted a phase Ib/IIa study to evaluate the safety and toxicity of romidepsin and lenalidomide in combination with carfilzomib in pts with relapsed or refractory lymphoma. Here we report the safety, toxicity, and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) from the completed phase I portion of the study as well as the efficacy data from the completed T-cell lymphoma phase IIa cohort. Methods: The phase I portion evaluated toxicity and defined MTD. The clinicalactivity of the combination of romidepsin, lenalidomide, and carfilzomib was assessed in the phase I and lineage specific phase IIa cohorts. Romidepsin and carfilzomib were given IV on days 1, 8 and lenalidomide was given orally on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle. A standard 3+3 dose escalation schema was followed: The starting dose was romidepsin 8 mg/m2,lenalidomide 15 mg, carfilzomib 36mg/m2. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined in cycle 1 as ≥ grade 3 non-hematologic toxicity, grade 4 hematologic toxicity, grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding, grade 3 hematologic toxicity resulting in a significant delay of treatment or inability to receive day 1 of cycle 2 due to continued drug related toxicity. Tumor response was based on disease-specific criteria.Pts could be treated until progression, intolerance, or response adequate to allow allogeneic transplantation. Results:20 pts were enrolled with 19 evaluable for toxicity (1 patient with T-cell lymphoma progressed prior to receipt of any study drug). 17 pts were treated for T-cell lymphoma (11 in the phase 1 portion and 6 in the phase IIa cohort): peripheral T-cell lymphoma-not otherwise specified (PTCL-NOS)-9, angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL)-4 (one with concurrent diffuse large B-cell lymphoma-DLBCL), mycosis fungoides (MF)-2, transformed MF-1, extra-nodal NK/T-cell lymphoma (ENKTCL)-1. 3 pts in the phase 1 portion were treated for B-cell lymphoma: DLBCL-3. The T-cell lymphoma cohort is complete and efficacy data is reported here. Dose level 2 (romidepsin 8 mg/m2,lenalidomide 15 mg, carfilzomib 45mg/m2) exceeded the MTD with 2/6 DLTs: 1 pt with grade 3 thrombocytopenia resulting in treatment delay and 1 pt with grade 4 thrombocytopenia. There were no DLTs among 6 pts treated in dose level 1 (romidepsin 8 mg/m2,lenalidomide 15 mg, carfilzomib 36mg/m2) and dose level 1 was deemed the MTD. Grade 3-4 toxicities in >10% pts included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. SAEs included: infection-3, progression of disease resulting in hospitalization-3, fever-2, febrile neutropenia-1, DVT-1, edema-1, dyspnea-1, atrial flutter-1, generalized weakness-1, and vomiting with diarrhea-1. Of the 16 pts with T-cell lymphoma evaluable for response, the overall response rate was 50% (8/16, 95% CI: 25 to 75%). The complete responses rate was 31% (5/16, 95% CI: 11 to 59%) and the partial response rate was 19% (3/16, 95% CI: 4 to 46%). Complete responses were seen in AITL (4/5) and PTCL-NOS (1/8) with 3 pts in CR proceeding to allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Partial responses were seen in PTCL-NOS-1, AITL-1, and transformed MF-1. In T-cell lymphoma, the median event free survival for all pts was 9.7 weeks (95% CI: 6.0 to NR) and for responders was not reached (95% CI: 15.0 to NR). The median time to response was 5.8 weeks. The median duration of response was 9.6 weeks (95% CI: 8.0 to NR). 3 pts underwent allogeneic transplantation following this therapy and another 2 pts with CR remain in continuous remission. Median duration of follow up was 20.4 weeks (range 3.4-40.9 weeks). Conclusions: The MTD dose for phase 2 study was identified as romidepsin 8mg/m2, lenalidomide 15mg and carfilzomib 36mg/m2. No unexpected toxicities have emerged. The preliminary overall and complete response rates of this regimen are promising in T-cell lymphoma, particularly in AITL, and warrants further study. An expansion cohort in B-cell lymphoma cohort is ongoing. Disclosures Moskowitz: Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Lunning:Gilead: Consultancy; Bristol-Myer-Squibb: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Juno: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Kumar:Celgene: Research Funding; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Scientific Advisory Board. Zelenetz:Gilead Sciences: Research Funding. Hamlin:Novartis: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Xencor: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Portola: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Molecular Templates: Research Funding. Noy:Pharmacyclics, LLC, an AbbVie Company: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding. Palomba:Pharmacyclics: Consultancy. Dogan:Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Consulting Cancer Panel: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cancer Genetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Peerview Institute: Consultancy. Horwitz:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Infinity: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; ADCT Therapeutics: Research Funding; Huya: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakka Kirin: Consultancy, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals Safety and Efficacy of Obinutuzumab Plus Bendamustine in Previously Untreated Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Subgroup Analysis of the Green Study

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 493-493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephan Stilgenbauer ◽  
Osman Ilhan ◽  
Darius Woszczyk ◽  
Christoph Renner ◽  
Eva Mikuskova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Marrow ◽  
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Febrile Neutropenia ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Safety And Efficacy ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background The glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab (GA101; GAZYVA/GAZYVARO; G) combined with chlorambucil (Clb) has superior efficacy to Clb monotherapy and to rituximab plus Clb with an acceptable safety profile in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), as shown in the CLL11 study (Goede V, et al. NEJM 2014). GREEN is an ongoing, non-randomized, multi-cohort phase IIIb study (NCT01905943) investigating the safety (primary objective) and efficacy of G alone or in combination with chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL and assessing various strategies (cohorts 1-3) for reducing the rate of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) during the first infusion of G (Bosch F, et al. Blood 2014). We report safety and efficacy data from a subgroup of previously untreated patients in cohort 1 who received G-bendamustine (G-B). Methods Subjects were aged ≥18 years withdocumented CLL (except one case of SLL), an ECOG performance status of 0-2, and adequate hematologic function. Non-fit patients were those with a CrCl of <70 mL/min, and/or a CIRS score of >6. Fit patients comprised all others. Treatment was six 28-day cycles of G-B, where G was administered IV on D1/D2 of C1 (split dose: 25mg D1/975mg D2), and 1000mg on D8 and D15 of C1 and D1 C2-6. B was administered ≥30 minutes after G on D1 and D2 of each cycle at 90mg/m2 IV, or at 70mg/m2 in non-fit patients at the investigator's discretion. Safety endpoints included incidence, type and severity of AEs. Efficacy endpoints included ORR (investigator-assessed) and minimal residual disease (MRD) measured 3 months post-treatment. ORR was strictly assessed per International Workshop Group criteria (iwCLL 2008). Patients with missing response assessment components had their responses downgraded mandatorily. MRD negativity was defined as <1x10-4 malignant B cells in peripheral blood or bone marrow aspirate, measured in a central laboratory by 4-color flow cytometry. The population comprised all patients from cohort 1 of GREEN who received at least a partial dose of both G and B, and was based on a data cut-off of 26 March 2015. Results With a planned overall sample size of 950 patients in GREEN, the G-B subgroup in cohort 1 comprised 158 patients (157 CLL, 1 SLL; 74 fit, 84 non-fit). Median age was 67.6 years, 15.8% of patients had a CIRS score of >6, and 44.9% had a CrCl of <70 mL/min; 31.6% of patients had Binet stage A disease, 38% Binet B, and 30.4% Binet C. 7.0% of patients' disease displayed 17p deletion, 16.5% 11q deletion, and 58.2% unmutated IGHV. 91.1% of patients receiving B and 93.0% of those receiving G took ≥90% of the recommended total dose. The safety profile of G-B was as expected. 50% of patients developed grade 3-5 neutropenia and 12.7% developed a grade 3-5 infection. Other common grade 3-5 AEs included thrombocytopenia (12.7%) and tumor lysis syndrome (TLS; 10.1%). The most common serious AEs were neutropenia (10.8%), pyrexia (7.6%), febrile neutropenia (7.0%), and TLS (5.1%). There were nine deaths - one due to progression, and eight due to AEs (considered related to study drug by the investigator: 1 infection, 1 sudden death, 1 acute hepatic failure, and 1 febrile neutropenia combined with TLS; considered unrelated: 2 infections and 2 secondary neoplasms). IRRs occurred in 55.7% of patients (15.2% grade 3-5, none fatal). Overall, 26 patients (16.5%) prematurely discontinued treatment due to ≥1 adverse event. The ORR was 78.5% (124/158). The rate of CR (including incomplete CR [CRi]) was 32.3% (51/158), PR 46.2% (73/158), SD 10.8% (17/158), and PD 0.6% (1/158); 10.1% (16/158) of patients had missing data. Response rates were similar in non-fit (34.5% CR/CRi, 41.7% PR, 10.7% SD, and 1.2% PD) and fit (29.7% CR/CRi, 51.4% PR, 10.8% SD, and 0% PD) patients. In an intent-to-treat analysis including all missing (not taken or evaluable) MRD results, MRD negativity was 58.9% (93/158, including 56 missing) in blood and 27.8% (44/158, including 95 missing) in bone marrow. With a median observation time of 11.2 months, PFS data were immature and the median was not reached. Conclusions Treatment with G-B in previously-untreated CLL patients is generally well tolerated and the observed toxicities are manageable and not unexpected. G-B achieves a promising rate of CRs and a high rate of MRD-negative remissions, and may offer a new treatment option for fit and non-fit patients with CLL. Disclosures Stilgenbauer: Gilead: Honoraria, Research Funding. Off Label Use: GAZYVA (obinutuzumab) is a CD20-directed cytolytic antibody and is indicated, in combination with chlorambucil, for the treatment of patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). This abstract reports on obinutuzumab alone or in combination with chemotherapy for previously untreated or relapsed/refractory CLL. Renner:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Böttcher:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Beckton Dickinson: Honoraria. Tausch:Gilead: Other: Travel support. Moore:Roche: Employment. Tyson:Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. Adamis:Roche: Employment. Leblonde:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Mundipharma: Speakers Bureau. Bosch:Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Foà:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document