Aggressive Lymphomas

Micrograph showing WM

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to zanubrutinib for the treatment of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM).

Zanubrutinib (BGB-3111) is a BTK inhibitor being developed by BeiGene to treat various B-cell malignancies.

BeiGene is preparing to submit to the FDA, in the first half of 2019, a new drug application seeking accelerated approval of zanubrutinib for patients with WM.

The application will be supported by results from a phase 1 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (14-ICML) last year.

Researchers are also evaluating zanubrutinib in phase 2 (NCT03332173) and phase 3 (NCT03053440) trials of WM patients. In the phase 3 trial, researchers are comparing zanubrutinib to the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

Phase 1 results

As of March 31, 2017, 48 WM patients were enrolled in the phase 1 study. Thirty-eight patients had relapsed/refractory disease, and 10 patients were treatment-naïve.

There was a dose-escalation phase and a dose-expansion phase. The dose-expansion phase included doses of 160 mg twice a day or 320 mg once a day.

The most common (>10%) adverse events, (AEs) of any attribution were petechiae/purpura/contusion (35%), upper respiratory tract infection (31%), constipation (25%), diarrhea (19%), epistaxis (19%), nausea (17%), cough (15%), anemia (15%), headache (15%), neutropenia (13%), and rash (13%).

Most of these events were grade 1 or 2 in severity. The exceptions were grade 3/4 anemia and neutropenia (8% each) as well as grade 3/4 diarrhea and headache (2% each).

Five serious AEs were considered possibly related to zanubrutinib—1 case each of hemothorax, atrial fibrillation, colitis, febrile neutropenia, and headache. Three AEs led to treatment discontinuation—1 case each of bronchiectasis, prostate adenocarcinoma, and adenocarcinoma of pylorus.

At the time of the data cutoff, 42 patients were evaluable for response. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months (range, 4.4 to 30.5 months), the overall response rate was 90% (38/42).

The major response rate was 76% (32/42), with very good partial responses in 43% (18/42) of patients and partial responses in 33% (14/42) of patients. There were no complete responses and 2 cases of disease progression.

About fast track designation

The FDA’s fast track development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of applications for products with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.

Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss the product’s development plan and written communications about issues such as trial design and use of biomarkers.

Products that receive fast track designation may be eligible for accelerated approval and priority review if relevant criteria are met. Such products may also be eligible for rolling review, which allows a developer to submit individual sections of a product’s application for review as they are ready, rather than waiting until all sections are complete.

Micrograph showing WM

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to zanubrutinib for the treatment of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM).

Zanubrutinib (BGB-3111) is a BTK inhibitor being developed by BeiGene to treat various B-cell malignancies.

BeiGene is preparing to submit to the FDA, in the first half of 2019, a new drug application seeking accelerated approval of zanubrutinib for patients with WM.

The application will be supported by results from a phase 1 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (14-ICML) last year.

Researchers are also evaluating zanubrutinib in phase 2 (NCT03332173) and phase 3 (NCT03053440) trials of WM patients. In the phase 3 trial, researchers are comparing zanubrutinib to the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

Phase 1 results

As of March 31, 2017, 48 WM patients were enrolled in the phase 1 study. Thirty-eight patients had relapsed/refractory disease, and 10 patients were treatment-naïve.

There was a dose-escalation phase and a dose-expansion phase. The dose-expansion phase included doses of 160 mg twice a day or 320 mg once a day.

The most common (>10%) adverse events, (AEs) of any attribution were petechiae/purpura/contusion (35%), upper respiratory tract infection (31%), constipation (25%), diarrhea (19%), epistaxis (19%), nausea (17%), cough (15%), anemia (15%), headache (15%), neutropenia (13%), and rash (13%).

Most of these events were grade 1 or 2 in severity. The exceptions were grade 3/4 anemia and neutropenia (8% each) as well as grade 3/4 diarrhea and headache (2% each).

Five serious AEs were considered possibly related to zanubrutinib—1 case each of hemothorax, atrial fibrillation, colitis, febrile neutropenia, and headache. Three AEs led to treatment discontinuation—1 case each of bronchiectasis, prostate adenocarcinoma, and adenocarcinoma of pylorus.

At the time of the data cutoff, 42 patients were evaluable for response. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months (range, 4.4 to 30.5 months), the overall response rate was 90% (38/42).

The major response rate was 76% (32/42), with very good partial responses in 43% (18/42) of patients and partial responses in 33% (14/42) of patients. There were no complete responses and 2 cases of disease progression.

About fast track designation

The FDA’s fast track development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of applications for products with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.

Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss the product’s development plan and written communications about issues such as trial design and use of biomarkers.

Products that receive fast track designation may be eligible for accelerated approval and priority review if relevant criteria are met. Such products may also be eligible for rolling review, which allows a developer to submit individual sections of a product’s application for review as they are ready, rather than waiting until all sections are complete.

Micrograph showing WM

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to zanubrutinib for the treatment of Waldenström’s macroglobulinemia (WM).

Zanubrutinib (BGB-3111) is a BTK inhibitor being developed by BeiGene to treat various B-cell malignancies.

BeiGene is preparing to submit to the FDA, in the first half of 2019, a new drug application seeking accelerated approval of zanubrutinib for patients with WM.

The application will be supported by results from a phase 1 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 14th International Conference on Malignant Lymphoma (14-ICML) last year.

Researchers are also evaluating zanubrutinib in phase 2 (NCT03332173) and phase 3 (NCT03053440) trials of WM patients. In the phase 3 trial, researchers are comparing zanubrutinib to the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

Phase 1 results

As of March 31, 2017, 48 WM patients were enrolled in the phase 1 study. Thirty-eight patients had relapsed/refractory disease, and 10 patients were treatment-naïve.

There was a dose-escalation phase and a dose-expansion phase. The dose-expansion phase included doses of 160 mg twice a day or 320 mg once a day.

The most common (>10%) adverse events, (AEs) of any attribution were petechiae/purpura/contusion (35%), upper respiratory tract infection (31%), constipation (25%), diarrhea (19%), epistaxis (19%), nausea (17%), cough (15%), anemia (15%), headache (15%), neutropenia (13%), and rash (13%).

Most of these events were grade 1 or 2 in severity. The exceptions were grade 3/4 anemia and neutropenia (8% each) as well as grade 3/4 diarrhea and headache (2% each).

Five serious AEs were considered possibly related to zanubrutinib—1 case each of hemothorax, atrial fibrillation, colitis, febrile neutropenia, and headache. Three AEs led to treatment discontinuation—1 case each of bronchiectasis, prostate adenocarcinoma, and adenocarcinoma of pylorus.

At the time of the data cutoff, 42 patients were evaluable for response. At a median follow-up of 12.3 months (range, 4.4 to 30.5 months), the overall response rate was 90% (38/42).

The major response rate was 76% (32/42), with very good partial responses in 43% (18/42) of patients and partial responses in 33% (14/42) of patients. There were no complete responses and 2 cases of disease progression.

About fast track designation

The FDA’s fast track development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of applications for products with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.

Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss the product’s development plan and written communications about issues such as trial design and use of biomarkers.

Products that receive fast track designation may be eligible for accelerated approval and priority review if relevant criteria are met. Such products may also be eligible for rolling review, which allows a developer to submit individual sections of a product’s application for review as they are ready, rather than waiting until all sections are complete.

Photo by Bill Branson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the leukocyte growth factor Nivestym™ (filgrastim-aafi), a biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Nivestym is approved to treat patients with nonmyeloid malignancies who are receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing bone marrow transplant, acute myeloid leukemia patients receiving induction or consolidation chemotherapy, patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell collection, and patients with severe chronic neutropenia.

The FDA’s approval of Nivestym was based on a review of evidence suggesting the drug is highly similar to Neupogen, according to Pfizer, the company developing Nivestym.

The full approved indication for Nivestym is as follows:

• To decrease the incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia, in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anticancer drugs associated with a significant incidence of severe neutropenia with fever
• To reduce the time to neutrophil recovery and the duration of fever following induction or consolidation chemotherapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia
• To reduce the duration of neutropenia and neutropenia-related clinical sequelae (eg, febrile neutropenia) in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies undergoing myeloablative chemotherapy followed by bone marrow transplant
• For the mobilization of autologous hematopoietic progenitor cells into the peripheral blood for collection by leukapheresis
• For chronic administration to reduce the incidence and duration of sequelae of severe neutropenia (eg, fever, infections, oropharyngeal ulcers) in symptomatic patients with congenital neutropenia, cyclic neutropenia, or idiopathic neutropenia.

For more details on Nivestym, see the full prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the leukocyte growth factor Nivestym™ (filgrastim-aafi), a biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Nivestym is approved to treat patients with nonmyeloid malignancies who are receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing bone marrow transplant, acute myeloid leukemia patients receiving induction or consolidation chemotherapy, patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell collection, and patients with severe chronic neutropenia.

The FDA’s approval of Nivestym was based on a review of evidence suggesting the drug is highly similar to Neupogen, according to Pfizer, the company developing Nivestym.

The full approved indication for Nivestym is as follows:

• To decrease the incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia, in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anticancer drugs associated with a significant incidence of severe neutropenia with fever
• To reduce the time to neutrophil recovery and the duration of fever following induction or consolidation chemotherapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia
• To reduce the duration of neutropenia and neutropenia-related clinical sequelae (eg, febrile neutropenia) in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies undergoing myeloablative chemotherapy followed by bone marrow transplant
• For the mobilization of autologous hematopoietic progenitor cells into the peripheral blood for collection by leukapheresis
• For chronic administration to reduce the incidence and duration of sequelae of severe neutropenia (eg, fever, infections, oropharyngeal ulcers) in symptomatic patients with congenital neutropenia, cyclic neutropenia, or idiopathic neutropenia.

For more details on Nivestym, see the full prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the leukocyte growth factor Nivestym™ (filgrastim-aafi), a biosimilar to Neupogen (filgrastim).

Nivestym is approved to treat patients with nonmyeloid malignancies who are receiving myelosuppressive chemotherapy or undergoing bone marrow transplant, acute myeloid leukemia patients receiving induction or consolidation chemotherapy, patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood progenitor cell collection, and patients with severe chronic neutropenia.

The FDA’s approval of Nivestym was based on a review of evidence suggesting the drug is highly similar to Neupogen, according to Pfizer, the company developing Nivestym.

The full approved indication for Nivestym is as follows:

• To decrease the incidence of infection, as manifested by febrile neutropenia, in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies receiving myelosuppressive anticancer drugs associated with a significant incidence of severe neutropenia with fever
• To reduce the time to neutrophil recovery and the duration of fever following induction or consolidation chemotherapy in patients with acute myeloid leukemia
• To reduce the duration of neutropenia and neutropenia-related clinical sequelae (eg, febrile neutropenia) in patients with nonmyeloid malignancies undergoing myeloablative chemotherapy followed by bone marrow transplant
• For the mobilization of autologous hematopoietic progenitor cells into the peripheral blood for collection by leukapheresis
• For chronic administration to reduce the incidence and duration of sequelae of severe neutropenia (eg, fever, infections, oropharyngeal ulcers) in symptomatic patients with congenital neutropenia, cyclic neutropenia, or idiopathic neutropenia.

For more details on Nivestym, see the full prescribing information.

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A review of data from more than 19 million people indicates that diabetes significantly raises a person’s risk of developing cancer.

When researchers compared patients with diabetes and without, both male and female diabetics had an increased risk of leukemias and lymphomas as well as certain solid tumors.

Researchers also found that diabetes conferred a higher cancer risk for women than men, both for all cancers combined and for some specific cancers, including leukemia.

“The link between diabetes and the risk of developing cancer is now firmly established,” said Toshiaki Ohkuma, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of New South Wales in Australia.

“We have also demonstrated, for the first time, that women with diabetes are more likely to develop any form of cancer and have a significantly higher chance of developing kidney, oral, and stomach cancers and leukemia.”

Dr Ohkuma and his colleagues reported these findings in Diabetologia.

The researchers conducted a systematic search in PubMed MEDLINE to identify reports on the links between diabetes and cancer. Additional reports were identified from the reference lists of the relevant studies.

Only those cohort studies providing relative risks (RRs) for the association between diabetes and cancer for both women and men were included. In total, 107 relevant articles were identified, along with 36 cohorts of individual participant data.

RRs for cancer were obtained for patients with diabetes (types 1 and 2 combined) versus those without diabetes, for both men and women. The women-to-men ratios of these relative risk ratios (RRRs) were then calculated to determine the excess risk in women if present.

Data on all-site cancer was available from 47 studies, involving 121 cohorts and 19,239,302 individuals.

Diabetics vs non-diabetics

Women with diabetes had a 27% higher risk of all-site cancer compared to women without diabetes (RR=1.27; 95% CI 1.21, 1.32; P<0.001).

For men, the risk of all-site cancer was 19% higher among those with diabetes than those without (RR=1.19; 95% CI 1.13, 1.25; P<0.001).

There were several hematologic malignancies for which diabetics had an increased risk, as shown in the following table.

Sex comparison

Calculation of the women-to-men ratio revealed that women with diabetes had a 6% greater excess risk of all-site cancer compared to men with diabetes (RRR=1.06; 95% CI 1.03, 1.09; P<0.001).

The women-to-men ratios also showed significantly higher risks for female diabetics for:

• Kidney cancer—RRR=1.11 (99% CI 1.04, 1.18; P<0.001)
• Oral cancer—RRR=1.13 (99% CI 1.00, 1.28; P=0.009)
• Stomach cancer—RRR=1.14 (99% CI 1.07, 1.22; P<0.001)
• Leukemia—RRR=1.15 (99% CI 1.02, 1.28; P=0.002).

However, women had a significantly lower risk of liver cancer (RRR=0.88; 99% CI 0.79, 0.99; P=0.005).

There are several possible reasons for the excess cancer risk observed in women, according to study author Sanne Peters, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of Oxford in the UK.

For example, on average, women are in the pre-diabetic state of impaired glucose tolerance 2 years longer than men.

“Historically, we know that women are often under-treated when they first present with symptoms of diabetes, are less likely to receive intensive care, and are not taking the same levels of medications as men,” Dr Peters said. “All of these could go some way into explaining why women are at greater risk of developing cancer, but, without more research, we can’t be certain.”

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A review of data from more than 19 million people indicates that diabetes significantly raises a person’s risk of developing cancer.

When researchers compared patients with diabetes and without, both male and female diabetics had an increased risk of leukemias and lymphomas as well as certain solid tumors.

Researchers also found that diabetes conferred a higher cancer risk for women than men, both for all cancers combined and for some specific cancers, including leukemia.

“The link between diabetes and the risk of developing cancer is now firmly established,” said Toshiaki Ohkuma, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of New South Wales in Australia.

“We have also demonstrated, for the first time, that women with diabetes are more likely to develop any form of cancer and have a significantly higher chance of developing kidney, oral, and stomach cancers and leukemia.”

Dr Ohkuma and his colleagues reported these findings in Diabetologia.

The researchers conducted a systematic search in PubMed MEDLINE to identify reports on the links between diabetes and cancer. Additional reports were identified from the reference lists of the relevant studies.

Only those cohort studies providing relative risks (RRs) for the association between diabetes and cancer for both women and men were included. In total, 107 relevant articles were identified, along with 36 cohorts of individual participant data.

RRs for cancer were obtained for patients with diabetes (types 1 and 2 combined) versus those without diabetes, for both men and women. The women-to-men ratios of these relative risk ratios (RRRs) were then calculated to determine the excess risk in women if present.

Data on all-site cancer was available from 47 studies, involving 121 cohorts and 19,239,302 individuals.

Diabetics vs non-diabetics

Women with diabetes had a 27% higher risk of all-site cancer compared to women without diabetes (RR=1.27; 95% CI 1.21, 1.32; P<0.001).

For men, the risk of all-site cancer was 19% higher among those with diabetes than those without (RR=1.19; 95% CI 1.13, 1.25; P<0.001).

There were several hematologic malignancies for which diabetics had an increased risk, as shown in the following table.

Sex comparison

Calculation of the women-to-men ratio revealed that women with diabetes had a 6% greater excess risk of all-site cancer compared to men with diabetes (RRR=1.06; 95% CI 1.03, 1.09; P<0.001).

The women-to-men ratios also showed significantly higher risks for female diabetics for:

• Kidney cancer—RRR=1.11 (99% CI 1.04, 1.18; P<0.001)
• Oral cancer—RRR=1.13 (99% CI 1.00, 1.28; P=0.009)
• Stomach cancer—RRR=1.14 (99% CI 1.07, 1.22; P<0.001)
• Leukemia—RRR=1.15 (99% CI 1.02, 1.28; P=0.002).

However, women had a significantly lower risk of liver cancer (RRR=0.88; 99% CI 0.79, 0.99; P=0.005).

There are several possible reasons for the excess cancer risk observed in women, according to study author Sanne Peters, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of Oxford in the UK.

For example, on average, women are in the pre-diabetic state of impaired glucose tolerance 2 years longer than men.

“Historically, we know that women are often under-treated when they first present with symptoms of diabetes, are less likely to receive intensive care, and are not taking the same levels of medications as men,” Dr Peters said. “All of these could go some way into explaining why women are at greater risk of developing cancer, but, without more research, we can’t be certain.”

Photo by Rhoda Baer

A review of data from more than 19 million people indicates that diabetes significantly raises a person’s risk of developing cancer.

When researchers compared patients with diabetes and without, both male and female diabetics had an increased risk of leukemias and lymphomas as well as certain solid tumors.

Researchers also found that diabetes conferred a higher cancer risk for women than men, both for all cancers combined and for some specific cancers, including leukemia.

“The link between diabetes and the risk of developing cancer is now firmly established,” said Toshiaki Ohkuma, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of New South Wales in Australia.

“We have also demonstrated, for the first time, that women with diabetes are more likely to develop any form of cancer and have a significantly higher chance of developing kidney, oral, and stomach cancers and leukemia.”

Dr Ohkuma and his colleagues reported these findings in Diabetologia.

The researchers conducted a systematic search in PubMed MEDLINE to identify reports on the links between diabetes and cancer. Additional reports were identified from the reference lists of the relevant studies.

Only those cohort studies providing relative risks (RRs) for the association between diabetes and cancer for both women and men were included. In total, 107 relevant articles were identified, along with 36 cohorts of individual participant data.

RRs for cancer were obtained for patients with diabetes (types 1 and 2 combined) versus those without diabetes, for both men and women. The women-to-men ratios of these relative risk ratios (RRRs) were then calculated to determine the excess risk in women if present.

Data on all-site cancer was available from 47 studies, involving 121 cohorts and 19,239,302 individuals.

Diabetics vs non-diabetics

Women with diabetes had a 27% higher risk of all-site cancer compared to women without diabetes (RR=1.27; 95% CI 1.21, 1.32; P<0.001).

For men, the risk of all-site cancer was 19% higher among those with diabetes than those without (RR=1.19; 95% CI 1.13, 1.25; P<0.001).

There were several hematologic malignancies for which diabetics had an increased risk, as shown in the following table.

Sex comparison

Calculation of the women-to-men ratio revealed that women with diabetes had a 6% greater excess risk of all-site cancer compared to men with diabetes (RRR=1.06; 95% CI 1.03, 1.09; P<0.001).

The women-to-men ratios also showed significantly higher risks for female diabetics for:

• Kidney cancer—RRR=1.11 (99% CI 1.04, 1.18; P<0.001)
• Oral cancer—RRR=1.13 (99% CI 1.00, 1.28; P=0.009)
• Stomach cancer—RRR=1.14 (99% CI 1.07, 1.22; P<0.001)
• Leukemia—RRR=1.15 (99% CI 1.02, 1.28; P=0.002).

However, women had a significantly lower risk of liver cancer (RRR=0.88; 99% CI 0.79, 0.99; P=0.005).

There are several possible reasons for the excess cancer risk observed in women, according to study author Sanne Peters, PhD, of The George Institute for Global Health at the University of Oxford in the UK.

For example, on average, women are in the pre-diabetic state of impaired glucose tolerance 2 years longer than men.

“Historically, we know that women are often under-treated when they first present with symptoms of diabetes, are less likely to receive intensive care, and are not taking the same levels of medications as men,” Dr Peters said. “All of these could go some way into explaining why women are at greater risk of developing cancer, but, without more research, we can’t be certain.”

Image from Jens Langner

In the PETAL trial, treatment intensification based on results of an interim positron emission tomography (PET) scan did not improve survival outcomes for patients with aggressive lymphomas.

PET-positive patients did not benefit by switching from R-CHOP to a more intensive chemotherapy regimen.

PET-negative patients did not benefit from 2 additional cycles of rituximab after R-CHOP.

These results were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

PETAL was a randomized trial of patients with newly diagnosed T- or B-cell lymphomas.

Patients received 2 cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone)—plus rituximab (R-CHOP) in CD20-positive lymphomas—followed by a PET scan.

PET-positive patients were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 6 blocks of an intensive protocol used to treat Burkitt lymphoma. This protocol consisted of high-dose methotrexate, cytarabine, hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide, split-dose doxorubicin and etoposide, vincristine, vindesine, and dexamethasone.

PET-negative patients with CD20-positive lymphomas were randomized to receive 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP followed by 2 more doses of rituximab.

Among patients with T-cell lymphomas, only PET-positive individuals underwent randomization. PET-negative patients received CHOP. Patients with CD20-positive T-cell lymphomas also received rituximab.

PET-positive results

Of the PET-positive patients (108/862), 52 were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP, and 56 were randomized to 6 cycles of the Burkitt protocol.

In general, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment. The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was 63.6% for patients who received R-CHOP and 55.4% for those who received the more intensive protocol.

Two-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 49.4% and 43.1%, respectively. Two-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 42.0% and 31.6%, respectively.

Among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the OS rate was 64.8% for patients who received R-CHOP and 47.1% for those on the Burkitt protocol. PFS rates were 55.5% and 41.4%, respectively.

There was a significant difference in EFS rates among the DLBCL patients—52.4% in the R-CHOP arm and 28.3% in the intensive arm (P=0.0186).

Among T-cell lymphoma patients, the OS rate was 22.2% in the R-CHOP arm and 30.0% in the intensive arm. The PFS rates were 12.7% and 30%, respectively. The EFS rates were the same as the PFS rates.

Overall, patients who received the Burkitt protocol had significantly higher rates of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities, infection, and mucositis.

PET-negative results

Of 754 PET-negative patients, 697 had CD20-positive lymphomas, and 255 of those patients (all with B-cell lymphomas) underwent randomization.

There were 129 patients who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP (2 before and 4 after randomization) and 126 who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP plus 2 additional cycles of rituximab.

Again, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment.

The 2-year OS was 88.2% for patients who received only R-CHOP and 87.2% for those with additional rituximab exposure. PFS rates were 82.0% and 77.5%, respectively. EFS rates were 76.4% and 73.5%, respectively.

In the DLBCL patients, the OS rate was 88.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 85.8% in the intensive arm. PFS rates were 82.3% and 77.7%, respectively. EFS rates were 72.6% and 78.9%, respectively.

As increasing the dose of rituximab did not improve outcomes, the investigators concluded that 6 cycles of R-CHOP should be the standard of care for these patients.

The team also said interim PET scanning is “a powerful tool” for identifying chemotherapy-resistant lymphomas, and PET-positive patients may be candidates for immunologic treatment approaches.

Image from Jens Langner

In the PETAL trial, treatment intensification based on results of an interim positron emission tomography (PET) scan did not improve survival outcomes for patients with aggressive lymphomas.

PET-positive patients did not benefit by switching from R-CHOP to a more intensive chemotherapy regimen.

PET-negative patients did not benefit from 2 additional cycles of rituximab after R-CHOP.

These results were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

PETAL was a randomized trial of patients with newly diagnosed T- or B-cell lymphomas.

Patients received 2 cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone)—plus rituximab (R-CHOP) in CD20-positive lymphomas—followed by a PET scan.

PET-positive patients were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 6 blocks of an intensive protocol used to treat Burkitt lymphoma. This protocol consisted of high-dose methotrexate, cytarabine, hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide, split-dose doxorubicin and etoposide, vincristine, vindesine, and dexamethasone.

PET-negative patients with CD20-positive lymphomas were randomized to receive 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP followed by 2 more doses of rituximab.

Among patients with T-cell lymphomas, only PET-positive individuals underwent randomization. PET-negative patients received CHOP. Patients with CD20-positive T-cell lymphomas also received rituximab.

PET-positive results

Of the PET-positive patients (108/862), 52 were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP, and 56 were randomized to 6 cycles of the Burkitt protocol.

In general, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment. The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was 63.6% for patients who received R-CHOP and 55.4% for those who received the more intensive protocol.

Two-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 49.4% and 43.1%, respectively. Two-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 42.0% and 31.6%, respectively.

Among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the OS rate was 64.8% for patients who received R-CHOP and 47.1% for those on the Burkitt protocol. PFS rates were 55.5% and 41.4%, respectively.

There was a significant difference in EFS rates among the DLBCL patients—52.4% in the R-CHOP arm and 28.3% in the intensive arm (P=0.0186).

Among T-cell lymphoma patients, the OS rate was 22.2% in the R-CHOP arm and 30.0% in the intensive arm. The PFS rates were 12.7% and 30%, respectively. The EFS rates were the same as the PFS rates.

Overall, patients who received the Burkitt protocol had significantly higher rates of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities, infection, and mucositis.

PET-negative results

Of 754 PET-negative patients, 697 had CD20-positive lymphomas, and 255 of those patients (all with B-cell lymphomas) underwent randomization.

There were 129 patients who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP (2 before and 4 after randomization) and 126 who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP plus 2 additional cycles of rituximab.

Again, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment.

The 2-year OS was 88.2% for patients who received only R-CHOP and 87.2% for those with additional rituximab exposure. PFS rates were 82.0% and 77.5%, respectively. EFS rates were 76.4% and 73.5%, respectively.

In the DLBCL patients, the OS rate was 88.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 85.8% in the intensive arm. PFS rates were 82.3% and 77.7%, respectively. EFS rates were 72.6% and 78.9%, respectively.

As increasing the dose of rituximab did not improve outcomes, the investigators concluded that 6 cycles of R-CHOP should be the standard of care for these patients.

The team also said interim PET scanning is “a powerful tool” for identifying chemotherapy-resistant lymphomas, and PET-positive patients may be candidates for immunologic treatment approaches.

Image from Jens Langner

In the PETAL trial, treatment intensification based on results of an interim positron emission tomography (PET) scan did not improve survival outcomes for patients with aggressive lymphomas.

PET-positive patients did not benefit by switching from R-CHOP to a more intensive chemotherapy regimen.

PET-negative patients did not benefit from 2 additional cycles of rituximab after R-CHOP.

These results were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

PETAL was a randomized trial of patients with newly diagnosed T- or B-cell lymphomas.

Patients received 2 cycles of CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone)—plus rituximab (R-CHOP) in CD20-positive lymphomas—followed by a PET scan.

PET-positive patients were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 6 blocks of an intensive protocol used to treat Burkitt lymphoma. This protocol consisted of high-dose methotrexate, cytarabine, hyperfractionated cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide, split-dose doxorubicin and etoposide, vincristine, vindesine, and dexamethasone.

PET-negative patients with CD20-positive lymphomas were randomized to receive 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP or 4 additional cycles of R-CHOP followed by 2 more doses of rituximab.

Among patients with T-cell lymphomas, only PET-positive individuals underwent randomization. PET-negative patients received CHOP. Patients with CD20-positive T-cell lymphomas also received rituximab.

PET-positive results

Of the PET-positive patients (108/862), 52 were randomized to receive 6 additional cycles of R-CHOP, and 56 were randomized to 6 cycles of the Burkitt protocol.

In general, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment. The 2-year overall survival (OS) rate was 63.6% for patients who received R-CHOP and 55.4% for those who received the more intensive protocol.

Two-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 49.4% and 43.1%, respectively. Two-year event-free survival (EFS) rates were 42.0% and 31.6%, respectively.

Among patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), the OS rate was 64.8% for patients who received R-CHOP and 47.1% for those on the Burkitt protocol. PFS rates were 55.5% and 41.4%, respectively.

There was a significant difference in EFS rates among the DLBCL patients—52.4% in the R-CHOP arm and 28.3% in the intensive arm (P=0.0186).

Among T-cell lymphoma patients, the OS rate was 22.2% in the R-CHOP arm and 30.0% in the intensive arm. The PFS rates were 12.7% and 30%, respectively. The EFS rates were the same as the PFS rates.

Overall, patients who received the Burkitt protocol had significantly higher rates of grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities, infection, and mucositis.

PET-negative results

Of 754 PET-negative patients, 697 had CD20-positive lymphomas, and 255 of those patients (all with B-cell lymphomas) underwent randomization.

There were 129 patients who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP (2 before and 4 after randomization) and 126 who were randomized to receive 6 cycles of R-CHOP plus 2 additional cycles of rituximab.

Again, survival rates were similar regardless of treatment.

The 2-year OS was 88.2% for patients who received only R-CHOP and 87.2% for those with additional rituximab exposure. PFS rates were 82.0% and 77.5%, respectively. EFS rates were 76.4% and 73.5%, respectively.

In the DLBCL patients, the OS rate was 88.5% in the R-CHOP arm and 85.8% in the intensive arm. PFS rates were 82.3% and 77.7%, respectively. EFS rates were 72.6% and 78.9%, respectively.

As increasing the dose of rituximab did not improve outcomes, the investigators concluded that 6 cycles of R-CHOP should be the standard of care for these patients.

The team also said interim PET scanning is “a powerful tool” for identifying chemotherapy-resistant lymphomas, and PET-positive patients may be candidates for immunologic treatment approaches.

Rituximab should be included in first-line chemotherapy when treating mantle cell lymphoma, according to a new management guideline from the British Society for Haematology.

The best outcome data is for the R-CHOP regimen (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) followed by maintenance treatment with rituximab, wrote Pamela McKay, MD, of Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre in Glasgow, and her colleagues. The report was published in the British Journal of Haematology. But the combination of rituximab and bendamustine is also effective and a more favorable safety profile, according to the guideline. Single agent rituximab is not recommended.

At relapse, the guideline calls on physicians to take an individualized approach based on age, comorbidities, performance status, and response to prior therapy. Some options to consider include ibrutinib as a single agent or rituximab plus chemotherapy. The authors cautioned that there is little evidence to support maintenance rituximab after relapse treatment.

The guideline also explores the role of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and allogeneic SCT (alloSCT). The authors recommend that ASCT be considered as consolidation of first-line therapy for patients who are fit for intensive therapy. AlloSCT is a viable option in second remission among fit patients who have an appropriate donor and it may also be effective as a rescue therapy for patients who relapse after ASCT. But alloSCT is appropriate only as a first-line therapy for high-risk patients and is best used as part of a clinical trial, according to the recommendations.

The British Society of Haematology previously issued guidance on mantle cell lymphoma in 2012, but the updated document includes new drug therapeutic options and transplant data. The guideline includes a therapeutic algorithm to assist physicians in choosing first-line therapy, options after first relapse, and management in the case of higher relapse.

The guideline authors reported having no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul;182(1):46-62.

Rituximab should be included in first-line chemotherapy when treating mantle cell lymphoma, according to a new management guideline from the British Society for Haematology.

The best outcome data is for the R-CHOP regimen (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) followed by maintenance treatment with rituximab, wrote Pamela McKay, MD, of Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre in Glasgow, and her colleagues. The report was published in the British Journal of Haematology. But the combination of rituximab and bendamustine is also effective and a more favorable safety profile, according to the guideline. Single agent rituximab is not recommended.

At relapse, the guideline calls on physicians to take an individualized approach based on age, comorbidities, performance status, and response to prior therapy. Some options to consider include ibrutinib as a single agent or rituximab plus chemotherapy. The authors cautioned that there is little evidence to support maintenance rituximab after relapse treatment.

The guideline also explores the role of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and allogeneic SCT (alloSCT). The authors recommend that ASCT be considered as consolidation of first-line therapy for patients who are fit for intensive therapy. AlloSCT is a viable option in second remission among fit patients who have an appropriate donor and it may also be effective as a rescue therapy for patients who relapse after ASCT. But alloSCT is appropriate only as a first-line therapy for high-risk patients and is best used as part of a clinical trial, according to the recommendations.

The British Society of Haematology previously issued guidance on mantle cell lymphoma in 2012, but the updated document includes new drug therapeutic options and transplant data. The guideline includes a therapeutic algorithm to assist physicians in choosing first-line therapy, options after first relapse, and management in the case of higher relapse.

The guideline authors reported having no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul;182(1):46-62.

Rituximab should be included in first-line chemotherapy when treating mantle cell lymphoma, according to a new management guideline from the British Society for Haematology.

The best outcome data is for the R-CHOP regimen (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) followed by maintenance treatment with rituximab, wrote Pamela McKay, MD, of Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre in Glasgow, and her colleagues. The report was published in the British Journal of Haematology. But the combination of rituximab and bendamustine is also effective and a more favorable safety profile, according to the guideline. Single agent rituximab is not recommended.

At relapse, the guideline calls on physicians to take an individualized approach based on age, comorbidities, performance status, and response to prior therapy. Some options to consider include ibrutinib as a single agent or rituximab plus chemotherapy. The authors cautioned that there is little evidence to support maintenance rituximab after relapse treatment.

The guideline also explores the role of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and allogeneic SCT (alloSCT). The authors recommend that ASCT be considered as consolidation of first-line therapy for patients who are fit for intensive therapy. AlloSCT is a viable option in second remission among fit patients who have an appropriate donor and it may also be effective as a rescue therapy for patients who relapse after ASCT. But alloSCT is appropriate only as a first-line therapy for high-risk patients and is best used as part of a clinical trial, according to the recommendations.

The British Society of Haematology previously issued guidance on mantle cell lymphoma in 2012, but the updated document includes new drug therapeutic options and transplant data. The guideline includes a therapeutic algorithm to assist physicians in choosing first-line therapy, options after first relapse, and management in the case of higher relapse.

The guideline authors reported having no conflicts of interest.

[email protected]

SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jul;182(1):46-62.

STOCKHOLM – A chemotherapy-free regimen of ibrutinib plus venetoclax was generally safe and showed promising early efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, investigators reported.

A planned interim analysis performed after the first 15 patients who had received two cycles of ibrutinib plus one of ibrutinib and venetoclax showed no treatment-related deaths or treatment interruptions, and all patients had clinical responses, including 8 with complete clinical remission (CR), reported Carsten U. Niemann, MD, PhD, from Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, and his colleagues.

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The goal of the ongoing VISION/HOVEN 141 study is to evaluate whether minimal residual disease (MRD)–guided therapy with the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax could lead to MRD negativity and allow select patients to stop treatment, Dr. Niemann said in an interview at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“It’s a 100% clinical response rate and 53% CR. Obviously these are clinical responses, so we don’t have the CT scans, we don’t have the bone marrow biopsies, but we’re very happy to see even in the relapsed/refractory setting such good response rates,” he said.

The investigators are enrolling patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic leukemia requiring treatment and starting all patients on ibrutinib 420 mg daily for the first 2 cycles, with venetoclax added in a 5-week ramp-up from 20 mg beginning with cycle 3 to a final dose of 400 mg daily for 15 total treatment cycles.

At the end of the induction phase, patients who are determined to be MRD-negative by flow cytometry at cycles 12 and 15, and by bone marrow at cycle 15, are randomized on a 1:2 basis to ibrutinib maintenance until disease progression or intolerable toxicity, or to observation until progression or loss of MRD negativity, at which time they start maintenance with ibrutinib until progression or toxicity, plus 12 months of venetoclax.

All 15 patients who were followed for 3 months had clinical responses, including 8 CRs (53%), 6 partial remissions (40%), and 1 partial remission with lymphocytosis (7%).

Three patients had ibrutinib dose reductions and two had venetoclax dose reductions, but no patients stopped treatment. Three patients had grade 2 adverse events (AEs), three had grade 3 AEs, and two had grade 4 AEs. There were no grade 5 AEs.

Two patients had serious AEs during the first two cycles with ibrutinib alone, one of which was a case of febrile neutropenia and one which was an adenocarcinoma of the lung. There were no serious AEs reported during venetoclax ramp-up. To date, there have been no cases of tumor lysis syndrome, atrial fibrillation, or bleeding events reported.

The results suggest that treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax ramp-up is manageable in this patient population, and the study is ongoing, with further results expected to be reported at either the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology or the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Dr. Niemann said.

The study is supported by AbbVie and Janssen, which supplied the drugs and had the right to comment on the presentation. Dr. Niemann has previously disclosed consultancy fees from those companies and others.

SOURCE: Niemann CU et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF346.


 

STOCKHOLM – A chemotherapy-free regimen of ibrutinib plus venetoclax was generally safe and showed promising early efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, investigators reported.

A planned interim analysis performed after the first 15 patients who had received two cycles of ibrutinib plus one of ibrutinib and venetoclax showed no treatment-related deaths or treatment interruptions, and all patients had clinical responses, including 8 with complete clinical remission (CR), reported Carsten U. Niemann, MD, PhD, from Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, and his colleagues.

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The goal of the ongoing VISION/HOVEN 141 study is to evaluate whether minimal residual disease (MRD)–guided therapy with the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax could lead to MRD negativity and allow select patients to stop treatment, Dr. Niemann said in an interview at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“It’s a 100% clinical response rate and 53% CR. Obviously these are clinical responses, so we don’t have the CT scans, we don’t have the bone marrow biopsies, but we’re very happy to see even in the relapsed/refractory setting such good response rates,” he said.

The investigators are enrolling patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic leukemia requiring treatment and starting all patients on ibrutinib 420 mg daily for the first 2 cycles, with venetoclax added in a 5-week ramp-up from 20 mg beginning with cycle 3 to a final dose of 400 mg daily for 15 total treatment cycles.

At the end of the induction phase, patients who are determined to be MRD-negative by flow cytometry at cycles 12 and 15, and by bone marrow at cycle 15, are randomized on a 1:2 basis to ibrutinib maintenance until disease progression or intolerable toxicity, or to observation until progression or loss of MRD negativity, at which time they start maintenance with ibrutinib until progression or toxicity, plus 12 months of venetoclax.

All 15 patients who were followed for 3 months had clinical responses, including 8 CRs (53%), 6 partial remissions (40%), and 1 partial remission with lymphocytosis (7%).

Three patients had ibrutinib dose reductions and two had venetoclax dose reductions, but no patients stopped treatment. Three patients had grade 2 adverse events (AEs), three had grade 3 AEs, and two had grade 4 AEs. There were no grade 5 AEs.

Two patients had serious AEs during the first two cycles with ibrutinib alone, one of which was a case of febrile neutropenia and one which was an adenocarcinoma of the lung. There were no serious AEs reported during venetoclax ramp-up. To date, there have been no cases of tumor lysis syndrome, atrial fibrillation, or bleeding events reported.

The results suggest that treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax ramp-up is manageable in this patient population, and the study is ongoing, with further results expected to be reported at either the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology or the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Dr. Niemann said.

The study is supported by AbbVie and Janssen, which supplied the drugs and had the right to comment on the presentation. Dr. Niemann has previously disclosed consultancy fees from those companies and others.

SOURCE: Niemann CU et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF346.


 

STOCKHOLM – A chemotherapy-free regimen of ibrutinib plus venetoclax was generally safe and showed promising early efficacy in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, investigators reported.

A planned interim analysis performed after the first 15 patients who had received two cycles of ibrutinib plus one of ibrutinib and venetoclax showed no treatment-related deaths or treatment interruptions, and all patients had clinical responses, including 8 with complete clinical remission (CR), reported Carsten U. Niemann, MD, PhD, from Rigshospitalet in Copenhagen, and his colleagues.

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The goal of the ongoing VISION/HOVEN 141 study is to evaluate whether minimal residual disease (MRD)–guided therapy with the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib and the BCL2 inhibitor venetoclax could lead to MRD negativity and allow select patients to stop treatment, Dr. Niemann said in an interview at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“It’s a 100% clinical response rate and 53% CR. Obviously these are clinical responses, so we don’t have the CT scans, we don’t have the bone marrow biopsies, but we’re very happy to see even in the relapsed/refractory setting such good response rates,” he said.

The investigators are enrolling patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic leukemia requiring treatment and starting all patients on ibrutinib 420 mg daily for the first 2 cycles, with venetoclax added in a 5-week ramp-up from 20 mg beginning with cycle 3 to a final dose of 400 mg daily for 15 total treatment cycles.

At the end of the induction phase, patients who are determined to be MRD-negative by flow cytometry at cycles 12 and 15, and by bone marrow at cycle 15, are randomized on a 1:2 basis to ibrutinib maintenance until disease progression or intolerable toxicity, or to observation until progression or loss of MRD negativity, at which time they start maintenance with ibrutinib until progression or toxicity, plus 12 months of venetoclax.

All 15 patients who were followed for 3 months had clinical responses, including 8 CRs (53%), 6 partial remissions (40%), and 1 partial remission with lymphocytosis (7%).

Three patients had ibrutinib dose reductions and two had venetoclax dose reductions, but no patients stopped treatment. Three patients had grade 2 adverse events (AEs), three had grade 3 AEs, and two had grade 4 AEs. There were no grade 5 AEs.

Two patients had serious AEs during the first two cycles with ibrutinib alone, one of which was a case of febrile neutropenia and one which was an adenocarcinoma of the lung. There were no serious AEs reported during venetoclax ramp-up. To date, there have been no cases of tumor lysis syndrome, atrial fibrillation, or bleeding events reported.

The results suggest that treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax ramp-up is manageable in this patient population, and the study is ongoing, with further results expected to be reported at either the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology or the 2019 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, Dr. Niemann said.

The study is supported by AbbVie and Janssen, which supplied the drugs and had the right to comment on the presentation. Dr. Niemann has previously disclosed consultancy fees from those companies and others.

SOURCE: Niemann CU et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF346.


 

Obinutuzumab (Gazyva)

Health Canada has expanded the approved use of obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).

The anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) that is advanced (stage II bulky, stage III, or stage IV).

In patients who respond to this treatment, obinutuzumab monotherapy can be given as maintenance.

Health Canada previously approved obinutuzumab for the following indications:

• In combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia
• First in combination with bendamustine, then as monotherapy, in FL patients who relapsed after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen.

Phase 3 results

Health Canada’s latest approval of obinutuzumab is based on results from the phase 3 GALLIUM study, which were published in NEJM in October 2017. The following are updated data from the product monograph.

GALLIUM included 1385 patients with previously untreated non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and 1202 of these patients had previously untreated, advanced FL.

Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).

The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone), and bendamustine.

At a median observation time of 41.1 months, the overall response rate was 91% in the obinutuzumab arm and 88% in the rituximab arm. The complete response rates were 28% and 27%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was not reached in either arm. The hazard ratio, for obinutuzumab compared to rituximab, was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56-0.93, P=0.0118).

The estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 78.9% in the rituximab arm and 83.4% in the obinutuzumab arm.

Safety was evaluated based on all 1385 patients in the study, 86% of whom had FL and 14% of whom had marginal zone lymphoma.

Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 50% of patients in the obinutuzumab arm and 43% in the rituximab arm. Fatal AEs occurred in 5% and 4%, respectively. Infections and second malignancies were the leading causes of these deaths.

During the monotherapy period, the most common AEs (≥ 5%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab were cough (21%), neutropenia (19%), upper respiratory tract infection (15%), viral upper respiratory tract infection (15%), diarrhea (13%), arthralgia (10%), fatigue (9%), sinusitis (9%), infusion reactions (8%), pneumonia (8%), herpes zoster (8%), lower respiratory tract infection (7%), pyrexia (7%), back pain (6%), headache (6%), urinary tract infection (6%), nausea (6%), bronchitis (5%), and vomiting (5%).

Grade 3-4 AEs (≥1%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab included neutropenia (17%), pneumonia (3%), and febrile neutropenia (2%). There were 2 deaths due to pneumonia in the obinutuzumab arm.

Obinutuzumab (Gazyva)

Health Canada has expanded the approved use of obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).

The anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) that is advanced (stage II bulky, stage III, or stage IV).

In patients who respond to this treatment, obinutuzumab monotherapy can be given as maintenance.

Health Canada previously approved obinutuzumab for the following indications:

• In combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia
• First in combination with bendamustine, then as monotherapy, in FL patients who relapsed after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen.

Phase 3 results

Health Canada’s latest approval of obinutuzumab is based on results from the phase 3 GALLIUM study, which were published in NEJM in October 2017. The following are updated data from the product monograph.

GALLIUM included 1385 patients with previously untreated non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and 1202 of these patients had previously untreated, advanced FL.

Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).

The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone), and bendamustine.

At a median observation time of 41.1 months, the overall response rate was 91% in the obinutuzumab arm and 88% in the rituximab arm. The complete response rates were 28% and 27%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was not reached in either arm. The hazard ratio, for obinutuzumab compared to rituximab, was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56-0.93, P=0.0118).

The estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 78.9% in the rituximab arm and 83.4% in the obinutuzumab arm.

Safety was evaluated based on all 1385 patients in the study, 86% of whom had FL and 14% of whom had marginal zone lymphoma.

Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 50% of patients in the obinutuzumab arm and 43% in the rituximab arm. Fatal AEs occurred in 5% and 4%, respectively. Infections and second malignancies were the leading causes of these deaths.

During the monotherapy period, the most common AEs (≥ 5%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab were cough (21%), neutropenia (19%), upper respiratory tract infection (15%), viral upper respiratory tract infection (15%), diarrhea (13%), arthralgia (10%), fatigue (9%), sinusitis (9%), infusion reactions (8%), pneumonia (8%), herpes zoster (8%), lower respiratory tract infection (7%), pyrexia (7%), back pain (6%), headache (6%), urinary tract infection (6%), nausea (6%), bronchitis (5%), and vomiting (5%).

Grade 3-4 AEs (≥1%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab included neutropenia (17%), pneumonia (3%), and febrile neutropenia (2%). There were 2 deaths due to pneumonia in the obinutuzumab arm.

Obinutuzumab (Gazyva)

Health Canada has expanded the approved use of obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).

The anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody is now approved for use in combination with chemotherapy to treat patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) that is advanced (stage II bulky, stage III, or stage IV).

In patients who respond to this treatment, obinutuzumab monotherapy can be given as maintenance.

Health Canada previously approved obinutuzumab for the following indications:

• In combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia
• First in combination with bendamustine, then as monotherapy, in FL patients who relapsed after or are refractory to a rituximab-containing regimen.

Phase 3 results

Health Canada’s latest approval of obinutuzumab is based on results from the phase 3 GALLIUM study, which were published in NEJM in October 2017. The following are updated data from the product monograph.

GALLIUM included 1385 patients with previously untreated non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and 1202 of these patients had previously untreated, advanced FL.

Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).

The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone), and bendamustine.

At a median observation time of 41.1 months, the overall response rate was 91% in the obinutuzumab arm and 88% in the rituximab arm. The complete response rates were 28% and 27%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was not reached in either arm. The hazard ratio, for obinutuzumab compared to rituximab, was 0.72 (95% CI, 0.56-0.93, P=0.0118).

The estimated 3-year progression-free survival was 78.9% in the rituximab arm and 83.4% in the obinutuzumab arm.

Safety was evaluated based on all 1385 patients in the study, 86% of whom had FL and 14% of whom had marginal zone lymphoma.

Serious adverse events (AEs) occurred in 50% of patients in the obinutuzumab arm and 43% in the rituximab arm. Fatal AEs occurred in 5% and 4%, respectively. Infections and second malignancies were the leading causes of these deaths.

During the monotherapy period, the most common AEs (≥ 5%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab were cough (21%), neutropenia (19%), upper respiratory tract infection (15%), viral upper respiratory tract infection (15%), diarrhea (13%), arthralgia (10%), fatigue (9%), sinusitis (9%), infusion reactions (8%), pneumonia (8%), herpes zoster (8%), lower respiratory tract infection (7%), pyrexia (7%), back pain (6%), headache (6%), urinary tract infection (6%), nausea (6%), bronchitis (5%), and vomiting (5%).

Grade 3-4 AEs (≥1%) in patients treated with obinutuzumab included neutropenia (17%), pneumonia (3%), and febrile neutropenia (2%). There were 2 deaths due to pneumonia in the obinutuzumab arm.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

Transplant with radioimmunotherapy (RIT)-based conditioning is a viable treatment option for patients with indolent—but not aggressive—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs), according to researchers.

Long-term follow-up data showed “excellent” outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL who received conditioning with ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan plus fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation (TBI) prior to HLA-matched hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

However, long-term outcomes were inferior in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Camille E. Puronen, MD, of the University of Washington in Seattle, and her colleagues reported these results in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The study enrolled 40 patients with high-risk B-NHL. This included DLBCL (n=14), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL; n=10), MCL (n=8), follicular lymphoma (FL; n=6); hairy cell leukemia (HCL; n=1), and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL; n=1).

Patients were treated with 0.4 mCi/kg ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan, given 2 weeks prior to HSCT, to a maximum dose of 32 mCi.

Patients also received fludarabine at 30 mg/m² on day 5, 6, and 7 prior to HSCT and 2 Gy TBI given on the day of transplant.

In an earlier report, the objective response rate (ORR) was 60%, and 35% of patients had a complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR.

The researchers said early responses were not associated with disease bulk or chemoresistance, as the ORR was 59% in patients with bulky or chemoresistant disease.

However, responses were associated with histology, as the ORR was 38% in patients with DLBCL, 50% in those with MCL, 83% in those with FL, and 90% in those with CLL.

Long-term survival

In the current report, 11 of 40 patients were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years (range, 5.3 to 10.2). Fourteen patients died of disease progression, and 14 died from complications of HSCT.

The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 40%, and the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 28%.

The best survival rates were in patients with indolent histology. The 5-year PFS was 44% in these patients, and the 5-year OS was 67%.

The researchers said early CR was not associated with long-term survival. However, patients who had at least stable disease (SD) at earlier time points did have the opportunity to achieve long-term survival. All patients who progressed before day 84 were dead by the 1-year mark.

Of the 11 patients who were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years, 4 had a CR or unconfirmed CR at day 84 (FL: 1; CLL: 2; MCL: 1); 6 were in partial response (CLL: 3; FL: 1; MCL: 1; MZL: 1); and 1 patient with FL had SD.

Among the 18 patients with indolent NHL, long-term PFS was observed in 5 of the 7 patients who achieved early CR and 8 of the 11 patients who did not achieve early CR.

Two of the 4 MCL patients who achieved an early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the MCL patients without an early CR had long-term PFS.

Among DLBCL patients, 1 of the 4 who achieved early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the patients without an early CR had long-term PFS. Only 1 DLBCL patient survived beyond 5 years. None survived beyond 8 years.

The researchers said the favorable outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL are consistent with the known efficacy of RIT and the graft-versus-leukemia effect in these patients.

The team also noted that, since this trial began, several novel agents have been approved for the treatment of indolent B-NHL, which means allogeneic HSCT is often moved to later in the disease course.

The researchers concluded that ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan-based conditioning could “continue to play an important role in these settings,” but “improved strategies are needed” for patients with MCL and DLBCL.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

Transplant with radioimmunotherapy (RIT)-based conditioning is a viable treatment option for patients with indolent—but not aggressive—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs), according to researchers.

Long-term follow-up data showed “excellent” outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL who received conditioning with ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan plus fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation (TBI) prior to HLA-matched hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

However, long-term outcomes were inferior in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Camille E. Puronen, MD, of the University of Washington in Seattle, and her colleagues reported these results in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The study enrolled 40 patients with high-risk B-NHL. This included DLBCL (n=14), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL; n=10), MCL (n=8), follicular lymphoma (FL; n=6); hairy cell leukemia (HCL; n=1), and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL; n=1).

Patients were treated with 0.4 mCi/kg ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan, given 2 weeks prior to HSCT, to a maximum dose of 32 mCi.

Patients also received fludarabine at 30 mg/m² on day 5, 6, and 7 prior to HSCT and 2 Gy TBI given on the day of transplant.

In an earlier report, the objective response rate (ORR) was 60%, and 35% of patients had a complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR.

The researchers said early responses were not associated with disease bulk or chemoresistance, as the ORR was 59% in patients with bulky or chemoresistant disease.

However, responses were associated with histology, as the ORR was 38% in patients with DLBCL, 50% in those with MCL, 83% in those with FL, and 90% in those with CLL.

Long-term survival

In the current report, 11 of 40 patients were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years (range, 5.3 to 10.2). Fourteen patients died of disease progression, and 14 died from complications of HSCT.

The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 40%, and the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 28%.

The best survival rates were in patients with indolent histology. The 5-year PFS was 44% in these patients, and the 5-year OS was 67%.

The researchers said early CR was not associated with long-term survival. However, patients who had at least stable disease (SD) at earlier time points did have the opportunity to achieve long-term survival. All patients who progressed before day 84 were dead by the 1-year mark.

Of the 11 patients who were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years, 4 had a CR or unconfirmed CR at day 84 (FL: 1; CLL: 2; MCL: 1); 6 were in partial response (CLL: 3; FL: 1; MCL: 1; MZL: 1); and 1 patient with FL had SD.

Among the 18 patients with indolent NHL, long-term PFS was observed in 5 of the 7 patients who achieved early CR and 8 of the 11 patients who did not achieve early CR.

Two of the 4 MCL patients who achieved an early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the MCL patients without an early CR had long-term PFS.

Among DLBCL patients, 1 of the 4 who achieved early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the patients without an early CR had long-term PFS. Only 1 DLBCL patient survived beyond 5 years. None survived beyond 8 years.

The researchers said the favorable outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL are consistent with the known efficacy of RIT and the graft-versus-leukemia effect in these patients.

The team also noted that, since this trial began, several novel agents have been approved for the treatment of indolent B-NHL, which means allogeneic HSCT is often moved to later in the disease course.

The researchers concluded that ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan-based conditioning could “continue to play an important role in these settings,” but “improved strategies are needed” for patients with MCL and DLBCL.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

Transplant with radioimmunotherapy (RIT)-based conditioning is a viable treatment option for patients with indolent—but not aggressive—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (NHLs), according to researchers.

Long-term follow-up data showed “excellent” outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL who received conditioning with ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan plus fludarabine and low-dose total body irradiation (TBI) prior to HLA-matched hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

However, long-term outcomes were inferior in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL).

Camille E. Puronen, MD, of the University of Washington in Seattle, and her colleagues reported these results in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

The study enrolled 40 patients with high-risk B-NHL. This included DLBCL (n=14), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL; n=10), MCL (n=8), follicular lymphoma (FL; n=6); hairy cell leukemia (HCL; n=1), and marginal zone lymphoma (MZL; n=1).

Patients were treated with 0.4 mCi/kg ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan, given 2 weeks prior to HSCT, to a maximum dose of 32 mCi.

Patients also received fludarabine at 30 mg/m² on day 5, 6, and 7 prior to HSCT and 2 Gy TBI given on the day of transplant.

In an earlier report, the objective response rate (ORR) was 60%, and 35% of patients had a complete response (CR) or unconfirmed CR.

The researchers said early responses were not associated with disease bulk or chemoresistance, as the ORR was 59% in patients with bulky or chemoresistant disease.

However, responses were associated with histology, as the ORR was 38% in patients with DLBCL, 50% in those with MCL, 83% in those with FL, and 90% in those with CLL.

Long-term survival

In the current report, 11 of 40 patients were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years (range, 5.3 to 10.2). Fourteen patients died of disease progression, and 14 died from complications of HSCT.

The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 40%, and the 5-year progression-free survival (PFS) was 28%.

The best survival rates were in patients with indolent histology. The 5-year PFS was 44% in these patients, and the 5-year OS was 67%.

The researchers said early CR was not associated with long-term survival. However, patients who had at least stable disease (SD) at earlier time points did have the opportunity to achieve long-term survival. All patients who progressed before day 84 were dead by the 1-year mark.

Of the 11 patients who were still alive at a median follow up of 9 years, 4 had a CR or unconfirmed CR at day 84 (FL: 1; CLL: 2; MCL: 1); 6 were in partial response (CLL: 3; FL: 1; MCL: 1; MZL: 1); and 1 patient with FL had SD.

Among the 18 patients with indolent NHL, long-term PFS was observed in 5 of the 7 patients who achieved early CR and 8 of the 11 patients who did not achieve early CR.

Two of the 4 MCL patients who achieved an early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the MCL patients without an early CR had long-term PFS.

Among DLBCL patients, 1 of the 4 who achieved early CR had long-term PFS, but none of the patients without an early CR had long-term PFS. Only 1 DLBCL patient survived beyond 5 years. None survived beyond 8 years.

The researchers said the favorable outcomes in patients with indolent B-NHL are consistent with the known efficacy of RIT and the graft-versus-leukemia effect in these patients.

The team also noted that, since this trial began, several novel agents have been approved for the treatment of indolent B-NHL, which means allogeneic HSCT is often moved to later in the disease course.

The researchers concluded that ⁹⁰Y-ibritumomab tiuxetan-based conditioning could “continue to play an important role in these settings,” but “improved strategies are needed” for patients with MCL and DLBCL.

STOCKHOLM – Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who experience relapse after therapy with a B-cell receptor signaling inhibitor tend to have a swiftly progressive disease course that requires immediate intervention. For these patients, a rapid venetoclax dose-escalation protocol may be a safe way to quickly regain disease control, and possibly bridge to salvage therapies, investigators reported.

Of 15 patients with CLL who relapsed after treatment with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi), all were able to get to their target dose of venetoclax under close inpatient monitoring at a median of 12 days, compared with the 35 days usually required for venetoclax dose escalation, reported Farrukh T. Awan, MD, of Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center in Columbus, and his colleagues.

Only two patients developed clinical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), a common occurrence with venetoclax therapy, and this adverse event was manageable, Dr. Awan said at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“The reason why we have been doing a slow ramp up on venetoclax is the original toxicity issues that we saw early on,” he said in an interview. “But unfortunately, a lot of patients are progressing on these new agents and have very rapid disease progression, and what we have seen is that if you stop the ibrutinib, the disease progresses very quickly, and by the time they can get up to the effective dose of venetoclax, they’re too sick to continue, or they might even die from disease progression.”

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The incidence of clinical TLS was 13.2%, occurring in two patients, one at the initial 20-mg dose, and one at the 200-mg dose level. Another five patients had asymptomatic TLS. Other treatment-related adverse events were anemia in seven patients, neutropenia in six patients, thrombocytopenia in five patients, and lung infection in one patient.

Twelve patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and two had progressive disease. The mean time to best response was 71 days.

One-year progression-free survival was 49%, and 1-year overall survival was 68%.

The investigators found that for patients who still have some disease control with a BCRi, it may be possible to keep them on that drug while transitioning to venetoclax. The rapid dose escalation protocol should only be attempted in highly experience comprehensive cancer centers, Dr. Awan said.

“Under very close monitoring in an experienced inpatient setting, where the nurses are very used to doing this on a weekly basis in a very high volume center, I think that our data show that we could do this without affecting toxicity significantly or mortality,” he said.

Venetoclax therapy could buy enough time for patients to bridge to other options, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy or allogeneic stem cell transplant, he noted.

“But if we had waited 4 weeks, most of these patients would not have made it,” he said.

The study was internally funded. Dr. Awan reported research funding from Gilead, Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, and Janssen.

SOURCE: Koenig K et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF357.

STOCKHOLM – Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who experience relapse after therapy with a B-cell receptor signaling inhibitor tend to have a swiftly progressive disease course that requires immediate intervention. For these patients, a rapid venetoclax dose-escalation protocol may be a safe way to quickly regain disease control, and possibly bridge to salvage therapies, investigators reported.

Of 15 patients with CLL who relapsed after treatment with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi), all were able to get to their target dose of venetoclax under close inpatient monitoring at a median of 12 days, compared with the 35 days usually required for venetoclax dose escalation, reported Farrukh T. Awan, MD, of Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center in Columbus, and his colleagues.

Only two patients developed clinical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), a common occurrence with venetoclax therapy, and this adverse event was manageable, Dr. Awan said at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“The reason why we have been doing a slow ramp up on venetoclax is the original toxicity issues that we saw early on,” he said in an interview. “But unfortunately, a lot of patients are progressing on these new agents and have very rapid disease progression, and what we have seen is that if you stop the ibrutinib, the disease progresses very quickly, and by the time they can get up to the effective dose of venetoclax, they’re too sick to continue, or they might even die from disease progression.”

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The incidence of clinical TLS was 13.2%, occurring in two patients, one at the initial 20-mg dose, and one at the 200-mg dose level. Another five patients had asymptomatic TLS. Other treatment-related adverse events were anemia in seven patients, neutropenia in six patients, thrombocytopenia in five patients, and lung infection in one patient.

Twelve patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and two had progressive disease. The mean time to best response was 71 days.

One-year progression-free survival was 49%, and 1-year overall survival was 68%.

The investigators found that for patients who still have some disease control with a BCRi, it may be possible to keep them on that drug while transitioning to venetoclax. The rapid dose escalation protocol should only be attempted in highly experience comprehensive cancer centers, Dr. Awan said.

“Under very close monitoring in an experienced inpatient setting, where the nurses are very used to doing this on a weekly basis in a very high volume center, I think that our data show that we could do this without affecting toxicity significantly or mortality,” he said.

Venetoclax therapy could buy enough time for patients to bridge to other options, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy or allogeneic stem cell transplant, he noted.

“But if we had waited 4 weeks, most of these patients would not have made it,” he said.

The study was internally funded. Dr. Awan reported research funding from Gilead, Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, and Janssen.

SOURCE: Koenig K et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF357.

STOCKHOLM – Patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who experience relapse after therapy with a B-cell receptor signaling inhibitor tend to have a swiftly progressive disease course that requires immediate intervention. For these patients, a rapid venetoclax dose-escalation protocol may be a safe way to quickly regain disease control, and possibly bridge to salvage therapies, investigators reported.

Of 15 patients with CLL who relapsed after treatment with a B-cell receptor inhibitor (BCRi), all were able to get to their target dose of venetoclax under close inpatient monitoring at a median of 12 days, compared with the 35 days usually required for venetoclax dose escalation, reported Farrukh T. Awan, MD, of Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center in Columbus, and his colleagues.

Only two patients developed clinical tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), a common occurrence with venetoclax therapy, and this adverse event was manageable, Dr. Awan said at the annual congress of the European Hematology Association.

“The reason why we have been doing a slow ramp up on venetoclax is the original toxicity issues that we saw early on,” he said in an interview. “But unfortunately, a lot of patients are progressing on these new agents and have very rapid disease progression, and what we have seen is that if you stop the ibrutinib, the disease progresses very quickly, and by the time they can get up to the effective dose of venetoclax, they’re too sick to continue, or they might even die from disease progression.”

Neil Osterweil/MDedge News

The incidence of clinical TLS was 13.2%, occurring in two patients, one at the initial 20-mg dose, and one at the 200-mg dose level. Another five patients had asymptomatic TLS. Other treatment-related adverse events were anemia in seven patients, neutropenia in six patients, thrombocytopenia in five patients, and lung infection in one patient.

Twelve patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and two had progressive disease. The mean time to best response was 71 days.

One-year progression-free survival was 49%, and 1-year overall survival was 68%.

The investigators found that for patients who still have some disease control with a BCRi, it may be possible to keep them on that drug while transitioning to venetoclax. The rapid dose escalation protocol should only be attempted in highly experience comprehensive cancer centers, Dr. Awan said.

“Under very close monitoring in an experienced inpatient setting, where the nurses are very used to doing this on a weekly basis in a very high volume center, I think that our data show that we could do this without affecting toxicity significantly or mortality,” he said.

Venetoclax therapy could buy enough time for patients to bridge to other options, such as chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy or allogeneic stem cell transplant, he noted.

“But if we had waited 4 weeks, most of these patients would not have made it,” he said.

The study was internally funded. Dr. Awan reported research funding from Gilead, Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, and Janssen.

SOURCE: Koenig K et al. EHA Congress, Abstract PF357.

Micrograph showing myelofibrosis

New research indicates that JAK inhibitors may increase the risk of lymphoma in patients with myelofibrosis (MF).

The patients studied had a 15- to 25-fold higher risk of developing B-cell lymphoma if they received treatment with JAK inhibitors.

The researchers speculate that screening MF patients for a pre-existing B-cell clone before starting JAK inhibitor therapy may help prevent lymphoma development.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, and his colleagues conducted this research and reported the findings in Blood.

“[W]e started noticing sporadic cases of lymphomas developing in patients being treated for myeloproliferative neoplasms and wanted to know if this phenomenon was connected to treatment,” Dr Gisslinger said.

Therefore, he and his colleagues assessed 626 patients receiving treatment for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) at the Medical University of Vienna.

The incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 5.8% (4/69) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.36% (2/557) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors. That amounts to a 16-fold increased risk of lymphoma in patients receiving JAK inhibitors.

When the researchers analyzed only patients with primary MF (n=216), the increased risk of B-cell lymphoma was even greater. The incidence of lymphoma was 9.68% (3/31) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.54% (1/185) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors.

That corresponds to a 19-fold increased risk of B-cell lymphoma in primary MF patients treated with JAK inhibitors. When the researchers adjusted for age, there was a 21-fold greater risk. When they adjusted for sex, the risk was 25 times higher.

In a second cohort of 929 MPN patients, the incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 3.51% (2/57) in patients who received JAK inhibitors and 0.23% (2/872) in patients who did not. This corresponds to a 15-fold increased risk of lymphoma in the JAK inhibitor recipients.

Lymphoma cases

In all, there were 6 patients who developed lymphoma after JAK inhibitor treatment. Five developed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and 1 had high-grade B-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified.

Four of the patients had primary MF, 1 had post-polycythemia vera MF, and 1 had post-essential thrombocythemia (ET) MF. Five patients had a JAK2V617F mutation, and 1 (the post-ET MF patient) had a CALR mutation.

All 6 patients had received treatment with ruxolitinib. One patient also received fedratinib.

B-cell clone

The researchers studied bone marrow samples from 54 of the 69 patients treated with JAK inhibitors in the first cohort. The team found a pre-existing B-cell clone in 3 of the 4 patients who developed lymphoma. Further investigation suggested this was the clone that later transformed into lymphoma.

The researchers also found an association between JAK inhibition and an increased frequency of aggressive B-cell lymphomas in mouse models.

“By replicating this link between this B-cell clone and aggressive lymphoma, we hope to speed the discovery of an alternative therapy for myelofibrosis,” said study author Veronica Sexl, MD, of the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna. “These findings are going to be valuable in clinical care.”

“We determined that patients with this pre-existing B-cell clone in their bone marrow are most at risk for developing aggressive lymphoma,” added study author Ulrich Jäger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna.

“We also know that up to 16% of people with myelofibrosis have immunoglobulin gene rearrangements like this B-cell clone. Therefore, our findings suggest that all patients with myelofibrosis should be tested for such gene rearrangements before prescribing JAK inhibitors to treat their disease.”

Micrograph showing myelofibrosis

New research indicates that JAK inhibitors may increase the risk of lymphoma in patients with myelofibrosis (MF).

The patients studied had a 15- to 25-fold higher risk of developing B-cell lymphoma if they received treatment with JAK inhibitors.

The researchers speculate that screening MF patients for a pre-existing B-cell clone before starting JAK inhibitor therapy may help prevent lymphoma development.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, and his colleagues conducted this research and reported the findings in Blood.

“[W]e started noticing sporadic cases of lymphomas developing in patients being treated for myeloproliferative neoplasms and wanted to know if this phenomenon was connected to treatment,” Dr Gisslinger said.

Therefore, he and his colleagues assessed 626 patients receiving treatment for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) at the Medical University of Vienna.

The incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 5.8% (4/69) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.36% (2/557) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors. That amounts to a 16-fold increased risk of lymphoma in patients receiving JAK inhibitors.

When the researchers analyzed only patients with primary MF (n=216), the increased risk of B-cell lymphoma was even greater. The incidence of lymphoma was 9.68% (3/31) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.54% (1/185) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors.

That corresponds to a 19-fold increased risk of B-cell lymphoma in primary MF patients treated with JAK inhibitors. When the researchers adjusted for age, there was a 21-fold greater risk. When they adjusted for sex, the risk was 25 times higher.

In a second cohort of 929 MPN patients, the incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 3.51% (2/57) in patients who received JAK inhibitors and 0.23% (2/872) in patients who did not. This corresponds to a 15-fold increased risk of lymphoma in the JAK inhibitor recipients.

Lymphoma cases

In all, there were 6 patients who developed lymphoma after JAK inhibitor treatment. Five developed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and 1 had high-grade B-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified.

Four of the patients had primary MF, 1 had post-polycythemia vera MF, and 1 had post-essential thrombocythemia (ET) MF. Five patients had a JAK2V617F mutation, and 1 (the post-ET MF patient) had a CALR mutation.

All 6 patients had received treatment with ruxolitinib. One patient also received fedratinib.

B-cell clone

The researchers studied bone marrow samples from 54 of the 69 patients treated with JAK inhibitors in the first cohort. The team found a pre-existing B-cell clone in 3 of the 4 patients who developed lymphoma. Further investigation suggested this was the clone that later transformed into lymphoma.

The researchers also found an association between JAK inhibition and an increased frequency of aggressive B-cell lymphomas in mouse models.

“By replicating this link between this B-cell clone and aggressive lymphoma, we hope to speed the discovery of an alternative therapy for myelofibrosis,” said study author Veronica Sexl, MD, of the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna. “These findings are going to be valuable in clinical care.”

“We determined that patients with this pre-existing B-cell clone in their bone marrow are most at risk for developing aggressive lymphoma,” added study author Ulrich Jäger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna.

“We also know that up to 16% of people with myelofibrosis have immunoglobulin gene rearrangements like this B-cell clone. Therefore, our findings suggest that all patients with myelofibrosis should be tested for such gene rearrangements before prescribing JAK inhibitors to treat their disease.”

Micrograph showing myelofibrosis

New research indicates that JAK inhibitors may increase the risk of lymphoma in patients with myelofibrosis (MF).

The patients studied had a 15- to 25-fold higher risk of developing B-cell lymphoma if they received treatment with JAK inhibitors.

The researchers speculate that screening MF patients for a pre-existing B-cell clone before starting JAK inhibitor therapy may help prevent lymphoma development.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, and his colleagues conducted this research and reported the findings in Blood.

“[W]e started noticing sporadic cases of lymphomas developing in patients being treated for myeloproliferative neoplasms and wanted to know if this phenomenon was connected to treatment,” Dr Gisslinger said.

Therefore, he and his colleagues assessed 626 patients receiving treatment for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) at the Medical University of Vienna.

The incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 5.8% (4/69) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.36% (2/557) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors. That amounts to a 16-fold increased risk of lymphoma in patients receiving JAK inhibitors.

When the researchers analyzed only patients with primary MF (n=216), the increased risk of B-cell lymphoma was even greater. The incidence of lymphoma was 9.68% (3/31) in patients treated with JAK inhibitors and 0.54% (1/185) in patients who did not receive JAK inhibitors.

That corresponds to a 19-fold increased risk of B-cell lymphoma in primary MF patients treated with JAK inhibitors. When the researchers adjusted for age, there was a 21-fold greater risk. When they adjusted for sex, the risk was 25 times higher.

In a second cohort of 929 MPN patients, the incidence of B-cell lymphoma was 3.51% (2/57) in patients who received JAK inhibitors and 0.23% (2/872) in patients who did not. This corresponds to a 15-fold increased risk of lymphoma in the JAK inhibitor recipients.

Lymphoma cases

In all, there were 6 patients who developed lymphoma after JAK inhibitor treatment. Five developed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and 1 had high-grade B-cell lymphoma not otherwise specified.

Four of the patients had primary MF, 1 had post-polycythemia vera MF, and 1 had post-essential thrombocythemia (ET) MF. Five patients had a JAK2V617F mutation, and 1 (the post-ET MF patient) had a CALR mutation.

All 6 patients had received treatment with ruxolitinib. One patient also received fedratinib.

B-cell clone

The researchers studied bone marrow samples from 54 of the 69 patients treated with JAK inhibitors in the first cohort. The team found a pre-existing B-cell clone in 3 of the 4 patients who developed lymphoma. Further investigation suggested this was the clone that later transformed into lymphoma.

The researchers also found an association between JAK inhibition and an increased frequency of aggressive B-cell lymphomas in mouse models.

“By replicating this link between this B-cell clone and aggressive lymphoma, we hope to speed the discovery of an alternative therapy for myelofibrosis,” said study author Veronica Sexl, MD, of the University of Veterinary Medicine in Vienna. “These findings are going to be valuable in clinical care.”

“We determined that patients with this pre-existing B-cell clone in their bone marrow are most at risk for developing aggressive lymphoma,” added study author Ulrich Jäger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna.

“We also know that up to 16% of people with myelofibrosis have immunoglobulin gene rearrangements like this B-cell clone. Therefore, our findings suggest that all patients with myelofibrosis should be tested for such gene rearrangements before prescribing JAK inhibitors to treat their disease.”