User login
Interim PET scans identify HL patients with better outcomes
CHICAGO—Interim PET scans can identify a subset of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients with a better outcome suitable for de-escalation treatment after upfront BEACOPP without impairing disease control, according to final results of the AHL2011-LYSA study.
BEACOPP, compared to ABVD, improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) and is associated with a higher risk of myelodysplasia, acute leukemia, and infertility.
Investigators evaluated whether some patients might be able to reduce treatment intensity without compromising the effectiveness of their therapy.
Olivier Casasnovas, MD, of CHU Le Bocage Service d'Hématologie Clinique, Dijon, France, presented the final analysis at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7503).
AHL2011-LYSA study (NCT01358747)
The randomized phase 3 study compared an early PET-driven treatment de-escalation to a non-PET-monitored strategy in patients with advanced-stage HL.
The study included 823 previously untreated patients, median age 30 years (range 16 – 60), with stage III, IV, or high-risk IIB HL.
The PET-driven strategy consisted of 2 BEACOPP* cycles (PET2), followed by 4 cycles of ABVD** for PET2-negative patients, and 4 cycles of BEACOPP for PET2-positive patients.
The experimental PET-driven strategy (410 patients) was randomly compared to a standard treatment delivering 6 cycles of BEACOPP (413 patients). PFS was the primary endpoint with a hypothesis of non-inferiority of the PET-driven arm compared to the standard arm.
Patients characteristics were well balanced between the arms, Dr Casasnovas said. PET2-positivity rate was similar in both arms (experimental 13%, standard 12%).
Based on PET2 results, 346 (84%) patients received 4 cycles of ABVD and 51 (12%) patients received 4 additional cycles of BEACOPP in the experimental arm.
Results
With a median follow-up of 50 months, the 5-year PFS was similar in the standard (86.2%) and the PET-driven arms (85.7%). The 5-year PFS for PET 2-negative/PET 4-negative patients was 90.9%, for PET 2-positive/PET4-negative patients was 75.4%, and for PET 4-positive patients was 46.5%.
The 5-year OS was similar in both arms (96.4% experimental, 95.2% standard).
The treatment toxicity was significantly higher in patients receiving 6 cycles of BEACOPP as compared to those who received 2 cycles of BEACOPP plus 4 cycles of ABVD.
Those who received more cycles of BEACOPP had more frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events than those with fewer cycles, including anemia (11% vs 2%), leukopenia (85% vs 74%), thrombocytopenia (44% vs 15%), and sepsis (7% vs 3%), as well as in serious adverse events (45% vs 28%).
“After 4 cycles of chemotherapy, it [PET positivity] identifies a subset of patients with a particularly poor outcome,” Dr Casasnovas said, “encouraging researchers to develop new treatment options in these patients.”
“PET performed after 2 cycles of BEACOPP escalation can be safely used to guide subsequent treatment,” he concluded.
“This approach allows clinicians to reduce the treatment-related immediate toxicity in most patients,” he added, “and provides similar patient outcomes compared to standard BEACOPP escalation treatment.”
* Bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone
**Adriamycin (doxorubicin), bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine
CHICAGO—Interim PET scans can identify a subset of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients with a better outcome suitable for de-escalation treatment after upfront BEACOPP without impairing disease control, according to final results of the AHL2011-LYSA study.
BEACOPP, compared to ABVD, improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) and is associated with a higher risk of myelodysplasia, acute leukemia, and infertility.
Investigators evaluated whether some patients might be able to reduce treatment intensity without compromising the effectiveness of their therapy.
Olivier Casasnovas, MD, of CHU Le Bocage Service d'Hématologie Clinique, Dijon, France, presented the final analysis at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7503).
AHL2011-LYSA study (NCT01358747)
The randomized phase 3 study compared an early PET-driven treatment de-escalation to a non-PET-monitored strategy in patients with advanced-stage HL.
The study included 823 previously untreated patients, median age 30 years (range 16 – 60), with stage III, IV, or high-risk IIB HL.
The PET-driven strategy consisted of 2 BEACOPP* cycles (PET2), followed by 4 cycles of ABVD** for PET2-negative patients, and 4 cycles of BEACOPP for PET2-positive patients.
The experimental PET-driven strategy (410 patients) was randomly compared to a standard treatment delivering 6 cycles of BEACOPP (413 patients). PFS was the primary endpoint with a hypothesis of non-inferiority of the PET-driven arm compared to the standard arm.
Patients characteristics were well balanced between the arms, Dr Casasnovas said. PET2-positivity rate was similar in both arms (experimental 13%, standard 12%).
Based on PET2 results, 346 (84%) patients received 4 cycles of ABVD and 51 (12%) patients received 4 additional cycles of BEACOPP in the experimental arm.
Results
With a median follow-up of 50 months, the 5-year PFS was similar in the standard (86.2%) and the PET-driven arms (85.7%). The 5-year PFS for PET 2-negative/PET 4-negative patients was 90.9%, for PET 2-positive/PET4-negative patients was 75.4%, and for PET 4-positive patients was 46.5%.
The 5-year OS was similar in both arms (96.4% experimental, 95.2% standard).
The treatment toxicity was significantly higher in patients receiving 6 cycles of BEACOPP as compared to those who received 2 cycles of BEACOPP plus 4 cycles of ABVD.
Those who received more cycles of BEACOPP had more frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events than those with fewer cycles, including anemia (11% vs 2%), leukopenia (85% vs 74%), thrombocytopenia (44% vs 15%), and sepsis (7% vs 3%), as well as in serious adverse events (45% vs 28%).
“After 4 cycles of chemotherapy, it [PET positivity] identifies a subset of patients with a particularly poor outcome,” Dr Casasnovas said, “encouraging researchers to develop new treatment options in these patients.”
“PET performed after 2 cycles of BEACOPP escalation can be safely used to guide subsequent treatment,” he concluded.
“This approach allows clinicians to reduce the treatment-related immediate toxicity in most patients,” he added, “and provides similar patient outcomes compared to standard BEACOPP escalation treatment.”
* Bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone
**Adriamycin (doxorubicin), bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine
CHICAGO—Interim PET scans can identify a subset of Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) patients with a better outcome suitable for de-escalation treatment after upfront BEACOPP without impairing disease control, according to final results of the AHL2011-LYSA study.
BEACOPP, compared to ABVD, improves progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) and is associated with a higher risk of myelodysplasia, acute leukemia, and infertility.
Investigators evaluated whether some patients might be able to reduce treatment intensity without compromising the effectiveness of their therapy.
Olivier Casasnovas, MD, of CHU Le Bocage Service d'Hématologie Clinique, Dijon, France, presented the final analysis at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7503).
AHL2011-LYSA study (NCT01358747)
The randomized phase 3 study compared an early PET-driven treatment de-escalation to a non-PET-monitored strategy in patients with advanced-stage HL.
The study included 823 previously untreated patients, median age 30 years (range 16 – 60), with stage III, IV, or high-risk IIB HL.
The PET-driven strategy consisted of 2 BEACOPP* cycles (PET2), followed by 4 cycles of ABVD** for PET2-negative patients, and 4 cycles of BEACOPP for PET2-positive patients.
The experimental PET-driven strategy (410 patients) was randomly compared to a standard treatment delivering 6 cycles of BEACOPP (413 patients). PFS was the primary endpoint with a hypothesis of non-inferiority of the PET-driven arm compared to the standard arm.
Patients characteristics were well balanced between the arms, Dr Casasnovas said. PET2-positivity rate was similar in both arms (experimental 13%, standard 12%).
Based on PET2 results, 346 (84%) patients received 4 cycles of ABVD and 51 (12%) patients received 4 additional cycles of BEACOPP in the experimental arm.
Results
With a median follow-up of 50 months, the 5-year PFS was similar in the standard (86.2%) and the PET-driven arms (85.7%). The 5-year PFS for PET 2-negative/PET 4-negative patients was 90.9%, for PET 2-positive/PET4-negative patients was 75.4%, and for PET 4-positive patients was 46.5%.
The 5-year OS was similar in both arms (96.4% experimental, 95.2% standard).
The treatment toxicity was significantly higher in patients receiving 6 cycles of BEACOPP as compared to those who received 2 cycles of BEACOPP plus 4 cycles of ABVD.
Those who received more cycles of BEACOPP had more frequent grade 3 or higher adverse events than those with fewer cycles, including anemia (11% vs 2%), leukopenia (85% vs 74%), thrombocytopenia (44% vs 15%), and sepsis (7% vs 3%), as well as in serious adverse events (45% vs 28%).
“After 4 cycles of chemotherapy, it [PET positivity] identifies a subset of patients with a particularly poor outcome,” Dr Casasnovas said, “encouraging researchers to develop new treatment options in these patients.”
“PET performed after 2 cycles of BEACOPP escalation can be safely used to guide subsequent treatment,” he concluded.
“This approach allows clinicians to reduce the treatment-related immediate toxicity in most patients,” he added, “and provides similar patient outcomes compared to standard BEACOPP escalation treatment.”
* Bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone
**Adriamycin (doxorubicin), bleomycin, vinblastine, dacarbazine
British good practice paper offers MCL diagnosis pearls
Immunohistochemical panels used in the diagnosis of mantle cell lymphoma should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining, according to a good practice paper from the British Society of Haematology.
Pamela McKay, MD, of the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, and her colleagues provided based on a review of literature from 1980 to 2017. The good practice paper aims to offer best practice advice based on consensus where the evidence is limited. Specifically, the paper incorporates new information on molecular pathology and the use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanning in staging of disease.
The top recommendations related to MCL diagnosis include performing lymph node excision or adequate core biopsy for diagnosis of nodal MCL. For non-nodal presentation, a tissue biopsy or peripheral blood can be used. Additionally, immunohistochemical panels should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining.
In cases of atypical morphology, aberrant immunophenotype, equivocal cyclin D1 positivity, or unusual clinical presentation, the authors recommended fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to demonstrate the presence of the t(11;14) translocation. They also recommended recording the Ki67 Proliferation Index at baseline, with an index of greater than 30% being indicative of a poorer outcome.
In terms of staging disease, Dr. McKay and her associates recommended that patients undergo staging with CT of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. They recommended against routine use of fluorodeoxyglucose PET for MCL staging, but said it could be considered if radical radiotherapy is being proposed for early-stage disease.
For cases with suspicion of central nervous system involvement, lumbar puncture with cytospin and immunophenotyping is recommended.
They recommended that all MCL patients have either their simplified or combined MCL international prognostic index score recorded at baseline.
All the authors made a declaration of interest to the British Society of Haematology and task force chairs, which may be viewed on request.
SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jun 8. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15281.
Immunohistochemical panels used in the diagnosis of mantle cell lymphoma should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining, according to a good practice paper from the British Society of Haematology.
Pamela McKay, MD, of the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, and her colleagues provided based on a review of literature from 1980 to 2017. The good practice paper aims to offer best practice advice based on consensus where the evidence is limited. Specifically, the paper incorporates new information on molecular pathology and the use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanning in staging of disease.
The top recommendations related to MCL diagnosis include performing lymph node excision or adequate core biopsy for diagnosis of nodal MCL. For non-nodal presentation, a tissue biopsy or peripheral blood can be used. Additionally, immunohistochemical panels should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining.
In cases of atypical morphology, aberrant immunophenotype, equivocal cyclin D1 positivity, or unusual clinical presentation, the authors recommended fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to demonstrate the presence of the t(11;14) translocation. They also recommended recording the Ki67 Proliferation Index at baseline, with an index of greater than 30% being indicative of a poorer outcome.
In terms of staging disease, Dr. McKay and her associates recommended that patients undergo staging with CT of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. They recommended against routine use of fluorodeoxyglucose PET for MCL staging, but said it could be considered if radical radiotherapy is being proposed for early-stage disease.
For cases with suspicion of central nervous system involvement, lumbar puncture with cytospin and immunophenotyping is recommended.
They recommended that all MCL patients have either their simplified or combined MCL international prognostic index score recorded at baseline.
All the authors made a declaration of interest to the British Society of Haematology and task force chairs, which may be viewed on request.
SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jun 8. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15281.
Immunohistochemical panels used in the diagnosis of mantle cell lymphoma should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining, according to a good practice paper from the British Society of Haematology.
Pamela McKay, MD, of the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Centre, Glasgow, and her colleagues provided based on a review of literature from 1980 to 2017. The good practice paper aims to offer best practice advice based on consensus where the evidence is limited. Specifically, the paper incorporates new information on molecular pathology and the use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) scanning in staging of disease.
The top recommendations related to MCL diagnosis include performing lymph node excision or adequate core biopsy for diagnosis of nodal MCL. For non-nodal presentation, a tissue biopsy or peripheral blood can be used. Additionally, immunohistochemical panels should include cyclin D1 and SOX11 immunostaining.
In cases of atypical morphology, aberrant immunophenotype, equivocal cyclin D1 positivity, or unusual clinical presentation, the authors recommended fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to demonstrate the presence of the t(11;14) translocation. They also recommended recording the Ki67 Proliferation Index at baseline, with an index of greater than 30% being indicative of a poorer outcome.
In terms of staging disease, Dr. McKay and her associates recommended that patients undergo staging with CT of the neck, chest, abdomen, and pelvis. They recommended against routine use of fluorodeoxyglucose PET for MCL staging, but said it could be considered if radical radiotherapy is being proposed for early-stage disease.
For cases with suspicion of central nervous system involvement, lumbar puncture with cytospin and immunophenotyping is recommended.
They recommended that all MCL patients have either their simplified or combined MCL international prognostic index score recorded at baseline.
All the authors made a declaration of interest to the British Society of Haematology and task force chairs, which may be viewed on request.
SOURCE: McKay P et al. Br J Haematol. 2018 Jun 8. doi: 10.1111/bjh.15281.
FROM THE BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
FDA approves pembrolizumab for relapsed/refractory PMBCL
The immune checkpoint inhibitor in adult and pediatric patients.
The Food and Drug Administration based the accelerated approval on results from 53 patients with relapsed or refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma in the KEYNOTE-170 trial. In the phase 2 trial, patients received 200 mg of pembrolizumab intravenously for 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression occurred. This continued for up to 24 months in patients who did not display progression. The overall response rate to pembrolizumab was 45% (95% CI, 32-60), which included both complete (11%) and partial (34%) responses. The median duration of response was not met within the follow-up period (median, 9.7 months) and the median time to first objective response was 2.8 months.
The recommended dose for pembrolizumab in adults is 200 mg every 3 weeks. It is recommended that pediatric patients receive 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with a maximum dose of 200 mg.
The most common adverse reactions to pembrolizumab were musculoskeletal pain, upper respiratory tract infection, pyrexia, fatigue, cough, dyspnea, diarrhea, nausea, arrhythmia, and headache. In total, a quarter of patients with adverse reactions required systemic treatment with a corticosteroid and 26% of patients had serious adverse reactions.
Pembrolizumab was approved via the FDA’s accelerated approval process, which allows for earlier approval of drugs that treat serious medical conditions and fulfill an unmet medical need. The drug was approved based on tumor response rate and durability of response, the FDA noted.
The immune checkpoint inhibitor in adult and pediatric patients.
The Food and Drug Administration based the accelerated approval on results from 53 patients with relapsed or refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma in the KEYNOTE-170 trial. In the phase 2 trial, patients received 200 mg of pembrolizumab intravenously for 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression occurred. This continued for up to 24 months in patients who did not display progression. The overall response rate to pembrolizumab was 45% (95% CI, 32-60), which included both complete (11%) and partial (34%) responses. The median duration of response was not met within the follow-up period (median, 9.7 months) and the median time to first objective response was 2.8 months.
The recommended dose for pembrolizumab in adults is 200 mg every 3 weeks. It is recommended that pediatric patients receive 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with a maximum dose of 200 mg.
The most common adverse reactions to pembrolizumab were musculoskeletal pain, upper respiratory tract infection, pyrexia, fatigue, cough, dyspnea, diarrhea, nausea, arrhythmia, and headache. In total, a quarter of patients with adverse reactions required systemic treatment with a corticosteroid and 26% of patients had serious adverse reactions.
Pembrolizumab was approved via the FDA’s accelerated approval process, which allows for earlier approval of drugs that treat serious medical conditions and fulfill an unmet medical need. The drug was approved based on tumor response rate and durability of response, the FDA noted.
The immune checkpoint inhibitor in adult and pediatric patients.
The Food and Drug Administration based the accelerated approval on results from 53 patients with relapsed or refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma in the KEYNOTE-170 trial. In the phase 2 trial, patients received 200 mg of pembrolizumab intravenously for 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression occurred. This continued for up to 24 months in patients who did not display progression. The overall response rate to pembrolizumab was 45% (95% CI, 32-60), which included both complete (11%) and partial (34%) responses. The median duration of response was not met within the follow-up period (median, 9.7 months) and the median time to first objective response was 2.8 months.
The recommended dose for pembrolizumab in adults is 200 mg every 3 weeks. It is recommended that pediatric patients receive 2 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with a maximum dose of 200 mg.
The most common adverse reactions to pembrolizumab were musculoskeletal pain, upper respiratory tract infection, pyrexia, fatigue, cough, dyspnea, diarrhea, nausea, arrhythmia, and headache. In total, a quarter of patients with adverse reactions required systemic treatment with a corticosteroid and 26% of patients had serious adverse reactions.
Pembrolizumab was approved via the FDA’s accelerated approval process, which allows for earlier approval of drugs that treat serious medical conditions and fulfill an unmet medical need. The drug was approved based on tumor response rate and durability of response, the FDA noted.
FDA grants pembrolizumab accelerated approval for PMBCL
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (Keytruda) for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL).
The indication also includes patients who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
Pembrolizumab had received priority review for PMBCL late last year and also has orphan drug designation and breakthrough therapy designation for this indication.
The FDA based its approval on data from the KEYNOTE-170 (NCT02576990 ) trial.
Investigators enrolled 53 patients onto the multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression.
Patients whose disease did not progress received the drug for up to 24 months.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 33 years (range, 20 – 61), 43% were male, 92% white, 43% had an ECOG performance status of 0, and 57% had an ECOG performance status of 1.
Almost half (49%) had relapsed disease, and 36% had primary refractory disease.
About a quarter (26%) had undergone prior autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant, and 32% had prior radiation therapy.
All patients had received prior rituximab.
Results
At a median follow-up of 9.7 months, the overall response rate was 45% (24 responders), including 11% complete responses and 34% partial responses.
The median duration of response was not reached during the follow-up period and ranged from a median 1.1 to 19.2 months.
Median time to first objective response was 2.8 months (range, 2.1 – 8.5). Accordingly, investigators do not recommend pembrolizumab for PMBCL patients who require urgent cytoreductive therapy.
Safety
The most common adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients were musculoskeletal pain (30%), upper respiratory tract infection (28%), pyrexia (28%), fatigue (23%), cough (26%), dyspnea (21%), diarrhea (13%), abdominal pain (13%), nausea (11%), arrhythmia (11%), and headache (11%).
Eight percent of patients discontinued treatment, and 15% interrupted treatment due to adverse reactions.
Adverse events requiring systemic corticosteroid therapy occurred in 25% of patients.
Serious adverse events occurred in 26% and included arrhythmia (4 %), cardiac tamponade (2%), myocardial infarction (2%), pericardial effusion (2%), and pericarditis (2%).
Six (11%) patients died within 30 days of start of treatment.
The recommended pembrolizumab dose for treatment of adults with PMBCL is 200 mg every 3 weeks. The recommended dose in pediatric patients is 2 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 200 mg) every 3 weeks.
Additional indications for pembrolizumab include melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous cell cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, gastric cancer, and cervical cancer.
The full prescribing information is available on the FDA website.
Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) is a product of Merck & Co, Inc.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (Keytruda) for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL).
The indication also includes patients who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
Pembrolizumab had received priority review for PMBCL late last year and also has orphan drug designation and breakthrough therapy designation for this indication.
The FDA based its approval on data from the KEYNOTE-170 (NCT02576990 ) trial.
Investigators enrolled 53 patients onto the multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression.
Patients whose disease did not progress received the drug for up to 24 months.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 33 years (range, 20 – 61), 43% were male, 92% white, 43% had an ECOG performance status of 0, and 57% had an ECOG performance status of 1.
Almost half (49%) had relapsed disease, and 36% had primary refractory disease.
About a quarter (26%) had undergone prior autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant, and 32% had prior radiation therapy.
All patients had received prior rituximab.
Results
At a median follow-up of 9.7 months, the overall response rate was 45% (24 responders), including 11% complete responses and 34% partial responses.
The median duration of response was not reached during the follow-up period and ranged from a median 1.1 to 19.2 months.
Median time to first objective response was 2.8 months (range, 2.1 – 8.5). Accordingly, investigators do not recommend pembrolizumab for PMBCL patients who require urgent cytoreductive therapy.
Safety
The most common adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients were musculoskeletal pain (30%), upper respiratory tract infection (28%), pyrexia (28%), fatigue (23%), cough (26%), dyspnea (21%), diarrhea (13%), abdominal pain (13%), nausea (11%), arrhythmia (11%), and headache (11%).
Eight percent of patients discontinued treatment, and 15% interrupted treatment due to adverse reactions.
Adverse events requiring systemic corticosteroid therapy occurred in 25% of patients.
Serious adverse events occurred in 26% and included arrhythmia (4 %), cardiac tamponade (2%), myocardial infarction (2%), pericardial effusion (2%), and pericarditis (2%).
Six (11%) patients died within 30 days of start of treatment.
The recommended pembrolizumab dose for treatment of adults with PMBCL is 200 mg every 3 weeks. The recommended dose in pediatric patients is 2 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 200 mg) every 3 weeks.
Additional indications for pembrolizumab include melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous cell cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, gastric cancer, and cervical cancer.
The full prescribing information is available on the FDA website.
Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) is a product of Merck & Co, Inc.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted accelerated approval to the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (Keytruda) for the treatment of adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL).
The indication also includes patients who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
Pembrolizumab had received priority review for PMBCL late last year and also has orphan drug designation and breakthrough therapy designation for this indication.
The FDA based its approval on data from the KEYNOTE-170 (NCT02576990 ) trial.
Investigators enrolled 53 patients onto the multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial. Patients received pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks until unacceptable toxicity or documented disease progression.
Patients whose disease did not progress received the drug for up to 24 months.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 33 years (range, 20 – 61), 43% were male, 92% white, 43% had an ECOG performance status of 0, and 57% had an ECOG performance status of 1.
Almost half (49%) had relapsed disease, and 36% had primary refractory disease.
About a quarter (26%) had undergone prior autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant, and 32% had prior radiation therapy.
All patients had received prior rituximab.
Results
At a median follow-up of 9.7 months, the overall response rate was 45% (24 responders), including 11% complete responses and 34% partial responses.
The median duration of response was not reached during the follow-up period and ranged from a median 1.1 to 19.2 months.
Median time to first objective response was 2.8 months (range, 2.1 – 8.5). Accordingly, investigators do not recommend pembrolizumab for PMBCL patients who require urgent cytoreductive therapy.
Safety
The most common adverse events occurring in 10% or more of patients were musculoskeletal pain (30%), upper respiratory tract infection (28%), pyrexia (28%), fatigue (23%), cough (26%), dyspnea (21%), diarrhea (13%), abdominal pain (13%), nausea (11%), arrhythmia (11%), and headache (11%).
Eight percent of patients discontinued treatment, and 15% interrupted treatment due to adverse reactions.
Adverse events requiring systemic corticosteroid therapy occurred in 25% of patients.
Serious adverse events occurred in 26% and included arrhythmia (4 %), cardiac tamponade (2%), myocardial infarction (2%), pericardial effusion (2%), and pericarditis (2%).
Six (11%) patients died within 30 days of start of treatment.
The recommended pembrolizumab dose for treatment of adults with PMBCL is 200 mg every 3 weeks. The recommended dose in pediatric patients is 2 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 200 mg) every 3 weeks.
Additional indications for pembrolizumab include melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, head and neck squamous cell cancer, classical Hodgkin lymphoma, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, gastric cancer, and cervical cancer.
The full prescribing information is available on the FDA website.
Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) is a product of Merck & Co, Inc.
Ibrutinib and venetoclax combo promising in frontline CLL
CHICAGO—Ibrutinib combined with venetoclax is showing promising clinical activity in the frontline treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to investigators for the CAPTIVATE study.
In the first 30 patients, 77% of treatment-naïve patients had undetected minimal residual disease (MRD; <10-4 cells) in the blood and 86% showed a similar response in the bone marrow.
The overall response rate (ORR) was 100% in 11 evaluable patients. The investigators reported this initial data at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7502).
“These early results show a highly active and safe treatment with 12 cycles of combined treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax,” said William G. Wierda, MD, PhD, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, who presented the findings at ASCO.
Ibrutinib, a Bruton-kinase inhibitor, has already been approved for the treatment of CLL and venetoclax, a Bcl-2 inhibitor, is currently used to treat relapsed del 17p CLL.
Venetoclax in combination with rituximab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma whether or not patients have del 17p.
With complementary mechanisms of action and preclinical studies suggesting synergy with the combination, CAPTIVATE was designed to test the efficacy of the oral combination given for 12 cycles.
Study design
CAPTIVATE (NCT02910583) is an ongoing phase 2 study that enrolled 164 patients with treatment-naïve CLL. Patients first received 3 cycles of ibrutinib monotherapy at the standard dose. This was intended to debulk the disease and reduce risk for venetoclax-associated tumor lysis syndrome (TLS).
Venetoclax 400 mg was initiated at cycle 4. After 12 cycles of the combination, patients with confirmed MRD negativity were randomized to receive ibrutinib with a placebo or to continue with the combination therapy.
In this initial report, Dr Wierda highlighted safety data for all 164 enrolled patients and efficacy data for the first 30 patients who had 6 cycles of combination therapy (MRD assessment cohort).
Dr Wierda also reported bone marrow data for the first 14 patients, who received a total of 12 cycles of the combination and represent the safety run-in cohort.
Ibrutinib and venetoclax show promising activity
Median age of patients was 58 years; about 2/3 of patients had unmutated IGHV and 1/3 had a creatine clearance of <80 mL/min.
Of 164 patients, 95% remain on therapy, with discontinuations reported for adverse events; one patient had disease progression to Richter’s transformation.
For the MRD evaluation, all 30 patients had 6 months of combination therapy and continue on treatment.
As expected, lead-in with ibrutinib monotherapy debulked the disease.
Investigators observed a reduction in the proportion of patients at high risk for TLS (24% to 3%) and an increase in the proportion of patients at low risk for TLS (12% to 29%).
A similar picture emerged for debulking of lymph node disease. No patient developed clinical TLS.
Other adverse events were consistent with the safety profile of single-agent ibrutinib and venetoclax. No new safety signals were seen.
After 6 cycles of the combination, blood MRD negativity was reported in 77% of the patients in the MRD assessment cohort.
In the safety-run in cohort of 14 patients, blood MRD negativity was reported in 86% of patients after 12 cycles and 93% of patients after 15 cycles of the combination. In these patients, bone marrow MRD negativity was achieved in 86%.
After 12 cycles of combination therapy, the objective response rate was 100% for 11 of the 14 evaluable patients from the safety run-in cohort: 6 patients showed complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) for a CR/CRi of 55%. All patients had confirmed undetectable MRD.
Investigators considered these responses promising and an assessment of the full treatment plan and durability of response are awaited.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics.
CHICAGO—Ibrutinib combined with venetoclax is showing promising clinical activity in the frontline treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to investigators for the CAPTIVATE study.
In the first 30 patients, 77% of treatment-naïve patients had undetected minimal residual disease (MRD; <10-4 cells) in the blood and 86% showed a similar response in the bone marrow.
The overall response rate (ORR) was 100% in 11 evaluable patients. The investigators reported this initial data at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7502).
“These early results show a highly active and safe treatment with 12 cycles of combined treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax,” said William G. Wierda, MD, PhD, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, who presented the findings at ASCO.
Ibrutinib, a Bruton-kinase inhibitor, has already been approved for the treatment of CLL and venetoclax, a Bcl-2 inhibitor, is currently used to treat relapsed del 17p CLL.
Venetoclax in combination with rituximab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma whether or not patients have del 17p.
With complementary mechanisms of action and preclinical studies suggesting synergy with the combination, CAPTIVATE was designed to test the efficacy of the oral combination given for 12 cycles.
Study design
CAPTIVATE (NCT02910583) is an ongoing phase 2 study that enrolled 164 patients with treatment-naïve CLL. Patients first received 3 cycles of ibrutinib monotherapy at the standard dose. This was intended to debulk the disease and reduce risk for venetoclax-associated tumor lysis syndrome (TLS).
Venetoclax 400 mg was initiated at cycle 4. After 12 cycles of the combination, patients with confirmed MRD negativity were randomized to receive ibrutinib with a placebo or to continue with the combination therapy.
In this initial report, Dr Wierda highlighted safety data for all 164 enrolled patients and efficacy data for the first 30 patients who had 6 cycles of combination therapy (MRD assessment cohort).
Dr Wierda also reported bone marrow data for the first 14 patients, who received a total of 12 cycles of the combination and represent the safety run-in cohort.
Ibrutinib and venetoclax show promising activity
Median age of patients was 58 years; about 2/3 of patients had unmutated IGHV and 1/3 had a creatine clearance of <80 mL/min.
Of 164 patients, 95% remain on therapy, with discontinuations reported for adverse events; one patient had disease progression to Richter’s transformation.
For the MRD evaluation, all 30 patients had 6 months of combination therapy and continue on treatment.
As expected, lead-in with ibrutinib monotherapy debulked the disease.
Investigators observed a reduction in the proportion of patients at high risk for TLS (24% to 3%) and an increase in the proportion of patients at low risk for TLS (12% to 29%).
A similar picture emerged for debulking of lymph node disease. No patient developed clinical TLS.
Other adverse events were consistent with the safety profile of single-agent ibrutinib and venetoclax. No new safety signals were seen.
After 6 cycles of the combination, blood MRD negativity was reported in 77% of the patients in the MRD assessment cohort.
In the safety-run in cohort of 14 patients, blood MRD negativity was reported in 86% of patients after 12 cycles and 93% of patients after 15 cycles of the combination. In these patients, bone marrow MRD negativity was achieved in 86%.
After 12 cycles of combination therapy, the objective response rate was 100% for 11 of the 14 evaluable patients from the safety run-in cohort: 6 patients showed complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) for a CR/CRi of 55%. All patients had confirmed undetectable MRD.
Investigators considered these responses promising and an assessment of the full treatment plan and durability of response are awaited.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics.
CHICAGO—Ibrutinib combined with venetoclax is showing promising clinical activity in the frontline treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to investigators for the CAPTIVATE study.
In the first 30 patients, 77% of treatment-naïve patients had undetected minimal residual disease (MRD; <10-4 cells) in the blood and 86% showed a similar response in the bone marrow.
The overall response rate (ORR) was 100% in 11 evaluable patients. The investigators reported this initial data at the 2018 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7502).
“These early results show a highly active and safe treatment with 12 cycles of combined treatment with ibrutinib and venetoclax,” said William G. Wierda, MD, PhD, of the MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, Texas, who presented the findings at ASCO.
Ibrutinib, a Bruton-kinase inhibitor, has already been approved for the treatment of CLL and venetoclax, a Bcl-2 inhibitor, is currently used to treat relapsed del 17p CLL.
Venetoclax in combination with rituximab was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration to treat patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma whether or not patients have del 17p.
With complementary mechanisms of action and preclinical studies suggesting synergy with the combination, CAPTIVATE was designed to test the efficacy of the oral combination given for 12 cycles.
Study design
CAPTIVATE (NCT02910583) is an ongoing phase 2 study that enrolled 164 patients with treatment-naïve CLL. Patients first received 3 cycles of ibrutinib monotherapy at the standard dose. This was intended to debulk the disease and reduce risk for venetoclax-associated tumor lysis syndrome (TLS).
Venetoclax 400 mg was initiated at cycle 4. After 12 cycles of the combination, patients with confirmed MRD negativity were randomized to receive ibrutinib with a placebo or to continue with the combination therapy.
In this initial report, Dr Wierda highlighted safety data for all 164 enrolled patients and efficacy data for the first 30 patients who had 6 cycles of combination therapy (MRD assessment cohort).
Dr Wierda also reported bone marrow data for the first 14 patients, who received a total of 12 cycles of the combination and represent the safety run-in cohort.
Ibrutinib and venetoclax show promising activity
Median age of patients was 58 years; about 2/3 of patients had unmutated IGHV and 1/3 had a creatine clearance of <80 mL/min.
Of 164 patients, 95% remain on therapy, with discontinuations reported for adverse events; one patient had disease progression to Richter’s transformation.
For the MRD evaluation, all 30 patients had 6 months of combination therapy and continue on treatment.
As expected, lead-in with ibrutinib monotherapy debulked the disease.
Investigators observed a reduction in the proportion of patients at high risk for TLS (24% to 3%) and an increase in the proportion of patients at low risk for TLS (12% to 29%).
A similar picture emerged for debulking of lymph node disease. No patient developed clinical TLS.
Other adverse events were consistent with the safety profile of single-agent ibrutinib and venetoclax. No new safety signals were seen.
After 6 cycles of the combination, blood MRD negativity was reported in 77% of the patients in the MRD assessment cohort.
In the safety-run in cohort of 14 patients, blood MRD negativity was reported in 86% of patients after 12 cycles and 93% of patients after 15 cycles of the combination. In these patients, bone marrow MRD negativity was achieved in 86%.
After 12 cycles of combination therapy, the objective response rate was 100% for 11 of the 14 evaluable patients from the safety run-in cohort: 6 patients showed complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi) for a CR/CRi of 55%. All patients had confirmed undetectable MRD.
Investigators considered these responses promising and an assessment of the full treatment plan and durability of response are awaited.
The study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics.
Chemo-free combo provides potential first-line option for FL
CHICAGO—A chemotherapy-free combination of lenalidomide plus rituximab shows similar efficacy and a different safety profile to chemotherapy plus rituximab (R-chemo) followed by rituximab maintenance in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
According to investigators, the multicenter, international phase 3 RELEVANCE trial is the first to evaluate the chemo-free combination against the standard of care, R-chemo with rituximab maintenance.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with FL requiring treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
Dr Fowler presented the results of the study at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7500).
The current standard of care in previously untreated symptomatic FL is immunochemotherapy induction followed by rituximab maintenance.
The immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide has complementary mechanisms with rituximab. Phase 2 studies of combined immunotherapy with lenalidomide and rituximab demonstrated 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 79%-81% in previously untreated FL, Dr Fowler said.
Phase 3 RELEVANCE trial (NCT01650701)
Investigators evaluated 1030 previously untreated grade 1-3a FL patients who required therapy.
Patients in the lenalidomide-rituximab group (n=513) received lenalidomide doses of 20 mg per day on days 2 to 22 and 28 for 6 to 12 cycles. Responders continued on therapy at 10 mg per day for a total of 18 cycles.
The rituximab dose was 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and day 1 in cycles 2 to 6 and continued in responders for 12 additional cycles.
Patients in the R-chemo arm (n=517) received the investigator’s choice of standard rituximab-CHOP, rituximab-bendamustine, or rituximab-CVP, followed by 12 cycles of rituximab.
Most patients (72%) in the R-chemo arm received R-CHOP.
Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, Dr Fowler said.
Co-primary endpoints were complete remission/complete remission unconfirmed (CR/Cru) at 120 weeks and PFS.
Results
At a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the superiority for lenalidomide and rituximab over rituximab-chemotherapy was not established.
For the lenalidomide-rituximab patients, the CR/Cru was 48% and 3-year PFS was 77% as compared to 53% and 78%, respectively, for rituximab-chemotherapy patients, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Overall survival was 94% in both groups.
Safety
“Important differences in safety profiles were observed between the arms,” Dr Fowler said.
Rituximab-chemotherapy patients had more frequent neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, growth factor usage, nausea, vomiting, neuropathy, and alopecia.
Lenalidomide and rituximab showed more cutaneous reactions, tumor flare, and diarrhea.
Toxicity profiles differed, with higher grade 4 neutropenia (31% vs 8%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%) with rituximab-chemotherapy compared with lenalidomide-rituximab, respectively.
More patients experienced grade 3/4 cutaneous events (7% vs 1%) with lenalidomide-rituximab.
Second primary malignancies were slightly higher with rituximab-chemotherapy (10%) than with lenalidomide-rituximab (7%). Grade 5 adverse events were 1% in both groups.
About 70% of patients completed treatment in both groups.
“Lenalidomide and rituximab was not superior to rituximab-chemotherapy based on mature CR/Cru at 120 weeks and interim PFS,” Dr Fowler said. “Both treatments showed similar efficacy results. Treatment effects on PFS were consistent across pre-specified subgroups.”
Dr Fowler presented data as of May 31, 2017. Continued follow-up on PFS and OS is ongoing.
The study is sponsored by Celgene Corporation and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation (LYSARC).
CHICAGO—A chemotherapy-free combination of lenalidomide plus rituximab shows similar efficacy and a different safety profile to chemotherapy plus rituximab (R-chemo) followed by rituximab maintenance in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
According to investigators, the multicenter, international phase 3 RELEVANCE trial is the first to evaluate the chemo-free combination against the standard of care, R-chemo with rituximab maintenance.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with FL requiring treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
Dr Fowler presented the results of the study at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7500).
The current standard of care in previously untreated symptomatic FL is immunochemotherapy induction followed by rituximab maintenance.
The immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide has complementary mechanisms with rituximab. Phase 2 studies of combined immunotherapy with lenalidomide and rituximab demonstrated 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 79%-81% in previously untreated FL, Dr Fowler said.
Phase 3 RELEVANCE trial (NCT01650701)
Investigators evaluated 1030 previously untreated grade 1-3a FL patients who required therapy.
Patients in the lenalidomide-rituximab group (n=513) received lenalidomide doses of 20 mg per day on days 2 to 22 and 28 for 6 to 12 cycles. Responders continued on therapy at 10 mg per day for a total of 18 cycles.
The rituximab dose was 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and day 1 in cycles 2 to 6 and continued in responders for 12 additional cycles.
Patients in the R-chemo arm (n=517) received the investigator’s choice of standard rituximab-CHOP, rituximab-bendamustine, or rituximab-CVP, followed by 12 cycles of rituximab.
Most patients (72%) in the R-chemo arm received R-CHOP.
Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, Dr Fowler said.
Co-primary endpoints were complete remission/complete remission unconfirmed (CR/Cru) at 120 weeks and PFS.
Results
At a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the superiority for lenalidomide and rituximab over rituximab-chemotherapy was not established.
For the lenalidomide-rituximab patients, the CR/Cru was 48% and 3-year PFS was 77% as compared to 53% and 78%, respectively, for rituximab-chemotherapy patients, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Overall survival was 94% in both groups.
Safety
“Important differences in safety profiles were observed between the arms,” Dr Fowler said.
Rituximab-chemotherapy patients had more frequent neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, growth factor usage, nausea, vomiting, neuropathy, and alopecia.
Lenalidomide and rituximab showed more cutaneous reactions, tumor flare, and diarrhea.
Toxicity profiles differed, with higher grade 4 neutropenia (31% vs 8%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%) with rituximab-chemotherapy compared with lenalidomide-rituximab, respectively.
More patients experienced grade 3/4 cutaneous events (7% vs 1%) with lenalidomide-rituximab.
Second primary malignancies were slightly higher with rituximab-chemotherapy (10%) than with lenalidomide-rituximab (7%). Grade 5 adverse events were 1% in both groups.
About 70% of patients completed treatment in both groups.
“Lenalidomide and rituximab was not superior to rituximab-chemotherapy based on mature CR/Cru at 120 weeks and interim PFS,” Dr Fowler said. “Both treatments showed similar efficacy results. Treatment effects on PFS were consistent across pre-specified subgroups.”
Dr Fowler presented data as of May 31, 2017. Continued follow-up on PFS and OS is ongoing.
The study is sponsored by Celgene Corporation and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation (LYSARC).
CHICAGO—A chemotherapy-free combination of lenalidomide plus rituximab shows similar efficacy and a different safety profile to chemotherapy plus rituximab (R-chemo) followed by rituximab maintenance in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
According to investigators, the multicenter, international phase 3 RELEVANCE trial is the first to evaluate the chemo-free combination against the standard of care, R-chemo with rituximab maintenance.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with FL requiring treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.
Dr Fowler presented the results of the study at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 7500).
The current standard of care in previously untreated symptomatic FL is immunochemotherapy induction followed by rituximab maintenance.
The immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide has complementary mechanisms with rituximab. Phase 2 studies of combined immunotherapy with lenalidomide and rituximab demonstrated 3-year progression-free survival (PFS) of 79%-81% in previously untreated FL, Dr Fowler said.
Phase 3 RELEVANCE trial (NCT01650701)
Investigators evaluated 1030 previously untreated grade 1-3a FL patients who required therapy.
Patients in the lenalidomide-rituximab group (n=513) received lenalidomide doses of 20 mg per day on days 2 to 22 and 28 for 6 to 12 cycles. Responders continued on therapy at 10 mg per day for a total of 18 cycles.
The rituximab dose was 375 mg/m2 weekly in cycle 1 and day 1 in cycles 2 to 6 and continued in responders for 12 additional cycles.
Patients in the R-chemo arm (n=517) received the investigator’s choice of standard rituximab-CHOP, rituximab-bendamustine, or rituximab-CVP, followed by 12 cycles of rituximab.
Most patients (72%) in the R-chemo arm received R-CHOP.
Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups, Dr Fowler said.
Co-primary endpoints were complete remission/complete remission unconfirmed (CR/Cru) at 120 weeks and PFS.
Results
At a median follow-up of 37.9 months, the superiority for lenalidomide and rituximab over rituximab-chemotherapy was not established.
For the lenalidomide-rituximab patients, the CR/Cru was 48% and 3-year PFS was 77% as compared to 53% and 78%, respectively, for rituximab-chemotherapy patients, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Overall survival was 94% in both groups.
Safety
“Important differences in safety profiles were observed between the arms,” Dr Fowler said.
Rituximab-chemotherapy patients had more frequent neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, growth factor usage, nausea, vomiting, neuropathy, and alopecia.
Lenalidomide and rituximab showed more cutaneous reactions, tumor flare, and diarrhea.
Toxicity profiles differed, with higher grade 4 neutropenia (31% vs 8%) and febrile neutropenia (7% vs 2%) with rituximab-chemotherapy compared with lenalidomide-rituximab, respectively.
More patients experienced grade 3/4 cutaneous events (7% vs 1%) with lenalidomide-rituximab.
Second primary malignancies were slightly higher with rituximab-chemotherapy (10%) than with lenalidomide-rituximab (7%). Grade 5 adverse events were 1% in both groups.
About 70% of patients completed treatment in both groups.
“Lenalidomide and rituximab was not superior to rituximab-chemotherapy based on mature CR/Cru at 120 weeks and interim PFS,” Dr Fowler said. “Both treatments showed similar efficacy results. Treatment effects on PFS were consistent across pre-specified subgroups.”
Dr Fowler presented data as of May 31, 2017. Continued follow-up on PFS and OS is ongoing.
The study is sponsored by Celgene Corporation and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation (LYSARC).
FDA approves venetoclax for CLL/SLL with or without del 17p
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved venetoclax tablets (Venclexta ®) in combination with rituximab to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who have received 1 prior therapy.
The combination is approved for patients with or without deletion of 17p (del 17p).
The FDA based its approval on the phase 3 MURANO trial, in which venetoclax in combination with rituximab (VEN+R) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in relapsed or refractory CLL patients compared to the chemoimmunotherapy regimen of bendamustine plus rituximab(B+R).
This approval, according to the drug’s developers, makes venetoclax plus rituximab the first oral-based, chemotherapy-free combination with a fixed treatment duration for CLL.
The FDA has also converted venetoclax's accelerated approval to a full approval. The drug was previously granted accelerated approval as a single agent for the treatment of people with CLL with 17p deletion.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche and jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech in the US and by AbbVie outside the US.
Phase 3 MURANO trial (NCT02005471)
The multicenter, open-label trial randomized 389 patients to VEN+R (194 patients) or B+R (195 patients). Median age of the patients was 65 years (range, 22 – 85).
Patients in the VEN+R arm completed a 5-week ramp-up of venetoclax followed by venetoclax 400 mg once daily for 24 months measured from the rituximab start date.
Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), caused by a rapid reduction in tumor volume, is an identified risk with venetoclax treatment. The dose ramp-up was intended to mitigate this risk.
Rituximab was initiated after venetoclax ramp-up and given for 6 cycles (375 mg/m2 intravenously on cycle 1 day 1 and 500 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of cycles 2-6, with a 28-day cycle length).
Patients in the B+R arm received 6 cycles of B+R (bendamustine 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle and rituximab at the above described dose and schedule).
Efficacy was based on PFS as assessed by an independent review committee.
After a median follow-up of 23 months, the median PFS was not reached in the VEN+R arm and was 18.1 months in the B+R arm (P<0.0001).
The overall response rate was 92% for patients treated with VEN+R compared to 72% for those treated with B+R.
Safety
The most common adverse events (AEs) in the VEN+R arms that occurred in 20% or more patients were neutropenia (65%), diarrhea (40%), upper respiratory tract infection (39%), fatigue (22%), cough (22%), and nausea (21%).
Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia developed in 64% of patients, and grade 4 neutropenia in 31%.
Serious adverse events (SAEs) developed in 46% of patients and serious infections in 21%, consisting most frequently of pneumonia (9%).
The incidence of TLS was 3%, occurring in 6 of 194 patients.
In the VEN+R arm, discontinuations due to any AEs occurred in 16% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 71%.
Neutropenia led to dose interruptions in 46% of patients and discontinuations in 3%. Thrombocytopenia led to discontinuations in 3% of patients.
Fatal AEs that occurred in the absence of disease progression and within 30 days of the last VEN+R treatment and/or 90 days of the last rituximab infusion were reported in 2% (4/194) of patients.
In the B+R arm, AEs led to treatment discontinuations in 10% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 40 %.
Investigators previously reported data from the phase 3 MURANO study as a late-breaking abstract at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and published the findings in NEJM.
John Seymour, MBBS, PhD, lead investigator of the MURANO study, said in the corporate release, the approval "validates the results seen in the phase 3 trial, including the significant improvement in progression-free survival over a standard of care comparator arm."
"Progression-free survival is considered a gold standard for demonstrating clinical benefit in oncology," he added.
Full prescribing information for venetoclax is available here.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved venetoclax tablets (Venclexta ®) in combination with rituximab to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who have received 1 prior therapy.
The combination is approved for patients with or without deletion of 17p (del 17p).
The FDA based its approval on the phase 3 MURANO trial, in which venetoclax in combination with rituximab (VEN+R) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in relapsed or refractory CLL patients compared to the chemoimmunotherapy regimen of bendamustine plus rituximab(B+R).
This approval, according to the drug’s developers, makes venetoclax plus rituximab the first oral-based, chemotherapy-free combination with a fixed treatment duration for CLL.
The FDA has also converted venetoclax's accelerated approval to a full approval. The drug was previously granted accelerated approval as a single agent for the treatment of people with CLL with 17p deletion.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche and jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech in the US and by AbbVie outside the US.
Phase 3 MURANO trial (NCT02005471)
The multicenter, open-label trial randomized 389 patients to VEN+R (194 patients) or B+R (195 patients). Median age of the patients was 65 years (range, 22 – 85).
Patients in the VEN+R arm completed a 5-week ramp-up of venetoclax followed by venetoclax 400 mg once daily for 24 months measured from the rituximab start date.
Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), caused by a rapid reduction in tumor volume, is an identified risk with venetoclax treatment. The dose ramp-up was intended to mitigate this risk.
Rituximab was initiated after venetoclax ramp-up and given for 6 cycles (375 mg/m2 intravenously on cycle 1 day 1 and 500 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of cycles 2-6, with a 28-day cycle length).
Patients in the B+R arm received 6 cycles of B+R (bendamustine 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle and rituximab at the above described dose and schedule).
Efficacy was based on PFS as assessed by an independent review committee.
After a median follow-up of 23 months, the median PFS was not reached in the VEN+R arm and was 18.1 months in the B+R arm (P<0.0001).
The overall response rate was 92% for patients treated with VEN+R compared to 72% for those treated with B+R.
Safety
The most common adverse events (AEs) in the VEN+R arms that occurred in 20% or more patients were neutropenia (65%), diarrhea (40%), upper respiratory tract infection (39%), fatigue (22%), cough (22%), and nausea (21%).
Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia developed in 64% of patients, and grade 4 neutropenia in 31%.
Serious adverse events (SAEs) developed in 46% of patients and serious infections in 21%, consisting most frequently of pneumonia (9%).
The incidence of TLS was 3%, occurring in 6 of 194 patients.
In the VEN+R arm, discontinuations due to any AEs occurred in 16% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 71%.
Neutropenia led to dose interruptions in 46% of patients and discontinuations in 3%. Thrombocytopenia led to discontinuations in 3% of patients.
Fatal AEs that occurred in the absence of disease progression and within 30 days of the last VEN+R treatment and/or 90 days of the last rituximab infusion were reported in 2% (4/194) of patients.
In the B+R arm, AEs led to treatment discontinuations in 10% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 40 %.
Investigators previously reported data from the phase 3 MURANO study as a late-breaking abstract at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and published the findings in NEJM.
John Seymour, MBBS, PhD, lead investigator of the MURANO study, said in the corporate release, the approval "validates the results seen in the phase 3 trial, including the significant improvement in progression-free survival over a standard of care comparator arm."
"Progression-free survival is considered a gold standard for demonstrating clinical benefit in oncology," he added.
Full prescribing information for venetoclax is available here.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved venetoclax tablets (Venclexta ®) in combination with rituximab to treat patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who have received 1 prior therapy.
The combination is approved for patients with or without deletion of 17p (del 17p).
The FDA based its approval on the phase 3 MURANO trial, in which venetoclax in combination with rituximab (VEN+R) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in relapsed or refractory CLL patients compared to the chemoimmunotherapy regimen of bendamustine plus rituximab(B+R).
This approval, according to the drug’s developers, makes venetoclax plus rituximab the first oral-based, chemotherapy-free combination with a fixed treatment duration for CLL.
The FDA has also converted venetoclax's accelerated approval to a full approval. The drug was previously granted accelerated approval as a single agent for the treatment of people with CLL with 17p deletion.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche and jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech in the US and by AbbVie outside the US.
Phase 3 MURANO trial (NCT02005471)
The multicenter, open-label trial randomized 389 patients to VEN+R (194 patients) or B+R (195 patients). Median age of the patients was 65 years (range, 22 – 85).
Patients in the VEN+R arm completed a 5-week ramp-up of venetoclax followed by venetoclax 400 mg once daily for 24 months measured from the rituximab start date.
Tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), caused by a rapid reduction in tumor volume, is an identified risk with venetoclax treatment. The dose ramp-up was intended to mitigate this risk.
Rituximab was initiated after venetoclax ramp-up and given for 6 cycles (375 mg/m2 intravenously on cycle 1 day 1 and 500 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 of cycles 2-6, with a 28-day cycle length).
Patients in the B+R arm received 6 cycles of B+R (bendamustine 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle and rituximab at the above described dose and schedule).
Efficacy was based on PFS as assessed by an independent review committee.
After a median follow-up of 23 months, the median PFS was not reached in the VEN+R arm and was 18.1 months in the B+R arm (P<0.0001).
The overall response rate was 92% for patients treated with VEN+R compared to 72% for those treated with B+R.
Safety
The most common adverse events (AEs) in the VEN+R arms that occurred in 20% or more patients were neutropenia (65%), diarrhea (40%), upper respiratory tract infection (39%), fatigue (22%), cough (22%), and nausea (21%).
Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia developed in 64% of patients, and grade 4 neutropenia in 31%.
Serious adverse events (SAEs) developed in 46% of patients and serious infections in 21%, consisting most frequently of pneumonia (9%).
The incidence of TLS was 3%, occurring in 6 of 194 patients.
In the VEN+R arm, discontinuations due to any AEs occurred in 16% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 71%.
Neutropenia led to dose interruptions in 46% of patients and discontinuations in 3%. Thrombocytopenia led to discontinuations in 3% of patients.
Fatal AEs that occurred in the absence of disease progression and within 30 days of the last VEN+R treatment and/or 90 days of the last rituximab infusion were reported in 2% (4/194) of patients.
In the B+R arm, AEs led to treatment discontinuations in 10% of patients, dose reductions in 15%, and dose interruptions in 40 %.
Investigators previously reported data from the phase 3 MURANO study as a late-breaking abstract at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting and published the findings in NEJM.
John Seymour, MBBS, PhD, lead investigator of the MURANO study, said in the corporate release, the approval "validates the results seen in the phase 3 trial, including the significant improvement in progression-free survival over a standard of care comparator arm."
"Progression-free survival is considered a gold standard for demonstrating clinical benefit in oncology," he added.
Full prescribing information for venetoclax is available here.
Polatuzumab plus BR improves efficacy in DLBCL
CHICAGO—Polatuzumab vedotin, when added to bendamustine (B) and rituximab (R), significantly improved response and survival rates in a cohort of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to a phase 2 study.
By contrast, there were no such improvements in a cohort of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients, at least in short-term follow-up, investigator Laurie Helen Sehn, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency in Vancouver, Canada, said at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting.
However, the improvement in overall survival in DLBCL patients is “remarkable,” Dr Sehn affirmed in an oral presentation (abstract 7507).
“Based on these encouraging results, polatuzumab vedotin has received breakthrough therapy designation and priority medicines designation by the FDA and EMA for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” she said.
Polatuzumab-BR study (NCT02257567)
The study by Dr Sehn and colleagues included a cohort of 80 DLBCL patients randomized to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 21-day cycles.
Investigators randomized another cohort of 80 FL patients to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 28-day cycles.
The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) assessed by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) at 6 to 8 weeks after the end of treatment.
DLBCL patients
A total of 40% of polatuzumab-BR-treated DLBCL patients achieved CR at the end of treatment, versus 15% of BR-treated patients (P=0.012).
That CR improvement translated into a significantly higher progression-free survival (PFS) (6.7 months for polatuzumab-BR vs 2.0 months for BR, P<0.0001) and overall survival (11.8 months versus 4.7 months, P=0.0008), according to Dr Sehn.
The FDG-PET CR rates were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm regardless of the number of prior lines of treatment for DLBCL, and regardless of relapsed versus refractory status, Dr. Sehn added.
FL patients
By contrast, in the FL cohort, the FDG-PET CR rate was high for both arms, at 69% for polatuzumab-BR and 63% for BR.
And there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (P=0.58) with “relatively short-term follow-up,” she said.
Adverse events
The most common grades 3 – 5 adverse events for both DLBCL and FL patients were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm than the BR arm and included cytopenias, febrile neutropenia, and infections.
Serious AEs were also higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm and included febrile neutropenia for both FL and DLBCL patients and infection for FL patients.
Five percent of FL patients and 18% of DLBCL had a grade 5 event.
Commentary
Whether polatuzumab vedotin will change treatment paradigms for DLBCL patients may be answered by the ongoing POLARIX study, according to Alison Moskowitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, NY.
The randomized phase 3 POLARIX study (abstract TPS7589) is comparing polatuzumab plus R-CHP to R-CHOP in patients with previously untreated DLBCL.
“Certainly, there are patients who do very well with R-CHOP chemotherapy alone, and so we need to learn whether this is necessary for all patients, or only the high-risk patients,” Dr Moskowitz said in a talk at ASCO commenting on the results of the polatuzumab-BR study.
Hoffman-LaRoche is the sponsor of the study.
CHICAGO—Polatuzumab vedotin, when added to bendamustine (B) and rituximab (R), significantly improved response and survival rates in a cohort of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to a phase 2 study.
By contrast, there were no such improvements in a cohort of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients, at least in short-term follow-up, investigator Laurie Helen Sehn, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency in Vancouver, Canada, said at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting.
However, the improvement in overall survival in DLBCL patients is “remarkable,” Dr Sehn affirmed in an oral presentation (abstract 7507).
“Based on these encouraging results, polatuzumab vedotin has received breakthrough therapy designation and priority medicines designation by the FDA and EMA for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” she said.
Polatuzumab-BR study (NCT02257567)
The study by Dr Sehn and colleagues included a cohort of 80 DLBCL patients randomized to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 21-day cycles.
Investigators randomized another cohort of 80 FL patients to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 28-day cycles.
The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) assessed by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) at 6 to 8 weeks after the end of treatment.
DLBCL patients
A total of 40% of polatuzumab-BR-treated DLBCL patients achieved CR at the end of treatment, versus 15% of BR-treated patients (P=0.012).
That CR improvement translated into a significantly higher progression-free survival (PFS) (6.7 months for polatuzumab-BR vs 2.0 months for BR, P<0.0001) and overall survival (11.8 months versus 4.7 months, P=0.0008), according to Dr Sehn.
The FDG-PET CR rates were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm regardless of the number of prior lines of treatment for DLBCL, and regardless of relapsed versus refractory status, Dr. Sehn added.
FL patients
By contrast, in the FL cohort, the FDG-PET CR rate was high for both arms, at 69% for polatuzumab-BR and 63% for BR.
And there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (P=0.58) with “relatively short-term follow-up,” she said.
Adverse events
The most common grades 3 – 5 adverse events for both DLBCL and FL patients were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm than the BR arm and included cytopenias, febrile neutropenia, and infections.
Serious AEs were also higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm and included febrile neutropenia for both FL and DLBCL patients and infection for FL patients.
Five percent of FL patients and 18% of DLBCL had a grade 5 event.
Commentary
Whether polatuzumab vedotin will change treatment paradigms for DLBCL patients may be answered by the ongoing POLARIX study, according to Alison Moskowitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, NY.
The randomized phase 3 POLARIX study (abstract TPS7589) is comparing polatuzumab plus R-CHP to R-CHOP in patients with previously untreated DLBCL.
“Certainly, there are patients who do very well with R-CHOP chemotherapy alone, and so we need to learn whether this is necessary for all patients, or only the high-risk patients,” Dr Moskowitz said in a talk at ASCO commenting on the results of the polatuzumab-BR study.
Hoffman-LaRoche is the sponsor of the study.
CHICAGO—Polatuzumab vedotin, when added to bendamustine (B) and rituximab (R), significantly improved response and survival rates in a cohort of patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to a phase 2 study.
By contrast, there were no such improvements in a cohort of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients, at least in short-term follow-up, investigator Laurie Helen Sehn, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency in Vancouver, Canada, said at the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting.
However, the improvement in overall survival in DLBCL patients is “remarkable,” Dr Sehn affirmed in an oral presentation (abstract 7507).
“Based on these encouraging results, polatuzumab vedotin has received breakthrough therapy designation and priority medicines designation by the FDA and EMA for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” she said.
Polatuzumab-BR study (NCT02257567)
The study by Dr Sehn and colleagues included a cohort of 80 DLBCL patients randomized to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 21-day cycles.
Investigators randomized another cohort of 80 FL patients to BR or polatuzumab-BR for 6 planned 28-day cycles.
The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) assessed by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) at 6 to 8 weeks after the end of treatment.
DLBCL patients
A total of 40% of polatuzumab-BR-treated DLBCL patients achieved CR at the end of treatment, versus 15% of BR-treated patients (P=0.012).
That CR improvement translated into a significantly higher progression-free survival (PFS) (6.7 months for polatuzumab-BR vs 2.0 months for BR, P<0.0001) and overall survival (11.8 months versus 4.7 months, P=0.0008), according to Dr Sehn.
The FDG-PET CR rates were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm regardless of the number of prior lines of treatment for DLBCL, and regardless of relapsed versus refractory status, Dr. Sehn added.
FL patients
By contrast, in the FL cohort, the FDG-PET CR rate was high for both arms, at 69% for polatuzumab-BR and 63% for BR.
And there was no significant difference in progression-free survival (P=0.58) with “relatively short-term follow-up,” she said.
Adverse events
The most common grades 3 – 5 adverse events for both DLBCL and FL patients were higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm than the BR arm and included cytopenias, febrile neutropenia, and infections.
Serious AEs were also higher in the polatuzumab-BR arm and included febrile neutropenia for both FL and DLBCL patients and infection for FL patients.
Five percent of FL patients and 18% of DLBCL had a grade 5 event.
Commentary
Whether polatuzumab vedotin will change treatment paradigms for DLBCL patients may be answered by the ongoing POLARIX study, according to Alison Moskowitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, NY.
The randomized phase 3 POLARIX study (abstract TPS7589) is comparing polatuzumab plus R-CHP to R-CHOP in patients with previously untreated DLBCL.
“Certainly, there are patients who do very well with R-CHOP chemotherapy alone, and so we need to learn whether this is necessary for all patients, or only the high-risk patients,” Dr Moskowitz said in a talk at ASCO commenting on the results of the polatuzumab-BR study.
Hoffman-LaRoche is the sponsor of the study.
Chemo-free regimen appears viable in previously untreated FL
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2) had comparable efficacy versus standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma, according to results from a phase 3 trial.
RELEVANCE is the first randomized, phase 3 trial to examine a chemotherapy-free regimen in this setting.
Response and progression-free survival (PFS) results were similar for patients who received R2 followed by rituximab maintenance and patients assigned to chemotherapy plus rituximab and rituximab maintenance, in study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, which is a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with follicular lymphoma that require treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
But since the study was designed as a superiority trial, rather than a noninferiority trial, and it failed to meet its primary endpoint of superior complete remission (CR) or CR unconfirmed (CRu) at 120 weeks, said Bruce D. Cheson, MD, head of hematology at Georgetown University, Washington.
R2 had a similar PFS overall and in all major patient subgroups, similar overall survival, less nonhematologic toxicity aside from rash, less neutropenia, and fewer infections despite increased use of growth factors in the chemoimmunotherapy arm, Dr. Cheson said in a presentation commenting on the results. “Therefore, I agree with Dr. Fowler’s conclusion that R2 can be considered as an option for the front-line therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma,” Dr. Cheson said.
The RELEVANCE study included 1,030 patients (median age, 59 years) with previously untreated, advanced follicular lymphoma requiring treatment. They were randomized 1:1 to either lenalidomide plus rituximab followed by rituximab maintenance, or R-chemotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance.
For patients randomly assigned to R-chemotherapy, physicians could choose among three standard regimens: rituximab plus bendamustine (R-B), rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP), or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CVP).
There was no statistical difference between treatment approaches in CR/CRu at 120 weeks, which was 48% in the R2 arm and 53% in the R-chemotherapy arm (P = 0.13). Best CR/CRu also was not statistically different between arms (59% and 67%, respectively), as was best overall response rate (84% and 89%). The 3-year duration of response was 77% in the R2 arm and 74% for R-chemotherapy.
With 37.9 months median follow-up, progression-free survival was “nearly identical” between the two groups, Dr. Fowler said, at 77% for R2 and 78% for R-chemotherapy (P = 0.48). The 3-year overall survival was 94% in both the R2 and R-chemotherapy arms, though survival data are still immature, Dr. Fowler noted.
Grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common in the R-chemotherapy arm, resulting in higher rates of febrile neutropenia, according to Dr. Fowler, who also noted that rash and cutaneous reactions were more common with R2. About 70% of patients in each arm were able to tolerate treatment, and reasons for discontinuation were “fairly similar” between arms, Dr. Fowler added.
Second primary malignancies occurred in 7% of patients in the R2 arm and 10% of the R-chemotherapy arm.
The study was sponsored was Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. Dr. Fowler reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.
SOURCE: Fowler NH et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract 7500.
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2) had comparable efficacy versus standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma, according to results from a phase 3 trial.
RELEVANCE is the first randomized, phase 3 trial to examine a chemotherapy-free regimen in this setting.
Response and progression-free survival (PFS) results were similar for patients who received R2 followed by rituximab maintenance and patients assigned to chemotherapy plus rituximab and rituximab maintenance, in study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, which is a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with follicular lymphoma that require treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
But since the study was designed as a superiority trial, rather than a noninferiority trial, and it failed to meet its primary endpoint of superior complete remission (CR) or CR unconfirmed (CRu) at 120 weeks, said Bruce D. Cheson, MD, head of hematology at Georgetown University, Washington.
R2 had a similar PFS overall and in all major patient subgroups, similar overall survival, less nonhematologic toxicity aside from rash, less neutropenia, and fewer infections despite increased use of growth factors in the chemoimmunotherapy arm, Dr. Cheson said in a presentation commenting on the results. “Therefore, I agree with Dr. Fowler’s conclusion that R2 can be considered as an option for the front-line therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma,” Dr. Cheson said.
The RELEVANCE study included 1,030 patients (median age, 59 years) with previously untreated, advanced follicular lymphoma requiring treatment. They were randomized 1:1 to either lenalidomide plus rituximab followed by rituximab maintenance, or R-chemotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance.
For patients randomly assigned to R-chemotherapy, physicians could choose among three standard regimens: rituximab plus bendamustine (R-B), rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP), or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CVP).
There was no statistical difference between treatment approaches in CR/CRu at 120 weeks, which was 48% in the R2 arm and 53% in the R-chemotherapy arm (P = 0.13). Best CR/CRu also was not statistically different between arms (59% and 67%, respectively), as was best overall response rate (84% and 89%). The 3-year duration of response was 77% in the R2 arm and 74% for R-chemotherapy.
With 37.9 months median follow-up, progression-free survival was “nearly identical” between the two groups, Dr. Fowler said, at 77% for R2 and 78% for R-chemotherapy (P = 0.48). The 3-year overall survival was 94% in both the R2 and R-chemotherapy arms, though survival data are still immature, Dr. Fowler noted.
Grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common in the R-chemotherapy arm, resulting in higher rates of febrile neutropenia, according to Dr. Fowler, who also noted that rash and cutaneous reactions were more common with R2. About 70% of patients in each arm were able to tolerate treatment, and reasons for discontinuation were “fairly similar” between arms, Dr. Fowler added.
Second primary malignancies occurred in 7% of patients in the R2 arm and 10% of the R-chemotherapy arm.
The study was sponsored was Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. Dr. Fowler reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.
SOURCE: Fowler NH et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract 7500.
CHICAGO – Lenalidomide plus rituximab (R2) had comparable efficacy versus standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma, according to results from a phase 3 trial.
RELEVANCE is the first randomized, phase 3 trial to examine a chemotherapy-free regimen in this setting.
Response and progression-free survival (PFS) results were similar for patients who received R2 followed by rituximab maintenance and patients assigned to chemotherapy plus rituximab and rituximab maintenance, in study results presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“These results show that lenalidomide plus rituximab, which is a novel immunomodulatory approach, is a potential first-line option for patients with follicular lymphoma that require treatment,” said investigator Nathan H. Fowler, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.
But since the study was designed as a superiority trial, rather than a noninferiority trial, and it failed to meet its primary endpoint of superior complete remission (CR) or CR unconfirmed (CRu) at 120 weeks, said Bruce D. Cheson, MD, head of hematology at Georgetown University, Washington.
R2 had a similar PFS overall and in all major patient subgroups, similar overall survival, less nonhematologic toxicity aside from rash, less neutropenia, and fewer infections despite increased use of growth factors in the chemoimmunotherapy arm, Dr. Cheson said in a presentation commenting on the results. “Therefore, I agree with Dr. Fowler’s conclusion that R2 can be considered as an option for the front-line therapy of patients with follicular lymphoma,” Dr. Cheson said.
The RELEVANCE study included 1,030 patients (median age, 59 years) with previously untreated, advanced follicular lymphoma requiring treatment. They were randomized 1:1 to either lenalidomide plus rituximab followed by rituximab maintenance, or R-chemotherapy followed by rituximab maintenance.
For patients randomly assigned to R-chemotherapy, physicians could choose among three standard regimens: rituximab plus bendamustine (R-B), rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP), or rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CVP).
There was no statistical difference between treatment approaches in CR/CRu at 120 weeks, which was 48% in the R2 arm and 53% in the R-chemotherapy arm (P = 0.13). Best CR/CRu also was not statistically different between arms (59% and 67%, respectively), as was best overall response rate (84% and 89%). The 3-year duration of response was 77% in the R2 arm and 74% for R-chemotherapy.
With 37.9 months median follow-up, progression-free survival was “nearly identical” between the two groups, Dr. Fowler said, at 77% for R2 and 78% for R-chemotherapy (P = 0.48). The 3-year overall survival was 94% in both the R2 and R-chemotherapy arms, though survival data are still immature, Dr. Fowler noted.
Grade 3/4 neutropenia was more common in the R-chemotherapy arm, resulting in higher rates of febrile neutropenia, according to Dr. Fowler, who also noted that rash and cutaneous reactions were more common with R2. About 70% of patients in each arm were able to tolerate treatment, and reasons for discontinuation were “fairly similar” between arms, Dr. Fowler added.
Second primary malignancies occurred in 7% of patients in the R2 arm and 10% of the R-chemotherapy arm.
The study was sponsored was Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. Dr. Fowler reported disclosures related to Abbvie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.
SOURCE: Fowler NH et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract 7500.
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2018
Key clinical point: in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma.
Major finding: With 37.9 months’ median follow-up, progression-free survival was “nearly identical” between the two groups, at 77% for R2 and 78% for rituximab chemotherapy (P = 0.48).
Study details: RELEVANCE, a phase 3, randomized clinical trial including 1,030 patients with previously untreated, advanced follicular lymphoma requiring treatment.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored was Celgene and the Lymphoma Academic Research Organisation. Dr. Fowler reported disclosures related to AbbVie, Celgene, Janssen, Merck, and Roche.
Source: Fowler NH et al. ASCO 2018, Abstract 7500.
Novel antibody shifts ‘eat me/don’t eat me’ balance in refractory NHL
CHICAGO – A first-in-class antibody targeting the macrophage checkpoint CD47 is a promising novel immunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, according to Ranjana H. Advani, MD, of Stanford (Calif.) Cancer Institute.
Treatment with Hu5F9-G4 (5F9), an antibody designed to overcome the “don’t eat me” signal associated with CD47, produced “encouraging” antitumor activity in a phase 1b study of 22 patients, Dr. Advani said in an oral abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“5F9 was well tolerated in combination with rituximab, with no maximum tolerated dose achieved,” said Dr. Advani, noting that there were complete remissions in 43% of the refractory follicular lymphoma patients and 33% of refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients in the phase 1b/2 study.
The antibody has an on-target anemia effect that occurs upon administration, but that was mitigated considerably by a priming and maintenance dosing approach, she added.
The study has demonstrated “excellent” response rates in a highly refractory patient population, said Caron A. Jacobson, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston. “Targeting CD47 ... really helps to shift the balance from ‘don’t eat me’ to ‘eat me,’ ” Dr. Jacobson said at the meeting.
“Importantly, we saw very little toxicity in the study, with very few grade 4 adverse events and no immune-related adverse events,” she added.
Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2, with the most common being the expected on-target anemia associated with 5F9. Using an initial priming dose of 5F9 results in a “temporary and mild decline” in hemoglobin due to clearance of aged red blood cells, Dr. Advani said.
The objective response rate in the study was 50%, with efficacy observed in rituximab-refractory patients, Dr. Advani said. With a median follow-up of greater than 6 months, just 1 of 11 responders had progressed. The median duration of response was not reached, with the longest complete remission lasting more than 14 months.
5F9 is able to selectively eliminate cancer cells through blockade of CD47, while rituximab enhances 5F9’s activity via antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis, according to Dr. Advani.
“CD47 blockade takes the foot off the brakes, while rituximab puts the foot on the accelerator, leading to maximal tumor phagocytosis,” she said.
The Food and Drug Administration recently granted 5F9 a fast track designation for both diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Phase 2 investigations of 5F9 in these lymphomas are ongoing, Dr. Advani said.
The trial is sponsored by Forty Seven. Dr. Advani reported research funding from Forty Seven, which is developing 5F9, as well as disclosures related to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cell Medica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics, among others.
SOURCE: Advani RH et al. ASCO 2018, abstract 7504.
CHICAGO – A first-in-class antibody targeting the macrophage checkpoint CD47 is a promising novel immunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, according to Ranjana H. Advani, MD, of Stanford (Calif.) Cancer Institute.
Treatment with Hu5F9-G4 (5F9), an antibody designed to overcome the “don’t eat me” signal associated with CD47, produced “encouraging” antitumor activity in a phase 1b study of 22 patients, Dr. Advani said in an oral abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“5F9 was well tolerated in combination with rituximab, with no maximum tolerated dose achieved,” said Dr. Advani, noting that there were complete remissions in 43% of the refractory follicular lymphoma patients and 33% of refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients in the phase 1b/2 study.
The antibody has an on-target anemia effect that occurs upon administration, but that was mitigated considerably by a priming and maintenance dosing approach, she added.
The study has demonstrated “excellent” response rates in a highly refractory patient population, said Caron A. Jacobson, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston. “Targeting CD47 ... really helps to shift the balance from ‘don’t eat me’ to ‘eat me,’ ” Dr. Jacobson said at the meeting.
“Importantly, we saw very little toxicity in the study, with very few grade 4 adverse events and no immune-related adverse events,” she added.
Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2, with the most common being the expected on-target anemia associated with 5F9. Using an initial priming dose of 5F9 results in a “temporary and mild decline” in hemoglobin due to clearance of aged red blood cells, Dr. Advani said.
The objective response rate in the study was 50%, with efficacy observed in rituximab-refractory patients, Dr. Advani said. With a median follow-up of greater than 6 months, just 1 of 11 responders had progressed. The median duration of response was not reached, with the longest complete remission lasting more than 14 months.
5F9 is able to selectively eliminate cancer cells through blockade of CD47, while rituximab enhances 5F9’s activity via antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis, according to Dr. Advani.
“CD47 blockade takes the foot off the brakes, while rituximab puts the foot on the accelerator, leading to maximal tumor phagocytosis,” she said.
The Food and Drug Administration recently granted 5F9 a fast track designation for both diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Phase 2 investigations of 5F9 in these lymphomas are ongoing, Dr. Advani said.
The trial is sponsored by Forty Seven. Dr. Advani reported research funding from Forty Seven, which is developing 5F9, as well as disclosures related to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cell Medica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics, among others.
SOURCE: Advani RH et al. ASCO 2018, abstract 7504.
CHICAGO – A first-in-class antibody targeting the macrophage checkpoint CD47 is a promising novel immunotherapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma, according to Ranjana H. Advani, MD, of Stanford (Calif.) Cancer Institute.
Treatment with Hu5F9-G4 (5F9), an antibody designed to overcome the “don’t eat me” signal associated with CD47, produced “encouraging” antitumor activity in a phase 1b study of 22 patients, Dr. Advani said in an oral abstract presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
“5F9 was well tolerated in combination with rituximab, with no maximum tolerated dose achieved,” said Dr. Advani, noting that there were complete remissions in 43% of the refractory follicular lymphoma patients and 33% of refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients in the phase 1b/2 study.
The antibody has an on-target anemia effect that occurs upon administration, but that was mitigated considerably by a priming and maintenance dosing approach, she added.
The study has demonstrated “excellent” response rates in a highly refractory patient population, said Caron A. Jacobson, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Harvard Medical School in Boston. “Targeting CD47 ... really helps to shift the balance from ‘don’t eat me’ to ‘eat me,’ ” Dr. Jacobson said at the meeting.
“Importantly, we saw very little toxicity in the study, with very few grade 4 adverse events and no immune-related adverse events,” she added.
Most adverse events were grade 1 or 2, with the most common being the expected on-target anemia associated with 5F9. Using an initial priming dose of 5F9 results in a “temporary and mild decline” in hemoglobin due to clearance of aged red blood cells, Dr. Advani said.
The objective response rate in the study was 50%, with efficacy observed in rituximab-refractory patients, Dr. Advani said. With a median follow-up of greater than 6 months, just 1 of 11 responders had progressed. The median duration of response was not reached, with the longest complete remission lasting more than 14 months.
5F9 is able to selectively eliminate cancer cells through blockade of CD47, while rituximab enhances 5F9’s activity via antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis, according to Dr. Advani.
“CD47 blockade takes the foot off the brakes, while rituximab puts the foot on the accelerator, leading to maximal tumor phagocytosis,” she said.
The Food and Drug Administration recently granted 5F9 a fast track designation for both diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and follicular lymphoma. Phase 2 investigations of 5F9 in these lymphomas are ongoing, Dr. Advani said.
The trial is sponsored by Forty Seven. Dr. Advani reported research funding from Forty Seven, which is developing 5F9, as well as disclosures related to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cell Medica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics, among others.
SOURCE: Advani RH et al. ASCO 2018, abstract 7504.
REPORTING FROM ASCO 2018
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Complete responses were seen in 43% of follicular lymphoma (FL) patients and 33% of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients.
Study details: Initial reported results from a phase 1b/2 study of 7 patients with FL and 15 patients with DLBCL.
Disclosures: Forty Seven sponsored the trial. Dr. Advani reported research funding from Forty Seven, which is developing 5F9, as well as disclosures related to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cell Medica, Genentech/Roche, Gilead Sciences, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics, among others.
Source: Advani RH et al. ASCO 2018, abstract 7504.