User login
Ibrutinib discontinuation harms survival in CLL
Discontinuing ibrutinib therapy because of disease progression was associated with worse survival, according to a real-world study of ibrutinib dosing in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients.
Researchers at the University of Rochester Wilmot Cancer Institute in New York, who performed the single-center study, also found that optimal dosing early on in treatment has a significant impact on disease progression.
“Treating physicians need to be aware of these outcomes when initiating therapy on patients with high-risk CLL or lymphoma, as well as those with significant comorbidities or immune deficiencies,” AnnaLynn M. Williams. MS, and her colleagues reported in Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia.
The researchers examined the impact of ibrutinib discontinuation and dose adherence on overall and progression-free survival in 170 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and CLL treated with the drug at the Wilmot Cancer Institute between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2016.
The study comprised 115 patients with CLL, 23 patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, 21 patients with mantle cell lymphoma, and 11 patients with other non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The median age of patients who started ibrutinib was 68 years, and the median treatment duration was 14.3 months. About a third of patients were taking ibrutinib as a first-line treatment.
Overall, 51 patients (30%) permanently discontinued ibrutinib during the study period, with more than half of the discontinuations stemming from adverse events or comorbidities. About 35% of the discontinuations were due to disease progression.
Median overall survival after discontinuation due to disease progression was 1.7 months. When patients discontinued for other reasons, median overall survival was not reached, compared with stopping for disease progression (P = .0008).
The researchers reported that among patients who discontinued for nonprogression reasons, 67% were alive after 1 year. Among CLL patients, 80% were alive after 1 year.
Among 20 patients who had a dose adherence of less than 80% in the first 8 weeks, the researchers found worse progression-free survival (P = .002) and overall survival (P = .021). Among CLL patients only, progression-free survival was significantly worse (P = .043) but overall survival was not (P = .816).
The study also included five patients who reduced their ibrutinib dose in the first 8 weeks – down to 280 mg in two patients, 140 mg in two patients, and 420 mg in one patient. Again, the researchers observed worse progression-free survival (P = .004) and overall survival (P = .014), compared with patients who maintained their dosing level.
Interrupting ibrutinib dosing had an impact on survival but not as much as discontinuation. Among 10 patients who interrupted therapy for more than a week and then restarted, progression-free survival was worse, compared with those who stayed on treatment continuously (P = .047), but overall survival was not significantly worse (P = .577).
“This would suggest that the ideal treatment strategy would be to recommend initiation of therapy at standard dosing and interruption as needed as directed in the [Food and Drug Administration] label,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and the Cadregari Endowment Fund. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Williams AM et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018 Oct 12. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.10.005.
Discontinuing ibrutinib therapy because of disease progression was associated with worse survival, according to a real-world study of ibrutinib dosing in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients.
Researchers at the University of Rochester Wilmot Cancer Institute in New York, who performed the single-center study, also found that optimal dosing early on in treatment has a significant impact on disease progression.
“Treating physicians need to be aware of these outcomes when initiating therapy on patients with high-risk CLL or lymphoma, as well as those with significant comorbidities or immune deficiencies,” AnnaLynn M. Williams. MS, and her colleagues reported in Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia.
The researchers examined the impact of ibrutinib discontinuation and dose adherence on overall and progression-free survival in 170 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and CLL treated with the drug at the Wilmot Cancer Institute between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2016.
The study comprised 115 patients with CLL, 23 patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, 21 patients with mantle cell lymphoma, and 11 patients with other non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The median age of patients who started ibrutinib was 68 years, and the median treatment duration was 14.3 months. About a third of patients were taking ibrutinib as a first-line treatment.
Overall, 51 patients (30%) permanently discontinued ibrutinib during the study period, with more than half of the discontinuations stemming from adverse events or comorbidities. About 35% of the discontinuations were due to disease progression.
Median overall survival after discontinuation due to disease progression was 1.7 months. When patients discontinued for other reasons, median overall survival was not reached, compared with stopping for disease progression (P = .0008).
The researchers reported that among patients who discontinued for nonprogression reasons, 67% were alive after 1 year. Among CLL patients, 80% were alive after 1 year.
Among 20 patients who had a dose adherence of less than 80% in the first 8 weeks, the researchers found worse progression-free survival (P = .002) and overall survival (P = .021). Among CLL patients only, progression-free survival was significantly worse (P = .043) but overall survival was not (P = .816).
The study also included five patients who reduced their ibrutinib dose in the first 8 weeks – down to 280 mg in two patients, 140 mg in two patients, and 420 mg in one patient. Again, the researchers observed worse progression-free survival (P = .004) and overall survival (P = .014), compared with patients who maintained their dosing level.
Interrupting ibrutinib dosing had an impact on survival but not as much as discontinuation. Among 10 patients who interrupted therapy for more than a week and then restarted, progression-free survival was worse, compared with those who stayed on treatment continuously (P = .047), but overall survival was not significantly worse (P = .577).
“This would suggest that the ideal treatment strategy would be to recommend initiation of therapy at standard dosing and interruption as needed as directed in the [Food and Drug Administration] label,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and the Cadregari Endowment Fund. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Williams AM et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018 Oct 12. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.10.005.
Discontinuing ibrutinib therapy because of disease progression was associated with worse survival, according to a real-world study of ibrutinib dosing in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients.
Researchers at the University of Rochester Wilmot Cancer Institute in New York, who performed the single-center study, also found that optimal dosing early on in treatment has a significant impact on disease progression.
“Treating physicians need to be aware of these outcomes when initiating therapy on patients with high-risk CLL or lymphoma, as well as those with significant comorbidities or immune deficiencies,” AnnaLynn M. Williams. MS, and her colleagues reported in Clinical Lymphoma, Myeloma and Leukemia.
The researchers examined the impact of ibrutinib discontinuation and dose adherence on overall and progression-free survival in 170 patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma and CLL treated with the drug at the Wilmot Cancer Institute between Jan. 1, 2014, and Dec. 1, 2016.
The study comprised 115 patients with CLL, 23 patients with Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, 21 patients with mantle cell lymphoma, and 11 patients with other non-Hodgkin lymphomas. The median age of patients who started ibrutinib was 68 years, and the median treatment duration was 14.3 months. About a third of patients were taking ibrutinib as a first-line treatment.
Overall, 51 patients (30%) permanently discontinued ibrutinib during the study period, with more than half of the discontinuations stemming from adverse events or comorbidities. About 35% of the discontinuations were due to disease progression.
Median overall survival after discontinuation due to disease progression was 1.7 months. When patients discontinued for other reasons, median overall survival was not reached, compared with stopping for disease progression (P = .0008).
The researchers reported that among patients who discontinued for nonprogression reasons, 67% were alive after 1 year. Among CLL patients, 80% were alive after 1 year.
Among 20 patients who had a dose adherence of less than 80% in the first 8 weeks, the researchers found worse progression-free survival (P = .002) and overall survival (P = .021). Among CLL patients only, progression-free survival was significantly worse (P = .043) but overall survival was not (P = .816).
The study also included five patients who reduced their ibrutinib dose in the first 8 weeks – down to 280 mg in two patients, 140 mg in two patients, and 420 mg in one patient. Again, the researchers observed worse progression-free survival (P = .004) and overall survival (P = .014), compared with patients who maintained their dosing level.
Interrupting ibrutinib dosing had an impact on survival but not as much as discontinuation. Among 10 patients who interrupted therapy for more than a week and then restarted, progression-free survival was worse, compared with those who stayed on treatment continuously (P = .047), but overall survival was not significantly worse (P = .577).
“This would suggest that the ideal treatment strategy would be to recommend initiation of therapy at standard dosing and interruption as needed as directed in the [Food and Drug Administration] label,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and the Cadregari Endowment Fund. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
SOURCE: Williams AM et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018 Oct 12. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.10.005.
FROM CLINICAL LYMPHOMA, MYELOMA AND LEUKEMIA
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Median overall survival after discontinuation of ibrutinib due to disease progression was 1.7 months.
Study details: A single-institution study of 170 patients with CLL or non-Hodgkin lymphoma who were taking ibrutinib.
Disclosures: The study was funded by the National Cancer Institute and the Cadregari Endowment Fund. The researchers reported having no conflicts of interest.
Source: Williams AM et al. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018 Oct 12. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2018.10.005.
Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab gets priority review in CLL/SLL
The Food and Drug Administration has granted priority review to an anti-CD20, chemotherapy-free combination – ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab – for the frontline treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).
The agency will review the combination in previously untreated adults.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica) is already approved as a single agent for adults with CLL/SLL for all lines of therapy and in combination with bendamustine and rituximab. Obinutuzumab (Gazyva) has been approved for patients with previously untreated CLL, in combination with chlorambucil.
The current application, which is sponsored by Janssen and Pharmacyclics, is based on results from the phase 3 iLLUMINATE trial. Preliminary results announced by Janssen and Pharmacyclics showed that ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab had statistically significant better progression-free survival, compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Complete results from the trial will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting, according to the sponsors.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted priority review to an anti-CD20, chemotherapy-free combination – ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab – for the frontline treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).
The agency will review the combination in previously untreated adults.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica) is already approved as a single agent for adults with CLL/SLL for all lines of therapy and in combination with bendamustine and rituximab. Obinutuzumab (Gazyva) has been approved for patients with previously untreated CLL, in combination with chlorambucil.
The current application, which is sponsored by Janssen and Pharmacyclics, is based on results from the phase 3 iLLUMINATE trial. Preliminary results announced by Janssen and Pharmacyclics showed that ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab had statistically significant better progression-free survival, compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Complete results from the trial will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting, according to the sponsors.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted priority review to an anti-CD20, chemotherapy-free combination – ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab – for the frontline treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL).
The agency will review the combination in previously untreated adults.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica) is already approved as a single agent for adults with CLL/SLL for all lines of therapy and in combination with bendamustine and rituximab. Obinutuzumab (Gazyva) has been approved for patients with previously untreated CLL, in combination with chlorambucil.
The current application, which is sponsored by Janssen and Pharmacyclics, is based on results from the phase 3 iLLUMINATE trial. Preliminary results announced by Janssen and Pharmacyclics showed that ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab had statistically significant better progression-free survival, compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab, as assessed by an independent review committee.
Complete results from the trial will be presented at an upcoming medical meeting, according to the sponsors.
Some mutation testing can be useful at CLL diagnosis
CHICAGO – A number of mutation tests – including immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IgVH), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and TP53 – provide useful prognostic information at the time of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) diagnosis, according to Paul M. Barr, MD.
“It’s understood that IgVH mutation status is certainly prognostic,” Dr. Barr, associate professor of hematology/oncology at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
The B-cell receptor of the CLL cells uses IgVH genes that may or may not have undergone somatic mutations, with unmutated being defined as 98% or more sequence homology to germline.
“This is indicative of stronger signaling through the B-cell receptor and, as we all know, predicts for an inferior prognosis,” he explained, citing a study that demonstrated superior survival rates with mutated IgVH genes (Blood. 1999;94[6]:1840-7).
“It’s also well understood and accepted that we should perform a FISH panel; we should look for interphase cytogenetics based on FISH in our patients,” Dr. Barr said. “Having said that, we, as medical oncologists, do not do a very good job of using this testing appropriately. Patterns of care studies have suggested that a significant number of patients don’t get FISH testing at diagnosis or before first-line therapy.”
In fact, a typical interphase FISH panel identifies cytogenetic lesions, including del(17p), del(11q), del(13q), and trisomy 12 in more than 80% of CLL cases, with del(13q) being the most common.
Another marker that can be assessed in CLL patients and has maintained prognostic value across multiple analyses is serum beta-2 microglobulin, Dr. Barr noted.
TP53 sequencing is valuable as well and has been associated with outcomes similar to those seen in patients with del(17p), he said, citing data from a study that found similarly poor outcomes with TP53 mutations or deletions and del(17p), even when minor subclones are identified using next-generation sequencing (Blood. 2014;123:2139-47).
“One of the primary reasons for this is that the two aberrations go together. Most often, if you have del(17p) you’re also going to find a TP53 mutation, but in about 30% of patients or so, only one allele is affected, so this is why it’s still important to test for TP53 mutations when you’re looking for a 17p deletion,” he said.
Numerous other recurrent mutations in CLL have been associated with poor overall survival and/or progression-free survival, including SF3B1, ATM, NOTCH1, POT1, BIRC3, and NFKBIE.
“The gut instinct is that maybe we should start testing for all of these mutations now, but I would caution everybody that we still need further validation before we can apply these to the majority of patients,” Dr. Barr said. “We still don’t know exactly what to do with all of these mutations – when and how often we should test for them, if the novel agents are truly better – so while, again, they can predict for inferior outcomes, I would say these are not yet standard of care to be tested in all patients.”
It is likely, though, that new prognostic systems will evolve as more is learned about how to use these molecular aberrations. Attempts are already being made to incorporate novel mutations into a prognostic system. Dr. Barr pointed to a report that looked at the integration of mutations and cytogenetic lesions to improve the accuracy of survival prediction in CLL (Blood. 2013;121:1403-12).
“But this still requires prospective testing, especially in patients getting the novel agents,” he said.
Conventional karyotyping also has potential, though a limited role in this setting, he said, noting that it can be reliably performed with stimulation of CLL cells.
“We also know additional aberrations are prognostic and that a complex karyotype predicts for a very poor outcome,” he said. The International Workshop on CLL (iwCLL) guidelines, which were recently updated for the first time in a decade, state that further validation is needed.
“I think it’s potentially useful in a very young patient you are considering taking to transplant, but again, I agree with the stance that this is not something that should be performed in every patient across the board,” he said.
The tests currently recommended by iwCLL before CLL treatment include IgVH mutation status; FISH for del(13q), del(11q), del(17p), and trisomy 12 in peripheral blood lymphocytes; and TP53.
“Some folks... don’t check a lot of these markers at diagnosis, but wait for patients to require therapy, and that’s a reasonable way to practice,” Dr. Barr said, noting, however, that he prefers knowing patients’ risk up front – especially for those patients he will see just once before they are “managed closer to home for the majority of their course.
“But if you [wait], then knowing what to repeat later is important,” he added. Namely, the FISH and TP53 tests are worth repeating as patients can acquire additional molecular aberrations over time.
Dr. Barr reported serving as a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics. He also reported receiving research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
CHICAGO – A number of mutation tests – including immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IgVH), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and TP53 – provide useful prognostic information at the time of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) diagnosis, according to Paul M. Barr, MD.
“It’s understood that IgVH mutation status is certainly prognostic,” Dr. Barr, associate professor of hematology/oncology at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
The B-cell receptor of the CLL cells uses IgVH genes that may or may not have undergone somatic mutations, with unmutated being defined as 98% or more sequence homology to germline.
“This is indicative of stronger signaling through the B-cell receptor and, as we all know, predicts for an inferior prognosis,” he explained, citing a study that demonstrated superior survival rates with mutated IgVH genes (Blood. 1999;94[6]:1840-7).
“It’s also well understood and accepted that we should perform a FISH panel; we should look for interphase cytogenetics based on FISH in our patients,” Dr. Barr said. “Having said that, we, as medical oncologists, do not do a very good job of using this testing appropriately. Patterns of care studies have suggested that a significant number of patients don’t get FISH testing at diagnosis or before first-line therapy.”
In fact, a typical interphase FISH panel identifies cytogenetic lesions, including del(17p), del(11q), del(13q), and trisomy 12 in more than 80% of CLL cases, with del(13q) being the most common.
Another marker that can be assessed in CLL patients and has maintained prognostic value across multiple analyses is serum beta-2 microglobulin, Dr. Barr noted.
TP53 sequencing is valuable as well and has been associated with outcomes similar to those seen in patients with del(17p), he said, citing data from a study that found similarly poor outcomes with TP53 mutations or deletions and del(17p), even when minor subclones are identified using next-generation sequencing (Blood. 2014;123:2139-47).
“One of the primary reasons for this is that the two aberrations go together. Most often, if you have del(17p) you’re also going to find a TP53 mutation, but in about 30% of patients or so, only one allele is affected, so this is why it’s still important to test for TP53 mutations when you’re looking for a 17p deletion,” he said.
Numerous other recurrent mutations in CLL have been associated with poor overall survival and/or progression-free survival, including SF3B1, ATM, NOTCH1, POT1, BIRC3, and NFKBIE.
“The gut instinct is that maybe we should start testing for all of these mutations now, but I would caution everybody that we still need further validation before we can apply these to the majority of patients,” Dr. Barr said. “We still don’t know exactly what to do with all of these mutations – when and how often we should test for them, if the novel agents are truly better – so while, again, they can predict for inferior outcomes, I would say these are not yet standard of care to be tested in all patients.”
It is likely, though, that new prognostic systems will evolve as more is learned about how to use these molecular aberrations. Attempts are already being made to incorporate novel mutations into a prognostic system. Dr. Barr pointed to a report that looked at the integration of mutations and cytogenetic lesions to improve the accuracy of survival prediction in CLL (Blood. 2013;121:1403-12).
“But this still requires prospective testing, especially in patients getting the novel agents,” he said.
Conventional karyotyping also has potential, though a limited role in this setting, he said, noting that it can be reliably performed with stimulation of CLL cells.
“We also know additional aberrations are prognostic and that a complex karyotype predicts for a very poor outcome,” he said. The International Workshop on CLL (iwCLL) guidelines, which were recently updated for the first time in a decade, state that further validation is needed.
“I think it’s potentially useful in a very young patient you are considering taking to transplant, but again, I agree with the stance that this is not something that should be performed in every patient across the board,” he said.
The tests currently recommended by iwCLL before CLL treatment include IgVH mutation status; FISH for del(13q), del(11q), del(17p), and trisomy 12 in peripheral blood lymphocytes; and TP53.
“Some folks... don’t check a lot of these markers at diagnosis, but wait for patients to require therapy, and that’s a reasonable way to practice,” Dr. Barr said, noting, however, that he prefers knowing patients’ risk up front – especially for those patients he will see just once before they are “managed closer to home for the majority of their course.
“But if you [wait], then knowing what to repeat later is important,” he added. Namely, the FISH and TP53 tests are worth repeating as patients can acquire additional molecular aberrations over time.
Dr. Barr reported serving as a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics. He also reported receiving research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
CHICAGO – A number of mutation tests – including immunoglobulin heavy chain gene (IgVH), fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), and TP53 – provide useful prognostic information at the time of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) diagnosis, according to Paul M. Barr, MD.
“It’s understood that IgVH mutation status is certainly prognostic,” Dr. Barr, associate professor of hematology/oncology at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
The B-cell receptor of the CLL cells uses IgVH genes that may or may not have undergone somatic mutations, with unmutated being defined as 98% or more sequence homology to germline.
“This is indicative of stronger signaling through the B-cell receptor and, as we all know, predicts for an inferior prognosis,” he explained, citing a study that demonstrated superior survival rates with mutated IgVH genes (Blood. 1999;94[6]:1840-7).
“It’s also well understood and accepted that we should perform a FISH panel; we should look for interphase cytogenetics based on FISH in our patients,” Dr. Barr said. “Having said that, we, as medical oncologists, do not do a very good job of using this testing appropriately. Patterns of care studies have suggested that a significant number of patients don’t get FISH testing at diagnosis or before first-line therapy.”
In fact, a typical interphase FISH panel identifies cytogenetic lesions, including del(17p), del(11q), del(13q), and trisomy 12 in more than 80% of CLL cases, with del(13q) being the most common.
Another marker that can be assessed in CLL patients and has maintained prognostic value across multiple analyses is serum beta-2 microglobulin, Dr. Barr noted.
TP53 sequencing is valuable as well and has been associated with outcomes similar to those seen in patients with del(17p), he said, citing data from a study that found similarly poor outcomes with TP53 mutations or deletions and del(17p), even when minor subclones are identified using next-generation sequencing (Blood. 2014;123:2139-47).
“One of the primary reasons for this is that the two aberrations go together. Most often, if you have del(17p) you’re also going to find a TP53 mutation, but in about 30% of patients or so, only one allele is affected, so this is why it’s still important to test for TP53 mutations when you’re looking for a 17p deletion,” he said.
Numerous other recurrent mutations in CLL have been associated with poor overall survival and/or progression-free survival, including SF3B1, ATM, NOTCH1, POT1, BIRC3, and NFKBIE.
“The gut instinct is that maybe we should start testing for all of these mutations now, but I would caution everybody that we still need further validation before we can apply these to the majority of patients,” Dr. Barr said. “We still don’t know exactly what to do with all of these mutations – when and how often we should test for them, if the novel agents are truly better – so while, again, they can predict for inferior outcomes, I would say these are not yet standard of care to be tested in all patients.”
It is likely, though, that new prognostic systems will evolve as more is learned about how to use these molecular aberrations. Attempts are already being made to incorporate novel mutations into a prognostic system. Dr. Barr pointed to a report that looked at the integration of mutations and cytogenetic lesions to improve the accuracy of survival prediction in CLL (Blood. 2013;121:1403-12).
“But this still requires prospective testing, especially in patients getting the novel agents,” he said.
Conventional karyotyping also has potential, though a limited role in this setting, he said, noting that it can be reliably performed with stimulation of CLL cells.
“We also know additional aberrations are prognostic and that a complex karyotype predicts for a very poor outcome,” he said. The International Workshop on CLL (iwCLL) guidelines, which were recently updated for the first time in a decade, state that further validation is needed.
“I think it’s potentially useful in a very young patient you are considering taking to transplant, but again, I agree with the stance that this is not something that should be performed in every patient across the board,” he said.
The tests currently recommended by iwCLL before CLL treatment include IgVH mutation status; FISH for del(13q), del(11q), del(17p), and trisomy 12 in peripheral blood lymphocytes; and TP53.
“Some folks... don’t check a lot of these markers at diagnosis, but wait for patients to require therapy, and that’s a reasonable way to practice,” Dr. Barr said, noting, however, that he prefers knowing patients’ risk up front – especially for those patients he will see just once before they are “managed closer to home for the majority of their course.
“But if you [wait], then knowing what to repeat later is important,” he added. Namely, the FISH and TP53 tests are worth repeating as patients can acquire additional molecular aberrations over time.
Dr. Barr reported serving as a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Infinity Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics. He also reported receiving research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM MHM 2018
Novel options for treating hairy cell leukemia
NEW YORK – Ibrutinib, and now moxetumomab pasudotox, are two novel therapies that can be tried in patients with previously treated hairy cell leukemia, although data and experience with them are so far limited in this rare disease, experts said during a panel discussion at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Hematologic Malignancies Annual Congress.
Since there are so few patients, data on the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in hairy cell leukemia is largely “anecdotal,” said Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
The anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody moxetumomab pasudotox – approved for hairy cell leukemia in September – isn’t yet on the formulary at Memorial Sloan Kettering, Dr. Zelenetz added in a panel discussion of treatment options for a patient previously treated with purine analogueues and vemurafenib.
Between the two agents, moxetumomab pasudotox has more robust data in this disease, said John N. Allan, MD, of Weill Cornell Medicine, New York.
“I think if you can get access to the drug, that’s probably the best answer,” Dr. Allan said in the case discussion.
Hairy cell leukemia is an indolent B-cell lymphoma that makes up just 2% of all lymphoid leukemias, according to NCCN guidelines.
It is a chronic disease that requires long-term management, according to Dr. Allan.
First-line treatment is usually a purine analogue, either cladribine or pentostatin, and multiple treatments are possible as long as responses of greater than 2 years are achieved, he told attendees at the NCCN conference.
For relapses more than 2 years after first-line treatment, patients can be retreated with the same purine analogue, with or without rituximab, or can be switched to the alternative purine analogue, he said.
Vemurafenib, the BRAF inhibitor, is “surprisingly” effective in 90% of classic hairy cell leukemia patients with the BRAF V600E mutation, Dr. Allan added, though only about 40% of patients achieve complete response.
In discussing therapy options for a hairy cell leukemia patient previously treated with purine analogues and vemurafenib, Dr. Allan noted that the data behind ibrutinib includes case reports and early clinical investigations.
Several phase 1 studies with small numbers of patients show response rates “in the 50% range,” he said.
“This is an option,” he said. “It’s in the guidelines, and it’s something to consider.”
Moxetumomab pasudotox was recently approved for intravenous use in adults with relapsed or refractory hairy cell leukemia who have had at least two previous systemic treatments, including a purine nucleoside analogue. The CD22-directed cytotoxin is the first of its kind for treating patients with hairy cell leukemia, according to the Food and Drug Administration.
In a single-arm, open-label clinical trial including 80 patients with hairy cell leukemia who had previous treatment in line with that indication, 75% had a partial or complete response, of whom 30% had a durable complete response (CR), defined as maintaining hematologic remission for at least 180 days following CR.
Following the FDA’s approval of moxetumomab pasudotox, the NCCN updated its hairy cell leukemia clinical practice guidelines to include the drug as a category 2A recommendation for relapsed/refractory treatment. Other category 2A options in that setting include ibrutinib, vemurafenib with or without rituximab, or a clinical trial.
Along with that, NCCN guideline authors added a full page on special considerations for use of moxetumomab pasudotox. That includes advice on monitoring for capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome, along with guidance on capillary leak syndrome grading and management by grade.
Dr. Zelenetz reported financial disclosures related to Adaptive Biotechnology, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Hoffman La Roche, MEI Pharma, MorphoSys AG, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Roche, and Verastem Oncology. Dr. Allan reported disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis, and Verastem Oncology.
NEW YORK – Ibrutinib, and now moxetumomab pasudotox, are two novel therapies that can be tried in patients with previously treated hairy cell leukemia, although data and experience with them are so far limited in this rare disease, experts said during a panel discussion at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Hematologic Malignancies Annual Congress.
Since there are so few patients, data on the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in hairy cell leukemia is largely “anecdotal,” said Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
The anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody moxetumomab pasudotox – approved for hairy cell leukemia in September – isn’t yet on the formulary at Memorial Sloan Kettering, Dr. Zelenetz added in a panel discussion of treatment options for a patient previously treated with purine analogueues and vemurafenib.
Between the two agents, moxetumomab pasudotox has more robust data in this disease, said John N. Allan, MD, of Weill Cornell Medicine, New York.
“I think if you can get access to the drug, that’s probably the best answer,” Dr. Allan said in the case discussion.
Hairy cell leukemia is an indolent B-cell lymphoma that makes up just 2% of all lymphoid leukemias, according to NCCN guidelines.
It is a chronic disease that requires long-term management, according to Dr. Allan.
First-line treatment is usually a purine analogue, either cladribine or pentostatin, and multiple treatments are possible as long as responses of greater than 2 years are achieved, he told attendees at the NCCN conference.
For relapses more than 2 years after first-line treatment, patients can be retreated with the same purine analogue, with or without rituximab, or can be switched to the alternative purine analogue, he said.
Vemurafenib, the BRAF inhibitor, is “surprisingly” effective in 90% of classic hairy cell leukemia patients with the BRAF V600E mutation, Dr. Allan added, though only about 40% of patients achieve complete response.
In discussing therapy options for a hairy cell leukemia patient previously treated with purine analogues and vemurafenib, Dr. Allan noted that the data behind ibrutinib includes case reports and early clinical investigations.
Several phase 1 studies with small numbers of patients show response rates “in the 50% range,” he said.
“This is an option,” he said. “It’s in the guidelines, and it’s something to consider.”
Moxetumomab pasudotox was recently approved for intravenous use in adults with relapsed or refractory hairy cell leukemia who have had at least two previous systemic treatments, including a purine nucleoside analogue. The CD22-directed cytotoxin is the first of its kind for treating patients with hairy cell leukemia, according to the Food and Drug Administration.
In a single-arm, open-label clinical trial including 80 patients with hairy cell leukemia who had previous treatment in line with that indication, 75% had a partial or complete response, of whom 30% had a durable complete response (CR), defined as maintaining hematologic remission for at least 180 days following CR.
Following the FDA’s approval of moxetumomab pasudotox, the NCCN updated its hairy cell leukemia clinical practice guidelines to include the drug as a category 2A recommendation for relapsed/refractory treatment. Other category 2A options in that setting include ibrutinib, vemurafenib with or without rituximab, or a clinical trial.
Along with that, NCCN guideline authors added a full page on special considerations for use of moxetumomab pasudotox. That includes advice on monitoring for capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome, along with guidance on capillary leak syndrome grading and management by grade.
Dr. Zelenetz reported financial disclosures related to Adaptive Biotechnology, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Hoffman La Roche, MEI Pharma, MorphoSys AG, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Roche, and Verastem Oncology. Dr. Allan reported disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis, and Verastem Oncology.
NEW YORK – Ibrutinib, and now moxetumomab pasudotox, are two novel therapies that can be tried in patients with previously treated hairy cell leukemia, although data and experience with them are so far limited in this rare disease, experts said during a panel discussion at the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Hematologic Malignancies Annual Congress.
Since there are so few patients, data on the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib in hairy cell leukemia is largely “anecdotal,” said Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.
The anti-CD22 monoclonal antibody moxetumomab pasudotox – approved for hairy cell leukemia in September – isn’t yet on the formulary at Memorial Sloan Kettering, Dr. Zelenetz added in a panel discussion of treatment options for a patient previously treated with purine analogueues and vemurafenib.
Between the two agents, moxetumomab pasudotox has more robust data in this disease, said John N. Allan, MD, of Weill Cornell Medicine, New York.
“I think if you can get access to the drug, that’s probably the best answer,” Dr. Allan said in the case discussion.
Hairy cell leukemia is an indolent B-cell lymphoma that makes up just 2% of all lymphoid leukemias, according to NCCN guidelines.
It is a chronic disease that requires long-term management, according to Dr. Allan.
First-line treatment is usually a purine analogue, either cladribine or pentostatin, and multiple treatments are possible as long as responses of greater than 2 years are achieved, he told attendees at the NCCN conference.
For relapses more than 2 years after first-line treatment, patients can be retreated with the same purine analogue, with or without rituximab, or can be switched to the alternative purine analogue, he said.
Vemurafenib, the BRAF inhibitor, is “surprisingly” effective in 90% of classic hairy cell leukemia patients with the BRAF V600E mutation, Dr. Allan added, though only about 40% of patients achieve complete response.
In discussing therapy options for a hairy cell leukemia patient previously treated with purine analogues and vemurafenib, Dr. Allan noted that the data behind ibrutinib includes case reports and early clinical investigations.
Several phase 1 studies with small numbers of patients show response rates “in the 50% range,” he said.
“This is an option,” he said. “It’s in the guidelines, and it’s something to consider.”
Moxetumomab pasudotox was recently approved for intravenous use in adults with relapsed or refractory hairy cell leukemia who have had at least two previous systemic treatments, including a purine nucleoside analogue. The CD22-directed cytotoxin is the first of its kind for treating patients with hairy cell leukemia, according to the Food and Drug Administration.
In a single-arm, open-label clinical trial including 80 patients with hairy cell leukemia who had previous treatment in line with that indication, 75% had a partial or complete response, of whom 30% had a durable complete response (CR), defined as maintaining hematologic remission for at least 180 days following CR.
Following the FDA’s approval of moxetumomab pasudotox, the NCCN updated its hairy cell leukemia clinical practice guidelines to include the drug as a category 2A recommendation for relapsed/refractory treatment. Other category 2A options in that setting include ibrutinib, vemurafenib with or without rituximab, or a clinical trial.
Along with that, NCCN guideline authors added a full page on special considerations for use of moxetumomab pasudotox. That includes advice on monitoring for capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome, along with guidance on capillary leak syndrome grading and management by grade.
Dr. Zelenetz reported financial disclosures related to Adaptive Biotechnology, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Genentech, Gilead, Hoffman La Roche, MEI Pharma, MorphoSys AG, Novartis, Pfizer, Pharmacyclics, Roche, and Verastem Oncology. Dr. Allan reported disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis, and Verastem Oncology.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM NCCN HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCIES
Real-world clues for optimal sequencing of CLL novel agents
NEW YORK – Although optimal sequencing strategies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia are still unclear, real-world data suggest an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax is the best approach for a patient who has received ibrutinib or idelalisib, according to John N. Allan, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
“I think for the most part, there’s enough evidence,” Dr. Allan said at the annual congress on Hematologic Malignancies held by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“If you had one to two lines of therapy, it still favors the novel agents rather than the chemotherapy arms in all these studies,” said Dr. Allan, referring to some of the pivotal trials supporting approval of novel agents in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). “The earlier we get to these drugs, I believe, the better.”
While venetoclax after ibrutinib is supported by multiple studies, “vice versa is unknown, but there’s seemingly no reason to think it wouldn’t work – different mechanisms of actions, different pathways,” Dr. Allan said.
What is clear, he added, is that retreating those patients with chemoimmunotherapy is not optimal.
In support of that, he cited a multicenter retrospective analysis, which is believed to be the largest real-world experience to date of novel agents in CLL looking at post–kinase inhibitor salvage strategies (Ann Oncol. 2017 May 1;28[5]:1050-6).
Using an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax resulted in superior progression-free survival versus chemoimmunotherapy at the time of initial kinase inhibitor failure in that study, which looked at treatment strategies and outcomes for 683 patients.
Ibrutinib appeared to be superior to idelalisib as a first kinase inhibitor, with significantly better progression-free survival in both frontline and relapsed/refractory settings, and in both complex karyotype and del17p patients, according to the report. Additionally, the response rate to venetoclax seemed superior to that of idelalisib in patients who discontinued ibrutinib because of progression or toxicity.
All of that supports the need for trials to test various sequencing strategies and establish clear treatment algorithms, according to Dr. Allan. “Optimal sequencing is unknown, but real-world data gives us some idea.”
For relapsed/refractory patients, ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax all have lengthened responses, improved survival, and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration, he added, noting that the toxicity profiles vary and must be understood when dosing and prescribing these agents.
More novel treatments are on the way. On Sept. 24, just days after Dr. Allan’s NCCN presentation, the FDA granted approval to duvelisib for adults with relapsed or refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma following two or more previous lines of therapy.
Dr. Allan reported financial disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, and Verastem Oncology.
NEW YORK – Although optimal sequencing strategies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia are still unclear, real-world data suggest an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax is the best approach for a patient who has received ibrutinib or idelalisib, according to John N. Allan, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
“I think for the most part, there’s enough evidence,” Dr. Allan said at the annual congress on Hematologic Malignancies held by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“If you had one to two lines of therapy, it still favors the novel agents rather than the chemotherapy arms in all these studies,” said Dr. Allan, referring to some of the pivotal trials supporting approval of novel agents in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). “The earlier we get to these drugs, I believe, the better.”
While venetoclax after ibrutinib is supported by multiple studies, “vice versa is unknown, but there’s seemingly no reason to think it wouldn’t work – different mechanisms of actions, different pathways,” Dr. Allan said.
What is clear, he added, is that retreating those patients with chemoimmunotherapy is not optimal.
In support of that, he cited a multicenter retrospective analysis, which is believed to be the largest real-world experience to date of novel agents in CLL looking at post–kinase inhibitor salvage strategies (Ann Oncol. 2017 May 1;28[5]:1050-6).
Using an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax resulted in superior progression-free survival versus chemoimmunotherapy at the time of initial kinase inhibitor failure in that study, which looked at treatment strategies and outcomes for 683 patients.
Ibrutinib appeared to be superior to idelalisib as a first kinase inhibitor, with significantly better progression-free survival in both frontline and relapsed/refractory settings, and in both complex karyotype and del17p patients, according to the report. Additionally, the response rate to venetoclax seemed superior to that of idelalisib in patients who discontinued ibrutinib because of progression or toxicity.
All of that supports the need for trials to test various sequencing strategies and establish clear treatment algorithms, according to Dr. Allan. “Optimal sequencing is unknown, but real-world data gives us some idea.”
For relapsed/refractory patients, ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax all have lengthened responses, improved survival, and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration, he added, noting that the toxicity profiles vary and must be understood when dosing and prescribing these agents.
More novel treatments are on the way. On Sept. 24, just days after Dr. Allan’s NCCN presentation, the FDA granted approval to duvelisib for adults with relapsed or refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma following two or more previous lines of therapy.
Dr. Allan reported financial disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, and Verastem Oncology.
NEW YORK – Although optimal sequencing strategies in chronic lymphocytic leukemia are still unclear, real-world data suggest an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax is the best approach for a patient who has received ibrutinib or idelalisib, according to John N. Allan, MD, of Cornell University, New York.
“I think for the most part, there’s enough evidence,” Dr. Allan said at the annual congress on Hematologic Malignancies held by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“If you had one to two lines of therapy, it still favors the novel agents rather than the chemotherapy arms in all these studies,” said Dr. Allan, referring to some of the pivotal trials supporting approval of novel agents in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). “The earlier we get to these drugs, I believe, the better.”
While venetoclax after ibrutinib is supported by multiple studies, “vice versa is unknown, but there’s seemingly no reason to think it wouldn’t work – different mechanisms of actions, different pathways,” Dr. Allan said.
What is clear, he added, is that retreating those patients with chemoimmunotherapy is not optimal.
In support of that, he cited a multicenter retrospective analysis, which is believed to be the largest real-world experience to date of novel agents in CLL looking at post–kinase inhibitor salvage strategies (Ann Oncol. 2017 May 1;28[5]:1050-6).
Using an alternate kinase inhibitor or venetoclax resulted in superior progression-free survival versus chemoimmunotherapy at the time of initial kinase inhibitor failure in that study, which looked at treatment strategies and outcomes for 683 patients.
Ibrutinib appeared to be superior to idelalisib as a first kinase inhibitor, with significantly better progression-free survival in both frontline and relapsed/refractory settings, and in both complex karyotype and del17p patients, according to the report. Additionally, the response rate to venetoclax seemed superior to that of idelalisib in patients who discontinued ibrutinib because of progression or toxicity.
All of that supports the need for trials to test various sequencing strategies and establish clear treatment algorithms, according to Dr. Allan. “Optimal sequencing is unknown, but real-world data gives us some idea.”
For relapsed/refractory patients, ibrutinib, idelalisib, and venetoclax all have lengthened responses, improved survival, and are approved by the Food and Drug Administration, he added, noting that the toxicity profiles vary and must be understood when dosing and prescribing these agents.
More novel treatments are on the way. On Sept. 24, just days after Dr. Allan’s NCCN presentation, the FDA granted approval to duvelisib for adults with relapsed or refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma following two or more previous lines of therapy.
Dr. Allan reported financial disclosures related to AbbVie, Acerta Pharma, Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, and Verastem Oncology.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM NCCN HEMATOLOGIC MALIGNANCIES CONGRESS
FDA approves new drug for CLL/SLL and follicular lymphoma
The Food and Drug Administration has approved duvelisib (Copiktra), a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor, for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) and follicular lymphoma.
who have received at least two prior therapies. Duvelisib also has accelerated approval to treat adults with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least two prior systemic therapies.
Accelerated approval is based on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint – in this case, overall response rate – that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Continued approval of duvelisib in FL may be contingent upon results of confirmatory trials verifying that the drug provides a clinical benefit.
Duvelisib will be available in the U.S. immediately, according to Verastem, the company marketing the drug. The prescribing information for duvelisib includes a boxed warning detailing four fatal and/or serious toxicities associated with the drug – infections, diarrhea or colitis, cutaneous reactions, and pneumonitis. Verastem said it is implementing an informational risk evaluation and mitigation strategy to provide appropriate dosing and safety information for duvelisib.
The recommended dose of duvelisib is 25 mg orally twice daily, taken continuously in 28-day treatment cycles.
The FDA’s approval of duvelisib is supported by data from the phase 3 DUO trial and the phase 2 DYNAMO trial. The DUO trial included 319 patients with CLL (n=312) or SLL (n=7) who had received at least one prior therapy. They were randomized to receive either duvelisib (25 mg orally twice daily) or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by 7 weekly infusions and 4 monthly infusions of 2,000 mg).
Efficacy results are based on patients who had received at least two prior therapies, including 95 patients in the duvelisib arm and 101 in the ofatumumab arm. The overall response rate was 78% in the duvelisib arm and 39% in the ofatumumab arm. All responses in both arms were partial responses.
The median progression-free survival was 16.4 months with duvelisib and 9.1 months with ofatumumab.
The safety results include all patients treated with duvelisib or ofatumumab in this trial. In the duvelisib arm, 12% of patients had fatal adverse events (AEs) within 30 days of the last dose. The same was true of 4% of patients treated with ofatumumab. Serious AEs occurred in 73% of patients treated with duvelisib. The most common were infection and diarrhea/colitis. The DYNAMO trial enrolled patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma whose disease was refractory to both rituximab and chemotherapy or radioimmunotherapy. There were 83 patients with FL.
Patients received duvelisib at 25 mg orally twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
The overall response rate was 42%. One patient achieved a complete response, and 34 had a partial response.
Forty-three percent of responders maintained their response at 6 months, and 17% maintained their response at 12 months.
Serious AEs occurred in 58% of FL patients. The most common were diarrhea/colitis, pneumonia, renal insufficiency, rash, and sepsis.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved duvelisib (Copiktra), a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor, for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) and follicular lymphoma.
who have received at least two prior therapies. Duvelisib also has accelerated approval to treat adults with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least two prior systemic therapies.
Accelerated approval is based on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint – in this case, overall response rate – that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Continued approval of duvelisib in FL may be contingent upon results of confirmatory trials verifying that the drug provides a clinical benefit.
Duvelisib will be available in the U.S. immediately, according to Verastem, the company marketing the drug. The prescribing information for duvelisib includes a boxed warning detailing four fatal and/or serious toxicities associated with the drug – infections, diarrhea or colitis, cutaneous reactions, and pneumonitis. Verastem said it is implementing an informational risk evaluation and mitigation strategy to provide appropriate dosing and safety information for duvelisib.
The recommended dose of duvelisib is 25 mg orally twice daily, taken continuously in 28-day treatment cycles.
The FDA’s approval of duvelisib is supported by data from the phase 3 DUO trial and the phase 2 DYNAMO trial. The DUO trial included 319 patients with CLL (n=312) or SLL (n=7) who had received at least one prior therapy. They were randomized to receive either duvelisib (25 mg orally twice daily) or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by 7 weekly infusions and 4 monthly infusions of 2,000 mg).
Efficacy results are based on patients who had received at least two prior therapies, including 95 patients in the duvelisib arm and 101 in the ofatumumab arm. The overall response rate was 78% in the duvelisib arm and 39% in the ofatumumab arm. All responses in both arms were partial responses.
The median progression-free survival was 16.4 months with duvelisib and 9.1 months with ofatumumab.
The safety results include all patients treated with duvelisib or ofatumumab in this trial. In the duvelisib arm, 12% of patients had fatal adverse events (AEs) within 30 days of the last dose. The same was true of 4% of patients treated with ofatumumab. Serious AEs occurred in 73% of patients treated with duvelisib. The most common were infection and diarrhea/colitis. The DYNAMO trial enrolled patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma whose disease was refractory to both rituximab and chemotherapy or radioimmunotherapy. There were 83 patients with FL.
Patients received duvelisib at 25 mg orally twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
The overall response rate was 42%. One patient achieved a complete response, and 34 had a partial response.
Forty-three percent of responders maintained their response at 6 months, and 17% maintained their response at 12 months.
Serious AEs occurred in 58% of FL patients. The most common were diarrhea/colitis, pneumonia, renal insufficiency, rash, and sepsis.
The Food and Drug Administration has approved duvelisib (Copiktra), a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor, for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma (CLL/SLL) and follicular lymphoma.
who have received at least two prior therapies. Duvelisib also has accelerated approval to treat adults with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) who have received at least two prior systemic therapies.
Accelerated approval is based on a surrogate or intermediate endpoint – in this case, overall response rate – that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. Continued approval of duvelisib in FL may be contingent upon results of confirmatory trials verifying that the drug provides a clinical benefit.
Duvelisib will be available in the U.S. immediately, according to Verastem, the company marketing the drug. The prescribing information for duvelisib includes a boxed warning detailing four fatal and/or serious toxicities associated with the drug – infections, diarrhea or colitis, cutaneous reactions, and pneumonitis. Verastem said it is implementing an informational risk evaluation and mitigation strategy to provide appropriate dosing and safety information for duvelisib.
The recommended dose of duvelisib is 25 mg orally twice daily, taken continuously in 28-day treatment cycles.
The FDA’s approval of duvelisib is supported by data from the phase 3 DUO trial and the phase 2 DYNAMO trial. The DUO trial included 319 patients with CLL (n=312) or SLL (n=7) who had received at least one prior therapy. They were randomized to receive either duvelisib (25 mg orally twice daily) or ofatumumab (initial infusion of 300 mg followed by 7 weekly infusions and 4 monthly infusions of 2,000 mg).
Efficacy results are based on patients who had received at least two prior therapies, including 95 patients in the duvelisib arm and 101 in the ofatumumab arm. The overall response rate was 78% in the duvelisib arm and 39% in the ofatumumab arm. All responses in both arms were partial responses.
The median progression-free survival was 16.4 months with duvelisib and 9.1 months with ofatumumab.
The safety results include all patients treated with duvelisib or ofatumumab in this trial. In the duvelisib arm, 12% of patients had fatal adverse events (AEs) within 30 days of the last dose. The same was true of 4% of patients treated with ofatumumab. Serious AEs occurred in 73% of patients treated with duvelisib. The most common were infection and diarrhea/colitis. The DYNAMO trial enrolled patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma whose disease was refractory to both rituximab and chemotherapy or radioimmunotherapy. There were 83 patients with FL.
Patients received duvelisib at 25 mg orally twice daily until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.
The overall response rate was 42%. One patient achieved a complete response, and 34 had a partial response.
Forty-three percent of responders maintained their response at 6 months, and 17% maintained their response at 12 months.
Serious AEs occurred in 58% of FL patients. The most common were diarrhea/colitis, pneumonia, renal insufficiency, rash, and sepsis.
FDA approves new hairy cell leukemia drug
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved moxetumomab pasudotox-tdfk (Lumoxiti), a CD22-directed cytotoxin, to treat hairy cell leukemia (HCL).
Moxetumomab pasudotox is approved to treat adults with relapsed or refractory HCL who have received at least two prior systemic therapies, including treatment with a purine nucleoside analog.
The prescribing information for moxetumomab pasudotox includes a boxed warning noting that the drug poses risks of capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Other serious warnings include the risk of decreased renal function, infusion-related reactions, and electrolyte abnormalities.
The FDA granted the application for moxetumomab pasudotox fast track, priority review, and an orphan drug designation.
The agency approved AstraZeneca’s moxetumomab pasudotox based on results from a phase 3 trial (NCT01829711). Data from this study were presented at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7004).
The trial included 80 patients with relapsed or refractory HCL who had received at least two prior lines of therapy.
At a median of 16.7 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 75%, the complete response (CR) rate was 41%, and the durable CR rate was 30%. Durable CR was defined as CR with hematologic remission for more than 180 days.
Most patients with a CR achieved minimal residual disease negativity (82%; 27/33).
The median duration of response was not reached, nor was the median progression-free survival.
The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea, peripheral edema, headache, and pyrexia. Other treatment-related AEs included infections and neutropenia.
Treatment-related AEs that led to discontinuation included capillary leak syndrome, hemolytic uremic syndrome, and increased blood creatinine.
There were three deaths in this trial, but none of them were considered treatment related.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved moxetumomab pasudotox-tdfk (Lumoxiti), a CD22-directed cytotoxin, to treat hairy cell leukemia (HCL).
Moxetumomab pasudotox is approved to treat adults with relapsed or refractory HCL who have received at least two prior systemic therapies, including treatment with a purine nucleoside analog.
The prescribing information for moxetumomab pasudotox includes a boxed warning noting that the drug poses risks of capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Other serious warnings include the risk of decreased renal function, infusion-related reactions, and electrolyte abnormalities.
The FDA granted the application for moxetumomab pasudotox fast track, priority review, and an orphan drug designation.
The agency approved AstraZeneca’s moxetumomab pasudotox based on results from a phase 3 trial (NCT01829711). Data from this study were presented at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7004).
The trial included 80 patients with relapsed or refractory HCL who had received at least two prior lines of therapy.
At a median of 16.7 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 75%, the complete response (CR) rate was 41%, and the durable CR rate was 30%. Durable CR was defined as CR with hematologic remission for more than 180 days.
Most patients with a CR achieved minimal residual disease negativity (82%; 27/33).
The median duration of response was not reached, nor was the median progression-free survival.
The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea, peripheral edema, headache, and pyrexia. Other treatment-related AEs included infections and neutropenia.
Treatment-related AEs that led to discontinuation included capillary leak syndrome, hemolytic uremic syndrome, and increased blood creatinine.
There were three deaths in this trial, but none of them were considered treatment related.
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved moxetumomab pasudotox-tdfk (Lumoxiti), a CD22-directed cytotoxin, to treat hairy cell leukemia (HCL).
Moxetumomab pasudotox is approved to treat adults with relapsed or refractory HCL who have received at least two prior systemic therapies, including treatment with a purine nucleoside analog.
The prescribing information for moxetumomab pasudotox includes a boxed warning noting that the drug poses risks of capillary leak syndrome and hemolytic uremic syndrome. Other serious warnings include the risk of decreased renal function, infusion-related reactions, and electrolyte abnormalities.
The FDA granted the application for moxetumomab pasudotox fast track, priority review, and an orphan drug designation.
The agency approved AstraZeneca’s moxetumomab pasudotox based on results from a phase 3 trial (NCT01829711). Data from this study were presented at the 2018 annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (abstract 7004).
The trial included 80 patients with relapsed or refractory HCL who had received at least two prior lines of therapy.
At a median of 16.7 months of follow-up, the objective response rate was 75%, the complete response (CR) rate was 41%, and the durable CR rate was 30%. Durable CR was defined as CR with hematologic remission for more than 180 days.
Most patients with a CR achieved minimal residual disease negativity (82%; 27/33).
The median duration of response was not reached, nor was the median progression-free survival.
The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea, peripheral edema, headache, and pyrexia. Other treatment-related AEs included infections and neutropenia.
Treatment-related AEs that led to discontinuation included capillary leak syndrome, hemolytic uremic syndrome, and increased blood creatinine.
There were three deaths in this trial, but none of them were considered treatment related.
Venetoclax label now includes MRD data
The Food and Drug Administration has expanded the label for venetoclax tablets (Venclexta) to include data on minimal residual disease.
The drug’s prescribing information will now include details on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in previously treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received venetoclax in combination with rituximab in the phase 3 MURANO trial.
The combination of venetoclax and rituximab was approved by the FDA in June 2018 for the treatment of patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma, with or without 17p deletion, who received at least one prior therapy.
The MURANO trial (NCT02005471), which supported the FDA approval, included 389 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL. They were randomized to receive venetoclax plus rituximab or bendamustine plus rituximab (N Engl J Med. 2018; 378:1107-20).
Researchers evaluated MRD in patients who achieved a partial response or better. MRD was assessed using allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction; the definition of MRD negativity was less than one CLL cell per 10,000 lymphocytes.
The researchers assessed MRD in the peripheral blood after about 9 months on therapy (3 months after the last dose of rituximab). At that time, 53% (103/194) of patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm were MRD negative, as were 12% (23/195) of patients in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
The researchers also assessed MRD in the peripheral blood of patients with a complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. MRD negativity was achieved by 3% (6/194) of these patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm and 2% (3/195) in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche. It is jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, in the United States and by AbbVie outside of the United States.
The Food and Drug Administration has expanded the label for venetoclax tablets (Venclexta) to include data on minimal residual disease.
The drug’s prescribing information will now include details on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in previously treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received venetoclax in combination with rituximab in the phase 3 MURANO trial.
The combination of venetoclax and rituximab was approved by the FDA in June 2018 for the treatment of patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma, with or without 17p deletion, who received at least one prior therapy.
The MURANO trial (NCT02005471), which supported the FDA approval, included 389 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL. They were randomized to receive venetoclax plus rituximab or bendamustine plus rituximab (N Engl J Med. 2018; 378:1107-20).
Researchers evaluated MRD in patients who achieved a partial response or better. MRD was assessed using allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction; the definition of MRD negativity was less than one CLL cell per 10,000 lymphocytes.
The researchers assessed MRD in the peripheral blood after about 9 months on therapy (3 months after the last dose of rituximab). At that time, 53% (103/194) of patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm were MRD negative, as were 12% (23/195) of patients in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
The researchers also assessed MRD in the peripheral blood of patients with a complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. MRD negativity was achieved by 3% (6/194) of these patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm and 2% (3/195) in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche. It is jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, in the United States and by AbbVie outside of the United States.
The Food and Drug Administration has expanded the label for venetoclax tablets (Venclexta) to include data on minimal residual disease.
The drug’s prescribing information will now include details on minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in previously treated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received venetoclax in combination with rituximab in the phase 3 MURANO trial.
The combination of venetoclax and rituximab was approved by the FDA in June 2018 for the treatment of patients with CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma, with or without 17p deletion, who received at least one prior therapy.
The MURANO trial (NCT02005471), which supported the FDA approval, included 389 patients with relapsed or refractory CLL. They were randomized to receive venetoclax plus rituximab or bendamustine plus rituximab (N Engl J Med. 2018; 378:1107-20).
Researchers evaluated MRD in patients who achieved a partial response or better. MRD was assessed using allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction; the definition of MRD negativity was less than one CLL cell per 10,000 lymphocytes.
The researchers assessed MRD in the peripheral blood after about 9 months on therapy (3 months after the last dose of rituximab). At that time, 53% (103/194) of patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm were MRD negative, as were 12% (23/195) of patients in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
The researchers also assessed MRD in the peripheral blood of patients with a complete response or complete response with incomplete marrow recovery. MRD negativity was achieved by 3% (6/194) of these patients in the venetoclax-rituximab arm and 2% (3/195) in the bendamustine-rituximab arm.
Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Roche. It is jointly commercialized by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, in the United States and by AbbVie outside of the United States.
RESONATE-2 update: First-line ibrutinib has sustained efficacy in older CLL patients
In older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), first-line treatment with ibrutinib resulted in a long-term progression-free survival benefit versus chemotherapy, according to extended follow-up results of a phase 3 trial.
The quality of response to ibrutinib continued to improve over time in the study, including a substantial increase in the proportion of patients achieving complete response, the updated results of the RESONATE-2 trial show.
Rates of serious adverse events decreased over time in the study, while common reasons for initiating treatment, such as marrow failure and disease symptoms, all improved to a greater extent than with chlorambucil, reported Paul M. Barr, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) and colleagues.
“These data support the use of ibrutinib in the first-line treatment of CLL as a chemotherapy-free option that can be taken continuously, achieving long-term disease control for the majority of patients, including those with high-risk features,” Dr. Barr and coauthors said in the journal Haematologica.
Previously reported primary results of the RESONATE-2 trial, which showed an 84% reduction in risk of death for ibrutinib versus chlorambucil with a median follow-up of 18 months, led to the approval of ibrutinib for first-line CLL treatment, the authors said.
The study included 269 patients with untreated CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma who had active disease and were at least 65 years of age. They were randomized 1:1 to ibrutinib or chlorambucil.
Out of 136 ibrutinib-treated patients, 107 (79%) remained on therapy at this extended analysis, which had a median follow-up of 29 months.
The extended analysis also showed an 88% reduction in risk of progression or death for those patients randomized to ibrutinib (P less than .0001), with significant improvements in subgroups evaluated, which include groups typically considered high risk, according to Dr. Barr and colleagues.
The rate of complete response improved over time in ibrutinib-treated patients, from 7% at 12 months, to 15% at 24 months, and to 18% with a maximum of 36 months’ follow-up, they said.
The overall response rate for ibrutinib was 92% in this extended analysis, with comparable findings in high-risk subgroups, including those with del(11q) at 100% and unmutated IGHV at 95%, according to the report.
Lymphadenopathy improved in most ibrutinib-treated patients, with complete resolution in 42% versus 7% with chlorambucil. Splenomegaly improved by at least 50% in 95% of ibrutinib-treated patients versus 52% for chlorambucil, with complete resolution in 56% of ibrutinib-treated patients and 22% of chlorambucil-treated patients.
Adverse events of grade 3 or greater were generally seen more often in the first year of ibrutinib therapy and decreased over time. Rates of grade 3 or greater neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia were 8.1%, 5.9%, and 2.2%, respectively, in the first 12 months of treatment; those decreased to 0%, 1%, and 0% in the third year.
The rate of atrial fibrillation increased from 6% in the primary analysis to 10% in extended follow-up; however, investigators said ibrutinib dose reductions and discontinuations because of this adverse effect were uncommon and less frequent with extended treatment.
“Atrial fibrillation therefore appears manageable and does not frequently necessitate ibrutinib discontinuation,” they concluded.
The study was supported by Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company, and by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the MD Anderson Moon Shot Program in CLL. Pharmacyclics designed the study and performed analysis of the data. Several study authors reported funding from various companies, including Pharmacyclics.
SOURCE: Barr PM, et al. Haematologica. 2018;103(9):1502-10.
In older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), first-line treatment with ibrutinib resulted in a long-term progression-free survival benefit versus chemotherapy, according to extended follow-up results of a phase 3 trial.
The quality of response to ibrutinib continued to improve over time in the study, including a substantial increase in the proportion of patients achieving complete response, the updated results of the RESONATE-2 trial show.
Rates of serious adverse events decreased over time in the study, while common reasons for initiating treatment, such as marrow failure and disease symptoms, all improved to a greater extent than with chlorambucil, reported Paul M. Barr, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) and colleagues.
“These data support the use of ibrutinib in the first-line treatment of CLL as a chemotherapy-free option that can be taken continuously, achieving long-term disease control for the majority of patients, including those with high-risk features,” Dr. Barr and coauthors said in the journal Haematologica.
Previously reported primary results of the RESONATE-2 trial, which showed an 84% reduction in risk of death for ibrutinib versus chlorambucil with a median follow-up of 18 months, led to the approval of ibrutinib for first-line CLL treatment, the authors said.
The study included 269 patients with untreated CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma who had active disease and were at least 65 years of age. They were randomized 1:1 to ibrutinib or chlorambucil.
Out of 136 ibrutinib-treated patients, 107 (79%) remained on therapy at this extended analysis, which had a median follow-up of 29 months.
The extended analysis also showed an 88% reduction in risk of progression or death for those patients randomized to ibrutinib (P less than .0001), with significant improvements in subgroups evaluated, which include groups typically considered high risk, according to Dr. Barr and colleagues.
The rate of complete response improved over time in ibrutinib-treated patients, from 7% at 12 months, to 15% at 24 months, and to 18% with a maximum of 36 months’ follow-up, they said.
The overall response rate for ibrutinib was 92% in this extended analysis, with comparable findings in high-risk subgroups, including those with del(11q) at 100% and unmutated IGHV at 95%, according to the report.
Lymphadenopathy improved in most ibrutinib-treated patients, with complete resolution in 42% versus 7% with chlorambucil. Splenomegaly improved by at least 50% in 95% of ibrutinib-treated patients versus 52% for chlorambucil, with complete resolution in 56% of ibrutinib-treated patients and 22% of chlorambucil-treated patients.
Adverse events of grade 3 or greater were generally seen more often in the first year of ibrutinib therapy and decreased over time. Rates of grade 3 or greater neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia were 8.1%, 5.9%, and 2.2%, respectively, in the first 12 months of treatment; those decreased to 0%, 1%, and 0% in the third year.
The rate of atrial fibrillation increased from 6% in the primary analysis to 10% in extended follow-up; however, investigators said ibrutinib dose reductions and discontinuations because of this adverse effect were uncommon and less frequent with extended treatment.
“Atrial fibrillation therefore appears manageable and does not frequently necessitate ibrutinib discontinuation,” they concluded.
The study was supported by Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company, and by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the MD Anderson Moon Shot Program in CLL. Pharmacyclics designed the study and performed analysis of the data. Several study authors reported funding from various companies, including Pharmacyclics.
SOURCE: Barr PM, et al. Haematologica. 2018;103(9):1502-10.
In older patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), first-line treatment with ibrutinib resulted in a long-term progression-free survival benefit versus chemotherapy, according to extended follow-up results of a phase 3 trial.
The quality of response to ibrutinib continued to improve over time in the study, including a substantial increase in the proportion of patients achieving complete response, the updated results of the RESONATE-2 trial show.
Rates of serious adverse events decreased over time in the study, while common reasons for initiating treatment, such as marrow failure and disease symptoms, all improved to a greater extent than with chlorambucil, reported Paul M. Barr, MD, of the University of Rochester (N.Y.) and colleagues.
“These data support the use of ibrutinib in the first-line treatment of CLL as a chemotherapy-free option that can be taken continuously, achieving long-term disease control for the majority of patients, including those with high-risk features,” Dr. Barr and coauthors said in the journal Haematologica.
Previously reported primary results of the RESONATE-2 trial, which showed an 84% reduction in risk of death for ibrutinib versus chlorambucil with a median follow-up of 18 months, led to the approval of ibrutinib for first-line CLL treatment, the authors said.
The study included 269 patients with untreated CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma who had active disease and were at least 65 years of age. They were randomized 1:1 to ibrutinib or chlorambucil.
Out of 136 ibrutinib-treated patients, 107 (79%) remained on therapy at this extended analysis, which had a median follow-up of 29 months.
The extended analysis also showed an 88% reduction in risk of progression or death for those patients randomized to ibrutinib (P less than .0001), with significant improvements in subgroups evaluated, which include groups typically considered high risk, according to Dr. Barr and colleagues.
The rate of complete response improved over time in ibrutinib-treated patients, from 7% at 12 months, to 15% at 24 months, and to 18% with a maximum of 36 months’ follow-up, they said.
The overall response rate for ibrutinib was 92% in this extended analysis, with comparable findings in high-risk subgroups, including those with del(11q) at 100% and unmutated IGHV at 95%, according to the report.
Lymphadenopathy improved in most ibrutinib-treated patients, with complete resolution in 42% versus 7% with chlorambucil. Splenomegaly improved by at least 50% in 95% of ibrutinib-treated patients versus 52% for chlorambucil, with complete resolution in 56% of ibrutinib-treated patients and 22% of chlorambucil-treated patients.
Adverse events of grade 3 or greater were generally seen more often in the first year of ibrutinib therapy and decreased over time. Rates of grade 3 or greater neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia were 8.1%, 5.9%, and 2.2%, respectively, in the first 12 months of treatment; those decreased to 0%, 1%, and 0% in the third year.
The rate of atrial fibrillation increased from 6% in the primary analysis to 10% in extended follow-up; however, investigators said ibrutinib dose reductions and discontinuations because of this adverse effect were uncommon and less frequent with extended treatment.
“Atrial fibrillation therefore appears manageable and does not frequently necessitate ibrutinib discontinuation,” they concluded.
The study was supported by Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company, and by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the MD Anderson Moon Shot Program in CLL. Pharmacyclics designed the study and performed analysis of the data. Several study authors reported funding from various companies, including Pharmacyclics.
SOURCE: Barr PM, et al. Haematologica. 2018;103(9):1502-10.
FROM HAEMATOLOGICA
Key clinical point:
Major finding: There was an 88% reduction in risk of progression-free survival events for those patients randomized to ibrutinib (P less than .0001).
Study details: Extended phase 3 results from the RESONATE-2 trial, including 269 older patients with untreated CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma.
Disclosures: This study was supported by Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company, and by grants from the National Institutes of Health and the MD Anderson Moon Shot Program in CLL. Pharmacyclics designed the study and performed analysis of the data.
Source: Barr PM et al. Haematologica. 2018;103(9):1502-10.
Combo treatment yields MRD-negative remissions in CLL
The combination of the anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab and venetoclax in chronic lymphocytic leukemia shows a high overall response rate and compares favorably with established therapies, according to a new report.
The ongoing, open-label, phase 2 study examined the outcomes of six induction cycles, followed by up to 24 months of maintenance treatment with obinutuzumab and venetoclax, in 66 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Of the 63 patients included in the efficacy analysis, 34 (54%) had treatment-naive and 29 (46%) had relapsed or refractory disease.
After an initial debulking with two cycles of bendamustine, followed by the obinutuzumab and venetoclax treatment, researchers observed an overall response rate of 95%. By the end of the induction phase, all the treatment-naive patients responded, as did 90% of the relapsed or refractory patients. Five patients had achieved complete remission and 55 patients had a partial response, the researchers reported in Lancet Oncology.
By 15 months, both progression-free and overall survival was 100% among treatment-naive patients, while progression-free survival was 83% and overall survival was 90% among the relapsed or refractory patients at this point.
Researchers observed minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood of 91% of treatment-naive patients and 83% of relapsed or refractory patients.
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab was chosen based on earlier trial data, which suggested a synergy between venetoclax and the less-potent anti-CD20 antibody rituximab.
Paula Cramer, MD, from the German CLL Study Group at University Hospital, Cologne, and her coauthors described the efficacy of the venetoclax and obinutuzumab combination as “encouraging.”
“The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab yields fast responses with MRD-negative remissions in most patients,” they wrote. “Based on the experience with venetoclax combined with rituximab in another trial and with venetoclax and obinutuzumab in this and another study, these deep, MRD-negative remissions seem to last for a substantial time after treatment termination.”
Of the 677 adverse events, 427 (63%) were deemed to be related to the study treatment, and 69 of these were serious adverse events.
The most common of these were infections, experienced by four patients during the debulking with bendamustine, and 18 cases in 11 patients during the induction treatment. This included pneumonia, sepsis and cytomegalovirus infection, as well as neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.
Six patients also experienced infusion-related reactions, four had coronary artery disorder – one during debulking and three during induction – and there were three cases of neoplasms.
Five patients in the relapsed or refractory group died; three of sepsis related to study treatment, and two from unrelated Richter’s transformation.
“With three deaths from sepsis in 66 enrolled patients, the treatment-related mortality seems high; however, in cases of low patient numbers, a few patients can have a substantial effect on the overall results,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie. Several authors reported research funding, grants, honoraria and other support from the pharmaceutical industry, including from the study sponsors.
SOURCE: Cramer P et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Aug 13. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30414-5.
The combination of the anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab and venetoclax in chronic lymphocytic leukemia shows a high overall response rate and compares favorably with established therapies, according to a new report.
The ongoing, open-label, phase 2 study examined the outcomes of six induction cycles, followed by up to 24 months of maintenance treatment with obinutuzumab and venetoclax, in 66 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Of the 63 patients included in the efficacy analysis, 34 (54%) had treatment-naive and 29 (46%) had relapsed or refractory disease.
After an initial debulking with two cycles of bendamustine, followed by the obinutuzumab and venetoclax treatment, researchers observed an overall response rate of 95%. By the end of the induction phase, all the treatment-naive patients responded, as did 90% of the relapsed or refractory patients. Five patients had achieved complete remission and 55 patients had a partial response, the researchers reported in Lancet Oncology.
By 15 months, both progression-free and overall survival was 100% among treatment-naive patients, while progression-free survival was 83% and overall survival was 90% among the relapsed or refractory patients at this point.
Researchers observed minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood of 91% of treatment-naive patients and 83% of relapsed or refractory patients.
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab was chosen based on earlier trial data, which suggested a synergy between venetoclax and the less-potent anti-CD20 antibody rituximab.
Paula Cramer, MD, from the German CLL Study Group at University Hospital, Cologne, and her coauthors described the efficacy of the venetoclax and obinutuzumab combination as “encouraging.”
“The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab yields fast responses with MRD-negative remissions in most patients,” they wrote. “Based on the experience with venetoclax combined with rituximab in another trial and with venetoclax and obinutuzumab in this and another study, these deep, MRD-negative remissions seem to last for a substantial time after treatment termination.”
Of the 677 adverse events, 427 (63%) were deemed to be related to the study treatment, and 69 of these were serious adverse events.
The most common of these were infections, experienced by four patients during the debulking with bendamustine, and 18 cases in 11 patients during the induction treatment. This included pneumonia, sepsis and cytomegalovirus infection, as well as neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.
Six patients also experienced infusion-related reactions, four had coronary artery disorder – one during debulking and three during induction – and there were three cases of neoplasms.
Five patients in the relapsed or refractory group died; three of sepsis related to study treatment, and two from unrelated Richter’s transformation.
“With three deaths from sepsis in 66 enrolled patients, the treatment-related mortality seems high; however, in cases of low patient numbers, a few patients can have a substantial effect on the overall results,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie. Several authors reported research funding, grants, honoraria and other support from the pharmaceutical industry, including from the study sponsors.
SOURCE: Cramer P et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Aug 13. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30414-5.
The combination of the anti-CD20 antibody obinutuzumab and venetoclax in chronic lymphocytic leukemia shows a high overall response rate and compares favorably with established therapies, according to a new report.
The ongoing, open-label, phase 2 study examined the outcomes of six induction cycles, followed by up to 24 months of maintenance treatment with obinutuzumab and venetoclax, in 66 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Of the 63 patients included in the efficacy analysis, 34 (54%) had treatment-naive and 29 (46%) had relapsed or refractory disease.
After an initial debulking with two cycles of bendamustine, followed by the obinutuzumab and venetoclax treatment, researchers observed an overall response rate of 95%. By the end of the induction phase, all the treatment-naive patients responded, as did 90% of the relapsed or refractory patients. Five patients had achieved complete remission and 55 patients had a partial response, the researchers reported in Lancet Oncology.
By 15 months, both progression-free and overall survival was 100% among treatment-naive patients, while progression-free survival was 83% and overall survival was 90% among the relapsed or refractory patients at this point.
Researchers observed minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood of 91% of treatment-naive patients and 83% of relapsed or refractory patients.
The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab was chosen based on earlier trial data, which suggested a synergy between venetoclax and the less-potent anti-CD20 antibody rituximab.
Paula Cramer, MD, from the German CLL Study Group at University Hospital, Cologne, and her coauthors described the efficacy of the venetoclax and obinutuzumab combination as “encouraging.”
“The combination of venetoclax and obinutuzumab yields fast responses with MRD-negative remissions in most patients,” they wrote. “Based on the experience with venetoclax combined with rituximab in another trial and with venetoclax and obinutuzumab in this and another study, these deep, MRD-negative remissions seem to last for a substantial time after treatment termination.”
Of the 677 adverse events, 427 (63%) were deemed to be related to the study treatment, and 69 of these were serious adverse events.
The most common of these were infections, experienced by four patients during the debulking with bendamustine, and 18 cases in 11 patients during the induction treatment. This included pneumonia, sepsis and cytomegalovirus infection, as well as neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.
Six patients also experienced infusion-related reactions, four had coronary artery disorder – one during debulking and three during induction – and there were three cases of neoplasms.
Five patients in the relapsed or refractory group died; three of sepsis related to study treatment, and two from unrelated Richter’s transformation.
“With three deaths from sepsis in 66 enrolled patients, the treatment-related mortality seems high; however, in cases of low patient numbers, a few patients can have a substantial effect on the overall results,” the researchers wrote.
The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie. Several authors reported research funding, grants, honoraria and other support from the pharmaceutical industry, including from the study sponsors.
SOURCE: Cramer P et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Aug 13. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30414-5.
FROM LANCET ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The overall response rate for obinutuzumab plus venetoclax in CLL was 95%.
Study details: An ongoing, phase 2, open-label trial in 66 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Disclosures: The study was funded by F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie. Several authors reported research funding, grants, honoraria, and other support from the pharmaceutical industry, including from the study sponsors.
Source: Cramer P et al. Lancet Oncol. 2018 Aug 13. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30414-5.