User login
iFCG achieves high MRD-negative remission in untreated CLL
NEW YORK – Three courses of treatment with the novel combination of ibrutinib, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and obinutuzumab (iFCG) was well tolerated and associated with a high rate of minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative remission in the bone marrow of favorable-risk, treatment-naive patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, based on early results from an ongoing investigator-initiated phase II trial.
Of 29 patients, 24 had completed treatment and been followed for a median of 8.3 months. All 24 had an overall response rate (42% complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and 58% partial response), and 83% of patients achieved MRD negativity (100% with complete response and 71% with partial response), Nitin Jain, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
All nine patients who reached the 12-month time point are off therapy and are being monitored, he said.
Patients with IGHV mutations generally have favorable long-term outcomes with 10-year progression-free survival rates greater than 60% after receiving standard first-line therapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). However, ibrutinib is approved for patients with CLL, and obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered type II CD20 monoclonal antibody, was superior to rituximab in the CLL11 trial, Dr. Jain said.
Further, data from the HELIOS trial indicated that combining targeted therapies with chemoimmunotherapy is safe and effective.
iFCG was developed with the intent to limit fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to three courses, potentially reducing short- and long-term toxicity, while maintaining efficacy through the addition of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab, he explained.
Of note, higher pretreatment levels of beta-2 microglobulin were associated with a lower MRD-negativity rate after 3 cycles of iFCG, he said.
In six patients with beta-2 microglobulin of 4 mg/dL or greater, the rate was 50%, compared with 94% in 18 patients with beta-2 microglobulin less than 4 mg/dL.
The patients in the current analysis had a median age of 60 years and adequate organ function. All had IGHV mutation and did not have del(17p) or TP53 mutation. They received three courses of iFCG, including ibrutinib at 420 mg once daily continuously starting at day 1 of course 1 (C1D1); obinutuzumab at 100 mg C1D1, 900 mg C1D2, 1000 mg C1D8, 1000 mg C1D15, 1000 mg C2D1, and 1000 mg C3D1; fludarabine at 25 mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course; and cyclophosphamide at 250mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course.
Per study protocol, all patients receive ibrutinib with obinutuzumab for courses 4-6. Patients meeting the primary endpoint of complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and bone marrow MRD negativity received ibrutinib monotherapy for courses 7-12. Those who did not achieve the primary endpoint received six more courses of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab. All patients who are MRD negative at 1 year stop all therapy, including ibrutinib, while those who are MRD positive at 1 year may continue ibrutinib monotherapy until disease progression.
The target bone marrow MRD-negative rate after 3 cycles of iFCG is 45%. The historic C3 bone marrow MRD-negative rate with standard FCR therapy in patients with IGHV mutation is 26%, Dr. Jain said, noting that the rate in the current analysis compared favorably with both.
The treatment thus far has been generally well tolerated. Toxicities included neutropenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 9 and 12 patients, respectively), thrombocytopenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 12 and 1 patients, respectively), ALT/AST (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 3 and 1 patients respectively), atrial fibrillation (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), arthralgia (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), and infusion-related reaction (grade 2 and 3 occurring in 9 patients and 1 patient, respectively).
Infections included herpes zoster, acute cholecystitis, pulmonary mycobacterium avium complex infection, and pneumocystis pneumonia, which occurred in 1 patient each, and neutropenic fever, which occurred in 4 patients.
“Notably, no patient has progressed or died in the study so far,” Dr. Jain said.
The trial continues to enroll patients, with plans for enrolling a total of 45.
Dr. Jain has received research support from and/or served on an advisory board for Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Abbvie, Prizer, Incyte, BMS, Infinity, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Celgene, Servier, Novartis Novimmune, and Adaptive Biotechnologies.
NEW YORK – Three courses of treatment with the novel combination of ibrutinib, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and obinutuzumab (iFCG) was well tolerated and associated with a high rate of minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative remission in the bone marrow of favorable-risk, treatment-naive patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, based on early results from an ongoing investigator-initiated phase II trial.
Of 29 patients, 24 had completed treatment and been followed for a median of 8.3 months. All 24 had an overall response rate (42% complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and 58% partial response), and 83% of patients achieved MRD negativity (100% with complete response and 71% with partial response), Nitin Jain, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
All nine patients who reached the 12-month time point are off therapy and are being monitored, he said.
Patients with IGHV mutations generally have favorable long-term outcomes with 10-year progression-free survival rates greater than 60% after receiving standard first-line therapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). However, ibrutinib is approved for patients with CLL, and obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered type II CD20 monoclonal antibody, was superior to rituximab in the CLL11 trial, Dr. Jain said.
Further, data from the HELIOS trial indicated that combining targeted therapies with chemoimmunotherapy is safe and effective.
iFCG was developed with the intent to limit fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to three courses, potentially reducing short- and long-term toxicity, while maintaining efficacy through the addition of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab, he explained.
Of note, higher pretreatment levels of beta-2 microglobulin were associated with a lower MRD-negativity rate after 3 cycles of iFCG, he said.
In six patients with beta-2 microglobulin of 4 mg/dL or greater, the rate was 50%, compared with 94% in 18 patients with beta-2 microglobulin less than 4 mg/dL.
The patients in the current analysis had a median age of 60 years and adequate organ function. All had IGHV mutation and did not have del(17p) or TP53 mutation. They received three courses of iFCG, including ibrutinib at 420 mg once daily continuously starting at day 1 of course 1 (C1D1); obinutuzumab at 100 mg C1D1, 900 mg C1D2, 1000 mg C1D8, 1000 mg C1D15, 1000 mg C2D1, and 1000 mg C3D1; fludarabine at 25 mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course; and cyclophosphamide at 250mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course.
Per study protocol, all patients receive ibrutinib with obinutuzumab for courses 4-6. Patients meeting the primary endpoint of complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and bone marrow MRD negativity received ibrutinib monotherapy for courses 7-12. Those who did not achieve the primary endpoint received six more courses of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab. All patients who are MRD negative at 1 year stop all therapy, including ibrutinib, while those who are MRD positive at 1 year may continue ibrutinib monotherapy until disease progression.
The target bone marrow MRD-negative rate after 3 cycles of iFCG is 45%. The historic C3 bone marrow MRD-negative rate with standard FCR therapy in patients with IGHV mutation is 26%, Dr. Jain said, noting that the rate in the current analysis compared favorably with both.
The treatment thus far has been generally well tolerated. Toxicities included neutropenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 9 and 12 patients, respectively), thrombocytopenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 12 and 1 patients, respectively), ALT/AST (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 3 and 1 patients respectively), atrial fibrillation (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), arthralgia (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), and infusion-related reaction (grade 2 and 3 occurring in 9 patients and 1 patient, respectively).
Infections included herpes zoster, acute cholecystitis, pulmonary mycobacterium avium complex infection, and pneumocystis pneumonia, which occurred in 1 patient each, and neutropenic fever, which occurred in 4 patients.
“Notably, no patient has progressed or died in the study so far,” Dr. Jain said.
The trial continues to enroll patients, with plans for enrolling a total of 45.
Dr. Jain has received research support from and/or served on an advisory board for Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Abbvie, Prizer, Incyte, BMS, Infinity, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Celgene, Servier, Novartis Novimmune, and Adaptive Biotechnologies.
NEW YORK – Three courses of treatment with the novel combination of ibrutinib, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and obinutuzumab (iFCG) was well tolerated and associated with a high rate of minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative remission in the bone marrow of favorable-risk, treatment-naive patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia, based on early results from an ongoing investigator-initiated phase II trial.
Of 29 patients, 24 had completed treatment and been followed for a median of 8.3 months. All 24 had an overall response rate (42% complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and 58% partial response), and 83% of patients achieved MRD negativity (100% with complete response and 71% with partial response), Nitin Jain, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
All nine patients who reached the 12-month time point are off therapy and are being monitored, he said.
Patients with IGHV mutations generally have favorable long-term outcomes with 10-year progression-free survival rates greater than 60% after receiving standard first-line therapy with fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR). However, ibrutinib is approved for patients with CLL, and obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered type II CD20 monoclonal antibody, was superior to rituximab in the CLL11 trial, Dr. Jain said.
Further, data from the HELIOS trial indicated that combining targeted therapies with chemoimmunotherapy is safe and effective.
iFCG was developed with the intent to limit fludarabine and cyclophosphamide to three courses, potentially reducing short- and long-term toxicity, while maintaining efficacy through the addition of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab, he explained.
Of note, higher pretreatment levels of beta-2 microglobulin were associated with a lower MRD-negativity rate after 3 cycles of iFCG, he said.
In six patients with beta-2 microglobulin of 4 mg/dL or greater, the rate was 50%, compared with 94% in 18 patients with beta-2 microglobulin less than 4 mg/dL.
The patients in the current analysis had a median age of 60 years and adequate organ function. All had IGHV mutation and did not have del(17p) or TP53 mutation. They received three courses of iFCG, including ibrutinib at 420 mg once daily continuously starting at day 1 of course 1 (C1D1); obinutuzumab at 100 mg C1D1, 900 mg C1D2, 1000 mg C1D8, 1000 mg C1D15, 1000 mg C2D1, and 1000 mg C3D1; fludarabine at 25 mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course; and cyclophosphamide at 250mg/m2 daily for 3 days each course.
Per study protocol, all patients receive ibrutinib with obinutuzumab for courses 4-6. Patients meeting the primary endpoint of complete response/complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery and bone marrow MRD negativity received ibrutinib monotherapy for courses 7-12. Those who did not achieve the primary endpoint received six more courses of ibrutinib and obinutuzumab. All patients who are MRD negative at 1 year stop all therapy, including ibrutinib, while those who are MRD positive at 1 year may continue ibrutinib monotherapy until disease progression.
The target bone marrow MRD-negative rate after 3 cycles of iFCG is 45%. The historic C3 bone marrow MRD-negative rate with standard FCR therapy in patients with IGHV mutation is 26%, Dr. Jain said, noting that the rate in the current analysis compared favorably with both.
The treatment thus far has been generally well tolerated. Toxicities included neutropenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 9 and 12 patients, respectively), thrombocytopenia (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 12 and 1 patients, respectively), ALT/AST (grade 3 and 4 occurring in 3 and 1 patients respectively), atrial fibrillation (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), arthralgia (grade 3 occurring in 1 patient), and infusion-related reaction (grade 2 and 3 occurring in 9 patients and 1 patient, respectively).
Infections included herpes zoster, acute cholecystitis, pulmonary mycobacterium avium complex infection, and pneumocystis pneumonia, which occurred in 1 patient each, and neutropenic fever, which occurred in 4 patients.
“Notably, no patient has progressed or died in the study so far,” Dr. Jain said.
The trial continues to enroll patients, with plans for enrolling a total of 45.
Dr. Jain has received research support from and/or served on an advisory board for Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Abbvie, Prizer, Incyte, BMS, Infinity, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Celgene, Servier, Novartis Novimmune, and Adaptive Biotechnologies.
AT THE IWCLL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The overall response rate was 100%, and 83% of patients achieved MRD-negativity after three courses.
Data source: 29 patients from an investigator-initiated phase II trial.
Disclosures: Dr. Jain has received research support from and/or served on an advisory board for Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Abbvie, Prizer, Incyte, BMS, Infinity, ADC Therapeutics, Seattle Genetics, Celgene, Servier, Novartis, Novimmune, and Adaptive Biotechnologies.
ECG finding predicts AFib in ibrutinib-treated CLL
NEW YORK – A left atrial abnormality on a pretreatment electrocardiogram (ECG) is a moderately specific and sensitive finding that independently predicts risk for developing atrial fibrillation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients starting on ibrutinib, findings from a retrospective cohort study indicate.
ECGs are inexpensive and available in most physician’s offices. Routinely checking for a left atrial abnormality before starting ibrutinib would identify a patient subgroup that would benefit from increased monitoring and allow for proactive intervention strategies to reduce complications should atrial fibrillation develop, Anthony Mato, MD, said at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
Prior studies, including the RESONATE and RESONATE 2 trials, have clearly demonstrated a link between ibrutinib exposure and the development of AFib. Long-term follow-up data suggest an estimated incidence of 9% to 11%.
Dr. Mato and his colleagues used a case-control design within a two-center retrospective cohort study to test the hypothesis that pre-ibrutinib left atrial abnormality, as determined by the ECG, can identify patients at increased risk for AFib during ibrutinib-based therapy.
Of 153 consecutive CLL patients who were treated with ibrutinib 420 mg/day, 11% developed new AFib at a median of 7 months after starting treatment. Discontinuation of ibrutinib because of AFib was low, with less than 2% of the entire cohort discontinuing treatment.
Based on findings in 20 case patients and 24 controls with an available pretreatment ECG, the presence of a left atrial abnormality before ibrutinib therapy was associated with a nine times increased risk of subsequently developing AFib.
“We looked at baseline hypertension, coronary disease, diabetes, age, and sex, and, although hypertension, coronary disease, and age appeared to have some effect, they weren’t as significant as left atrial abnormality” for predicting risk of AFib, Dr. Mato noted.
On multivariate analysis, controlling for hypertension, coronary disease, and age, a left atrial abnormality continued to be a significant predictor of AFib (odds ratio, 6.6).
“We then wanted to make this more practical for clinicians who may potentially perform an ECG to estimate risk,” he said, noting that ECG test characteristics associated with left atrial abnormality were defined: Sensitivity was estimated to be 79%, specificity was 71%, positive and negative likelihood ratios were 2.7 and 0.3, respectively. Positive predictive value was 68%, and negative predictive value was 81%.
The area under the ROC curve for this single predictor was 75%, he said.
The median age of the cohort at CLL diagnosis was 61 years, and the median age at ibrutinib start was 70. Patients had undergone a median of 2 prior lines of therapy, and 87% were treated in the relapsed/refractory setting.
The median follow-up was 17 months, and the median time from CLL diagnosis to the start of ibrutinib was 73 months.
Cardiovascular characteristics prior to treatment included smoking or former smoking in 49%, hypertension in 42%, hyperlipidemia in 39%, diabetes in 17%, coronary artery disease in 12%, and valvular heart disease in 5%.
Controls were matched to cases on baseline characteristics, and only those with no pretreatment history of AFib, a pretreatment ECG, and therapeutic ibrutinib dosing (420 mg/day for at least 4 months) were included.
To minimize bias, all ECGs were reviewed by a cardio-oncologist blinded to clinical outcomes.
The findings need prospective validation, as they are limited by the retrospective study design, lack of balance with respect to cardiovascular characteristics among cases and controls, a small number of atrial fibrillation cases, and variable timing of pre-ibrutinib ECG, he said.
Patients should be educated about the signs and symptoms of AFib. “The development of AFib during ibrutinib treatment should not prevent its continuation. These patients should be managed medically,” he added.
Dr. Mato reported having no disclosures.
NEW YORK – A left atrial abnormality on a pretreatment electrocardiogram (ECG) is a moderately specific and sensitive finding that independently predicts risk for developing atrial fibrillation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients starting on ibrutinib, findings from a retrospective cohort study indicate.
ECGs are inexpensive and available in most physician’s offices. Routinely checking for a left atrial abnormality before starting ibrutinib would identify a patient subgroup that would benefit from increased monitoring and allow for proactive intervention strategies to reduce complications should atrial fibrillation develop, Anthony Mato, MD, said at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
Prior studies, including the RESONATE and RESONATE 2 trials, have clearly demonstrated a link between ibrutinib exposure and the development of AFib. Long-term follow-up data suggest an estimated incidence of 9% to 11%.
Dr. Mato and his colleagues used a case-control design within a two-center retrospective cohort study to test the hypothesis that pre-ibrutinib left atrial abnormality, as determined by the ECG, can identify patients at increased risk for AFib during ibrutinib-based therapy.
Of 153 consecutive CLL patients who were treated with ibrutinib 420 mg/day, 11% developed new AFib at a median of 7 months after starting treatment. Discontinuation of ibrutinib because of AFib was low, with less than 2% of the entire cohort discontinuing treatment.
Based on findings in 20 case patients and 24 controls with an available pretreatment ECG, the presence of a left atrial abnormality before ibrutinib therapy was associated with a nine times increased risk of subsequently developing AFib.
“We looked at baseline hypertension, coronary disease, diabetes, age, and sex, and, although hypertension, coronary disease, and age appeared to have some effect, they weren’t as significant as left atrial abnormality” for predicting risk of AFib, Dr. Mato noted.
On multivariate analysis, controlling for hypertension, coronary disease, and age, a left atrial abnormality continued to be a significant predictor of AFib (odds ratio, 6.6).
“We then wanted to make this more practical for clinicians who may potentially perform an ECG to estimate risk,” he said, noting that ECG test characteristics associated with left atrial abnormality were defined: Sensitivity was estimated to be 79%, specificity was 71%, positive and negative likelihood ratios were 2.7 and 0.3, respectively. Positive predictive value was 68%, and negative predictive value was 81%.
The area under the ROC curve for this single predictor was 75%, he said.
The median age of the cohort at CLL diagnosis was 61 years, and the median age at ibrutinib start was 70. Patients had undergone a median of 2 prior lines of therapy, and 87% were treated in the relapsed/refractory setting.
The median follow-up was 17 months, and the median time from CLL diagnosis to the start of ibrutinib was 73 months.
Cardiovascular characteristics prior to treatment included smoking or former smoking in 49%, hypertension in 42%, hyperlipidemia in 39%, diabetes in 17%, coronary artery disease in 12%, and valvular heart disease in 5%.
Controls were matched to cases on baseline characteristics, and only those with no pretreatment history of AFib, a pretreatment ECG, and therapeutic ibrutinib dosing (420 mg/day for at least 4 months) were included.
To minimize bias, all ECGs were reviewed by a cardio-oncologist blinded to clinical outcomes.
The findings need prospective validation, as they are limited by the retrospective study design, lack of balance with respect to cardiovascular characteristics among cases and controls, a small number of atrial fibrillation cases, and variable timing of pre-ibrutinib ECG, he said.
Patients should be educated about the signs and symptoms of AFib. “The development of AFib during ibrutinib treatment should not prevent its continuation. These patients should be managed medically,” he added.
Dr. Mato reported having no disclosures.
NEW YORK – A left atrial abnormality on a pretreatment electrocardiogram (ECG) is a moderately specific and sensitive finding that independently predicts risk for developing atrial fibrillation in chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients starting on ibrutinib, findings from a retrospective cohort study indicate.
ECGs are inexpensive and available in most physician’s offices. Routinely checking for a left atrial abnormality before starting ibrutinib would identify a patient subgroup that would benefit from increased monitoring and allow for proactive intervention strategies to reduce complications should atrial fibrillation develop, Anthony Mato, MD, said at the annual meeting of the International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
Prior studies, including the RESONATE and RESONATE 2 trials, have clearly demonstrated a link between ibrutinib exposure and the development of AFib. Long-term follow-up data suggest an estimated incidence of 9% to 11%.
Dr. Mato and his colleagues used a case-control design within a two-center retrospective cohort study to test the hypothesis that pre-ibrutinib left atrial abnormality, as determined by the ECG, can identify patients at increased risk for AFib during ibrutinib-based therapy.
Of 153 consecutive CLL patients who were treated with ibrutinib 420 mg/day, 11% developed new AFib at a median of 7 months after starting treatment. Discontinuation of ibrutinib because of AFib was low, with less than 2% of the entire cohort discontinuing treatment.
Based on findings in 20 case patients and 24 controls with an available pretreatment ECG, the presence of a left atrial abnormality before ibrutinib therapy was associated with a nine times increased risk of subsequently developing AFib.
“We looked at baseline hypertension, coronary disease, diabetes, age, and sex, and, although hypertension, coronary disease, and age appeared to have some effect, they weren’t as significant as left atrial abnormality” for predicting risk of AFib, Dr. Mato noted.
On multivariate analysis, controlling for hypertension, coronary disease, and age, a left atrial abnormality continued to be a significant predictor of AFib (odds ratio, 6.6).
“We then wanted to make this more practical for clinicians who may potentially perform an ECG to estimate risk,” he said, noting that ECG test characteristics associated with left atrial abnormality were defined: Sensitivity was estimated to be 79%, specificity was 71%, positive and negative likelihood ratios were 2.7 and 0.3, respectively. Positive predictive value was 68%, and negative predictive value was 81%.
The area under the ROC curve for this single predictor was 75%, he said.
The median age of the cohort at CLL diagnosis was 61 years, and the median age at ibrutinib start was 70. Patients had undergone a median of 2 prior lines of therapy, and 87% were treated in the relapsed/refractory setting.
The median follow-up was 17 months, and the median time from CLL diagnosis to the start of ibrutinib was 73 months.
Cardiovascular characteristics prior to treatment included smoking or former smoking in 49%, hypertension in 42%, hyperlipidemia in 39%, diabetes in 17%, coronary artery disease in 12%, and valvular heart disease in 5%.
Controls were matched to cases on baseline characteristics, and only those with no pretreatment history of AFib, a pretreatment ECG, and therapeutic ibrutinib dosing (420 mg/day for at least 4 months) were included.
To minimize bias, all ECGs were reviewed by a cardio-oncologist blinded to clinical outcomes.
The findings need prospective validation, as they are limited by the retrospective study design, lack of balance with respect to cardiovascular characteristics among cases and controls, a small number of atrial fibrillation cases, and variable timing of pre-ibrutinib ECG, he said.
Patients should be educated about the signs and symptoms of AFib. “The development of AFib during ibrutinib treatment should not prevent its continuation. These patients should be managed medically,” he added.
Dr. Mato reported having no disclosures.
AT THE IWCLL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Left atrial abnormality as measured using ECG was a significant predictor of AFIB (adjusted odds ratio, 6.6).
Data source: A case-control study of 44 patients within a retrospective cohort.
Disclosures: Dr. Mato reported having no disclosures.
In good-candidate CLL, don’t wait too long for alloHCT
NEW YORK – Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) using HLA-compatible donors results in excellent long-term progression-free survival in younger high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients, an analysis of data from a European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry cohort suggests.
AlloHCT may, in some patients, be preferable to sequential targeted therapy, according to Michel van Gelder, MD.
This is especially true for those progressing with Richter’s syndrome, who comprise about one-third of patients, he noted.
“On the other hand, allogeneic stem cell transplantation can induce prolonged progression-free survival,” said Dr. van Gelder of Maastricht (the Netherlands) University Medical Center.
Further, most alloHCT patients become minimal residual disease negative, which predicts prolonged progression-free survival (PFS).
“The down-side, of course, is nonrelapse mortality,” he said, noting that NRM depends on factors such as age, performance status, and HLA match.
In a recent risk factor analysis currently pending publication, he and his colleagues found, in a large group of patients, that age, performance status, remission at time of transplant, donor relationship, HLA and sex match each had an impact on 5-year PFS after alloHCT.
The more risk factors a patient had, the worse the outcome, he said.
Based on current knowledge, the place for alloHCT in CLL treatment is in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Patients can be treated first with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax followed by transplant, or they can wait for progression and then do the transplant, he said.
Those without high risk cytogenetics but with short PFS after treatment with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax may also be candidates for alloHCT, he added.
“Preferably they should be young [and] have a good matched donor and low comorbidity,” he said.
In the current study, the focus was on younger CLL patients. “We tried to identify factors that predict for a low 2-year NRM and a high 8-year PFS. We studied the impact of high risk cytogenetics, and, for this study, we chose del(17p) and del(11q), and we tried to officialize the PFS, the relapse incidence, and the nonrelapse mortality of so-called ‘good transplant risk CLL patients’ with these high cytogenetic risk factors,” he explained.
In 197 patients under age 50 years (median 46 years) with a median follow-up of 90 months in an updated EBMT registry cohort, the most important relevant prognostic factor for 2-year NRM was the donor HLA match (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.5 for a matched unrelated donor, 4.0 for a partially matched unrelated donor, both vs. a matched sibling), and predictors for poor 8-year PFS were no remission at the time of alloHCT (hazard ratio, 1.7), and partially HLA matched unrelated donor (HR, 2.8).
High-risk cytogenetics did not significantly impact 8-year PFS, Dr. van Gelder said, noting that this confirms findings from prior studies.
Most of the patients included in the analysis were fludarabine refractory, 70% had del(17p), 35% had del(11q), and the median number of prior treatments was 3. Additionally, 12% had previous autologous transplant, 62% had remission at time of transplant, and most had good performance status, he said.
Conditioning regimens varied by site, 42% of patients had an HLA-matched sibling donor, and 50% had a matched unrelated donor.
Based on the regression model, a reference patient with high risk cytogenetics (del[17p] and/or del[11q]) and good transplant characteristics (age 46 years, no prior autologous stem cell transplantation, remission at the time of alloHCT and HLA- and sex-matched sibling donor) was created. A reference patient with poor transplant characteristics (not in remission at the time of transplant, with an unrelated, non-sex-matched donor) was also created. The predicted 2-year NRM for the good transplant risk patient was 12.1%, and 8-year PFS was more than 50%, Dr. van Gelder said.
For the poor risk patient, 2-year NRM was 37%, and PFS was below 50%, he said.
“So, in conclusion ... good transplant risk young patients with a low nonrelapse mortality and high 8-year progression-free survival can be identified,” he said.
The problem in clinical practice is determining whether – and when – to do a transplant in a young patient, he continued.
“There are a lot of possibilities. Nobody knows, of course, what is the best regimen, but a problem in these patients is that, if they have progression with Richter’s transformation, then you are lost,” he said. “So, if you would like to prevent this, and you have a patient with a low nonrelapse mortality risk, maybe it is better to do the transplant before.”
As for whether alloHCT can be done after kinase inhibitor therapy, the data are limited, but data presented at EBMT 2017 suggest the approach is feasible and effective. In 43 younger patients who underwent alloHCT after ibrutinib treatment, including 37% with TP53 mutation, the 1-year NRM and PFS rates were 9% and 63%, which is “in the same range as in the era before kinase inhibitors,” Dr. van Gelder said regarding the abstract presented by Peter Dreger, MD.
In 32 patients who underwent alloHCT after idelalisib treatment, including 44% with del(17p)/del(11q) and 85% in remission at the time of alloHCT, early follow-up showed that 6-month NRM and PFS was 7% and 83%, respectively, according to another abstract presented by Johannes Schetelig, MD.
“It’s all about balancing the risks. On the one hand you can use sequential therapies. On the other, if you have patients with high-risk cytogenetics [and] CLL in remission and you have a well-matched donor, maybe you should consider the transplant earlier, Dr. van Gelder said. “If you have a good transplant patient in remission, I would propose [that you] don’t wait too long.”
Dr. van Gelder reported having no relevant disclosures.
NEW YORK – Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) using HLA-compatible donors results in excellent long-term progression-free survival in younger high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients, an analysis of data from a European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry cohort suggests.
AlloHCT may, in some patients, be preferable to sequential targeted therapy, according to Michel van Gelder, MD.
This is especially true for those progressing with Richter’s syndrome, who comprise about one-third of patients, he noted.
“On the other hand, allogeneic stem cell transplantation can induce prolonged progression-free survival,” said Dr. van Gelder of Maastricht (the Netherlands) University Medical Center.
Further, most alloHCT patients become minimal residual disease negative, which predicts prolonged progression-free survival (PFS).
“The down-side, of course, is nonrelapse mortality,” he said, noting that NRM depends on factors such as age, performance status, and HLA match.
In a recent risk factor analysis currently pending publication, he and his colleagues found, in a large group of patients, that age, performance status, remission at time of transplant, donor relationship, HLA and sex match each had an impact on 5-year PFS after alloHCT.
The more risk factors a patient had, the worse the outcome, he said.
Based on current knowledge, the place for alloHCT in CLL treatment is in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Patients can be treated first with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax followed by transplant, or they can wait for progression and then do the transplant, he said.
Those without high risk cytogenetics but with short PFS after treatment with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax may also be candidates for alloHCT, he added.
“Preferably they should be young [and] have a good matched donor and low comorbidity,” he said.
In the current study, the focus was on younger CLL patients. “We tried to identify factors that predict for a low 2-year NRM and a high 8-year PFS. We studied the impact of high risk cytogenetics, and, for this study, we chose del(17p) and del(11q), and we tried to officialize the PFS, the relapse incidence, and the nonrelapse mortality of so-called ‘good transplant risk CLL patients’ with these high cytogenetic risk factors,” he explained.
In 197 patients under age 50 years (median 46 years) with a median follow-up of 90 months in an updated EBMT registry cohort, the most important relevant prognostic factor for 2-year NRM was the donor HLA match (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.5 for a matched unrelated donor, 4.0 for a partially matched unrelated donor, both vs. a matched sibling), and predictors for poor 8-year PFS were no remission at the time of alloHCT (hazard ratio, 1.7), and partially HLA matched unrelated donor (HR, 2.8).
High-risk cytogenetics did not significantly impact 8-year PFS, Dr. van Gelder said, noting that this confirms findings from prior studies.
Most of the patients included in the analysis were fludarabine refractory, 70% had del(17p), 35% had del(11q), and the median number of prior treatments was 3. Additionally, 12% had previous autologous transplant, 62% had remission at time of transplant, and most had good performance status, he said.
Conditioning regimens varied by site, 42% of patients had an HLA-matched sibling donor, and 50% had a matched unrelated donor.
Based on the regression model, a reference patient with high risk cytogenetics (del[17p] and/or del[11q]) and good transplant characteristics (age 46 years, no prior autologous stem cell transplantation, remission at the time of alloHCT and HLA- and sex-matched sibling donor) was created. A reference patient with poor transplant characteristics (not in remission at the time of transplant, with an unrelated, non-sex-matched donor) was also created. The predicted 2-year NRM for the good transplant risk patient was 12.1%, and 8-year PFS was more than 50%, Dr. van Gelder said.
For the poor risk patient, 2-year NRM was 37%, and PFS was below 50%, he said.
“So, in conclusion ... good transplant risk young patients with a low nonrelapse mortality and high 8-year progression-free survival can be identified,” he said.
The problem in clinical practice is determining whether – and when – to do a transplant in a young patient, he continued.
“There are a lot of possibilities. Nobody knows, of course, what is the best regimen, but a problem in these patients is that, if they have progression with Richter’s transformation, then you are lost,” he said. “So, if you would like to prevent this, and you have a patient with a low nonrelapse mortality risk, maybe it is better to do the transplant before.”
As for whether alloHCT can be done after kinase inhibitor therapy, the data are limited, but data presented at EBMT 2017 suggest the approach is feasible and effective. In 43 younger patients who underwent alloHCT after ibrutinib treatment, including 37% with TP53 mutation, the 1-year NRM and PFS rates were 9% and 63%, which is “in the same range as in the era before kinase inhibitors,” Dr. van Gelder said regarding the abstract presented by Peter Dreger, MD.
In 32 patients who underwent alloHCT after idelalisib treatment, including 44% with del(17p)/del(11q) and 85% in remission at the time of alloHCT, early follow-up showed that 6-month NRM and PFS was 7% and 83%, respectively, according to another abstract presented by Johannes Schetelig, MD.
“It’s all about balancing the risks. On the one hand you can use sequential therapies. On the other, if you have patients with high-risk cytogenetics [and] CLL in remission and you have a well-matched donor, maybe you should consider the transplant earlier, Dr. van Gelder said. “If you have a good transplant patient in remission, I would propose [that you] don’t wait too long.”
Dr. van Gelder reported having no relevant disclosures.
NEW YORK – Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHCT) using HLA-compatible donors results in excellent long-term progression-free survival in younger high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients, an analysis of data from a European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry cohort suggests.
AlloHCT may, in some patients, be preferable to sequential targeted therapy, according to Michel van Gelder, MD.
This is especially true for those progressing with Richter’s syndrome, who comprise about one-third of patients, he noted.
“On the other hand, allogeneic stem cell transplantation can induce prolonged progression-free survival,” said Dr. van Gelder of Maastricht (the Netherlands) University Medical Center.
Further, most alloHCT patients become minimal residual disease negative, which predicts prolonged progression-free survival (PFS).
“The down-side, of course, is nonrelapse mortality,” he said, noting that NRM depends on factors such as age, performance status, and HLA match.
In a recent risk factor analysis currently pending publication, he and his colleagues found, in a large group of patients, that age, performance status, remission at time of transplant, donor relationship, HLA and sex match each had an impact on 5-year PFS after alloHCT.
The more risk factors a patient had, the worse the outcome, he said.
Based on current knowledge, the place for alloHCT in CLL treatment is in patients with high-risk cytogenetics. Patients can be treated first with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax followed by transplant, or they can wait for progression and then do the transplant, he said.
Those without high risk cytogenetics but with short PFS after treatment with a kinase inhibitor or venetoclax may also be candidates for alloHCT, he added.
“Preferably they should be young [and] have a good matched donor and low comorbidity,” he said.
In the current study, the focus was on younger CLL patients. “We tried to identify factors that predict for a low 2-year NRM and a high 8-year PFS. We studied the impact of high risk cytogenetics, and, for this study, we chose del(17p) and del(11q), and we tried to officialize the PFS, the relapse incidence, and the nonrelapse mortality of so-called ‘good transplant risk CLL patients’ with these high cytogenetic risk factors,” he explained.
In 197 patients under age 50 years (median 46 years) with a median follow-up of 90 months in an updated EBMT registry cohort, the most important relevant prognostic factor for 2-year NRM was the donor HLA match (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.5 for a matched unrelated donor, 4.0 for a partially matched unrelated donor, both vs. a matched sibling), and predictors for poor 8-year PFS were no remission at the time of alloHCT (hazard ratio, 1.7), and partially HLA matched unrelated donor (HR, 2.8).
High-risk cytogenetics did not significantly impact 8-year PFS, Dr. van Gelder said, noting that this confirms findings from prior studies.
Most of the patients included in the analysis were fludarabine refractory, 70% had del(17p), 35% had del(11q), and the median number of prior treatments was 3. Additionally, 12% had previous autologous transplant, 62% had remission at time of transplant, and most had good performance status, he said.
Conditioning regimens varied by site, 42% of patients had an HLA-matched sibling donor, and 50% had a matched unrelated donor.
Based on the regression model, a reference patient with high risk cytogenetics (del[17p] and/or del[11q]) and good transplant characteristics (age 46 years, no prior autologous stem cell transplantation, remission at the time of alloHCT and HLA- and sex-matched sibling donor) was created. A reference patient with poor transplant characteristics (not in remission at the time of transplant, with an unrelated, non-sex-matched donor) was also created. The predicted 2-year NRM for the good transplant risk patient was 12.1%, and 8-year PFS was more than 50%, Dr. van Gelder said.
For the poor risk patient, 2-year NRM was 37%, and PFS was below 50%, he said.
“So, in conclusion ... good transplant risk young patients with a low nonrelapse mortality and high 8-year progression-free survival can be identified,” he said.
The problem in clinical practice is determining whether – and when – to do a transplant in a young patient, he continued.
“There are a lot of possibilities. Nobody knows, of course, what is the best regimen, but a problem in these patients is that, if they have progression with Richter’s transformation, then you are lost,” he said. “So, if you would like to prevent this, and you have a patient with a low nonrelapse mortality risk, maybe it is better to do the transplant before.”
As for whether alloHCT can be done after kinase inhibitor therapy, the data are limited, but data presented at EBMT 2017 suggest the approach is feasible and effective. In 43 younger patients who underwent alloHCT after ibrutinib treatment, including 37% with TP53 mutation, the 1-year NRM and PFS rates were 9% and 63%, which is “in the same range as in the era before kinase inhibitors,” Dr. van Gelder said regarding the abstract presented by Peter Dreger, MD.
In 32 patients who underwent alloHCT after idelalisib treatment, including 44% with del(17p)/del(11q) and 85% in remission at the time of alloHCT, early follow-up showed that 6-month NRM and PFS was 7% and 83%, respectively, according to another abstract presented by Johannes Schetelig, MD.
“It’s all about balancing the risks. On the one hand you can use sequential therapies. On the other, if you have patients with high-risk cytogenetics [and] CLL in remission and you have a well-matched donor, maybe you should consider the transplant earlier, Dr. van Gelder said. “If you have a good transplant patient in remission, I would propose [that you] don’t wait too long.”
Dr. van Gelder reported having no relevant disclosures.
AT THE IWCLL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The predicted 2-year nonrelapse mortality was 12.1% for a patient who is a good transplant risk and predicted 8-year PFS was more than 50%.
Data source: An analysis of updated registry data for 197 patients.
Disclosures: Dr. van Gelder reported having no relevant disclosures
Ibrutinib response in CLL/SLL less affected by select risk factors
NEW YORK – Risk factors associated with poor outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic leukemia patients treated with standard therapies appear to have less relevance with ibrutinib treatment, according to an integrated analysis of data from the randomized, phase III RESONATE, RESONATE 2, and HELIOS trials.
In the combined analysis, at a median follow-up of 21 months, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and complete response rate (CRR) were better in ibrutinib-treated patients than in comparator-treated patients – and, in the ibrutinib-treated patients, the outcomes did not differ based on the adverse genomic factors examined, Thomas J. Kipps, MD, PhD, said at the annual International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
The trials compared well with each other, but differed in terms of number of prior therapies received by patients, he said. Furthermore, the analysis did not examine the effect of del(17p); patients with that deletion were included only in the RESONATE trial.
In RESONATE, ibrutinib was superior to ofatumumab in relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. In RESONATE 2, ibrutinib was superior to chlorambucil in treatment-naive patients with CLL/SLL. In HELIOS, ibrutinib with bendamustine/rituximab was superior to placebo with bendamustine/rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL.
In the new multivariate analysis of the pooled data from these trials – adjusting for the four genomic risk factors and age, sex, ECOG performance status, cytopenia, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), bulky disease, and number of prior therapies – only having had one or more vs. no prior therapies, and having two or more vs. one prior therapies was associated with shorter PFS and OS in ibrutinib-treated patients, with a trend toward significance.
In comparator-treated patients, however, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), complex karyotype, male sex, two or more prior therapies, and bulky disease all were associated with significantly shorter PFS. Complex karyotype, male sex, bulky disease, ECOG performance status greater than 1, and elevated LDH were associated with significantly shorter OS.
“We need to debate on what the significance of this is and how that can be incorporated into our idea about first-line therapies,” said Dr. Kipps, who was an investigator in both RESONATE trials and is a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.
In univariate analysis of data from ibrutinib-treated patients, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), trisomy 12, and complex karyotype were generally not associated with shorter PFS, OS, or lower ORR or CRR.
Overall survival with and without unmutated IGHV was 78% and 84%, respectively; with and without trisomy 12 was 82% and 80%, respectively; and with and without complex karyotype was 77% and 78%, respectively.
ORR, for example, was comparable in the presence (90%) and absence (89%) of unmutated IGHV in ibrutinib-treated patients, as was CRR, at 29% and 26%, respectively.
In the presence and absence of trisomy 12, ORR was 85% and 91%, respectively; CRR was 33% and 22%.
In the presence and absence of complex karyotype, ORR was 88% and 89%, respectively, and CRR was 18% and 24%.
In the presence and absence of del(11q), ORR was 91% and 90%, respectively, and CRR was 22% and 27%.
The only difference that reached statistical significance was the complete response rate with trisomy 12, which favored the presence of trisomy 12.
Interestingly, the ibrutinib-treated patients with del(11q) had a trend toward longer PFS and OS, compared with those without del(11q), said Dr. Kipps.
At 36 months, PFS was 74% with the presence of del(11q) and 68% with the absence of del(11q) (hazard ratio, 0.73 vs. 1.88 in comparator-treated patients), and overall survival at 42 months was 80% in patients with del(11q) and 78% in those without del(11q) (HR, 0.73), Dr. Kipps said.
“The [finding in the] patients with the complex karyotype was a bit surprising, and I think this requires further analysis,” he said, explaining that complex karyotype actually was associated with a shorter PFS in patients treated on the comparator arm, and that this finding conflicts with earlier data.
The findings suggest ibrutinib-treated patients with trisomy 12, for reasons that are unclear, had a significantly higher complete response rate, but not greater PFS or OS vs. those without trisomy 12, Dr. Kipps said.
“It’s also interesting that ... unmutated antibody genes or del(11q) or complex karyotype were adverse prognostic factors in patients treated with comparator treatments, but not necessarily in patients treated with ibrutinib-based therapy,” he said.
Furthermore, although a prior phase II study involving heavily pretreated patients suggested that del(11q) may have adverse prognostic influence on PFS, that finding may not be borne out in patients with fewer lines of prior therapy.
The findings suggest that genomic risk factors associated with poor outcomes with initial chemoimmunotherapy may be less apparent in patients treated with ibrutinib.
“I think this is important, because it may then turn a prognostic factor into a predictive factor, meaning, a predictor of adverse outcomes for a given type of therapy as opposed to adverse prognostic value overall,” he concluded.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica, Pharmacyclics) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in January 2015 for the treatment of CLL after previous therapy. Dr. Kipps has received research funding from and/or served as a consultant or advisor for AbbVie, Genentech, Gilead, and Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company.
[email protected]
NEW YORK – Risk factors associated with poor outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic leukemia patients treated with standard therapies appear to have less relevance with ibrutinib treatment, according to an integrated analysis of data from the randomized, phase III RESONATE, RESONATE 2, and HELIOS trials.
In the combined analysis, at a median follow-up of 21 months, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and complete response rate (CRR) were better in ibrutinib-treated patients than in comparator-treated patients – and, in the ibrutinib-treated patients, the outcomes did not differ based on the adverse genomic factors examined, Thomas J. Kipps, MD, PhD, said at the annual International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
The trials compared well with each other, but differed in terms of number of prior therapies received by patients, he said. Furthermore, the analysis did not examine the effect of del(17p); patients with that deletion were included only in the RESONATE trial.
In RESONATE, ibrutinib was superior to ofatumumab in relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. In RESONATE 2, ibrutinib was superior to chlorambucil in treatment-naive patients with CLL/SLL. In HELIOS, ibrutinib with bendamustine/rituximab was superior to placebo with bendamustine/rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL.
In the new multivariate analysis of the pooled data from these trials – adjusting for the four genomic risk factors and age, sex, ECOG performance status, cytopenia, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), bulky disease, and number of prior therapies – only having had one or more vs. no prior therapies, and having two or more vs. one prior therapies was associated with shorter PFS and OS in ibrutinib-treated patients, with a trend toward significance.
In comparator-treated patients, however, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), complex karyotype, male sex, two or more prior therapies, and bulky disease all were associated with significantly shorter PFS. Complex karyotype, male sex, bulky disease, ECOG performance status greater than 1, and elevated LDH were associated with significantly shorter OS.
“We need to debate on what the significance of this is and how that can be incorporated into our idea about first-line therapies,” said Dr. Kipps, who was an investigator in both RESONATE trials and is a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.
In univariate analysis of data from ibrutinib-treated patients, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), trisomy 12, and complex karyotype were generally not associated with shorter PFS, OS, or lower ORR or CRR.
Overall survival with and without unmutated IGHV was 78% and 84%, respectively; with and without trisomy 12 was 82% and 80%, respectively; and with and without complex karyotype was 77% and 78%, respectively.
ORR, for example, was comparable in the presence (90%) and absence (89%) of unmutated IGHV in ibrutinib-treated patients, as was CRR, at 29% and 26%, respectively.
In the presence and absence of trisomy 12, ORR was 85% and 91%, respectively; CRR was 33% and 22%.
In the presence and absence of complex karyotype, ORR was 88% and 89%, respectively, and CRR was 18% and 24%.
In the presence and absence of del(11q), ORR was 91% and 90%, respectively, and CRR was 22% and 27%.
The only difference that reached statistical significance was the complete response rate with trisomy 12, which favored the presence of trisomy 12.
Interestingly, the ibrutinib-treated patients with del(11q) had a trend toward longer PFS and OS, compared with those without del(11q), said Dr. Kipps.
At 36 months, PFS was 74% with the presence of del(11q) and 68% with the absence of del(11q) (hazard ratio, 0.73 vs. 1.88 in comparator-treated patients), and overall survival at 42 months was 80% in patients with del(11q) and 78% in those without del(11q) (HR, 0.73), Dr. Kipps said.
“The [finding in the] patients with the complex karyotype was a bit surprising, and I think this requires further analysis,” he said, explaining that complex karyotype actually was associated with a shorter PFS in patients treated on the comparator arm, and that this finding conflicts with earlier data.
The findings suggest ibrutinib-treated patients with trisomy 12, for reasons that are unclear, had a significantly higher complete response rate, but not greater PFS or OS vs. those without trisomy 12, Dr. Kipps said.
“It’s also interesting that ... unmutated antibody genes or del(11q) or complex karyotype were adverse prognostic factors in patients treated with comparator treatments, but not necessarily in patients treated with ibrutinib-based therapy,” he said.
Furthermore, although a prior phase II study involving heavily pretreated patients suggested that del(11q) may have adverse prognostic influence on PFS, that finding may not be borne out in patients with fewer lines of prior therapy.
The findings suggest that genomic risk factors associated with poor outcomes with initial chemoimmunotherapy may be less apparent in patients treated with ibrutinib.
“I think this is important, because it may then turn a prognostic factor into a predictive factor, meaning, a predictor of adverse outcomes for a given type of therapy as opposed to adverse prognostic value overall,” he concluded.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica, Pharmacyclics) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in January 2015 for the treatment of CLL after previous therapy. Dr. Kipps has received research funding from and/or served as a consultant or advisor for AbbVie, Genentech, Gilead, and Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company.
[email protected]
NEW YORK – Risk factors associated with poor outcomes in chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic leukemia patients treated with standard therapies appear to have less relevance with ibrutinib treatment, according to an integrated analysis of data from the randomized, phase III RESONATE, RESONATE 2, and HELIOS trials.
In the combined analysis, at a median follow-up of 21 months, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and complete response rate (CRR) were better in ibrutinib-treated patients than in comparator-treated patients – and, in the ibrutinib-treated patients, the outcomes did not differ based on the adverse genomic factors examined, Thomas J. Kipps, MD, PhD, said at the annual International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.
The trials compared well with each other, but differed in terms of number of prior therapies received by patients, he said. Furthermore, the analysis did not examine the effect of del(17p); patients with that deletion were included only in the RESONATE trial.
In RESONATE, ibrutinib was superior to ofatumumab in relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL. In RESONATE 2, ibrutinib was superior to chlorambucil in treatment-naive patients with CLL/SLL. In HELIOS, ibrutinib with bendamustine/rituximab was superior to placebo with bendamustine/rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL.
In the new multivariate analysis of the pooled data from these trials – adjusting for the four genomic risk factors and age, sex, ECOG performance status, cytopenia, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), bulky disease, and number of prior therapies – only having had one or more vs. no prior therapies, and having two or more vs. one prior therapies was associated with shorter PFS and OS in ibrutinib-treated patients, with a trend toward significance.
In comparator-treated patients, however, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), complex karyotype, male sex, two or more prior therapies, and bulky disease all were associated with significantly shorter PFS. Complex karyotype, male sex, bulky disease, ECOG performance status greater than 1, and elevated LDH were associated with significantly shorter OS.
“We need to debate on what the significance of this is and how that can be incorporated into our idea about first-line therapies,” said Dr. Kipps, who was an investigator in both RESONATE trials and is a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego.
In univariate analysis of data from ibrutinib-treated patients, unmutated IGHV, del(11q), trisomy 12, and complex karyotype were generally not associated with shorter PFS, OS, or lower ORR or CRR.
Overall survival with and without unmutated IGHV was 78% and 84%, respectively; with and without trisomy 12 was 82% and 80%, respectively; and with and without complex karyotype was 77% and 78%, respectively.
ORR, for example, was comparable in the presence (90%) and absence (89%) of unmutated IGHV in ibrutinib-treated patients, as was CRR, at 29% and 26%, respectively.
In the presence and absence of trisomy 12, ORR was 85% and 91%, respectively; CRR was 33% and 22%.
In the presence and absence of complex karyotype, ORR was 88% and 89%, respectively, and CRR was 18% and 24%.
In the presence and absence of del(11q), ORR was 91% and 90%, respectively, and CRR was 22% and 27%.
The only difference that reached statistical significance was the complete response rate with trisomy 12, which favored the presence of trisomy 12.
Interestingly, the ibrutinib-treated patients with del(11q) had a trend toward longer PFS and OS, compared with those without del(11q), said Dr. Kipps.
At 36 months, PFS was 74% with the presence of del(11q) and 68% with the absence of del(11q) (hazard ratio, 0.73 vs. 1.88 in comparator-treated patients), and overall survival at 42 months was 80% in patients with del(11q) and 78% in those without del(11q) (HR, 0.73), Dr. Kipps said.
“The [finding in the] patients with the complex karyotype was a bit surprising, and I think this requires further analysis,” he said, explaining that complex karyotype actually was associated with a shorter PFS in patients treated on the comparator arm, and that this finding conflicts with earlier data.
The findings suggest ibrutinib-treated patients with trisomy 12, for reasons that are unclear, had a significantly higher complete response rate, but not greater PFS or OS vs. those without trisomy 12, Dr. Kipps said.
“It’s also interesting that ... unmutated antibody genes or del(11q) or complex karyotype were adverse prognostic factors in patients treated with comparator treatments, but not necessarily in patients treated with ibrutinib-based therapy,” he said.
Furthermore, although a prior phase II study involving heavily pretreated patients suggested that del(11q) may have adverse prognostic influence on PFS, that finding may not be borne out in patients with fewer lines of prior therapy.
The findings suggest that genomic risk factors associated with poor outcomes with initial chemoimmunotherapy may be less apparent in patients treated with ibrutinib.
“I think this is important, because it may then turn a prognostic factor into a predictive factor, meaning, a predictor of adverse outcomes for a given type of therapy as opposed to adverse prognostic value overall,” he concluded.
Ibrutinib (Imbruvica, Pharmacyclics) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in January 2015 for the treatment of CLL after previous therapy. Dr. Kipps has received research funding from and/or served as a consultant or advisor for AbbVie, Genentech, Gilead, and Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company.
[email protected]
AT THE IWCLL MEETING
Key clinical point:
Major finding: In ibrutinib-treated patients, overall survival with and without unmutated IGHV was 78% and 84%, respectively; with and without trisomy 12 was 82% and 80%, respectively; and with and without complex karyotype was 77% and 78%, respectively.
Data source: A pooled analysis of data from 1,210 patients from three randomized phase III trials.
Disclosures: Dr. Kipps has received research funding from and/or served as a consultant or advisor for AbbVie, Genentech, Gilead, and Pharmacyclics, an AbbVie company.
Targeted drugs transform CLL management
NEW YORK – New, targeted treatments, especially ibrutinib (Imbruvica), have sharply shifted prognosis for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and raised new issues for managing these patients now that they survive years longer.
“Ibrutinib has produced a profound change in survival” of patients with CLL, Timothy G. Call, MD, a hematologist/oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., said at a conference held by Imedex. It “has changed the playing field.” No other new agent so far “has produced the same level of progression-free survival in CLL.”
An analysis published in early 2017 projected a greater than 50% jump in U.S. patients living with CLL from 2011, before the advent of targeted oral drugs, to 2025, when the study predicted that there will be nearly 200,000 U.S. patients living with CLL (J Clin Oncol. 2017 January;35[2]:166-74). With targeted drugs like ibrutinib and idelalisib (Zydelig) costing about $130,000 per patient each year, the projected cost for managing the U.S. CLL population is on track to rise to more than $5 billion by 2025, a nearly sixfold increase, compared with CLL patient expenditures in 2011, according to this analysis.
The impact of the higher cost of treatment is already being felt more acutely by many patients because of recent cuts in assistance from the Patient Access Network, which helps patients with copays but recently had to put a lid on CLL assistance availability when its funding availability hit a wall, Dr. Call said.
On the clinical side, there are new considerations triggered by greater patient longevity. “As we make patients live longer with CLL, we need to double down on the diagnosis and treatment of its complications,” such as watching for development of secondary cancers, Dr. Call said in an interview. This stems from the reduced immunosurveillance in patients with CLL and their resulting increased susceptibility to developing environmentally-triggered malignancies like lung and skin cancers. Other long-term implications of impaired immunosurveillance include increased infection susceptibility, an ongoing risk for Richter’s or Hodgkin lymphoma transformation, and a risk for autoimmune complications, such as red blood cell aplasia and transfusion-associated graft versus host disease.
Patients with CLL can also be susceptible to complications from long-term use of the targeted drug they’re on. The new targeted agents can trigger bruising and bleeding, diarrhea, rash, fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and arrhythmia, he noted.
Potential adverse effects, specifically from ibrutinib, include a 3% risk for a major bleed, a 10% rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation, and a 20% risk for new hypertension, Dr. Call said. Before starting ibrutinib, patients should undergo screening for hepatitis B virus infection and receive prophylaxis against herpes zoster activation with acyclovir or valacyclovir. If the patient starts with a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3, it might be prudent to prophylax the patient against Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia.
However, even if a toxicity develops on ibrutinib, Dr. Call recommended reducing the dosage rather than discontinuing the drug. “I rarely see a loss in response from a reduced dosage of ibrutinib,” he said.
Because ibrutinib is primarily metabolized via the liver enzyme cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A), other drugs that enhance or reduce the activity of this enzyme produce significant changes in ibrutinib levels. The Food and Drug Administration considers ibrutinib a “sensitive substrate” for fluctuations in CYP3A activity. Strong CYP3A inhibitors include clarithromycin, ketoconazole, and various anti-HIV medications; moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors include ciprofloxacin, and verapamil; and inducers of CYP3A include phenytoin and rifampin. A more complete list of the drugs that inhibit or induce CYP3A activity can be found at the FDA website: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm093664.htm#table2-2.
Dr. Call presented the combined experience from several U.S. Mayo Clinic centers for 118 patients treated with ibrutinib after the drug received FDA marketing approval in November 2013. The clinicians identified 75 patients (64%) who were on a concurrent medication that could potentially increase the risk for ibrutinib toxicity and 4 patients (3%) who were on a concurrent drug with the potential to reduce ibrutinib efficacy (Leukemia Lymphoma, 2017;58[6]:1376-83).
“We don’t change the dosage of ibrutinib when the patient is on a CYP3A inducer, but, if the patient is getting a CYP3A inhibitor, we change that to another drug or reduce the ibrutinib dosage,” Dr. Call said.
Dr. Call had no disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
NEW YORK – New, targeted treatments, especially ibrutinib (Imbruvica), have sharply shifted prognosis for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and raised new issues for managing these patients now that they survive years longer.
“Ibrutinib has produced a profound change in survival” of patients with CLL, Timothy G. Call, MD, a hematologist/oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., said at a conference held by Imedex. It “has changed the playing field.” No other new agent so far “has produced the same level of progression-free survival in CLL.”
An analysis published in early 2017 projected a greater than 50% jump in U.S. patients living with CLL from 2011, before the advent of targeted oral drugs, to 2025, when the study predicted that there will be nearly 200,000 U.S. patients living with CLL (J Clin Oncol. 2017 January;35[2]:166-74). With targeted drugs like ibrutinib and idelalisib (Zydelig) costing about $130,000 per patient each year, the projected cost for managing the U.S. CLL population is on track to rise to more than $5 billion by 2025, a nearly sixfold increase, compared with CLL patient expenditures in 2011, according to this analysis.
The impact of the higher cost of treatment is already being felt more acutely by many patients because of recent cuts in assistance from the Patient Access Network, which helps patients with copays but recently had to put a lid on CLL assistance availability when its funding availability hit a wall, Dr. Call said.
On the clinical side, there are new considerations triggered by greater patient longevity. “As we make patients live longer with CLL, we need to double down on the diagnosis and treatment of its complications,” such as watching for development of secondary cancers, Dr. Call said in an interview. This stems from the reduced immunosurveillance in patients with CLL and their resulting increased susceptibility to developing environmentally-triggered malignancies like lung and skin cancers. Other long-term implications of impaired immunosurveillance include increased infection susceptibility, an ongoing risk for Richter’s or Hodgkin lymphoma transformation, and a risk for autoimmune complications, such as red blood cell aplasia and transfusion-associated graft versus host disease.
Patients with CLL can also be susceptible to complications from long-term use of the targeted drug they’re on. The new targeted agents can trigger bruising and bleeding, diarrhea, rash, fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and arrhythmia, he noted.
Potential adverse effects, specifically from ibrutinib, include a 3% risk for a major bleed, a 10% rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation, and a 20% risk for new hypertension, Dr. Call said. Before starting ibrutinib, patients should undergo screening for hepatitis B virus infection and receive prophylaxis against herpes zoster activation with acyclovir or valacyclovir. If the patient starts with a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3, it might be prudent to prophylax the patient against Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia.
However, even if a toxicity develops on ibrutinib, Dr. Call recommended reducing the dosage rather than discontinuing the drug. “I rarely see a loss in response from a reduced dosage of ibrutinib,” he said.
Because ibrutinib is primarily metabolized via the liver enzyme cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A), other drugs that enhance or reduce the activity of this enzyme produce significant changes in ibrutinib levels. The Food and Drug Administration considers ibrutinib a “sensitive substrate” for fluctuations in CYP3A activity. Strong CYP3A inhibitors include clarithromycin, ketoconazole, and various anti-HIV medications; moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors include ciprofloxacin, and verapamil; and inducers of CYP3A include phenytoin and rifampin. A more complete list of the drugs that inhibit or induce CYP3A activity can be found at the FDA website: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm093664.htm#table2-2.
Dr. Call presented the combined experience from several U.S. Mayo Clinic centers for 118 patients treated with ibrutinib after the drug received FDA marketing approval in November 2013. The clinicians identified 75 patients (64%) who were on a concurrent medication that could potentially increase the risk for ibrutinib toxicity and 4 patients (3%) who were on a concurrent drug with the potential to reduce ibrutinib efficacy (Leukemia Lymphoma, 2017;58[6]:1376-83).
“We don’t change the dosage of ibrutinib when the patient is on a CYP3A inducer, but, if the patient is getting a CYP3A inhibitor, we change that to another drug or reduce the ibrutinib dosage,” Dr. Call said.
Dr. Call had no disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
NEW YORK – New, targeted treatments, especially ibrutinib (Imbruvica), have sharply shifted prognosis for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and raised new issues for managing these patients now that they survive years longer.
“Ibrutinib has produced a profound change in survival” of patients with CLL, Timothy G. Call, MD, a hematologist/oncologist at the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., said at a conference held by Imedex. It “has changed the playing field.” No other new agent so far “has produced the same level of progression-free survival in CLL.”
An analysis published in early 2017 projected a greater than 50% jump in U.S. patients living with CLL from 2011, before the advent of targeted oral drugs, to 2025, when the study predicted that there will be nearly 200,000 U.S. patients living with CLL (J Clin Oncol. 2017 January;35[2]:166-74). With targeted drugs like ibrutinib and idelalisib (Zydelig) costing about $130,000 per patient each year, the projected cost for managing the U.S. CLL population is on track to rise to more than $5 billion by 2025, a nearly sixfold increase, compared with CLL patient expenditures in 2011, according to this analysis.
The impact of the higher cost of treatment is already being felt more acutely by many patients because of recent cuts in assistance from the Patient Access Network, which helps patients with copays but recently had to put a lid on CLL assistance availability when its funding availability hit a wall, Dr. Call said.
On the clinical side, there are new considerations triggered by greater patient longevity. “As we make patients live longer with CLL, we need to double down on the diagnosis and treatment of its complications,” such as watching for development of secondary cancers, Dr. Call said in an interview. This stems from the reduced immunosurveillance in patients with CLL and their resulting increased susceptibility to developing environmentally-triggered malignancies like lung and skin cancers. Other long-term implications of impaired immunosurveillance include increased infection susceptibility, an ongoing risk for Richter’s or Hodgkin lymphoma transformation, and a risk for autoimmune complications, such as red blood cell aplasia and transfusion-associated graft versus host disease.
Patients with CLL can also be susceptible to complications from long-term use of the targeted drug they’re on. The new targeted agents can trigger bruising and bleeding, diarrhea, rash, fatigue, muscle and joint aches, and arrhythmia, he noted.
Potential adverse effects, specifically from ibrutinib, include a 3% risk for a major bleed, a 10% rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation, and a 20% risk for new hypertension, Dr. Call said. Before starting ibrutinib, patients should undergo screening for hepatitis B virus infection and receive prophylaxis against herpes zoster activation with acyclovir or valacyclovir. If the patient starts with a CD4 cell count below 200 cells/mm3, it might be prudent to prophylax the patient against Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia.
However, even if a toxicity develops on ibrutinib, Dr. Call recommended reducing the dosage rather than discontinuing the drug. “I rarely see a loss in response from a reduced dosage of ibrutinib,” he said.
Because ibrutinib is primarily metabolized via the liver enzyme cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A), other drugs that enhance or reduce the activity of this enzyme produce significant changes in ibrutinib levels. The Food and Drug Administration considers ibrutinib a “sensitive substrate” for fluctuations in CYP3A activity. Strong CYP3A inhibitors include clarithromycin, ketoconazole, and various anti-HIV medications; moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors include ciprofloxacin, and verapamil; and inducers of CYP3A include phenytoin and rifampin. A more complete list of the drugs that inhibit or induce CYP3A activity can be found at the FDA website: https://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DevelopmentApprovalProcess/DevelopmentResources/DrugInteractionsLabeling/ucm093664.htm#table2-2.
Dr. Call presented the combined experience from several U.S. Mayo Clinic centers for 118 patients treated with ibrutinib after the drug received FDA marketing approval in November 2013. The clinicians identified 75 patients (64%) who were on a concurrent medication that could potentially increase the risk for ibrutinib toxicity and 4 patients (3%) who were on a concurrent drug with the potential to reduce ibrutinib efficacy (Leukemia Lymphoma, 2017;58[6]:1376-83).
“We don’t change the dosage of ibrutinib when the patient is on a CYP3A inducer, but, if the patient is getting a CYP3A inhibitor, we change that to another drug or reduce the ibrutinib dosage,” Dr. Call said.
Dr. Call had no disclosures.
[email protected]
On Twitter @mitchelzoler
Venetoclax produces durable effects in relapsed/refractory CLL
ORLANDO – In patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the results with venetoclax continue to be encouraging, and recent findings from a multicenter phase Ib study hint that venetoclax may also provide durable responses – even with treatment discontinuation.
Venetoclax is an orally bioavailable selective BCL2 inhibitor that is typically given in an open-ended fashion. Toxicity – including tumor lysis syndrome – is always a concern, however, and the issue of whether open-ended administration is necessary is an important question, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
In one phase II multicenter study of venetoclax monotherapy in 107 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL with del(17p) at 31 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe, the overall response rate was 79.4% based on an independent review committee assessment, (Lancet Oncol. 2016[17]:768-78).
Treatment included once-daily venetoclax beginning with a dose of 20 mg that was ramped up to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg over 4-5 weeks, followed by daily 400 mg continuous dosing until disease progression or discontinuation for another reason.
Notably, 18 of 85 patients from the study who achieved an objective response were minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative in peripheral blood samples – an outcome that has not been seen with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, noted Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
The durability of venetoclax’s activity in the study was 84.7% at 12 months in all responders; 100% in those who achieved complete response, complete response with incomplete recovery of blood counts, or nodular partial remission; and 94.4% in the MRD-negative patients.
The authors concluded that venetoclax monotherapy is active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory del(17p) chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and that given the distinct mechanism of action of this new therapeutic option for these very poor-prognosis patients, it deserves further investigation as part of a combination or as part of sequential treatment with other novel targeted agents.
The finding that patients on venetoclax can achieve MRD negativity also raised the question of whether treatment can be stopped, Dr. Zelenetz said.
“Because who wants to be on a drug forever? Nobody,” he added.
This question was explored in a study published in February by Seymour et al., which provided early evidence that stopping treatment may indeed be feasible in some patients (Lancet Oncol. 2017;18[2]:230-40).
Venetoclax in this study was given in a dose-escalating fashion to target doses of 200-600 mg daily, in 49 patients with relapsed or refractory “moderately heavily pretreated” CLL. Rituximab was added at a dose of 375 mg/m2 in month 1 and 500 mg/m2 in months 2-6.
Patients had the option of stopping treatment if they achieved a complete response.
The overall response rate was 86%, including a complete response in 51% of patients. Two-year estimates for progression-free survival and ongoing response were 82% and 89% respectively.
MRD negativity was attained in 80% of complete responders and 57% of patients overall. Thirteen responders discontinued all treatment, and at the time of publication, 11 MRD-negative responders who discontinued therapy remained progression free off therapy. Two MRD-positive patients who achieved complete response and discontinued therapy progressed after 2 years, but were able to recapture response once they restarted the drug.
“So it’s really quite interesting. We might have durable responses after discontinuation of this drug in an MRD-negative state,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Of note, the latest update to the NCCN guidelines for the treatment of CLL/SLL (small lymphocytic lymphoma) included the addition of “+/– rituximab” as part of the “suggested treatment regimen” of venetoclax in the relapsed/refractory disease setting. This recommendation is category 2A, meaning it is based on lower level evidence with uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Venetoclax: adverse events of special interest
In these studies, venetoclax was considered well tolerated, but attention to adverse events and their prevention and management – particularly with respect to tumor lysis syndrome – is essential, Dr. Zelenetz said.
In the phase II study by Stilgenbauer et al., adverse events of special interest included grade 3/4 neutropenia, which occurred in 40% of patients. This was manageable with dose interruptions (five patients) or reductions (four patients), or with granulocyte–colony stimulating factor and antibiotics (six patients, including one who received only antibiotics). None of the patients permanently discontinued treatment.
Infections occurred in 72% of patients, and grade 3 or greater infections occurred in 20% of patients. The most common overall were upper respiratory infections (15%), nasopharyngitis (14%), and urinary tract infections (9%).
Serious infections occurring in two or more patients were pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection, and upper respiratory tract infection. One patient died from septic shock, 10 had infections leading to venetoclax interruption, and 2 had infections leading to dose reduction.
No mandated infection prophylaxis was used in this study.
Serious adverse events occurred in 59 patients (55%). The most common, occurring in at least 5% of patients, were pyrexia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, pneumonia, and febrile neutropenia. Thirteen had adverse events leading to dose reductions, most commonly due to neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and febrile neutropenia.
Laboratory-confirmed tumor lysis syndrome was reported in five patients during the ramp-up period, including four who developed the syndrome within the first 2 days of treatment. All cases resolved without clinical sequelae. Treatment was continued without interruption in three patients with tumor lysis syndrome, who received only electrolyte management, and two patients had a 1-day treatment interruption. Both resumed dosing the next day.
In the phase Ib study by Seymour et al., common grade 1-2 toxicities included upper respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, and nausea occurring in 57%, 55%, and 53% of patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 76% of 49 patients, and most often included neutropenia (12% of patients), thrombocytopenia (16%), anemia (14%), febrile neutropenia (12%), and leukopenia (12%). The most common serious adverse events were pyrexia (12%), febrile neutropenia (10%), lower respiratory tract infection (6%), and pneumonia (6%). Clinical tumor lysis syndrome occurred in two patients who initiated venetoclax at 50 mg, one of whom died as a result.
After enhancement of tumor lysis syndrome prophylaxis measures and reduction of the starting dose of venetoclax to 20 mg, no additional cases occurred, the authors reported.
Mitigating tumor lysis syndrome risk
General measures for mitigating the risk of tumor lysis syndrome include identification of patients at increased risk, initiation of prophylaxis with hydration and a uric acid reducing agent, and initiation of venetoclax at a 20 mg dose for 1 week, with gradual step-wise ramp-up over 5 weeks to the target dose, Dr. Zelenetz noted.
As reported by Stilgenbauer, et al., patients with a nodal mass less than 5 cm and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) of 25,000 or less are considered at low risk for tumor lysis syndrome, those with a nodal mass of 5 cm to less than 10 cm or ALC greater than 25,000 are at medium risk, and those with a nodal mass of 10 cm or greater or nodal mass of 5 cm or greater and ALC of greater than 25,000 are considered to be at high risk.
High-risk patients in the study received inpatient venetoclax dosing and monitoring at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours with 20 mg and 50 mg dosing, as well as outpatient intravenous hydration at 100 mg if there was no indication to hospitalize, and post-dose 8-24 hour laboratory monitoring at 100 mg and above.
Medium-risk patients received IV hydration at 20 and 50 mg dosing, inpatient care if creatinine clearance was less than 80 mL/min or if there was a high tumor burden, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose escalations. Low-risk patients received outpatient dosing at all dose levels in the absence of an indication to hospitalize, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose increases.
“Unfortunately, the dose-limiting toxicity of venetoclax is fatal tumor lysis,” Dr. Zelenetz said, adding that by increasing the dose slowly over time according to current treatment recommendations – from 20 mg, to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg at weekly intervals, this complication can be avoided.
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Genentech, the maker of venetoclax (Venclexta), and a wide variety of other drug companies.
ORLANDO – In patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the results with venetoclax continue to be encouraging, and recent findings from a multicenter phase Ib study hint that venetoclax may also provide durable responses – even with treatment discontinuation.
Venetoclax is an orally bioavailable selective BCL2 inhibitor that is typically given in an open-ended fashion. Toxicity – including tumor lysis syndrome – is always a concern, however, and the issue of whether open-ended administration is necessary is an important question, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
In one phase II multicenter study of venetoclax monotherapy in 107 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL with del(17p) at 31 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe, the overall response rate was 79.4% based on an independent review committee assessment, (Lancet Oncol. 2016[17]:768-78).
Treatment included once-daily venetoclax beginning with a dose of 20 mg that was ramped up to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg over 4-5 weeks, followed by daily 400 mg continuous dosing until disease progression or discontinuation for another reason.
Notably, 18 of 85 patients from the study who achieved an objective response were minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative in peripheral blood samples – an outcome that has not been seen with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, noted Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
The durability of venetoclax’s activity in the study was 84.7% at 12 months in all responders; 100% in those who achieved complete response, complete response with incomplete recovery of blood counts, or nodular partial remission; and 94.4% in the MRD-negative patients.
The authors concluded that venetoclax monotherapy is active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory del(17p) chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and that given the distinct mechanism of action of this new therapeutic option for these very poor-prognosis patients, it deserves further investigation as part of a combination or as part of sequential treatment with other novel targeted agents.
The finding that patients on venetoclax can achieve MRD negativity also raised the question of whether treatment can be stopped, Dr. Zelenetz said.
“Because who wants to be on a drug forever? Nobody,” he added.
This question was explored in a study published in February by Seymour et al., which provided early evidence that stopping treatment may indeed be feasible in some patients (Lancet Oncol. 2017;18[2]:230-40).
Venetoclax in this study was given in a dose-escalating fashion to target doses of 200-600 mg daily, in 49 patients with relapsed or refractory “moderately heavily pretreated” CLL. Rituximab was added at a dose of 375 mg/m2 in month 1 and 500 mg/m2 in months 2-6.
Patients had the option of stopping treatment if they achieved a complete response.
The overall response rate was 86%, including a complete response in 51% of patients. Two-year estimates for progression-free survival and ongoing response were 82% and 89% respectively.
MRD negativity was attained in 80% of complete responders and 57% of patients overall. Thirteen responders discontinued all treatment, and at the time of publication, 11 MRD-negative responders who discontinued therapy remained progression free off therapy. Two MRD-positive patients who achieved complete response and discontinued therapy progressed after 2 years, but were able to recapture response once they restarted the drug.
“So it’s really quite interesting. We might have durable responses after discontinuation of this drug in an MRD-negative state,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Of note, the latest update to the NCCN guidelines for the treatment of CLL/SLL (small lymphocytic lymphoma) included the addition of “+/– rituximab” as part of the “suggested treatment regimen” of venetoclax in the relapsed/refractory disease setting. This recommendation is category 2A, meaning it is based on lower level evidence with uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Venetoclax: adverse events of special interest
In these studies, venetoclax was considered well tolerated, but attention to adverse events and their prevention and management – particularly with respect to tumor lysis syndrome – is essential, Dr. Zelenetz said.
In the phase II study by Stilgenbauer et al., adverse events of special interest included grade 3/4 neutropenia, which occurred in 40% of patients. This was manageable with dose interruptions (five patients) or reductions (four patients), or with granulocyte–colony stimulating factor and antibiotics (six patients, including one who received only antibiotics). None of the patients permanently discontinued treatment.
Infections occurred in 72% of patients, and grade 3 or greater infections occurred in 20% of patients. The most common overall were upper respiratory infections (15%), nasopharyngitis (14%), and urinary tract infections (9%).
Serious infections occurring in two or more patients were pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection, and upper respiratory tract infection. One patient died from septic shock, 10 had infections leading to venetoclax interruption, and 2 had infections leading to dose reduction.
No mandated infection prophylaxis was used in this study.
Serious adverse events occurred in 59 patients (55%). The most common, occurring in at least 5% of patients, were pyrexia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, pneumonia, and febrile neutropenia. Thirteen had adverse events leading to dose reductions, most commonly due to neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and febrile neutropenia.
Laboratory-confirmed tumor lysis syndrome was reported in five patients during the ramp-up period, including four who developed the syndrome within the first 2 days of treatment. All cases resolved without clinical sequelae. Treatment was continued without interruption in three patients with tumor lysis syndrome, who received only electrolyte management, and two patients had a 1-day treatment interruption. Both resumed dosing the next day.
In the phase Ib study by Seymour et al., common grade 1-2 toxicities included upper respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, and nausea occurring in 57%, 55%, and 53% of patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 76% of 49 patients, and most often included neutropenia (12% of patients), thrombocytopenia (16%), anemia (14%), febrile neutropenia (12%), and leukopenia (12%). The most common serious adverse events were pyrexia (12%), febrile neutropenia (10%), lower respiratory tract infection (6%), and pneumonia (6%). Clinical tumor lysis syndrome occurred in two patients who initiated venetoclax at 50 mg, one of whom died as a result.
After enhancement of tumor lysis syndrome prophylaxis measures and reduction of the starting dose of venetoclax to 20 mg, no additional cases occurred, the authors reported.
Mitigating tumor lysis syndrome risk
General measures for mitigating the risk of tumor lysis syndrome include identification of patients at increased risk, initiation of prophylaxis with hydration and a uric acid reducing agent, and initiation of venetoclax at a 20 mg dose for 1 week, with gradual step-wise ramp-up over 5 weeks to the target dose, Dr. Zelenetz noted.
As reported by Stilgenbauer, et al., patients with a nodal mass less than 5 cm and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) of 25,000 or less are considered at low risk for tumor lysis syndrome, those with a nodal mass of 5 cm to less than 10 cm or ALC greater than 25,000 are at medium risk, and those with a nodal mass of 10 cm or greater or nodal mass of 5 cm or greater and ALC of greater than 25,000 are considered to be at high risk.
High-risk patients in the study received inpatient venetoclax dosing and monitoring at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours with 20 mg and 50 mg dosing, as well as outpatient intravenous hydration at 100 mg if there was no indication to hospitalize, and post-dose 8-24 hour laboratory monitoring at 100 mg and above.
Medium-risk patients received IV hydration at 20 and 50 mg dosing, inpatient care if creatinine clearance was less than 80 mL/min or if there was a high tumor burden, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose escalations. Low-risk patients received outpatient dosing at all dose levels in the absence of an indication to hospitalize, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose increases.
“Unfortunately, the dose-limiting toxicity of venetoclax is fatal tumor lysis,” Dr. Zelenetz said, adding that by increasing the dose slowly over time according to current treatment recommendations – from 20 mg, to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg at weekly intervals, this complication can be avoided.
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Genentech, the maker of venetoclax (Venclexta), and a wide variety of other drug companies.
ORLANDO – In patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), the results with venetoclax continue to be encouraging, and recent findings from a multicenter phase Ib study hint that venetoclax may also provide durable responses – even with treatment discontinuation.
Venetoclax is an orally bioavailable selective BCL2 inhibitor that is typically given in an open-ended fashion. Toxicity – including tumor lysis syndrome – is always a concern, however, and the issue of whether open-ended administration is necessary is an important question, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
In one phase II multicenter study of venetoclax monotherapy in 107 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL with del(17p) at 31 centers in the United States, Canada, and Europe, the overall response rate was 79.4% based on an independent review committee assessment, (Lancet Oncol. 2016[17]:768-78).
Treatment included once-daily venetoclax beginning with a dose of 20 mg that was ramped up to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg over 4-5 weeks, followed by daily 400 mg continuous dosing until disease progression or discontinuation for another reason.
Notably, 18 of 85 patients from the study who achieved an objective response were minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative in peripheral blood samples – an outcome that has not been seen with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, noted Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.
The durability of venetoclax’s activity in the study was 84.7% at 12 months in all responders; 100% in those who achieved complete response, complete response with incomplete recovery of blood counts, or nodular partial remission; and 94.4% in the MRD-negative patients.
The authors concluded that venetoclax monotherapy is active and well tolerated in patients with relapsed or refractory del(17p) chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and that given the distinct mechanism of action of this new therapeutic option for these very poor-prognosis patients, it deserves further investigation as part of a combination or as part of sequential treatment with other novel targeted agents.
The finding that patients on venetoclax can achieve MRD negativity also raised the question of whether treatment can be stopped, Dr. Zelenetz said.
“Because who wants to be on a drug forever? Nobody,” he added.
This question was explored in a study published in February by Seymour et al., which provided early evidence that stopping treatment may indeed be feasible in some patients (Lancet Oncol. 2017;18[2]:230-40).
Venetoclax in this study was given in a dose-escalating fashion to target doses of 200-600 mg daily, in 49 patients with relapsed or refractory “moderately heavily pretreated” CLL. Rituximab was added at a dose of 375 mg/m2 in month 1 and 500 mg/m2 in months 2-6.
Patients had the option of stopping treatment if they achieved a complete response.
The overall response rate was 86%, including a complete response in 51% of patients. Two-year estimates for progression-free survival and ongoing response were 82% and 89% respectively.
MRD negativity was attained in 80% of complete responders and 57% of patients overall. Thirteen responders discontinued all treatment, and at the time of publication, 11 MRD-negative responders who discontinued therapy remained progression free off therapy. Two MRD-positive patients who achieved complete response and discontinued therapy progressed after 2 years, but were able to recapture response once they restarted the drug.
“So it’s really quite interesting. We might have durable responses after discontinuation of this drug in an MRD-negative state,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Of note, the latest update to the NCCN guidelines for the treatment of CLL/SLL (small lymphocytic lymphoma) included the addition of “+/– rituximab” as part of the “suggested treatment regimen” of venetoclax in the relapsed/refractory disease setting. This recommendation is category 2A, meaning it is based on lower level evidence with uniform NCCN consensus that the intervention is appropriate.
Venetoclax: adverse events of special interest
In these studies, venetoclax was considered well tolerated, but attention to adverse events and their prevention and management – particularly with respect to tumor lysis syndrome – is essential, Dr. Zelenetz said.
In the phase II study by Stilgenbauer et al., adverse events of special interest included grade 3/4 neutropenia, which occurred in 40% of patients. This was manageable with dose interruptions (five patients) or reductions (four patients), or with granulocyte–colony stimulating factor and antibiotics (six patients, including one who received only antibiotics). None of the patients permanently discontinued treatment.
Infections occurred in 72% of patients, and grade 3 or greater infections occurred in 20% of patients. The most common overall were upper respiratory infections (15%), nasopharyngitis (14%), and urinary tract infections (9%).
Serious infections occurring in two or more patients were pneumonia, lower respiratory tract infection, and upper respiratory tract infection. One patient died from septic shock, 10 had infections leading to venetoclax interruption, and 2 had infections leading to dose reduction.
No mandated infection prophylaxis was used in this study.
Serious adverse events occurred in 59 patients (55%). The most common, occurring in at least 5% of patients, were pyrexia, autoimmune hemolytic anemia, pneumonia, and febrile neutropenia. Thirteen had adverse events leading to dose reductions, most commonly due to neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and febrile neutropenia.
Laboratory-confirmed tumor lysis syndrome was reported in five patients during the ramp-up period, including four who developed the syndrome within the first 2 days of treatment. All cases resolved without clinical sequelae. Treatment was continued without interruption in three patients with tumor lysis syndrome, who received only electrolyte management, and two patients had a 1-day treatment interruption. Both resumed dosing the next day.
In the phase Ib study by Seymour et al., common grade 1-2 toxicities included upper respiratory tract infections, diarrhea, and nausea occurring in 57%, 55%, and 53% of patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 76% of 49 patients, and most often included neutropenia (12% of patients), thrombocytopenia (16%), anemia (14%), febrile neutropenia (12%), and leukopenia (12%). The most common serious adverse events were pyrexia (12%), febrile neutropenia (10%), lower respiratory tract infection (6%), and pneumonia (6%). Clinical tumor lysis syndrome occurred in two patients who initiated venetoclax at 50 mg, one of whom died as a result.
After enhancement of tumor lysis syndrome prophylaxis measures and reduction of the starting dose of venetoclax to 20 mg, no additional cases occurred, the authors reported.
Mitigating tumor lysis syndrome risk
General measures for mitigating the risk of tumor lysis syndrome include identification of patients at increased risk, initiation of prophylaxis with hydration and a uric acid reducing agent, and initiation of venetoclax at a 20 mg dose for 1 week, with gradual step-wise ramp-up over 5 weeks to the target dose, Dr. Zelenetz noted.
As reported by Stilgenbauer, et al., patients with a nodal mass less than 5 cm and absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) of 25,000 or less are considered at low risk for tumor lysis syndrome, those with a nodal mass of 5 cm to less than 10 cm or ALC greater than 25,000 are at medium risk, and those with a nodal mass of 10 cm or greater or nodal mass of 5 cm or greater and ALC of greater than 25,000 are considered to be at high risk.
High-risk patients in the study received inpatient venetoclax dosing and monitoring at 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours with 20 mg and 50 mg dosing, as well as outpatient intravenous hydration at 100 mg if there was no indication to hospitalize, and post-dose 8-24 hour laboratory monitoring at 100 mg and above.
Medium-risk patients received IV hydration at 20 and 50 mg dosing, inpatient care if creatinine clearance was less than 80 mL/min or if there was a high tumor burden, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose escalations. Low-risk patients received outpatient dosing at all dose levels in the absence of an indication to hospitalize, and postdose 8- and 24-hour laboratory monitoring after the initial dose and at dose increases.
“Unfortunately, the dose-limiting toxicity of venetoclax is fatal tumor lysis,” Dr. Zelenetz said, adding that by increasing the dose slowly over time according to current treatment recommendations – from 20 mg, to 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg at weekly intervals, this complication can be avoided.
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Genentech, the maker of venetoclax (Venclexta), and a wide variety of other drug companies.
EXPERT ANALYSIS AT THE NCCN ANNUAL CONFERENCE
Advanced CLL treatment approach depends on comorbidity burden
ORLANDO – The choice of first-line therapy in symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients depends largely on comorbidity burden, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“This is a disease of elderly patients. Frequently they have comorbidities,” he said. Categorizing these patients as having a low or high comorbidity burden can be done with the Cumulative Index Rating Scale score, which involves scoring of all organ systems on a 0-5 scale representing “not affected” to “extremely disabled.”
“We use this to determine first-line therapy,” said Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York. Dr. Zelenetz is chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Guidelines panel.
Patients with a score of greater than 12 on the 0- to 56-point scale, are “no-go” patients with respect to therapy, and are typically treated only with palliative approaches. Those with a score of 7-12 (“slow-go” patients) have a significant comorbidity burden, but can undergo treatment, thought typically to be at reduced intensity. Those with a score of 0-6 are “go-go” patients with respect to treatment, as they are physically fit, have excellent renal function, and have no significant comorbidities, he said.
Treatment options for ‘go-go’ CLL patients
Among the treatment options for the latter is FCR–the combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab, which was shown in the phase III CLL10 trial of patients with advanced CLL to be associated with improved complete response rates compared with the popular regimen of bendamustine and rituximab (BR), both overall and in patients under age 65. In older patients, the advantage disappeared, Dr. Zelenetz said.
FCR was also associated with improved outcomes vs. BR in patients with del(11q).
The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival, which favored FCR (median of 55.2 vs. 41.7 months; hazard ratio, 1.643), he said, noting that no difference was seen between the two regimens in terms of overall survival.
In a recent publication, MD Anderson Cancer Center reported its experience with its first 300 CLL patients treated with FCR. With long-term follow-up of at least 9-10 years (median of 12.8 years), patients in this trial have done extremely well.
“But interestingly, when you stratify these patients by whether they have IGHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain variable] mutated or unmutated [disease], the IGHV mutated patients have something that looks a whole lot like a survival plateau, and that survival plateau is not trivial – it’s about 60%,” he said. “So there is a group of patients with CLL who are, in fact, curable with conventional chemoimmunotherapy.
“This is an appropriate treatment for a young, fit, ‘go-go’ patient, and it has a big implication,” he said. That is, patients who are young and fit require IGHV mutation testing, as “you will absolutely choose FCR chemotherapy for the fit, young patients who has IGHV mutated disease.
“In that setting IGHV testing is now mandatory,” he stressed, noting that the benefits in this population extend to overall survival as well as progression-free survival.
Dr. Zelenetz also emphasized the need for increasing the single dose of rituximab from 375 mg/m2 during cycle 1 to 500 mg/m2 during cycles 2-6 in those receiving FCR, as this is often forgotten.
The data demonstrating the efficacy of FCR were based on this approach, he said.
Fludarabine is to be given at a dose of 25 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 250 mg/m2 – both for 2-4 days during cycle 1 and for 1-3 days during cycles 2-6.
Treatment options for ‘slow-go’ CLL patients
In “slow-go” patients, an interesting approach is to use new anti-CD20 antibodies such as ofatumumab and obinutuzumab, which have features that are distinct from rituximab.
Both have been studied in CLL. The CLL11 trial compared chlorambucil, rituximab+chlorambucil, and obinutuzumab+chlorambucil, and the latest analysis showed substantial improvement in progression-free survival with obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. the other two regimens (26.7 months vs. 11.1 and 16.3 months, respectively), Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that rituximab+chlorambucil was also superior to chlorambucil alone, but that only the obinutuzumab regimen had an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil alone.
An updated analysis to be reported soon will show emerging evidence of a survival advantage of obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. rituximab+chlorambucil, he said.
“This suggests that obinutuzumab is a far better antibody,” he added, noting that the reasons for that are under debate, “but the way it’s given, it works better in CLL, and that, I think is unequivocal.”
A similar study looking at chlorambucil with and without ofatumumab in “slow-go” patients also demonstrated an improvement in PFS with ofatumumab, but showed “no difference whatsoever in overall survival.”
“This is actually very similar to the rituximab result, and I actually call this the ‘death of ofatumumab’ study, because clearly obinutuzumab in CLL is, I think, a superior anti-CD20 antibody,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Studies in which obinutuzumab is substituted for rituximab in the FCR combination are currently underway as are a number of other studies of obinutuzumab, he noted.
Another treatment option in the up-front setting is ibrutinib, which was shown to be effective in the RESONATE 2 trial .
“But notice, a very, very small [complete response rate]. CRs are very difficult to achieve with ibrutinib alone, so this drug is given continuously, lifelong,” Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that it was, however, associated with an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil.
“Should this be the standard of care? I think it is in patients who have del(17p) or mutation of TP53. Outside of that setting, I’m still concerned about the cost of long-term tolerability of the agent,” he said.
Future of first-line CLL treatment
Avoidance of long-term therapy and conventional chemotherapy in patients with CLL is a goal, he added, noting that new understanding from studies in patients in the relapsed/refractory CLL setting – such as recent findings from a phase Ib study of venetoclax plus rituximab, which demonstrated potentially durable responses after treatment discontinuation in minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative patients – are providing insights into achieving MRD negativity that could be applied in the front line treatment setting.
“We’re still trying to figure out how to best use this. We want to try to use some of this knowledge about achievement of MRD negativity in the up-front setting so we don’t have to give patients long-term therapy, and we would like to avoid conventional chemotherapy,” he said. “So I’m hoping we’re going to be able to replace chronic long-term therapy of CLL with a defined course of treatment with high levels of MRD negativity.”
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Acerta Pharma, Amgen Inc., BeiGene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, MEI Pharma, NanoString Technologies, Pharmacyclics, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Roche Laboratories, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America.
ORLANDO – The choice of first-line therapy in symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients depends largely on comorbidity burden, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“This is a disease of elderly patients. Frequently they have comorbidities,” he said. Categorizing these patients as having a low or high comorbidity burden can be done with the Cumulative Index Rating Scale score, which involves scoring of all organ systems on a 0-5 scale representing “not affected” to “extremely disabled.”
“We use this to determine first-line therapy,” said Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York. Dr. Zelenetz is chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Guidelines panel.
Patients with a score of greater than 12 on the 0- to 56-point scale, are “no-go” patients with respect to therapy, and are typically treated only with palliative approaches. Those with a score of 7-12 (“slow-go” patients) have a significant comorbidity burden, but can undergo treatment, thought typically to be at reduced intensity. Those with a score of 0-6 are “go-go” patients with respect to treatment, as they are physically fit, have excellent renal function, and have no significant comorbidities, he said.
Treatment options for ‘go-go’ CLL patients
Among the treatment options for the latter is FCR–the combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab, which was shown in the phase III CLL10 trial of patients with advanced CLL to be associated with improved complete response rates compared with the popular regimen of bendamustine and rituximab (BR), both overall and in patients under age 65. In older patients, the advantage disappeared, Dr. Zelenetz said.
FCR was also associated with improved outcomes vs. BR in patients with del(11q).
The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival, which favored FCR (median of 55.2 vs. 41.7 months; hazard ratio, 1.643), he said, noting that no difference was seen between the two regimens in terms of overall survival.
In a recent publication, MD Anderson Cancer Center reported its experience with its first 300 CLL patients treated with FCR. With long-term follow-up of at least 9-10 years (median of 12.8 years), patients in this trial have done extremely well.
“But interestingly, when you stratify these patients by whether they have IGHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain variable] mutated or unmutated [disease], the IGHV mutated patients have something that looks a whole lot like a survival plateau, and that survival plateau is not trivial – it’s about 60%,” he said. “So there is a group of patients with CLL who are, in fact, curable with conventional chemoimmunotherapy.
“This is an appropriate treatment for a young, fit, ‘go-go’ patient, and it has a big implication,” he said. That is, patients who are young and fit require IGHV mutation testing, as “you will absolutely choose FCR chemotherapy for the fit, young patients who has IGHV mutated disease.
“In that setting IGHV testing is now mandatory,” he stressed, noting that the benefits in this population extend to overall survival as well as progression-free survival.
Dr. Zelenetz also emphasized the need for increasing the single dose of rituximab from 375 mg/m2 during cycle 1 to 500 mg/m2 during cycles 2-6 in those receiving FCR, as this is often forgotten.
The data demonstrating the efficacy of FCR were based on this approach, he said.
Fludarabine is to be given at a dose of 25 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 250 mg/m2 – both for 2-4 days during cycle 1 and for 1-3 days during cycles 2-6.
Treatment options for ‘slow-go’ CLL patients
In “slow-go” patients, an interesting approach is to use new anti-CD20 antibodies such as ofatumumab and obinutuzumab, which have features that are distinct from rituximab.
Both have been studied in CLL. The CLL11 trial compared chlorambucil, rituximab+chlorambucil, and obinutuzumab+chlorambucil, and the latest analysis showed substantial improvement in progression-free survival with obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. the other two regimens (26.7 months vs. 11.1 and 16.3 months, respectively), Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that rituximab+chlorambucil was also superior to chlorambucil alone, but that only the obinutuzumab regimen had an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil alone.
An updated analysis to be reported soon will show emerging evidence of a survival advantage of obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. rituximab+chlorambucil, he said.
“This suggests that obinutuzumab is a far better antibody,” he added, noting that the reasons for that are under debate, “but the way it’s given, it works better in CLL, and that, I think is unequivocal.”
A similar study looking at chlorambucil with and without ofatumumab in “slow-go” patients also demonstrated an improvement in PFS with ofatumumab, but showed “no difference whatsoever in overall survival.”
“This is actually very similar to the rituximab result, and I actually call this the ‘death of ofatumumab’ study, because clearly obinutuzumab in CLL is, I think, a superior anti-CD20 antibody,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Studies in which obinutuzumab is substituted for rituximab in the FCR combination are currently underway as are a number of other studies of obinutuzumab, he noted.
Another treatment option in the up-front setting is ibrutinib, which was shown to be effective in the RESONATE 2 trial .
“But notice, a very, very small [complete response rate]. CRs are very difficult to achieve with ibrutinib alone, so this drug is given continuously, lifelong,” Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that it was, however, associated with an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil.
“Should this be the standard of care? I think it is in patients who have del(17p) or mutation of TP53. Outside of that setting, I’m still concerned about the cost of long-term tolerability of the agent,” he said.
Future of first-line CLL treatment
Avoidance of long-term therapy and conventional chemotherapy in patients with CLL is a goal, he added, noting that new understanding from studies in patients in the relapsed/refractory CLL setting – such as recent findings from a phase Ib study of venetoclax plus rituximab, which demonstrated potentially durable responses after treatment discontinuation in minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative patients – are providing insights into achieving MRD negativity that could be applied in the front line treatment setting.
“We’re still trying to figure out how to best use this. We want to try to use some of this knowledge about achievement of MRD negativity in the up-front setting so we don’t have to give patients long-term therapy, and we would like to avoid conventional chemotherapy,” he said. “So I’m hoping we’re going to be able to replace chronic long-term therapy of CLL with a defined course of treatment with high levels of MRD negativity.”
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Acerta Pharma, Amgen Inc., BeiGene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, MEI Pharma, NanoString Technologies, Pharmacyclics, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Roche Laboratories, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America.
ORLANDO – The choice of first-line therapy in symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients depends largely on comorbidity burden, Andrew D. Zelenetz, MD, PhD, said at the annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
“This is a disease of elderly patients. Frequently they have comorbidities,” he said. Categorizing these patients as having a low or high comorbidity burden can be done with the Cumulative Index Rating Scale score, which involves scoring of all organ systems on a 0-5 scale representing “not affected” to “extremely disabled.”
“We use this to determine first-line therapy,” said Dr. Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York. Dr. Zelenetz is chair of the NCCN Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma Guidelines panel.
Patients with a score of greater than 12 on the 0- to 56-point scale, are “no-go” patients with respect to therapy, and are typically treated only with palliative approaches. Those with a score of 7-12 (“slow-go” patients) have a significant comorbidity burden, but can undergo treatment, thought typically to be at reduced intensity. Those with a score of 0-6 are “go-go” patients with respect to treatment, as they are physically fit, have excellent renal function, and have no significant comorbidities, he said.
Treatment options for ‘go-go’ CLL patients
Among the treatment options for the latter is FCR–the combination of fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab, which was shown in the phase III CLL10 trial of patients with advanced CLL to be associated with improved complete response rates compared with the popular regimen of bendamustine and rituximab (BR), both overall and in patients under age 65. In older patients, the advantage disappeared, Dr. Zelenetz said.
FCR was also associated with improved outcomes vs. BR in patients with del(11q).
The primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival, which favored FCR (median of 55.2 vs. 41.7 months; hazard ratio, 1.643), he said, noting that no difference was seen between the two regimens in terms of overall survival.
In a recent publication, MD Anderson Cancer Center reported its experience with its first 300 CLL patients treated with FCR. With long-term follow-up of at least 9-10 years (median of 12.8 years), patients in this trial have done extremely well.
“But interestingly, when you stratify these patients by whether they have IGHV [immunoglobulin heavy chain variable] mutated or unmutated [disease], the IGHV mutated patients have something that looks a whole lot like a survival plateau, and that survival plateau is not trivial – it’s about 60%,” he said. “So there is a group of patients with CLL who are, in fact, curable with conventional chemoimmunotherapy.
“This is an appropriate treatment for a young, fit, ‘go-go’ patient, and it has a big implication,” he said. That is, patients who are young and fit require IGHV mutation testing, as “you will absolutely choose FCR chemotherapy for the fit, young patients who has IGHV mutated disease.
“In that setting IGHV testing is now mandatory,” he stressed, noting that the benefits in this population extend to overall survival as well as progression-free survival.
Dr. Zelenetz also emphasized the need for increasing the single dose of rituximab from 375 mg/m2 during cycle 1 to 500 mg/m2 during cycles 2-6 in those receiving FCR, as this is often forgotten.
The data demonstrating the efficacy of FCR were based on this approach, he said.
Fludarabine is to be given at a dose of 25 mg/m2, and cyclophosphamide at a dose of 250 mg/m2 – both for 2-4 days during cycle 1 and for 1-3 days during cycles 2-6.
Treatment options for ‘slow-go’ CLL patients
In “slow-go” patients, an interesting approach is to use new anti-CD20 antibodies such as ofatumumab and obinutuzumab, which have features that are distinct from rituximab.
Both have been studied in CLL. The CLL11 trial compared chlorambucil, rituximab+chlorambucil, and obinutuzumab+chlorambucil, and the latest analysis showed substantial improvement in progression-free survival with obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. the other two regimens (26.7 months vs. 11.1 and 16.3 months, respectively), Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that rituximab+chlorambucil was also superior to chlorambucil alone, but that only the obinutuzumab regimen had an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil alone.
An updated analysis to be reported soon will show emerging evidence of a survival advantage of obinutuzumab+chlorambucil vs. rituximab+chlorambucil, he said.
“This suggests that obinutuzumab is a far better antibody,” he added, noting that the reasons for that are under debate, “but the way it’s given, it works better in CLL, and that, I think is unequivocal.”
A similar study looking at chlorambucil with and without ofatumumab in “slow-go” patients also demonstrated an improvement in PFS with ofatumumab, but showed “no difference whatsoever in overall survival.”
“This is actually very similar to the rituximab result, and I actually call this the ‘death of ofatumumab’ study, because clearly obinutuzumab in CLL is, I think, a superior anti-CD20 antibody,” Dr. Zelenetz said.
Studies in which obinutuzumab is substituted for rituximab in the FCR combination are currently underway as are a number of other studies of obinutuzumab, he noted.
Another treatment option in the up-front setting is ibrutinib, which was shown to be effective in the RESONATE 2 trial .
“But notice, a very, very small [complete response rate]. CRs are very difficult to achieve with ibrutinib alone, so this drug is given continuously, lifelong,” Dr. Zelenetz said, noting that it was, however, associated with an overall survival advantage vs. chlorambucil.
“Should this be the standard of care? I think it is in patients who have del(17p) or mutation of TP53. Outside of that setting, I’m still concerned about the cost of long-term tolerability of the agent,” he said.
Future of first-line CLL treatment
Avoidance of long-term therapy and conventional chemotherapy in patients with CLL is a goal, he added, noting that new understanding from studies in patients in the relapsed/refractory CLL setting – such as recent findings from a phase Ib study of venetoclax plus rituximab, which demonstrated potentially durable responses after treatment discontinuation in minimal residual disease (MRD)–negative patients – are providing insights into achieving MRD negativity that could be applied in the front line treatment setting.
“We’re still trying to figure out how to best use this. We want to try to use some of this knowledge about achievement of MRD negativity in the up-front setting so we don’t have to give patients long-term therapy, and we would like to avoid conventional chemotherapy,” he said. “So I’m hoping we’re going to be able to replace chronic long-term therapy of CLL with a defined course of treatment with high levels of MRD negativity.”
Dr. Zelenetz reported receiving consulting fees, honoraria, and/or grant/research support from Acerta Pharma, Amgen Inc., BeiGene, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, Janssen Pharmaceutica Products, MEI Pharma, NanoString Technologies, Pharmacyclics, Portola Pharmaceuticals, Roche Laboratories, and Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM THE NCCN ANNUAL CONFERENCE
CLL boost in PFS came at high cost in side effects
Add-on idelalisib boosted the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia by over 9 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 416 participants. But that improvement came at the price of a 4% absolute increase in treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death.
At a median follow-up of 14 months, the median PFS was 20.8 months in the 207 patients in the idelalisib group and 11.1 months in the 209 patients in the placebo group. However, 11% of patients in the idelalisib group and 7% of those in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events that resulted in death.
Overall, 68% of those in the idelalisib group, and 44% in the placebo group, had serious adverse events that included febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, and pyrexia. Six deaths resulted from infections in the idelalisib group, and three deaths resulted from infections in the placebo group.
All 416 participants in the international, multicenter study had measurable lymphadenopathy by CT or MRI and progression of chronic lymphocytic leukemia within 36 months of their last therapy. Patients were stratified by high-risk genetic mutations (IGHV, del[17p], or TP53) and refractory versus relapsed disease. Participants were randomly assigned to receive daily idelalisib or placebo, plus a maximum of six cycles of bendamustine and rituximab.
The primary endpoint of PFS was assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population.
A 150 mg dose of idelalisib or placebo was given twice daily until disease progressed or drug-related toxicity was intolerable. Bendamustine was given intravenously at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 for six 28-day cycles. Rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and at 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2–6.
The trial is ongoing, the researchers reported.
The trial is funded by Gilead Sciences, the maker of idelalisib (Zydelig). Dr. Zelenetz disclosed consulting with multiple drug companies, including Gilead.
[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales
Add-on idelalisib boosted the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia by over 9 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 416 participants. But that improvement came at the price of a 4% absolute increase in treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death.
At a median follow-up of 14 months, the median PFS was 20.8 months in the 207 patients in the idelalisib group and 11.1 months in the 209 patients in the placebo group. However, 11% of patients in the idelalisib group and 7% of those in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events that resulted in death.
Overall, 68% of those in the idelalisib group, and 44% in the placebo group, had serious adverse events that included febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, and pyrexia. Six deaths resulted from infections in the idelalisib group, and three deaths resulted from infections in the placebo group.
All 416 participants in the international, multicenter study had measurable lymphadenopathy by CT or MRI and progression of chronic lymphocytic leukemia within 36 months of their last therapy. Patients were stratified by high-risk genetic mutations (IGHV, del[17p], or TP53) and refractory versus relapsed disease. Participants were randomly assigned to receive daily idelalisib or placebo, plus a maximum of six cycles of bendamustine and rituximab.
The primary endpoint of PFS was assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population.
A 150 mg dose of idelalisib or placebo was given twice daily until disease progressed or drug-related toxicity was intolerable. Bendamustine was given intravenously at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 for six 28-day cycles. Rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and at 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2–6.
The trial is ongoing, the researchers reported.
The trial is funded by Gilead Sciences, the maker of idelalisib (Zydelig). Dr. Zelenetz disclosed consulting with multiple drug companies, including Gilead.
[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales
Add-on idelalisib boosted the progression-free survival (PFS) of patients with relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia by over 9 months in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 416 participants. But that improvement came at the price of a 4% absolute increase in treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death.
At a median follow-up of 14 months, the median PFS was 20.8 months in the 207 patients in the idelalisib group and 11.1 months in the 209 patients in the placebo group. However, 11% of patients in the idelalisib group and 7% of those in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events that resulted in death.
Overall, 68% of those in the idelalisib group, and 44% in the placebo group, had serious adverse events that included febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, and pyrexia. Six deaths resulted from infections in the idelalisib group, and three deaths resulted from infections in the placebo group.
All 416 participants in the international, multicenter study had measurable lymphadenopathy by CT or MRI and progression of chronic lymphocytic leukemia within 36 months of their last therapy. Patients were stratified by high-risk genetic mutations (IGHV, del[17p], or TP53) and refractory versus relapsed disease. Participants were randomly assigned to receive daily idelalisib or placebo, plus a maximum of six cycles of bendamustine and rituximab.
The primary endpoint of PFS was assessed by an independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population.
A 150 mg dose of idelalisib or placebo was given twice daily until disease progressed or drug-related toxicity was intolerable. Bendamustine was given intravenously at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 for six 28-day cycles. Rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycle 1 and at 500 mg/m2 on day 1 of cycles 2–6.
The trial is ongoing, the researchers reported.
The trial is funded by Gilead Sciences, the maker of idelalisib (Zydelig). Dr. Zelenetz disclosed consulting with multiple drug companies, including Gilead.
[email protected]
On Twitter @maryjodales
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Add-on idelalisib boosted the progression-free survival of patients with relapsed and refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia by over 9 months.
Data source: A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 416 participants.
Disclosures: Gilead Sciences, the maker of idelalisib (Zydelig), sponsored the study. Dr. Zelenetz disclosed consulting with multiple drug companies, including Gilead.
CAR designers report high B-cell cancer response rates
ORLANDO – Patients with advanced hematologic malignancies of B-cell lineage had robust immune responses following infusion of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)–T-cell construct designed to deliver a specific balance of antigens, investigators reported.
Adults with relapsed or refractory B-lineage acute myeloid leukemia (ALL), non–Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received a CAR-T cell construct consisting of autologous CD4-positive and CD-8-positive T cells that were transduced separately, recombined, and then delivered in a single infusion had comparatively high overall response and complete response rates, reported Cameron Turtle, MBBS, PhD, from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.
“We know that patients have a highly variable CD4 to CD8 ratio, so by actually controlling this and separately transducing, expanding, and then reformulating in this defined composition, we’re able to eliminate one source of variability in CAR-T cell products,” Dr. Turtle said at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
In preclinical studies, an even balance of CD4-positive and CD8-positive central memory T cells or naive T cells evoked more potent immune responses against B-cell malignancies in mice than CD19-positive cells, he explained
To see whether this would also hold true in humans, the investigators enrolled into a phase I/II trial adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell malignancies, including ALL (36 patients), NHL (41), and CLL (24). No patients were excluded on the basis of either absolute lymphocyte, circulating tumors cells, history of stem cell transplant, or results of in vitro test expansions.
All patients underwent leukapheresis for harvesting of T-cells, and populations of CD4- and CD8-positive cells were separated and transduced with a lentiviral vector to express a CD19 CAR and a truncated human epidermal growth factor receptor that allowed tracing of the transduced cells via flow cytometry. The patients underwent lymphodepleting chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (for the earliest patients), or cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine. Fifteen days after leukapheresis, the separated, transduced, and expanded cells were combined and delivered back to patients in a single infusion at one of three dose levels: 2 x 105, 2 x 106, or 2 x 107 CAR-T cells/kg.
ALL results
Two of the 36 patients with ALL died from complications of the CAR-T cell infusion process prior to evaluation. The 34 remaining patients all had morphologic bone marrow complete responses (CR). Of this group, 32 also had bone marrow CR on flow cytometry.
Using immunoglobulin H (IgH) deep sequencing in a subset of 20 patients 3 weeks after CAR-T cell infusion, the investigators could not detect the malignant IgH index clone in 13 of the patients, and found fewer than 10 copies in the bone marrow of 5 patients.
Six of seven patients with extramedullary disease at baseline had a complete response. The remaining patient in this group had an equivocal PET scan result, and experienced a relapse 2 months after assessment.
The investigators also determined that the lymphodepletion regimen may affect overall results, based on the finding that 10 of 12 patients who received cyclophosphamide alone achieved a CR, but seven of these 10 patients had a relapse within a few months. Of these seven patients. five received a second T-cell infusion, but none had significant T-cell expansion. The investigators traced the failure of the second attempt to a CD8-mediated transgene immune response to a murine single-chain variable fragment used in the construct.
For subsequent patients, they altered the lymphodepletion regimen to include fludarabine to prevent priming of the anti-CAR transgenic immune response. This modification resulted in improved progression-free survival and overall survival for subsequent patients receiving a second infusion, Dr. Turtle said.
NHL results
Of the 41 patients with NHL, 30 (73%) had aggressive histologies, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell, and Burkitt lymphomas, and 11 (27%) had indolent histologies, including mantle cell and follicular lymphomas. Most of the patients had received multiple prior lines of therapy, and 19 (46%) had undergone either an autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplant.
Of the 39 evaluable patients who completed therapy, the overall response rate was 67%, including 13 (39%) with CR. Dr. Turtle noted that the CR rate was substantially higher among patients who received cyclophosphamide and fludarabine lymphodepletion, compared with cyclophosphamide alone.
There were also a few responses, including two CRs, among patients with indolent histologies, he said.
CLL, safety results
All 24 patients with CLL had previously received ibrutinib (Imbruvica). Of this group, 19 either had no significant responses to the drug, inactivating mutations, or intolerable toxicities. All but 1 of the 24 patients also had high-risk cytogenetics.
Of the 16 ibrutinib-refractory patients who were evaluable for restaging, 14 had no evidence of disease in bone marrow by flow cytometry at 4 weeks. The overall response rate in this group was 69%, which included four CRs.
Among a majority of all patients, toxicity with the CAR-T cell therapy was mild to moderate. Early cytokine changes appeared to be predictive of serious adverse events such as the cytokine release syndrome, a finding that may allow clinicians to intervene early to prevent complications, Dr. Turtle said.
In the CAR-T cell therapy, “multiple things affect the response and toxicity, including CAR T-cell dose, disease burden, the anti-CAR transgene immune response and the lymphodepletion regimen, not to mention other patient factors that we’re still sorting out,” he commented.
The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health, Life Science Development Fund, Juno Therapeutics and the Bezos Family Foundation. Dr. Turtle disclosed consultancy, honoraria, and/or research funding from Juno Therapeutics and Seattle Genetics.
ORLANDO – Patients with advanced hematologic malignancies of B-cell lineage had robust immune responses following infusion of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)–T-cell construct designed to deliver a specific balance of antigens, investigators reported.
Adults with relapsed or refractory B-lineage acute myeloid leukemia (ALL), non–Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received a CAR-T cell construct consisting of autologous CD4-positive and CD-8-positive T cells that were transduced separately, recombined, and then delivered in a single infusion had comparatively high overall response and complete response rates, reported Cameron Turtle, MBBS, PhD, from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.
“We know that patients have a highly variable CD4 to CD8 ratio, so by actually controlling this and separately transducing, expanding, and then reformulating in this defined composition, we’re able to eliminate one source of variability in CAR-T cell products,” Dr. Turtle said at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
In preclinical studies, an even balance of CD4-positive and CD8-positive central memory T cells or naive T cells evoked more potent immune responses against B-cell malignancies in mice than CD19-positive cells, he explained
To see whether this would also hold true in humans, the investigators enrolled into a phase I/II trial adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell malignancies, including ALL (36 patients), NHL (41), and CLL (24). No patients were excluded on the basis of either absolute lymphocyte, circulating tumors cells, history of stem cell transplant, or results of in vitro test expansions.
All patients underwent leukapheresis for harvesting of T-cells, and populations of CD4- and CD8-positive cells were separated and transduced with a lentiviral vector to express a CD19 CAR and a truncated human epidermal growth factor receptor that allowed tracing of the transduced cells via flow cytometry. The patients underwent lymphodepleting chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (for the earliest patients), or cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine. Fifteen days after leukapheresis, the separated, transduced, and expanded cells were combined and delivered back to patients in a single infusion at one of three dose levels: 2 x 105, 2 x 106, or 2 x 107 CAR-T cells/kg.
ALL results
Two of the 36 patients with ALL died from complications of the CAR-T cell infusion process prior to evaluation. The 34 remaining patients all had morphologic bone marrow complete responses (CR). Of this group, 32 also had bone marrow CR on flow cytometry.
Using immunoglobulin H (IgH) deep sequencing in a subset of 20 patients 3 weeks after CAR-T cell infusion, the investigators could not detect the malignant IgH index clone in 13 of the patients, and found fewer than 10 copies in the bone marrow of 5 patients.
Six of seven patients with extramedullary disease at baseline had a complete response. The remaining patient in this group had an equivocal PET scan result, and experienced a relapse 2 months after assessment.
The investigators also determined that the lymphodepletion regimen may affect overall results, based on the finding that 10 of 12 patients who received cyclophosphamide alone achieved a CR, but seven of these 10 patients had a relapse within a few months. Of these seven patients. five received a second T-cell infusion, but none had significant T-cell expansion. The investigators traced the failure of the second attempt to a CD8-mediated transgene immune response to a murine single-chain variable fragment used in the construct.
For subsequent patients, they altered the lymphodepletion regimen to include fludarabine to prevent priming of the anti-CAR transgenic immune response. This modification resulted in improved progression-free survival and overall survival for subsequent patients receiving a second infusion, Dr. Turtle said.
NHL results
Of the 41 patients with NHL, 30 (73%) had aggressive histologies, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell, and Burkitt lymphomas, and 11 (27%) had indolent histologies, including mantle cell and follicular lymphomas. Most of the patients had received multiple prior lines of therapy, and 19 (46%) had undergone either an autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplant.
Of the 39 evaluable patients who completed therapy, the overall response rate was 67%, including 13 (39%) with CR. Dr. Turtle noted that the CR rate was substantially higher among patients who received cyclophosphamide and fludarabine lymphodepletion, compared with cyclophosphamide alone.
There were also a few responses, including two CRs, among patients with indolent histologies, he said.
CLL, safety results
All 24 patients with CLL had previously received ibrutinib (Imbruvica). Of this group, 19 either had no significant responses to the drug, inactivating mutations, or intolerable toxicities. All but 1 of the 24 patients also had high-risk cytogenetics.
Of the 16 ibrutinib-refractory patients who were evaluable for restaging, 14 had no evidence of disease in bone marrow by flow cytometry at 4 weeks. The overall response rate in this group was 69%, which included four CRs.
Among a majority of all patients, toxicity with the CAR-T cell therapy was mild to moderate. Early cytokine changes appeared to be predictive of serious adverse events such as the cytokine release syndrome, a finding that may allow clinicians to intervene early to prevent complications, Dr. Turtle said.
In the CAR-T cell therapy, “multiple things affect the response and toxicity, including CAR T-cell dose, disease burden, the anti-CAR transgene immune response and the lymphodepletion regimen, not to mention other patient factors that we’re still sorting out,” he commented.
The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health, Life Science Development Fund, Juno Therapeutics and the Bezos Family Foundation. Dr. Turtle disclosed consultancy, honoraria, and/or research funding from Juno Therapeutics and Seattle Genetics.
ORLANDO – Patients with advanced hematologic malignancies of B-cell lineage had robust immune responses following infusion of a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)–T-cell construct designed to deliver a specific balance of antigens, investigators reported.
Adults with relapsed or refractory B-lineage acute myeloid leukemia (ALL), non–Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who received a CAR-T cell construct consisting of autologous CD4-positive and CD-8-positive T cells that were transduced separately, recombined, and then delivered in a single infusion had comparatively high overall response and complete response rates, reported Cameron Turtle, MBBS, PhD, from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.
“We know that patients have a highly variable CD4 to CD8 ratio, so by actually controlling this and separately transducing, expanding, and then reformulating in this defined composition, we’re able to eliminate one source of variability in CAR-T cell products,” Dr. Turtle said at the ASCO-SITC Clinical Immuno-Oncology Symposium.
In preclinical studies, an even balance of CD4-positive and CD8-positive central memory T cells or naive T cells evoked more potent immune responses against B-cell malignancies in mice than CD19-positive cells, he explained
To see whether this would also hold true in humans, the investigators enrolled into a phase I/II trial adults with relapsed/refractory B-cell malignancies, including ALL (36 patients), NHL (41), and CLL (24). No patients were excluded on the basis of either absolute lymphocyte, circulating tumors cells, history of stem cell transplant, or results of in vitro test expansions.
All patients underwent leukapheresis for harvesting of T-cells, and populations of CD4- and CD8-positive cells were separated and transduced with a lentiviral vector to express a CD19 CAR and a truncated human epidermal growth factor receptor that allowed tracing of the transduced cells via flow cytometry. The patients underwent lymphodepleting chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide (for the earliest patients), or cyclophosphamide plus fludarabine. Fifteen days after leukapheresis, the separated, transduced, and expanded cells were combined and delivered back to patients in a single infusion at one of three dose levels: 2 x 105, 2 x 106, or 2 x 107 CAR-T cells/kg.
ALL results
Two of the 36 patients with ALL died from complications of the CAR-T cell infusion process prior to evaluation. The 34 remaining patients all had morphologic bone marrow complete responses (CR). Of this group, 32 also had bone marrow CR on flow cytometry.
Using immunoglobulin H (IgH) deep sequencing in a subset of 20 patients 3 weeks after CAR-T cell infusion, the investigators could not detect the malignant IgH index clone in 13 of the patients, and found fewer than 10 copies in the bone marrow of 5 patients.
Six of seven patients with extramedullary disease at baseline had a complete response. The remaining patient in this group had an equivocal PET scan result, and experienced a relapse 2 months after assessment.
The investigators also determined that the lymphodepletion regimen may affect overall results, based on the finding that 10 of 12 patients who received cyclophosphamide alone achieved a CR, but seven of these 10 patients had a relapse within a few months. Of these seven patients. five received a second T-cell infusion, but none had significant T-cell expansion. The investigators traced the failure of the second attempt to a CD8-mediated transgene immune response to a murine single-chain variable fragment used in the construct.
For subsequent patients, they altered the lymphodepletion regimen to include fludarabine to prevent priming of the anti-CAR transgenic immune response. This modification resulted in improved progression-free survival and overall survival for subsequent patients receiving a second infusion, Dr. Turtle said.
NHL results
Of the 41 patients with NHL, 30 (73%) had aggressive histologies, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma, T-cell/histiocyte-rich large B-cell, and Burkitt lymphomas, and 11 (27%) had indolent histologies, including mantle cell and follicular lymphomas. Most of the patients had received multiple prior lines of therapy, and 19 (46%) had undergone either an autologous or allogeneic stem cell transplant.
Of the 39 evaluable patients who completed therapy, the overall response rate was 67%, including 13 (39%) with CR. Dr. Turtle noted that the CR rate was substantially higher among patients who received cyclophosphamide and fludarabine lymphodepletion, compared with cyclophosphamide alone.
There were also a few responses, including two CRs, among patients with indolent histologies, he said.
CLL, safety results
All 24 patients with CLL had previously received ibrutinib (Imbruvica). Of this group, 19 either had no significant responses to the drug, inactivating mutations, or intolerable toxicities. All but 1 of the 24 patients also had high-risk cytogenetics.
Of the 16 ibrutinib-refractory patients who were evaluable for restaging, 14 had no evidence of disease in bone marrow by flow cytometry at 4 weeks. The overall response rate in this group was 69%, which included four CRs.
Among a majority of all patients, toxicity with the CAR-T cell therapy was mild to moderate. Early cytokine changes appeared to be predictive of serious adverse events such as the cytokine release syndrome, a finding that may allow clinicians to intervene early to prevent complications, Dr. Turtle said.
In the CAR-T cell therapy, “multiple things affect the response and toxicity, including CAR T-cell dose, disease burden, the anti-CAR transgene immune response and the lymphodepletion regimen, not to mention other patient factors that we’re still sorting out,” he commented.
The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health, Life Science Development Fund, Juno Therapeutics and the Bezos Family Foundation. Dr. Turtle disclosed consultancy, honoraria, and/or research funding from Juno Therapeutics and Seattle Genetics.
AT THE CLINICAL IMMUNO-ONCOLOGY SYMPOSIUM
Key clinical point: A defined CAR-T cell construct was associated with high response rates in patients with B-cell malignancies.
Major finding: The overall response rate among patients with ibrutinib-refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia was 69%, including four complete responses.
Data source: Phase I/II dose-finding, safety and efficacy study in patients with B-lineage hematologic malignancies
Disclosures: The trial was funded by the National Institutes of Health, Life Science Development Fund, Juno Therapeutics and the Bezos Family Foundation. Dr. Turtle disclosed consultancy, honoraria, and/or research funding from Juno Therapeutics and Seattle Genetics.
Ublituximab was safe, highly active in rituximab-pretreated B-cell NHL, CLL
The investigational anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ublituximab is safe and has good antitumor activity in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have previously received the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab, results from a phase I/II trial suggest.
Ublituximab is engineered to have a low fucose content. This feature gives it enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity relative to other anti-CD20 antibodies, especially against tumors having low expression of that protein, as may occur in the development of rituximab resistance.
In the trial, nearly half of the 35 patients studied had a complete or partial response to ublituximab, including nearly one-third of those whose disease was refractory to rituximab (Rituxan) (Br J Haematol. 2017 Apr;177[2]:243-53). The main adverse events were infusion-related reactions, fatigue, pyrexia, and diarrhea, but almost all were lower grade.
“Ublituximab was well tolerated and efficacious in a heterogeneous and highly rituximab–pretreated patient population,” said the investigators, who were led by Ahmed Sawas, MD, at the Center for Lymphoid Malignancies, Columbia University Medical Center, N.Y.
The observed response rate is much the same as those seen with two other anti-CD20 antibodies – obinutuzumab (Gazyva)and ofatumumab (Arzerra)– in similar patient populations, and ublituximab may have advantages in terms of fewer higher-grade infusion-related reactions and shorter infusion time.
“Enhanced anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibodies] that are well tolerated and active in rituximab-resistant disease can provide meaningful clinical benefit to patients with limited treatment options,” the investigators noted.
The trial enrolled 27 patients with B-NHL and 8 patients with CLL (or small lymphocytic lymphoma) who had rituximab-refractory disease (defined by progression on or within 6 months of receiving that agent) or rituximab-relapsed disease (defined by progression more than 6 months after receiving it). They had received a median of three prior therapies.
The patients were treated on an open-label basis with ublituximab at various doses as induction therapy (3-4 weekly infusions during cycles 1 and 2) and then as maintenance therapy (monthly during cycles 3-5, then once every 3 months for up to 2 years). All patients received an oral antihistamine and steroids before infusions.
By the end of the trial, 60% of patients had discontinued treatment because of progression; 23% had discontinued because of adverse events, physician decision, or other reasons; and the remaining 17% had received all planned treatment, Dr. Sawas and his coinvestigators reported.
None of the patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities or unexpected adverse events. The rate of any-grade adverse events was 100%, and the rate specifically of grade 3/4 adverse events was 49%. The rate of serious adverse events (most commonly pneumonia) was 37%.
The leading nonhematologic adverse events were infusion-related reactions (40%; grade 3/4, 0%), fatigue (37%; grade 3/4, 3%), pyrexia (29%; grade 3/4, 0%), and diarrhea (26%; grade 3/4, 0%).
The leading hematologic adverse events were neutropenia (14%; grade 3/4, 14%), with no associated infections; anemia (11%; grade 3/4, 6%); and thrombocytopenia (6%; grade 3/4, 6%), with no associated bleeding.
The overall response rate was 45% (44% in the B-NHL cohort and 50% in the CLL cohort); the majority of responses were partial responses. Notably, the rate was 31% among the subset of patients who had rituximab-refractory disease.
The median duration of response to ublituximab was 9.2 months, and the median progression-free survival was 7.7 months.
“Anti-CD20 therapy has demonstrated the greatest benefit in combination, traditionally with multidrug chemotherapy–based regimens,” the investigators noted. “While the introduction of novel targeted therapies has shifted the treatment paradigm of CLL and indolent lymphoma, the activity of these agents is likely to be potentiated by the addition of an anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibody], given their different mechanisms of action.”
In fact, several multidrug, non–chemotherapy-based regimens are showing promising efficacy and milder toxicity in early trials, they pointed out. “In similar fashion, ublituximab is being evaluated for the treatment of NHL or CLL in combination with other agents,” such as the immunomodulator lenalidomide (Revlimid) and the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib (Imbruvica).
TG Therapeutics funded the trial. Dr. Sawas disclosed that he receives research funds from TG Therapeutics.
The investigational anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ublituximab is safe and has good antitumor activity in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have previously received the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab, results from a phase I/II trial suggest.
Ublituximab is engineered to have a low fucose content. This feature gives it enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity relative to other anti-CD20 antibodies, especially against tumors having low expression of that protein, as may occur in the development of rituximab resistance.
In the trial, nearly half of the 35 patients studied had a complete or partial response to ublituximab, including nearly one-third of those whose disease was refractory to rituximab (Rituxan) (Br J Haematol. 2017 Apr;177[2]:243-53). The main adverse events were infusion-related reactions, fatigue, pyrexia, and diarrhea, but almost all were lower grade.
“Ublituximab was well tolerated and efficacious in a heterogeneous and highly rituximab–pretreated patient population,” said the investigators, who were led by Ahmed Sawas, MD, at the Center for Lymphoid Malignancies, Columbia University Medical Center, N.Y.
The observed response rate is much the same as those seen with two other anti-CD20 antibodies – obinutuzumab (Gazyva)and ofatumumab (Arzerra)– in similar patient populations, and ublituximab may have advantages in terms of fewer higher-grade infusion-related reactions and shorter infusion time.
“Enhanced anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibodies] that are well tolerated and active in rituximab-resistant disease can provide meaningful clinical benefit to patients with limited treatment options,” the investigators noted.
The trial enrolled 27 patients with B-NHL and 8 patients with CLL (or small lymphocytic lymphoma) who had rituximab-refractory disease (defined by progression on or within 6 months of receiving that agent) or rituximab-relapsed disease (defined by progression more than 6 months after receiving it). They had received a median of three prior therapies.
The patients were treated on an open-label basis with ublituximab at various doses as induction therapy (3-4 weekly infusions during cycles 1 and 2) and then as maintenance therapy (monthly during cycles 3-5, then once every 3 months for up to 2 years). All patients received an oral antihistamine and steroids before infusions.
By the end of the trial, 60% of patients had discontinued treatment because of progression; 23% had discontinued because of adverse events, physician decision, or other reasons; and the remaining 17% had received all planned treatment, Dr. Sawas and his coinvestigators reported.
None of the patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities or unexpected adverse events. The rate of any-grade adverse events was 100%, and the rate specifically of grade 3/4 adverse events was 49%. The rate of serious adverse events (most commonly pneumonia) was 37%.
The leading nonhematologic adverse events were infusion-related reactions (40%; grade 3/4, 0%), fatigue (37%; grade 3/4, 3%), pyrexia (29%; grade 3/4, 0%), and diarrhea (26%; grade 3/4, 0%).
The leading hematologic adverse events were neutropenia (14%; grade 3/4, 14%), with no associated infections; anemia (11%; grade 3/4, 6%); and thrombocytopenia (6%; grade 3/4, 6%), with no associated bleeding.
The overall response rate was 45% (44% in the B-NHL cohort and 50% in the CLL cohort); the majority of responses were partial responses. Notably, the rate was 31% among the subset of patients who had rituximab-refractory disease.
The median duration of response to ublituximab was 9.2 months, and the median progression-free survival was 7.7 months.
“Anti-CD20 therapy has demonstrated the greatest benefit in combination, traditionally with multidrug chemotherapy–based regimens,” the investigators noted. “While the introduction of novel targeted therapies has shifted the treatment paradigm of CLL and indolent lymphoma, the activity of these agents is likely to be potentiated by the addition of an anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibody], given their different mechanisms of action.”
In fact, several multidrug, non–chemotherapy-based regimens are showing promising efficacy and milder toxicity in early trials, they pointed out. “In similar fashion, ublituximab is being evaluated for the treatment of NHL or CLL in combination with other agents,” such as the immunomodulator lenalidomide (Revlimid) and the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib (Imbruvica).
TG Therapeutics funded the trial. Dr. Sawas disclosed that he receives research funds from TG Therapeutics.
The investigational anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody ublituximab is safe and has good antitumor activity in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who have previously received the anti-CD20 antibody rituximab, results from a phase I/II trial suggest.
Ublituximab is engineered to have a low fucose content. This feature gives it enhanced antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity relative to other anti-CD20 antibodies, especially against tumors having low expression of that protein, as may occur in the development of rituximab resistance.
In the trial, nearly half of the 35 patients studied had a complete or partial response to ublituximab, including nearly one-third of those whose disease was refractory to rituximab (Rituxan) (Br J Haematol. 2017 Apr;177[2]:243-53). The main adverse events were infusion-related reactions, fatigue, pyrexia, and diarrhea, but almost all were lower grade.
“Ublituximab was well tolerated and efficacious in a heterogeneous and highly rituximab–pretreated patient population,” said the investigators, who were led by Ahmed Sawas, MD, at the Center for Lymphoid Malignancies, Columbia University Medical Center, N.Y.
The observed response rate is much the same as those seen with two other anti-CD20 antibodies – obinutuzumab (Gazyva)and ofatumumab (Arzerra)– in similar patient populations, and ublituximab may have advantages in terms of fewer higher-grade infusion-related reactions and shorter infusion time.
“Enhanced anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibodies] that are well tolerated and active in rituximab-resistant disease can provide meaningful clinical benefit to patients with limited treatment options,” the investigators noted.
The trial enrolled 27 patients with B-NHL and 8 patients with CLL (or small lymphocytic lymphoma) who had rituximab-refractory disease (defined by progression on or within 6 months of receiving that agent) or rituximab-relapsed disease (defined by progression more than 6 months after receiving it). They had received a median of three prior therapies.
The patients were treated on an open-label basis with ublituximab at various doses as induction therapy (3-4 weekly infusions during cycles 1 and 2) and then as maintenance therapy (monthly during cycles 3-5, then once every 3 months for up to 2 years). All patients received an oral antihistamine and steroids before infusions.
By the end of the trial, 60% of patients had discontinued treatment because of progression; 23% had discontinued because of adverse events, physician decision, or other reasons; and the remaining 17% had received all planned treatment, Dr. Sawas and his coinvestigators reported.
None of the patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities or unexpected adverse events. The rate of any-grade adverse events was 100%, and the rate specifically of grade 3/4 adverse events was 49%. The rate of serious adverse events (most commonly pneumonia) was 37%.
The leading nonhematologic adverse events were infusion-related reactions (40%; grade 3/4, 0%), fatigue (37%; grade 3/4, 3%), pyrexia (29%; grade 3/4, 0%), and diarrhea (26%; grade 3/4, 0%).
The leading hematologic adverse events were neutropenia (14%; grade 3/4, 14%), with no associated infections; anemia (11%; grade 3/4, 6%); and thrombocytopenia (6%; grade 3/4, 6%), with no associated bleeding.
The overall response rate was 45% (44% in the B-NHL cohort and 50% in the CLL cohort); the majority of responses were partial responses. Notably, the rate was 31% among the subset of patients who had rituximab-refractory disease.
The median duration of response to ublituximab was 9.2 months, and the median progression-free survival was 7.7 months.
“Anti-CD20 therapy has demonstrated the greatest benefit in combination, traditionally with multidrug chemotherapy–based regimens,” the investigators noted. “While the introduction of novel targeted therapies has shifted the treatment paradigm of CLL and indolent lymphoma, the activity of these agents is likely to be potentiated by the addition of an anti-CD20 [monoclonal antibody], given their different mechanisms of action.”
In fact, several multidrug, non–chemotherapy-based regimens are showing promising efficacy and milder toxicity in early trials, they pointed out. “In similar fashion, ublituximab is being evaluated for the treatment of NHL or CLL in combination with other agents,” such as the immunomodulator lenalidomide (Revlimid) and the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib (Imbruvica).
TG Therapeutics funded the trial. Dr. Sawas disclosed that he receives research funds from TG Therapeutics.
Key clinical point:
Major finding: The overall response rate was 45%. There were no dose-limiting toxicities; main adverse events of any grade were infusion-related reactions (40%), fatigue (37%), pyrexia (29%), and diarrhea (26%).
Data source: A phase I/II trial among 35 patients with B-NHL or CLL who had previously received rituximab.
Disclosures: TG Therapeutics funded the trial. Dr. Sawas disclosed that he receives research funds from TG Therapeutics.