Lymphoma & Plasma Cell Disorders

SAN DIEGO – It was banner year for new hematology drug approvals, according to R. Angelo de Claro, MD, of the Food and Drug Administration.

So far in 2018 there have been 32 new malignant hematology and nonmalignant hematology drug approvals by the FDA, including 12 first-time approvals, 5 new biosimilars, and 15 new indications for previously approved drugs, Dr. de Claro, clinical team leader in the FDA’s division of hematology products in Silver Spring, Md., said during an overview of the approvals at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

These include six new approvals for first-line treatment, and eight for pediatric indications, he said.

Highlights were discussed at two ASH-FDA joint symposia at the meeting, including one focused on the malignant hematology approvals, and another on the nonmalignant hematology approvals. In a video interview, Dr. de Claro provides some additional insight into their importance and about what might lie ahead.

“I think what’s exciting is that you have drug development occurring in more common conditions such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia, as well as in rare conditions, including hairy cell leukemia – and the first-ever approval in hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis,” he said. “It’s been very busy at the FDA; stay tuned ... the year’s not done yet. There could be more coming and we certainly anticipate more applications in the future.”

Dr. de Claro is an FDA employee. He reported having no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SAN DIEGO – It was banner year for new hematology drug approvals, according to R. Angelo de Claro, MD, of the Food and Drug Administration.

So far in 2018 there have been 32 new malignant hematology and nonmalignant hematology drug approvals by the FDA, including 12 first-time approvals, 5 new biosimilars, and 15 new indications for previously approved drugs, Dr. de Claro, clinical team leader in the FDA’s division of hematology products in Silver Spring, Md., said during an overview of the approvals at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

These include six new approvals for first-line treatment, and eight for pediatric indications, he said.

Highlights were discussed at two ASH-FDA joint symposia at the meeting, including one focused on the malignant hematology approvals, and another on the nonmalignant hematology approvals. In a video interview, Dr. de Claro provides some additional insight into their importance and about what might lie ahead.

“I think what’s exciting is that you have drug development occurring in more common conditions such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia, as well as in rare conditions, including hairy cell leukemia – and the first-ever approval in hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis,” he said. “It’s been very busy at the FDA; stay tuned ... the year’s not done yet. There could be more coming and we certainly anticipate more applications in the future.”

Dr. de Claro is an FDA employee. He reported having no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SAN DIEGO – It was banner year for new hematology drug approvals, according to R. Angelo de Claro, MD, of the Food and Drug Administration.

So far in 2018 there have been 32 new malignant hematology and nonmalignant hematology drug approvals by the FDA, including 12 first-time approvals, 5 new biosimilars, and 15 new indications for previously approved drugs, Dr. de Claro, clinical team leader in the FDA’s division of hematology products in Silver Spring, Md., said during an overview of the approvals at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

These include six new approvals for first-line treatment, and eight for pediatric indications, he said.

Highlights were discussed at two ASH-FDA joint symposia at the meeting, including one focused on the malignant hematology approvals, and another on the nonmalignant hematology approvals. In a video interview, Dr. de Claro provides some additional insight into their importance and about what might lie ahead.

“I think what’s exciting is that you have drug development occurring in more common conditions such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia, as well as in rare conditions, including hairy cell leukemia – and the first-ever approval in hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis,” he said. “It’s been very busy at the FDA; stay tuned ... the year’s not done yet. There could be more coming and we certainly anticipate more applications in the future.”

Dr. de Claro is an FDA employee. He reported having no other relevant disclosures.

[email protected]

SAN DIEGO – The potential rituximab biosimilar drug PF-05280586 showed efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics similar to those of rituximab at up to 26 weeks in a randomized phase 3 study of treatment-naive patients with CD20-positive low tumor burden follicular lymphoma (LTB-FL).

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

The primary endpoint of overall response rate at 26 weeks was 75.5% in 196 patients randomized to receive PF-05280586, and 70.7% in 198 patients who received a rituximab reference product sourced from the European Union (MabThera; rituximab‑EU), Jeff Sharman, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

“This resulted in a difference between the two arms of 4.66%,” said Dr. Sharman of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center, Springfield, Ore.

The 95% confidence interval for this difference ... was entirely contained within the prespecified equivalence margin, he said.

“Depth of response was a key secondary endpoint, and rates of complete response were 29.3% and 30.4%, respectively,” he said, noting that rates of partial response, stable response, and progressive disease were also similar between the two study arms.

Estimated 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were also highly similar at 76.4% and 81.2% in the PF-05280586 and rituximab-EU arms.


Rapid depletion in CD19-positive B-cell counts was observed in both groups after initial dosing, with recovery by week 39 and a sustained increase until the end of week 52.

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% vs. 72.1% of patients in the PF‑05280586 vs. rituximab‑EU arms, respectively, and the rates of serious adverse events and grade 3 events were similar in the groups, as were rates of infusion interruptions or infusion-related reactions (IRRs), Dr. Sharman said.

IRRs occurred in about 25% of patients in each arm, and most were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 IRRs occurred in 2.6% vs. 0.5% of patients in the groups, respectively, and no grade 4 IRRs occurred.

Rates of anti-drug antibodies were also similar in the two groups, as were serum drug concentrations – regardless of anti-drug antibody status, he noted.

Study subjects were adults with a mean age of 60 years and histologically confirmed CD20-positive grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma with no prior rituximab or system therapy for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). They had Ann Arbor disease stages II (26.9%), III (44.2%) or IV (28.9%), ECOG performance status of 0-1, and at least 1 measurable disease lesion identifiable on imaging.

Risk level as assessed by the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index–2 was low in 28.4%, medium in 66%, and high in 5.6% of patients.

Treatment with each agent was given at intravenous doses of 375 mg/m² weekly for 4 weeks at days 1, 8, 15, and 22.

PF-05280586 is being developed by Pfizer, and in this 52-week double-blind study – the largest study to date of the early use of the potential rituximab biosimilar in patients with previously untreated CD20-positive LTB-FL – the primary endpoint was met, demonstrating its therapeutic equivalence with rituximab-EU for overall response rate at week 26, Dr. Sharman said.

“These results therefore confirm the biosimilarity of PF-05280586 with rituximab-EU,” he concluded.

Of note, the reporting of these findings comes on the heels of the first Food and Drug Administration approval of a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of NHL; Celltrion’s product Truxima (formerly CT-P10), a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan (rituximab), was approved Nov. 28 to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

The PF-0528056 study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Sharman has been a consultant for, and/or received research funding and honoraria from Acerta, Pharmacyclics (an AbbVie Company), Pfizer, TG Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Genentech.

SOURCE: Sharman J et al. ASH 2018: Abstract 394.

SAN DIEGO – The potential rituximab biosimilar drug PF-05280586 showed efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics similar to those of rituximab at up to 26 weeks in a randomized phase 3 study of treatment-naive patients with CD20-positive low tumor burden follicular lymphoma (LTB-FL).

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

The primary endpoint of overall response rate at 26 weeks was 75.5% in 196 patients randomized to receive PF-05280586, and 70.7% in 198 patients who received a rituximab reference product sourced from the European Union (MabThera; rituximab‑EU), Jeff Sharman, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

“This resulted in a difference between the two arms of 4.66%,” said Dr. Sharman of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center, Springfield, Ore.

The 95% confidence interval for this difference ... was entirely contained within the prespecified equivalence margin, he said.

“Depth of response was a key secondary endpoint, and rates of complete response were 29.3% and 30.4%, respectively,” he said, noting that rates of partial response, stable response, and progressive disease were also similar between the two study arms.

Estimated 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were also highly similar at 76.4% and 81.2% in the PF-05280586 and rituximab-EU arms.


Rapid depletion in CD19-positive B-cell counts was observed in both groups after initial dosing, with recovery by week 39 and a sustained increase until the end of week 52.

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% vs. 72.1% of patients in the PF‑05280586 vs. rituximab‑EU arms, respectively, and the rates of serious adverse events and grade 3 events were similar in the groups, as were rates of infusion interruptions or infusion-related reactions (IRRs), Dr. Sharman said.

IRRs occurred in about 25% of patients in each arm, and most were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 IRRs occurred in 2.6% vs. 0.5% of patients in the groups, respectively, and no grade 4 IRRs occurred.

Rates of anti-drug antibodies were also similar in the two groups, as were serum drug concentrations – regardless of anti-drug antibody status, he noted.

Study subjects were adults with a mean age of 60 years and histologically confirmed CD20-positive grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma with no prior rituximab or system therapy for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). They had Ann Arbor disease stages II (26.9%), III (44.2%) or IV (28.9%), ECOG performance status of 0-1, and at least 1 measurable disease lesion identifiable on imaging.

Risk level as assessed by the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index–2 was low in 28.4%, medium in 66%, and high in 5.6% of patients.

Treatment with each agent was given at intravenous doses of 375 mg/m² weekly for 4 weeks at days 1, 8, 15, and 22.

PF-05280586 is being developed by Pfizer, and in this 52-week double-blind study – the largest study to date of the early use of the potential rituximab biosimilar in patients with previously untreated CD20-positive LTB-FL – the primary endpoint was met, demonstrating its therapeutic equivalence with rituximab-EU for overall response rate at week 26, Dr. Sharman said.

“These results therefore confirm the biosimilarity of PF-05280586 with rituximab-EU,” he concluded.

Of note, the reporting of these findings comes on the heels of the first Food and Drug Administration approval of a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of NHL; Celltrion’s product Truxima (formerly CT-P10), a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan (rituximab), was approved Nov. 28 to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

The PF-0528056 study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Sharman has been a consultant for, and/or received research funding and honoraria from Acerta, Pharmacyclics (an AbbVie Company), Pfizer, TG Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Genentech.

SOURCE: Sharman J et al. ASH 2018: Abstract 394.

SAN DIEGO – The potential rituximab biosimilar drug PF-05280586 showed efficacy, safety, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics similar to those of rituximab at up to 26 weeks in a randomized phase 3 study of treatment-naive patients with CD20-positive low tumor burden follicular lymphoma (LTB-FL).

Sharon Worcester/MDedge News

The primary endpoint of overall response rate at 26 weeks was 75.5% in 196 patients randomized to receive PF-05280586, and 70.7% in 198 patients who received a rituximab reference product sourced from the European Union (MabThera; rituximab‑EU), Jeff Sharman, MD, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

“This resulted in a difference between the two arms of 4.66%,” said Dr. Sharman of Willamette Valley Cancer Institute and Research Center, Springfield, Ore.

The 95% confidence interval for this difference ... was entirely contained within the prespecified equivalence margin, he said.

“Depth of response was a key secondary endpoint, and rates of complete response were 29.3% and 30.4%, respectively,” he said, noting that rates of partial response, stable response, and progressive disease were also similar between the two study arms.

Estimated 1-year progression-free survival (PFS) rates were also highly similar at 76.4% and 81.2% in the PF-05280586 and rituximab-EU arms.


Rapid depletion in CD19-positive B-cell counts was observed in both groups after initial dosing, with recovery by week 39 and a sustained increase until the end of week 52.

Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 78.6% vs. 72.1% of patients in the PF‑05280586 vs. rituximab‑EU arms, respectively, and the rates of serious adverse events and grade 3 events were similar in the groups, as were rates of infusion interruptions or infusion-related reactions (IRRs), Dr. Sharman said.

IRRs occurred in about 25% of patients in each arm, and most were grade 1 or 2. Grade 3 IRRs occurred in 2.6% vs. 0.5% of patients in the groups, respectively, and no grade 4 IRRs occurred.

Rates of anti-drug antibodies were also similar in the two groups, as were serum drug concentrations – regardless of anti-drug antibody status, he noted.

Study subjects were adults with a mean age of 60 years and histologically confirmed CD20-positive grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma with no prior rituximab or system therapy for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL). They had Ann Arbor disease stages II (26.9%), III (44.2%) or IV (28.9%), ECOG performance status of 0-1, and at least 1 measurable disease lesion identifiable on imaging.

Risk level as assessed by the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index–2 was low in 28.4%, medium in 66%, and high in 5.6% of patients.

Treatment with each agent was given at intravenous doses of 375 mg/m² weekly for 4 weeks at days 1, 8, 15, and 22.

PF-05280586 is being developed by Pfizer, and in this 52-week double-blind study – the largest study to date of the early use of the potential rituximab biosimilar in patients with previously untreated CD20-positive LTB-FL – the primary endpoint was met, demonstrating its therapeutic equivalence with rituximab-EU for overall response rate at week 26, Dr. Sharman said.

“These results therefore confirm the biosimilarity of PF-05280586 with rituximab-EU,” he concluded.

Of note, the reporting of these findings comes on the heels of the first Food and Drug Administration approval of a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of NHL; Celltrion’s product Truxima (formerly CT-P10), a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan (rituximab), was approved Nov. 28 to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

The PF-0528056 study was sponsored by Pfizer. Dr. Sharman has been a consultant for, and/or received research funding and honoraria from Acerta, Pharmacyclics (an AbbVie Company), Pfizer, TG Therapeutics, Abbvie, and Genentech.

SOURCE: Sharman J et al. ASH 2018: Abstract 394.

SAN DIEGO – A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax (Venclexta), appears to be a major contributor to drug resistance in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), investigators reported.

The mutation has been detected in some patients with CLL up to 2 years before resistance to venetoclax actually develops, said lead author Piers Blombery, MBBS, from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said in a late-breaking oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The mutation, which the investigators have labeled BCL2 Gly101Val, “is a recurrent and frequent mediator of resistance and may be detected years before clinical relapse occurs,” he added.

The paper was published online in Cancer Discovery (2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1119) to coincide with the presentation at ASH.

Despite the demonstrated efficacy of venetoclax as continuous therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL, the majority of patients experience disease progression, prompting the investigators to explore molecular mechanisms of secondary resistance.

To do this, they analyzed paired samples from 15 patients with CLL, enrolled in clinical trials of venetoclax, collected both before the start of venetoclax therapy and at the time of disease progression.

In seven of the patients, they identified a novel mutation that showed up at the time of progression, but was absent from the pre-venetoclax samples. The mutation first became detectable from about 19 to 42 months after the start of therapy and preceded clinical progression by as much as 25 months, the investigators found.

They pinned the mutation down to the BH3-binding groove on BCL2, the same molecular site targeted by venetoclax. They found that the mutation was not present in samples from 96 patients with venetoclax-naive CLL nor in any other B-cell malignancies. Searches for references to the mutation in both a cancer database (COSMIC) and a population database (gnomAD) came up empty.

In other experiments, they determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and that in the presence of venetoclax in vitro, BCL2 Gly101Val-expressing cells have a growth advantage, compared with wild type cells.

Additionally, they showed that the mutation results in impaired venetoclax binding in vitro.

“BCL2 Gly101Val is observed subclonally, implicating multiple mechanisms of venetoclax resistance in the same patient,” Dr. Blombery said.

In an interview, Dr. Blombery said that the identification of the resistance mutation is a strong rationale for using combination therapy to treat patients with relapsed or refractory CLL to help prevent or attenuate selection pressures that lead to resistance.

The investigators were supported by the Wilson Center for Lymphoma Genomics, Snowdome Foundation, National Health Medical Research Council, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Leukemia Foundation, Cancer Council of Victoria, and Australian Cancer Research Foundation. Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Blombery P et al. ASH 2018, Abstract LBA-7.

SAN DIEGO – A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax (Venclexta), appears to be a major contributor to drug resistance in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), investigators reported.

The mutation has been detected in some patients with CLL up to 2 years before resistance to venetoclax actually develops, said lead author Piers Blombery, MBBS, from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said in a late-breaking oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The mutation, which the investigators have labeled BCL2 Gly101Val, “is a recurrent and frequent mediator of resistance and may be detected years before clinical relapse occurs,” he added.

The paper was published online in Cancer Discovery (2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1119) to coincide with the presentation at ASH.

Despite the demonstrated efficacy of venetoclax as continuous therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL, the majority of patients experience disease progression, prompting the investigators to explore molecular mechanisms of secondary resistance.

To do this, they analyzed paired samples from 15 patients with CLL, enrolled in clinical trials of venetoclax, collected both before the start of venetoclax therapy and at the time of disease progression.

In seven of the patients, they identified a novel mutation that showed up at the time of progression, but was absent from the pre-venetoclax samples. The mutation first became detectable from about 19 to 42 months after the start of therapy and preceded clinical progression by as much as 25 months, the investigators found.

They pinned the mutation down to the BH3-binding groove on BCL2, the same molecular site targeted by venetoclax. They found that the mutation was not present in samples from 96 patients with venetoclax-naive CLL nor in any other B-cell malignancies. Searches for references to the mutation in both a cancer database (COSMIC) and a population database (gnomAD) came up empty.

In other experiments, they determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and that in the presence of venetoclax in vitro, BCL2 Gly101Val-expressing cells have a growth advantage, compared with wild type cells.

Additionally, they showed that the mutation results in impaired venetoclax binding in vitro.

“BCL2 Gly101Val is observed subclonally, implicating multiple mechanisms of venetoclax resistance in the same patient,” Dr. Blombery said.

In an interview, Dr. Blombery said that the identification of the resistance mutation is a strong rationale for using combination therapy to treat patients with relapsed or refractory CLL to help prevent or attenuate selection pressures that lead to resistance.

The investigators were supported by the Wilson Center for Lymphoma Genomics, Snowdome Foundation, National Health Medical Research Council, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Leukemia Foundation, Cancer Council of Victoria, and Australian Cancer Research Foundation. Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Blombery P et al. ASH 2018, Abstract LBA-7.

SAN DIEGO – A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax (Venclexta), appears to be a major contributor to drug resistance in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), investigators reported.

The mutation has been detected in some patients with CLL up to 2 years before resistance to venetoclax actually develops, said lead author Piers Blombery, MBBS, from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said in a late-breaking oral abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The mutation, which the investigators have labeled BCL2 Gly101Val, “is a recurrent and frequent mediator of resistance and may be detected years before clinical relapse occurs,” he added.

The paper was published online in Cancer Discovery (2018 Dec 4. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-1119) to coincide with the presentation at ASH.

Despite the demonstrated efficacy of venetoclax as continuous therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL, the majority of patients experience disease progression, prompting the investigators to explore molecular mechanisms of secondary resistance.

To do this, they analyzed paired samples from 15 patients with CLL, enrolled in clinical trials of venetoclax, collected both before the start of venetoclax therapy and at the time of disease progression.

In seven of the patients, they identified a novel mutation that showed up at the time of progression, but was absent from the pre-venetoclax samples. The mutation first became detectable from about 19 to 42 months after the start of therapy and preceded clinical progression by as much as 25 months, the investigators found.

They pinned the mutation down to the BH3-binding groove on BCL2, the same molecular site targeted by venetoclax. They found that the mutation was not present in samples from 96 patients with venetoclax-naive CLL nor in any other B-cell malignancies. Searches for references to the mutation in both a cancer database (COSMIC) and a population database (gnomAD) came up empty.

In other experiments, they determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and that in the presence of venetoclax in vitro, BCL2 Gly101Val-expressing cells have a growth advantage, compared with wild type cells.

Additionally, they showed that the mutation results in impaired venetoclax binding in vitro.

“BCL2 Gly101Val is observed subclonally, implicating multiple mechanisms of venetoclax resistance in the same patient,” Dr. Blombery said.

In an interview, Dr. Blombery said that the identification of the resistance mutation is a strong rationale for using combination therapy to treat patients with relapsed or refractory CLL to help prevent or attenuate selection pressures that lead to resistance.

The investigators were supported by the Wilson Center for Lymphoma Genomics, Snowdome Foundation, National Health Medical Research Council, Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, Leukemia Foundation, Cancer Council of Victoria, and Australian Cancer Research Foundation. Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures.

SOURCE: Blombery P et al. ASH 2018, Abstract LBA-7.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) bearing IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, combinations of either ivosidenib (Tibsovo, for IDH1) or enasidenib (Idhifa, for IDH2) with standard induction and consolidation regimens are safe and well tolerated and are associated with encouraging remission rates, results of a phase 1 trial indicate.

In the open-label, phase 1 trial, ivosidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of minimal residual disease (MRD) by flow cytometry in 88% of treated patients and with IDH1-mutation clearance in 41% of patients.

Enasidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of MRD in 45% of patients and with IDH2-mutation clearance in 25% of patients, said Eytan M. Stein, MD, from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“The overall survival rates are robust, with greater than 75% 1-year survival in both ivosidenib- and enasidenib-treated patients,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Both ivosidenib and enasidenib are approved in the United States for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory AML bearing either IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, respectively. In this trial, the investigators explored the therapeutic potential of the IDH inhibitors in patients with previously untreated disease.

Dr. Stein and his colleagues investigated combining each of the agents with standard induction therapy with either daunorubicin 60 mg/m² per day or idarubicin 12 mg/m² per day for 3 days, plus cytarabine 200 mg/m² per day for 7 days. Patients with IDH1 mutations received ivosidenib 500 mg once daily, and those with IDH2 mutations received enasidenib 100 mg once daily.

After induction, patients with a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of hematologic counts (CRi), or CR with incomplete recovery of platelets (CRp) could receive up to four cycles of consolidation therapy while continuing the IDH inhibitor. Patients who completed consolidation or were ineligible for consolidation could continue on maintenance therapy with their assigned drug until the end of the study.

The drugs were discontinued in patients who went on to hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

The most frequent co-occurring baseline mutations were DNMT3A, NPM1, and NRAS for patients with IDH1 mutations, and DNMT3A, SRSF2, and ASXL1 for patients with IDH2 mutations.

A total of 60 patients were assigned to ivosidenib and chemotherapy and 93 were assigned to enasidenib/chemotherapy. The median patient age was about 63 years in each arm.

All patients in each arm received a least one induction dose and about 48% in each arm received at least some consolidation dosing. In all, 18% of patients in the ivosidenib arm and 19% in the enasidenib arm went on to maintenance.

Treatment discontinuations occurred in 55% of patients in the ivosidenib group and 84% in the enasidenib group. The primary reason for discontinuation included HSCT, adverse events, progressive disease, and death (one and four patients in the respective arms).

Adverse events of interest, regardless of attribution, included the IDH differentiation syndrome in two patients on ivosidenib and one on enasidenib, leukocytosis, QT interval prolongation, and increased blood bilirubin.

The 30-day and 60-day mortality rates were 5% and 8% in the ivosidenib arm and 5% and 9% in the enasidenib arm, respectively.

Best overall response rates (CR+CRi+CRp) among all patients were 80% in the ivosidenib arm and 72% in the enasidenib arm. In each trial arm, the response rates were higher among patients with de novo AML, compared with secondary AML.

Of 12 ivosidenib-treated patients who had IDH1-mutation clearance, 10 had clearance at the end of induction therapy, and 2 achieved clearance during or after consolidation. Of 15 ivosidenib-treated patients who became MRD negative, 12 had achieved it by the end of induction, and 3 became MRD negative during consolidation.

In the enasidenib arm, 15 patients had IDH2 mutation clearance (11 after induction, 4 during consolidation) and 9 became MRD negative (7 after induction and 2 during or after consolidation).

The probability of surviving to 1 year after the start of induction among ivosidenib-treated patients was 79%; the median overall survival had not been reached and was not estimable at the time of data cutoff. The probability of surviving to 1 year among patients in the enasidenib arm was 75%. In this group, too, median overall survival had not been reached.

The clinical benefit of adding either IDH inhibitor to induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed AML with IDH mutations will be further evaluated in a randomized, phase 3 trial, Dr. Stein said.

The study was funded by Agios Pharmaceuticals and Celgene. Dr. Stein reported consulting with those companies and others.

SOURCE: Stein EM et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 560.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) bearing IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, combinations of either ivosidenib (Tibsovo, for IDH1) or enasidenib (Idhifa, for IDH2) with standard induction and consolidation regimens are safe and well tolerated and are associated with encouraging remission rates, results of a phase 1 trial indicate.

In the open-label, phase 1 trial, ivosidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of minimal residual disease (MRD) by flow cytometry in 88% of treated patients and with IDH1-mutation clearance in 41% of patients.

Enasidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of MRD in 45% of patients and with IDH2-mutation clearance in 25% of patients, said Eytan M. Stein, MD, from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“The overall survival rates are robust, with greater than 75% 1-year survival in both ivosidenib- and enasidenib-treated patients,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Both ivosidenib and enasidenib are approved in the United States for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory AML bearing either IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, respectively. In this trial, the investigators explored the therapeutic potential of the IDH inhibitors in patients with previously untreated disease.

Dr. Stein and his colleagues investigated combining each of the agents with standard induction therapy with either daunorubicin 60 mg/m² per day or idarubicin 12 mg/m² per day for 3 days, plus cytarabine 200 mg/m² per day for 7 days. Patients with IDH1 mutations received ivosidenib 500 mg once daily, and those with IDH2 mutations received enasidenib 100 mg once daily.

After induction, patients with a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of hematologic counts (CRi), or CR with incomplete recovery of platelets (CRp) could receive up to four cycles of consolidation therapy while continuing the IDH inhibitor. Patients who completed consolidation or were ineligible for consolidation could continue on maintenance therapy with their assigned drug until the end of the study.

The drugs were discontinued in patients who went on to hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

The most frequent co-occurring baseline mutations were DNMT3A, NPM1, and NRAS for patients with IDH1 mutations, and DNMT3A, SRSF2, and ASXL1 for patients with IDH2 mutations.

A total of 60 patients were assigned to ivosidenib and chemotherapy and 93 were assigned to enasidenib/chemotherapy. The median patient age was about 63 years in each arm.

All patients in each arm received a least one induction dose and about 48% in each arm received at least some consolidation dosing. In all, 18% of patients in the ivosidenib arm and 19% in the enasidenib arm went on to maintenance.

Treatment discontinuations occurred in 55% of patients in the ivosidenib group and 84% in the enasidenib group. The primary reason for discontinuation included HSCT, adverse events, progressive disease, and death (one and four patients in the respective arms).

Adverse events of interest, regardless of attribution, included the IDH differentiation syndrome in two patients on ivosidenib and one on enasidenib, leukocytosis, QT interval prolongation, and increased blood bilirubin.

The 30-day and 60-day mortality rates were 5% and 8% in the ivosidenib arm and 5% and 9% in the enasidenib arm, respectively.

Best overall response rates (CR+CRi+CRp) among all patients were 80% in the ivosidenib arm and 72% in the enasidenib arm. In each trial arm, the response rates were higher among patients with de novo AML, compared with secondary AML.

Of 12 ivosidenib-treated patients who had IDH1-mutation clearance, 10 had clearance at the end of induction therapy, and 2 achieved clearance during or after consolidation. Of 15 ivosidenib-treated patients who became MRD negative, 12 had achieved it by the end of induction, and 3 became MRD negative during consolidation.

In the enasidenib arm, 15 patients had IDH2 mutation clearance (11 after induction, 4 during consolidation) and 9 became MRD negative (7 after induction and 2 during or after consolidation).

The probability of surviving to 1 year after the start of induction among ivosidenib-treated patients was 79%; the median overall survival had not been reached and was not estimable at the time of data cutoff. The probability of surviving to 1 year among patients in the enasidenib arm was 75%. In this group, too, median overall survival had not been reached.

The clinical benefit of adding either IDH inhibitor to induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed AML with IDH mutations will be further evaluated in a randomized, phase 3 trial, Dr. Stein said.

The study was funded by Agios Pharmaceuticals and Celgene. Dr. Stein reported consulting with those companies and others.

SOURCE: Stein EM et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 560.

SAN DIEGO – In patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) bearing IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, combinations of either ivosidenib (Tibsovo, for IDH1) or enasidenib (Idhifa, for IDH2) with standard induction and consolidation regimens are safe and well tolerated and are associated with encouraging remission rates, results of a phase 1 trial indicate.

In the open-label, phase 1 trial, ivosidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of minimal residual disease (MRD) by flow cytometry in 88% of treated patients and with IDH1-mutation clearance in 41% of patients.

Enasidenib plus chemotherapy was associated with elimination of MRD in 45% of patients and with IDH2-mutation clearance in 25% of patients, said Eytan M. Stein, MD, from Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York.

“The overall survival rates are robust, with greater than 75% 1-year survival in both ivosidenib- and enasidenib-treated patients,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Both ivosidenib and enasidenib are approved in the United States for treatment of patients with relapsed or refractory AML bearing either IDH1 or IDH2 mutations, respectively. In this trial, the investigators explored the therapeutic potential of the IDH inhibitors in patients with previously untreated disease.

Dr. Stein and his colleagues investigated combining each of the agents with standard induction therapy with either daunorubicin 60 mg/m² per day or idarubicin 12 mg/m² per day for 3 days, plus cytarabine 200 mg/m² per day for 7 days. Patients with IDH1 mutations received ivosidenib 500 mg once daily, and those with IDH2 mutations received enasidenib 100 mg once daily.

After induction, patients with a complete remission (CR), CR with incomplete recovery of hematologic counts (CRi), or CR with incomplete recovery of platelets (CRp) could receive up to four cycles of consolidation therapy while continuing the IDH inhibitor. Patients who completed consolidation or were ineligible for consolidation could continue on maintenance therapy with their assigned drug until the end of the study.

The drugs were discontinued in patients who went on to hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

The most frequent co-occurring baseline mutations were DNMT3A, NPM1, and NRAS for patients with IDH1 mutations, and DNMT3A, SRSF2, and ASXL1 for patients with IDH2 mutations.

A total of 60 patients were assigned to ivosidenib and chemotherapy and 93 were assigned to enasidenib/chemotherapy. The median patient age was about 63 years in each arm.

All patients in each arm received a least one induction dose and about 48% in each arm received at least some consolidation dosing. In all, 18% of patients in the ivosidenib arm and 19% in the enasidenib arm went on to maintenance.

Treatment discontinuations occurred in 55% of patients in the ivosidenib group and 84% in the enasidenib group. The primary reason for discontinuation included HSCT, adverse events, progressive disease, and death (one and four patients in the respective arms).

Adverse events of interest, regardless of attribution, included the IDH differentiation syndrome in two patients on ivosidenib and one on enasidenib, leukocytosis, QT interval prolongation, and increased blood bilirubin.

The 30-day and 60-day mortality rates were 5% and 8% in the ivosidenib arm and 5% and 9% in the enasidenib arm, respectively.

Best overall response rates (CR+CRi+CRp) among all patients were 80% in the ivosidenib arm and 72% in the enasidenib arm. In each trial arm, the response rates were higher among patients with de novo AML, compared with secondary AML.

Of 12 ivosidenib-treated patients who had IDH1-mutation clearance, 10 had clearance at the end of induction therapy, and 2 achieved clearance during or after consolidation. Of 15 ivosidenib-treated patients who became MRD negative, 12 had achieved it by the end of induction, and 3 became MRD negative during consolidation.

In the enasidenib arm, 15 patients had IDH2 mutation clearance (11 after induction, 4 during consolidation) and 9 became MRD negative (7 after induction and 2 during or after consolidation).

The probability of surviving to 1 year after the start of induction among ivosidenib-treated patients was 79%; the median overall survival had not been reached and was not estimable at the time of data cutoff. The probability of surviving to 1 year among patients in the enasidenib arm was 75%. In this group, too, median overall survival had not been reached.

The clinical benefit of adding either IDH inhibitor to induction, consolidation, and maintenance therapy for patients with newly diagnosed AML with IDH mutations will be further evaluated in a randomized, phase 3 trial, Dr. Stein said.

The study was funded by Agios Pharmaceuticals and Celgene. Dr. Stein reported consulting with those companies and others.

SOURCE: Stein EM et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 560.

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—A shortened regimen of four cycles of rituximab (R) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) chemotherapy was noninferior in efficacy to the standard six cycles of R-CHOP in younger patients with favorable-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to investigators of the FLYER trial.

In addition, the truncated regimen was associated with about a one-third reduction in non-hematologic adverse events.

Viola Poeschel, MD, of Saarland University Medical School in Homburg/Saar, Germany, reported results of this study on behalf of the German High-Grade Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma Study Group/German Lymphoma Alliance at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 781).

Among 588 evaluable patients younger than 60 with favorable-prognosis DLBCL, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS), event-free survival (EFS), or overall survival (OS) between patients who received four cycles of R-CHOP and those who received six cycles, Dr. Poeschel reported.

“Six cycles of R-CHOP led to a higher toxicity with respect to leukocytopenia and anemia, both of any grade and also of grades 3 to 4, compared to four cycles of R-CHOP,” she said.

The findings suggest that, for younger patients with favorable-prognosis DLBCL—defined as an age-adjusted International Prognostic Index score of 0 and low tumor burden (less than 7.5 cm)—four cycles of R-CHOP can be a new standard of care, Dr. Poeschel said.

The investigators were prompted to look at the question of a shorter R-CHOP regimen by results of the MInT trial, in which a subpopulation of favorable-prognosis DLBCL patients had a 3-year PFS rate of 89%.

The FLYER trial (NCT00278421) was designed as a non-inferiority study to see whether, in a similar group of patients, reducing the number of R-CHOP cycles could maintain efficacy while reducing toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 66 months, the PFS rate, the primary endpoint, was 94% in the six-cycle group and 96% for the four-cycle group.

“As the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of our experimental arm was 94%, it is shown that it is definitely non-inferior to the standard arm, six cycles of R-CHOP,” Dr. Poeschel said.

Similarly, the rate of 3-year OS was 98% in the six-cycle group, compared with 99% in the four-cycle group, and the survival curves were virtually superimposable out to more than 10 years of follow-up.

Treatment with six cycles was associated with more frequent hematologic adverse events than four cycles. Leukopenia of any grade occurred in 237 and 171 patients, respectively. Grade 3-4 leukopenia occurred in 110 and 80 patients, respectively.

Any-grade anemia occurred in 172 patients assigned to six cycles and 107 assigned to four cycles. Rates of grade 3-4 anemia were similar between the groups, as were rates of thrombocytopenia of any grade or grade 3-4.

Non-hematologic adverse events of any grade or grade 3-4 that were more frequent with six cycles included parasthesia, nausea, infection, vomiting, and mucositis.

The total number of non-hematologic adverse events was reduced by about one-third.

“We are certainly always looking for ways to make treatments easier for our patients to reduce adverse effects, and, certainly, for this subgroup of patients, it appears that we can make their treatment shorter and have less burden but equivalent efficacy,” said David Steensma, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Harvard Cancer Center in Boston, Massachusetts.

Drs. Steensma and Poeschel both cautioned that the results of this study pertain only to those patients with DLBCL who are younger and have favorable-prognosis disease.

“We can’t extend it to other subtypes of large-cell lymphoma, but that’s always a laudable goal, so I think this will immediately influence clinical practice,” Dr. Steensma said.

The study was supported by Deutsche Krebshilfe. Dr. Poeschel disclosed travel grants from Roche and Amgen. Dr. Steensma had no disclosures relevant to the study. 

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A newly approved treatment regimen provides a survival benefit over standard therapy for patients with CD30-positive peripheral T-cell lymphomas (PTCLs), according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

In the ECHELON-2 trial, patients who received brentuximab vedotin (BV) plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (CHP) had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to patients who received standard treatment with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP).

These results supported the recent U.S. approval of BV in combination with CHP for adults with previously untreated, systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma or other CD30-expressing PTCLs, including angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma and PTCL not otherwise specified.

“ECHELON-2 is the first prospective trial in peripheral T-cell lymphoma to show an overall survival benefit over CHOP,” said Steven M. Horwitz, MD, of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.

Dr. Horwitz presented results from this trial at ASH as abstract 997. Results were simultaneously published in The Lancet.

Patients and treatment

ECHELON-2 (NCT01777152) enrolled 452 patients with previously untreated, CD30-positive PTCL. Subtypes included ALK-positive (n=98) or -negative (n=218) systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, PTCL not otherwise specified (n=72), angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (n=54), enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma (n=7), and adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (n=3).

Patients were randomized to receive BV-CHP plus placebo (n=226) or CHOP plus placebo (n=226) every 3 weeks for six to eight cycles.

At baseline, the median age was 58 in both the BV-CHP arm (range, 18-85) and the CHOP arm (range, 18-83). The majority of patients were male—59% in the BV-CHP arm and 67% in the CHOP arm—and most patients had stage III/IV disease—81% and 80%, respectively.

Eighty-nine percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 81% in the CHOP arm completed six or more cycles of their assigned treatment.

Twenty-seven percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 19% in the CHOP arm received consolidation consisting of radiotherapy (6% and 3%, respectively) and/or stem cell transplant (22% and 17%).

Twenty-six percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 42% in the CHOP arm received systemic therapy for residual or progressive disease, and 4% of patients in each arm received palliative radiation.

Efficacy

The overall response rate was 83% in the BV-CHP arm and 72% in the CHOP arm (P=0.0032). The complete response rates were 68% and 56%, respectively (P=0.0066).

At a median follow-up of 36.2 months, the median PFS was 48.2 months in the BV-CHP arm and 20.8 months in the CHOP arm. The rate of death or progression was 42% in the BV-CHP arm and 55% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.71, P=0.011).

At a median follow-up of 42.1 months, the median OS was not reached in either treatment arm. The rate of death was 23% in the BV-CHP arm and 32% in the CHOP arm (hazard ratio=0.66, P=0.0244).

Dr. Horwitz noted that this study was not powered to determine differences in OS or PFS according to PTCL subtypes.

Safety

BV-CHP had a comparable safety profile to CHOP, Dr. Horwitz said.

The rate of adverse events (AEs) was 99% in the BV-CHP arm and 98% in the CHOP arm. Grade 3 or higher AEs occurred in 66% and 65% of patients, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 39% and 38%, respectively.

Three percent of patients in the BV-CHP arm and 4% of those in the CHOP arm had fatal AEs.

The most common AEs of any grade occurring in at least 20% of patients (in the BV-CHP and CHOP arms, respectively) were:

• Nausea (46% and 38%)
• Peripheral sensory neuropathy (45% and 41%)
• Neutropenia (38% for both)
• Diarrhea (38% and 20%)
• Constipation (29% and 30%)
• Alopecia (26% and 25%)
• Pyrexia (26% and 19%)
• Vomiting (26% and 17%)
• Fatigue (24% and 20%)
• Anemia (21% and 16%).

This research was funded by Seattle Genetics Inc. and Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.

Dr. Horwitz disclosed relationships with Seattle Genetics, Aileron Therapeutics, Innate Pharma, Millennium/Takeda, Forty Seven, Corvus, Mundipharma, ADC Therapeutics, Trillium, Celgene, Portola, Infinity/Verastem, Spectrum, and Kyowa-Hakka-Kirin.

© ASH/Luke Franke 2018

SAN DIEGO—An updated analysis of the JULIET trial showed that tisagenlecleucel produced a high rate of durable responses in adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

After a median follow-up of 19 months, two-thirds of adults with relapsed/refractory DLBCL who had early responses to the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy remained in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease.

“Since the previous report, no new deaths have been reported due to any cause other than patient disease progression, no treatment-related mortality was seen throughout the study, and there were three early deaths, all related to lymphoma that progressed,” said study investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University’s Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

Dr. Maziarz and his colleagues reported the updated study results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1684). Results were published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine. Data reported here are based on the ASH data.

JULIET then

In the phase 2, single-arm trial, investigators enrolled adults with DLBCL who had relapsed or were refractory after two or more prior lines of therapy and who were either ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) or who experienced disease progression after HSCT.

Interim results of the study were previously reported at the 22nd Congress of the European Hematology Association in 2017.

At that meeting, Gilles Salles, MD, PhD, of the University of Lyon in France, presented results of an analysis of available efficacy data on 51 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up.

In this population, the best overall response rate (ORR) was 59%. Three-month ORR was 45%, consisting of 37% complete responses (CR) and 8% partial responses (PR).

Relapse-free survival at 6 months was 79%, and all patients who had responses at 3 months continued to have responses at the time of data cutoff.

JULIET now

The current analysis was completed after a median time from infusion to data cutoff of 19 months as of May 21, 2018. The analysis included 115 patients who received CAR T-cell infusions, 99 of whom were evaluable for efficacy.

As reported at ASH, the best ORR, the primary endpoint, was 54%, comprised of 40% CR and 13% PR.

Fifty-four percent of patients who had achieved PR converted to CR.

The response rates were consistent across all subgroups, regardless of age, sex, previous response status, International Prognostic Index score at enrollment, prior therapy, molecular subtype, and other factors.

Estimated relapse-free survival 12 months after documentation of an initial response was 64%.

The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a CR.

Median overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months and not reached for patients in CR.

Adverse events of special interest included grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in 23% of patients, prolonged cytopenia in 34%, infections in 19%, neurologic events in 11%, febrile neutropenia in 15%, and tumor lysis syndrome in 2%.

There were no deaths attributable to the treatment, CRS, or to cerebral edema, a complication of CAR T-cell therapy that appears to be related to the costimulatory molecule used in various constructs.

The JULIET trial is supported by Novartis. Dr. Maziarz disclosed honoraria, consultancy fees, and/or research funding from Novartis, Incyte, Juno Therapeutics, and Kite Therapeutics as well as patents/royalties from Athersys, Inc. 

© ASH/Luke Franke 2018

SAN DIEGO—An updated analysis of the JULIET trial showed that tisagenlecleucel produced a high rate of durable responses in adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

After a median follow-up of 19 months, two-thirds of adults with relapsed/refractory DLBCL who had early responses to the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy remained in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease.

“Since the previous report, no new deaths have been reported due to any cause other than patient disease progression, no treatment-related mortality was seen throughout the study, and there were three early deaths, all related to lymphoma that progressed,” said study investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University’s Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

Dr. Maziarz and his colleagues reported the updated study results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1684). Results were published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine. Data reported here are based on the ASH data.

JULIET then

In the phase 2, single-arm trial, investigators enrolled adults with DLBCL who had relapsed or were refractory after two or more prior lines of therapy and who were either ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) or who experienced disease progression after HSCT.

Interim results of the study were previously reported at the 22nd Congress of the European Hematology Association in 2017.

At that meeting, Gilles Salles, MD, PhD, of the University of Lyon in France, presented results of an analysis of available efficacy data on 51 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up.

In this population, the best overall response rate (ORR) was 59%. Three-month ORR was 45%, consisting of 37% complete responses (CR) and 8% partial responses (PR).

Relapse-free survival at 6 months was 79%, and all patients who had responses at 3 months continued to have responses at the time of data cutoff.

JULIET now

The current analysis was completed after a median time from infusion to data cutoff of 19 months as of May 21, 2018. The analysis included 115 patients who received CAR T-cell infusions, 99 of whom were evaluable for efficacy.

As reported at ASH, the best ORR, the primary endpoint, was 54%, comprised of 40% CR and 13% PR.

Fifty-four percent of patients who had achieved PR converted to CR.

The response rates were consistent across all subgroups, regardless of age, sex, previous response status, International Prognostic Index score at enrollment, prior therapy, molecular subtype, and other factors.

Estimated relapse-free survival 12 months after documentation of an initial response was 64%.

The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a CR.

Median overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months and not reached for patients in CR.

Adverse events of special interest included grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in 23% of patients, prolonged cytopenia in 34%, infections in 19%, neurologic events in 11%, febrile neutropenia in 15%, and tumor lysis syndrome in 2%.

There were no deaths attributable to the treatment, CRS, or to cerebral edema, a complication of CAR T-cell therapy that appears to be related to the costimulatory molecule used in various constructs.

The JULIET trial is supported by Novartis. Dr. Maziarz disclosed honoraria, consultancy fees, and/or research funding from Novartis, Incyte, Juno Therapeutics, and Kite Therapeutics as well as patents/royalties from Athersys, Inc. 

© ASH/Luke Franke 2018

SAN DIEGO—An updated analysis of the JULIET trial showed that tisagenlecleucel produced a high rate of durable responses in adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

After a median follow-up of 19 months, two-thirds of adults with relapsed/refractory DLBCL who had early responses to the chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy remained in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease.

“Since the previous report, no new deaths have been reported due to any cause other than patient disease progression, no treatment-related mortality was seen throughout the study, and there were three early deaths, all related to lymphoma that progressed,” said study investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, of Oregon Health & Science University’s Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

Dr. Maziarz and his colleagues reported the updated study results at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1684). Results were published simultaneously in The New England Journal of Medicine. Data reported here are based on the ASH data.

JULIET then

In the phase 2, single-arm trial, investigators enrolled adults with DLBCL who had relapsed or were refractory after two or more prior lines of therapy and who were either ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) or who experienced disease progression after HSCT.

Interim results of the study were previously reported at the 22nd Congress of the European Hematology Association in 2017.

At that meeting, Gilles Salles, MD, PhD, of the University of Lyon in France, presented results of an analysis of available efficacy data on 51 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up.

In this population, the best overall response rate (ORR) was 59%. Three-month ORR was 45%, consisting of 37% complete responses (CR) and 8% partial responses (PR).

Relapse-free survival at 6 months was 79%, and all patients who had responses at 3 months continued to have responses at the time of data cutoff.

JULIET now

The current analysis was completed after a median time from infusion to data cutoff of 19 months as of May 21, 2018. The analysis included 115 patients who received CAR T-cell infusions, 99 of whom were evaluable for efficacy.

As reported at ASH, the best ORR, the primary endpoint, was 54%, comprised of 40% CR and 13% PR.

Fifty-four percent of patients who had achieved PR converted to CR.

The response rates were consistent across all subgroups, regardless of age, sex, previous response status, International Prognostic Index score at enrollment, prior therapy, molecular subtype, and other factors.

Estimated relapse-free survival 12 months after documentation of an initial response was 64%.

The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a CR.

Median overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months and not reached for patients in CR.

Adverse events of special interest included grade 3 or 4 cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in 23% of patients, prolonged cytopenia in 34%, infections in 19%, neurologic events in 11%, febrile neutropenia in 15%, and tumor lysis syndrome in 2%.

There were no deaths attributable to the treatment, CRS, or to cerebral edema, a complication of CAR T-cell therapy that appears to be related to the costimulatory molecule used in various constructs.

The JULIET trial is supported by Novartis. Dr. Maziarz disclosed honoraria, consultancy fees, and/or research funding from Novartis, Incyte, Juno Therapeutics, and Kite Therapeutics as well as patents/royalties from Athersys, Inc. 

SAN DIEGO – Ixazomib improved progression-free survival following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

Treatment with the oral proteasome inhibitor for 24 months was well tolerated, had a low discontinuation rate, and improved progression-free survival by 39% versus placebo, according to Meletios A. Dimopoulos, MD, of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.

These findings suggest ixazomib (Ninlaro) represents a “new treatment option for maintenance after transplantation,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial, known as TOURMALINE-MM3, is the first-ever randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of a proteasome inhibitor used as maintenance after ASCT, according to Dr. Dimopoulos. Lenalidomide is approved in that setting, but 29% of patients who start the treatment discontinue because of treatment-related adverse events.

“Proteasome inhibitors have a different mechanism of action and may provide an alternative to lenalidomide,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at an oral abstract session. Ixazomib has a manageable toxicity profile and “convenient” weekly oral dosing, making it “well suited” for maintenance.

When asked by an attendee whether ixazomib would become “the standard of care” for younger patients with myeloma in this setting, Dr. Dimopoulos replied the results show that ixazomib “is an option for patients, especially for those where a physician may believe that a proteasome inhibitor may be indicated.”

However, when pressed by an attendee to comment on how ixazomib compares with lenalidomide for maintenance, Dr. Dimopoulos remarked that current maintenance studies are moving in the direction of combining therapies.

“I think that instead of saying, ‘is ixazomib better than lenalidomide?’ or vice versa, it is better to see how one may combine those drugs in subsets of patients, or even combine these drugs with other agents,” he said.

The TOURMALINE-MM3 study included 656 patients randomized posttransplantation to receive weekly ixazomib or placebo for up to 2 years.

The median progression-free survival was 26.5 months for ixazomib versus 21.3 months for placebo (P = .002; hazard ratio, 0.720; 95% confidence interval, 0.582-0.890). Median overall survival had not been reached in either ixazomib or placebo arms as of this report, with a median follow-up of 31 months.

The discontinuation rate was 7% for ixazomib versus 5% for placebo, according to the investigator. Moreover, ixazomib was associated with “low toxicity” and no difference in the rates of new primary malignancies, at 3% in both arms.

A manuscript describing results of the TOURMALINE-MM3 study is in press in the Lancet, with an expected online publication date of Dec. 10, Dr. Dimopoulos told attendees. Other studies are ongoing to evaluate ixazomib combinations and treatment to progression in this setting.

TOURMALINE-MM3 is sponsored by Takeda (Millennium), the maker of ixazomib. Dr. Dimopoulos reported honoraria and consultancy with Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene.

SOURCE: Dimopoulos MA et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 301.

SAN DIEGO – Ixazomib improved progression-free survival following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

Treatment with the oral proteasome inhibitor for 24 months was well tolerated, had a low discontinuation rate, and improved progression-free survival by 39% versus placebo, according to Meletios A. Dimopoulos, MD, of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.

These findings suggest ixazomib (Ninlaro) represents a “new treatment option for maintenance after transplantation,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial, known as TOURMALINE-MM3, is the first-ever randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of a proteasome inhibitor used as maintenance after ASCT, according to Dr. Dimopoulos. Lenalidomide is approved in that setting, but 29% of patients who start the treatment discontinue because of treatment-related adverse events.

“Proteasome inhibitors have a different mechanism of action and may provide an alternative to lenalidomide,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at an oral abstract session. Ixazomib has a manageable toxicity profile and “convenient” weekly oral dosing, making it “well suited” for maintenance.

When asked by an attendee whether ixazomib would become “the standard of care” for younger patients with myeloma in this setting, Dr. Dimopoulos replied the results show that ixazomib “is an option for patients, especially for those where a physician may believe that a proteasome inhibitor may be indicated.”

However, when pressed by an attendee to comment on how ixazomib compares with lenalidomide for maintenance, Dr. Dimopoulos remarked that current maintenance studies are moving in the direction of combining therapies.

“I think that instead of saying, ‘is ixazomib better than lenalidomide?’ or vice versa, it is better to see how one may combine those drugs in subsets of patients, or even combine these drugs with other agents,” he said.

The TOURMALINE-MM3 study included 656 patients randomized posttransplantation to receive weekly ixazomib or placebo for up to 2 years.

The median progression-free survival was 26.5 months for ixazomib versus 21.3 months for placebo (P = .002; hazard ratio, 0.720; 95% confidence interval, 0.582-0.890). Median overall survival had not been reached in either ixazomib or placebo arms as of this report, with a median follow-up of 31 months.

The discontinuation rate was 7% for ixazomib versus 5% for placebo, according to the investigator. Moreover, ixazomib was associated with “low toxicity” and no difference in the rates of new primary malignancies, at 3% in both arms.

A manuscript describing results of the TOURMALINE-MM3 study is in press in the Lancet, with an expected online publication date of Dec. 10, Dr. Dimopoulos told attendees. Other studies are ongoing to evaluate ixazomib combinations and treatment to progression in this setting.

TOURMALINE-MM3 is sponsored by Takeda (Millennium), the maker of ixazomib. Dr. Dimopoulos reported honoraria and consultancy with Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene.

SOURCE: Dimopoulos MA et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 301.

SAN DIEGO – Ixazomib improved progression-free survival following autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, according to results of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

Andrew Bowser/MDedge News

Treatment with the oral proteasome inhibitor for 24 months was well tolerated, had a low discontinuation rate, and improved progression-free survival by 39% versus placebo, according to Meletios A. Dimopoulos, MD, of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens.

These findings suggest ixazomib (Ninlaro) represents a “new treatment option for maintenance after transplantation,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial, known as TOURMALINE-MM3, is the first-ever randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of a proteasome inhibitor used as maintenance after ASCT, according to Dr. Dimopoulos. Lenalidomide is approved in that setting, but 29% of patients who start the treatment discontinue because of treatment-related adverse events.

“Proteasome inhibitors have a different mechanism of action and may provide an alternative to lenalidomide,” Dr. Dimopoulos said at an oral abstract session. Ixazomib has a manageable toxicity profile and “convenient” weekly oral dosing, making it “well suited” for maintenance.

When asked by an attendee whether ixazomib would become “the standard of care” for younger patients with myeloma in this setting, Dr. Dimopoulos replied the results show that ixazomib “is an option for patients, especially for those where a physician may believe that a proteasome inhibitor may be indicated.”

However, when pressed by an attendee to comment on how ixazomib compares with lenalidomide for maintenance, Dr. Dimopoulos remarked that current maintenance studies are moving in the direction of combining therapies.

“I think that instead of saying, ‘is ixazomib better than lenalidomide?’ or vice versa, it is better to see how one may combine those drugs in subsets of patients, or even combine these drugs with other agents,” he said.

The TOURMALINE-MM3 study included 656 patients randomized posttransplantation to receive weekly ixazomib or placebo for up to 2 years.

The median progression-free survival was 26.5 months for ixazomib versus 21.3 months for placebo (P = .002; hazard ratio, 0.720; 95% confidence interval, 0.582-0.890). Median overall survival had not been reached in either ixazomib or placebo arms as of this report, with a median follow-up of 31 months.

The discontinuation rate was 7% for ixazomib versus 5% for placebo, according to the investigator. Moreover, ixazomib was associated with “low toxicity” and no difference in the rates of new primary malignancies, at 3% in both arms.

A manuscript describing results of the TOURMALINE-MM3 study is in press in the Lancet, with an expected online publication date of Dec. 10, Dr. Dimopoulos told attendees. Other studies are ongoing to evaluate ixazomib combinations and treatment to progression in this setting.

TOURMALINE-MM3 is sponsored by Takeda (Millennium), the maker of ixazomib. Dr. Dimopoulos reported honoraria and consultancy with Janssen, Takeda Pharmaceutical, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Celgene.

SOURCE: Dimopoulos MA et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 301.

SAN DIEGO – Two-thirds of adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who had early responses to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy with tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) remain in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease, according to an updated analysis of the JULIET trial.

In the single-arm, open-label trial, the overall response rate after 19 months of follow-up was 54%, including 40% complete remissions and 14% partial remissions. The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a complete remission. Overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months.

Adverse events were similar to those previously reported and were manageable, according to investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, from the Oregon Health & Science Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

In this video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, Dr. Maziarz discusses the promising results using CAR T cells in this difficult to treat population.

SAN DIEGO – Two-thirds of adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who had early responses to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy with tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) remain in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease, according to an updated analysis of the JULIET trial.

In the single-arm, open-label trial, the overall response rate after 19 months of follow-up was 54%, including 40% complete remissions and 14% partial remissions. The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a complete remission. Overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months.

Adverse events were similar to those previously reported and were manageable, according to investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, from the Oregon Health & Science Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

In this video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, Dr. Maziarz discusses the promising results using CAR T cells in this difficult to treat population.

SAN DIEGO – Two-thirds of adults with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who had early responses to chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR T) therapy with tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah) remain in remission with no evidence of minimal residual disease, according to an updated analysis of the JULIET trial.

In the single-arm, open-label trial, the overall response rate after 19 months of follow-up was 54%, including 40% complete remissions and 14% partial remissions. The median duration of response had not been reached at the time of data cutoff, and the median overall survival had not been reached for patients with a complete remission. Overall survival in this heavily pretreated population as a whole (all patients who received CAR T-cell infusions) was 11.1 months.

Adverse events were similar to those previously reported and were manageable, according to investigator Richard Thomas Maziarz, MD, from the Oregon Health & Science Knight Cancer Institute in Portland.

In this video interview at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, Dr. Maziarz discusses the promising results using CAR T cells in this difficult to treat population.

SAN DIEGO – Investigators demonstrated the feasibility of delivering genomic results in 7 days in a population of older, newly diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The Beat AML Master Trial is an ongoing umbrella study that harnesses cytogenetic information and next generation sequencing to match patients with targeted therapies across a number of substudies or outside of the trial’s multicenter network.

The researchers chose AML for this precision-medicine study because of its rapid onset and lethal nature, its heterogeneity, and the availability of more-targeted therapies, said Amy Burd, PhD, of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, which is sponsoring the study.

Initial data from the trial showed that more than 95% of patients were assigned to treatment in 7 days or less, based on their personalized genomic information.

Overall, 285 patients had usable genomic screening data and were assigned to treatment. Of those patients, 273 were assigned to a treatment within 7 days, Dr. Burd reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The speed of delivering these results is critical, said Joseph Mikhael, MD, chief medical officer for the International Myeloma Foundation in Phoenix, who moderated a media briefing on personalized medicine.

“One of the greatest challenges we faced in the concept of personalized medicine is by the time you’ve determined what is best for that patient ... the horse is already out of the barn,” Dr. Mikhael said. “You have to have started the patient on treatment already or else their disease could have progressed quite rapidly.”

In the past, genomic results might come back a month after the patient started therapy. “It was really almost academic,” he said.

In the Beat AML study, more than half (146 patients) were treated based on their AML subtype. The remaining patients (139) were not treated: 2.5% of patients died within 7 days, 7% of patients chose an alternative treatment prior to assignment, 20% chose standard of care, 9.1% chose an alternative trial after assignment, 8.1% chose palliative care, and the remainder had a reason that was not specified.

“The treatment decisions are made for what’s best for the patient even if that means a study outside of Beat AML,” Dr. Burd said.

Currently, there are 11 substudies offering treatment to trial participants across 13 clinical sites. There has been promising efficacy in many of the treatment arms, Dr. Burd said.

In the future, the researchers are looking to expand the substudies to look into novel drug combinations for certain AML subtypes, specifically isocitrate dehydrogenase 2–mutated groups.

Dr. Burd is an employee of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. Other coinvestigators reported financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Mikhael reported research funding from AbbVie, Celgene, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Burd A et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 559.

SAN DIEGO – Investigators demonstrated the feasibility of delivering genomic results in 7 days in a population of older, newly diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The Beat AML Master Trial is an ongoing umbrella study that harnesses cytogenetic information and next generation sequencing to match patients with targeted therapies across a number of substudies or outside of the trial’s multicenter network.

The researchers chose AML for this precision-medicine study because of its rapid onset and lethal nature, its heterogeneity, and the availability of more-targeted therapies, said Amy Burd, PhD, of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, which is sponsoring the study.

Initial data from the trial showed that more than 95% of patients were assigned to treatment in 7 days or less, based on their personalized genomic information.

Overall, 285 patients had usable genomic screening data and were assigned to treatment. Of those patients, 273 were assigned to a treatment within 7 days, Dr. Burd reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The speed of delivering these results is critical, said Joseph Mikhael, MD, chief medical officer for the International Myeloma Foundation in Phoenix, who moderated a media briefing on personalized medicine.

“One of the greatest challenges we faced in the concept of personalized medicine is by the time you’ve determined what is best for that patient ... the horse is already out of the barn,” Dr. Mikhael said. “You have to have started the patient on treatment already or else their disease could have progressed quite rapidly.”

In the past, genomic results might come back a month after the patient started therapy. “It was really almost academic,” he said.

In the Beat AML study, more than half (146 patients) were treated based on their AML subtype. The remaining patients (139) were not treated: 2.5% of patients died within 7 days, 7% of patients chose an alternative treatment prior to assignment, 20% chose standard of care, 9.1% chose an alternative trial after assignment, 8.1% chose palliative care, and the remainder had a reason that was not specified.

“The treatment decisions are made for what’s best for the patient even if that means a study outside of Beat AML,” Dr. Burd said.

Currently, there are 11 substudies offering treatment to trial participants across 13 clinical sites. There has been promising efficacy in many of the treatment arms, Dr. Burd said.

In the future, the researchers are looking to expand the substudies to look into novel drug combinations for certain AML subtypes, specifically isocitrate dehydrogenase 2–mutated groups.

Dr. Burd is an employee of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. Other coinvestigators reported financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Mikhael reported research funding from AbbVie, Celgene, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Burd A et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 559.

SAN DIEGO – Investigators demonstrated the feasibility of delivering genomic results in 7 days in a population of older, newly diagnosed patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The Beat AML Master Trial is an ongoing umbrella study that harnesses cytogenetic information and next generation sequencing to match patients with targeted therapies across a number of substudies or outside of the trial’s multicenter network.

The researchers chose AML for this precision-medicine study because of its rapid onset and lethal nature, its heterogeneity, and the availability of more-targeted therapies, said Amy Burd, PhD, of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, which is sponsoring the study.

Initial data from the trial showed that more than 95% of patients were assigned to treatment in 7 days or less, based on their personalized genomic information.

Overall, 285 patients had usable genomic screening data and were assigned to treatment. Of those patients, 273 were assigned to a treatment within 7 days, Dr. Burd reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The speed of delivering these results is critical, said Joseph Mikhael, MD, chief medical officer for the International Myeloma Foundation in Phoenix, who moderated a media briefing on personalized medicine.

“One of the greatest challenges we faced in the concept of personalized medicine is by the time you’ve determined what is best for that patient ... the horse is already out of the barn,” Dr. Mikhael said. “You have to have started the patient on treatment already or else their disease could have progressed quite rapidly.”

In the past, genomic results might come back a month after the patient started therapy. “It was really almost academic,” he said.

In the Beat AML study, more than half (146 patients) were treated based on their AML subtype. The remaining patients (139) were not treated: 2.5% of patients died within 7 days, 7% of patients chose an alternative treatment prior to assignment, 20% chose standard of care, 9.1% chose an alternative trial after assignment, 8.1% chose palliative care, and the remainder had a reason that was not specified.

“The treatment decisions are made for what’s best for the patient even if that means a study outside of Beat AML,” Dr. Burd said.

Currently, there are 11 substudies offering treatment to trial participants across 13 clinical sites. There has been promising efficacy in many of the treatment arms, Dr. Burd said.

In the future, the researchers are looking to expand the substudies to look into novel drug combinations for certain AML subtypes, specifically isocitrate dehydrogenase 2–mutated groups.

Dr. Burd is an employee of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society. Other coinvestigators reported financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry. Dr. Mikhael reported research funding from AbbVie, Celgene, Onyx Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi.

[email protected]

SOURCE: Burd A et al. ASH 2018, Abstract 559.