Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Photo from Penn Medicine

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

• Hypotension
• Capillary leak (hypoxia)
• End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
• Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
• Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
• Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
• Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

• Aphasia
• Altered level of consciousness
• Impairment of cognitive skills
• Motor weakness
• Seizures
• Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

Photo from Penn Medicine

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

• Hypotension
• Capillary leak (hypoxia)
• End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
• Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
• Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
• Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
• Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

• Aphasia
• Altered level of consciousness
• Impairment of cognitive skills
• Motor weakness
• Seizures
• Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

Photo from Penn Medicine

A group of experts has proposed new consensus definitions and grading systems for cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity related to immune effector cell therapies.

The group hopes their recommendations will be widely accepted and used in both trials and the clinical setting.

The recommendations were devised by 49 experts at a meeting supported by the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (ASBMT), compiled by a writing group, and reviewed by stakeholders.

Daniel W. Lee, MD, of the University of Virginia School of Medicine in Charlottesville, and his colleagues described the ASBMT consensus definitions and grading systems in Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation.

CRS

The ASBMT consensus definition for CRS is “a supraphysiologic response following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

To be diagnosed with CRS, a patient must have a fever and may have the following symptoms:

• Hypotension
• Capillary leak (hypoxia)
• End organ dysfunction.

The ASBMT consensus for grading CRS is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a fever, defined as a temperature of 38.0°C or higher
• Grade 2—Patient has a fever, hypotension that doesn’t require vasopressors, and/or hypoxia that requires oxygen delivered by low-flow nasal cannula (≤6 L/min) or blow-by
• Grade 3—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring one vasopressor (with or without vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) that requires high-flow nasal cannula (>6 L/min), facemask, non-rebreather mask, or venturi mask
• Grade 4—Patient has a fever, hypotension requiring multiple vasopressors (excluding vasopressin), and/or hypoxia (not attributable to any other cause) requiring positive-pressure ventilation
• Grade 5—Death due to CRS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Typically, severe CRS can be considered resolved if “fever, oxygen, and pressor requirements have resolved,” Dr. Lee and his coauthors said.

The authors also stressed that neurotoxicity that occurs with or after CRS “does not inform the grade of CRS but is instead captured separately in the neurotoxicity scale.”

Neurotoxicity

Dr. Lee and his coauthors said neurotoxicity in this setting is called “immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS).”

The ASBMT consensus definition for ICANs is “a disorder characterized by a pathologic process involving the central nervous system following any immune therapy that results in the activation or engagement of endogenous or infused T cells and/or other immune effector cells.”

Symptoms of ICANS may include:

• Aphasia
• Altered level of consciousness
• Impairment of cognitive skills
• Motor weakness
• Seizures
• Cerebral edema.

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in adults and children age 12 and older is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a score of 7-9 on the 10-point immune effector cell-associated encephalopathy (ICE) assessment and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a score of 3-6 on the ICE assessment and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a score of 0-2 on the ICE assessment, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform the ICE assessment, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors noted that the ICE assessment is not suitable for children younger than 12. For these patients (and older patients with baseline developmental delays), ICANS can be assessed using the Cornell Assessment of Pediatric Delirium (CAPD).

The ASBMT consensus for grading ICANS in children younger than 12 (or older patients with developmental delays) is as follows:

• Grade 1—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and awakens spontaneously
• Grade 2—Patient has a CAPD score lower than 9 and will awaken to the sound of a voice
• Grade 3—Patient has a CAPD score of 9 or higher, awakens only to tactile stimulus, has any clinical seizure that resolves rapidly or non-convulsive seizures that resolve with intervention, and/or has focal/local edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 4—Patient is unable to perform CAPD, is unarousable or requires “vigorous stimuli” to be aroused, has life-threatening seizure (lasting more than 5 minutes) or repetitive clinical or electrical seizures without return to baseline in between, has deep focal motor weakness, and/or has decerebrate or decorticate posturing, cranial nerve VI palsy, papilledema, Cushing’s triad, or signs of diffuse cerebral edema on neuroimaging
• Grade 5—Death due to ICANS when there is no other “principle factor” leading to death.

Dr. Lee and his coauthors reported relationships with a range of companies. 

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—In a phase 3 trial, ibrutinib plus rituximab (IR) improved survival when compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients younger than 70 with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Patients who received IR had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival compared to patients who received fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR).

“This establishes ibrutinib-based therapy as the most effective treatment tested to date in this disease for untreated patients,” said Tait D. Shanafelt, MD, of Stanford University in California.

In fact, the study results are likely to dethrone FCR as the most active chemoimmunotherapy regimen against CLL, Dr. Shanafelt said.

He presented the results during the late-breaking abstract session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-4*).

The trial (NCT02048813) included 529 patients age 70 or younger with previously untreated CLL. They were randomized on a 2:1 basis to either six cycles of FCR according to standard protocols (n=175) or IR (n=354).

IR consisted of ibrutinib given at 420 mg daily for each 28-day cycle and rituximab given at 50 mg/m² on day 1 of cycle 2, at 325 mg/m² on day 2 of cycle 2, and at 500 mg/m² on day 1 for cycles 3 to 7.

From cycle 8 on, patients in the IR arm received daily ibrutinib at 420 mg until disease progression.

Dr. Shanafelt said patient characteristics were well-balanced between the treatment arms.

He presented results from both an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis and a per-protocol analysis excluding 22 patients in the IR arm and nine patients in the FCR arm who were randomized but later found not to meet eligibility criteria.

PFS

In the ITT analysis, there were 37 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 40 cases in the FCR arm. This difference translated into a hazard ratio (HR) for progression or death of 0.35 with IR (P<0.00001).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were 33 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 39 cases in the FCR arm. The HR was 0.32 favoring IR (P<0.00001).

In a subgroup analysis of PFS, IR was superior to FCR regardless of patient age, sex, performance status, disease stage, or the presence or absence of the 11q23.3 deletion.

PFS was significantly better with IR in patients with unmutated IGHV (HR= 0.26, P<0.00001) but not in patients with mutated IGHV (HR=0.44, P=0.07).

Overall survival

In the ITT analysis, there were four deaths in the IR arm and 10 in the FCR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0003).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were three deaths in the IR arm and 10 deaths in the FCR arm (HR=0.13, P<0.0001).

Dr. Shanafelt noted that, although the overall number of deaths was relatively small, there were twice as many patients enrolled in the IR arm as in the FCR arm, meaning the rate of death in the FCR arm was five-fold higher than in the IR arm.

Safety and cost

Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 58.5% of patients in the IR arm and 72.1% of patients in the FCR arm (P=0.004).

Specific AEs that occurred significantly less often with IR included neutropenia (22.7% vs. 43.7%), anemia (2.6% vs. 12.0%), thrombocytopenia (2.9% vs. 13.9%), any infection (7.1% vs. 19.0%), and neutropenic fever (2.3% vs. 15.8%; P<0.001 for all comparisons).

AEs that occurred more frequently with IR than FCR included atrial fibrillation (2.9% vs. 0%, P=0.04) and hypertension (7.4% vs. 1.9%, P=0.01).

Dr. Shanafelt acknowledged that one possible barrier to the IR regimen is cost. The monthly cost of ibrutinib maintenance is about $10,000, he said, although he noted that cost considerations were not studied in the trial.

“Future trials testing novel agent combinations to see if we can eliminate the need for chronic therapy should be pursued,” he said.

The trial was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute with additional support from Pharmacyclics. Dr. Shanafelt reported patents and royalties from the Mayo Clinic, and research funding from Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, and Janssen.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—In a phase 3 trial, ibrutinib plus rituximab (IR) improved survival when compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients younger than 70 with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Patients who received IR had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival compared to patients who received fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR).

“This establishes ibrutinib-based therapy as the most effective treatment tested to date in this disease for untreated patients,” said Tait D. Shanafelt, MD, of Stanford University in California.

In fact, the study results are likely to dethrone FCR as the most active chemoimmunotherapy regimen against CLL, Dr. Shanafelt said.

He presented the results during the late-breaking abstract session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-4*).

The trial (NCT02048813) included 529 patients age 70 or younger with previously untreated CLL. They were randomized on a 2:1 basis to either six cycles of FCR according to standard protocols (n=175) or IR (n=354).

IR consisted of ibrutinib given at 420 mg daily for each 28-day cycle and rituximab given at 50 mg/m² on day 1 of cycle 2, at 325 mg/m² on day 2 of cycle 2, and at 500 mg/m² on day 1 for cycles 3 to 7.

From cycle 8 on, patients in the IR arm received daily ibrutinib at 420 mg until disease progression.

Dr. Shanafelt said patient characteristics were well-balanced between the treatment arms.

He presented results from both an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis and a per-protocol analysis excluding 22 patients in the IR arm and nine patients in the FCR arm who were randomized but later found not to meet eligibility criteria.

PFS

In the ITT analysis, there were 37 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 40 cases in the FCR arm. This difference translated into a hazard ratio (HR) for progression or death of 0.35 with IR (P<0.00001).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were 33 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 39 cases in the FCR arm. The HR was 0.32 favoring IR (P<0.00001).

In a subgroup analysis of PFS, IR was superior to FCR regardless of patient age, sex, performance status, disease stage, or the presence or absence of the 11q23.3 deletion.

PFS was significantly better with IR in patients with unmutated IGHV (HR= 0.26, P<0.00001) but not in patients with mutated IGHV (HR=0.44, P=0.07).

Overall survival

In the ITT analysis, there were four deaths in the IR arm and 10 in the FCR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0003).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were three deaths in the IR arm and 10 deaths in the FCR arm (HR=0.13, P<0.0001).

Dr. Shanafelt noted that, although the overall number of deaths was relatively small, there were twice as many patients enrolled in the IR arm as in the FCR arm, meaning the rate of death in the FCR arm was five-fold higher than in the IR arm.

Safety and cost

Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 58.5% of patients in the IR arm and 72.1% of patients in the FCR arm (P=0.004).

Specific AEs that occurred significantly less often with IR included neutropenia (22.7% vs. 43.7%), anemia (2.6% vs. 12.0%), thrombocytopenia (2.9% vs. 13.9%), any infection (7.1% vs. 19.0%), and neutropenic fever (2.3% vs. 15.8%; P<0.001 for all comparisons).

AEs that occurred more frequently with IR than FCR included atrial fibrillation (2.9% vs. 0%, P=0.04) and hypertension (7.4% vs. 1.9%, P=0.01).

Dr. Shanafelt acknowledged that one possible barrier to the IR regimen is cost. The monthly cost of ibrutinib maintenance is about $10,000, he said, although he noted that cost considerations were not studied in the trial.

“Future trials testing novel agent combinations to see if we can eliminate the need for chronic therapy should be pursued,” he said.

The trial was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute with additional support from Pharmacyclics. Dr. Shanafelt reported patents and royalties from the Mayo Clinic, and research funding from Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, and Janssen.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

©ASH/Scott Morgan 2018

SAN DIEGO—In a phase 3 trial, ibrutinib plus rituximab (IR) improved survival when compared with standard chemoimmunotherapy in patients younger than 70 with untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

Patients who received IR had superior progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival compared to patients who received fludarabine, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab (FCR).

“This establishes ibrutinib-based therapy as the most effective treatment tested to date in this disease for untreated patients,” said Tait D. Shanafelt, MD, of Stanford University in California.

In fact, the study results are likely to dethrone FCR as the most active chemoimmunotherapy regimen against CLL, Dr. Shanafelt said.

He presented the results during the late-breaking abstract session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract LBA-4*).

The trial (NCT02048813) included 529 patients age 70 or younger with previously untreated CLL. They were randomized on a 2:1 basis to either six cycles of FCR according to standard protocols (n=175) or IR (n=354).

IR consisted of ibrutinib given at 420 mg daily for each 28-day cycle and rituximab given at 50 mg/m² on day 1 of cycle 2, at 325 mg/m² on day 2 of cycle 2, and at 500 mg/m² on day 1 for cycles 3 to 7.

From cycle 8 on, patients in the IR arm received daily ibrutinib at 420 mg until disease progression.

Dr. Shanafelt said patient characteristics were well-balanced between the treatment arms.

He presented results from both an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis and a per-protocol analysis excluding 22 patients in the IR arm and nine patients in the FCR arm who were randomized but later found not to meet eligibility criteria.

PFS

In the ITT analysis, there were 37 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 40 cases in the FCR arm. This difference translated into a hazard ratio (HR) for progression or death of 0.35 with IR (P<0.00001).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were 33 cases of progression or death in the IR arm and 39 cases in the FCR arm. The HR was 0.32 favoring IR (P<0.00001).

In a subgroup analysis of PFS, IR was superior to FCR regardless of patient age, sex, performance status, disease stage, or the presence or absence of the 11q23.3 deletion.

PFS was significantly better with IR in patients with unmutated IGHV (HR= 0.26, P<0.00001) but not in patients with mutated IGHV (HR=0.44, P=0.07).

Overall survival

In the ITT analysis, there were four deaths in the IR arm and 10 in the FCR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0003).

In the per-protocol analysis, there were three deaths in the IR arm and 10 deaths in the FCR arm (HR=0.13, P<0.0001).

Dr. Shanafelt noted that, although the overall number of deaths was relatively small, there were twice as many patients enrolled in the IR arm as in the FCR arm, meaning the rate of death in the FCR arm was five-fold higher than in the IR arm.

Safety and cost

Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 58.5% of patients in the IR arm and 72.1% of patients in the FCR arm (P=0.004).

Specific AEs that occurred significantly less often with IR included neutropenia (22.7% vs. 43.7%), anemia (2.6% vs. 12.0%), thrombocytopenia (2.9% vs. 13.9%), any infection (7.1% vs. 19.0%), and neutropenic fever (2.3% vs. 15.8%; P<0.001 for all comparisons).

AEs that occurred more frequently with IR than FCR included atrial fibrillation (2.9% vs. 0%, P=0.04) and hypertension (7.4% vs. 1.9%, P=0.01).

Dr. Shanafelt acknowledged that one possible barrier to the IR regimen is cost. The monthly cost of ibrutinib maintenance is about $10,000, he said, although he noted that cost considerations were not studied in the trial.

“Future trials testing novel agent combinations to see if we can eliminate the need for chronic therapy should be pursued,” he said.

The trial was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute with additional support from Pharmacyclics. Dr. Shanafelt reported patents and royalties from the Mayo Clinic, and research funding from Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Genentech, AbbVie, Pharmacyclics, and Janssen.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—Fludarabine is “very important” for lymphodepletion prior to CD30-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

A phase 1/2 study showed that bendamustine alone was not sufficient as lymphodepletion.

However, adding fludarabine to bendamustine could enhance responses to CD30.CAR T-cell therapy and improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Natalie S. Grover, MD, of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, presented these results as abstract 681.*

This trial (NCT02690545) included patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma or T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Twenty-four adult patients have been treated thus far. Twenty-two had classical Hodgkin lymphoma, one had Sézary syndrome, and one had enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma.

The patients’ median age at baseline was 34.5 years (range, 23-69), and they had received a median of 7.5 prior lines of therapy (range, 3-17).

Prior treatments included brentuximab vedotin (n=23), checkpoint inhibitors (n=16), autologous transplant (n=17), and allogeneic transplant (n=7).

In this trial, patients could receive bridging therapy while their T cells were being processed. They then underwent lymphodepletion and received CAR T-cell therapy at one of two doses.

Bendamustine alone

Eight patients received lymphodepletion with 2 days of bendamustine at 90 mg/m². Three of these patients received CD30.CAR T-cell therapy at 1×10⁸ cells/m², and all three progressed.

Of the five patients who received CAR T-cell therapy at a dose of 2×10⁸ cells/m², one progressed, one had stable disease, and three had a complete response (CR).

However, all three complete responders were in CR prior to lymphodepletion as a result of bridging therapy.

“Responses were more modest than what we were hoping for with lymphodepletion,” Dr. Grover noted. “We looked at the cytokine levels in patients getting bendamustine lymphodepletion and saw that bendamustine wasn’t supporting an ideal cytokine milieu. IL-7 and IL-15 are important for T-cell expansion, and these levels were not increased in patients post-bendamustine.”

When the researchers added fludarabine to the lymphodepleting regimen, they observed an increase in T-cell expansion.

Bendamustine plus fludarabine

Sixteen patients received bendamustine plus fludarabine prior to CAR T-cell therapy. The regimen consisted of 3 days of bendamustine at 70 mg/m² and fludarabine at 30 mg/m².

All 16 patients received CAR T cells at 2×10⁸ cells/m², which was the recommended phase 2 dose.

“Responses were more impressive in the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort,” Dr. Grover noted.

Twelve of the 16 patients achieved a CR, although two patients were already in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

Two patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and one progressed.

PFS and toxicity

Dr. Grover and her colleagues also assessed PFS. At a median follow-up of 100 days, the median PFS was 164 days for the entire cohort, excluding patients who were in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

The median PFS was 396 days for the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort and 55 days for patients in the bendamustine-alone cohort (P=0.001).

There was no neurotoxicity in this trial.

Three patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Two patients had grade 1 CRS that resolved spontaneously, and one patient had grade 2 CRS, which responded to tocilizumab. Two of the patients with CRS had T-cell lymphoma. The Sézary patient had grade 2 CRS.

Eight patients had a mild rash, one of whom had a rash at baseline.

“CAR T cells against CD30 preceded by lymphodepletion with bendamustine and fludarabine have promising efficacy and a good safety profile in treating patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ lymphomas,” Dr. Grover said in closing.

“Fludarabine is very important in enhancing cytokines for improved growth and persistence of CAR T cells.”

This trial was sponsored by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Grover reported consulting for Seattle Genetics.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—Fludarabine is “very important” for lymphodepletion prior to CD30-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

A phase 1/2 study showed that bendamustine alone was not sufficient as lymphodepletion.

However, adding fludarabine to bendamustine could enhance responses to CD30.CAR T-cell therapy and improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Natalie S. Grover, MD, of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, presented these results as abstract 681.*

This trial (NCT02690545) included patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma or T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Twenty-four adult patients have been treated thus far. Twenty-two had classical Hodgkin lymphoma, one had Sézary syndrome, and one had enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma.

The patients’ median age at baseline was 34.5 years (range, 23-69), and they had received a median of 7.5 prior lines of therapy (range, 3-17).

Prior treatments included brentuximab vedotin (n=23), checkpoint inhibitors (n=16), autologous transplant (n=17), and allogeneic transplant (n=7).

In this trial, patients could receive bridging therapy while their T cells were being processed. They then underwent lymphodepletion and received CAR T-cell therapy at one of two doses.

Bendamustine alone

Eight patients received lymphodepletion with 2 days of bendamustine at 90 mg/m². Three of these patients received CD30.CAR T-cell therapy at 1×10⁸ cells/m², and all three progressed.

Of the five patients who received CAR T-cell therapy at a dose of 2×10⁸ cells/m², one progressed, one had stable disease, and three had a complete response (CR).

However, all three complete responders were in CR prior to lymphodepletion as a result of bridging therapy.

“Responses were more modest than what we were hoping for with lymphodepletion,” Dr. Grover noted. “We looked at the cytokine levels in patients getting bendamustine lymphodepletion and saw that bendamustine wasn’t supporting an ideal cytokine milieu. IL-7 and IL-15 are important for T-cell expansion, and these levels were not increased in patients post-bendamustine.”

When the researchers added fludarabine to the lymphodepleting regimen, they observed an increase in T-cell expansion.

Bendamustine plus fludarabine

Sixteen patients received bendamustine plus fludarabine prior to CAR T-cell therapy. The regimen consisted of 3 days of bendamustine at 70 mg/m² and fludarabine at 30 mg/m².

All 16 patients received CAR T cells at 2×10⁸ cells/m², which was the recommended phase 2 dose.

“Responses were more impressive in the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort,” Dr. Grover noted.

Twelve of the 16 patients achieved a CR, although two patients were already in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

Two patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and one progressed.

PFS and toxicity

Dr. Grover and her colleagues also assessed PFS. At a median follow-up of 100 days, the median PFS was 164 days for the entire cohort, excluding patients who were in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

The median PFS was 396 days for the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort and 55 days for patients in the bendamustine-alone cohort (P=0.001).

There was no neurotoxicity in this trial.

Three patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Two patients had grade 1 CRS that resolved spontaneously, and one patient had grade 2 CRS, which responded to tocilizumab. Two of the patients with CRS had T-cell lymphoma. The Sézary patient had grade 2 CRS.

Eight patients had a mild rash, one of whom had a rash at baseline.

“CAR T cells against CD30 preceded by lymphodepletion with bendamustine and fludarabine have promising efficacy and a good safety profile in treating patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ lymphomas,” Dr. Grover said in closing.

“Fludarabine is very important in enhancing cytokines for improved growth and persistence of CAR T cells.”

This trial was sponsored by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Grover reported consulting for Seattle Genetics.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—Fludarabine is “very important” for lymphodepletion prior to CD30-directed chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy, according to a presentation at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

A phase 1/2 study showed that bendamustine alone was not sufficient as lymphodepletion.

However, adding fludarabine to bendamustine could enhance responses to CD30.CAR T-cell therapy and improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with Hodgkin or non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Natalie S. Grover, MD, of the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, presented these results as abstract 681.*

This trial (NCT02690545) included patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma or T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

Twenty-four adult patients have been treated thus far. Twenty-two had classical Hodgkin lymphoma, one had Sézary syndrome, and one had enteropathy-associated T-cell lymphoma.

The patients’ median age at baseline was 34.5 years (range, 23-69), and they had received a median of 7.5 prior lines of therapy (range, 3-17).

Prior treatments included brentuximab vedotin (n=23), checkpoint inhibitors (n=16), autologous transplant (n=17), and allogeneic transplant (n=7).

In this trial, patients could receive bridging therapy while their T cells were being processed. They then underwent lymphodepletion and received CAR T-cell therapy at one of two doses.

Bendamustine alone

Eight patients received lymphodepletion with 2 days of bendamustine at 90 mg/m². Three of these patients received CD30.CAR T-cell therapy at 1×10⁸ cells/m², and all three progressed.

Of the five patients who received CAR T-cell therapy at a dose of 2×10⁸ cells/m², one progressed, one had stable disease, and three had a complete response (CR).

However, all three complete responders were in CR prior to lymphodepletion as a result of bridging therapy.

“Responses were more modest than what we were hoping for with lymphodepletion,” Dr. Grover noted. “We looked at the cytokine levels in patients getting bendamustine lymphodepletion and saw that bendamustine wasn’t supporting an ideal cytokine milieu. IL-7 and IL-15 are important for T-cell expansion, and these levels were not increased in patients post-bendamustine.”

When the researchers added fludarabine to the lymphodepleting regimen, they observed an increase in T-cell expansion.

Bendamustine plus fludarabine

Sixteen patients received bendamustine plus fludarabine prior to CAR T-cell therapy. The regimen consisted of 3 days of bendamustine at 70 mg/m² and fludarabine at 30 mg/m².

All 16 patients received CAR T cells at 2×10⁸ cells/m², which was the recommended phase 2 dose.

“Responses were more impressive in the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort,” Dr. Grover noted.

Twelve of the 16 patients achieved a CR, although two patients were already in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

Two patients had a partial response, one had stable disease, and one progressed.

PFS and toxicity

Dr. Grover and her colleagues also assessed PFS. At a median follow-up of 100 days, the median PFS was 164 days for the entire cohort, excluding patients who were in CR prior to lymphodepletion.

The median PFS was 396 days for the bendamustine-fludarabine cohort and 55 days for patients in the bendamustine-alone cohort (P=0.001).

There was no neurotoxicity in this trial.

Three patients developed cytokine release syndrome (CRS). Two patients had grade 1 CRS that resolved spontaneously, and one patient had grade 2 CRS, which responded to tocilizumab. Two of the patients with CRS had T-cell lymphoma. The Sézary patient had grade 2 CRS.

Eight patients had a mild rash, one of whom had a rash at baseline.

“CAR T cells against CD30 preceded by lymphodepletion with bendamustine and fludarabine have promising efficacy and a good safety profile in treating patients with relapsed/refractory, CD30+ lymphomas,” Dr. Grover said in closing.

“Fludarabine is very important in enhancing cytokines for improved growth and persistence of CAR T cells.”

This trial was sponsored by UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center. Dr. Grover reported consulting for Seattle Genetics.

*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax, 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, according to Piers Blombery, MBBS, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said during the late-breaking abstracts session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

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,” Dr. Blombery added.

A paper on the mutation was published in Cancer Discovery to coincide with the presentation at ASH (abstract LBA-7).

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 patients, the investigators 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 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, the investigators determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and, 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.

He added 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.

Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures. 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.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax, 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, according to Piers Blombery, MBBS, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said during the late-breaking abstracts session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

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,” Dr. Blombery added.

A paper on the mutation was published in Cancer Discovery to coincide with the presentation at ASH (abstract LBA-7).

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 patients, the investigators 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 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, the investigators determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and, 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.

He added 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.

Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures. 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.

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN DIEGO—A recurrent mutation in BCL2, the therapeutic target of venetoclax, 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, according to Piers Blombery, MBBS, of the Peter MacCallum Cancer Center in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

“We have identified the first acquired BCL2 mutation developed in patients clinically treated with venetoclax,” he said during the late-breaking abstracts session at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting.

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,” Dr. Blombery added.

A paper on the mutation was published in Cancer Discovery to coincide with the presentation at ASH (abstract LBA-7).

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 patients, the investigators 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 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, the investigators determined that cell lines overexpressing BCL2 Gly101Val are resistant to venetoclax, and, 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.

He added 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.

Dr. Blombery reported having no relevant disclosures. 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.

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

© ASH/Todd Buchanan 2018

SAN DIEGO—Nivolumab plus brentuximab vedotin may be a new treatment option for patients with relapsed/refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL), according to investigators from the CheckMate 436 trial.

Interim results from this phase 1/2 trial revealed an overall response rate of 70%, including a complete response rate of 27%.

“It’s very promising . . . to see this level of activity in this advanced, relapsed/refractory population,” said Joseph E. Eid, MD, senior vice president and head of medical at Bristol-Myers Squibb, which is sponsoring CheckMate 436 in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

Dr. Eid also noted that adverse events (AEs) observed with this regimen were consistent with the safety profiles of nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin alone.

These results were presented as a poster at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1691).

Rationale

Dr. Eid noted that patients with relapsed or refractory PMBCL have limited treatment options.

“The initial therapy works well in 70% to 80% of patients, but the patients who fail don’t have good options,” he said.

Prior research has shown that PMBCL is often characterized by overexpression of the PD-1 ligands PD-L1 and PD-L2, and most PMBCL expresses CD30.

Dr. Eid said CheckMate 436 (NCT02581631) was designed to “take advantage” of these characteristics by employing the anti-PD-1 checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab and the anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate brentuximab vedotin.

Patients and treatment

The interim analysis of this trial included 30 patients with relapsed/refractory PMCBL. Their median age at enrollment was 35.5 (range, 19 to 83), and 57% of patients were female.

Sixty percent of patients had refractory disease, 23% had relapsed disease, and 17% had both.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-5). Thirteen percent of patients had prior autologous stem cell transplant.

The patients received nivolumab at 240 mg and brentuximab vedotin at 1.8 mg/kg every 3 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity.

At a median follow-up of 6.1 months, 10 patients were still on treatment. Reasons for discontinuation included maximum clinical benefit (n=9), disease progression (n=7), AEs unrelated to treatment (n=2), patient request (n=1), and “other” reasons (n=1).

Safety

“There were no new safety signals,” Dr. Eid said. “The adverse events reflected the two agents’ profiles.”

The rate of treatment-related AEs was 83%. The most common of these were neutropenia (27%), peripheral neuropathy (20%), hyperthyroidism (13%), rash (10%), and thrombocytopenia (10%).

Grade 3-4 treatment-related AEs included neutropenia (27%), thrombocytopenia (7%), decreased neutrophil count (7%), hypersensitivity (3%), diarrhea (3%), and maculopapular rash (3%).

The rate of serious treatment-related AEs was 10%. This included grade 3-4 diarrhea and maculopapular rash and grade 5 acute kidney injury.

The acute kidney injury was the only fatal AE considered treatment-related. There were three other deaths in the trial, but they were considered unrelated to treatment.

Response

The complete response rate was 27% (n=8), and the partial response rate was 43% (n=13), for an overall response rate of 70% (n=21).

“The early indication is that 70% response is a pretty good outcome in a relapsed/refractory population that, otherwise, their outcome is pretty dismal,” Dr. Eid said.

Ten percent of patients (n=3) had stable disease, 13% (n=4) progressed, and investigators were unable to determine the status for 7% of patients (n=2).

The median time to response was 1.3 months, and the median time to complete response was 3.0 months. The median duration of response and complete response were not reached.

Overall and progression-free survival data are not yet mature.

Still, the investigators concluded that nivolumab and brentuximab vedotin “may provide a new treatment option” for patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL.

“The results are very, very promising,” Dr. Eid said.

This trial is supported by Bristol-Myers Squibb in collaboration with Seattle Genetics.

©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.

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Image by Michael Bonert

New guidelines on the diagnosis and management of patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) emphasize prompt diagnosis, aggressive treatment whenever possible, and multidisciplinary team support.

A unique aspect for hematologic cancers, the guidelines note, is that appropriate treatment for PCNSL requires input from neurology specialists.

And the guidelines recommend methotrexate-based treatment only be administered at centers experienced in delivering intensive chemotherapy.

Christopher P. Fox, MD, of the Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust in Nottingham, U.K., and his colleagues on behalf of the British Society for Haematology published the guidelines in BJH.

The authors incorporated findings from studies published since the society’s last comprehensive PCNSL guidelines were issued more than a decade ago.

The new guidelines provide recommendations for diagnosis and imaging, primary treatment of PCNSL, consolidation chemotherapy, follow-up, management of relapsed/refractory disease, and neuropsychological assessments.

Highlights include:

• People with suspected PCNSL must receive quick and coordinated attention from a multidisciplinary team of neurologists, hematologist-oncologists, and ocular specialists
• Histological diagnoses in addition to imaging findings should be performed
• Corticosteroids should be avoided or discontinued before biopsy, as even a short course of steroids can impede diagnosis
• Aggressive induction treatment should be chosen based on the patient’s fitness
• Patients should be offered entry into clinical trials whenever possible
• Universal screening for eye involvement should be conducted.

Primary treatment

Dr. Fox and his colleagues say definitive treatment for PCNSL—induction of remission followed by consolidation—should start within 2 weeks of diagnosis, and a treatment regimen should be chosen according to a patient’s physiological fitness, not age.

The fittest patients, who have better organ function and fewer comorbidities, should be eligible for intensive combination immuno-chemotherapy incorporating high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)—optimally, four cycles of HD-MTX, cytarabine, thiotepa, and rituximab.

Those deemed unfit for this regimen should be offered induction treatment with HD-MTX, rituximab, and procarbazine, the guidelines say.

If patients cannot tolerate HD-MTX, oral chemotherapy, whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT), or corticosteroids may be used.

The authors do not recommend intrathecal chemotherapy alongside systemic CNS-directed therapy.

Response should be assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) routinely after every two cycles of HD-MTX-based therapy and at the end of remission induction.

Consolidation chemotherapy

Consolidation therapy should be initiated after induction for all patients with non-progressive disease. High-dose thiotepa-based chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is the recommended first-line option for consolidation.

Patients ineligible for high-dose therapy followed by ASCT who have residual disease after induction therapy should be considered for WBRT. This is also the case for patients with residual disease after thiotepa-based ASCT.

However, Dr. Fox and his colleagues say WBRT consolidation is “contentious” for patients in complete response after HD-MTX regimens but ineligible for ASCT. The authors suggest carefully balancing potential improvement in progression-free survival against risks of neurocognitive toxicity.

Response to consolidation, again measured with contrast-enhanced MRI, should be carried out between 1 and 2 months after therapy is completed, and patients should be referred for neuropsychological testing to assess cognitive function.

Patients with relapsed or refractory disease should be approached with maximum urgency—the guidelines offer an algorithm for retreatment options—and offered clinical trial entry wherever possible.

Some coauthors, including the lead author, disclosed receiving fees from pharmaceutical manufacturers Adienne and/or F. Hoffman-La Roche. 

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

Photo by Bill Branson

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a biosimilar rituximab product for the treatment of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL).

Celltrion’s Truxima (rituximab-abbs) is a biosimilar of Genentech’s Rituxan and the first biosimilar approved in the United States to treat NHL.

Truxima (formerly CT-P10) is approved to treat adults with CD20-positive, B-cell NHL, either as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy.

Specifically, Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat relapsed or refractory, low grade or follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved in combination with first-line chemotherapy to treat previously untreated follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL.

Truxima is approved as single-agent maintenance therapy in patients with follicular, CD20-positive, B-cell NHL who achieve a complete or partial response to a rituximab product in combination with chemotherapy.

And Truxima is approved as a single agent to treat non-progressing, low-grade, CD20­-positive, B-cell NHL after first-line treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone.

The label for Truxima contains a boxed warning detailing the risk of fatal infusion reactions, severe skin and mouth reactions (some with fatal outcomes), hepatitis B virus reactivation that may cause serious liver problems (including liver failure and death), and progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy.

The FDA said its approval of Truxima is “based on a review of evidence that included extensive structural and functional characterization, animal study data, human pharmacokinetic data, clinical immunogenicity data, and other clinical data that demonstrates Truxima is biosimilar to Rituxan.”

A phase 3 trial recently published in The Lancet Haematology suggested that Truxima is equivalent to the reference product in patients with low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma.

For more details on Truxima, see the prescribing information.

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).

mycosis fungoides

The European Commission (EC) has granted marketing authorization for mogamulizumab (Poteligeo), a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4.

This means mogamulizumab is approved for use in adults with mycosis fungoides (MF) or Sézary syndrome (SS) who have received at least one prior systemic therapy.

This approval is valid in all countries of the European Union as well as Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein.

Kyowa Kirin plans to launch mogamulizumab in various European markets starting next year.

The EC’s decision to approve mogamulizumab was supported by the phase 3 MAVORIC trial. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Oncology in August.

MAVORIC was a comparison of mogamulizumab and vorinostat in 372 adults with MF or SS who had received at least one prior systemic therapy.

Mogamulizumab provided a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), the study’s primary endpoint.

According to investigators, the median PFS was 7.7 months with mogamulizumab and 3.1 months with vorinostat (hazard ratio=0.53, P<0.0001).

According to an independent review committee, the median PFS was 6.7 months and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.64, P<0.0007).

There was a significant improvement in overall response rate (ORR) with mogamulizumab.

According to independent review, the global ORR was 23% (43/186) in the mogamulizumab arm and 4% (7/186) in the vorinostat arm (risk ratio=19.4, P<0.0001).

According to investigators, the global ORR was 28% (52/186) and 5% (9/186), respectively (risk ratio=23.1, P<0.0001).

For patients with MF, the investigator-assessed ORR was 21% (22/105) with mogamulizumab and 7% (7/99) with vorinostat.

For SS patients, the investigator-assessed ORR was 37% (30/81) and 2% (2/87), respectively.

Grade 3 adverse events (AEs) in the mogamulizumab arm included drug eruptions (n=8), hypertension (n=8), pneumonia (n=6), fatigue (n=3), cellulitis (n=3), infusion-related reactions (n=3), sepsis (n=2), decreased appetite (n=2), AST increase (n=2), weight decrease (n=1), pyrexia (n=1), constipation (n=1), nausea (n=1), and diarrhea (n=1).

Grade 4 AEs with mogamulizumab were cellulitis (n=1) and pneumonia (n=1). Grade 5 AEs included pneumonia (n=1) and sepsis (n=1).