Hematology Times

Vials of a drug

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the intravenous administration of asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi (Erwinaze).

The product is indicated as a component of a multi-agent chemotherapy regimen to treat patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who have developed hypersensitivity to E coli-derived asparaginase.

Previously, the only FDA-approved route of administration for asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi was through intramuscular injection.

The FDA’s decision to expand the drug’s use was based on a pharmacokinetic study (published in Blood in 2013) of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

The trial included 30 patients with ALL or lymphoblastic lymphoma who developed hypersensitivity (grade ≥ 2) to E coli–derived asparaginase. The patients’ median age was 6.5 years (range, 1-17), 63% were male, and 83% were Caucasian.

Patients received intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi at 25,000 IU/m²/dose, on a Monday/Wednesday/Friday schedule for 2 consecutive weeks (6 doses=1 cycle) for each dose of pegaspargase remaining in their original treatment plan. All other chemotherapy was continued per the original treatment plan.

Before the first dose of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi, nadir serum asparaginase activity (NSAA) levels were below the limit of quantification (defined as 0.0129 IU/mL) for 91% of patients.

The study’s primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL, which has been associated with complete asparagine depletion, at 48 hours after dose 5 in cycle 1. Nineteen of the 23 evaluable patients (83%) achieved this endpoint.

A secondary objective of the study was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL at 72 hours after dose 6 in cycle 1. Nine patients (45%) achieved this endpoint.

In all 30 patients, the most common asparaginase-related toxicities reported during cycle 1 were hypersensitivity (23%), vomiting (20%), nausea (20%), and hyperglycemia (13%). Pancreatitis and thrombosis each occurred in 3% of patients. One patient experienced a transient ischemic attack.

The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was febrile neutropenia (7%). Four patients discontinued treatment before completing cycle 1—3 of them due to hypersensitivity and 1 due to pancreatitis. There were no deaths.

This study was funded by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, the company developing asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

Vials of a drug

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the intravenous administration of asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi (Erwinaze).

The product is indicated as a component of a multi-agent chemotherapy regimen to treat patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who have developed hypersensitivity to E coli-derived asparaginase.

Previously, the only FDA-approved route of administration for asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi was through intramuscular injection.

The FDA’s decision to expand the drug’s use was based on a pharmacokinetic study (published in Blood in 2013) of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

The trial included 30 patients with ALL or lymphoblastic lymphoma who developed hypersensitivity (grade ≥ 2) to E coli–derived asparaginase. The patients’ median age was 6.5 years (range, 1-17), 63% were male, and 83% were Caucasian.

Patients received intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi at 25,000 IU/m²/dose, on a Monday/Wednesday/Friday schedule for 2 consecutive weeks (6 doses=1 cycle) for each dose of pegaspargase remaining in their original treatment plan. All other chemotherapy was continued per the original treatment plan.

Before the first dose of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi, nadir serum asparaginase activity (NSAA) levels were below the limit of quantification (defined as 0.0129 IU/mL) for 91% of patients.

The study’s primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL, which has been associated with complete asparagine depletion, at 48 hours after dose 5 in cycle 1. Nineteen of the 23 evaluable patients (83%) achieved this endpoint.

A secondary objective of the study was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL at 72 hours after dose 6 in cycle 1. Nine patients (45%) achieved this endpoint.

In all 30 patients, the most common asparaginase-related toxicities reported during cycle 1 were hypersensitivity (23%), vomiting (20%), nausea (20%), and hyperglycemia (13%). Pancreatitis and thrombosis each occurred in 3% of patients. One patient experienced a transient ischemic attack.

The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was febrile neutropenia (7%). Four patients discontinued treatment before completing cycle 1—3 of them due to hypersensitivity and 1 due to pancreatitis. There were no deaths.

This study was funded by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, the company developing asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

Vials of a drug

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the intravenous administration of asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi (Erwinaze).

The product is indicated as a component of a multi-agent chemotherapy regimen to treat patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) who have developed hypersensitivity to E coli-derived asparaginase.

Previously, the only FDA-approved route of administration for asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi was through intramuscular injection.

The FDA’s decision to expand the drug’s use was based on a pharmacokinetic study (published in Blood in 2013) of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

The trial included 30 patients with ALL or lymphoblastic lymphoma who developed hypersensitivity (grade ≥ 2) to E coli–derived asparaginase. The patients’ median age was 6.5 years (range, 1-17), 63% were male, and 83% were Caucasian.

Patients received intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi at 25,000 IU/m²/dose, on a Monday/Wednesday/Friday schedule for 2 consecutive weeks (6 doses=1 cycle) for each dose of pegaspargase remaining in their original treatment plan. All other chemotherapy was continued per the original treatment plan.

Before the first dose of intravenous asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi, nadir serum asparaginase activity (NSAA) levels were below the limit of quantification (defined as 0.0129 IU/mL) for 91% of patients.

The study’s primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL, which has been associated with complete asparagine depletion, at 48 hours after dose 5 in cycle 1. Nineteen of the 23 evaluable patients (83%) achieved this endpoint.

A secondary objective of the study was to determine the proportion of patients who achieved NSAA ≥ 0.1 IU/mL at 72 hours after dose 6 in cycle 1. Nine patients (45%) achieved this endpoint.

In all 30 patients, the most common asparaginase-related toxicities reported during cycle 1 were hypersensitivity (23%), vomiting (20%), nausea (20%), and hyperglycemia (13%). Pancreatitis and thrombosis each occurred in 3% of patients. One patient experienced a transient ischemic attack.

The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event was febrile neutropenia (7%). Four patients discontinued treatment before completing cycle 1—3 of them due to hypersensitivity and 1 due to pancreatitis. There were no deaths.

This study was funded by Jazz Pharmaceuticals, the company developing asparaginase Erwinia chrysanthemi.

SAN FRANCISCO—New research suggests complex metaphase karyotype (CKT) is a stronger predictor of inferior outcome than 17p deletion in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who are treated with the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

The study showed that CKT, defined as 3 or more distinct chromosomal abnormalities, was independently associated with inferior event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS), but del(17p) was not.

According to investigators, this suggests that del(17p) patients without CKT could be managed with long-term ibrutinib and close monitoring, as these patients have similar outcomes as patients without del(17p).

However, patients with CKT will likely require treatment-intensification strategies after ibrutinib-based therapy.

“We believe that patients with a complex karyotype represent an ideal group in whom to study novel treatment approaches, including ibrutinib-based combination regimens and/or consolidated approaches after initial ibrutinib response,” said investigator Philip A. Thompson, MBBS, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Dr Thompson presented his group’s findings at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting as abstract 22.* Investigators involved in this study received research funding or consultancy fees from Pharmacyclics, Inc., makers of ibrutinib.

Patient characteristics

Dr Thompson and his colleagues analyzed 100 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received treatment with ibrutinib-based regimens—50 with ibrutinib alone, 36 with ibrutinib and rituximab, and 14 with ibrutinib, rituximab, and bendamustine.

The median age was 65 (range, 35-83), patients received a median of 2 prior therapies (range, 1-12), and 19% were fludarabine-refractory. Sixty percent of patients had Rai stage III-IV disease, 52% had bulky adenopathy, 81% had unmutated IGHV, and 56% had β2-microglobulin ≥ 4.0 mg/L.

FISH was available for 94 patients, and metaphase analysis was available for 65 patients. Forty-two percent (27/65) of patients had CKT, 28% (26/94) had del(11q), and 48% (45/94) had del(17p).

Of the 45 patients who had del(17p), 23 also had CKT. And of the 49 patients who did not have del(17p), 4 had CKT.

Event-free survival

The median follow-up in surviving patients was 27 months (range, 11-48). Eight patients had planned allogeneic stem cell transplant and were censored for the EFS analysis.

“As has been shown previously, patients with 17p deletion by FISH did have inferior event-free survival,” Dr Thompson said. “And when we looked at those patients with complex metaphase karyotype, there was a highly significant inferior event-free survival in these patients, compared to those with complex karyotype.”

EFS was 78% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 69% in patients with del(11q), and 60% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.014).

EFS was 82% in patients without CKT and 44% in those with CKT (P<0.0001). In patients with del(17p), EFS was 78% in those without CKT and 48% in those with CKT (P=0.047).

In patients without CKT, EFS was 79% in those without del(17p) or del(11q), 90% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.516).

“Interestingly, when we looked at the events that occurred in those patients without complex karyotype, none were due to CLL progression or Richter’s transformation,” Dr Thompson said.

In multivariable analysis, CKT was significantly associated with EFS (P=0.011), but del(17p) was not (P=0.887).

Overall survival

There was no significant difference in OS according to the presence of del(17p) or del(11q). OS was 87% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 81% in patients with del(11q), and 67% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.054).

However, there was a significant difference in OS for patients with and without CKT. OS was 82% in patients without CKT and 56% in patients with CKT (P=0.006).

Among patients without CKT, OS was 84% in those with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 80% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.52).

In multivariable analysis, OS was significantly associated with CKT (P=0.011) and fludarabine-refractory disease (P=0.004) but not del(17p) (P=0.981).

“So, in summary, complex karyotype appears to be a more important predictor of outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL treated with ibrutinib-based regimens than the presence of del(17p) by FISH,” Dr Thompson said.

“Patients without complex karyotype have a low rate of disease progression, including those who have del(17p). Most progressions during ibrutinib therapy occur late, beyond the 12-month time point, but survival is short after disease progression.”

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.

SAN FRANCISCO—New research suggests complex metaphase karyotype (CKT) is a stronger predictor of inferior outcome than 17p deletion in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who are treated with the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

The study showed that CKT, defined as 3 or more distinct chromosomal abnormalities, was independently associated with inferior event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS), but del(17p) was not.

According to investigators, this suggests that del(17p) patients without CKT could be managed with long-term ibrutinib and close monitoring, as these patients have similar outcomes as patients without del(17p).

However, patients with CKT will likely require treatment-intensification strategies after ibrutinib-based therapy.

“We believe that patients with a complex karyotype represent an ideal group in whom to study novel treatment approaches, including ibrutinib-based combination regimens and/or consolidated approaches after initial ibrutinib response,” said investigator Philip A. Thompson, MBBS, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Dr Thompson presented his group’s findings at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting as abstract 22.* Investigators involved in this study received research funding or consultancy fees from Pharmacyclics, Inc., makers of ibrutinib.

Patient characteristics

Dr Thompson and his colleagues analyzed 100 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received treatment with ibrutinib-based regimens—50 with ibrutinib alone, 36 with ibrutinib and rituximab, and 14 with ibrutinib, rituximab, and bendamustine.

The median age was 65 (range, 35-83), patients received a median of 2 prior therapies (range, 1-12), and 19% were fludarabine-refractory. Sixty percent of patients had Rai stage III-IV disease, 52% had bulky adenopathy, 81% had unmutated IGHV, and 56% had β2-microglobulin ≥ 4.0 mg/L.

FISH was available for 94 patients, and metaphase analysis was available for 65 patients. Forty-two percent (27/65) of patients had CKT, 28% (26/94) had del(11q), and 48% (45/94) had del(17p).

Of the 45 patients who had del(17p), 23 also had CKT. And of the 49 patients who did not have del(17p), 4 had CKT.

Event-free survival

The median follow-up in surviving patients was 27 months (range, 11-48). Eight patients had planned allogeneic stem cell transplant and were censored for the EFS analysis.

“As has been shown previously, patients with 17p deletion by FISH did have inferior event-free survival,” Dr Thompson said. “And when we looked at those patients with complex metaphase karyotype, there was a highly significant inferior event-free survival in these patients, compared to those with complex karyotype.”

EFS was 78% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 69% in patients with del(11q), and 60% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.014).

EFS was 82% in patients without CKT and 44% in those with CKT (P<0.0001). In patients with del(17p), EFS was 78% in those without CKT and 48% in those with CKT (P=0.047).

In patients without CKT, EFS was 79% in those without del(17p) or del(11q), 90% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.516).

“Interestingly, when we looked at the events that occurred in those patients without complex karyotype, none were due to CLL progression or Richter’s transformation,” Dr Thompson said.

In multivariable analysis, CKT was significantly associated with EFS (P=0.011), but del(17p) was not (P=0.887).

Overall survival

There was no significant difference in OS according to the presence of del(17p) or del(11q). OS was 87% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 81% in patients with del(11q), and 67% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.054).

However, there was a significant difference in OS for patients with and without CKT. OS was 82% in patients without CKT and 56% in patients with CKT (P=0.006).

Among patients without CKT, OS was 84% in those with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 80% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.52).

In multivariable analysis, OS was significantly associated with CKT (P=0.011) and fludarabine-refractory disease (P=0.004) but not del(17p) (P=0.981).

“So, in summary, complex karyotype appears to be a more important predictor of outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL treated with ibrutinib-based regimens than the presence of del(17p) by FISH,” Dr Thompson said.

“Patients without complex karyotype have a low rate of disease progression, including those who have del(17p). Most progressions during ibrutinib therapy occur late, beyond the 12-month time point, but survival is short after disease progression.”

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.

SAN FRANCISCO—New research suggests complex metaphase karyotype (CKT) is a stronger predictor of inferior outcome than 17p deletion in patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) who are treated with the BTK inhibitor ibrutinib.

The study showed that CKT, defined as 3 or more distinct chromosomal abnormalities, was independently associated with inferior event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS), but del(17p) was not.

According to investigators, this suggests that del(17p) patients without CKT could be managed with long-term ibrutinib and close monitoring, as these patients have similar outcomes as patients without del(17p).

However, patients with CKT will likely require treatment-intensification strategies after ibrutinib-based therapy.

“We believe that patients with a complex karyotype represent an ideal group in whom to study novel treatment approaches, including ibrutinib-based combination regimens and/or consolidated approaches after initial ibrutinib response,” said investigator Philip A. Thompson, MBBS, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

Dr Thompson presented his group’s findings at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting as abstract 22.* Investigators involved in this study received research funding or consultancy fees from Pharmacyclics, Inc., makers of ibrutinib.

Patient characteristics

Dr Thompson and his colleagues analyzed 100 patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received treatment with ibrutinib-based regimens—50 with ibrutinib alone, 36 with ibrutinib and rituximab, and 14 with ibrutinib, rituximab, and bendamustine.

The median age was 65 (range, 35-83), patients received a median of 2 prior therapies (range, 1-12), and 19% were fludarabine-refractory. Sixty percent of patients had Rai stage III-IV disease, 52% had bulky adenopathy, 81% had unmutated IGHV, and 56% had β2-microglobulin ≥ 4.0 mg/L.

FISH was available for 94 patients, and metaphase analysis was available for 65 patients. Forty-two percent (27/65) of patients had CKT, 28% (26/94) had del(11q), and 48% (45/94) had del(17p).

Of the 45 patients who had del(17p), 23 also had CKT. And of the 49 patients who did not have del(17p), 4 had CKT.

Event-free survival

The median follow-up in surviving patients was 27 months (range, 11-48). Eight patients had planned allogeneic stem cell transplant and were censored for the EFS analysis.

“As has been shown previously, patients with 17p deletion by FISH did have inferior event-free survival,” Dr Thompson said. “And when we looked at those patients with complex metaphase karyotype, there was a highly significant inferior event-free survival in these patients, compared to those with complex karyotype.”

EFS was 78% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 69% in patients with del(11q), and 60% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.014).

EFS was 82% in patients without CKT and 44% in those with CKT (P<0.0001). In patients with del(17p), EFS was 78% in those without CKT and 48% in those with CKT (P=0.047).

In patients without CKT, EFS was 79% in those without del(17p) or del(11q), 90% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.516).

“Interestingly, when we looked at the events that occurred in those patients without complex karyotype, none were due to CLL progression or Richter’s transformation,” Dr Thompson said.

In multivariable analysis, CKT was significantly associated with EFS (P=0.011), but del(17p) was not (P=0.887).

Overall survival

There was no significant difference in OS according to the presence of del(17p) or del(11q). OS was 87% in patients with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 81% in patients with del(11q), and 67% in patients with del(17p) (P=0.054).

However, there was a significant difference in OS for patients with and without CKT. OS was 82% in patients without CKT and 56% in patients with CKT (P=0.006).

Among patients without CKT, OS was 84% in those with neither del(17p) nor del(11q), 80% in those with del(11q), and 78% in those with del(17p) (P=0.52).

In multivariable analysis, OS was significantly associated with CKT (P=0.011) and fludarabine-refractory disease (P=0.004) but not del(17p) (P=0.981).

“So, in summary, complex karyotype appears to be a more important predictor of outcomes in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL treated with ibrutinib-based regimens than the presence of del(17p) by FISH,” Dr Thompson said.

“Patients without complex karyotype have a low rate of disease progression, including those who have del(17p). Most progressions during ibrutinib therapy occur late, beyond the 12-month time point, but survival is short after disease progression.”

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.

Micrograph showing MM

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) is recommending approval of continuous oral treatment with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in adults with previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The European Commission, which generally follows the CHMP’s recommendations, is expected to make its final decision in about 2 months.

Lenalidomide is not currently approved to treat newly diagnosed MM in any country.

The drug is approved in the European Union (EU) for use in combination with dexamethasone to treat adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy.

Lenalidomide is also approved in the EU to treat patients with transfusion-dependent anemia due to low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes associated with 5q deletion when other therapeutic options are insufficient or inadequate.

The CHMP’s recommendation to extend the use of lenalidomide to HSCT-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM was based on the results of 2 studies: MM-015 and MM-020, also known as FIRST.

The FIRST trial

In the phase 3 FIRST trial, researchers enrolled 1623 patients who were newly diagnosed with MM and not eligible for HSCT.

Patients were randomized to receive lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in 28-day cycles until disease progression (n=535), 18 cycles of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd18) for 72 weeks (n=541), or melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) for 72 weeks (n=547).

Response rates were significantly better with continuous Rd (75%) and Rd18 (73%) than with MPT (62%, P<0.001 for both comparisons). Complete response rates were 15%, 14%, and 9%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was 25.5 months with continuous Rd, 20.7 months with Rd18, and 21.2 months with MPT.

This resulted in a 28% reduction in the risk of progression or death for patients treated with continuous Rd compared with those treated with MPT (hazard ratio[HR]=0.72, P<0.001) and a 30% reduction compared with Rd18 (HR=0.70, P<0.001).

The pre-planned interim analysis of overall survival showed a 22% reduction in the risk of death for continuous Rd vs MPT (HR=0.78, P=0.02), but the difference did not cross the pre-specified superiority boundary (P<0.0096).

Adverse events reported in 20% or more of patients in the continuous Rd, Rd18, or MPT arms included diarrhea (45.5%, 38.5%, 16.5%), anemia (43.8%, 35.7%, 42.3%), neutropenia (35.0%, 33.0%, 60.6%), fatigue (32.5%, 32.8%, 28.5%), back pain (32.0%, 26.9%, 21.4%), insomnia (27.6%, 23.5%, 9.8%), asthenia (28.2%, 22.8%, 22.9%), rash (26.1%, 28.0%, 19.4%), decreased appetite (23.1%, 21.3%, 13.3%), cough (22.7%, 17.4%, 12.6%), pyrexia (21.4%, 18.9%, 14.0%), muscle spasms (20.5%, 18.9%, 11.3%) and abdominal pain (20.5%, 14.4%, 11.1%).

The incidence of invasive second primary malignancies was 3% in patients taking continuous Rd, 6% in patients taking Rd18, and 5% in those taking MPT. The overall incidence of solid tumors was identical in the continuous Rd and MPT arms (3%) and 5% in the Rd18 arm.

The MM-015 trial

In the phase 3 MM-015 study, researchers enrolled 459 patients who were 65 or older and newly diagnosed with MM. The team compared melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R) with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or melphalan-prednisone (MP) followed by placebo.

Patients who received MPR-R or MPR had significantly better response rates than patients who received MP, at 77%, 68%, and 50%, respectively (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively, for the comparison with MP).

And the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with MPR-R (31 months) than with MPR (14 months, HR=0.49, P<0.001) or MP (13 months, HR=0.40, P<0.001).

During induction, the most frequent adverse events were hematologic. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 35% of patients in the MPR-R arm, 32% in the MPR arm, and 8% in the MP arm. The 3-year rate of second primary malignancies was 7%, 7%, and 3%, respectively.

Micrograph showing MM

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) is recommending approval of continuous oral treatment with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in adults with previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The European Commission, which generally follows the CHMP’s recommendations, is expected to make its final decision in about 2 months.

Lenalidomide is not currently approved to treat newly diagnosed MM in any country.

The drug is approved in the European Union (EU) for use in combination with dexamethasone to treat adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy.

Lenalidomide is also approved in the EU to treat patients with transfusion-dependent anemia due to low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes associated with 5q deletion when other therapeutic options are insufficient or inadequate.

The CHMP’s recommendation to extend the use of lenalidomide to HSCT-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM was based on the results of 2 studies: MM-015 and MM-020, also known as FIRST.

The FIRST trial

In the phase 3 FIRST trial, researchers enrolled 1623 patients who were newly diagnosed with MM and not eligible for HSCT.

Patients were randomized to receive lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in 28-day cycles until disease progression (n=535), 18 cycles of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd18) for 72 weeks (n=541), or melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) for 72 weeks (n=547).

Response rates were significantly better with continuous Rd (75%) and Rd18 (73%) than with MPT (62%, P<0.001 for both comparisons). Complete response rates were 15%, 14%, and 9%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was 25.5 months with continuous Rd, 20.7 months with Rd18, and 21.2 months with MPT.

This resulted in a 28% reduction in the risk of progression or death for patients treated with continuous Rd compared with those treated with MPT (hazard ratio[HR]=0.72, P<0.001) and a 30% reduction compared with Rd18 (HR=0.70, P<0.001).

The pre-planned interim analysis of overall survival showed a 22% reduction in the risk of death for continuous Rd vs MPT (HR=0.78, P=0.02), but the difference did not cross the pre-specified superiority boundary (P<0.0096).

Adverse events reported in 20% or more of patients in the continuous Rd, Rd18, or MPT arms included diarrhea (45.5%, 38.5%, 16.5%), anemia (43.8%, 35.7%, 42.3%), neutropenia (35.0%, 33.0%, 60.6%), fatigue (32.5%, 32.8%, 28.5%), back pain (32.0%, 26.9%, 21.4%), insomnia (27.6%, 23.5%, 9.8%), asthenia (28.2%, 22.8%, 22.9%), rash (26.1%, 28.0%, 19.4%), decreased appetite (23.1%, 21.3%, 13.3%), cough (22.7%, 17.4%, 12.6%), pyrexia (21.4%, 18.9%, 14.0%), muscle spasms (20.5%, 18.9%, 11.3%) and abdominal pain (20.5%, 14.4%, 11.1%).

The incidence of invasive second primary malignancies was 3% in patients taking continuous Rd, 6% in patients taking Rd18, and 5% in those taking MPT. The overall incidence of solid tumors was identical in the continuous Rd and MPT arms (3%) and 5% in the Rd18 arm.

The MM-015 trial

In the phase 3 MM-015 study, researchers enrolled 459 patients who were 65 or older and newly diagnosed with MM. The team compared melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R) with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or melphalan-prednisone (MP) followed by placebo.

Patients who received MPR-R or MPR had significantly better response rates than patients who received MP, at 77%, 68%, and 50%, respectively (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively, for the comparison with MP).

And the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with MPR-R (31 months) than with MPR (14 months, HR=0.49, P<0.001) or MP (13 months, HR=0.40, P<0.001).

During induction, the most frequent adverse events were hematologic. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 35% of patients in the MPR-R arm, 32% in the MPR arm, and 8% in the MP arm. The 3-year rate of second primary malignancies was 7%, 7%, and 3%, respectively.

Micrograph showing MM

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) is recommending approval of continuous oral treatment with lenalidomide (Revlimid) in adults with previously untreated multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

The European Commission, which generally follows the CHMP’s recommendations, is expected to make its final decision in about 2 months.

Lenalidomide is not currently approved to treat newly diagnosed MM in any country.

The drug is approved in the European Union (EU) for use in combination with dexamethasone to treat adults with MM who have received at least one prior therapy.

Lenalidomide is also approved in the EU to treat patients with transfusion-dependent anemia due to low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndromes associated with 5q deletion when other therapeutic options are insufficient or inadequate.

The CHMP’s recommendation to extend the use of lenalidomide to HSCT-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed MM was based on the results of 2 studies: MM-015 and MM-020, also known as FIRST.

The FIRST trial

In the phase 3 FIRST trial, researchers enrolled 1623 patients who were newly diagnosed with MM and not eligible for HSCT.

Patients were randomized to receive lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) in 28-day cycles until disease progression (n=535), 18 cycles of lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd18) for 72 weeks (n=541), or melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT) for 72 weeks (n=547).

Response rates were significantly better with continuous Rd (75%) and Rd18 (73%) than with MPT (62%, P<0.001 for both comparisons). Complete response rates were 15%, 14%, and 9%, respectively.

The median progression-free survival was 25.5 months with continuous Rd, 20.7 months with Rd18, and 21.2 months with MPT.

This resulted in a 28% reduction in the risk of progression or death for patients treated with continuous Rd compared with those treated with MPT (hazard ratio[HR]=0.72, P<0.001) and a 30% reduction compared with Rd18 (HR=0.70, P<0.001).

The pre-planned interim analysis of overall survival showed a 22% reduction in the risk of death for continuous Rd vs MPT (HR=0.78, P=0.02), but the difference did not cross the pre-specified superiority boundary (P<0.0096).

Adverse events reported in 20% or more of patients in the continuous Rd, Rd18, or MPT arms included diarrhea (45.5%, 38.5%, 16.5%), anemia (43.8%, 35.7%, 42.3%), neutropenia (35.0%, 33.0%, 60.6%), fatigue (32.5%, 32.8%, 28.5%), back pain (32.0%, 26.9%, 21.4%), insomnia (27.6%, 23.5%, 9.8%), asthenia (28.2%, 22.8%, 22.9%), rash (26.1%, 28.0%, 19.4%), decreased appetite (23.1%, 21.3%, 13.3%), cough (22.7%, 17.4%, 12.6%), pyrexia (21.4%, 18.9%, 14.0%), muscle spasms (20.5%, 18.9%, 11.3%) and abdominal pain (20.5%, 14.4%, 11.1%).

The incidence of invasive second primary malignancies was 3% in patients taking continuous Rd, 6% in patients taking Rd18, and 5% in those taking MPT. The overall incidence of solid tumors was identical in the continuous Rd and MPT arms (3%) and 5% in the Rd18 arm.

The MM-015 trial

In the phase 3 MM-015 study, researchers enrolled 459 patients who were 65 or older and newly diagnosed with MM. The team compared melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (MPR-R) with melphalan-prednisone-lenalidomide (MPR) or melphalan-prednisone (MP) followed by placebo.

Patients who received MPR-R or MPR had significantly better response rates than patients who received MP, at 77%, 68%, and 50%, respectively (P<0.001 and P=0.002, respectively, for the comparison with MP).

And the median progression-free survival was significantly longer with MPR-R (31 months) than with MPR (14 months, HR=0.49, P<0.001) or MP (13 months, HR=0.40, P<0.001).

During induction, the most frequent adverse events were hematologic. Grade 4 neutropenia occurred in 35% of patients in the MPR-R arm, 32% in the MPR arm, and 8% in the MP arm. The 3-year rate of second primary malignancies was 7%, 7%, and 3%, respectively.

Micrograph showing MCL

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has recommended the approval of bortezomib (Velcade) in combination with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (VR-CAP) to treat adults with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who are unsuitable for hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

Bortezomib is already approved in the European Union to treat multiple myeloma, either as monotherapy or in combination with other treatment regimens.

The CHMP’s decision to expand the approved use of bortezomib is based on data from the phase 3 LYM-3002 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 8500).

LYM-3002 included 487 patients newly diagnosed with MCL who were ineligible, or not considered, for transplant. Patients were randomized to receive VR-CAP or R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The VR-CAP regimen significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, when compared to R-CHOP.

According to an independent review committee, there was a 59% improvement in PFS for the VR-CAP arm compared to the R-CHOP arm, with median PFS times of 24.7 months and 14.4 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.63; P<0.001).

Study investigators reported a 96% increase in PFS with VR-CAP compared to R-CHOP, with median PFS times of 30.7 months and 16.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.51, P<0.001).

VR-CAP was associated with additional, but manageable, toxicity when compared to R-CHOP. Serious adverse events (AE) were reported in 38% and 30% of patients, respectively. And grade 3 or higher AEs were reported in 93% and 85%, respectively.

Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 9% of patients in the VR-CAP arm and 7% in the R-CHOP arm. On-treatment, drug-related deaths occurred in 2% and 3%, respectively.

The CHMP’s positive opinion will be reviewed by the European Commission, which has the authority to grant a label extension for medicines in the European Economic Area. A final decision on the use of bortezomib in MCL is expected early next year.

Micrograph showing MCL

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has recommended the approval of bortezomib (Velcade) in combination with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (VR-CAP) to treat adults with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who are unsuitable for hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

Bortezomib is already approved in the European Union to treat multiple myeloma, either as monotherapy or in combination with other treatment regimens.

The CHMP’s decision to expand the approved use of bortezomib is based on data from the phase 3 LYM-3002 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 8500).

LYM-3002 included 487 patients newly diagnosed with MCL who were ineligible, or not considered, for transplant. Patients were randomized to receive VR-CAP or R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The VR-CAP regimen significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, when compared to R-CHOP.

According to an independent review committee, there was a 59% improvement in PFS for the VR-CAP arm compared to the R-CHOP arm, with median PFS times of 24.7 months and 14.4 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.63; P<0.001).

Study investigators reported a 96% increase in PFS with VR-CAP compared to R-CHOP, with median PFS times of 30.7 months and 16.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.51, P<0.001).

VR-CAP was associated with additional, but manageable, toxicity when compared to R-CHOP. Serious adverse events (AE) were reported in 38% and 30% of patients, respectively. And grade 3 or higher AEs were reported in 93% and 85%, respectively.

Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 9% of patients in the VR-CAP arm and 7% in the R-CHOP arm. On-treatment, drug-related deaths occurred in 2% and 3%, respectively.

The CHMP’s positive opinion will be reviewed by the European Commission, which has the authority to grant a label extension for medicines in the European Economic Area. A final decision on the use of bortezomib in MCL is expected early next year.

Micrograph showing MCL

The European Medicines Agency’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) has recommended the approval of bortezomib (Velcade) in combination with rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (VR-CAP) to treat adults with previously untreated mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) who are unsuitable for hematopoietic stem cell transplant.

Bortezomib is already approved in the European Union to treat multiple myeloma, either as monotherapy or in combination with other treatment regimens.

The CHMP’s decision to expand the approved use of bortezomib is based on data from the phase 3 LYM-3002 study. Results from this trial were presented at the 2014 ASCO Annual Meeting (abstract 8500).

LYM-3002 included 487 patients newly diagnosed with MCL who were ineligible, or not considered, for transplant. Patients were randomized to receive VR-CAP or R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone).

The VR-CAP regimen significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS), the primary endpoint, when compared to R-CHOP.

According to an independent review committee, there was a 59% improvement in PFS for the VR-CAP arm compared to the R-CHOP arm, with median PFS times of 24.7 months and 14.4 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.63; P<0.001).

Study investigators reported a 96% increase in PFS with VR-CAP compared to R-CHOP, with median PFS times of 30.7 months and 16.1 months, respectively (hazard ratio=0.51, P<0.001).

VR-CAP was associated with additional, but manageable, toxicity when compared to R-CHOP. Serious adverse events (AE) were reported in 38% and 30% of patients, respectively. And grade 3 or higher AEs were reported in 93% and 85%, respectively.

Treatment discontinuation due to AEs occurred in 9% of patients in the VR-CAP arm and 7% in the R-CHOP arm. On-treatment, drug-related deaths occurred in 2% and 3%, respectively.

The CHMP’s positive opinion will be reviewed by the European Commission, which has the authority to grant a label extension for medicines in the European Economic Area. A final decision on the use of bortezomib in MCL is expected early next year.

Haruko Obokata, PhD

Credit: Associated Press

After months of trying, Haruko Obokata, PhD, and a team of researchers at her institution, RIKEN, have failed to produce stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP) cells.

Officials from RIKEN said they have accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and the institution has decided to end its efforts to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon.

Dr Obokata and her colleagues initially reported the creation of STAP cells in an article and a letter published in Nature last January. The researchers said they had induced pluripotency in somatic cells by exposing the cells to a low-pH environment.

Not long after the papers were published, members of the scientific community began to question the validity of the research.

So RIKEN launched an investigation, ultimately concluding that Dr Obokata was guilty of misconduct, and some of her colleagues—including the deceased Yoshiki Sasai, MD, PhD—were guilty of negligence.

RIKEN also called for the papers to be retracted, and, in July, they were.

Throughout these proceedings, Dr Obokata insisted the STAP cell phenomenon is real. To investigate this claim, RIKEN organized a group of researchers to recreate Dr Obokata’s experiments.

In August, the group reported initial results, saying their attempts had failed, but they would continue trying to create STAP cells until March 2015. Meanwhile, Dr Obokata was trying to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon on her own, under supervision.

Shinichi Aizawa, PhD, the leader of RIKEN’s team, explained the final results of their experiments, as well as Dr Obokata’s, in a press conference in Tokyo on Friday.

Dr Obokata was able to show a fluorescent phenomenon that indicates the possibility of pluripotency in cells, albeit at a very low rate. However, she could not confirm the pluripotency of STAP cells in mice.

The RIKEN team had similar results. So they have decided not to continue with the experiments.

RIKEN accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and a disciplinary committee has been discussing how they will reprimand her for research misconduct. RIKEN officials said they will make an announcement once the decision has been made.

Haruko Obokata, PhD

Credit: Associated Press

After months of trying, Haruko Obokata, PhD, and a team of researchers at her institution, RIKEN, have failed to produce stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP) cells.

Officials from RIKEN said they have accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and the institution has decided to end its efforts to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon.

Dr Obokata and her colleagues initially reported the creation of STAP cells in an article and a letter published in Nature last January. The researchers said they had induced pluripotency in somatic cells by exposing the cells to a low-pH environment.

Not long after the papers were published, members of the scientific community began to question the validity of the research.

So RIKEN launched an investigation, ultimately concluding that Dr Obokata was guilty of misconduct, and some of her colleagues—including the deceased Yoshiki Sasai, MD, PhD—were guilty of negligence.

RIKEN also called for the papers to be retracted, and, in July, they were.

Throughout these proceedings, Dr Obokata insisted the STAP cell phenomenon is real. To investigate this claim, RIKEN organized a group of researchers to recreate Dr Obokata’s experiments.

In August, the group reported initial results, saying their attempts had failed, but they would continue trying to create STAP cells until March 2015. Meanwhile, Dr Obokata was trying to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon on her own, under supervision.

Shinichi Aizawa, PhD, the leader of RIKEN’s team, explained the final results of their experiments, as well as Dr Obokata’s, in a press conference in Tokyo on Friday.

Dr Obokata was able to show a fluorescent phenomenon that indicates the possibility of pluripotency in cells, albeit at a very low rate. However, she could not confirm the pluripotency of STAP cells in mice.

The RIKEN team had similar results. So they have decided not to continue with the experiments.

RIKEN accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and a disciplinary committee has been discussing how they will reprimand her for research misconduct. RIKEN officials said they will make an announcement once the decision has been made.

Haruko Obokata, PhD

Credit: Associated Press

After months of trying, Haruko Obokata, PhD, and a team of researchers at her institution, RIKEN, have failed to produce stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP) cells.

Officials from RIKEN said they have accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and the institution has decided to end its efforts to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon.

Dr Obokata and her colleagues initially reported the creation of STAP cells in an article and a letter published in Nature last January. The researchers said they had induced pluripotency in somatic cells by exposing the cells to a low-pH environment.

Not long after the papers were published, members of the scientific community began to question the validity of the research.

So RIKEN launched an investigation, ultimately concluding that Dr Obokata was guilty of misconduct, and some of her colleagues—including the deceased Yoshiki Sasai, MD, PhD—were guilty of negligence.

RIKEN also called for the papers to be retracted, and, in July, they were.

Throughout these proceedings, Dr Obokata insisted the STAP cell phenomenon is real. To investigate this claim, RIKEN organized a group of researchers to recreate Dr Obokata’s experiments.

In August, the group reported initial results, saying their attempts had failed, but they would continue trying to create STAP cells until March 2015. Meanwhile, Dr Obokata was trying to recreate the STAP cell phenomenon on her own, under supervision.

Shinichi Aizawa, PhD, the leader of RIKEN’s team, explained the final results of their experiments, as well as Dr Obokata’s, in a press conference in Tokyo on Friday.

Dr Obokata was able to show a fluorescent phenomenon that indicates the possibility of pluripotency in cells, albeit at a very low rate. However, she could not confirm the pluripotency of STAP cells in mice.

The RIKEN team had similar results. So they have decided not to continue with the experiments.

RIKEN accepted Dr Obokata’s resignation, and a disciplinary committee has been discussing how they will reprimand her for research misconduct. RIKEN officials said they will make an announcement once the decision has been made.

Attendees at ASH 2014

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN FRANCISCO—Two recent studies have shown combination therapy with brentuximab vedotin to be highly active in newly diagnosed patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and in relapsed or refractory patients after frontline therapy.

The first study evaluated brentuximab with ABVD or AVD and the second with bendamustine.

Objective response rates were 95% with ABVD, 96% with AVD, and 96% with bendamustine.

Both studies were presented at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting, and both were sponsored by Seattle Genetics, Inc., the company developing brentuximab vedotin.

Brentuximab with ABVD or AVD

Standard frontline therapy with ABVD (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or AVD (the same regimen without bleomycin) fails to cure up to 30% of patients with HL.

So investigators decided to try a new approach to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity—combining brentuximab with standard therapy.

Joseph M. Connors, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency and University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, presented long-term outcomes of the brentuximab-ABVD combination as abstract 292.*

Phase 1 dose-escalation study

The key initial study of the combination determined the maximum tolerated dose of brentuximab to be 1.2 mg/kg delivered on a 2-week schedule to match the other agents in the ABVD regimen. Brentuximab was delivered for up to 6 cycles.

Of the 50 patients treated, 75% were males with an ECOG status of 0 or 1. Their median age was 32.5 years (range, 18 to 59). Approximately 80% were stage III or IV.

“We learned several key lessons from that initial study,” Dr Connors said. “The first was that when one adds brentuximab vedotin to the full-dose combination ABVD, unacceptable levels of pulmonary toxicity occurred, with 44% of the patients eventually experiencing pulmonary toxicity, typically manifest between the third and sixth cycle of treatment.”

The toxicity resolved in 9 of the 11 patients, but was fatal in 2. The median time to resolution was 2.6 weeks.

Eight patients discontinued bleomycin but were able to complete treatment with AVD and brentuximab.

“When we dropped bleomycin from the combination and shifted to AVD without bleomycin, no patients experienced pulmonary toxicity,” Dr Connors added.

Ultimately, the combination produced a response rate of 95% with ABVD and 96% with AVD.

Long-term follow-up

Investigators then assessed the durability of the response and the time distribution of any relapses.

All but 1 patient was available for follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 45 months in the ABVD arm and 36 months in the AVD arm.

In the ABVD arm, 22 of 24 patients are living, and all 26 patients in the AVD group are alive. Altogether, there have been 5 relapses—3 in the ABVD arm (occurring at 9, 22, and 23 months) and 2 in the AVD arm (occurring at 7 and 22 months).

The 3-year failure-free survival is 79% with ABVD and 92% with AVD.  And the 3-year overall survival is 92% in the ABVD arm and 100% in the AVD arm.

No deaths from HL have occurred, and all 5 relapsed patients have undergone autologous stem cell transplant. One of those has subsequently relapsed.

“So far,” Dr Connors said, “survival has been excellent.” And responses are durable.

“This has encouraged activation of the large, international trial,” Dr Connors said, comparing AVD plus brentuximab to standard ABVD in frontline treatment of HL.

Brentuximab with bendamustine

Brentuximab is also active as a single agent in relapsed/refractory HL, producing a 34% complete response (CR) rate. And the alkylating agent bendamustine produces a 33% CR rate in these patients. Furthermore, both agents have manageable safety profiles and different mechanisms of action.

Investigators therefore hypothesized that brentuximab in combination with bendamustine could induce more CRs in HL patients with relapsed or refractory disease after frontline therapy.

Ann LaCasce, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, presented the data at ASH as abstract 293.*

Ten patients were enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study to determine the optimal dose level of bendamustine and to assess safety and tolerability.

No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. So the investigators used bendamustine at 90 mg/m² and brentuximab at 1.8 mg/kg. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range, 1 to 6) of combination therapy.

Patients had the option to proceed to an autologous stem cell transplant at any time after cycle 2 and could receive brentuximab monotherapy thereafter for up to 16 total doses.

The phase 2 expansion portion enrolled 44 patients and assessed the best response, duration of response, and progression-free survival.

Results

Patients were a median age of 37 years (range, 27 to 51), and 57% were male. Ninety-eight percent were ECOG status 0 or 1, and 54% had stage III or IV disease at diagnosis.

The majority of patients had received ABVD as frontline therapy, Dr LaCasce pointed out.

The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was infusion-related reactions, accounting for 96% of the events. Dyspnea (15%), chills (13%), and flushing (13%) were the most common symptoms, and hypotension requiring vasopressor support also occurred.

Most reactions occurred within 24 hours of the cycle 2 infusion and were considered related to both agents. However, delayed hypersensitivity reactions also occurred, Dr LaCasce said, the most common being rash in 14 patients up to 22 days after infusion.

“Based on the number of infusion-related reactions after 24 patients, the protocol was amended to require mandatory corticosteroids and anthistamine premedication,” Dr LaCasce explained. “[T]his resulted in a significant decrease in the severity of the infusion-related reactions.”

The best clinical response for the 48 evaluable patients was 83% CR and 13% partial remission, for an objective response rate of 96%.

The median progression-free survival has not yet been reached, and the combination has had no negative impact on stem cell mobilization or engraftment to date.

The response rate compares very favorably to historical data, Dr LaCasce said, and the combination represents a promising salvage regimen for HL patients.

*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.

Attendees at ASH 2014

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN FRANCISCO—Two recent studies have shown combination therapy with brentuximab vedotin to be highly active in newly diagnosed patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and in relapsed or refractory patients after frontline therapy.

The first study evaluated brentuximab with ABVD or AVD and the second with bendamustine.

Objective response rates were 95% with ABVD, 96% with AVD, and 96% with bendamustine.

Both studies were presented at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting, and both were sponsored by Seattle Genetics, Inc., the company developing brentuximab vedotin.

Brentuximab with ABVD or AVD

Standard frontline therapy with ABVD (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or AVD (the same regimen without bleomycin) fails to cure up to 30% of patients with HL.

So investigators decided to try a new approach to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity—combining brentuximab with standard therapy.

Joseph M. Connors, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency and University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, presented long-term outcomes of the brentuximab-ABVD combination as abstract 292.*

Phase 1 dose-escalation study

The key initial study of the combination determined the maximum tolerated dose of brentuximab to be 1.2 mg/kg delivered on a 2-week schedule to match the other agents in the ABVD regimen. Brentuximab was delivered for up to 6 cycles.

Of the 50 patients treated, 75% were males with an ECOG status of 0 or 1. Their median age was 32.5 years (range, 18 to 59). Approximately 80% were stage III or IV.

“We learned several key lessons from that initial study,” Dr Connors said. “The first was that when one adds brentuximab vedotin to the full-dose combination ABVD, unacceptable levels of pulmonary toxicity occurred, with 44% of the patients eventually experiencing pulmonary toxicity, typically manifest between the third and sixth cycle of treatment.”

The toxicity resolved in 9 of the 11 patients, but was fatal in 2. The median time to resolution was 2.6 weeks.

Eight patients discontinued bleomycin but were able to complete treatment with AVD and brentuximab.

“When we dropped bleomycin from the combination and shifted to AVD without bleomycin, no patients experienced pulmonary toxicity,” Dr Connors added.

Ultimately, the combination produced a response rate of 95% with ABVD and 96% with AVD.

Long-term follow-up

Investigators then assessed the durability of the response and the time distribution of any relapses.

All but 1 patient was available for follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 45 months in the ABVD arm and 36 months in the AVD arm.

In the ABVD arm, 22 of 24 patients are living, and all 26 patients in the AVD group are alive. Altogether, there have been 5 relapses—3 in the ABVD arm (occurring at 9, 22, and 23 months) and 2 in the AVD arm (occurring at 7 and 22 months).

The 3-year failure-free survival is 79% with ABVD and 92% with AVD.  And the 3-year overall survival is 92% in the ABVD arm and 100% in the AVD arm.

No deaths from HL have occurred, and all 5 relapsed patients have undergone autologous stem cell transplant. One of those has subsequently relapsed.

“So far,” Dr Connors said, “survival has been excellent.” And responses are durable.

“This has encouraged activation of the large, international trial,” Dr Connors said, comparing AVD plus brentuximab to standard ABVD in frontline treatment of HL.

Brentuximab with bendamustine

Brentuximab is also active as a single agent in relapsed/refractory HL, producing a 34% complete response (CR) rate. And the alkylating agent bendamustine produces a 33% CR rate in these patients. Furthermore, both agents have manageable safety profiles and different mechanisms of action.

Investigators therefore hypothesized that brentuximab in combination with bendamustine could induce more CRs in HL patients with relapsed or refractory disease after frontline therapy.

Ann LaCasce, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, presented the data at ASH as abstract 293.*

Ten patients were enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study to determine the optimal dose level of bendamustine and to assess safety and tolerability.

No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. So the investigators used bendamustine at 90 mg/m² and brentuximab at 1.8 mg/kg. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range, 1 to 6) of combination therapy.

Patients had the option to proceed to an autologous stem cell transplant at any time after cycle 2 and could receive brentuximab monotherapy thereafter for up to 16 total doses.

The phase 2 expansion portion enrolled 44 patients and assessed the best response, duration of response, and progression-free survival.

Results

Patients were a median age of 37 years (range, 27 to 51), and 57% were male. Ninety-eight percent were ECOG status 0 or 1, and 54% had stage III or IV disease at diagnosis.

The majority of patients had received ABVD as frontline therapy, Dr LaCasce pointed out.

The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was infusion-related reactions, accounting for 96% of the events. Dyspnea (15%), chills (13%), and flushing (13%) were the most common symptoms, and hypotension requiring vasopressor support also occurred.

Most reactions occurred within 24 hours of the cycle 2 infusion and were considered related to both agents. However, delayed hypersensitivity reactions also occurred, Dr LaCasce said, the most common being rash in 14 patients up to 22 days after infusion.

“Based on the number of infusion-related reactions after 24 patients, the protocol was amended to require mandatory corticosteroids and anthistamine premedication,” Dr LaCasce explained. “[T]his resulted in a significant decrease in the severity of the infusion-related reactions.”

The best clinical response for the 48 evaluable patients was 83% CR and 13% partial remission, for an objective response rate of 96%.

The median progression-free survival has not yet been reached, and the combination has had no negative impact on stem cell mobilization or engraftment to date.

The response rate compares very favorably to historical data, Dr LaCasce said, and the combination represents a promising salvage regimen for HL patients.

*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.

Attendees at ASH 2014

Photo courtesy of ASH

SAN FRANCISCO—Two recent studies have shown combination therapy with brentuximab vedotin to be highly active in newly diagnosed patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) and in relapsed or refractory patients after frontline therapy.

The first study evaluated brentuximab with ABVD or AVD and the second with bendamustine.

Objective response rates were 95% with ABVD, 96% with AVD, and 96% with bendamustine.

Both studies were presented at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting, and both were sponsored by Seattle Genetics, Inc., the company developing brentuximab vedotin.

Brentuximab with ABVD or AVD

Standard frontline therapy with ABVD (adriamycin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine) or AVD (the same regimen without bleomycin) fails to cure up to 30% of patients with HL.

So investigators decided to try a new approach to increase efficacy and reduce toxicity—combining brentuximab with standard therapy.

Joseph M. Connors, MD, of the BC Cancer Agency and University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada, presented long-term outcomes of the brentuximab-ABVD combination as abstract 292.*

Phase 1 dose-escalation study

The key initial study of the combination determined the maximum tolerated dose of brentuximab to be 1.2 mg/kg delivered on a 2-week schedule to match the other agents in the ABVD regimen. Brentuximab was delivered for up to 6 cycles.

Of the 50 patients treated, 75% were males with an ECOG status of 0 or 1. Their median age was 32.5 years (range, 18 to 59). Approximately 80% were stage III or IV.

“We learned several key lessons from that initial study,” Dr Connors said. “The first was that when one adds brentuximab vedotin to the full-dose combination ABVD, unacceptable levels of pulmonary toxicity occurred, with 44% of the patients eventually experiencing pulmonary toxicity, typically manifest between the third and sixth cycle of treatment.”

The toxicity resolved in 9 of the 11 patients, but was fatal in 2. The median time to resolution was 2.6 weeks.

Eight patients discontinued bleomycin but were able to complete treatment with AVD and brentuximab.

“When we dropped bleomycin from the combination and shifted to AVD without bleomycin, no patients experienced pulmonary toxicity,” Dr Connors added.

Ultimately, the combination produced a response rate of 95% with ABVD and 96% with AVD.

Long-term follow-up

Investigators then assessed the durability of the response and the time distribution of any relapses.

All but 1 patient was available for follow-up. Patients were followed for a median of 45 months in the ABVD arm and 36 months in the AVD arm.

In the ABVD arm, 22 of 24 patients are living, and all 26 patients in the AVD group are alive. Altogether, there have been 5 relapses—3 in the ABVD arm (occurring at 9, 22, and 23 months) and 2 in the AVD arm (occurring at 7 and 22 months).

The 3-year failure-free survival is 79% with ABVD and 92% with AVD.  And the 3-year overall survival is 92% in the ABVD arm and 100% in the AVD arm.

No deaths from HL have occurred, and all 5 relapsed patients have undergone autologous stem cell transplant. One of those has subsequently relapsed.

“So far,” Dr Connors said, “survival has been excellent.” And responses are durable.

“This has encouraged activation of the large, international trial,” Dr Connors said, comparing AVD plus brentuximab to standard ABVD in frontline treatment of HL.

Brentuximab with bendamustine

Brentuximab is also active as a single agent in relapsed/refractory HL, producing a 34% complete response (CR) rate. And the alkylating agent bendamustine produces a 33% CR rate in these patients. Furthermore, both agents have manageable safety profiles and different mechanisms of action.

Investigators therefore hypothesized that brentuximab in combination with bendamustine could induce more CRs in HL patients with relapsed or refractory disease after frontline therapy.

Ann LaCasce, MD, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, presented the data at ASH as abstract 293.*

Ten patients were enrolled in the phase 1 portion of the study to determine the optimal dose level of bendamustine and to assess safety and tolerability.

No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. So the investigators used bendamustine at 90 mg/m² and brentuximab at 1.8 mg/kg. Patients received a median of 2 cycles (range, 1 to 6) of combination therapy.

Patients had the option to proceed to an autologous stem cell transplant at any time after cycle 2 and could receive brentuximab monotherapy thereafter for up to 16 total doses.

The phase 2 expansion portion enrolled 44 patients and assessed the best response, duration of response, and progression-free survival.

Results

Patients were a median age of 37 years (range, 27 to 51), and 57% were male. Ninety-eight percent were ECOG status 0 or 1, and 54% had stage III or IV disease at diagnosis.

The majority of patients had received ABVD as frontline therapy, Dr LaCasce pointed out.

The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was infusion-related reactions, accounting for 96% of the events. Dyspnea (15%), chills (13%), and flushing (13%) were the most common symptoms, and hypotension requiring vasopressor support also occurred.

Most reactions occurred within 24 hours of the cycle 2 infusion and were considered related to both agents. However, delayed hypersensitivity reactions also occurred, Dr LaCasce said, the most common being rash in 14 patients up to 22 days after infusion.

“Based on the number of infusion-related reactions after 24 patients, the protocol was amended to require mandatory corticosteroids and anthistamine premedication,” Dr LaCasce explained. “[T]his resulted in a significant decrease in the severity of the infusion-related reactions.”

The best clinical response for the 48 evaluable patients was 83% CR and 13% partial remission, for an objective response rate of 96%.

The median progression-free survival has not yet been reached, and the combination has had no negative impact on stem cell mobilization or engraftment to date.

The response rate compares very favorably to historical data, Dr LaCasce said, and the combination represents a promising salvage regimen for HL patients.

*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, the first system of its kind to be approved in the US.

It is used to inactivate viruses, bacteria, spirochetes, parasites, and leukocytes in apheresis platelet components.

This can reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted infection and, potentially, transfusion-associated graft-vs-host disease, although the system cannot inactivate all pathogens.

Certain non-enveloped viruses (such as HAV, HEV, B19, and poliovirus) and Bacillus cereus spores have demonstrated resistance to the INTERCEPT process.

Earlier this week, the FDA approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for plasma (also the first system of its kind to gain FDA approval).

The platelet and plasma systems use the same illumination device, the same active compound (amotosalen), and very similar production steps.

The INTERCEPT systems target a basic biological difference between the therapeutic components of blood. Platelets, plasma, and red blood cells do not require functional DNA or RNA for therapeutic efficacy. But pathogens and white blood cells do, in order to transmit infection.

The INTERCEPT systems use a proprietary molecule that, when activated by UVA light, binds to and blocks the replication of DNA and RNA, preventing nucleic acid replication and rendering the pathogen inactive.

The INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets has been approved in Europe since 2002 and is currently used in 20 countries.

The system was recently made available in the US and its territories under an investigational device exemption study to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted dengue and Chikungunya viruses, both of which are epidemic in the Caribbean region, including Puerto Rico, as well as sporadically in the southern US. No approved blood bank screening tests are available for either virus.

Researchers have evaluated INTERCEPT-processed platelets in 10 controlled clinical trials. Details on these trials can be found in the package insert.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, the first system of its kind to be approved in the US.

It is used to inactivate viruses, bacteria, spirochetes, parasites, and leukocytes in apheresis platelet components.

This can reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted infection and, potentially, transfusion-associated graft-vs-host disease, although the system cannot inactivate all pathogens.

Certain non-enveloped viruses (such as HAV, HEV, B19, and poliovirus) and Bacillus cereus spores have demonstrated resistance to the INTERCEPT process.

Earlier this week, the FDA approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for plasma (also the first system of its kind to gain FDA approval).

The platelet and plasma systems use the same illumination device, the same active compound (amotosalen), and very similar production steps.

The INTERCEPT systems target a basic biological difference between the therapeutic components of blood. Platelets, plasma, and red blood cells do not require functional DNA or RNA for therapeutic efficacy. But pathogens and white blood cells do, in order to transmit infection.

The INTERCEPT systems use a proprietary molecule that, when activated by UVA light, binds to and blocks the replication of DNA and RNA, preventing nucleic acid replication and rendering the pathogen inactive.

The INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets has been approved in Europe since 2002 and is currently used in 20 countries.

The system was recently made available in the US and its territories under an investigational device exemption study to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted dengue and Chikungunya viruses, both of which are epidemic in the Caribbean region, including Puerto Rico, as well as sporadically in the southern US. No approved blood bank screening tests are available for either virus.

Researchers have evaluated INTERCEPT-processed platelets in 10 controlled clinical trials. Details on these trials can be found in the package insert.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, the first system of its kind to be approved in the US.

It is used to inactivate viruses, bacteria, spirochetes, parasites, and leukocytes in apheresis platelet components.

This can reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted infection and, potentially, transfusion-associated graft-vs-host disease, although the system cannot inactivate all pathogens.

Certain non-enveloped viruses (such as HAV, HEV, B19, and poliovirus) and Bacillus cereus spores have demonstrated resistance to the INTERCEPT process.

Earlier this week, the FDA approved the INTERCEPT Blood System for plasma (also the first system of its kind to gain FDA approval).

The platelet and plasma systems use the same illumination device, the same active compound (amotosalen), and very similar production steps.

The INTERCEPT systems target a basic biological difference between the therapeutic components of blood. Platelets, plasma, and red blood cells do not require functional DNA or RNA for therapeutic efficacy. But pathogens and white blood cells do, in order to transmit infection.

The INTERCEPT systems use a proprietary molecule that, when activated by UVA light, binds to and blocks the replication of DNA and RNA, preventing nucleic acid replication and rendering the pathogen inactive.

The INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets has been approved in Europe since 2002 and is currently used in 20 countries.

The system was recently made available in the US and its territories under an investigational device exemption study to reduce the risk of transfusion-transmitted dengue and Chikungunya viruses, both of which are epidemic in the Caribbean region, including Puerto Rico, as well as sporadically in the southern US. No approved blood bank screening tests are available for either virus.

Researchers have evaluated INTERCEPT-processed platelets in 10 controlled clinical trials. Details on these trials can be found in the package insert.

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Elise Amendola

Two studies shed new light on the prevalence of transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) and transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) in the US.

The research showed that postoperative TRALI is significantly underreported and more common than previously thought, with an overall rate of 1.4%.

And the rate of TACO is on the decline, but the risk to surgical patients remains high, at 4%, similar to previous TACO estimates in non-surgical patients.

“An accurate understanding of the risks associated with blood transfusions is essential when determining the safety and appropriateness of transfusion therapies for patients,” said Daryl Kor, MD, senior author of both studies and an associate professor at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

“Our research provides a greater awareness of the incidence of TRALI and TACO in surgical patients, a population that has been perhaps underrepresented in studies in this area. We believe this to be an important first step in our efforts to prevent these life-threatening transfusion complications.”

Dr Kor and his colleagues described this research in Anesthesiology alongside a related editorial.

In the two retrospective studies, the researchers examined the incidence of TRALI in 3379 patients and TACO in 4070 patients who received blood transfusions during non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia in 2004 and 2011.

Using a novel algorithm, followed by a rigorous manual review, the team performed a detailed epidemiologic analysis for both complications.

The first study showed that TRALI occurred in 1.4% of surgical patients, with higher rates in specific surgical populations such as those having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or having an organ transplant. Patients who received larger volumes of blood were also at increased risk.

Previous studies investigating TRALI rates have primarily focused on the critically ill and reported variable incidence rates. Many studies have reported incidences between 0.02% and 0.05%.

The second study showed that TACO occurs in 4.3% of surgical patients, with higher rates associated with increased volume of blood transfused, advanced age, and total intraoperative fluid balance. Again, patients having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or organ transplants were at the greatest risk.

The study also revealed that the rate of TACO decreased significantly from 2004 to 2011—from 5.5% to 3%. This decline was not fully explained by any of the patient or transfusion characteristics evaluated in the study.

The researchers said future studies are needed to further explore which mechanisms and risk factors are responsible for TACO and TRALI.

“With improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying TRALI and TACO, we may be able to refine the novel electronic algorithms used to screen patients in these studies,” Dr Kor said. “Ultimately, we hope to develop a real-time prediction model for these complications so that we can identify those at greatest risk and perhaps implement strategies to reduce this risk.”

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Elise Amendola

Two studies shed new light on the prevalence of transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) and transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) in the US.

The research showed that postoperative TRALI is significantly underreported and more common than previously thought, with an overall rate of 1.4%.

And the rate of TACO is on the decline, but the risk to surgical patients remains high, at 4%, similar to previous TACO estimates in non-surgical patients.

“An accurate understanding of the risks associated with blood transfusions is essential when determining the safety and appropriateness of transfusion therapies for patients,” said Daryl Kor, MD, senior author of both studies and an associate professor at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

“Our research provides a greater awareness of the incidence of TRALI and TACO in surgical patients, a population that has been perhaps underrepresented in studies in this area. We believe this to be an important first step in our efforts to prevent these life-threatening transfusion complications.”

Dr Kor and his colleagues described this research in Anesthesiology alongside a related editorial.

In the two retrospective studies, the researchers examined the incidence of TRALI in 3379 patients and TACO in 4070 patients who received blood transfusions during non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia in 2004 and 2011.

Using a novel algorithm, followed by a rigorous manual review, the team performed a detailed epidemiologic analysis for both complications.

The first study showed that TRALI occurred in 1.4% of surgical patients, with higher rates in specific surgical populations such as those having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or having an organ transplant. Patients who received larger volumes of blood were also at increased risk.

Previous studies investigating TRALI rates have primarily focused on the critically ill and reported variable incidence rates. Many studies have reported incidences between 0.02% and 0.05%.

The second study showed that TACO occurs in 4.3% of surgical patients, with higher rates associated with increased volume of blood transfused, advanced age, and total intraoperative fluid balance. Again, patients having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or organ transplants were at the greatest risk.

The study also revealed that the rate of TACO decreased significantly from 2004 to 2011—from 5.5% to 3%. This decline was not fully explained by any of the patient or transfusion characteristics evaluated in the study.

The researchers said future studies are needed to further explore which mechanisms and risk factors are responsible for TACO and TRALI.

“With improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying TRALI and TACO, we may be able to refine the novel electronic algorithms used to screen patients in these studies,” Dr Kor said. “Ultimately, we hope to develop a real-time prediction model for these complications so that we can identify those at greatest risk and perhaps implement strategies to reduce this risk.”

Blood for transfusion

Credit: Elise Amendola

Two studies shed new light on the prevalence of transfusion-related acute lung injury (TRALI) and transfusion-associated circulatory overload (TACO) in the US.

The research showed that postoperative TRALI is significantly underreported and more common than previously thought, with an overall rate of 1.4%.

And the rate of TACO is on the decline, but the risk to surgical patients remains high, at 4%, similar to previous TACO estimates in non-surgical patients.

“An accurate understanding of the risks associated with blood transfusions is essential when determining the safety and appropriateness of transfusion therapies for patients,” said Daryl Kor, MD, senior author of both studies and an associate professor at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.

“Our research provides a greater awareness of the incidence of TRALI and TACO in surgical patients, a population that has been perhaps underrepresented in studies in this area. We believe this to be an important first step in our efforts to prevent these life-threatening transfusion complications.”

Dr Kor and his colleagues described this research in Anesthesiology alongside a related editorial.

In the two retrospective studies, the researchers examined the incidence of TRALI in 3379 patients and TACO in 4070 patients who received blood transfusions during non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia in 2004 and 2011.

Using a novel algorithm, followed by a rigorous manual review, the team performed a detailed epidemiologic analysis for both complications.

The first study showed that TRALI occurred in 1.4% of surgical patients, with higher rates in specific surgical populations such as those having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or having an organ transplant. Patients who received larger volumes of blood were also at increased risk.

Previous studies investigating TRALI rates have primarily focused on the critically ill and reported variable incidence rates. Many studies have reported incidences between 0.02% and 0.05%.

The second study showed that TACO occurs in 4.3% of surgical patients, with higher rates associated with increased volume of blood transfused, advanced age, and total intraoperative fluid balance. Again, patients having surgery inside the chest cavity, on major blood vessels, or organ transplants were at the greatest risk.

The study also revealed that the rate of TACO decreased significantly from 2004 to 2011—from 5.5% to 3%. This decline was not fully explained by any of the patient or transfusion characteristics evaluated in the study.

The researchers said future studies are needed to further explore which mechanisms and risk factors are responsible for TACO and TRALI.

“With improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying TRALI and TACO, we may be able to refine the novel electronic algorithms used to screen patients in these studies,” Dr Kor said. “Ultimately, we hope to develop a real-time prediction model for these complications so that we can identify those at greatest risk and perhaps implement strategies to reduce this risk.”

Prescription medications

Credit: CDC

The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published a final guidance recommending the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim) as an option for treating and preventing recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in adults.

The guidance says dabigatran can provide a benefit for these patients, with cost- and clinical-effectiveness similar to rivaroxaban and added convenience compared to warfarin.

“For many people, using warfarin can be difficult because of the need for frequent tests to see if the blood is clotting properly, and having to adjust the dose of the

drug if it is not,” said Carole Longson, NICE Health Technology Evaluation Centre Director.

“The appraisal committee felt that dabigatran represents a potential benefit for many people who have had a DVT or PE, particularly those who have risk factors for recurrence of a blood clot and who therefore need longer-term treatment. We are pleased, therefore, to be able to recommend dabigatran as a cost-effective option for treating DVT and PE and preventing further episodes in adults.”

NICE expects dabigatran to be available on the National Health Service within 3 months.

Cost considerations

Dabigatran costs £65.90 for a 60-capsule pack of the 150 mg or 110 mg doses (excluding tax) and £2.20 per day of treatment, although costs may vary in different settings.

The most plausible incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for dabigatran compared with warfarin for acute treatment was uncertain.

However, both Boehringer Ingelheim’s and the evidence review group’s exploratory ICER remained in the range that could be considered a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. That is, both were under £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (QALY).

Neither Boehringer Ingelheim nor the evidence review group found any significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran and rivaroxaban for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in their indirect comparisons, and the costs were also very similar between these two treatments.

For combined treatment and secondary prevention of VTE, the appraisal committee said the company’s base case ICER for dabigatran compared with warfarin was likely too low (£9973 per QALY gained).

But the evidence review group’s exploratory base case for dabigatran compared with warfarin may have overestimated the ICER (£35,786 per QALY gained). So the ICER probably lies somewhere between these estimates.

Clinical evidence

To assess the clinical effectiveness of dabigatran, the appraisal committee evaluated data from the RECOVER, RE-MEDY, and RESONATE trials.

In the first RE-COVER trial, dabigatran proved noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence, and rates of major bleeding were similar between the treatment arms.

However, patients were more likely to discontinue dabigatran due to adverse events. Results from this trial were presented at ASH 2009 and published in NEJM.

The RE-COVER II trial also suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence and related deaths, and dabigatran was associated with a lower rate of major bleeding.

Rates of death, adverse events, and acute coronary syndromes were similar between the treatment arms. Results from this trial were published in Circulation in 2013.

The RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE trials were designed to evaluate dabigatran as extended VTE prophylaxis. Results of both trials were reported in a single NEJM article published in 2013.

The RE-MEDY trial suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin as extended prophylaxis for recurrent VTE, and warfarin presented a significantly higher risk of bleeding.

Results of the RE-SONATE trial indicated that dabigatran was superior to placebo for preventing recurrent VTE, although the drug significantly increased the risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding.

Prescription medications

Credit: CDC

The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published a final guidance recommending the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim) as an option for treating and preventing recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in adults.

The guidance says dabigatran can provide a benefit for these patients, with cost- and clinical-effectiveness similar to rivaroxaban and added convenience compared to warfarin.

“For many people, using warfarin can be difficult because of the need for frequent tests to see if the blood is clotting properly, and having to adjust the dose of the

drug if it is not,” said Carole Longson, NICE Health Technology Evaluation Centre Director.

“The appraisal committee felt that dabigatran represents a potential benefit for many people who have had a DVT or PE, particularly those who have risk factors for recurrence of a blood clot and who therefore need longer-term treatment. We are pleased, therefore, to be able to recommend dabigatran as a cost-effective option for treating DVT and PE and preventing further episodes in adults.”

NICE expects dabigatran to be available on the National Health Service within 3 months.

Cost considerations

Dabigatran costs £65.90 for a 60-capsule pack of the 150 mg or 110 mg doses (excluding tax) and £2.20 per day of treatment, although costs may vary in different settings.

The most plausible incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for dabigatran compared with warfarin for acute treatment was uncertain.

However, both Boehringer Ingelheim’s and the evidence review group’s exploratory ICER remained in the range that could be considered a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. That is, both were under £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (QALY).

Neither Boehringer Ingelheim nor the evidence review group found any significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran and rivaroxaban for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in their indirect comparisons, and the costs were also very similar between these two treatments.

For combined treatment and secondary prevention of VTE, the appraisal committee said the company’s base case ICER for dabigatran compared with warfarin was likely too low (£9973 per QALY gained).

But the evidence review group’s exploratory base case for dabigatran compared with warfarin may have overestimated the ICER (£35,786 per QALY gained). So the ICER probably lies somewhere between these estimates.

Clinical evidence

To assess the clinical effectiveness of dabigatran, the appraisal committee evaluated data from the RECOVER, RE-MEDY, and RESONATE trials.

In the first RE-COVER trial, dabigatran proved noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence, and rates of major bleeding were similar between the treatment arms.

However, patients were more likely to discontinue dabigatran due to adverse events. Results from this trial were presented at ASH 2009 and published in NEJM.

The RE-COVER II trial also suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence and related deaths, and dabigatran was associated with a lower rate of major bleeding.

Rates of death, adverse events, and acute coronary syndromes were similar between the treatment arms. Results from this trial were published in Circulation in 2013.

The RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE trials were designed to evaluate dabigatran as extended VTE prophylaxis. Results of both trials were reported in a single NEJM article published in 2013.

The RE-MEDY trial suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin as extended prophylaxis for recurrent VTE, and warfarin presented a significantly higher risk of bleeding.

Results of the RE-SONATE trial indicated that dabigatran was superior to placebo for preventing recurrent VTE, although the drug significantly increased the risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding.

Prescription medications

Credit: CDC

The UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) has published a final guidance recommending the anticoagulant dabigatran (Pradaxa, Boehringer Ingelheim) as an option for treating and preventing recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) in adults.

The guidance says dabigatran can provide a benefit for these patients, with cost- and clinical-effectiveness similar to rivaroxaban and added convenience compared to warfarin.

“For many people, using warfarin can be difficult because of the need for frequent tests to see if the blood is clotting properly, and having to adjust the dose of the

drug if it is not,” said Carole Longson, NICE Health Technology Evaluation Centre Director.

“The appraisal committee felt that dabigatran represents a potential benefit for many people who have had a DVT or PE, particularly those who have risk factors for recurrence of a blood clot and who therefore need longer-term treatment. We are pleased, therefore, to be able to recommend dabigatran as a cost-effective option for treating DVT and PE and preventing further episodes in adults.”

NICE expects dabigatran to be available on the National Health Service within 3 months.

Cost considerations

Dabigatran costs £65.90 for a 60-capsule pack of the 150 mg or 110 mg doses (excluding tax) and £2.20 per day of treatment, although costs may vary in different settings.

The most plausible incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for dabigatran compared with warfarin for acute treatment was uncertain.

However, both Boehringer Ingelheim’s and the evidence review group’s exploratory ICER remained in the range that could be considered a cost-effective use of National Health Service resources. That is, both were under £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained (QALY).

Neither Boehringer Ingelheim nor the evidence review group found any significant difference in efficacy between dabigatran and rivaroxaban for acute treatment of venous thromboembolism (VTE) in their indirect comparisons, and the costs were also very similar between these two treatments.

For combined treatment and secondary prevention of VTE, the appraisal committee said the company’s base case ICER for dabigatran compared with warfarin was likely too low (£9973 per QALY gained).

But the evidence review group’s exploratory base case for dabigatran compared with warfarin may have overestimated the ICER (£35,786 per QALY gained). So the ICER probably lies somewhere between these estimates.

Clinical evidence

To assess the clinical effectiveness of dabigatran, the appraisal committee evaluated data from the RECOVER, RE-MEDY, and RESONATE trials.

In the first RE-COVER trial, dabigatran proved noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence, and rates of major bleeding were similar between the treatment arms.

However, patients were more likely to discontinue dabigatran due to adverse events. Results from this trial were presented at ASH 2009 and published in NEJM.

The RE-COVER II trial also suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin for preventing VTE recurrence and related deaths, and dabigatran was associated with a lower rate of major bleeding.

Rates of death, adverse events, and acute coronary syndromes were similar between the treatment arms. Results from this trial were published in Circulation in 2013.

The RE-MEDY and RE-SONATE trials were designed to evaluate dabigatran as extended VTE prophylaxis. Results of both trials were reported in a single NEJM article published in 2013.

The RE-MEDY trial suggested that dabigatran was noninferior to warfarin as extended prophylaxis for recurrent VTE, and warfarin presented a significantly higher risk of bleeding.

Results of the RE-SONATE trial indicated that dabigatran was superior to placebo for preventing recurrent VTE, although the drug significantly increased the risk of major or clinically relevant bleeding.

SAN FRANCISCO—Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) should replace warfarin as thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients, according to a speaker at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting.

Results of the phase 3 CATCH trial showed that long-term treatment with the LMWH tinzaparin was associated with a 35% lower risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) when compared to warfarin, although the difference between the treatment arms was not statistically significant.

Patients who received tinzaparin did have a significantly lower risk of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and clinically relevant, non-major bleeding.

However, there was no difference between the treatment arms with regard to major bleeding or overall mortality.

Agnes Y.Y. Lee, MD, of the University of British Columbia and Vancouver Coastal Health in British Columbia, Canada, presented these results at ASH as LBA-2.*

“CATCH is the largest randomized trial studying treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis,” she said. “It provides confirmatory data for improved efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin over warfarin.”

The trial included 900 cancer patients from 164 centers around the world. The mean patient age was 59 (range, 18-89), and 59% were female. The most common cancers were gynecologic, colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, and lung.

Patients were stratified by geographic region, tumor characteristics, and history of VTE. They were randomized to receive tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 6 months (n=449) or initial tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 5 to 10 days overlapped and followed by dose-adjusted warfarin for 6 months (n=451).

In all, 416 patients completed treatment with tinzaparin, and 401 completed warfarin treatment. The patients were followed up to 6 months or death, whichever came first.

Efficacy data 

The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, which included symptomatic DVT and/or pulmonary embolism (PE), incidental proximal DVT and/or PE, and fatal PE.

The rate of recurrent VTE was 7.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 10.5% in the warfarin arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.65, P=0.07). This represents a 35% reduction in recurrent VTE with the LMWH.

In the per-protocol analysis, the rates of recurrent VTE were 8.3% and 12.7%, respectively (HR=0.62), which translates to a 38% reduction in recurrent VTE with tinzaparin.

“Pre-specified efficacy analyses further showed that tinzaparin significantly reduced symptomatic, recurrent DVT by 52%,” Dr Lee noted. “There were very few symptomatic PEs, equal numbers of fatal PEs occurred in each arm, and there were only 2 incidental thrombotic events, both in the warfarin arm.”

Symptomatic, non-fatal DVT occurred in 12 patients (2.7%) in the tinzaparin arm and 24 (5.3%) in the warfarin arm (HR=0.48, P=0.04). Symptomatic, non-fatal PE occurred in 3 patients (0.7%) and 2 patients (0.4%), respectively. And fatal PE occurred in 17 patients (3.8%) in each arm (HR=0.96).

“We were clearly disappointed that our primary efficacy outcome did not achieve statistical significance,” Dr Lee said. “But our sample size was based on an estimated recurrent [VTE] rate of 12.6% in the warfarin group, and we only saw a 10% [sic] recurrence. So, basically, our study was slightly underpowered to achieve statistical significance.”

“I think that, given the symptomatic DVT results, as well as the per-protocol analysis, in additon to all the previous data on low-molecular-weight heparin, this is still very strong confirmatory data that low-molecular-weight heparin is more effective than warfarin therapy in treating cancer patients with thrombosis.”

Safety and mortality

The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding, which occurred in 2.9% of patients in the tinzaparin arm and 2.6% in the warfarin arm (HR=0.89).

The rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding was 11.1% and 16.2%, respectively (HR=0.69, P=0.03).

“Tinzaparin reduced the rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding by 31%,” Dr Lee noted.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the arms with regard to 180-day overall mortality, which was 34.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 32.3% in the warfarin arm (HR=1.08).

This research was sponsored by LEO Pharma, the company developing tinzaparin (Innohep).

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.

SAN FRANCISCO—Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) should replace warfarin as thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients, according to a speaker at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting.

Results of the phase 3 CATCH trial showed that long-term treatment with the LMWH tinzaparin was associated with a 35% lower risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) when compared to warfarin, although the difference between the treatment arms was not statistically significant.

Patients who received tinzaparin did have a significantly lower risk of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and clinically relevant, non-major bleeding.

However, there was no difference between the treatment arms with regard to major bleeding or overall mortality.

Agnes Y.Y. Lee, MD, of the University of British Columbia and Vancouver Coastal Health in British Columbia, Canada, presented these results at ASH as LBA-2.*

“CATCH is the largest randomized trial studying treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis,” she said. “It provides confirmatory data for improved efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin over warfarin.”

The trial included 900 cancer patients from 164 centers around the world. The mean patient age was 59 (range, 18-89), and 59% were female. The most common cancers were gynecologic, colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, and lung.

Patients were stratified by geographic region, tumor characteristics, and history of VTE. They were randomized to receive tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 6 months (n=449) or initial tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 5 to 10 days overlapped and followed by dose-adjusted warfarin for 6 months (n=451).

In all, 416 patients completed treatment with tinzaparin, and 401 completed warfarin treatment. The patients were followed up to 6 months or death, whichever came first.

Efficacy data 

The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, which included symptomatic DVT and/or pulmonary embolism (PE), incidental proximal DVT and/or PE, and fatal PE.

The rate of recurrent VTE was 7.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 10.5% in the warfarin arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.65, P=0.07). This represents a 35% reduction in recurrent VTE with the LMWH.

In the per-protocol analysis, the rates of recurrent VTE were 8.3% and 12.7%, respectively (HR=0.62), which translates to a 38% reduction in recurrent VTE with tinzaparin.

“Pre-specified efficacy analyses further showed that tinzaparin significantly reduced symptomatic, recurrent DVT by 52%,” Dr Lee noted. “There were very few symptomatic PEs, equal numbers of fatal PEs occurred in each arm, and there were only 2 incidental thrombotic events, both in the warfarin arm.”

Symptomatic, non-fatal DVT occurred in 12 patients (2.7%) in the tinzaparin arm and 24 (5.3%) in the warfarin arm (HR=0.48, P=0.04). Symptomatic, non-fatal PE occurred in 3 patients (0.7%) and 2 patients (0.4%), respectively. And fatal PE occurred in 17 patients (3.8%) in each arm (HR=0.96).

“We were clearly disappointed that our primary efficacy outcome did not achieve statistical significance,” Dr Lee said. “But our sample size was based on an estimated recurrent [VTE] rate of 12.6% in the warfarin group, and we only saw a 10% [sic] recurrence. So, basically, our study was slightly underpowered to achieve statistical significance.”

“I think that, given the symptomatic DVT results, as well as the per-protocol analysis, in additon to all the previous data on low-molecular-weight heparin, this is still very strong confirmatory data that low-molecular-weight heparin is more effective than warfarin therapy in treating cancer patients with thrombosis.”

Safety and mortality

The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding, which occurred in 2.9% of patients in the tinzaparin arm and 2.6% in the warfarin arm (HR=0.89).

The rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding was 11.1% and 16.2%, respectively (HR=0.69, P=0.03).

“Tinzaparin reduced the rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding by 31%,” Dr Lee noted.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the arms with regard to 180-day overall mortality, which was 34.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 32.3% in the warfarin arm (HR=1.08).

This research was sponsored by LEO Pharma, the company developing tinzaparin (Innohep).

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.

SAN FRANCISCO—Low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) should replace warfarin as thromboprophylaxis in cancer patients, according to a speaker at the 2014 ASH Annual Meeting.

Results of the phase 3 CATCH trial showed that long-term treatment with the LMWH tinzaparin was associated with a 35% lower risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE) when compared to warfarin, although the difference between the treatment arms was not statistically significant.

Patients who received tinzaparin did have a significantly lower risk of symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and clinically relevant, non-major bleeding.

However, there was no difference between the treatment arms with regard to major bleeding or overall mortality.

Agnes Y.Y. Lee, MD, of the University of British Columbia and Vancouver Coastal Health in British Columbia, Canada, presented these results at ASH as LBA-2.*

“CATCH is the largest randomized trial studying treatment of cancer-associated thrombosis,” she said. “It provides confirmatory data for improved efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin over warfarin.”

The trial included 900 cancer patients from 164 centers around the world. The mean patient age was 59 (range, 18-89), and 59% were female. The most common cancers were gynecologic, colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, and lung.

Patients were stratified by geographic region, tumor characteristics, and history of VTE. They were randomized to receive tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 6 months (n=449) or initial tinzaparin at 175 IU/kg once daily for 5 to 10 days overlapped and followed by dose-adjusted warfarin for 6 months (n=451).

In all, 416 patients completed treatment with tinzaparin, and 401 completed warfarin treatment. The patients were followed up to 6 months or death, whichever came first.

Efficacy data 

The primary efficacy outcome was recurrent VTE, which included symptomatic DVT and/or pulmonary embolism (PE), incidental proximal DVT and/or PE, and fatal PE.

The rate of recurrent VTE was 7.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 10.5% in the warfarin arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.65, P=0.07). This represents a 35% reduction in recurrent VTE with the LMWH.

In the per-protocol analysis, the rates of recurrent VTE were 8.3% and 12.7%, respectively (HR=0.62), which translates to a 38% reduction in recurrent VTE with tinzaparin.

“Pre-specified efficacy analyses further showed that tinzaparin significantly reduced symptomatic, recurrent DVT by 52%,” Dr Lee noted. “There were very few symptomatic PEs, equal numbers of fatal PEs occurred in each arm, and there were only 2 incidental thrombotic events, both in the warfarin arm.”

Symptomatic, non-fatal DVT occurred in 12 patients (2.7%) in the tinzaparin arm and 24 (5.3%) in the warfarin arm (HR=0.48, P=0.04). Symptomatic, non-fatal PE occurred in 3 patients (0.7%) and 2 patients (0.4%), respectively. And fatal PE occurred in 17 patients (3.8%) in each arm (HR=0.96).

“We were clearly disappointed that our primary efficacy outcome did not achieve statistical significance,” Dr Lee said. “But our sample size was based on an estimated recurrent [VTE] rate of 12.6% in the warfarin group, and we only saw a 10% [sic] recurrence. So, basically, our study was slightly underpowered to achieve statistical significance.”

“I think that, given the symptomatic DVT results, as well as the per-protocol analysis, in additon to all the previous data on low-molecular-weight heparin, this is still very strong confirmatory data that low-molecular-weight heparin is more effective than warfarin therapy in treating cancer patients with thrombosis.”

Safety and mortality

The primary safety endpoint was major bleeding, which occurred in 2.9% of patients in the tinzaparin arm and 2.6% in the warfarin arm (HR=0.89).

The rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding was 11.1% and 16.2%, respectively (HR=0.69, P=0.03).

“Tinzaparin reduced the rate of clinically relevant, non-major bleeding by 31%,” Dr Lee noted.

On the other hand, there was no significant difference between the arms with regard to 180-day overall mortality, which was 34.2% in the tinzaparin arm and 32.3% in the warfarin arm (HR=1.08).

This research was sponsored by LEO Pharma, the company developing tinzaparin (Innohep).

*Information in the abstract differs from that presented at the meeting.