User login
Survival improvements lag for young Hispanic patients with myeloma
ATLANTA –
Among U.S. adults diagnosed with multiple myeloma by age 40 years, 5-year and 10-year survival improved significantly (P less than .0001) for non-Hispanic blacks and whites, but not for Hispanics (5-year survival, P = .08; 10-year survival, P = .13), Abdel-Ghani Azzouqa, MD, and colleagues reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Other population-based studies have uncovered racial and ethnic disparities in myeloma outcomes but had not honed in on the experience of young adult patients, who make up a growing proportion of diagnosed patients, said Dr. Azzouqa.
He and his associates analyzed Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data on patients diagnosed between ages 18 and 40 years with histologically confirmed multiple myeloma. The dataset spanned 1973-2014 and included 1,460 patients, of whom about 60% were male. Median age at diagnosis was 37 years; 47% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 28% were non-Hispanic black, 18% were Hispanic, 5.5% were Asian, and about 1% were of other ethnicities.
For young Hispanic patients with myeloma, 5-year survival improved from 39% before 1996, when stem cell transplants and novel therapies became available, to 56% from 2002 onward. This change was not statistically significant (P = .08), and 10-year survival rates also did not change significantly (from 21% to 33%; P = .13).
Five-year and 10-year survival did improve significantly for both genders (P = .0001) and among non-Hispanic blacks (P = .0001) and non-Hispanic whites (P = .0001).
Racial/ethnic subgroups did not differ significantly by median age at diagnosis, gender distribution, or listed cause of death, Dr. Azzouqa noted. Thus, reasons for the difference in survival for Hispanic patients remain unclear. Perhaps they reflect differences in disease biology, treatment response, or access or use of effective novel therapies, he said.
The researchers had no external funding sources. Dr. Azzouqa had no conflicts of interest. Lead author Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi disclosed ties to funding Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Novartis, and Takeda.
SOURCE: Ailawadhi S et al. ASH Abstract 2149
ATLANTA –
Among U.S. adults diagnosed with multiple myeloma by age 40 years, 5-year and 10-year survival improved significantly (P less than .0001) for non-Hispanic blacks and whites, but not for Hispanics (5-year survival, P = .08; 10-year survival, P = .13), Abdel-Ghani Azzouqa, MD, and colleagues reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Other population-based studies have uncovered racial and ethnic disparities in myeloma outcomes but had not honed in on the experience of young adult patients, who make up a growing proportion of diagnosed patients, said Dr. Azzouqa.
He and his associates analyzed Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data on patients diagnosed between ages 18 and 40 years with histologically confirmed multiple myeloma. The dataset spanned 1973-2014 and included 1,460 patients, of whom about 60% were male. Median age at diagnosis was 37 years; 47% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 28% were non-Hispanic black, 18% were Hispanic, 5.5% were Asian, and about 1% were of other ethnicities.
For young Hispanic patients with myeloma, 5-year survival improved from 39% before 1996, when stem cell transplants and novel therapies became available, to 56% from 2002 onward. This change was not statistically significant (P = .08), and 10-year survival rates also did not change significantly (from 21% to 33%; P = .13).
Five-year and 10-year survival did improve significantly for both genders (P = .0001) and among non-Hispanic blacks (P = .0001) and non-Hispanic whites (P = .0001).
Racial/ethnic subgroups did not differ significantly by median age at diagnosis, gender distribution, or listed cause of death, Dr. Azzouqa noted. Thus, reasons for the difference in survival for Hispanic patients remain unclear. Perhaps they reflect differences in disease biology, treatment response, or access or use of effective novel therapies, he said.
The researchers had no external funding sources. Dr. Azzouqa had no conflicts of interest. Lead author Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi disclosed ties to funding Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Novartis, and Takeda.
SOURCE: Ailawadhi S et al. ASH Abstract 2149
ATLANTA –
Among U.S. adults diagnosed with multiple myeloma by age 40 years, 5-year and 10-year survival improved significantly (P less than .0001) for non-Hispanic blacks and whites, but not for Hispanics (5-year survival, P = .08; 10-year survival, P = .13), Abdel-Ghani Azzouqa, MD, and colleagues reported in a poster at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Other population-based studies have uncovered racial and ethnic disparities in myeloma outcomes but had not honed in on the experience of young adult patients, who make up a growing proportion of diagnosed patients, said Dr. Azzouqa.
He and his associates analyzed Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data on patients diagnosed between ages 18 and 40 years with histologically confirmed multiple myeloma. The dataset spanned 1973-2014 and included 1,460 patients, of whom about 60% were male. Median age at diagnosis was 37 years; 47% of patients were non-Hispanic white, 28% were non-Hispanic black, 18% were Hispanic, 5.5% were Asian, and about 1% were of other ethnicities.
For young Hispanic patients with myeloma, 5-year survival improved from 39% before 1996, when stem cell transplants and novel therapies became available, to 56% from 2002 onward. This change was not statistically significant (P = .08), and 10-year survival rates also did not change significantly (from 21% to 33%; P = .13).
Five-year and 10-year survival did improve significantly for both genders (P = .0001) and among non-Hispanic blacks (P = .0001) and non-Hispanic whites (P = .0001).
Racial/ethnic subgroups did not differ significantly by median age at diagnosis, gender distribution, or listed cause of death, Dr. Azzouqa noted. Thus, reasons for the difference in survival for Hispanic patients remain unclear. Perhaps they reflect differences in disease biology, treatment response, or access or use of effective novel therapies, he said.
The researchers had no external funding sources. Dr. Azzouqa had no conflicts of interest. Lead author Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi disclosed ties to funding Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Novartis, and Takeda.
SOURCE: Ailawadhi S et al. ASH Abstract 2149
REPORTING FROM ASH 2017
Key clinical point: Recent improvements in multiple myeloma survival have left young Hispanics behind.
Major finding: Five-year and 10-year survival have improved significantly among young blacks and non-Hispanic whites with multiple myeloma (P less than .0001 for all comparisons) but not Hispanics (5-year survival P = .08; 10-year survival P = .13).
Data source: Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) data for 1,460 adults up to 40 years old when diagnosed with multiple myeloma.
Disclosures: The researchers had no external funding sources. Dr. Azzouqa had no conflicts of interest. Lead author Dr. Sikander Ailawadhi disclosed funding from Pharmacyclics, Amgen, Novartis, and Takeda.
Source: Ailawadhi S et al. ASH Abstract 2149.
Drug receives fast track, orphan designations for PTCL
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug and fast track designations to tenalisib (RP6530) for the treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL).
Tenalisib is a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor being developed by Rhizen Pharmaceuticals.
Research has shown that tenalisib inhibits the growth of immortalized cancerous cell lines and primary leukemia/lymphoma cells.
In preclinical studies, tenalisib reprogrammed macrophages from an immunosuppressive M2-like phenotype (pro-tumor) to an inflammatory M1-like state (anti-tumor).
Researchers are currently conducting a phase 1 study of tenalisib in patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL. Results from this study were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2791*).
The presentation included data on 50 patients—24 with PTCL and 26 with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
For the PTCL patients, the median age was 63 (range, 40-89), and 67% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1-7). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=14) or 1 (n=10). More patients had relapsed disease (n=17, 58%) than refractory disease (n=10, 42%).
For the CTCL patients, the median age was 67 (range, 37-84), and 46% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 5.5 (range, 2-15). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=23) or 1 (n=3). More patients had refractory disease (n=15, 58%) than relapsed disease (n=11, 42%).
In the dose-escalation portion of the study, patients received tenalisib at 200 mg twice daily (BID), 400 mg BID, 800 mg BID fasting, or 800 mg BID fed. The maximum tolerated dose was 800 mg BID fasting, so this dose is being used in the expansion cohort.
Twelve PTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate in these patients was 58% (7/12), with a 25% complete response rate (3/12).
Sixteen CTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate was 56% (9/16). All responders had partial responses.
In both PTCL and CTCL patients, treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) included transaminitis (22%), rash (6%), neutropenia (6%), hypophosphatemia (2%), increased international normalized ratio (2%), diplopia secondary to neuropathy (2%), and sepsis (2%).
Treatment-related serious AEs included sepsis, increased international normalized ratio, diplopia secondary to neuropathy, and pyrexia. Five patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.
About orphan and fast track designations
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
The FDA’s fast track drug development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of new drug applications for medicines with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss all aspects of development to support a drug’s approval, and also provides the opportunity to submit sections of a new drug application on a rolling basis as data become available.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug and fast track designations to tenalisib (RP6530) for the treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL).
Tenalisib is a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor being developed by Rhizen Pharmaceuticals.
Research has shown that tenalisib inhibits the growth of immortalized cancerous cell lines and primary leukemia/lymphoma cells.
In preclinical studies, tenalisib reprogrammed macrophages from an immunosuppressive M2-like phenotype (pro-tumor) to an inflammatory M1-like state (anti-tumor).
Researchers are currently conducting a phase 1 study of tenalisib in patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL. Results from this study were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2791*).
The presentation included data on 50 patients—24 with PTCL and 26 with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
For the PTCL patients, the median age was 63 (range, 40-89), and 67% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1-7). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=14) or 1 (n=10). More patients had relapsed disease (n=17, 58%) than refractory disease (n=10, 42%).
For the CTCL patients, the median age was 67 (range, 37-84), and 46% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 5.5 (range, 2-15). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=23) or 1 (n=3). More patients had refractory disease (n=15, 58%) than relapsed disease (n=11, 42%).
In the dose-escalation portion of the study, patients received tenalisib at 200 mg twice daily (BID), 400 mg BID, 800 mg BID fasting, or 800 mg BID fed. The maximum tolerated dose was 800 mg BID fasting, so this dose is being used in the expansion cohort.
Twelve PTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate in these patients was 58% (7/12), with a 25% complete response rate (3/12).
Sixteen CTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate was 56% (9/16). All responders had partial responses.
In both PTCL and CTCL patients, treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) included transaminitis (22%), rash (6%), neutropenia (6%), hypophosphatemia (2%), increased international normalized ratio (2%), diplopia secondary to neuropathy (2%), and sepsis (2%).
Treatment-related serious AEs included sepsis, increased international normalized ratio, diplopia secondary to neuropathy, and pyrexia. Five patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.
About orphan and fast track designations
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
The FDA’s fast track drug development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of new drug applications for medicines with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss all aspects of development to support a drug’s approval, and also provides the opportunity to submit sections of a new drug application on a rolling basis as data become available.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug and fast track designations to tenalisib (RP6530) for the treatment of peripheral T-cell lymphoma (PTCL).
Tenalisib is a dual PI3K delta/gamma inhibitor being developed by Rhizen Pharmaceuticals.
Research has shown that tenalisib inhibits the growth of immortalized cancerous cell lines and primary leukemia/lymphoma cells.
In preclinical studies, tenalisib reprogrammed macrophages from an immunosuppressive M2-like phenotype (pro-tumor) to an inflammatory M1-like state (anti-tumor).
Researchers are currently conducting a phase 1 study of tenalisib in patients with relapsed/refractory PTCL. Results from this study were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2791*).
The presentation included data on 50 patients—24 with PTCL and 26 with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
For the PTCL patients, the median age was 63 (range, 40-89), and 67% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 3 (range, 1-7). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=14) or 1 (n=10). More patients had relapsed disease (n=17, 58%) than refractory disease (n=10, 42%).
For the CTCL patients, the median age was 67 (range, 37-84), and 46% were male. The median number of prior therapies was 5.5 (range, 2-15). All patients had an ECOG status of 0 (n=23) or 1 (n=3). More patients had refractory disease (n=15, 58%) than relapsed disease (n=11, 42%).
In the dose-escalation portion of the study, patients received tenalisib at 200 mg twice daily (BID), 400 mg BID, 800 mg BID fasting, or 800 mg BID fed. The maximum tolerated dose was 800 mg BID fasting, so this dose is being used in the expansion cohort.
Twelve PTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate in these patients was 58% (7/12), with a 25% complete response rate (3/12).
Sixteen CTCL patients were evaluable for efficacy. The overall response rate was 56% (9/16). All responders had partial responses.
In both PTCL and CTCL patients, treatment-related grade 3 or higher adverse events (AEs) included transaminitis (22%), rash (6%), neutropenia (6%), hypophosphatemia (2%), increased international normalized ratio (2%), diplopia secondary to neuropathy (2%), and sepsis (2%).
Treatment-related serious AEs included sepsis, increased international normalized ratio, diplopia secondary to neuropathy, and pyrexia. Five patients discontinued treatment due to AEs.
About orphan and fast track designations
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
The FDA’s fast track drug development program is designed to expedite clinical development and submission of new drug applications for medicines with the potential to treat serious or life-threatening conditions and address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation facilitates frequent interactions with the FDA review team, including meetings to discuss all aspects of development to support a drug’s approval, and also provides the opportunity to submit sections of a new drug application on a rolling basis as data become available.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
Single-agent daratumumab active in smoldering multiple myeloma
ATLANTA – Daratumumab monotherapy led to durable partial responses among intermediate to high-risk patients with smoldering multiple myeloma, according to results from the phase II CENTAURUS trial.
Although less than 5% of patients had complete responses, 27% had at least a very good partial response to long-term therapy (up to 20 treatment cycles lasting 8 weeks each), Craig C. Hofmeister, MD, of the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. The coprimary endpoint, median progression-free survival, exceeded 24 months in all dose cohorts, and was the longest when patients were treated longest.
Current guidelines recommend monitoring smoldering multiple myeloma every 3-6 months and treating only after patients progress. However, some experts pursue earlier treatment in the premalignant setting.
In CENTAURUS, 123 adults with smoldering multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to receive daratumumab (16 mg/kg IV) in 8-week cycles according to a long, intermediate, or short/intense schedule. The long schedule consisted of treatment weekly for cycle 1, every other week for cycles 2-3, monthly for cycles 4-7, and once every 8 weeks for up to 13 more cycles. The intermediate schedule consisted of treatment weekly in cycle 1 and every 8 weeks for up to 20 cycles. The short, intense schedule consisted of weekly treatment for 8 weeks (one cycle). Patients were followed for up to 4 years or until they progressed to multiple myeloma based on International Myeloma Working Group guidelines.
Over a median follow-up period of 15.8 months (range, 0 to 24 months), rates of complete response were 2% in the long treatment arm, 5% in the intermediate treatment arm, and 0% in the short treatment arm. Rates of at least very good partial response were 29%, 24%, and 15%, respectively. Overall response rates were 56%, 54%, and 38%, respectively. Median PFS was not reached in any arm, exceeding 24 months.
Treatment was generally well tolerated, said Dr. Hofmeister. The most common treatment-related adverse effects were fatigue, cough, upper respiratory tract infection, headache, and insomnia. Hypertension and hyperglycemia were the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events, affecting up to 5% of patients per arm. Fewer than 10% of patients in any arm developed treatment-emergent hematologic adverse events, and fewer than 5% developed grade 3-4 pneumonia or sepsis. There were three cases of a second primary malignancy, including one case of breast cancer and two cases of melanoma.
Rates of infusion-related reactions did not correlate with treatment duration. Grade 3-4 infusion-related reactions affected 0% to 3% of patients per arm. The sole death in this trial resulted from disease progression in a patient from the short treatment arm. “Taken together, efficacy and safety data support long dosing compared to intermediate and short dosing,” Dr. Hofmeister said.
The three arms were demographically similar. Patients tended to be white, in their late 50s to 60s, and to have ECOG scores of 0 with at least two risk factors for progression. About 70% had IgG disease and nearly half had less than 20% plasma cells in bone marrow.
Janssen, the maker of daratumumab, sponsored the trial. Dr. Hofmeister disclosed research funding from Janssen and research support, honoraria, and advisory relationships with Adaptive Biotechnologies, Thrasos, Celgene, Karyopharm, Takeda, and other pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Hofmeister C et al, ASH 2017, Abstract 510.
ATLANTA – Daratumumab monotherapy led to durable partial responses among intermediate to high-risk patients with smoldering multiple myeloma, according to results from the phase II CENTAURUS trial.
Although less than 5% of patients had complete responses, 27% had at least a very good partial response to long-term therapy (up to 20 treatment cycles lasting 8 weeks each), Craig C. Hofmeister, MD, of the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. The coprimary endpoint, median progression-free survival, exceeded 24 months in all dose cohorts, and was the longest when patients were treated longest.
Current guidelines recommend monitoring smoldering multiple myeloma every 3-6 months and treating only after patients progress. However, some experts pursue earlier treatment in the premalignant setting.
In CENTAURUS, 123 adults with smoldering multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to receive daratumumab (16 mg/kg IV) in 8-week cycles according to a long, intermediate, or short/intense schedule. The long schedule consisted of treatment weekly for cycle 1, every other week for cycles 2-3, monthly for cycles 4-7, and once every 8 weeks for up to 13 more cycles. The intermediate schedule consisted of treatment weekly in cycle 1 and every 8 weeks for up to 20 cycles. The short, intense schedule consisted of weekly treatment for 8 weeks (one cycle). Patients were followed for up to 4 years or until they progressed to multiple myeloma based on International Myeloma Working Group guidelines.
Over a median follow-up period of 15.8 months (range, 0 to 24 months), rates of complete response were 2% in the long treatment arm, 5% in the intermediate treatment arm, and 0% in the short treatment arm. Rates of at least very good partial response were 29%, 24%, and 15%, respectively. Overall response rates were 56%, 54%, and 38%, respectively. Median PFS was not reached in any arm, exceeding 24 months.
Treatment was generally well tolerated, said Dr. Hofmeister. The most common treatment-related adverse effects were fatigue, cough, upper respiratory tract infection, headache, and insomnia. Hypertension and hyperglycemia were the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events, affecting up to 5% of patients per arm. Fewer than 10% of patients in any arm developed treatment-emergent hematologic adverse events, and fewer than 5% developed grade 3-4 pneumonia or sepsis. There were three cases of a second primary malignancy, including one case of breast cancer and two cases of melanoma.
Rates of infusion-related reactions did not correlate with treatment duration. Grade 3-4 infusion-related reactions affected 0% to 3% of patients per arm. The sole death in this trial resulted from disease progression in a patient from the short treatment arm. “Taken together, efficacy and safety data support long dosing compared to intermediate and short dosing,” Dr. Hofmeister said.
The three arms were demographically similar. Patients tended to be white, in their late 50s to 60s, and to have ECOG scores of 0 with at least two risk factors for progression. About 70% had IgG disease and nearly half had less than 20% plasma cells in bone marrow.
Janssen, the maker of daratumumab, sponsored the trial. Dr. Hofmeister disclosed research funding from Janssen and research support, honoraria, and advisory relationships with Adaptive Biotechnologies, Thrasos, Celgene, Karyopharm, Takeda, and other pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Hofmeister C et al, ASH 2017, Abstract 510.
ATLANTA – Daratumumab monotherapy led to durable partial responses among intermediate to high-risk patients with smoldering multiple myeloma, according to results from the phase II CENTAURUS trial.
Although less than 5% of patients had complete responses, 27% had at least a very good partial response to long-term therapy (up to 20 treatment cycles lasting 8 weeks each), Craig C. Hofmeister, MD, of the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology. The coprimary endpoint, median progression-free survival, exceeded 24 months in all dose cohorts, and was the longest when patients were treated longest.
Current guidelines recommend monitoring smoldering multiple myeloma every 3-6 months and treating only after patients progress. However, some experts pursue earlier treatment in the premalignant setting.
In CENTAURUS, 123 adults with smoldering multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to receive daratumumab (16 mg/kg IV) in 8-week cycles according to a long, intermediate, or short/intense schedule. The long schedule consisted of treatment weekly for cycle 1, every other week for cycles 2-3, monthly for cycles 4-7, and once every 8 weeks for up to 13 more cycles. The intermediate schedule consisted of treatment weekly in cycle 1 and every 8 weeks for up to 20 cycles. The short, intense schedule consisted of weekly treatment for 8 weeks (one cycle). Patients were followed for up to 4 years or until they progressed to multiple myeloma based on International Myeloma Working Group guidelines.
Over a median follow-up period of 15.8 months (range, 0 to 24 months), rates of complete response were 2% in the long treatment arm, 5% in the intermediate treatment arm, and 0% in the short treatment arm. Rates of at least very good partial response were 29%, 24%, and 15%, respectively. Overall response rates were 56%, 54%, and 38%, respectively. Median PFS was not reached in any arm, exceeding 24 months.
Treatment was generally well tolerated, said Dr. Hofmeister. The most common treatment-related adverse effects were fatigue, cough, upper respiratory tract infection, headache, and insomnia. Hypertension and hyperglycemia were the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events, affecting up to 5% of patients per arm. Fewer than 10% of patients in any arm developed treatment-emergent hematologic adverse events, and fewer than 5% developed grade 3-4 pneumonia or sepsis. There were three cases of a second primary malignancy, including one case of breast cancer and two cases of melanoma.
Rates of infusion-related reactions did not correlate with treatment duration. Grade 3-4 infusion-related reactions affected 0% to 3% of patients per arm. The sole death in this trial resulted from disease progression in a patient from the short treatment arm. “Taken together, efficacy and safety data support long dosing compared to intermediate and short dosing,” Dr. Hofmeister said.
The three arms were demographically similar. Patients tended to be white, in their late 50s to 60s, and to have ECOG scores of 0 with at least two risk factors for progression. About 70% had IgG disease and nearly half had less than 20% plasma cells in bone marrow.
Janssen, the maker of daratumumab, sponsored the trial. Dr. Hofmeister disclosed research funding from Janssen and research support, honoraria, and advisory relationships with Adaptive Biotechnologies, Thrasos, Celgene, Karyopharm, Takeda, and other pharmaceutical companies.
SOURCE: Hofmeister C et al, ASH 2017, Abstract 510.
REPORTING FROM ASH 2017
Key clinical point: Single-agent daratumumab therapy was active and its safety profile was acceptable in patients with smoldering multiple myeloma.
Major finding: Rates of at least very good partial response were 29%, 24%, and 15% among patients who received long, intermediate, and short/intense treatment schedules, respectively. Median progression-free survival exceeded 24 months in all three arms.
Data source: CENTAURUS, a phase II trial of 123 patients with smoldering multiple myeloma.
Disclosures: Janssen sponsored the trial. Dr. Hofmeister disclosed research funding from Janssen and research support, honoraria, and advisory relationships with Adaptive Biotechnologies, Thrasos, Celgene, Karyopharm, Takeda, and other pharmaceutical companies.
Source: Hofmeister C et al, ASH 2017, Abstract 510.
Study identifies predictors of acquired von Willebrand disease
ATLANTA – Waldenström macroglobulinemia can present as acquired von Willebrand disease (VWD), and when it does, the finding strongly correlates with high serum IgM levels and the presence of CXCR4 mutations, according to the results of a large, single-center retrospective study.
Further, successfully treating Waldenström macroglobulinemia often resolves acquired VWD, and the depth of treatment response predicts the degree of improvement, Jorge J. Castillo, MD, and his associates wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Acquired VWD is an uncommon, poorly understood presentation of Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Because affected patients require treatment, better characterizing this subgroup is important, the investigators noted.
At the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, the researchers retrospectively studied 320 individuals with newly diagnosed Waldenström macroglobulinemia and used logistic regression analysis to seek predictors of acquired VWD, which they evaluated by measuring levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII. Levels under 30% were considered VWD and levels between 30% and 50% were considered low-level VWD.
In all, 49 individuals had acquired VWD while 271 patients did not. These two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, hemoglobin level, platelet count, and bone marrow involvement. However, 45% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL versus 6% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001), and 47% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 versus 31% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001). Also, 77% of patients with acquired VWD tested positive for CXCR4 mutation versus 37% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001).
A significantly higher proportion of patients without acquired VWD had white blood cell concentrations above 6,000/mcL (29% vs. 50%; P = .006). This finding lost statistical significance in the logistic regression model, but all the other variables remained significantly associated. Serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL conferred a 55-fold increase in the odds of having acquired VWD (95% confidence interval, 17-177; P less than .001), and serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 mg/dL led to an 11-fold increase in these odds (95% CI, 4-34). The presence of CXCR4 mutations was associated with a sixfold increased odds of acquired VWD (95% CI, 2-15). The P value for each of these three associations was at or below .001.
Therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia led to statistically significant increases in levels of factor VIII, VW factor antigen, and VW factor activity (P less than .001) and the median of each level improved by at least 35% after treatment. After treatment, 78% of patients with acquired VWD had levels of all three measures above 50% (versus 0% before treatment; P less than .001). Patients with acquired VWD with the best responses to treatment had about a 90% decrease in IgM levels, while those with a partial response had about a two-thirds decrease and patients with stable disease had about a 20% decrease. A linear regression model confirmed that depth of treatment response, based on change in IgM level, correlated with degree of improvement in VWD – that is, the extent of improvement in levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII.
No external funding sources were reported. Dr. Castillo disclosed consulting ties and research funding from Pharmacyclics and Janssen, and research funding from Millenium and Abbvie.
SOURCE: Castillo J, et al. ASH 2017 Abstract 1088.
ATLANTA – Waldenström macroglobulinemia can present as acquired von Willebrand disease (VWD), and when it does, the finding strongly correlates with high serum IgM levels and the presence of CXCR4 mutations, according to the results of a large, single-center retrospective study.
Further, successfully treating Waldenström macroglobulinemia often resolves acquired VWD, and the depth of treatment response predicts the degree of improvement, Jorge J. Castillo, MD, and his associates wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Acquired VWD is an uncommon, poorly understood presentation of Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Because affected patients require treatment, better characterizing this subgroup is important, the investigators noted.
At the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, the researchers retrospectively studied 320 individuals with newly diagnosed Waldenström macroglobulinemia and used logistic regression analysis to seek predictors of acquired VWD, which they evaluated by measuring levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII. Levels under 30% were considered VWD and levels between 30% and 50% were considered low-level VWD.
In all, 49 individuals had acquired VWD while 271 patients did not. These two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, hemoglobin level, platelet count, and bone marrow involvement. However, 45% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL versus 6% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001), and 47% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 versus 31% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001). Also, 77% of patients with acquired VWD tested positive for CXCR4 mutation versus 37% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001).
A significantly higher proportion of patients without acquired VWD had white blood cell concentrations above 6,000/mcL (29% vs. 50%; P = .006). This finding lost statistical significance in the logistic regression model, but all the other variables remained significantly associated. Serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL conferred a 55-fold increase in the odds of having acquired VWD (95% confidence interval, 17-177; P less than .001), and serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 mg/dL led to an 11-fold increase in these odds (95% CI, 4-34). The presence of CXCR4 mutations was associated with a sixfold increased odds of acquired VWD (95% CI, 2-15). The P value for each of these three associations was at or below .001.
Therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia led to statistically significant increases in levels of factor VIII, VW factor antigen, and VW factor activity (P less than .001) and the median of each level improved by at least 35% after treatment. After treatment, 78% of patients with acquired VWD had levels of all three measures above 50% (versus 0% before treatment; P less than .001). Patients with acquired VWD with the best responses to treatment had about a 90% decrease in IgM levels, while those with a partial response had about a two-thirds decrease and patients with stable disease had about a 20% decrease. A linear regression model confirmed that depth of treatment response, based on change in IgM level, correlated with degree of improvement in VWD – that is, the extent of improvement in levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII.
No external funding sources were reported. Dr. Castillo disclosed consulting ties and research funding from Pharmacyclics and Janssen, and research funding from Millenium and Abbvie.
SOURCE: Castillo J, et al. ASH 2017 Abstract 1088.
ATLANTA – Waldenström macroglobulinemia can present as acquired von Willebrand disease (VWD), and when it does, the finding strongly correlates with high serum IgM levels and the presence of CXCR4 mutations, according to the results of a large, single-center retrospective study.
Further, successfully treating Waldenström macroglobulinemia often resolves acquired VWD, and the depth of treatment response predicts the degree of improvement, Jorge J. Castillo, MD, and his associates wrote in a poster presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.
Acquired VWD is an uncommon, poorly understood presentation of Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Because affected patients require treatment, better characterizing this subgroup is important, the investigators noted.
At the Bing Center for Waldenström Macroglobulinemia at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, the researchers retrospectively studied 320 individuals with newly diagnosed Waldenström macroglobulinemia and used logistic regression analysis to seek predictors of acquired VWD, which they evaluated by measuring levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII. Levels under 30% were considered VWD and levels between 30% and 50% were considered low-level VWD.
In all, 49 individuals had acquired VWD while 271 patients did not. These two groups were similar in terms of age, sex, hemoglobin level, platelet count, and bone marrow involvement. However, 45% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL versus 6% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001), and 47% of patients with acquired VWD had serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 versus 31% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001). Also, 77% of patients with acquired VWD tested positive for CXCR4 mutation versus 37% of patients without acquired VWD (P less than .001).
A significantly higher proportion of patients without acquired VWD had white blood cell concentrations above 6,000/mcL (29% vs. 50%; P = .006). This finding lost statistical significance in the logistic regression model, but all the other variables remained significantly associated. Serum IgM levels above 6,000 mg/dL conferred a 55-fold increase in the odds of having acquired VWD (95% confidence interval, 17-177; P less than .001), and serum IgM levels between 3,000 and 5,999 mg/dL led to an 11-fold increase in these odds (95% CI, 4-34). The presence of CXCR4 mutations was associated with a sixfold increased odds of acquired VWD (95% CI, 2-15). The P value for each of these three associations was at or below .001.
Therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia led to statistically significant increases in levels of factor VIII, VW factor antigen, and VW factor activity (P less than .001) and the median of each level improved by at least 35% after treatment. After treatment, 78% of patients with acquired VWD had levels of all three measures above 50% (versus 0% before treatment; P less than .001). Patients with acquired VWD with the best responses to treatment had about a 90% decrease in IgM levels, while those with a partial response had about a two-thirds decrease and patients with stable disease had about a 20% decrease. A linear regression model confirmed that depth of treatment response, based on change in IgM level, correlated with degree of improvement in VWD – that is, the extent of improvement in levels of VW factor antigen, VW factor activity, and factor VIII.
No external funding sources were reported. Dr. Castillo disclosed consulting ties and research funding from Pharmacyclics and Janssen, and research funding from Millenium and Abbvie.
SOURCE: Castillo J, et al. ASH 2017 Abstract 1088.
AT ASH 2017
Key clinical point: Successfully treating Waldenström macroglobulinemia often resolves acquired von Willebrand disease.
Major finding: Therapy for Waldenström macroglobulinemia led to statistically significant increases in levels of factor VIII, VW factor antigen, and VW factor activity (P less than .001) and the median of each level improved by at least 35% after treatment.
Data source: A single-center retrospective study of 320 patients with newly diagnosed Waldenström macroglobulinemia.
Disclosures: No external funding sources were reported. Dr. Castillo disclosed consultancy and research funding from Pharmacyclics and Janssen. He also disclosed research funding from Millenium and Abbvie.
Source: Castillo J, et al. ASH 2017 Abstract 1088.
Chemo-free combo should be option for rel/ref CLL, doc says
ATLANTA—The combination of venetoclax and rituximab (VR) should be a standard treatment option for adults with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to a speaker at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting.
Data from the phase 3 MURANO study showed that patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received VR had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than those who received bendamustine and rituximab (BR).
In addition, “secondary endpoints were consistently in favor of venetoclax-rituximab,” said study investigator John F. Seymour, MBBS, PhD, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Adverse events (AEs) were largely consistent with the known safety profiles of the drugs studied, but tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was infrequent and occurred at a similar frequency in both treatment arms.
“Thus, overall, I believe venetoclax and rituximab should be considered as a suitable standard therapeutic option in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL,” Dr Seymour said.
It is important to note, however, that patients in the VR arm of this study could receive venetoclax for up to 2 years, whereas patients in the BR arm received study treatment for a maximum of six 28-day cycles.
Dr Seymour presented results from MURANO as a late-breaking abstract at ASH (LBA-2). The study was sponsored by Hoffman-La Roche and AbbVie.
MURANO enrolled 389 CLL patients who had received 1 to 3 prior therapies. Patients were randomized to receive VR (n=194) or BR (n=195). Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms.
In both arms, patients received a single monthly dose of rituximab for 6 cycles. The first dose was 375 mg/m2, and all subsequent doses were 500 mg/m2.
In the VR arm, patients received a 4-week or 5-week dose ramp-up of venetoclax from 20 mg to 400 mg daily. This was intended to mitigate the risk of TLS, which has been observed in previous studies of venetoclax.
Patients in the VR arm continued with daily venetoclax at 400 mg for a maximum of 2 years or until disease progression or cessation due to toxicity. They started receiving rituximab after the ramp-up period (at week 6).
In the BR arm, patients received bendamustine at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle for 6 cycles. Patients could proceed to subsequent therapy if they progressed.
The median follow-up was 23.8 months (range, 0-37.4 months).
Twenty-five percent of patients in the VR arm and 17% in the BR arm discontinued treatment ahead of schedule. Reasons for discontinuation (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were disease progression (5% and 3%), AEs (12% and 6%), death (1% and 2%), and “other” (6% and 7%).
Survival
The study’s primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. PFS according to an independent review committee (IRC) was a secondary endpoint.
According to investigators, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 17.0 months in the BR arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.17, P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 18.1 months in the BR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the estimated PFS at 24 months was 84.9% in the VR arm and 36.3% in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the 24-month PFS was 82.8% and 37.4%, respectively.
The benefit with VR was consistent across subgroups. Patients had a PFS benefit regardless of their number of prior therapies, deletion 17p status, TP53 mutational status, baseline IGHV mutational status, and whether they had relapsed or refractory disease.
Dr Seymour acknowledged that the differences in treatment duration between the BR and VR arms may have affected the interpretation of these results.
“[T]he treatment duration differed, although, of course, the capacity to deliver more than 6 cycles of bendamustine-rituximab would have been problematic,” he said. “There is some data that antibody treatment may prolong progression-free survival. However, when this study was designed, in 2013, that data was certainly not available. And I believe, currently, maintenance antibody is not an accepted standard of treatment.”
The median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either treatment arm. The 1-year OS rate was 95.9% in the VR arm and 91.1% in the BR arm. The 2-year OS rate was 91.9% and 86.6%, respectively (HR=0.48, P=0.0186).
“[W]ith median follow-up of just on 2 years, there is already a clinically meaningful difference [in OS between the treatment arms],” Dr Seymour said.
“This is not attributable to any difference in availability of novel therapies. Of the 54 patients who received subsequent therapy after progression on the bendamustine-rituximab arm, 40 of those received novel targeted agents.”
Response and MRD
According to investigators, the overall response rate was 93.3% (181/194) in the VR arm and 67.7% (312/195) in the BR arm (P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the overall response rate was 92.3% (179/194) and 72.3% (141/195), respectively (P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the rate of complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) was 26.8% (n=52) in the VR arm and 8.2% (n=16) in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the CR/CRi rate was 8.2% (n=16) and 3.6% (n=7), respectively.
Dr Seymour acknowledged the differences in CR/CRi between investigator and IRC assessments. He said 28 of the 42 discrepancies in the VR arm “were attributable to residual CT scan nodal abnormalities in the 16- to 30-mm size.” However, he also noted that 88% of these patients were negative for minimal residual disease (MRD) in the peripheral blood at that time point.
MRD was assessed every 3 months. Patients were counted as MRD-positive if they were positive by either allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction or multicolor flow cytometry. Patients were also counted as MRD-positive if there was a failure to collect a sample.
The proportion of patients who were MRD-negative in the VR and BR arms, respectively, was:
- 45% and 6% at 4 months
- 62% and 13% at 9 months
- 60% and 10% at 12 months
- 57% and 9% at 15 months
- 60% and 5% at 18 months.
Dr Seymour pointed out that 65 patients in the VR arm surpassed the maximum treatment duration for venetoclax (2 years) and therefore stopped receiving the drug, but only 12 of these patients have follow-up beyond 3 months.
“So information about the durability of response after cessation remains immature at the moment,” he said.
Safety
All patients in the VR arm and 98% in the BR arm had at least 1 AE. The rate of serious AEs was 46% and 43%, respectively. The rate of grade 3/4 AEs was 82% and 70%, respectively.
Grade 3/4 AEs with at least a 2% difference in incidence between the treatment arms (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were neutropenia (58% and 39%), anemia (11% and 14%), thrombocytopenia (6% and 10%), febrile neutropenia (4% and 10%), pneumonia (5% and 8%), infusion-related reactions (2% and 5%), TLS (3% and 1%), hypotension (0% and 3%), hyperglycemia (2% and 0%), and hypogammaglobulinemia (2% and 0%).
The rate of grade 5 AEs was 5% in the VR arm and 6% in the BR arm.
Grade 5 AEs in the VR arm were pneumonia (n=3), sepsis (n=1), cardiac failure (n=1), myocardial infarction (n=1), sudden cardiac death (n=1), colorectal cancer (n=1), status epilepticus (n=1), and acute respiratory failure (n=1).
Grade 5 AEs in the BR arm included sepsis (n=2), lung cancer (n=2), Listeria sepsis (n=1), Scedosporium infection (n=1), lymphoma (n=1), hemorrhagic stroke (n=1), pulmonary embolism (n=1), acute myeloid leukemia (n=1), and sudden death (n=1).
ATLANTA—The combination of venetoclax and rituximab (VR) should be a standard treatment option for adults with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to a speaker at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting.
Data from the phase 3 MURANO study showed that patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received VR had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than those who received bendamustine and rituximab (BR).
In addition, “secondary endpoints were consistently in favor of venetoclax-rituximab,” said study investigator John F. Seymour, MBBS, PhD, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Adverse events (AEs) were largely consistent with the known safety profiles of the drugs studied, but tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was infrequent and occurred at a similar frequency in both treatment arms.
“Thus, overall, I believe venetoclax and rituximab should be considered as a suitable standard therapeutic option in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL,” Dr Seymour said.
It is important to note, however, that patients in the VR arm of this study could receive venetoclax for up to 2 years, whereas patients in the BR arm received study treatment for a maximum of six 28-day cycles.
Dr Seymour presented results from MURANO as a late-breaking abstract at ASH (LBA-2). The study was sponsored by Hoffman-La Roche and AbbVie.
MURANO enrolled 389 CLL patients who had received 1 to 3 prior therapies. Patients were randomized to receive VR (n=194) or BR (n=195). Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms.
In both arms, patients received a single monthly dose of rituximab for 6 cycles. The first dose was 375 mg/m2, and all subsequent doses were 500 mg/m2.
In the VR arm, patients received a 4-week or 5-week dose ramp-up of venetoclax from 20 mg to 400 mg daily. This was intended to mitigate the risk of TLS, which has been observed in previous studies of venetoclax.
Patients in the VR arm continued with daily venetoclax at 400 mg for a maximum of 2 years or until disease progression or cessation due to toxicity. They started receiving rituximab after the ramp-up period (at week 6).
In the BR arm, patients received bendamustine at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle for 6 cycles. Patients could proceed to subsequent therapy if they progressed.
The median follow-up was 23.8 months (range, 0-37.4 months).
Twenty-five percent of patients in the VR arm and 17% in the BR arm discontinued treatment ahead of schedule. Reasons for discontinuation (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were disease progression (5% and 3%), AEs (12% and 6%), death (1% and 2%), and “other” (6% and 7%).
Survival
The study’s primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. PFS according to an independent review committee (IRC) was a secondary endpoint.
According to investigators, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 17.0 months in the BR arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.17, P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 18.1 months in the BR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the estimated PFS at 24 months was 84.9% in the VR arm and 36.3% in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the 24-month PFS was 82.8% and 37.4%, respectively.
The benefit with VR was consistent across subgroups. Patients had a PFS benefit regardless of their number of prior therapies, deletion 17p status, TP53 mutational status, baseline IGHV mutational status, and whether they had relapsed or refractory disease.
Dr Seymour acknowledged that the differences in treatment duration between the BR and VR arms may have affected the interpretation of these results.
“[T]he treatment duration differed, although, of course, the capacity to deliver more than 6 cycles of bendamustine-rituximab would have been problematic,” he said. “There is some data that antibody treatment may prolong progression-free survival. However, when this study was designed, in 2013, that data was certainly not available. And I believe, currently, maintenance antibody is not an accepted standard of treatment.”
The median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either treatment arm. The 1-year OS rate was 95.9% in the VR arm and 91.1% in the BR arm. The 2-year OS rate was 91.9% and 86.6%, respectively (HR=0.48, P=0.0186).
“[W]ith median follow-up of just on 2 years, there is already a clinically meaningful difference [in OS between the treatment arms],” Dr Seymour said.
“This is not attributable to any difference in availability of novel therapies. Of the 54 patients who received subsequent therapy after progression on the bendamustine-rituximab arm, 40 of those received novel targeted agents.”
Response and MRD
According to investigators, the overall response rate was 93.3% (181/194) in the VR arm and 67.7% (312/195) in the BR arm (P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the overall response rate was 92.3% (179/194) and 72.3% (141/195), respectively (P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the rate of complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) was 26.8% (n=52) in the VR arm and 8.2% (n=16) in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the CR/CRi rate was 8.2% (n=16) and 3.6% (n=7), respectively.
Dr Seymour acknowledged the differences in CR/CRi between investigator and IRC assessments. He said 28 of the 42 discrepancies in the VR arm “were attributable to residual CT scan nodal abnormalities in the 16- to 30-mm size.” However, he also noted that 88% of these patients were negative for minimal residual disease (MRD) in the peripheral blood at that time point.
MRD was assessed every 3 months. Patients were counted as MRD-positive if they were positive by either allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction or multicolor flow cytometry. Patients were also counted as MRD-positive if there was a failure to collect a sample.
The proportion of patients who were MRD-negative in the VR and BR arms, respectively, was:
- 45% and 6% at 4 months
- 62% and 13% at 9 months
- 60% and 10% at 12 months
- 57% and 9% at 15 months
- 60% and 5% at 18 months.
Dr Seymour pointed out that 65 patients in the VR arm surpassed the maximum treatment duration for venetoclax (2 years) and therefore stopped receiving the drug, but only 12 of these patients have follow-up beyond 3 months.
“So information about the durability of response after cessation remains immature at the moment,” he said.
Safety
All patients in the VR arm and 98% in the BR arm had at least 1 AE. The rate of serious AEs was 46% and 43%, respectively. The rate of grade 3/4 AEs was 82% and 70%, respectively.
Grade 3/4 AEs with at least a 2% difference in incidence between the treatment arms (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were neutropenia (58% and 39%), anemia (11% and 14%), thrombocytopenia (6% and 10%), febrile neutropenia (4% and 10%), pneumonia (5% and 8%), infusion-related reactions (2% and 5%), TLS (3% and 1%), hypotension (0% and 3%), hyperglycemia (2% and 0%), and hypogammaglobulinemia (2% and 0%).
The rate of grade 5 AEs was 5% in the VR arm and 6% in the BR arm.
Grade 5 AEs in the VR arm were pneumonia (n=3), sepsis (n=1), cardiac failure (n=1), myocardial infarction (n=1), sudden cardiac death (n=1), colorectal cancer (n=1), status epilepticus (n=1), and acute respiratory failure (n=1).
Grade 5 AEs in the BR arm included sepsis (n=2), lung cancer (n=2), Listeria sepsis (n=1), Scedosporium infection (n=1), lymphoma (n=1), hemorrhagic stroke (n=1), pulmonary embolism (n=1), acute myeloid leukemia (n=1), and sudden death (n=1).
ATLANTA—The combination of venetoclax and rituximab (VR) should be a standard treatment option for adults with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), according to a speaker at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting.
Data from the phase 3 MURANO study showed that patients with relapsed/refractory CLL who received VR had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) than those who received bendamustine and rituximab (BR).
In addition, “secondary endpoints were consistently in favor of venetoclax-rituximab,” said study investigator John F. Seymour, MBBS, PhD, of Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Adverse events (AEs) were largely consistent with the known safety profiles of the drugs studied, but tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was infrequent and occurred at a similar frequency in both treatment arms.
“Thus, overall, I believe venetoclax and rituximab should be considered as a suitable standard therapeutic option in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL,” Dr Seymour said.
It is important to note, however, that patients in the VR arm of this study could receive venetoclax for up to 2 years, whereas patients in the BR arm received study treatment for a maximum of six 28-day cycles.
Dr Seymour presented results from MURANO as a late-breaking abstract at ASH (LBA-2). The study was sponsored by Hoffman-La Roche and AbbVie.
MURANO enrolled 389 CLL patients who had received 1 to 3 prior therapies. Patients were randomized to receive VR (n=194) or BR (n=195). Baseline characteristics were similar between the treatment arms.
In both arms, patients received a single monthly dose of rituximab for 6 cycles. The first dose was 375 mg/m2, and all subsequent doses were 500 mg/m2.
In the VR arm, patients received a 4-week or 5-week dose ramp-up of venetoclax from 20 mg to 400 mg daily. This was intended to mitigate the risk of TLS, which has been observed in previous studies of venetoclax.
Patients in the VR arm continued with daily venetoclax at 400 mg for a maximum of 2 years or until disease progression or cessation due to toxicity. They started receiving rituximab after the ramp-up period (at week 6).
In the BR arm, patients received bendamustine at 70 mg/m2 on days 1 and 2 of each 28-day cycle for 6 cycles. Patients could proceed to subsequent therapy if they progressed.
The median follow-up was 23.8 months (range, 0-37.4 months).
Twenty-five percent of patients in the VR arm and 17% in the BR arm discontinued treatment ahead of schedule. Reasons for discontinuation (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were disease progression (5% and 3%), AEs (12% and 6%), death (1% and 2%), and “other” (6% and 7%).
Survival
The study’s primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. PFS according to an independent review committee (IRC) was a secondary endpoint.
According to investigators, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 17.0 months in the BR arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.17, P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the median PFS was not reached in the VR arm and was 18.1 months in the BR arm (HR=0.17, P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the estimated PFS at 24 months was 84.9% in the VR arm and 36.3% in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the 24-month PFS was 82.8% and 37.4%, respectively.
The benefit with VR was consistent across subgroups. Patients had a PFS benefit regardless of their number of prior therapies, deletion 17p status, TP53 mutational status, baseline IGHV mutational status, and whether they had relapsed or refractory disease.
Dr Seymour acknowledged that the differences in treatment duration between the BR and VR arms may have affected the interpretation of these results.
“[T]he treatment duration differed, although, of course, the capacity to deliver more than 6 cycles of bendamustine-rituximab would have been problematic,” he said. “There is some data that antibody treatment may prolong progression-free survival. However, when this study was designed, in 2013, that data was certainly not available. And I believe, currently, maintenance antibody is not an accepted standard of treatment.”
The median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either treatment arm. The 1-year OS rate was 95.9% in the VR arm and 91.1% in the BR arm. The 2-year OS rate was 91.9% and 86.6%, respectively (HR=0.48, P=0.0186).
“[W]ith median follow-up of just on 2 years, there is already a clinically meaningful difference [in OS between the treatment arms],” Dr Seymour said.
“This is not attributable to any difference in availability of novel therapies. Of the 54 patients who received subsequent therapy after progression on the bendamustine-rituximab arm, 40 of those received novel targeted agents.”
Response and MRD
According to investigators, the overall response rate was 93.3% (181/194) in the VR arm and 67.7% (312/195) in the BR arm (P<0.0001). According to the IRC, the overall response rate was 92.3% (179/194) and 72.3% (141/195), respectively (P<0.0001).
According to investigators, the rate of complete response (CR) or CR with incomplete marrow recovery (CRi) was 26.8% (n=52) in the VR arm and 8.2% (n=16) in the BR arm. According to the IRC, the CR/CRi rate was 8.2% (n=16) and 3.6% (n=7), respectively.
Dr Seymour acknowledged the differences in CR/CRi between investigator and IRC assessments. He said 28 of the 42 discrepancies in the VR arm “were attributable to residual CT scan nodal abnormalities in the 16- to 30-mm size.” However, he also noted that 88% of these patients were negative for minimal residual disease (MRD) in the peripheral blood at that time point.
MRD was assessed every 3 months. Patients were counted as MRD-positive if they were positive by either allele-specific oligonucleotide polymerase chain reaction or multicolor flow cytometry. Patients were also counted as MRD-positive if there was a failure to collect a sample.
The proportion of patients who were MRD-negative in the VR and BR arms, respectively, was:
- 45% and 6% at 4 months
- 62% and 13% at 9 months
- 60% and 10% at 12 months
- 57% and 9% at 15 months
- 60% and 5% at 18 months.
Dr Seymour pointed out that 65 patients in the VR arm surpassed the maximum treatment duration for venetoclax (2 years) and therefore stopped receiving the drug, but only 12 of these patients have follow-up beyond 3 months.
“So information about the durability of response after cessation remains immature at the moment,” he said.
Safety
All patients in the VR arm and 98% in the BR arm had at least 1 AE. The rate of serious AEs was 46% and 43%, respectively. The rate of grade 3/4 AEs was 82% and 70%, respectively.
Grade 3/4 AEs with at least a 2% difference in incidence between the treatment arms (in the VR and BR arms, respectively) were neutropenia (58% and 39%), anemia (11% and 14%), thrombocytopenia (6% and 10%), febrile neutropenia (4% and 10%), pneumonia (5% and 8%), infusion-related reactions (2% and 5%), TLS (3% and 1%), hypotension (0% and 3%), hyperglycemia (2% and 0%), and hypogammaglobulinemia (2% and 0%).
The rate of grade 5 AEs was 5% in the VR arm and 6% in the BR arm.
Grade 5 AEs in the VR arm were pneumonia (n=3), sepsis (n=1), cardiac failure (n=1), myocardial infarction (n=1), sudden cardiac death (n=1), colorectal cancer (n=1), status epilepticus (n=1), and acute respiratory failure (n=1).
Grade 5 AEs in the BR arm included sepsis (n=2), lung cancer (n=2), Listeria sepsis (n=1), Scedosporium infection (n=1), lymphoma (n=1), hemorrhagic stroke (n=1), pulmonary embolism (n=1), acute myeloid leukemia (n=1), and sudden death (n=1).
Risk stratification may be possible with JCAR017
ATLANTA—Data suggest a therapeutic window may exist for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell expansion with JCAR017, according to a preliminary model.
In a core set of 67 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who had received JCAR017 in the TRANSCEND NHL 001 trial, investigators observed that baseline high tumor burden and inflammatory biomarkers were associated with high CAR T-cell expansion and increased rates of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity.
If the model holds up, researchers say they could potentially identify patients at risk for low or high T-cell expansion levels and develop a strategy to enhance or limit the expansion.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 (NCT02631044) is a multicenter, phase 1 trial in relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma evaluating 2 dose levels of JCAR017, also known as lisocabtagene maraleucel, or liso-cel for short.
Liso-cel is a CD19-directed 4-1BB CAR T cell administered at precise doses of CD4+ and CD8+ CAR T cells. It had previously demonstrated high complete remission (CR) rates and low incidences of CRS and neurotoxicity.
Tanya Saddiqi, MD, of City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, California, presented data from the dose-finding and expansion cohorts at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 193*).
Study design
Patients with DLBCL after 2 lines of prior therapy or mantle cell lymphoma after 1 prior line of therapy were eligible to enroll in TRANSCEND NHL 001.
Patients with de novo DLBCL, those who transformed from follicular lymphoma, or those with high-grade B-cell lymphoma made up the pivotal or core population. All DLBCL patients enrolled on the trial comprised the full population.
Patients were screened, enrolled, and underwent apheresis. Bridging therapy was permitted while their CAR T cells were being manufactured.
Patients then had a PET scan and lab tests prior to lymphodepletion.
“This is the time point of our interest,” Dr Saddiqi said, “to see if there are any patient characteristics or biomarkers that we can identify . . . that could help us figure out which patients are at higher risk of toxicity, potentially.”
Lymphodepletion consisted of fludarabine (30 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 for 3 days).
Patients received the JCAR017 infusion, and, at specific time points thereafter, cytokine, pharmacokinetic (PK), and clinical lab evaluations were conducted. PK evaluation and scans were performed every 3 months for the first year after JCAR017 infusion, and safety and viral vector follow-up for 15 years.
Dose levels were 5 x 107 cells as a single or double dose (DL1S) and 1 x 108 cells as a single dose (DL2S). Dose level 2 was chosen for further study, and double dosing was discontinued.
“Double dosing was actually not pursued further,” Dr Saddiqi explained, “because it did not seem to add any benefit over single dosing.”
At the time of the presentation, 91 total patients were treated, 67 of whom were the core population.
Results
Dr Saddiqi reported that patients treated with JCAR017 achieved a relatively high best overall response rate (ORR) and high durable CR rates.
“And this seems to be especially true for the core set of patients and particularly for patients at dose level 2,” she added.
At all dose levels, the core patients had a best ORR of 84% (41/49) and a CR rate of 61% (30/49).
At follow-up of 3 months or longer, the core group had an ORR of 65% (26/40) for all dose levels, 52% (11/21) for dose level 1, and 80% (12/15) for dose level 2.
The 3-month CR rate was 53% (21/40) for all dose levels in the core group, 33% (7/21) in dose level 1, and 73% (11/15) in dose level 2.
Dr Saddiqi noted that CRS and neurotoxicity did not differ by dose level or schedule, and there were no grade 5 events of CRS or neurotoxicity.
“Among the core group, dose level change did not add to their toxicity,” she said. “And so the question is: Is it patient factors, is it tumor factors? What is it that is actually causing the toxicities in these patients?”
Dr Saddiqi focused the presentation on patient factors.
Patient factors
The data showed that tumor burden and lactose dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity.
Univariate analysis revealed that CRS and neurotoxicity were associated with a shorter time since diagnosis.
However, prior number of therapies, patient weight, and disease stage were not associated with CRS or neurotoxicity.
Investigators were able to identify preliminary risk boundaries. Core patients with high LDH levels (≥ 500 U/L) and sum of the products of diameters (SPD) ≥ 50 cm2 at baseline had an 8-fold increase in risk of CRS and neurotoxicity.
“Inversely, if these patients did not meet the cutoff for LDH or SPD,” Dr Saddiqi pointed out, “if they were lower than that, they have significantly lower CRS and neurotoxicity events.”
Investigators also observed that baseline markers of inflammation and inflammatory cytokines trended higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity. For CRS, this includes ferritin, C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-10, IL-15, IL-16, TNFα, and MIP-1β. For neurotoxicity, this includes ferritin, CRP, d-Dimer, IL-6, IL-15, TNFα, and MIP-1α.
The team also observed that tumor burden, baseline markers of inflammation, and inflammatory cytokines trended lower in core patients with durable responses.
“Interestingly, it’s inversely true that patients who did have these higher levels [of inflammation markers], and higher tumor burden, and higher LDH, actually were the ones that were either showing no response at 3 months or had lost their response by the 3-month assessment point,” Dr Saddiqi explained.
And in patients with higher baseline tumor burden and inflammatory cytokine levels, JCAR017 T-cell expansion trended higher.
“Some were deemed to be super expanders because their CAR T-cell levels were very high in their blood,” she added.
The investigators created a preliminary logistic model based on the data that suggests a therapeutic window might be able to limit toxicity and optimize efficacy.
The model indicates that patients with higher tumor burden, higher LDH, and higher inflammatory state at baseline seem to be the ones who are having more CRS and more neurotoxicity after CAR T-cell infusion.
“They are expanding their cells much more, yet their responses at 3 months seem to be affected adversely by this entire situation,” Dr Saddiqi said.
"One explanation, potentially, could be that these CAR T cells are seeing a lot of antigen when they go into the body. They have the perfect cytokine milieu to grow, expand, and go crazy in the body, if you will, and very quickly peter out as well because there’s T-cell exhaustion that happens rather rapidly and clinical responses are then then lost.”
The investigators believe that if they can identify those patients ahead of time who may be at risk of too high expansion or too low expansion of their CAR T cells, they may be able to find strategies to push expansion into the “sweet spot of CAR T-cell expansion and ultimately get the holy grail of having durable responses for all with minimal toxicity,” Dr Saddiqi concluded.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 is sponsored by Juno Therapeutics, Inc. Dr Saddiqi has served on a steering committee for JCAR017.
*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.
ATLANTA—Data suggest a therapeutic window may exist for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell expansion with JCAR017, according to a preliminary model.
In a core set of 67 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who had received JCAR017 in the TRANSCEND NHL 001 trial, investigators observed that baseline high tumor burden and inflammatory biomarkers were associated with high CAR T-cell expansion and increased rates of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity.
If the model holds up, researchers say they could potentially identify patients at risk for low or high T-cell expansion levels and develop a strategy to enhance or limit the expansion.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 (NCT02631044) is a multicenter, phase 1 trial in relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma evaluating 2 dose levels of JCAR017, also known as lisocabtagene maraleucel, or liso-cel for short.
Liso-cel is a CD19-directed 4-1BB CAR T cell administered at precise doses of CD4+ and CD8+ CAR T cells. It had previously demonstrated high complete remission (CR) rates and low incidences of CRS and neurotoxicity.
Tanya Saddiqi, MD, of City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, California, presented data from the dose-finding and expansion cohorts at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 193*).
Study design
Patients with DLBCL after 2 lines of prior therapy or mantle cell lymphoma after 1 prior line of therapy were eligible to enroll in TRANSCEND NHL 001.
Patients with de novo DLBCL, those who transformed from follicular lymphoma, or those with high-grade B-cell lymphoma made up the pivotal or core population. All DLBCL patients enrolled on the trial comprised the full population.
Patients were screened, enrolled, and underwent apheresis. Bridging therapy was permitted while their CAR T cells were being manufactured.
Patients then had a PET scan and lab tests prior to lymphodepletion.
“This is the time point of our interest,” Dr Saddiqi said, “to see if there are any patient characteristics or biomarkers that we can identify . . . that could help us figure out which patients are at higher risk of toxicity, potentially.”
Lymphodepletion consisted of fludarabine (30 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 for 3 days).
Patients received the JCAR017 infusion, and, at specific time points thereafter, cytokine, pharmacokinetic (PK), and clinical lab evaluations were conducted. PK evaluation and scans were performed every 3 months for the first year after JCAR017 infusion, and safety and viral vector follow-up for 15 years.
Dose levels were 5 x 107 cells as a single or double dose (DL1S) and 1 x 108 cells as a single dose (DL2S). Dose level 2 was chosen for further study, and double dosing was discontinued.
“Double dosing was actually not pursued further,” Dr Saddiqi explained, “because it did not seem to add any benefit over single dosing.”
At the time of the presentation, 91 total patients were treated, 67 of whom were the core population.
Results
Dr Saddiqi reported that patients treated with JCAR017 achieved a relatively high best overall response rate (ORR) and high durable CR rates.
“And this seems to be especially true for the core set of patients and particularly for patients at dose level 2,” she added.
At all dose levels, the core patients had a best ORR of 84% (41/49) and a CR rate of 61% (30/49).
At follow-up of 3 months or longer, the core group had an ORR of 65% (26/40) for all dose levels, 52% (11/21) for dose level 1, and 80% (12/15) for dose level 2.
The 3-month CR rate was 53% (21/40) for all dose levels in the core group, 33% (7/21) in dose level 1, and 73% (11/15) in dose level 2.
Dr Saddiqi noted that CRS and neurotoxicity did not differ by dose level or schedule, and there were no grade 5 events of CRS or neurotoxicity.
“Among the core group, dose level change did not add to their toxicity,” she said. “And so the question is: Is it patient factors, is it tumor factors? What is it that is actually causing the toxicities in these patients?”
Dr Saddiqi focused the presentation on patient factors.
Patient factors
The data showed that tumor burden and lactose dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity.
Univariate analysis revealed that CRS and neurotoxicity were associated with a shorter time since diagnosis.
However, prior number of therapies, patient weight, and disease stage were not associated with CRS or neurotoxicity.
Investigators were able to identify preliminary risk boundaries. Core patients with high LDH levels (≥ 500 U/L) and sum of the products of diameters (SPD) ≥ 50 cm2 at baseline had an 8-fold increase in risk of CRS and neurotoxicity.
“Inversely, if these patients did not meet the cutoff for LDH or SPD,” Dr Saddiqi pointed out, “if they were lower than that, they have significantly lower CRS and neurotoxicity events.”
Investigators also observed that baseline markers of inflammation and inflammatory cytokines trended higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity. For CRS, this includes ferritin, C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-10, IL-15, IL-16, TNFα, and MIP-1β. For neurotoxicity, this includes ferritin, CRP, d-Dimer, IL-6, IL-15, TNFα, and MIP-1α.
The team also observed that tumor burden, baseline markers of inflammation, and inflammatory cytokines trended lower in core patients with durable responses.
“Interestingly, it’s inversely true that patients who did have these higher levels [of inflammation markers], and higher tumor burden, and higher LDH, actually were the ones that were either showing no response at 3 months or had lost their response by the 3-month assessment point,” Dr Saddiqi explained.
And in patients with higher baseline tumor burden and inflammatory cytokine levels, JCAR017 T-cell expansion trended higher.
“Some were deemed to be super expanders because their CAR T-cell levels were very high in their blood,” she added.
The investigators created a preliminary logistic model based on the data that suggests a therapeutic window might be able to limit toxicity and optimize efficacy.
The model indicates that patients with higher tumor burden, higher LDH, and higher inflammatory state at baseline seem to be the ones who are having more CRS and more neurotoxicity after CAR T-cell infusion.
“They are expanding their cells much more, yet their responses at 3 months seem to be affected adversely by this entire situation,” Dr Saddiqi said.
"One explanation, potentially, could be that these CAR T cells are seeing a lot of antigen when they go into the body. They have the perfect cytokine milieu to grow, expand, and go crazy in the body, if you will, and very quickly peter out as well because there’s T-cell exhaustion that happens rather rapidly and clinical responses are then then lost.”
The investigators believe that if they can identify those patients ahead of time who may be at risk of too high expansion or too low expansion of their CAR T cells, they may be able to find strategies to push expansion into the “sweet spot of CAR T-cell expansion and ultimately get the holy grail of having durable responses for all with minimal toxicity,” Dr Saddiqi concluded.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 is sponsored by Juno Therapeutics, Inc. Dr Saddiqi has served on a steering committee for JCAR017.
*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.
ATLANTA—Data suggest a therapeutic window may exist for chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell expansion with JCAR017, according to a preliminary model.
In a core set of 67 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) who had received JCAR017 in the TRANSCEND NHL 001 trial, investigators observed that baseline high tumor burden and inflammatory biomarkers were associated with high CAR T-cell expansion and increased rates of cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and neurotoxicity.
If the model holds up, researchers say they could potentially identify patients at risk for low or high T-cell expansion levels and develop a strategy to enhance or limit the expansion.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 (NCT02631044) is a multicenter, phase 1 trial in relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma evaluating 2 dose levels of JCAR017, also known as lisocabtagene maraleucel, or liso-cel for short.
Liso-cel is a CD19-directed 4-1BB CAR T cell administered at precise doses of CD4+ and CD8+ CAR T cells. It had previously demonstrated high complete remission (CR) rates and low incidences of CRS and neurotoxicity.
Tanya Saddiqi, MD, of City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, California, presented data from the dose-finding and expansion cohorts at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 193*).
Study design
Patients with DLBCL after 2 lines of prior therapy or mantle cell lymphoma after 1 prior line of therapy were eligible to enroll in TRANSCEND NHL 001.
Patients with de novo DLBCL, those who transformed from follicular lymphoma, or those with high-grade B-cell lymphoma made up the pivotal or core population. All DLBCL patients enrolled on the trial comprised the full population.
Patients were screened, enrolled, and underwent apheresis. Bridging therapy was permitted while their CAR T cells were being manufactured.
Patients then had a PET scan and lab tests prior to lymphodepletion.
“This is the time point of our interest,” Dr Saddiqi said, “to see if there are any patient characteristics or biomarkers that we can identify . . . that could help us figure out which patients are at higher risk of toxicity, potentially.”
Lymphodepletion consisted of fludarabine (30 mg/m2) and cyclophosphamide (300 mg/m2 for 3 days).
Patients received the JCAR017 infusion, and, at specific time points thereafter, cytokine, pharmacokinetic (PK), and clinical lab evaluations were conducted. PK evaluation and scans were performed every 3 months for the first year after JCAR017 infusion, and safety and viral vector follow-up for 15 years.
Dose levels were 5 x 107 cells as a single or double dose (DL1S) and 1 x 108 cells as a single dose (DL2S). Dose level 2 was chosen for further study, and double dosing was discontinued.
“Double dosing was actually not pursued further,” Dr Saddiqi explained, “because it did not seem to add any benefit over single dosing.”
At the time of the presentation, 91 total patients were treated, 67 of whom were the core population.
Results
Dr Saddiqi reported that patients treated with JCAR017 achieved a relatively high best overall response rate (ORR) and high durable CR rates.
“And this seems to be especially true for the core set of patients and particularly for patients at dose level 2,” she added.
At all dose levels, the core patients had a best ORR of 84% (41/49) and a CR rate of 61% (30/49).
At follow-up of 3 months or longer, the core group had an ORR of 65% (26/40) for all dose levels, 52% (11/21) for dose level 1, and 80% (12/15) for dose level 2.
The 3-month CR rate was 53% (21/40) for all dose levels in the core group, 33% (7/21) in dose level 1, and 73% (11/15) in dose level 2.
Dr Saddiqi noted that CRS and neurotoxicity did not differ by dose level or schedule, and there were no grade 5 events of CRS or neurotoxicity.
“Among the core group, dose level change did not add to their toxicity,” she said. “And so the question is: Is it patient factors, is it tumor factors? What is it that is actually causing the toxicities in these patients?”
Dr Saddiqi focused the presentation on patient factors.
Patient factors
The data showed that tumor burden and lactose dehydrogenase (LDH) levels were higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity.
Univariate analysis revealed that CRS and neurotoxicity were associated with a shorter time since diagnosis.
However, prior number of therapies, patient weight, and disease stage were not associated with CRS or neurotoxicity.
Investigators were able to identify preliminary risk boundaries. Core patients with high LDH levels (≥ 500 U/L) and sum of the products of diameters (SPD) ≥ 50 cm2 at baseline had an 8-fold increase in risk of CRS and neurotoxicity.
“Inversely, if these patients did not meet the cutoff for LDH or SPD,” Dr Saddiqi pointed out, “if they were lower than that, they have significantly lower CRS and neurotoxicity events.”
Investigators also observed that baseline markers of inflammation and inflammatory cytokines trended higher in patients with CRS and neurotoxicity. For CRS, this includes ferritin, C-reactive protein (CRP), IL-10, IL-15, IL-16, TNFα, and MIP-1β. For neurotoxicity, this includes ferritin, CRP, d-Dimer, IL-6, IL-15, TNFα, and MIP-1α.
The team also observed that tumor burden, baseline markers of inflammation, and inflammatory cytokines trended lower in core patients with durable responses.
“Interestingly, it’s inversely true that patients who did have these higher levels [of inflammation markers], and higher tumor burden, and higher LDH, actually were the ones that were either showing no response at 3 months or had lost their response by the 3-month assessment point,” Dr Saddiqi explained.
And in patients with higher baseline tumor burden and inflammatory cytokine levels, JCAR017 T-cell expansion trended higher.
“Some were deemed to be super expanders because their CAR T-cell levels were very high in their blood,” she added.
The investigators created a preliminary logistic model based on the data that suggests a therapeutic window might be able to limit toxicity and optimize efficacy.
The model indicates that patients with higher tumor burden, higher LDH, and higher inflammatory state at baseline seem to be the ones who are having more CRS and more neurotoxicity after CAR T-cell infusion.
“They are expanding their cells much more, yet their responses at 3 months seem to be affected adversely by this entire situation,” Dr Saddiqi said.
"One explanation, potentially, could be that these CAR T cells are seeing a lot of antigen when they go into the body. They have the perfect cytokine milieu to grow, expand, and go crazy in the body, if you will, and very quickly peter out as well because there’s T-cell exhaustion that happens rather rapidly and clinical responses are then then lost.”
The investigators believe that if they can identify those patients ahead of time who may be at risk of too high expansion or too low expansion of their CAR T cells, they may be able to find strategies to push expansion into the “sweet spot of CAR T-cell expansion and ultimately get the holy grail of having durable responses for all with minimal toxicity,” Dr Saddiqi concluded.
TRANSCEND NHL 001 is sponsored by Juno Therapeutics, Inc. Dr Saddiqi has served on a steering committee for JCAR017.
*Data in the presentation differ from the abstract.
Pembrolizumab sBLA receives priority review
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA).
With this sBLA, Merck is seeking approval for pembrolizumab to treat adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) or patients with PMBCL who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
The FDA expects to make a decision on the sBLA by April 3, 2018.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
Pembrolizumab is currently FDA-approved to treat classical Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, and gastric cancer.
The sBLA for pembrolizumab as a treatment for PMBCL is supported by the phase 2 KEYNOTE-170 trial. Results from this trial were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2833).
KEYNOTE-170 is an ongoing study in which researchers are evaluating pembrolizumab (given at a 200 mg fixed dose every 3 weeks) in patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL or relapsed/refractory Richter syndrome.
The PMBCL cohort enrolled patients who relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), were refractory to ASCT, or were ineligible for ASCT. Patients ineligible for ASCT had to have received 2 or more lines of prior therapy.
The median duration of follow-up was 10.5 months (range, 0.1-17.7).
In the efficacy population (n=29), the overall response rate was 41% (n=12), and the complete response rate was 24% (n=7).
The median time to response was 2.8 months (range, 2.4-5.5), and the median duration of response was not reached (range, 1.1+ to 13.6+ months).
Of the 53 patients evaluated for safety, 57% (n=30) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), including 21% (n=11) who experienced grade 3-4 TRAEs.
The most common TRAEs (occurring in at least 5% of patients) were neutropenia (n=11), hypothyroidism (n=4), asthenia (n=3), and pyrexia (n=3).
Immune-mediated adverse events of all grades occurred in 11% (n=6) of patients. These include hypothyroidism (n=4), hyperthyroidism (n=2), pneumonitis (n=1), and thyroiditis (n=1). There were no treatment-related deaths.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA).
With this sBLA, Merck is seeking approval for pembrolizumab to treat adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) or patients with PMBCL who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
The FDA expects to make a decision on the sBLA by April 3, 2018.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
Pembrolizumab is currently FDA-approved to treat classical Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, and gastric cancer.
The sBLA for pembrolizumab as a treatment for PMBCL is supported by the phase 2 KEYNOTE-170 trial. Results from this trial were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2833).
KEYNOTE-170 is an ongoing study in which researchers are evaluating pembrolizumab (given at a 200 mg fixed dose every 3 weeks) in patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL or relapsed/refractory Richter syndrome.
The PMBCL cohort enrolled patients who relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), were refractory to ASCT, or were ineligible for ASCT. Patients ineligible for ASCT had to have received 2 or more lines of prior therapy.
The median duration of follow-up was 10.5 months (range, 0.1-17.7).
In the efficacy population (n=29), the overall response rate was 41% (n=12), and the complete response rate was 24% (n=7).
The median time to response was 2.8 months (range, 2.4-5.5), and the median duration of response was not reached (range, 1.1+ to 13.6+ months).
Of the 53 patients evaluated for safety, 57% (n=30) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), including 21% (n=11) who experienced grade 3-4 TRAEs.
The most common TRAEs (occurring in at least 5% of patients) were neutropenia (n=11), hypothyroidism (n=4), asthenia (n=3), and pyrexia (n=3).
Immune-mediated adverse events of all grades occurred in 11% (n=6) of patients. These include hypothyroidism (n=4), hyperthyroidism (n=2), pneumonitis (n=1), and thyroiditis (n=1). There were no treatment-related deaths.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for the anti-PD-1 therapy pembrolizumab (KEYTRUDA).
With this sBLA, Merck is seeking approval for pembrolizumab to treat adult and pediatric patients with refractory primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) or patients with PMBCL who have relapsed after 2 or more prior lines of therapy.
The FDA expects to make a decision on the sBLA by April 3, 2018.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
Pembrolizumab is currently FDA-approved to treat classical Hodgkin lymphoma, melanoma, lung cancer, head and neck cancer, urothelial carcinoma, microsatellite instability-high cancer, and gastric cancer.
The sBLA for pembrolizumab as a treatment for PMBCL is supported by the phase 2 KEYNOTE-170 trial. Results from this trial were presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 2833).
KEYNOTE-170 is an ongoing study in which researchers are evaluating pembrolizumab (given at a 200 mg fixed dose every 3 weeks) in patients with relapsed/refractory PMBCL or relapsed/refractory Richter syndrome.
The PMBCL cohort enrolled patients who relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), were refractory to ASCT, or were ineligible for ASCT. Patients ineligible for ASCT had to have received 2 or more lines of prior therapy.
The median duration of follow-up was 10.5 months (range, 0.1-17.7).
In the efficacy population (n=29), the overall response rate was 41% (n=12), and the complete response rate was 24% (n=7).
The median time to response was 2.8 months (range, 2.4-5.5), and the median duration of response was not reached (range, 1.1+ to 13.6+ months).
Of the 53 patients evaluated for safety, 57% (n=30) experienced treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs), including 21% (n=11) who experienced grade 3-4 TRAEs.
The most common TRAEs (occurring in at least 5% of patients) were neutropenia (n=11), hypothyroidism (n=4), asthenia (n=3), and pyrexia (n=3).
Immune-mediated adverse events of all grades occurred in 11% (n=6) of patients. These include hypothyroidism (n=4), hyperthyroidism (n=2), pneumonitis (n=1), and thyroiditis (n=1). There were no treatment-related deaths.
*Data in the abstract differ from the presentation.
Primary analysis confirms interim findings of CTL019 in DLBCL
ATLANTA—The first chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved in the US to treat children and young adults with leukemia is also producing high response rates in lymphoma, according to investigators of the JULIET trial.
They reported that tisagenlecleucel (formerly CTL019) produced an overall response rate (ORR) of 53% and a complete response (CR) rate of 40% in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
Additionally, researchers say the stability in the response rate at 3 and 6 months—38% and 37%, respectively—indicates the durability of the therapy.
At 3 months, 32% of patients who achieved CR remained in CR. At 6 months, 30% remained in CR.
Researchers believe these results confirm the durable clinical benefit reported previously.
Stephen J. Schuster, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, presented the JULIET data at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 577).
“Only about half of relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients are eligible for transplant,” Dr Schuster said. “[O]f those patients, only about a half respond to salvage chemotherapy, and a significant number of patients relapse post-transplant. So there is really a large unmet need for these patients, and CAR T-cell therapy is a potential agent [for them].”
The JULIET trial was a global, single-arm, phase 2 trial evaluating tisagenlecleucel in DLBCL patients. Tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah™) consists of CAR T cells with a CD19 antigen-binding domain, a 4-1BB costimulatory domain, and a CD3-zeta signaling domain.
The trial was conducted at 27 sites in 10 countries across North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. There were 2 centralized manufacturing sites, one in Europe and one in the US.
Patients had to be 18 years or older, have had 2 or more prior lines of therapy for DLBCL, and have progressive disease or be ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT). They could not have had any prior anti-CD19 therapy, and they could not have any central nervous system involvement.
The primary endpoint was best ORR using Lugano criteria with assessment by an independent review committee. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, overall survival (OS), and safety.
Study design and enrollment
Patients were screened and underwent apheresis with cryopreservation of their leukapheresis products during screening, which “allowed for enrollment of all eligible patients,” Dr Schuster said.
Patients could receive bridging chemotherapy while they awaited the manufacture of the CAR T cells.
“What’s important to note is that, early on in the trial, there was a shortage of manufacturing capacity, and this led to a longer-than-anticipated interval between enrollment and treatment,” Dr Schuster said. “This interval decreased as manufacturing capacity improved throughout the trial.”
When their CAR T cells were ready, patients were restaged, lymphodepleted, and received the tisagenlecleucel infusion. The dose ranged from 0.6 x 108 to 6.0 x 108 CAR-positive T cells.
The infusion could be conducted on an inpatient or outpatient basis at the investigator’s discretion, Dr Schuster said.
As of the data cutoff in March 2017, investigators enrolled 147 patients and infused 99 with tisagenlecleucel.
Forty-three patients discontinued before infusion, 9 because of an inability to manufacture the T-cell product and 34 due to death (n=16), physician decision (n=12), patient decision (n=3), adverse event (n=2), and protocol deviation (n=1). Five patients were pending infusion.
There were 81 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up or earlier disease progression evaluable for response.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 22–76), and 23% were 65 or older. All had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, 80% had DLBCL, and 19% had transformed follicular lymphoma.
Fifteen percent had double or triple hits in CMYC, BCL2, and BCL6 genes, and 52% had germinal center B-cell type disease.
Forty-four percent had 2 prior lines of therapy, 31% had 3 prior lines of therapy, and 19% had 4 to 6 prior lines of therapy. All were either refractory to or relapsed from their last therapy.
Forty-seven percent had undergone prior auto-SCT.
Eighty-nine of the 99 patients infused with tisagenlecleucel received bridging therapy, and 92 received lymphodepleting therapy.
Twenty-six patients were infused as outpatients, and 20 remained as outpatients for 3 or more days after the infusion.
Efficacy
The trial met its primary endpoint with an ORR of 53% tested against the null hypothesis of 20% or less. Forty percent of patients achieved a CR, and 14% had a partial response.
The ORR was consistent across all subgroups, including age, sex, lines of prior antineoplastic therapy, cell of origin, and rearranged MYC/BCL2/BCL6.
“The durability of response, however, which is really the message, is shown by the stability between 3- and 6-month response rates, 38% and 37%, respectively,” Dr Schuster said. “The response rate at 3 months is really indicative of the long-term benefit of this treatment approach.”
The investigators observed no apparent relationship between tumor response at month 3 and dose. And they observed responses at all dose levels.
The very early response may be due, to a certain extent, to the chemotherapy, according to Dr Schuster.
“The effect of the T cells becomes evident as you follow these patients over time,” he said.
The median duration of response and overall response have not been reached. And 74% of patients were relapse-free at 6 months.
“Importantly, almost all the complete responders at month 3 remained in complete response,” Dr Schuster said.
Safety
Adverse events of special interest that occurred within 8 weeks of the infusion included:
- Cytokine release syndrome (CRS)—58% all grades, 15% grade 3, 8% grade 4
- Neurologic events—21% all grades, 8% grade 3, 4% grade 4
- Prolonged cytopenia—36% all grades, 15% grade 3, 12% grade 4
- Infections—34% all grades, 18% grade 3, 2% grade 4
- Febrile neutropenia—13% all grades, 11% grade 3, 2% grade 4
No deaths occurred due to tisagenlecleucel, CRS, or cerebral edema.
Fifty-seven patients developed CRS. The median time to onset of CRS was 3 days (range, 1–9), and the median duration of CRS was 7 days (range, 2–30).
Twenty-eight percent of patients developed hypotension that required intervention, 6% requiring high-dose vasopressors. Eight percent were intubated, and 16% received anticytokine therapy—15% with tocilizumab and 11% with corticosteroids.
Investigators did not observe a relationship between dose and neurological events. However, they did detect a higher probability of CRS with the higher doses of tisagenlecleucel.
They also noted that dose and exposure were independent.
Dr Schuster indicated that these data are the basis for global regulatory submissions.
Manufacture of tisagenlecleucel was centralized, and investigators believe the trial shows the feasibility of global distribution of CAR T-cell therapy using cryopreserved apheresis and centralized manufacturing.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals, the sponsor of the trial, is now able to commercially manufacture the CAR T cells in 22 days.
Dr Schuster disclosed research funding and consulting fees from Novartis and Celgene.
ATLANTA—The first chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved in the US to treat children and young adults with leukemia is also producing high response rates in lymphoma, according to investigators of the JULIET trial.
They reported that tisagenlecleucel (formerly CTL019) produced an overall response rate (ORR) of 53% and a complete response (CR) rate of 40% in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
Additionally, researchers say the stability in the response rate at 3 and 6 months—38% and 37%, respectively—indicates the durability of the therapy.
At 3 months, 32% of patients who achieved CR remained in CR. At 6 months, 30% remained in CR.
Researchers believe these results confirm the durable clinical benefit reported previously.
Stephen J. Schuster, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, presented the JULIET data at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 577).
“Only about half of relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients are eligible for transplant,” Dr Schuster said. “[O]f those patients, only about a half respond to salvage chemotherapy, and a significant number of patients relapse post-transplant. So there is really a large unmet need for these patients, and CAR T-cell therapy is a potential agent [for them].”
The JULIET trial was a global, single-arm, phase 2 trial evaluating tisagenlecleucel in DLBCL patients. Tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah™) consists of CAR T cells with a CD19 antigen-binding domain, a 4-1BB costimulatory domain, and a CD3-zeta signaling domain.
The trial was conducted at 27 sites in 10 countries across North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. There were 2 centralized manufacturing sites, one in Europe and one in the US.
Patients had to be 18 years or older, have had 2 or more prior lines of therapy for DLBCL, and have progressive disease or be ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT). They could not have had any prior anti-CD19 therapy, and they could not have any central nervous system involvement.
The primary endpoint was best ORR using Lugano criteria with assessment by an independent review committee. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, overall survival (OS), and safety.
Study design and enrollment
Patients were screened and underwent apheresis with cryopreservation of their leukapheresis products during screening, which “allowed for enrollment of all eligible patients,” Dr Schuster said.
Patients could receive bridging chemotherapy while they awaited the manufacture of the CAR T cells.
“What’s important to note is that, early on in the trial, there was a shortage of manufacturing capacity, and this led to a longer-than-anticipated interval between enrollment and treatment,” Dr Schuster said. “This interval decreased as manufacturing capacity improved throughout the trial.”
When their CAR T cells were ready, patients were restaged, lymphodepleted, and received the tisagenlecleucel infusion. The dose ranged from 0.6 x 108 to 6.0 x 108 CAR-positive T cells.
The infusion could be conducted on an inpatient or outpatient basis at the investigator’s discretion, Dr Schuster said.
As of the data cutoff in March 2017, investigators enrolled 147 patients and infused 99 with tisagenlecleucel.
Forty-three patients discontinued before infusion, 9 because of an inability to manufacture the T-cell product and 34 due to death (n=16), physician decision (n=12), patient decision (n=3), adverse event (n=2), and protocol deviation (n=1). Five patients were pending infusion.
There were 81 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up or earlier disease progression evaluable for response.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 22–76), and 23% were 65 or older. All had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, 80% had DLBCL, and 19% had transformed follicular lymphoma.
Fifteen percent had double or triple hits in CMYC, BCL2, and BCL6 genes, and 52% had germinal center B-cell type disease.
Forty-four percent had 2 prior lines of therapy, 31% had 3 prior lines of therapy, and 19% had 4 to 6 prior lines of therapy. All were either refractory to or relapsed from their last therapy.
Forty-seven percent had undergone prior auto-SCT.
Eighty-nine of the 99 patients infused with tisagenlecleucel received bridging therapy, and 92 received lymphodepleting therapy.
Twenty-six patients were infused as outpatients, and 20 remained as outpatients for 3 or more days after the infusion.
Efficacy
The trial met its primary endpoint with an ORR of 53% tested against the null hypothesis of 20% or less. Forty percent of patients achieved a CR, and 14% had a partial response.
The ORR was consistent across all subgroups, including age, sex, lines of prior antineoplastic therapy, cell of origin, and rearranged MYC/BCL2/BCL6.
“The durability of response, however, which is really the message, is shown by the stability between 3- and 6-month response rates, 38% and 37%, respectively,” Dr Schuster said. “The response rate at 3 months is really indicative of the long-term benefit of this treatment approach.”
The investigators observed no apparent relationship between tumor response at month 3 and dose. And they observed responses at all dose levels.
The very early response may be due, to a certain extent, to the chemotherapy, according to Dr Schuster.
“The effect of the T cells becomes evident as you follow these patients over time,” he said.
The median duration of response and overall response have not been reached. And 74% of patients were relapse-free at 6 months.
“Importantly, almost all the complete responders at month 3 remained in complete response,” Dr Schuster said.
Safety
Adverse events of special interest that occurred within 8 weeks of the infusion included:
- Cytokine release syndrome (CRS)—58% all grades, 15% grade 3, 8% grade 4
- Neurologic events—21% all grades, 8% grade 3, 4% grade 4
- Prolonged cytopenia—36% all grades, 15% grade 3, 12% grade 4
- Infections—34% all grades, 18% grade 3, 2% grade 4
- Febrile neutropenia—13% all grades, 11% grade 3, 2% grade 4
No deaths occurred due to tisagenlecleucel, CRS, or cerebral edema.
Fifty-seven patients developed CRS. The median time to onset of CRS was 3 days (range, 1–9), and the median duration of CRS was 7 days (range, 2–30).
Twenty-eight percent of patients developed hypotension that required intervention, 6% requiring high-dose vasopressors. Eight percent were intubated, and 16% received anticytokine therapy—15% with tocilizumab and 11% with corticosteroids.
Investigators did not observe a relationship between dose and neurological events. However, they did detect a higher probability of CRS with the higher doses of tisagenlecleucel.
They also noted that dose and exposure were independent.
Dr Schuster indicated that these data are the basis for global regulatory submissions.
Manufacture of tisagenlecleucel was centralized, and investigators believe the trial shows the feasibility of global distribution of CAR T-cell therapy using cryopreserved apheresis and centralized manufacturing.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals, the sponsor of the trial, is now able to commercially manufacture the CAR T cells in 22 days.
Dr Schuster disclosed research funding and consulting fees from Novartis and Celgene.
ATLANTA—The first chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy approved in the US to treat children and young adults with leukemia is also producing high response rates in lymphoma, according to investigators of the JULIET trial.
They reported that tisagenlecleucel (formerly CTL019) produced an overall response rate (ORR) of 53% and a complete response (CR) rate of 40% in patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
Additionally, researchers say the stability in the response rate at 3 and 6 months—38% and 37%, respectively—indicates the durability of the therapy.
At 3 months, 32% of patients who achieved CR remained in CR. At 6 months, 30% remained in CR.
Researchers believe these results confirm the durable clinical benefit reported previously.
Stephen J. Schuster, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia, presented the JULIET data at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 577).
“Only about half of relapsed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients are eligible for transplant,” Dr Schuster said. “[O]f those patients, only about a half respond to salvage chemotherapy, and a significant number of patients relapse post-transplant. So there is really a large unmet need for these patients, and CAR T-cell therapy is a potential agent [for them].”
The JULIET trial was a global, single-arm, phase 2 trial evaluating tisagenlecleucel in DLBCL patients. Tisagenlecleucel (Kymriah™) consists of CAR T cells with a CD19 antigen-binding domain, a 4-1BB costimulatory domain, and a CD3-zeta signaling domain.
The trial was conducted at 27 sites in 10 countries across North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. There were 2 centralized manufacturing sites, one in Europe and one in the US.
Patients had to be 18 years or older, have had 2 or more prior lines of therapy for DLBCL, and have progressive disease or be ineligible for autologous stem cell transplant (auto-SCT). They could not have had any prior anti-CD19 therapy, and they could not have any central nervous system involvement.
The primary endpoint was best ORR using Lugano criteria with assessment by an independent review committee. Secondary endpoints included duration of response, overall survival (OS), and safety.
Study design and enrollment
Patients were screened and underwent apheresis with cryopreservation of their leukapheresis products during screening, which “allowed for enrollment of all eligible patients,” Dr Schuster said.
Patients could receive bridging chemotherapy while they awaited the manufacture of the CAR T cells.
“What’s important to note is that, early on in the trial, there was a shortage of manufacturing capacity, and this led to a longer-than-anticipated interval between enrollment and treatment,” Dr Schuster said. “This interval decreased as manufacturing capacity improved throughout the trial.”
When their CAR T cells were ready, patients were restaged, lymphodepleted, and received the tisagenlecleucel infusion. The dose ranged from 0.6 x 108 to 6.0 x 108 CAR-positive T cells.
The infusion could be conducted on an inpatient or outpatient basis at the investigator’s discretion, Dr Schuster said.
As of the data cutoff in March 2017, investigators enrolled 147 patients and infused 99 with tisagenlecleucel.
Forty-three patients discontinued before infusion, 9 because of an inability to manufacture the T-cell product and 34 due to death (n=16), physician decision (n=12), patient decision (n=3), adverse event (n=2), and protocol deviation (n=1). Five patients were pending infusion.
There were 81 patients with at least 3 months of follow-up or earlier disease progression evaluable for response.
Patient characteristics
Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 22–76), and 23% were 65 or older. All had an ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, 80% had DLBCL, and 19% had transformed follicular lymphoma.
Fifteen percent had double or triple hits in CMYC, BCL2, and BCL6 genes, and 52% had germinal center B-cell type disease.
Forty-four percent had 2 prior lines of therapy, 31% had 3 prior lines of therapy, and 19% had 4 to 6 prior lines of therapy. All were either refractory to or relapsed from their last therapy.
Forty-seven percent had undergone prior auto-SCT.
Eighty-nine of the 99 patients infused with tisagenlecleucel received bridging therapy, and 92 received lymphodepleting therapy.
Twenty-six patients were infused as outpatients, and 20 remained as outpatients for 3 or more days after the infusion.
Efficacy
The trial met its primary endpoint with an ORR of 53% tested against the null hypothesis of 20% or less. Forty percent of patients achieved a CR, and 14% had a partial response.
The ORR was consistent across all subgroups, including age, sex, lines of prior antineoplastic therapy, cell of origin, and rearranged MYC/BCL2/BCL6.
“The durability of response, however, which is really the message, is shown by the stability between 3- and 6-month response rates, 38% and 37%, respectively,” Dr Schuster said. “The response rate at 3 months is really indicative of the long-term benefit of this treatment approach.”
The investigators observed no apparent relationship between tumor response at month 3 and dose. And they observed responses at all dose levels.
The very early response may be due, to a certain extent, to the chemotherapy, according to Dr Schuster.
“The effect of the T cells becomes evident as you follow these patients over time,” he said.
The median duration of response and overall response have not been reached. And 74% of patients were relapse-free at 6 months.
“Importantly, almost all the complete responders at month 3 remained in complete response,” Dr Schuster said.
Safety
Adverse events of special interest that occurred within 8 weeks of the infusion included:
- Cytokine release syndrome (CRS)—58% all grades, 15% grade 3, 8% grade 4
- Neurologic events—21% all grades, 8% grade 3, 4% grade 4
- Prolonged cytopenia—36% all grades, 15% grade 3, 12% grade 4
- Infections—34% all grades, 18% grade 3, 2% grade 4
- Febrile neutropenia—13% all grades, 11% grade 3, 2% grade 4
No deaths occurred due to tisagenlecleucel, CRS, or cerebral edema.
Fifty-seven patients developed CRS. The median time to onset of CRS was 3 days (range, 1–9), and the median duration of CRS was 7 days (range, 2–30).
Twenty-eight percent of patients developed hypotension that required intervention, 6% requiring high-dose vasopressors. Eight percent were intubated, and 16% received anticytokine therapy—15% with tocilizumab and 11% with corticosteroids.
Investigators did not observe a relationship between dose and neurological events. However, they did detect a higher probability of CRS with the higher doses of tisagenlecleucel.
They also noted that dose and exposure were independent.
Dr Schuster indicated that these data are the basis for global regulatory submissions.
Manufacture of tisagenlecleucel was centralized, and investigators believe the trial shows the feasibility of global distribution of CAR T-cell therapy using cryopreserved apheresis and centralized manufacturing.
Novartis Pharmaceuticals, the sponsor of the trial, is now able to commercially manufacture the CAR T cells in 22 days.
Dr Schuster disclosed research funding and consulting fees from Novartis and Celgene.
Providers endorse medical marijuana for kids with cancer
A survey of nearly 300 US medical providers revealed that many were open to helping children with cancer access medical marijuana (MM).
However, most of the providers surveyed did not know state-specific regulations pertaining to MM.
Providers who were legally eligible to certify (ETC) for MM were less open to endorsing its use.
The lack of standards on formulations, dosing, and potency of MM was identified as the greatest barrier to recommending MM for children with cancer.
Kelly Michelson, MD, of Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago in Illinois, and her colleagues reported these findings in Pediatrics.
The researchers used a 32-item survey to assess MM practices, knowledge, attitudes, and barriers for pediatric oncology providers in Illinois, Massachusetts, and Washington.
The survey was sent to providers at Dana-Farber/Boston Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Seattle Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, and Lurie Children’s Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders.
There were 288 respondents, and 33% were legally ETC for MM. Eighty-six percent of ETC providers were physicians, and 14% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants.
Of the non-ETC providers, 89% were nurses, 8% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants, 2% were psychosocial providers, and 2% were “other” providers.
Thirty percent of all providers said they had received at least 1 request for MM in the previous month. And 14% of these providers facilitated patient access to MM.
Ninety-two percent of providers said they were willing to help pediatric cancer patients access MM. Fifty-seven percent of providers approved of patients smoking MM, 89% approved of oral formulations, 67% approved of using MM as cancer-directed therapy, and 92% approved of using MM to manage symptoms.
Fifty-nine percent of providers knew that MM is against federal laws, and 86% knew that their state had legalized MM, but only 5% knew state-specific regulations.
ETC providers were less likely to report willingness to help patients access MM. These providers were also less likely to approve of MM use by smoking, oral formulations, as cancer-directed therapy, or to manage symptoms.
“It is not surprising that providers who are eligible to certify for medical marijuana were more cautious about recommending it, given that their licensure could be jeopardized due to federal prohibition,” Dr Michelson said.
“Institutional policies also may have influenced their attitudes. Lurie Children’s, for example, prohibits pediatric providers from facilitating medical marijuana access in accordance with the federal law, even though it is legal in Illinois.”
Most providers considered MM more permissible for use in children with advanced cancer or near the end of life than in earlier stages of cancer treatment. This is consistent with the current American Academy of Pediatrics position that sanctions MM use for “children with life-limiting or seriously debilitating conditions.”
Only 2% of providers reported that MM was never appropriate for a child with cancer.
Most providers (63%) were not concerned about substance abuse in children who receive MM or about being prosecuted for helping patients access MM (80%).
The greatest concern (listed by 46% of providers) was the absence of standards around prescribing MM to children with cancer.
“In addition to unclear dosage guidelines, the lack of high quality scientific data that medical marijuana benefits outweigh possible harm is a huge concern for providers accustomed to evidence-based practice,” Dr Michelson said. “We need rigorously designed clinical trials on the use of medical marijuana in children with cancer.”
A survey of nearly 300 US medical providers revealed that many were open to helping children with cancer access medical marijuana (MM).
However, most of the providers surveyed did not know state-specific regulations pertaining to MM.
Providers who were legally eligible to certify (ETC) for MM were less open to endorsing its use.
The lack of standards on formulations, dosing, and potency of MM was identified as the greatest barrier to recommending MM for children with cancer.
Kelly Michelson, MD, of Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago in Illinois, and her colleagues reported these findings in Pediatrics.
The researchers used a 32-item survey to assess MM practices, knowledge, attitudes, and barriers for pediatric oncology providers in Illinois, Massachusetts, and Washington.
The survey was sent to providers at Dana-Farber/Boston Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Seattle Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, and Lurie Children’s Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders.
There were 288 respondents, and 33% were legally ETC for MM. Eighty-six percent of ETC providers were physicians, and 14% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants.
Of the non-ETC providers, 89% were nurses, 8% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants, 2% were psychosocial providers, and 2% were “other” providers.
Thirty percent of all providers said they had received at least 1 request for MM in the previous month. And 14% of these providers facilitated patient access to MM.
Ninety-two percent of providers said they were willing to help pediatric cancer patients access MM. Fifty-seven percent of providers approved of patients smoking MM, 89% approved of oral formulations, 67% approved of using MM as cancer-directed therapy, and 92% approved of using MM to manage symptoms.
Fifty-nine percent of providers knew that MM is against federal laws, and 86% knew that their state had legalized MM, but only 5% knew state-specific regulations.
ETC providers were less likely to report willingness to help patients access MM. These providers were also less likely to approve of MM use by smoking, oral formulations, as cancer-directed therapy, or to manage symptoms.
“It is not surprising that providers who are eligible to certify for medical marijuana were more cautious about recommending it, given that their licensure could be jeopardized due to federal prohibition,” Dr Michelson said.
“Institutional policies also may have influenced their attitudes. Lurie Children’s, for example, prohibits pediatric providers from facilitating medical marijuana access in accordance with the federal law, even though it is legal in Illinois.”
Most providers considered MM more permissible for use in children with advanced cancer or near the end of life than in earlier stages of cancer treatment. This is consistent with the current American Academy of Pediatrics position that sanctions MM use for “children with life-limiting or seriously debilitating conditions.”
Only 2% of providers reported that MM was never appropriate for a child with cancer.
Most providers (63%) were not concerned about substance abuse in children who receive MM or about being prosecuted for helping patients access MM (80%).
The greatest concern (listed by 46% of providers) was the absence of standards around prescribing MM to children with cancer.
“In addition to unclear dosage guidelines, the lack of high quality scientific data that medical marijuana benefits outweigh possible harm is a huge concern for providers accustomed to evidence-based practice,” Dr Michelson said. “We need rigorously designed clinical trials on the use of medical marijuana in children with cancer.”
A survey of nearly 300 US medical providers revealed that many were open to helping children with cancer access medical marijuana (MM).
However, most of the providers surveyed did not know state-specific regulations pertaining to MM.
Providers who were legally eligible to certify (ETC) for MM were less open to endorsing its use.
The lack of standards on formulations, dosing, and potency of MM was identified as the greatest barrier to recommending MM for children with cancer.
Kelly Michelson, MD, of Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago in Illinois, and her colleagues reported these findings in Pediatrics.
The researchers used a 32-item survey to assess MM practices, knowledge, attitudes, and barriers for pediatric oncology providers in Illinois, Massachusetts, and Washington.
The survey was sent to providers at Dana-Farber/Boston Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, Seattle Children’s Cancer and Blood Disorders Center, and Lurie Children’s Center for Cancer and Blood Disorders.
There were 288 respondents, and 33% were legally ETC for MM. Eighty-six percent of ETC providers were physicians, and 14% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants.
Of the non-ETC providers, 89% were nurses, 8% were nurse practitioners or physician assistants, 2% were psychosocial providers, and 2% were “other” providers.
Thirty percent of all providers said they had received at least 1 request for MM in the previous month. And 14% of these providers facilitated patient access to MM.
Ninety-two percent of providers said they were willing to help pediatric cancer patients access MM. Fifty-seven percent of providers approved of patients smoking MM, 89% approved of oral formulations, 67% approved of using MM as cancer-directed therapy, and 92% approved of using MM to manage symptoms.
Fifty-nine percent of providers knew that MM is against federal laws, and 86% knew that their state had legalized MM, but only 5% knew state-specific regulations.
ETC providers were less likely to report willingness to help patients access MM. These providers were also less likely to approve of MM use by smoking, oral formulations, as cancer-directed therapy, or to manage symptoms.
“It is not surprising that providers who are eligible to certify for medical marijuana were more cautious about recommending it, given that their licensure could be jeopardized due to federal prohibition,” Dr Michelson said.
“Institutional policies also may have influenced their attitudes. Lurie Children’s, for example, prohibits pediatric providers from facilitating medical marijuana access in accordance with the federal law, even though it is legal in Illinois.”
Most providers considered MM more permissible for use in children with advanced cancer or near the end of life than in earlier stages of cancer treatment. This is consistent with the current American Academy of Pediatrics position that sanctions MM use for “children with life-limiting or seriously debilitating conditions.”
Only 2% of providers reported that MM was never appropriate for a child with cancer.
Most providers (63%) were not concerned about substance abuse in children who receive MM or about being prosecuted for helping patients access MM (80%).
The greatest concern (listed by 46% of providers) was the absence of standards around prescribing MM to children with cancer.
“In addition to unclear dosage guidelines, the lack of high quality scientific data that medical marijuana benefits outweigh possible harm is a huge concern for providers accustomed to evidence-based practice,” Dr Michelson said. “We need rigorously designed clinical trials on the use of medical marijuana in children with cancer.”
VIDEO - New lymphoma drug approvals: Clinical use, future directions
ATLANTA – 2017 was a banner year for the approval of new drugs to treat hematologic disorders.
At a special interest session at the annual meeting of American Society of Hematology, representatives from the Food and Drug Administration joined forces with clinicians to discuss the use of the newly approved treatments in the real-world setting.
In this video interview,
“This is extremely exciting,” she said regarding the pace of new approvals for hematologic malignancies.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Axicabtagene ciloleucel, a CAR T-cell product approved in October for the treatment of relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma in adults, is particularly interesting, she said.
“The data shows that if you look at a population of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients, that historically have a very poor outcome, there is definitely an impressive response rate and improved survival, compared to the natural history cohort,” said Dr. Heslop of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.
However, while the findings are encouraging, only 30%-40% are having a durable response, she added.
“So I think there’ll be lots of efforts to try and improve the response rate by combination with other agents such as checkpoint inhibitors or other immunomodulators,” she said.
With respect to the second-generation Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib, which was approved in October for adults with mantle cell lymphoma who have been treated with at least one prior therapy, she discussed the potential for improved outcomes and the importance of looking further into its use in patients who have failed ibrutinib therapy, as well as its use in combination with other agents, such as bendamustine and rituximab early in the course of disease.
Copanlisib, a PI3 kinase inhibitor approved in September, is an addition to the armamentarium for adult patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma after two lines of previous therapy.
“It still does have some side effects, as do other drugs in this class, so I think it’s place will still need to be defined,” Dr. Heslop said.
She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
ATLANTA – 2017 was a banner year for the approval of new drugs to treat hematologic disorders.
At a special interest session at the annual meeting of American Society of Hematology, representatives from the Food and Drug Administration joined forces with clinicians to discuss the use of the newly approved treatments in the real-world setting.
In this video interview,
“This is extremely exciting,” she said regarding the pace of new approvals for hematologic malignancies.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Axicabtagene ciloleucel, a CAR T-cell product approved in October for the treatment of relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma in adults, is particularly interesting, she said.
“The data shows that if you look at a population of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients, that historically have a very poor outcome, there is definitely an impressive response rate and improved survival, compared to the natural history cohort,” said Dr. Heslop of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.
However, while the findings are encouraging, only 30%-40% are having a durable response, she added.
“So I think there’ll be lots of efforts to try and improve the response rate by combination with other agents such as checkpoint inhibitors or other immunomodulators,” she said.
With respect to the second-generation Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib, which was approved in October for adults with mantle cell lymphoma who have been treated with at least one prior therapy, she discussed the potential for improved outcomes and the importance of looking further into its use in patients who have failed ibrutinib therapy, as well as its use in combination with other agents, such as bendamustine and rituximab early in the course of disease.
Copanlisib, a PI3 kinase inhibitor approved in September, is an addition to the armamentarium for adult patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma after two lines of previous therapy.
“It still does have some side effects, as do other drugs in this class, so I think it’s place will still need to be defined,” Dr. Heslop said.
She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
ATLANTA – 2017 was a banner year for the approval of new drugs to treat hematologic disorders.
At a special interest session at the annual meeting of American Society of Hematology, representatives from the Food and Drug Administration joined forces with clinicians to discuss the use of the newly approved treatments in the real-world setting.
In this video interview,
“This is extremely exciting,” she said regarding the pace of new approvals for hematologic malignancies.
The video associated with this article is no longer available on this site. Please view all of our videos on the MDedge YouTube channel
Axicabtagene ciloleucel, a CAR T-cell product approved in October for the treatment of relapsed/refractory large B-cell lymphoma in adults, is particularly interesting, she said.
“The data shows that if you look at a population of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients, that historically have a very poor outcome, there is definitely an impressive response rate and improved survival, compared to the natural history cohort,” said Dr. Heslop of Baylor College of Medicine, Houston.
However, while the findings are encouraging, only 30%-40% are having a durable response, she added.
“So I think there’ll be lots of efforts to try and improve the response rate by combination with other agents such as checkpoint inhibitors or other immunomodulators,” she said.
With respect to the second-generation Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor acalabrutinib, which was approved in October for adults with mantle cell lymphoma who have been treated with at least one prior therapy, she discussed the potential for improved outcomes and the importance of looking further into its use in patients who have failed ibrutinib therapy, as well as its use in combination with other agents, such as bendamustine and rituximab early in the course of disease.
Copanlisib, a PI3 kinase inhibitor approved in September, is an addition to the armamentarium for adult patients with relapsed follicular lymphoma after two lines of previous therapy.
“It still does have some side effects, as do other drugs in this class, so I think it’s place will still need to be defined,” Dr. Heslop said.
She reported having no relevant financial disclosures.
REPORTING FROM ASH 2017