Hematology Times

Photo by Esther Dyson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed a partial clinical hold on all trials of selinexor (KPT-330).

Selinexor is an inhibitor being evaluated in multiple trials of patients with relapsed and/or refractory hematologic and solid tumor malignancies.

While the partial clinical hold remains in effect, patients with stable disease or better may remain on selinexor.

However, no new patients may be enrolled in selinexor trials until the hold is lifted.

The FDA has indicated that the partial clinical hold is due to incomplete information in the existing version of the investigator’s brochure, including an incomplete list of serious adverse events associated with selinexor.

Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., the company developing selinexor, said it has amended the brochure, updated the informed consent documents accordingly, and submitted the documents to the FDA as requested.

As of March 10, Karyopharm had provided all requested materials to the FDA believed to be required to lift the partial clinical hold.  By regulation, the FDA has 30 days from the receipt of Karyopharm’s submission to notify the company whether the partial clinical hold is lifted.

Karyopharm said it is working with the FDA to seek the release of the hold and resume enrollment in its selinexor trials as expeditiously as possible. The company believes its previously disclosed enrollment rates and timelines for its ongoing trials will remain materially unchanged.

About selinexor

Selinexor is a selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) XPO1 antagonist. The drug binds with and inhibits XPO1, leading to the accumulation of tumor suppressor proteins in the cell nucleus. This reinitiates and amplifies their tumor suppressor function and is believed to induce apoptosis in cancer cells while largely sparing normal cells.

To date, more than 1900 patients have been treated with selinexor. The drug is currently being evaluated in several trials across multiple cancer indications.

One of these is the phase 2 SOPRA trial, in which selinexor is being compared to investigator’s choice of therapy (1 of 3 potential salvage therapies). The trial is enrolling patients 60 years of age or older with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia who are ineligible for standard intensive chemotherapy and/or transplant.

The SADAL study is a phase 2b trial comparing high and low doses of selinexor in patients with relapsed and/or refractory de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who have no therapeutic options of demonstrated clinical benefit.

STORM is a phase 2b trial evaluating selinexor and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM). And STOMP is a phase 1b/2 study evaluating selinexor in combination with existing therapies across the broader population in MM.

Karyopharm is also planning a randomized, phase 3 study known as BOSTON. In this trial, researchers will compare selinexor plus bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone to bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone in MM patients who have had 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy.

Additional phase 1, 2, and 3 studies are ongoing or currently planned. 

Photo by Esther Dyson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed a partial clinical hold on all trials of selinexor (KPT-330).

Selinexor is an inhibitor being evaluated in multiple trials of patients with relapsed and/or refractory hematologic and solid tumor malignancies.

While the partial clinical hold remains in effect, patients with stable disease or better may remain on selinexor.

However, no new patients may be enrolled in selinexor trials until the hold is lifted.

The FDA has indicated that the partial clinical hold is due to incomplete information in the existing version of the investigator’s brochure, including an incomplete list of serious adverse events associated with selinexor.

Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., the company developing selinexor, said it has amended the brochure, updated the informed consent documents accordingly, and submitted the documents to the FDA as requested.

As of March 10, Karyopharm had provided all requested materials to the FDA believed to be required to lift the partial clinical hold.  By regulation, the FDA has 30 days from the receipt of Karyopharm’s submission to notify the company whether the partial clinical hold is lifted.

Karyopharm said it is working with the FDA to seek the release of the hold and resume enrollment in its selinexor trials as expeditiously as possible. The company believes its previously disclosed enrollment rates and timelines for its ongoing trials will remain materially unchanged.

About selinexor

Selinexor is a selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) XPO1 antagonist. The drug binds with and inhibits XPO1, leading to the accumulation of tumor suppressor proteins in the cell nucleus. This reinitiates and amplifies their tumor suppressor function and is believed to induce apoptosis in cancer cells while largely sparing normal cells.

To date, more than 1900 patients have been treated with selinexor. The drug is currently being evaluated in several trials across multiple cancer indications.

One of these is the phase 2 SOPRA trial, in which selinexor is being compared to investigator’s choice of therapy (1 of 3 potential salvage therapies). The trial is enrolling patients 60 years of age or older with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia who are ineligible for standard intensive chemotherapy and/or transplant.

The SADAL study is a phase 2b trial comparing high and low doses of selinexor in patients with relapsed and/or refractory de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who have no therapeutic options of demonstrated clinical benefit.

STORM is a phase 2b trial evaluating selinexor and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM). And STOMP is a phase 1b/2 study evaluating selinexor in combination with existing therapies across the broader population in MM.

Karyopharm is also planning a randomized, phase 3 study known as BOSTON. In this trial, researchers will compare selinexor plus bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone to bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone in MM patients who have had 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy.

Additional phase 1, 2, and 3 studies are ongoing or currently planned. 

Photo by Esther Dyson

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has placed a partial clinical hold on all trials of selinexor (KPT-330).

Selinexor is an inhibitor being evaluated in multiple trials of patients with relapsed and/or refractory hematologic and solid tumor malignancies.

While the partial clinical hold remains in effect, patients with stable disease or better may remain on selinexor.

However, no new patients may be enrolled in selinexor trials until the hold is lifted.

The FDA has indicated that the partial clinical hold is due to incomplete information in the existing version of the investigator’s brochure, including an incomplete list of serious adverse events associated with selinexor.

Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc., the company developing selinexor, said it has amended the brochure, updated the informed consent documents accordingly, and submitted the documents to the FDA as requested.

As of March 10, Karyopharm had provided all requested materials to the FDA believed to be required to lift the partial clinical hold.  By regulation, the FDA has 30 days from the receipt of Karyopharm’s submission to notify the company whether the partial clinical hold is lifted.

Karyopharm said it is working with the FDA to seek the release of the hold and resume enrollment in its selinexor trials as expeditiously as possible. The company believes its previously disclosed enrollment rates and timelines for its ongoing trials will remain materially unchanged.

About selinexor

Selinexor is a selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) XPO1 antagonist. The drug binds with and inhibits XPO1, leading to the accumulation of tumor suppressor proteins in the cell nucleus. This reinitiates and amplifies their tumor suppressor function and is believed to induce apoptosis in cancer cells while largely sparing normal cells.

To date, more than 1900 patients have been treated with selinexor. The drug is currently being evaluated in several trials across multiple cancer indications.

One of these is the phase 2 SOPRA trial, in which selinexor is being compared to investigator’s choice of therapy (1 of 3 potential salvage therapies). The trial is enrolling patients 60 years of age or older with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia who are ineligible for standard intensive chemotherapy and/or transplant.

The SADAL study is a phase 2b trial comparing high and low doses of selinexor in patients with relapsed and/or refractory de novo diffuse large B-cell lymphoma who have no therapeutic options of demonstrated clinical benefit.

STORM is a phase 2b trial evaluating selinexor and low-dose dexamethasone in patients with heavily pretreated multiple myeloma (MM). And STOMP is a phase 1b/2 study evaluating selinexor in combination with existing therapies across the broader population in MM.

Karyopharm is also planning a randomized, phase 3 study known as BOSTON. In this trial, researchers will compare selinexor plus bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone to bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone in MM patients who have had 1 to 3 prior lines of therapy.

Additional phase 1, 2, and 3 studies are ongoing or currently planned. 

Image by Spencer Phillips

Black individuals with sickle cell trait (SCT) have an increased risk of developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD), according to new research.

The study indicates that having SCT actually doubles the risk of ESRD.

And the trait confers a similar degree of risk as APOL1 gene variants, which are currently the most widely recognized genetic contributors to kidney disease in blacks.

Researchers believe this finding may have important public policy implications for genetic counseling for individuals with SCT.

Rakhi P. Naik, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and her colleagues reported this finding in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

Previous research suggested there is an association between SCT and chronic kidney disease, but it hasn’t been clear if that extends to ESRD. Studies have also suggested a possible association between kidney disease and hemoglobin C trait, but the link has not been confirmed.

So Dr Naik and her colleagues decided to investigate these potential links. To do so, the researchers analyzed data from a large, population-based study, the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study.

The team evaluated information on 9909 black individuals, 739 of whom had SCT and 243 of whom had hemoglobin C trait.

The data indicate that individuals with SCT have a 2-fold higher risk of developing ESRD when compared to those without SCT. But there is no association between hemoglobin C trait and ESRD.

At a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the incidence of ESRD was 5.4% (40/739) in participants with SCT, 2.5% (6/243) in subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 2.6% (234/8927) in individuals without either trait.

The incidence rate for ESRD was 8.5 per 1000 person-years for participants with SCT, 3.9 per 1000 person-years for subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 4.0 per 1000 person-years for individuals without either trait.

The researchers noted that SCT conferred a similar degree of ESRD risk as APOL1 gene variants. The hazard ratio for subjects with SCT was 2.03, and the hazard ratio for those with APOL1 high-risk genotypes was 1.77.

“Although you cannot change the genes you are born with, doctors can use this information to start screening for kidney disease earlier and to aggressively treat any other risk factors you may have, such as diabetes or high blood pressure,” Dr Naik said.

“We still need more studies to determine if there are other treatments that can be used to slow the progression of kidney disease, specifically in individuals with sickle cell trait.”

Image by Spencer Phillips

Black individuals with sickle cell trait (SCT) have an increased risk of developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD), according to new research.

The study indicates that having SCT actually doubles the risk of ESRD.

And the trait confers a similar degree of risk as APOL1 gene variants, which are currently the most widely recognized genetic contributors to kidney disease in blacks.

Researchers believe this finding may have important public policy implications for genetic counseling for individuals with SCT.

Rakhi P. Naik, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and her colleagues reported this finding in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

Previous research suggested there is an association between SCT and chronic kidney disease, but it hasn’t been clear if that extends to ESRD. Studies have also suggested a possible association between kidney disease and hemoglobin C trait, but the link has not been confirmed.

So Dr Naik and her colleagues decided to investigate these potential links. To do so, the researchers analyzed data from a large, population-based study, the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study.

The team evaluated information on 9909 black individuals, 739 of whom had SCT and 243 of whom had hemoglobin C trait.

The data indicate that individuals with SCT have a 2-fold higher risk of developing ESRD when compared to those without SCT. But there is no association between hemoglobin C trait and ESRD.

At a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the incidence of ESRD was 5.4% (40/739) in participants with SCT, 2.5% (6/243) in subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 2.6% (234/8927) in individuals without either trait.

The incidence rate for ESRD was 8.5 per 1000 person-years for participants with SCT, 3.9 per 1000 person-years for subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 4.0 per 1000 person-years for individuals without either trait.

The researchers noted that SCT conferred a similar degree of ESRD risk as APOL1 gene variants. The hazard ratio for subjects with SCT was 2.03, and the hazard ratio for those with APOL1 high-risk genotypes was 1.77.

“Although you cannot change the genes you are born with, doctors can use this information to start screening for kidney disease earlier and to aggressively treat any other risk factors you may have, such as diabetes or high blood pressure,” Dr Naik said.

“We still need more studies to determine if there are other treatments that can be used to slow the progression of kidney disease, specifically in individuals with sickle cell trait.”

Image by Spencer Phillips

Black individuals with sickle cell trait (SCT) have an increased risk of developing end-stage renal disease (ESRD), according to new research.

The study indicates that having SCT actually doubles the risk of ESRD.

And the trait confers a similar degree of risk as APOL1 gene variants, which are currently the most widely recognized genetic contributors to kidney disease in blacks.

Researchers believe this finding may have important public policy implications for genetic counseling for individuals with SCT.

Rakhi P. Naik, MD, of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and her colleagues reported this finding in the Journal of the American Society of Nephrology.

Previous research suggested there is an association between SCT and chronic kidney disease, but it hasn’t been clear if that extends to ESRD. Studies have also suggested a possible association between kidney disease and hemoglobin C trait, but the link has not been confirmed.

So Dr Naik and her colleagues decided to investigate these potential links. To do so, the researchers analyzed data from a large, population-based study, the REasons for Geographic and Racial Differences in Stroke (REGARDS) study.

The team evaluated information on 9909 black individuals, 739 of whom had SCT and 243 of whom had hemoglobin C trait.

The data indicate that individuals with SCT have a 2-fold higher risk of developing ESRD when compared to those without SCT. But there is no association between hemoglobin C trait and ESRD.

At a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the incidence of ESRD was 5.4% (40/739) in participants with SCT, 2.5% (6/243) in subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 2.6% (234/8927) in individuals without either trait.

The incidence rate for ESRD was 8.5 per 1000 person-years for participants with SCT, 3.9 per 1000 person-years for subjects with hemoglobin C trait, and 4.0 per 1000 person-years for individuals without either trait.

The researchers noted that SCT conferred a similar degree of ESRD risk as APOL1 gene variants. The hazard ratio for subjects with SCT was 2.03, and the hazard ratio for those with APOL1 high-risk genotypes was 1.77.

“Although you cannot change the genes you are born with, doctors can use this information to start screening for kidney disease earlier and to aggressively treat any other risk factors you may have, such as diabetes or high blood pressure,” Dr Naik said.

“We still need more studies to determine if there are other treatments that can be used to slow the progression of kidney disease, specifically in individuals with sickle cell trait.”

MRI scan

The European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) has recommended suspending marketing authorizations for 4 linear gadolinium contrast agents because of evidence that small amounts of the gadolinium they contain are deposited in the brain.

The agents concerned are intravenous injections of gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide, which are given to patients to enhance images from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) body scans.

The PRAC’s review of gadolinium agents found “convincing evidence” of accumulation of gadolinium in the brain from studies directly measuring gadolinium in brain tissues and areas of increased signal intensity seen on MRI scan images many months after the last injection of a gadolinium contrast agent.

Although no symptoms or diseases linked to gadolinium in the brain have been reported, the PRAC took a precautionary approach, noting that data on the long-term effects in the brain are limited.

Companies concerned by this review have the right to request that the PRAC re-examine its recommendations.

The PRAC’s recommendations will be sent to the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) for its opinion. Further details will be published at the time of the CHMP opinion.

The final stage of the review procedure is the adoption by the European Commission of a legally binding decision applicable in all European Union member states.

Details of the review, recommendations

The PRAC’s review was initiated on March 17, 2016, at the request of the European Commission, under Article 31 of Directive 2001/83/EC.

The review covers agents containing the following active substances: gadobenic acid, gadobutrol, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, gadoteric acid, gadoteridol, gadoversetamide, and gadoxetic acid.

The 4 agents recommended for suspension (gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide) are linear agents. They have a structure more likely to release gadolinium, which can build up in body tissues.

Other agents, known as macrocyclic agents, are more stable and have a much lower propensity to release gadolinium.

The PRAC recommends that macrocyclic agents (gadobutrol, gadoteric acid, and gadoteridol) be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only when unenhanced body scans are not suitable.

The PRAC has recommended that some linear agents remain available. The committee said that gadoxetic acid, a linear agent used at a low dose for liver scans, can remain on the market as it meets an important diagnostic need in patients with few alternatives.

In addition, a formulation of gadopentetic acid injected directly into joints should remain available because its gadolinium concentration is very low—around 200 times lower than those of intravenous products.

Both agents should be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only if unenhanced scans are not suitable.

For those marketing authorizations recommended for suspension, the suspensions can be lifted if the respective companies provide evidence of new benefits in an identified patient group that outweigh its risks or show that their product (modified or not) does not release gadolinium significantly or lead to its retention in tissues.

MRI scan

The European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) has recommended suspending marketing authorizations for 4 linear gadolinium contrast agents because of evidence that small amounts of the gadolinium they contain are deposited in the brain.

The agents concerned are intravenous injections of gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide, which are given to patients to enhance images from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) body scans.

The PRAC’s review of gadolinium agents found “convincing evidence” of accumulation of gadolinium in the brain from studies directly measuring gadolinium in brain tissues and areas of increased signal intensity seen on MRI scan images many months after the last injection of a gadolinium contrast agent.

Although no symptoms or diseases linked to gadolinium in the brain have been reported, the PRAC took a precautionary approach, noting that data on the long-term effects in the brain are limited.

Companies concerned by this review have the right to request that the PRAC re-examine its recommendations.

The PRAC’s recommendations will be sent to the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) for its opinion. Further details will be published at the time of the CHMP opinion.

The final stage of the review procedure is the adoption by the European Commission of a legally binding decision applicable in all European Union member states.

Details of the review, recommendations

The PRAC’s review was initiated on March 17, 2016, at the request of the European Commission, under Article 31 of Directive 2001/83/EC.

The review covers agents containing the following active substances: gadobenic acid, gadobutrol, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, gadoteric acid, gadoteridol, gadoversetamide, and gadoxetic acid.

The 4 agents recommended for suspension (gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide) are linear agents. They have a structure more likely to release gadolinium, which can build up in body tissues.

Other agents, known as macrocyclic agents, are more stable and have a much lower propensity to release gadolinium.

The PRAC recommends that macrocyclic agents (gadobutrol, gadoteric acid, and gadoteridol) be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only when unenhanced body scans are not suitable.

The PRAC has recommended that some linear agents remain available. The committee said that gadoxetic acid, a linear agent used at a low dose for liver scans, can remain on the market as it meets an important diagnostic need in patients with few alternatives.

In addition, a formulation of gadopentetic acid injected directly into joints should remain available because its gadolinium concentration is very low—around 200 times lower than those of intravenous products.

Both agents should be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only if unenhanced scans are not suitable.

For those marketing authorizations recommended for suspension, the suspensions can be lifted if the respective companies provide evidence of new benefits in an identified patient group that outweigh its risks or show that their product (modified or not) does not release gadolinium significantly or lead to its retention in tissues.

MRI scan

The European Medicines Agency’s (EMA) Pharmacovigilance and Risk Assessment Committee (PRAC) has recommended suspending marketing authorizations for 4 linear gadolinium contrast agents because of evidence that small amounts of the gadolinium they contain are deposited in the brain.

The agents concerned are intravenous injections of gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide, which are given to patients to enhance images from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) body scans.

The PRAC’s review of gadolinium agents found “convincing evidence” of accumulation of gadolinium in the brain from studies directly measuring gadolinium in brain tissues and areas of increased signal intensity seen on MRI scan images many months after the last injection of a gadolinium contrast agent.

Although no symptoms or diseases linked to gadolinium in the brain have been reported, the PRAC took a precautionary approach, noting that data on the long-term effects in the brain are limited.

Companies concerned by this review have the right to request that the PRAC re-examine its recommendations.

The PRAC’s recommendations will be sent to the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) for its opinion. Further details will be published at the time of the CHMP opinion.

The final stage of the review procedure is the adoption by the European Commission of a legally binding decision applicable in all European Union member states.

Details of the review, recommendations

The PRAC’s review was initiated on March 17, 2016, at the request of the European Commission, under Article 31 of Directive 2001/83/EC.

The review covers agents containing the following active substances: gadobenic acid, gadobutrol, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, gadoteric acid, gadoteridol, gadoversetamide, and gadoxetic acid.

The 4 agents recommended for suspension (gadobenic acid, gadodiamide, gadopentetic acid, and gadoversetamide) are linear agents. They have a structure more likely to release gadolinium, which can build up in body tissues.

Other agents, known as macrocyclic agents, are more stable and have a much lower propensity to release gadolinium.

The PRAC recommends that macrocyclic agents (gadobutrol, gadoteric acid, and gadoteridol) be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only when unenhanced body scans are not suitable.

The PRAC has recommended that some linear agents remain available. The committee said that gadoxetic acid, a linear agent used at a low dose for liver scans, can remain on the market as it meets an important diagnostic need in patients with few alternatives.

In addition, a formulation of gadopentetic acid injected directly into joints should remain available because its gadolinium concentration is very low—around 200 times lower than those of intravenous products.

Both agents should be used at the lowest dose that enhances images sufficiently to make diagnoses and only if unenhanced scans are not suitable.

For those marketing authorizations recommended for suspension, the suspensions can be lifted if the respective companies provide evidence of new benefits in an identified patient group that outweigh its risks or show that their product (modified or not) does not release gadolinium significantly or lead to its retention in tissues.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

ORLANDO, FL—Minimal residual disease (MRD) measurements before and after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) can help predict outcomes in patients with childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to researchers.

Their work also suggests several other factors can be used to predict event-free survival (EFS) in this patient population, and the team developed risk scores incorporating these factors.

Michael A. Pulsipher, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles in California, presented this work as one of the “Best Abstracts” at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings (abstract 4*).

“The new risk scores that we were able to develop very nicely predict outcomes post-transplant and can guide study planning,” Dr Pulsipher said.

“MRD pre-transplant was a very powerful predictor of outcome, and MRD post-transplant highlights individual patients at risk.”

For this study, Dr Pulsipher and his colleagues retrospectively analyzed 747 patients treated in Europe, North America, and Australia. The patients received transplants between September 1999 and May 2015.

Most patients had pre-B ALL (78%, n=586), 19% (n=145) had T-cell ALL, 2% had “other” ALLs (n=8) or no data on ALL type (n=8). Sixty-two percent (n=466) were male.

Nearly half of patients were between the ages of 2 and 10 (49%, n=365), 47% (n=351) were older than 10, and 4% (n=31) were younger than 2.

Transplant details

Patients received grafts from matched unrelated donors (42%, n=314), matched sibling donors (30%, n=227), mismatched donors (10%, n=75), and cord blood from unrelated donors (17%, n=128). There was no data on donor type for 3 patients.

Most patients received bone marrow transplants (61%, n=458), 20% (n=147) received cord blood, and 18% (n=131) received peripheral blood stem cells. Eight patients received “other” types of transplants, and 3 patients had no data on stem cell source.

More than half of the patients (55%, n=410) were in their second complete remission (CR) at transplant. Thirty-seven percent were in their first CR (n=275), 7% were in their third or greater CR (n=53), and 1% were not in remission (n=7). Two patients had no data on remission status.

MRD

MRD was assessed before HSCT as well as after—on or near days 30, 60, 90, 180, 365, and beyond.

There were 4 MRD categories:

• MRD negative: No signal
• MRD low: >0 to <10^-4 (<0.01%)
• MRD high: ≥10^-4 to <10^-3 (0.01 to 0.1%)
• MRD very high: ≥10^-3 to <10^-2 (>0.1%).

Dr Pulsipher noted that, when analyzing MRD pre-HSCT or at 30 days after HSCT, the estimated 5-year EFS was similar for patients in the MRD-negative and MRD-low groups. However, as time went on (at days 90, 180, and 365), any detectable level of MRD was associated with a poor prognosis.

“And patients arriving at day 365 with no detectable MRD had an exceptional prognosis, with survival approaching 90%,” Dr Pulsipher said.

He also pointed out an interaction between acute graft-vs-host disease (aGVHD) and MRD post-HSCT. He and his colleagues observed better survival for MRD-positive patients with aGVHD (grade 1-2) than for MRD-positive patients without aGVHD.

Pre-HSCT risk score

Via an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the researchers identified several pre-transplant factors that predicted EFS at 18 months.

These included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, and MRD. The researchers assigned points to each of these factors to create a risk score.

Compared to patients in first CR, the hazard ratio (HR) for patients in early second CR was 2.53, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.95, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with a matched sibling donor, the HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.41, and the score was 1. For patients who received cord blood from an unrelated donor, the HR was 1.48, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with T-cell ALL, the HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.35, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with MRD <10^-4, the HR for patients with MRD ≥10^-4 was 2.32, and the score was 2.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 78% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 1 points, 54% ± 3% for those with 2 to 3 points, and 46% ± 5% for patients with 4 or more points.

Day 30 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 30 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, aGVHD status, and MRD.

The HR for patients in early second CR was 2.51, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 2.09, and the score was 2.

The HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.75, and the score was 2. The HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.40, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 2.02 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 3 aGVHD, the HR was 1.44, and the score was 1. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 7.12, and the score was 7.

The researchers evaluated MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 30, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 2.29, and the score was 2.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 3.17, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 30, the HR was 3.63, and the score was 4.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 80% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 3 points, 54% ± 4% for those with 4 to 6 points, and 25% ± 6% for those with 7 or more points.

Day 90 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 90 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, aGVHD status, and MRD.

For patients in early second CR, the HR was 2.81, and the score was 3. For those in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.85, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 1.60 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 2.49, and the score was 2.

The researchers assessed MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 90, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 6.03, and the score was 6.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 3.11, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 90, the HR was 4.59, and the score was 5.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 83% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 2 points, 60% ± 4% for those with 3 to 5 points, and 17% ± 11 for those with 6 or more points.

*Information in the abstract differs from the presentation.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

ORLANDO, FL—Minimal residual disease (MRD) measurements before and after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) can help predict outcomes in patients with childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to researchers.

Their work also suggests several other factors can be used to predict event-free survival (EFS) in this patient population, and the team developed risk scores incorporating these factors.

Michael A. Pulsipher, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles in California, presented this work as one of the “Best Abstracts” at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings (abstract 4*).

“The new risk scores that we were able to develop very nicely predict outcomes post-transplant and can guide study planning,” Dr Pulsipher said.

“MRD pre-transplant was a very powerful predictor of outcome, and MRD post-transplant highlights individual patients at risk.”

For this study, Dr Pulsipher and his colleagues retrospectively analyzed 747 patients treated in Europe, North America, and Australia. The patients received transplants between September 1999 and May 2015.

Most patients had pre-B ALL (78%, n=586), 19% (n=145) had T-cell ALL, 2% had “other” ALLs (n=8) or no data on ALL type (n=8). Sixty-two percent (n=466) were male.

Nearly half of patients were between the ages of 2 and 10 (49%, n=365), 47% (n=351) were older than 10, and 4% (n=31) were younger than 2.

Transplant details

Patients received grafts from matched unrelated donors (42%, n=314), matched sibling donors (30%, n=227), mismatched donors (10%, n=75), and cord blood from unrelated donors (17%, n=128). There was no data on donor type for 3 patients.

Most patients received bone marrow transplants (61%, n=458), 20% (n=147) received cord blood, and 18% (n=131) received peripheral blood stem cells. Eight patients received “other” types of transplants, and 3 patients had no data on stem cell source.

More than half of the patients (55%, n=410) were in their second complete remission (CR) at transplant. Thirty-seven percent were in their first CR (n=275), 7% were in their third or greater CR (n=53), and 1% were not in remission (n=7). Two patients had no data on remission status.

MRD

MRD was assessed before HSCT as well as after—on or near days 30, 60, 90, 180, 365, and beyond.

There were 4 MRD categories:

• MRD negative: No signal
• MRD low: >0 to <10^-4 (<0.01%)
• MRD high: ≥10^-4 to <10^-3 (0.01 to 0.1%)
• MRD very high: ≥10^-3 to <10^-2 (>0.1%).

Dr Pulsipher noted that, when analyzing MRD pre-HSCT or at 30 days after HSCT, the estimated 5-year EFS was similar for patients in the MRD-negative and MRD-low groups. However, as time went on (at days 90, 180, and 365), any detectable level of MRD was associated with a poor prognosis.

“And patients arriving at day 365 with no detectable MRD had an exceptional prognosis, with survival approaching 90%,” Dr Pulsipher said.

He also pointed out an interaction between acute graft-vs-host disease (aGVHD) and MRD post-HSCT. He and his colleagues observed better survival for MRD-positive patients with aGVHD (grade 1-2) than for MRD-positive patients without aGVHD.

Pre-HSCT risk score

Via an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the researchers identified several pre-transplant factors that predicted EFS at 18 months.

These included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, and MRD. The researchers assigned points to each of these factors to create a risk score.

Compared to patients in first CR, the hazard ratio (HR) for patients in early second CR was 2.53, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.95, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with a matched sibling donor, the HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.41, and the score was 1. For patients who received cord blood from an unrelated donor, the HR was 1.48, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with T-cell ALL, the HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.35, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with MRD <10^-4, the HR for patients with MRD ≥10^-4 was 2.32, and the score was 2.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 78% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 1 points, 54% ± 3% for those with 2 to 3 points, and 46% ± 5% for patients with 4 or more points.

Day 30 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 30 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, aGVHD status, and MRD.

The HR for patients in early second CR was 2.51, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 2.09, and the score was 2.

The HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.75, and the score was 2. The HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.40, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 2.02 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 3 aGVHD, the HR was 1.44, and the score was 1. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 7.12, and the score was 7.

The researchers evaluated MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 30, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 2.29, and the score was 2.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 3.17, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 30, the HR was 3.63, and the score was 4.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 80% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 3 points, 54% ± 4% for those with 4 to 6 points, and 25% ± 6% for those with 7 or more points.

Day 90 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 90 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, aGVHD status, and MRD.

For patients in early second CR, the HR was 2.81, and the score was 3. For those in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.85, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 1.60 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 2.49, and the score was 2.

The researchers assessed MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 90, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 6.03, and the score was 6.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 3.11, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 90, the HR was 4.59, and the score was 5.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 83% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 2 points, 60% ± 4% for those with 3 to 5 points, and 17% ± 11 for those with 6 or more points.

*Information in the abstract differs from the presentation.

Photo by Chad McNeeley

ORLANDO, FL—Minimal residual disease (MRD) measurements before and after hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) can help predict outcomes in patients with childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), according to researchers.

Their work also suggests several other factors can be used to predict event-free survival (EFS) in this patient population, and the team developed risk scores incorporating these factors.

Michael A. Pulsipher, MD, of Children’s Hospital Los Angeles in California, presented this work as one of the “Best Abstracts” at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings (abstract 4*).

“The new risk scores that we were able to develop very nicely predict outcomes post-transplant and can guide study planning,” Dr Pulsipher said.

“MRD pre-transplant was a very powerful predictor of outcome, and MRD post-transplant highlights individual patients at risk.”

For this study, Dr Pulsipher and his colleagues retrospectively analyzed 747 patients treated in Europe, North America, and Australia. The patients received transplants between September 1999 and May 2015.

Most patients had pre-B ALL (78%, n=586), 19% (n=145) had T-cell ALL, 2% had “other” ALLs (n=8) or no data on ALL type (n=8). Sixty-two percent (n=466) were male.

Nearly half of patients were between the ages of 2 and 10 (49%, n=365), 47% (n=351) were older than 10, and 4% (n=31) were younger than 2.

Transplant details

Patients received grafts from matched unrelated donors (42%, n=314), matched sibling donors (30%, n=227), mismatched donors (10%, n=75), and cord blood from unrelated donors (17%, n=128). There was no data on donor type for 3 patients.

Most patients received bone marrow transplants (61%, n=458), 20% (n=147) received cord blood, and 18% (n=131) received peripheral blood stem cells. Eight patients received “other” types of transplants, and 3 patients had no data on stem cell source.

More than half of the patients (55%, n=410) were in their second complete remission (CR) at transplant. Thirty-seven percent were in their first CR (n=275), 7% were in their third or greater CR (n=53), and 1% were not in remission (n=7). Two patients had no data on remission status.

MRD

MRD was assessed before HSCT as well as after—on or near days 30, 60, 90, 180, 365, and beyond.

There were 4 MRD categories:

• MRD negative: No signal
• MRD low: >0 to <10^-4 (<0.01%)
• MRD high: ≥10^-4 to <10^-3 (0.01 to 0.1%)
• MRD very high: ≥10^-3 to <10^-2 (>0.1%).

Dr Pulsipher noted that, when analyzing MRD pre-HSCT or at 30 days after HSCT, the estimated 5-year EFS was similar for patients in the MRD-negative and MRD-low groups. However, as time went on (at days 90, 180, and 365), any detectable level of MRD was associated with a poor prognosis.

“And patients arriving at day 365 with no detectable MRD had an exceptional prognosis, with survival approaching 90%,” Dr Pulsipher said.

He also pointed out an interaction between acute graft-vs-host disease (aGVHD) and MRD post-HSCT. He and his colleagues observed better survival for MRD-positive patients with aGVHD (grade 1-2) than for MRD-positive patients without aGVHD.

Pre-HSCT risk score

Via an adjusted Cox regression analysis, the researchers identified several pre-transplant factors that predicted EFS at 18 months.

These included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, and MRD. The researchers assigned points to each of these factors to create a risk score.

Compared to patients in first CR, the hazard ratio (HR) for patients in early second CR was 2.53, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.95, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with a matched sibling donor, the HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.41, and the score was 1. For patients who received cord blood from an unrelated donor, the HR was 1.48, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with T-cell ALL, the HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.35, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with MRD <10^-4, the HR for patients with MRD ≥10^-4 was 2.32, and the score was 2.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 78% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 1 points, 54% ± 3% for those with 2 to 3 points, and 46% ± 5% for patients with 4 or more points.

Day 30 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 30 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, donor type, immunophenotype, aGVHD status, and MRD.

The HR for patients in early second CR was 2.51, and the score was 3. For patients in third CR or greater, the HR was 2.09, and the score was 2.

The HR for patients with a mismatched donor was 1.75, and the score was 2. The HR for patients with pre-B ALL was 1.40, and the score was 1.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 2.02 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 3 aGVHD, the HR was 1.44, and the score was 1. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 7.12, and the score was 7.

The researchers evaluated MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 30, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 2.29, and the score was 2.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 30, the HR was 3.17, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 30, the HR was 3.63, and the score was 4.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 80% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 3 points, 54% ± 4% for those with 4 to 6 points, and 25% ± 6% for those with 7 or more points.

Day 90 post-HSCT risk score

When considering patients at day 90 post-HSCT, factors that predicted 18-month EFS included remission status, aGVHD status, and MRD.

For patients in early second CR, the HR was 2.81, and the score was 3. For those in third CR or greater, the HR was 1.85, and the score was 2.

Compared to patients with grade 1-2 aGVHD, the HR was 1.60 for patients with grade 0 aGVHD, and the score was 2. For patients with grade 4 aGVHD, the HR was 2.49, and the score was 2.

The researchers assessed MRD prior to HSCT and MRD at day 90, using a reference of MRD <10^-4 at both time points. For patients with MRD <10^-4 pre-HSCT and ≥10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 6.03, and the score was 6.

For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and <10^-4 at day 90, the HR was 3.11, and the score was 3. For patients with MRD ≥10^-4 pre-HSCT and at day 90, the HR was 4.59, and the score was 5.

The probability of EFS at 18 months was 83% ± 2% for patients with 0 to 2 points, 60% ± 4% for those with 3 to 5 points, and 17% ± 11 for those with 6 or more points.

*Information in the abstract differs from the presentation.

Micrograph showing DLBCL

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for eFT508 to treat diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

eFT508 is a highly selective inhibitor of MNK1 and MNK2, enzymes that integrate signals from several oncogenic and immune signaling pathways.

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs or biologics intended to treat a disease or condition affecting fewer than 200,000 patients in the US.

The orphan designation for eFT508 provides several incentives for eFFECTOR Therapeutics, the company developing eFT508.

These incentives include increased access to FDA reviewers to discuss clinical trial designs, the ability to qualify for tax credits for certain clinical research costs, the ability to apply for annual grant funding, a waiver of Prescription Drug User Fee Act filing fees, and the potential for 7 years of US marketing exclusivity if eFT508 is approved.

eFFECTOR has dosed the first subject in a phase 1/2 trial of eFT508 in patients with B-cell hematologic malignancies. The study is designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of eFT508.

eFFECTOR presented preclinical research of eFT508 in DLBCL at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting. The poster is available for download from the eFFECTOR website.

The researchers reported that eFT508 demonstrated anti-proliferative activity against multiple DLBCL cell lines, including the TMD8, OCI-Ly3, and HBL1 cell lines.

eFT508 also exhibited “significant anti-tumor activity” in mouse models of TMD8 and HBL-1 ABC-DLBCL.

Finally, the researchers found that eFT508 synergized with everolimus, ibrutinib, and venetoclax both in vitro and in vivo.

Micrograph showing DLBCL

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for eFT508 to treat diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

eFT508 is a highly selective inhibitor of MNK1 and MNK2, enzymes that integrate signals from several oncogenic and immune signaling pathways.

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs or biologics intended to treat a disease or condition affecting fewer than 200,000 patients in the US.

The orphan designation for eFT508 provides several incentives for eFFECTOR Therapeutics, the company developing eFT508.

These incentives include increased access to FDA reviewers to discuss clinical trial designs, the ability to qualify for tax credits for certain clinical research costs, the ability to apply for annual grant funding, a waiver of Prescription Drug User Fee Act filing fees, and the potential for 7 years of US marketing exclusivity if eFT508 is approved.

eFFECTOR has dosed the first subject in a phase 1/2 trial of eFT508 in patients with B-cell hematologic malignancies. The study is designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of eFT508.

eFFECTOR presented preclinical research of eFT508 in DLBCL at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting. The poster is available for download from the eFFECTOR website.

The researchers reported that eFT508 demonstrated anti-proliferative activity against multiple DLBCL cell lines, including the TMD8, OCI-Ly3, and HBL1 cell lines.

eFT508 also exhibited “significant anti-tumor activity” in mouse models of TMD8 and HBL-1 ABC-DLBCL.

Finally, the researchers found that eFT508 synergized with everolimus, ibrutinib, and venetoclax both in vitro and in vivo.

Micrograph showing DLBCL

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for eFT508 to treat diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

eFT508 is a highly selective inhibitor of MNK1 and MNK2, enzymes that integrate signals from several oncogenic and immune signaling pathways.

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs or biologics intended to treat a disease or condition affecting fewer than 200,000 patients in the US.

The orphan designation for eFT508 provides several incentives for eFFECTOR Therapeutics, the company developing eFT508.

These incentives include increased access to FDA reviewers to discuss clinical trial designs, the ability to qualify for tax credits for certain clinical research costs, the ability to apply for annual grant funding, a waiver of Prescription Drug User Fee Act filing fees, and the potential for 7 years of US marketing exclusivity if eFT508 is approved.

eFFECTOR has dosed the first subject in a phase 1/2 trial of eFT508 in patients with B-cell hematologic malignancies. The study is designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of eFT508.

eFFECTOR presented preclinical research of eFT508 in DLBCL at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting. The poster is available for download from the eFFECTOR website.

The researchers reported that eFT508 demonstrated anti-proliferative activity against multiple DLBCL cell lines, including the TMD8, OCI-Ly3, and HBL1 cell lines.

eFT508 also exhibited “significant anti-tumor activity” in mouse models of TMD8 and HBL-1 ABC-DLBCL.

Finally, the researchers found that eFT508 synergized with everolimus, ibrutinib, and venetoclax both in vitro and in vivo.

Photo by Linda Bartlett

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for BI 836858, an anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody (mAb), in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

BI 836858 previously received orphan designation for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs and biologics intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent rare diseases/disorders affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

Orphan designation provides companies with certain incentives to develop products for rare diseases.

This includes a 50% tax break on research and development, a fee waiver, access to federal grants, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

About BI 836858

BI 836858 is a fully human, immunoglobulin G1 anti-CD33 mAb. It has been engineered for improved binding to FcgRIIIa to mediate natural killer cell antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against CD33-expressing tumor cells.

BI 836858 is being developed by Boehringer Ingelheim.

A phase 1/2 trial (NCT02240706) of BI 836858 in patients with MDS is ongoing. The phase 1 portion was designed to evaluate various doses of the mAb in patients with low or intermediate-1 risk MDS with symptomatic anemia.

The phase 2 portion was designed to compare BI 836858 plus best supportive care to best supportive care alone in patients with low- or intermediate-1-risk MDS who have symptomatic anemia but do not have a 5q deletion.

BI 836858 is also being tested in combination with decitabine in a phase 1/2 study (NCT02632721) of patients with AML.

The goals of the phase 1 portion and the phase 1 extension are to determine the maximum-tolerated dose/recommended dose, safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine.

The goals of the phase 2 portion of the study are to investigate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine compared to decitabine monotherapy.

BI 836858 was previously evaluated in combination with decitabine in a preclinical study. The combination exhibited activity against AML in vitro. The research was published in Blood last year.

BI 836858 is also being evaluated as part of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Beat AML Master Trial program to advance treatment for patients with AML.

In this trial, investigators are using genomic technology to identify AML mutations in newly diagnosed patients over the age of 60 and match the patients with an investigational drug or drugs best suited to attack the mutations found.

Photo by Linda Bartlett

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for BI 836858, an anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody (mAb), in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

BI 836858 previously received orphan designation for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs and biologics intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent rare diseases/disorders affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

Orphan designation provides companies with certain incentives to develop products for rare diseases.

This includes a 50% tax break on research and development, a fee waiver, access to federal grants, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

About BI 836858

BI 836858 is a fully human, immunoglobulin G1 anti-CD33 mAb. It has been engineered for improved binding to FcgRIIIa to mediate natural killer cell antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against CD33-expressing tumor cells.

BI 836858 is being developed by Boehringer Ingelheim.

A phase 1/2 trial (NCT02240706) of BI 836858 in patients with MDS is ongoing. The phase 1 portion was designed to evaluate various doses of the mAb in patients with low or intermediate-1 risk MDS with symptomatic anemia.

The phase 2 portion was designed to compare BI 836858 plus best supportive care to best supportive care alone in patients with low- or intermediate-1-risk MDS who have symptomatic anemia but do not have a 5q deletion.

BI 836858 is also being tested in combination with decitabine in a phase 1/2 study (NCT02632721) of patients with AML.

The goals of the phase 1 portion and the phase 1 extension are to determine the maximum-tolerated dose/recommended dose, safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine.

The goals of the phase 2 portion of the study are to investigate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine compared to decitabine monotherapy.

BI 836858 was previously evaluated in combination with decitabine in a preclinical study. The combination exhibited activity against AML in vitro. The research was published in Blood last year.

BI 836858 is also being evaluated as part of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Beat AML Master Trial program to advance treatment for patients with AML.

In this trial, investigators are using genomic technology to identify AML mutations in newly diagnosed patients over the age of 60 and match the patients with an investigational drug or drugs best suited to attack the mutations found.

Photo by Linda Bartlett

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation for BI 836858, an anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody (mAb), in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

BI 836858 previously received orphan designation for the treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML).

The FDA grants orphan designation to drugs and biologics intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent rare diseases/disorders affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the US.

Orphan designation provides companies with certain incentives to develop products for rare diseases.

This includes a 50% tax break on research and development, a fee waiver, access to federal grants, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.

About BI 836858

BI 836858 is a fully human, immunoglobulin G1 anti-CD33 mAb. It has been engineered for improved binding to FcgRIIIa to mediate natural killer cell antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity against CD33-expressing tumor cells.

BI 836858 is being developed by Boehringer Ingelheim.

A phase 1/2 trial (NCT02240706) of BI 836858 in patients with MDS is ongoing. The phase 1 portion was designed to evaluate various doses of the mAb in patients with low or intermediate-1 risk MDS with symptomatic anemia.

The phase 2 portion was designed to compare BI 836858 plus best supportive care to best supportive care alone in patients with low- or intermediate-1-risk MDS who have symptomatic anemia but do not have a 5q deletion.

BI 836858 is also being tested in combination with decitabine in a phase 1/2 study (NCT02632721) of patients with AML.

The goals of the phase 1 portion and the phase 1 extension are to determine the maximum-tolerated dose/recommended dose, safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine.

The goals of the phase 2 portion of the study are to investigate the efficacy, safety, and pharmacokinetics of BI 836858 in combination with decitabine compared to decitabine monotherapy.

BI 836858 was previously evaluated in combination with decitabine in a preclinical study. The combination exhibited activity against AML in vitro. The research was published in Blood last year.

BI 836858 is also being evaluated as part of the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Beat AML Master Trial program to advance treatment for patients with AML.

In this trial, investigators are using genomic technology to identify AML mutations in newly diagnosed patients over the age of 60 and match the patients with an investigational drug or drugs best suited to attack the mutations found.

Adipose tissue

ORLANDO, FL—A recently conducted study confirms that survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have increased body fat mass and lower lean mass compared to normal controls. And this is despite having a comparable body mass index (BMI).

Researchers say the abnormalities in adipokine levels—leptin and adiponectin—could provide insight into the mechanisms that contribute to the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications that often develop in HSCT survivors.

Leptin and adiponectin are associated with obesity, insulin secretion, insulin resistance, endothelial function, vascular homeostasis, and atherosclerosis.

“So knowing that there is a dynamic interplay between obesity and insulin resistance and cytokine and adipokine profiles and, ultimately, insulin-resistance syndrome, we sought to evaluate, as part of a larger study, how treatment effects, including high-dose chemotherapy and radiation, alter cytokine profiles as well as obesity and body composition,” said Tyler G. Ketterl, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington.

Dr Ketterl presented the findings at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings as abstract 52.*

Study design

The research team compared 151 HSCT recipients who had survived more than 2 years after transplant with 92 sibling controls.

HSCT survivors were randomly recruited from 2 centers—Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Minnesota Masonic Children’s Hospital—and were younger than 21 years when diagnosed.

The researchers evaluated all participants for body composition, cardiovascular risk factors, and adipokines using anthropomorphic measurements, DXA scans for muscle and fat mass, and laboratory bloodwork.

The team stratified the HSCT survivors by the preparative regimen they had received—total body irradiation (TBI) alone, TBI plus cranial radiation (CRT), and chemotherapy alone.

Study population

Males comprised more than half the study population in each arm, 58% of HSCT survivors and 54% of siblings.

Nine percent and 8% in the HSCT and sibling arms, respectively, were non-white and/or Hispanic, and the mean current ages were 24.0 (range, 10-51) for HSCT survivors and 24.2 (range, 10-48) for siblings.

The survivors’ mean age at diagnosis was 9.1 years (range, 0.4–20.6), their mean age at transplant was 11.2 years (range, 0.6–32.6), and the mean time from transplant to study participation was 13.5 years (range, 2.6–32).

Most patients received a transplant for leukemia—54 (36%) for acute myeloid leukemia, 46 (31%) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 15 (10%) for chronic myeloid leukemia. Thirteen (9%) received transplants for myelodysplastic syndromes, 12 (8%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 10 (6%) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

A little more than half had TBI (85, 56%) as the preparative regimen, 31 (21%) had TBI plus CRT, and 35 (23%) had chemotherapy only.

About three-quarters (116, 77%) had an allogeneic transplant, and 35 (23%) had an autologous transplant.

Results

Overall, HSCT survivors had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

Survivors who received TBI with or without CRT had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001), while survivors who received chemotherapy alone did not (P=0.42).

Adiponectin is involved in insulin sensitization, hepatoprotective action, antiatherogenic action, protection against the development of diabetes, and regulation of lipid metabolism.

Overall, survivors had significantly higher leptin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

This held true regardless of conditioning regimen, although levels for patients who received chemotherapy only were not as significantly high (P=0.02) as for survivors who received TBI (P<0.001).

Leptin helps increase energy expenditure, decrease appetite and food uptake, modify insulin sensitivity on muscles and liver, prevent ectopic lipid deposition, and regulate immune function.

BMI adjusted for age, sex, and Tanner stage was not significantly different between survivors and siblings, but percent fat mass was significantly higher across all conditioning regimens for survivors compared to siblings (P<0.001).

“And this goes along with previous data,” Dr Ketterl said, “that shows sarcopenic obesity is common amongst transplant survivors.”

The researchers believe these significant differences may provide insight into the underlying risk of developing metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications in transplant survivors. 

*Some details in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Adipose tissue

ORLANDO, FL—A recently conducted study confirms that survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have increased body fat mass and lower lean mass compared to normal controls. And this is despite having a comparable body mass index (BMI).

Researchers say the abnormalities in adipokine levels—leptin and adiponectin—could provide insight into the mechanisms that contribute to the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications that often develop in HSCT survivors.

Leptin and adiponectin are associated with obesity, insulin secretion, insulin resistance, endothelial function, vascular homeostasis, and atherosclerosis.

“So knowing that there is a dynamic interplay between obesity and insulin resistance and cytokine and adipokine profiles and, ultimately, insulin-resistance syndrome, we sought to evaluate, as part of a larger study, how treatment effects, including high-dose chemotherapy and radiation, alter cytokine profiles as well as obesity and body composition,” said Tyler G. Ketterl, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington.

Dr Ketterl presented the findings at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings as abstract 52.*

Study design

The research team compared 151 HSCT recipients who had survived more than 2 years after transplant with 92 sibling controls.

HSCT survivors were randomly recruited from 2 centers—Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Minnesota Masonic Children’s Hospital—and were younger than 21 years when diagnosed.

The researchers evaluated all participants for body composition, cardiovascular risk factors, and adipokines using anthropomorphic measurements, DXA scans for muscle and fat mass, and laboratory bloodwork.

The team stratified the HSCT survivors by the preparative regimen they had received—total body irradiation (TBI) alone, TBI plus cranial radiation (CRT), and chemotherapy alone.

Study population

Males comprised more than half the study population in each arm, 58% of HSCT survivors and 54% of siblings.

Nine percent and 8% in the HSCT and sibling arms, respectively, were non-white and/or Hispanic, and the mean current ages were 24.0 (range, 10-51) for HSCT survivors and 24.2 (range, 10-48) for siblings.

The survivors’ mean age at diagnosis was 9.1 years (range, 0.4–20.6), their mean age at transplant was 11.2 years (range, 0.6–32.6), and the mean time from transplant to study participation was 13.5 years (range, 2.6–32).

Most patients received a transplant for leukemia—54 (36%) for acute myeloid leukemia, 46 (31%) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 15 (10%) for chronic myeloid leukemia. Thirteen (9%) received transplants for myelodysplastic syndromes, 12 (8%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 10 (6%) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

A little more than half had TBI (85, 56%) as the preparative regimen, 31 (21%) had TBI plus CRT, and 35 (23%) had chemotherapy only.

About three-quarters (116, 77%) had an allogeneic transplant, and 35 (23%) had an autologous transplant.

Results

Overall, HSCT survivors had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

Survivors who received TBI with or without CRT had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001), while survivors who received chemotherapy alone did not (P=0.42).

Adiponectin is involved in insulin sensitization, hepatoprotective action, antiatherogenic action, protection against the development of diabetes, and regulation of lipid metabolism.

Overall, survivors had significantly higher leptin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

This held true regardless of conditioning regimen, although levels for patients who received chemotherapy only were not as significantly high (P=0.02) as for survivors who received TBI (P<0.001).

Leptin helps increase energy expenditure, decrease appetite and food uptake, modify insulin sensitivity on muscles and liver, prevent ectopic lipid deposition, and regulate immune function.

BMI adjusted for age, sex, and Tanner stage was not significantly different between survivors and siblings, but percent fat mass was significantly higher across all conditioning regimens for survivors compared to siblings (P<0.001).

“And this goes along with previous data,” Dr Ketterl said, “that shows sarcopenic obesity is common amongst transplant survivors.”

The researchers believe these significant differences may provide insight into the underlying risk of developing metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications in transplant survivors. 

*Some details in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Adipose tissue

ORLANDO, FL—A recently conducted study confirms that survivors of hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) have increased body fat mass and lower lean mass compared to normal controls. And this is despite having a comparable body mass index (BMI).

Researchers say the abnormalities in adipokine levels—leptin and adiponectin—could provide insight into the mechanisms that contribute to the metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications that often develop in HSCT survivors.

Leptin and adiponectin are associated with obesity, insulin secretion, insulin resistance, endothelial function, vascular homeostasis, and atherosclerosis.

“So knowing that there is a dynamic interplay between obesity and insulin resistance and cytokine and adipokine profiles and, ultimately, insulin-resistance syndrome, we sought to evaluate, as part of a larger study, how treatment effects, including high-dose chemotherapy and radiation, alter cytokine profiles as well as obesity and body composition,” said Tyler G. Ketterl, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington.

Dr Ketterl presented the findings at the 2017 BMT Tandem Meetings as abstract 52.*

Study design

The research team compared 151 HSCT recipients who had survived more than 2 years after transplant with 92 sibling controls.

HSCT survivors were randomly recruited from 2 centers—Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and University of Minnesota Masonic Children’s Hospital—and were younger than 21 years when diagnosed.

The researchers evaluated all participants for body composition, cardiovascular risk factors, and adipokines using anthropomorphic measurements, DXA scans for muscle and fat mass, and laboratory bloodwork.

The team stratified the HSCT survivors by the preparative regimen they had received—total body irradiation (TBI) alone, TBI plus cranial radiation (CRT), and chemotherapy alone.

Study population

Males comprised more than half the study population in each arm, 58% of HSCT survivors and 54% of siblings.

Nine percent and 8% in the HSCT and sibling arms, respectively, were non-white and/or Hispanic, and the mean current ages were 24.0 (range, 10-51) for HSCT survivors and 24.2 (range, 10-48) for siblings.

The survivors’ mean age at diagnosis was 9.1 years (range, 0.4–20.6), their mean age at transplant was 11.2 years (range, 0.6–32.6), and the mean time from transplant to study participation was 13.5 years (range, 2.6–32).

Most patients received a transplant for leukemia—54 (36%) for acute myeloid leukemia, 46 (31%) for acute lymphoblastic leukemia, and 15 (10%) for chronic myeloid leukemia. Thirteen (9%) received transplants for myelodysplastic syndromes, 12 (8%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 10 (6%) for non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

A little more than half had TBI (85, 56%) as the preparative regimen, 31 (21%) had TBI plus CRT, and 35 (23%) had chemotherapy only.

About three-quarters (116, 77%) had an allogeneic transplant, and 35 (23%) had an autologous transplant.

Results

Overall, HSCT survivors had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

Survivors who received TBI with or without CRT had significantly lower adiponectin levels than siblings (P<0.001), while survivors who received chemotherapy alone did not (P=0.42).

Adiponectin is involved in insulin sensitization, hepatoprotective action, antiatherogenic action, protection against the development of diabetes, and regulation of lipid metabolism.

Overall, survivors had significantly higher leptin levels than siblings (P<0.001).

This held true regardless of conditioning regimen, although levels for patients who received chemotherapy only were not as significantly high (P=0.02) as for survivors who received TBI (P<0.001).

Leptin helps increase energy expenditure, decrease appetite and food uptake, modify insulin sensitivity on muscles and liver, prevent ectopic lipid deposition, and regulate immune function.

BMI adjusted for age, sex, and Tanner stage was not significantly different between survivors and siblings, but percent fat mass was significantly higher across all conditioning regimens for survivors compared to siblings (P<0.001).

“And this goes along with previous data,” Dr Ketterl said, “that shows sarcopenic obesity is common amongst transplant survivors.”

The researchers believe these significant differences may provide insight into the underlying risk of developing metabolic syndrome and cardiovascular complications in transplant survivors. 

*Some details in the abstract differ from the presentation.

Photo by Patrick Pelletier

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with imatinib suggests the drug can remain effective beyond 10 years and does not confer “unacceptable” cumulative toxicity, according to researchers.

The group evaluated data on patients who had newly diagnosed, chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) when they began treatment with imatinib.

The median treatment duration was 8.9 years, and the estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% to 84.4%.

The researchers said serious adverse events (AEs) thought to be related to imatinib were uncommon and typically occurred early, within the first year of treatment.

These results were reported in NEJM. The research was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals, which markets imatinib as Gleevec.

“The long-term success of this treatment confirms the remarkable success we’ve seen since the very first Gleevec trials,” said study author Brian Druker, MD, a physician-scientist at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon, who led the original clinical development of Gleevec.

“This study reinforces the notion that we can create effective and non-toxic therapies.”

The study enrolled 1106 newly diagnosed, chronic-phase CML patients at 177 cancer centers in more than 16 countries. Half were assigned to treatment with imatinib (n=533) and the other half to interferon alfa plus cytarabine.

This study allowed for cross-over between the treatment arms, and 65.6% of patients in the cytarabine/interferon alfa arm ultimately crossed over to the imatinib arm.

However, when assessing the effects of imatinib, the researchers focused only on the patients who were first randomized to receive imatinib.

The median follow-up was 10.9 years (range, 0 to 11.7, which included follow-up after patients discontinued study treatment).

Of the patients randomized to imatinib, 48.3% (n=267) completed treatment with the drug. The median duration of first-line imatinib was 8.9 years (range, <0.1 to 11.7).

For patients who did not complete imatinib treatment, reasons for discontinuation included a lack of efficacy (15.9%), withdrawn consent (10.3%), AEs (6.9%), because they proceeded to transplant (3.8%), death (3.4%), protocol violation (3.1%), loss to follow-up (2.7%), cross over to the interferon arm (2.5%), administrative problems (2.2%), abnormal laboratory values (0.5%), or abnormal procedure (0.4%).

Safety

The incidence of serious AEs considered related to imatinib was 9.3% (51/551).

Drug-related serious AEs occurring in at least 2 patients included abdominal pain (n=4), anemia (n=3), congestive cardiac failure (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), vomiting (n=3), alanine aminotransferase increase (n=2), cardiac arrest (n=2), conjunctival hemorrhage (n=2), and melana (n=2).

Six patients had a second neoplasm (benign, malignant, or unspecified).

Response

The cumulative rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCR) at the end of the trial was 82.8%.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of CCR went from 52.8% in the first year to 22.2% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of CCR went from 70.9% (292/412) in the first year to 91.8% (123/134) in year 10.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of major molecular response went from 27.7% in the first year to 34.4% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of major molecular response went from 50.2% (153/305) in the first year to 93.1% (190/204) in year 10.

Progression and survival

The rate of progression was 6.9% (38/553) in the intent-to-treat population. Most of these patients (n=34) progressed during the first 4 years.

There were 260 patients who were still alive and receiving imatinib at 10 years and 96 patients who were alive but not receiving imatinib.

The researchers did not know the survival status of 111 patients, and there were 86 known deaths at 10 years (89 by the end of the study).

The estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% (assuming all 111 patients with unknown status had died) to 84.4% (assuming all 111 were alive).

The cause of death was CML in 50 patients, a secondary malignant condition in 11, a cardiac disorder/cardiovascular disease in 7, infectious disease in 5, and “other” causes in 16 patients.

Photo by Patrick Pelletier

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with imatinib suggests the drug can remain effective beyond 10 years and does not confer “unacceptable” cumulative toxicity, according to researchers.

The group evaluated data on patients who had newly diagnosed, chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) when they began treatment with imatinib.

The median treatment duration was 8.9 years, and the estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% to 84.4%.

The researchers said serious adverse events (AEs) thought to be related to imatinib were uncommon and typically occurred early, within the first year of treatment.

These results were reported in NEJM. The research was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals, which markets imatinib as Gleevec.

“The long-term success of this treatment confirms the remarkable success we’ve seen since the very first Gleevec trials,” said study author Brian Druker, MD, a physician-scientist at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon, who led the original clinical development of Gleevec.

“This study reinforces the notion that we can create effective and non-toxic therapies.”

The study enrolled 1106 newly diagnosed, chronic-phase CML patients at 177 cancer centers in more than 16 countries. Half were assigned to treatment with imatinib (n=533) and the other half to interferon alfa plus cytarabine.

This study allowed for cross-over between the treatment arms, and 65.6% of patients in the cytarabine/interferon alfa arm ultimately crossed over to the imatinib arm.

However, when assessing the effects of imatinib, the researchers focused only on the patients who were first randomized to receive imatinib.

The median follow-up was 10.9 years (range, 0 to 11.7, which included follow-up after patients discontinued study treatment).

Of the patients randomized to imatinib, 48.3% (n=267) completed treatment with the drug. The median duration of first-line imatinib was 8.9 years (range, <0.1 to 11.7).

For patients who did not complete imatinib treatment, reasons for discontinuation included a lack of efficacy (15.9%), withdrawn consent (10.3%), AEs (6.9%), because they proceeded to transplant (3.8%), death (3.4%), protocol violation (3.1%), loss to follow-up (2.7%), cross over to the interferon arm (2.5%), administrative problems (2.2%), abnormal laboratory values (0.5%), or abnormal procedure (0.4%).

Safety

The incidence of serious AEs considered related to imatinib was 9.3% (51/551).

Drug-related serious AEs occurring in at least 2 patients included abdominal pain (n=4), anemia (n=3), congestive cardiac failure (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), vomiting (n=3), alanine aminotransferase increase (n=2), cardiac arrest (n=2), conjunctival hemorrhage (n=2), and melana (n=2).

Six patients had a second neoplasm (benign, malignant, or unspecified).

Response

The cumulative rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCR) at the end of the trial was 82.8%.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of CCR went from 52.8% in the first year to 22.2% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of CCR went from 70.9% (292/412) in the first year to 91.8% (123/134) in year 10.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of major molecular response went from 27.7% in the first year to 34.4% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of major molecular response went from 50.2% (153/305) in the first year to 93.1% (190/204) in year 10.

Progression and survival

The rate of progression was 6.9% (38/553) in the intent-to-treat population. Most of these patients (n=34) progressed during the first 4 years.

There were 260 patients who were still alive and receiving imatinib at 10 years and 96 patients who were alive but not receiving imatinib.

The researchers did not know the survival status of 111 patients, and there were 86 known deaths at 10 years (89 by the end of the study).

The estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% (assuming all 111 patients with unknown status had died) to 84.4% (assuming all 111 were alive).

The cause of death was CML in 50 patients, a secondary malignant condition in 11, a cardiac disorder/cardiovascular disease in 7, infectious disease in 5, and “other” causes in 16 patients.

Photo by Patrick Pelletier

Long-term follow-up of patients treated with imatinib suggests the drug can remain effective beyond 10 years and does not confer “unacceptable” cumulative toxicity, according to researchers.

The group evaluated data on patients who had newly diagnosed, chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) when they began treatment with imatinib.

The median treatment duration was 8.9 years, and the estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% to 84.4%.

The researchers said serious adverse events (AEs) thought to be related to imatinib were uncommon and typically occurred early, within the first year of treatment.

These results were reported in NEJM. The research was funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals, which markets imatinib as Gleevec.

“The long-term success of this treatment confirms the remarkable success we’ve seen since the very first Gleevec trials,” said study author Brian Druker, MD, a physician-scientist at Oregon Health & Science University in Portland, Oregon, who led the original clinical development of Gleevec.

“This study reinforces the notion that we can create effective and non-toxic therapies.”

The study enrolled 1106 newly diagnosed, chronic-phase CML patients at 177 cancer centers in more than 16 countries. Half were assigned to treatment with imatinib (n=533) and the other half to interferon alfa plus cytarabine.

This study allowed for cross-over between the treatment arms, and 65.6% of patients in the cytarabine/interferon alfa arm ultimately crossed over to the imatinib arm.

However, when assessing the effects of imatinib, the researchers focused only on the patients who were first randomized to receive imatinib.

The median follow-up was 10.9 years (range, 0 to 11.7, which included follow-up after patients discontinued study treatment).

Of the patients randomized to imatinib, 48.3% (n=267) completed treatment with the drug. The median duration of first-line imatinib was 8.9 years (range, <0.1 to 11.7).

For patients who did not complete imatinib treatment, reasons for discontinuation included a lack of efficacy (15.9%), withdrawn consent (10.3%), AEs (6.9%), because they proceeded to transplant (3.8%), death (3.4%), protocol violation (3.1%), loss to follow-up (2.7%), cross over to the interferon arm (2.5%), administrative problems (2.2%), abnormal laboratory values (0.5%), or abnormal procedure (0.4%).

Safety

The incidence of serious AEs considered related to imatinib was 9.3% (51/551).

Drug-related serious AEs occurring in at least 2 patients included abdominal pain (n=4), anemia (n=3), congestive cardiac failure (n=3), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (n=3), vomiting (n=3), alanine aminotransferase increase (n=2), cardiac arrest (n=2), conjunctival hemorrhage (n=2), and melana (n=2).

Six patients had a second neoplasm (benign, malignant, or unspecified).

Response

The cumulative rate of complete cytogenetic response (CCR) at the end of the trial was 82.8%.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of CCR went from 52.8% in the first year to 22.2% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of CCR went from 70.9% (292/412) in the first year to 91.8% (123/134) in year 10.

In the intent-to-treat population, the rate of major molecular response went from 27.7% in the first year to 34.4% at year 10.

Among evaluable patients, the rate of major molecular response went from 50.2% (153/305) in the first year to 93.1% (190/204) in year 10.

Progression and survival

The rate of progression was 6.9% (38/553) in the intent-to-treat population. Most of these patients (n=34) progressed during the first 4 years.

There were 260 patients who were still alive and receiving imatinib at 10 years and 96 patients who were alive but not receiving imatinib.

The researchers did not know the survival status of 111 patients, and there were 86 known deaths at 10 years (89 by the end of the study).

The estimated 10-year survival rate ranged from 64.4% (assuming all 111 patients with unknown status had died) to 84.4% (assuming all 111 were alive).

The cause of death was CML in 50 patients, a secondary malignant condition in 11, a cardiac disorder/cardiovascular disease in 7, infectious disease in 5, and “other” causes in 16 patients.

Lab mouse

An experimental drug called LCL161 stimulates the immune system to fight multiple myeloma (MM), according to research published in Nature Medicine.

Investigators said LCL161 exhibited “robust” activity in a transgenic myeloma mouse model and in patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

Single-agent LCL161 did not produce responses in MM patients, but patients did respond to treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

The investigators also found that single-agent LCL161 provided “long-term anti-tumor protection” in mice, and combining LCL161 with an antibody against PD-1 could cure mice of MM.

“The drug, LCL161, was initially developed to promote tumor death,” said study author Marta Chesi, PhD, of Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale.

“However, we found that the drug does not kill tumor cells directly. Rather, it makes them more visible to the immune system that recognizes them as foreign invaders and eliminates them.”

Dr Chesi and her colleagues explained that the cellular inhibitors of apoptosis (cIAP) 1 and 2 have been identified as potential therapeutic targets in some cancers.

And LCL161 is a small-molecule IAP antagonist that induces tumor necrosis factor-mediated apoptosis in cancer cells. However, the investigators found that LCL161 was not directly cytotoxic to MM cells.

Instead, the drug upregulated tumor-cell-autonomous type I interferon signaling and induced an acute inflammatory response. This led to the activation of macrophages and dendritic cells, which prompted phagocytosis in MM cells.

Results in mice

The investigators first tested LCL161 alone (at a dose previously shown to be well-tolerated) in Vk*MYC transgenic mice with established MM.

The team said they observed a reduction in tumor burden that was comparable to that observed in response to drugs currently used to treat MM—carfilzomib, bortezomib, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, panobinostat, dexamethasone, and pomalidomide.

The investigators then tested the combination of LCL161 and a PD1 antibody in Vk12598-tumor-bearing mice.

The team said the combination was curative in all mice that completed 2 weeks of treatment. In fact, it was more effective than combination treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

Results in patients

Dr Chesi and her colleagues conducted a phase 2 trial of LCL161 in 25 patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Patients could receive cyclophosphamide if they failed to respond or progressed after 8 weeks of treatment with LCL161 alone.

The patients’ median age was 68 (range, 47-90), and they had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-6). Forty-four percent of patients had high-risk features, 28% had relapsed disease, and 72% had relapsed and refractory disease.

Four patients experienced grade 2 cytokine release syndrome when they received LCL161 at a dose of 1800 mg weekly, so the dose was lowered to 1200 mg.

None of the patients responded to single-agent LCL161. So 23 of the patients received 500 mg of weekly cyclophosphamide as well.

There was 1 complete response to the combination therapy, 1 very good partial response, 2 partial responses, and 1 minimal response. The median progression-free survival in these patients was 10 months.

Grade 3 adverse events included decrease in neutrophil count (28%), decrease in lymphocyte count (28%), anemia (24%), fatigue (16%), hyperglycemia (12%), syncope (12%), decrease in white blood cell count (12%), decrease in platelet count (8%), increase in lymphocyte count (8%), nausea (4%), vomiting (4%), diarrhea (4%), maculo-papular rash (4%), hypotension (4%), lung infection (4%), pain in extremity (4%), and urticaria (4%).

Grade 4 events included decrease in lymphocyte count (24%), decrease in neutrophil count (8%), decrease in white blood cell count (8%), hyperuricemia (4%), decrease in platelet count (4%), and sepsis (4%).

Based on these results, the investigators said the combination of LCL161 and cyclophosphamide is “an attractive platform for future trials,” and the same is true for LCL161 in combination with anti-PD1 therapy.

The phase 2 trial was sponsored by Mayo Clinic and the National Cancer Institute. Novartis provided LCL161 for this research and supported the trial. 

Lab mouse

An experimental drug called LCL161 stimulates the immune system to fight multiple myeloma (MM), according to research published in Nature Medicine.

Investigators said LCL161 exhibited “robust” activity in a transgenic myeloma mouse model and in patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

Single-agent LCL161 did not produce responses in MM patients, but patients did respond to treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

The investigators also found that single-agent LCL161 provided “long-term anti-tumor protection” in mice, and combining LCL161 with an antibody against PD-1 could cure mice of MM.

“The drug, LCL161, was initially developed to promote tumor death,” said study author Marta Chesi, PhD, of Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale.

“However, we found that the drug does not kill tumor cells directly. Rather, it makes them more visible to the immune system that recognizes them as foreign invaders and eliminates them.”

Dr Chesi and her colleagues explained that the cellular inhibitors of apoptosis (cIAP) 1 and 2 have been identified as potential therapeutic targets in some cancers.

And LCL161 is a small-molecule IAP antagonist that induces tumor necrosis factor-mediated apoptosis in cancer cells. However, the investigators found that LCL161 was not directly cytotoxic to MM cells.

Instead, the drug upregulated tumor-cell-autonomous type I interferon signaling and induced an acute inflammatory response. This led to the activation of macrophages and dendritic cells, which prompted phagocytosis in MM cells.

Results in mice

The investigators first tested LCL161 alone (at a dose previously shown to be well-tolerated) in Vk*MYC transgenic mice with established MM.

The team said they observed a reduction in tumor burden that was comparable to that observed in response to drugs currently used to treat MM—carfilzomib, bortezomib, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, panobinostat, dexamethasone, and pomalidomide.

The investigators then tested the combination of LCL161 and a PD1 antibody in Vk12598-tumor-bearing mice.

The team said the combination was curative in all mice that completed 2 weeks of treatment. In fact, it was more effective than combination treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

Results in patients

Dr Chesi and her colleagues conducted a phase 2 trial of LCL161 in 25 patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Patients could receive cyclophosphamide if they failed to respond or progressed after 8 weeks of treatment with LCL161 alone.

The patients’ median age was 68 (range, 47-90), and they had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-6). Forty-four percent of patients had high-risk features, 28% had relapsed disease, and 72% had relapsed and refractory disease.

Four patients experienced grade 2 cytokine release syndrome when they received LCL161 at a dose of 1800 mg weekly, so the dose was lowered to 1200 mg.

None of the patients responded to single-agent LCL161. So 23 of the patients received 500 mg of weekly cyclophosphamide as well.

There was 1 complete response to the combination therapy, 1 very good partial response, 2 partial responses, and 1 minimal response. The median progression-free survival in these patients was 10 months.

Grade 3 adverse events included decrease in neutrophil count (28%), decrease in lymphocyte count (28%), anemia (24%), fatigue (16%), hyperglycemia (12%), syncope (12%), decrease in white blood cell count (12%), decrease in platelet count (8%), increase in lymphocyte count (8%), nausea (4%), vomiting (4%), diarrhea (4%), maculo-papular rash (4%), hypotension (4%), lung infection (4%), pain in extremity (4%), and urticaria (4%).

Grade 4 events included decrease in lymphocyte count (24%), decrease in neutrophil count (8%), decrease in white blood cell count (8%), hyperuricemia (4%), decrease in platelet count (4%), and sepsis (4%).

Based on these results, the investigators said the combination of LCL161 and cyclophosphamide is “an attractive platform for future trials,” and the same is true for LCL161 in combination with anti-PD1 therapy.

The phase 2 trial was sponsored by Mayo Clinic and the National Cancer Institute. Novartis provided LCL161 for this research and supported the trial. 

Lab mouse

An experimental drug called LCL161 stimulates the immune system to fight multiple myeloma (MM), according to research published in Nature Medicine.

Investigators said LCL161 exhibited “robust” activity in a transgenic myeloma mouse model and in patients with relapsed/refractory MM.

Single-agent LCL161 did not produce responses in MM patients, but patients did respond to treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

The investigators also found that single-agent LCL161 provided “long-term anti-tumor protection” in mice, and combining LCL161 with an antibody against PD-1 could cure mice of MM.

“The drug, LCL161, was initially developed to promote tumor death,” said study author Marta Chesi, PhD, of Mayo Clinic Arizona in Scottsdale.

“However, we found that the drug does not kill tumor cells directly. Rather, it makes them more visible to the immune system that recognizes them as foreign invaders and eliminates them.”

Dr Chesi and her colleagues explained that the cellular inhibitors of apoptosis (cIAP) 1 and 2 have been identified as potential therapeutic targets in some cancers.

And LCL161 is a small-molecule IAP antagonist that induces tumor necrosis factor-mediated apoptosis in cancer cells. However, the investigators found that LCL161 was not directly cytotoxic to MM cells.

Instead, the drug upregulated tumor-cell-autonomous type I interferon signaling and induced an acute inflammatory response. This led to the activation of macrophages and dendritic cells, which prompted phagocytosis in MM cells.

Results in mice

The investigators first tested LCL161 alone (at a dose previously shown to be well-tolerated) in Vk*MYC transgenic mice with established MM.

The team said they observed a reduction in tumor burden that was comparable to that observed in response to drugs currently used to treat MM—carfilzomib, bortezomib, melphalan, cyclophosphamide, panobinostat, dexamethasone, and pomalidomide.

The investigators then tested the combination of LCL161 and a PD1 antibody in Vk12598-tumor-bearing mice.

The team said the combination was curative in all mice that completed 2 weeks of treatment. In fact, it was more effective than combination treatment with LCL161 and cyclophosphamide.

Results in patients

Dr Chesi and her colleagues conducted a phase 2 trial of LCL161 in 25 patients with relapsed/refractory MM. Patients could receive cyclophosphamide if they failed to respond or progressed after 8 weeks of treatment with LCL161 alone.

The patients’ median age was 68 (range, 47-90), and they had a median of 3 prior therapies (range, 1-6). Forty-four percent of patients had high-risk features, 28% had relapsed disease, and 72% had relapsed and refractory disease.

Four patients experienced grade 2 cytokine release syndrome when they received LCL161 at a dose of 1800 mg weekly, so the dose was lowered to 1200 mg.

None of the patients responded to single-agent LCL161. So 23 of the patients received 500 mg of weekly cyclophosphamide as well.

There was 1 complete response to the combination therapy, 1 very good partial response, 2 partial responses, and 1 minimal response. The median progression-free survival in these patients was 10 months.

Grade 3 adverse events included decrease in neutrophil count (28%), decrease in lymphocyte count (28%), anemia (24%), fatigue (16%), hyperglycemia (12%), syncope (12%), decrease in white blood cell count (12%), decrease in platelet count (8%), increase in lymphocyte count (8%), nausea (4%), vomiting (4%), diarrhea (4%), maculo-papular rash (4%), hypotension (4%), lung infection (4%), pain in extremity (4%), and urticaria (4%).

Grade 4 events included decrease in lymphocyte count (24%), decrease in neutrophil count (8%), decrease in white blood cell count (8%), hyperuricemia (4%), decrease in platelet count (4%), and sepsis (4%).

Based on these results, the investigators said the combination of LCL161 and cyclophosphamide is “an attractive platform for future trials,” and the same is true for LCL161 in combination with anti-PD1 therapy.

The phase 2 trial was sponsored by Mayo Clinic and the National Cancer Institute. Novartis provided LCL161 for this research and supported the trial. 

Photo from UAB Hospital

A retrospective study indicates that a high transfusion ratio of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) to red blood cells (RBCs) may not be beneficial for surgical patients who do not have traumatic injuries.

In fact, the data suggest a high FFP:RBC ratio may be harmful for some of these patients.

“The strategy of giving patients requiring massive transfusion greater amounts of fresh frozen plasma, relative to the amount of red blood cells, has spilled over from trauma patients into unstudied patient populations,” said Daniel Dante Yeh, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

“This may have important consequences, since our results suggest that certain populations may be harmed by this practice.”

Dr Yeh and his colleagues reported these results in JAMA Surgery.

The researchers reviewed all massive transfusions performed at Massachusetts General Hospital from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2012.

A transfusion qualified as “massive” if at least 10 units of RBCs were given in the first 24 hours after a patient’s admission to the operating room, emergency department, or intensive care unit.

The researchers included all patients who received massive transfusions during the study period and survived more than 30 minutes after hospital arrival.

According to these criteria, there were 865 massive transfusion events. The total number of units transfused was 16,569 for RBCs, 13,933 for FFP, 5228 for cryoprecipitate, and 22,635 for platelets.

A majority of the massive transfusion recipients were not trauma patients (88.7%). Most of the transfusions were performed for intraoperative bleeding (62.9%).

The researchers compared patients who survived at least 30 days from hospital arrival to those who did not. Patients who died were older and received more RBCs (P<0.001), FFP (P<0.001), and cryoprecipitate (P=0.008).

However, the FFP:RBC ratios of survivors and non-survivors were similar. The median was 1:1.5 for survivors and 1:1.4 for non-survivors (P=0.43).

Patients without trauma

Among all non-trauma patients (n=767), there was no significant difference in the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for 30-day mortality between patients who received a transfusion with a high FFP:RBC ratio and those who received one with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=1.10, P=0.65). (The analysis was adjusted for patient age and total units of RBCs transfused.)

Among patients undergoing vascular surgery, those who received transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were less likely to die within 30 days than those who received transfusions with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=0.16, P=0.02).

However, among general surgery and medical service patients, those receiving transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were more likely to die within 30 days than those receiving low-ratio transfusions. The aOR was 4.27 (P=0.02) for general surgery and 8.48 (P=0.02) for medicine.

“Finding evidence of increased mortality in some patients was surprising because that is directly contradictory to what is expected and intended,” Dr Yeh said. “Avoiding unnecessary FFP transfusion is important because there have been reports that associated the use of excess FFP with worse outcomes among patients that required less-than-massive transfusions.”

“Because our study is retrospective, it can only point to the need for further research. Ratio-based transfusion has been studied in trauma patients, most recently in a landmark, multicenter, randomized study called the PROPRR trial. Similar studies now need to be performed in non-trauma patients before the approach can be accepted as standard practice here at MGH [Massachusetts General Hospital] and elsewhere.”

Photo from UAB Hospital

A retrospective study indicates that a high transfusion ratio of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) to red blood cells (RBCs) may not be beneficial for surgical patients who do not have traumatic injuries.

In fact, the data suggest a high FFP:RBC ratio may be harmful for some of these patients.

“The strategy of giving patients requiring massive transfusion greater amounts of fresh frozen plasma, relative to the amount of red blood cells, has spilled over from trauma patients into unstudied patient populations,” said Daniel Dante Yeh, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

“This may have important consequences, since our results suggest that certain populations may be harmed by this practice.”

Dr Yeh and his colleagues reported these results in JAMA Surgery.

The researchers reviewed all massive transfusions performed at Massachusetts General Hospital from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2012.

A transfusion qualified as “massive” if at least 10 units of RBCs were given in the first 24 hours after a patient’s admission to the operating room, emergency department, or intensive care unit.

The researchers included all patients who received massive transfusions during the study period and survived more than 30 minutes after hospital arrival.

According to these criteria, there were 865 massive transfusion events. The total number of units transfused was 16,569 for RBCs, 13,933 for FFP, 5228 for cryoprecipitate, and 22,635 for platelets.

A majority of the massive transfusion recipients were not trauma patients (88.7%). Most of the transfusions were performed for intraoperative bleeding (62.9%).

The researchers compared patients who survived at least 30 days from hospital arrival to those who did not. Patients who died were older and received more RBCs (P<0.001), FFP (P<0.001), and cryoprecipitate (P=0.008).

However, the FFP:RBC ratios of survivors and non-survivors were similar. The median was 1:1.5 for survivors and 1:1.4 for non-survivors (P=0.43).

Patients without trauma

Among all non-trauma patients (n=767), there was no significant difference in the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for 30-day mortality between patients who received a transfusion with a high FFP:RBC ratio and those who received one with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=1.10, P=0.65). (The analysis was adjusted for patient age and total units of RBCs transfused.)

Among patients undergoing vascular surgery, those who received transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were less likely to die within 30 days than those who received transfusions with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=0.16, P=0.02).

However, among general surgery and medical service patients, those receiving transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were more likely to die within 30 days than those receiving low-ratio transfusions. The aOR was 4.27 (P=0.02) for general surgery and 8.48 (P=0.02) for medicine.

“Finding evidence of increased mortality in some patients was surprising because that is directly contradictory to what is expected and intended,” Dr Yeh said. “Avoiding unnecessary FFP transfusion is important because there have been reports that associated the use of excess FFP with worse outcomes among patients that required less-than-massive transfusions.”

“Because our study is retrospective, it can only point to the need for further research. Ratio-based transfusion has been studied in trauma patients, most recently in a landmark, multicenter, randomized study called the PROPRR trial. Similar studies now need to be performed in non-trauma patients before the approach can be accepted as standard practice here at MGH [Massachusetts General Hospital] and elsewhere.”

Photo from UAB Hospital

A retrospective study indicates that a high transfusion ratio of fresh frozen plasma (FFP) to red blood cells (RBCs) may not be beneficial for surgical patients who do not have traumatic injuries.

In fact, the data suggest a high FFP:RBC ratio may be harmful for some of these patients.

“The strategy of giving patients requiring massive transfusion greater amounts of fresh frozen plasma, relative to the amount of red blood cells, has spilled over from trauma patients into unstudied patient populations,” said Daniel Dante Yeh, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston.

“This may have important consequences, since our results suggest that certain populations may be harmed by this practice.”

Dr Yeh and his colleagues reported these results in JAMA Surgery.

The researchers reviewed all massive transfusions performed at Massachusetts General Hospital from January 1, 2009, through December 31, 2012.

A transfusion qualified as “massive” if at least 10 units of RBCs were given in the first 24 hours after a patient’s admission to the operating room, emergency department, or intensive care unit.

The researchers included all patients who received massive transfusions during the study period and survived more than 30 minutes after hospital arrival.

According to these criteria, there were 865 massive transfusion events. The total number of units transfused was 16,569 for RBCs, 13,933 for FFP, 5228 for cryoprecipitate, and 22,635 for platelets.

A majority of the massive transfusion recipients were not trauma patients (88.7%). Most of the transfusions were performed for intraoperative bleeding (62.9%).

The researchers compared patients who survived at least 30 days from hospital arrival to those who did not. Patients who died were older and received more RBCs (P<0.001), FFP (P<0.001), and cryoprecipitate (P=0.008).

However, the FFP:RBC ratios of survivors and non-survivors were similar. The median was 1:1.5 for survivors and 1:1.4 for non-survivors (P=0.43).

Patients without trauma

Among all non-trauma patients (n=767), there was no significant difference in the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) for 30-day mortality between patients who received a transfusion with a high FFP:RBC ratio and those who received one with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=1.10, P=0.65). (The analysis was adjusted for patient age and total units of RBCs transfused.)

Among patients undergoing vascular surgery, those who received transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were less likely to die within 30 days than those who received transfusions with a low FFP:RBC ratio (aOR=0.16, P=0.02).

However, among general surgery and medical service patients, those receiving transfusions with a high FFP:RBC ratio were more likely to die within 30 days than those receiving low-ratio transfusions. The aOR was 4.27 (P=0.02) for general surgery and 8.48 (P=0.02) for medicine.

“Finding evidence of increased mortality in some patients was surprising because that is directly contradictory to what is expected and intended,” Dr Yeh said. “Avoiding unnecessary FFP transfusion is important because there have been reports that associated the use of excess FFP with worse outcomes among patients that required less-than-massive transfusions.”

“Because our study is retrospective, it can only point to the need for further research. Ratio-based transfusion has been studied in trauma patients, most recently in a landmark, multicenter, randomized study called the PROPRR trial. Similar studies now need to be performed in non-trauma patients before the approach can be accepted as standard practice here at MGH [Massachusetts General Hospital] and elsewhere.”