Hematology Times

Blood for transfusion

Photo from UAB Hospital

SAN DIEGO—Results of the phase 3 TRIST study support the use of a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) to treat hematologic disorders.

The study suggests a restrictive strategy—in which patients receive 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin level is below 70 g/L—is non-inferior to a liberal strategy—in which patients receive 2 units if their hemoglobin level is below 90 g/L.

Clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were similar with both strategies.

Therefore, a restrictive strategy should be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing HSCT, according to study investigator Jason Tay, MD, of the University of Calgary/Tom Baker Cancer Center in Alberta, Canada.

Dr Tay presented results of the TRIST study at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1032*).

He noted that recent AABB guidelines recommend using a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy in most circumstances. However, these recommendations do not apply to patients treated for hematologic or oncologic diseases who are at risk of bleeding, as there is a lack of randomized trials in such patients.

So Dr Tay and his colleagues decided to conduct a randomized, controlled trial comparing 2 RBC transfusion strategies in patients undergoing HSCT to treat hematologic disorders.

The study enrolled 300 patients who underwent HSCT between March 28, 2011, and February 3, 2016, at 4 Canadian centers.

The patients were randomized to 1 of 2 transfusion strategies from day 0 to day 100 post-HSCT:

• Restrictive strategy (n=149)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 70 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 70-90 g/L
• Liberal strategy (n=150)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 90 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 90-110 g/L.

The median age was 57.47 (range, 48.94-62.66) in the restrictive group and 56.04 (range, 48.27-62.24) in the liberal group. Most patients were male—65.10% and 62.67%, respectively.

Patients had acute leukemia (25.50% and 24.00%, respectively), chronic leukemia (6.71% and 6.00%), myeloproliferative disorders (2.68% and 2.00%), lymphoma (30.87% and 33.33%), myeloma (24.16% and 28.00%), and other disorders (10.07% and 6.67%, respectively).

About half of patients in each transfusion group received an autologous HSCT (49.66% and 50.00%, respectively), and about half received an allogeneic HSCT (50.34% and 50.00%, respectively).

Transfusion use

The total number of RBC units transfused was 407 in the restrictive group and 753 in the liberal group. The median number of RBC units transfused per patient was 2 (range, 0-2) and 4 (range, 2-6), respectively. The mean number was 2.73 and 5.02, respectively (P=0.0004).

The total number of RBC transfusion episodes was 234 in the restrictive group and 407 in the liberal group. The median number per patient was 1 (range, 0-2) and 2 (range, 1-3), respectively, and the mean was 1.57 and 2.70, respectively (P=0.002).

The median storage duration of the RBC units transfused was 17 days (range, 13-23) in the restrictive group and 20 days (range, 15-25) in the liberal group. The mean was 18.46 and 19.95, respectively (P=0.0003).

The between-group difference in the overall mean pre-transfusion hemoglobin per patient over the study period was 13.71 g/L.

The median number of platelet units transfused was 2 (range, 1-3) in the

restrictive group and 3 (range, 1-4) in the liberal group. The mean was 3.84 and 3.61, respectively (P=0.6930).

The median number of platelet transfusion episodes was 2 for both groups (range, 1-3 and

1-4, respectively). The mean was 3.84 in the restrictive group and 3.61 in the liberal group (P=0.77).

Adherence

In both groups, there were cases of non-adherence to the trigger hemoglobin value.

There were 49 non-adherent patients (32.89%) in the restrictive group—35 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 14 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

There were 83 non-adherent patients (55.3%) in the liberal group—11 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 72 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

Sixty-nine patients (46.31%) in the restrictive group and 21 (14%) in the liberal group never received an RBC transfusion.

Outcomes

The study’s primary endpoint was HRQOL, as measured by the FACT-BMT scale.

The total FACT-BMT score at day 100 was 116.3 (range, 98-129.2) in the restrictive group and 109.2 (range, 92.1-125.2) in the liberal group (P<0.0001 for non-inferiority).

Non-inferiority in HRQOL was shown for all other time points assessed as well—day 7 (P<0.001), day 14 (P<0.0001), day 28 (P<0.0001), and day 60 (P<0.0001). Total FACT-BMT scores at all time points were higher for patients in the restrictive group than the liberal one.

The study’s secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes and FACT-Anemia scores at several time points.

There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the restrictive and liberal transfusion groups.

There were 2 cases of transplant-related mortality in the restrictive group and 4 in the liberal group (P=0.42). And there were 4 cases of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in both groups (P=0.98).

The median Bearman toxicity score at day 28 was 2 in both groups (range, 1-3 and 1-4, respectively). The mean was 2.5 in the restrictive group and 2.8 in the liberal group (P=0.33).

There was no significant between-group difference in WHO bleeding score at day 14 (P=0.13), day 28 (P=0.81), or day 100 (P=0.28).

There was no significant difference between the transfusion groups in the length of hospital stay for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.95) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.23) or in the number of hospital readmissions for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.29) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.81).

The total FACT-Anemia score was significantly higher in the restrictive transfusion group at day 7 (P=0.03) and day 60 (P=0.03) post-HSCT.

However, there was no significant between-group difference in FACT-Anemia score at 14 days (P=0.07), 28 days (P=0.51), or 100 days (P=0.14).

Dr Tay said these results suggest a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is non-inferior to a liberal one in patients undergoing HSCT to treat a hematologic disorder.

“Moreover, a restrictive strategy is safe and results in less blood transfusions,” he said. “We’d like to suggest that a strategy of 70 g/L can be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing a stem cell transplantation.”

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

Blood for transfusion

Photo from UAB Hospital

SAN DIEGO—Results of the phase 3 TRIST study support the use of a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) to treat hematologic disorders.

The study suggests a restrictive strategy—in which patients receive 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin level is below 70 g/L—is non-inferior to a liberal strategy—in which patients receive 2 units if their hemoglobin level is below 90 g/L.

Clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were similar with both strategies.

Therefore, a restrictive strategy should be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing HSCT, according to study investigator Jason Tay, MD, of the University of Calgary/Tom Baker Cancer Center in Alberta, Canada.

Dr Tay presented results of the TRIST study at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1032*).

He noted that recent AABB guidelines recommend using a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy in most circumstances. However, these recommendations do not apply to patients treated for hematologic or oncologic diseases who are at risk of bleeding, as there is a lack of randomized trials in such patients.

So Dr Tay and his colleagues decided to conduct a randomized, controlled trial comparing 2 RBC transfusion strategies in patients undergoing HSCT to treat hematologic disorders.

The study enrolled 300 patients who underwent HSCT between March 28, 2011, and February 3, 2016, at 4 Canadian centers.

The patients were randomized to 1 of 2 transfusion strategies from day 0 to day 100 post-HSCT:

• Restrictive strategy (n=149)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 70 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 70-90 g/L
• Liberal strategy (n=150)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 90 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 90-110 g/L.

The median age was 57.47 (range, 48.94-62.66) in the restrictive group and 56.04 (range, 48.27-62.24) in the liberal group. Most patients were male—65.10% and 62.67%, respectively.

Patients had acute leukemia (25.50% and 24.00%, respectively), chronic leukemia (6.71% and 6.00%), myeloproliferative disorders (2.68% and 2.00%), lymphoma (30.87% and 33.33%), myeloma (24.16% and 28.00%), and other disorders (10.07% and 6.67%, respectively).

About half of patients in each transfusion group received an autologous HSCT (49.66% and 50.00%, respectively), and about half received an allogeneic HSCT (50.34% and 50.00%, respectively).

Transfusion use

The total number of RBC units transfused was 407 in the restrictive group and 753 in the liberal group. The median number of RBC units transfused per patient was 2 (range, 0-2) and 4 (range, 2-6), respectively. The mean number was 2.73 and 5.02, respectively (P=0.0004).

The total number of RBC transfusion episodes was 234 in the restrictive group and 407 in the liberal group. The median number per patient was 1 (range, 0-2) and 2 (range, 1-3), respectively, and the mean was 1.57 and 2.70, respectively (P=0.002).

The median storage duration of the RBC units transfused was 17 days (range, 13-23) in the restrictive group and 20 days (range, 15-25) in the liberal group. The mean was 18.46 and 19.95, respectively (P=0.0003).

The between-group difference in the overall mean pre-transfusion hemoglobin per patient over the study period was 13.71 g/L.

The median number of platelet units transfused was 2 (range, 1-3) in the

restrictive group and 3 (range, 1-4) in the liberal group. The mean was 3.84 and 3.61, respectively (P=0.6930).

The median number of platelet transfusion episodes was 2 for both groups (range, 1-3 and

1-4, respectively). The mean was 3.84 in the restrictive group and 3.61 in the liberal group (P=0.77).

Adherence

In both groups, there were cases of non-adherence to the trigger hemoglobin value.

There were 49 non-adherent patients (32.89%) in the restrictive group—35 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 14 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

There were 83 non-adherent patients (55.3%) in the liberal group—11 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 72 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

Sixty-nine patients (46.31%) in the restrictive group and 21 (14%) in the liberal group never received an RBC transfusion.

Outcomes

The study’s primary endpoint was HRQOL, as measured by the FACT-BMT scale.

The total FACT-BMT score at day 100 was 116.3 (range, 98-129.2) in the restrictive group and 109.2 (range, 92.1-125.2) in the liberal group (P<0.0001 for non-inferiority).

Non-inferiority in HRQOL was shown for all other time points assessed as well—day 7 (P<0.001), day 14 (P<0.0001), day 28 (P<0.0001), and day 60 (P<0.0001). Total FACT-BMT scores at all time points were higher for patients in the restrictive group than the liberal one.

The study’s secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes and FACT-Anemia scores at several time points.

There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the restrictive and liberal transfusion groups.

There were 2 cases of transplant-related mortality in the restrictive group and 4 in the liberal group (P=0.42). And there were 4 cases of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in both groups (P=0.98).

The median Bearman toxicity score at day 28 was 2 in both groups (range, 1-3 and 1-4, respectively). The mean was 2.5 in the restrictive group and 2.8 in the liberal group (P=0.33).

There was no significant between-group difference in WHO bleeding score at day 14 (P=0.13), day 28 (P=0.81), or day 100 (P=0.28).

There was no significant difference between the transfusion groups in the length of hospital stay for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.95) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.23) or in the number of hospital readmissions for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.29) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.81).

The total FACT-Anemia score was significantly higher in the restrictive transfusion group at day 7 (P=0.03) and day 60 (P=0.03) post-HSCT.

However, there was no significant between-group difference in FACT-Anemia score at 14 days (P=0.07), 28 days (P=0.51), or 100 days (P=0.14).

Dr Tay said these results suggest a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is non-inferior to a liberal one in patients undergoing HSCT to treat a hematologic disorder.

“Moreover, a restrictive strategy is safe and results in less blood transfusions,” he said. “We’d like to suggest that a strategy of 70 g/L can be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing a stem cell transplantation.”

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

Blood for transfusion

Photo from UAB Hospital

SAN DIEGO—Results of the phase 3 TRIST study support the use of a restrictive red blood cell (RBC) transfusion strategy in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) to treat hematologic disorders.

The study suggests a restrictive strategy—in which patients receive 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin level is below 70 g/L—is non-inferior to a liberal strategy—in which patients receive 2 units if their hemoglobin level is below 90 g/L.

Clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were similar with both strategies.

Therefore, a restrictive strategy should be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing HSCT, according to study investigator Jason Tay, MD, of the University of Calgary/Tom Baker Cancer Center in Alberta, Canada.

Dr Tay presented results of the TRIST study at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1032*).

He noted that recent AABB guidelines recommend using a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy in most circumstances. However, these recommendations do not apply to patients treated for hematologic or oncologic diseases who are at risk of bleeding, as there is a lack of randomized trials in such patients.

So Dr Tay and his colleagues decided to conduct a randomized, controlled trial comparing 2 RBC transfusion strategies in patients undergoing HSCT to treat hematologic disorders.

The study enrolled 300 patients who underwent HSCT between March 28, 2011, and February 3, 2016, at 4 Canadian centers.

The patients were randomized to 1 of 2 transfusion strategies from day 0 to day 100 post-HSCT:

• Restrictive strategy (n=149)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 70 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 70-90 g/L
• Liberal strategy (n=150)—patients received 2 RBC units if their hemoglobin levels were below 90 g/L, to target a hemoglobin level of 90-110 g/L.

The median age was 57.47 (range, 48.94-62.66) in the restrictive group and 56.04 (range, 48.27-62.24) in the liberal group. Most patients were male—65.10% and 62.67%, respectively.

Patients had acute leukemia (25.50% and 24.00%, respectively), chronic leukemia (6.71% and 6.00%), myeloproliferative disorders (2.68% and 2.00%), lymphoma (30.87% and 33.33%), myeloma (24.16% and 28.00%), and other disorders (10.07% and 6.67%, respectively).

About half of patients in each transfusion group received an autologous HSCT (49.66% and 50.00%, respectively), and about half received an allogeneic HSCT (50.34% and 50.00%, respectively).

Transfusion use

The total number of RBC units transfused was 407 in the restrictive group and 753 in the liberal group. The median number of RBC units transfused per patient was 2 (range, 0-2) and 4 (range, 2-6), respectively. The mean number was 2.73 and 5.02, respectively (P=0.0004).

The total number of RBC transfusion episodes was 234 in the restrictive group and 407 in the liberal group. The median number per patient was 1 (range, 0-2) and 2 (range, 1-3), respectively, and the mean was 1.57 and 2.70, respectively (P=0.002).

The median storage duration of the RBC units transfused was 17 days (range, 13-23) in the restrictive group and 20 days (range, 15-25) in the liberal group. The mean was 18.46 and 19.95, respectively (P=0.0003).

The between-group difference in the overall mean pre-transfusion hemoglobin per patient over the study period was 13.71 g/L.

The median number of platelet units transfused was 2 (range, 1-3) in the

restrictive group and 3 (range, 1-4) in the liberal group. The mean was 3.84 and 3.61, respectively (P=0.6930).

The median number of platelet transfusion episodes was 2 for both groups (range, 1-3 and

1-4, respectively). The mean was 3.84 in the restrictive group and 3.61 in the liberal group (P=0.77).

Adherence

In both groups, there were cases of non-adherence to the trigger hemoglobin value.

There were 49 non-adherent patients (32.89%) in the restrictive group—35 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 14 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

There were 83 non-adherent patients (55.3%) in the liberal group—11 in whom an RBC transfusion occurred above the assigned trigger and 72 in whom a transfusion did not occur when the assigned trigger was reached.

Sixty-nine patients (46.31%) in the restrictive group and 21 (14%) in the liberal group never received an RBC transfusion.

Outcomes

The study’s primary endpoint was HRQOL, as measured by the FACT-BMT scale.

The total FACT-BMT score at day 100 was 116.3 (range, 98-129.2) in the restrictive group and 109.2 (range, 92.1-125.2) in the liberal group (P<0.0001 for non-inferiority).

Non-inferiority in HRQOL was shown for all other time points assessed as well—day 7 (P<0.001), day 14 (P<0.0001), day 28 (P<0.0001), and day 60 (P<0.0001). Total FACT-BMT scores at all time points were higher for patients in the restrictive group than the liberal one.

The study’s secondary endpoints included clinical outcomes and FACT-Anemia scores at several time points.

There was no significant difference in clinical outcomes between the restrictive and liberal transfusion groups.

There were 2 cases of transplant-related mortality in the restrictive group and 4 in the liberal group (P=0.42). And there were 4 cases of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome in both groups (P=0.98).

The median Bearman toxicity score at day 28 was 2 in both groups (range, 1-3 and 1-4, respectively). The mean was 2.5 in the restrictive group and 2.8 in the liberal group (P=0.33).

There was no significant between-group difference in WHO bleeding score at day 14 (P=0.13), day 28 (P=0.81), or day 100 (P=0.28).

There was no significant difference between the transfusion groups in the length of hospital stay for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.95) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.23) or in the number of hospital readmissions for patients who received autologous HSCT (P=0.29) or allogeneic HSCT (P=0.81).

The total FACT-Anemia score was significantly higher in the restrictive transfusion group at day 7 (P=0.03) and day 60 (P=0.03) post-HSCT.

However, there was no significant between-group difference in FACT-Anemia score at 14 days (P=0.07), 28 days (P=0.51), or 100 days (P=0.14).

Dr Tay said these results suggest a restrictive RBC transfusion strategy is non-inferior to a liberal one in patients undergoing HSCT to treat a hematologic disorder.

“Moreover, a restrictive strategy is safe and results in less blood transfusions,” he said. “We’d like to suggest that a strategy of 70 g/L can be considered the standard of care in patients undergoing a stem cell transplantation.”

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

Johns Hopkins clinicians caring

for a child in the pediatric ICU

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

New research suggests clinical practice guidelines can reduce the number of potentially unnecessary blood culture draws in critically ill children without endangering doctors’ ability to diagnose and treat sepsis.

The guidelines consist of 2 documents—a screening checklist and a decision algorithm.

In a single-center study, clinicians consulted these documents when considering ordering blood cultures for patients in a pediatric intensive care unit (ICU).

The clinicians said there was an immediate reduction in unnecessary blood draws after they began using these guidelines, and they were able to sustain the reduction over time.

Aaron Milstone, MD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and his colleagues described these results in JAMA Pediatrics.

The guidelines were created by a team of nurses, vascular access specialists, and physicians across specialties. The team created a fever/sepsis screening checklist and an accompanying decision-making flow chart designed to guide clinicians in the decision to draw blood.

These tools were posted in the pediatric ICU at The Johns Hopkins Hospital with instructions to be completed at the bedside by nurses and physicians. Each week, the team would meet to evaluate the data gathered, review how many cultures were sent from the unit, and discuss in detail individual cases where blood draws were necessary.

The researchers compared patient length of stay, mortality, readmission, and the number of episodes of suspected septic shock at the hospital before and after this intervention was implemented.

In the year before the team introduced the tools, there were 2204 patient visits to the pediatric ICU and 1807 blood cultures drawn.

After the intervention, there were 984 blood cultures drawn for 2356 patient visits, almost halving the number of blood cultures per patient day.

Comparing the pre- and post-intervention periods, there was no statistical difference in the occurrence of septic shock, hospital mortality, or hospital readmission.

Dr Milstone said this means patients experienced no increased risk of a missed sepsis diagnosis because of the intervention.

He and his colleagues said the future directions of this research include further exploring the implications this intervention may have for antibiotic use as well as working to implement the tools in other ICUs. The tools are already being tried at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in Florida and in the pediatric ICU at the University of Virginia.

Johns Hopkins clinicians caring

for a child in the pediatric ICU

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

New research suggests clinical practice guidelines can reduce the number of potentially unnecessary blood culture draws in critically ill children without endangering doctors’ ability to diagnose and treat sepsis.

The guidelines consist of 2 documents—a screening checklist and a decision algorithm.

In a single-center study, clinicians consulted these documents when considering ordering blood cultures for patients in a pediatric intensive care unit (ICU).

The clinicians said there was an immediate reduction in unnecessary blood draws after they began using these guidelines, and they were able to sustain the reduction over time.

Aaron Milstone, MD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and his colleagues described these results in JAMA Pediatrics.

The guidelines were created by a team of nurses, vascular access specialists, and physicians across specialties. The team created a fever/sepsis screening checklist and an accompanying decision-making flow chart designed to guide clinicians in the decision to draw blood.

These tools were posted in the pediatric ICU at The Johns Hopkins Hospital with instructions to be completed at the bedside by nurses and physicians. Each week, the team would meet to evaluate the data gathered, review how many cultures were sent from the unit, and discuss in detail individual cases where blood draws were necessary.

The researchers compared patient length of stay, mortality, readmission, and the number of episodes of suspected septic shock at the hospital before and after this intervention was implemented.

In the year before the team introduced the tools, there were 2204 patient visits to the pediatric ICU and 1807 blood cultures drawn.

After the intervention, there were 984 blood cultures drawn for 2356 patient visits, almost halving the number of blood cultures per patient day.

Comparing the pre- and post-intervention periods, there was no statistical difference in the occurrence of septic shock, hospital mortality, or hospital readmission.

Dr Milstone said this means patients experienced no increased risk of a missed sepsis diagnosis because of the intervention.

He and his colleagues said the future directions of this research include further exploring the implications this intervention may have for antibiotic use as well as working to implement the tools in other ICUs. The tools are already being tried at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in Florida and in the pediatric ICU at the University of Virginia.

Johns Hopkins clinicians caring

for a child in the pediatric ICU

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

New research suggests clinical practice guidelines can reduce the number of potentially unnecessary blood culture draws in critically ill children without endangering doctors’ ability to diagnose and treat sepsis.

The guidelines consist of 2 documents—a screening checklist and a decision algorithm.

In a single-center study, clinicians consulted these documents when considering ordering blood cultures for patients in a pediatric intensive care unit (ICU).

The clinicians said there was an immediate reduction in unnecessary blood draws after they began using these guidelines, and they were able to sustain the reduction over time.

Aaron Milstone, MD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland, and his colleagues described these results in JAMA Pediatrics.

The guidelines were created by a team of nurses, vascular access specialists, and physicians across specialties. The team created a fever/sepsis screening checklist and an accompanying decision-making flow chart designed to guide clinicians in the decision to draw blood.

These tools were posted in the pediatric ICU at The Johns Hopkins Hospital with instructions to be completed at the bedside by nurses and physicians. Each week, the team would meet to evaluate the data gathered, review how many cultures were sent from the unit, and discuss in detail individual cases where blood draws were necessary.

The researchers compared patient length of stay, mortality, readmission, and the number of episodes of suspected septic shock at the hospital before and after this intervention was implemented.

In the year before the team introduced the tools, there were 2204 patient visits to the pediatric ICU and 1807 blood cultures drawn.

After the intervention, there were 984 blood cultures drawn for 2356 patient visits, almost halving the number of blood cultures per patient day.

Comparing the pre- and post-intervention periods, there was no statistical difference in the occurrence of septic shock, hospital mortality, or hospital readmission.

Dr Milstone said this means patients experienced no increased risk of a missed sepsis diagnosis because of the intervention.

He and his colleagues said the future directions of this research include further exploring the implications this intervention may have for antibiotic use as well as working to implement the tools in other ICUs. The tools are already being tried at Johns Hopkins All Children’s Hospital in Florida and in the pediatric ICU at the University of Virginia.

 

Hydroxyurea

Photo by Zak Hubbard

 

SAN DIEGO—Results of the PROUD-PV trial suggest ropeginterferon alfa-2b is safer than hydroxyurea (HU) for patients with polycythemia vera (PV).

In this phase 3 trial, ropeginterferon alfa-2b demonstrated non-inferiority to HU with regard to complete hematologic response (CHR).

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b also had a significantly better overall safety profile.

Unlike the patients who received HU, none of the patients on ropeginterferon alfa-2b developed secondary malignancies.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, presented these results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 475). The PROUD-PV study was sponsored by AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG.

Dr Gisslinger noted that interferons have been successful in treating PV since the 1980s, although toxicities contribute to discontinuation rates of approximately 25%. Still, interferons are the only known drugs with the potential for disease modification by specific targeting of the malignant clone.

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b is a long-acting, mono-pegylated proline interferon with improved pharmacokinetic properties that allow for administration once every 2 weeks.

The goal of PROUD-PV was to determine how this drug stacks up against HU in both treatment-naive and HU-pretreated patients with PV.

“Our results from the first and largest, prospective, controlled trial of an interferon in polycythemia vera confirm previously reported efficacy,” Dr Gisslinger said.

“The observed safety and tolerability profile of ropeginterferon appears to be superior compared to previously reported data of interferon treatment. The unique disease-modification capability of interferon and its potential to improve progression-free survival hold promise for long-term benefit for patients.”

Patients and treatment

PROUD-PV enrolled 254 patients, and they were randomized to receive ropeginterferon alfa-2b (n=127) or HU (n=127). In both arms, 100% of patients were Caucasian, slightly more than half were female, and the median age was 60 (overall range, 21-85).

The median disease duration was 1.9 months in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 3.6 months in the HU arm. Thirty-seven percent (n=47) of patients in each arm had previously received HU.

The mean hematocrit was about 50% in both arms, the median spleen length was about 13 cm, about 90% of patients had a normal/slightly enlarged spleen, and the mean JAK2V617F burden was slightly more than 40%.

The median plateau dose was 450 µg in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 1250 mg in the HU arm.

A quarter (25.2%) of patients had dose reductions due to adverse events (AEs) in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm, as did 51.2% of patients in the HU arm. The 12-month discontinuation rate was 16.5% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 12.6% in the HU arm.

Response

The study’s primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of ropeginterferon alfa-2b compared to HU. For this, the researchers used the 12-month CHR rate. CHR was defined as normalization of red blood cell, white blood cell, and platelet counts (without phlebotomy).

At 12 months, in the intent-to-treat population, the CHR rate was 43.1% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 45.6% in the HU arm (P=0.0028). In the per-protocol population, the CHR rate was 44.3% and 46.5%, respectively (P=0.0036).

The researchers therefore concluded that non-inferiority was demonstrated.

The study’s pre-specified primary endpoint was actually a composite of CHR and spleen length normality. However, this was confounded by the fact that the patients’ median spleen length was almost normal at baseline and the observed change was not clinically relevant.

In the intent-to-treat-population, CHR with spleen normality occurred in 21.3% of patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 27.6% of patients in the HU arm (P=0.2233).

Safety

The incidence of AEs was 81.9% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 87.4% in the HU arm. The incidence of grade 3 AEs was 16.5% and 20.5%, respectively. And the incidence of treatment-related AEs was 59.6% and 75.6%, respectively (P<0.05).

There was a significantly higher incidence (P<0.01) of the following AEs in the HU arm than the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm: anemia (24.4% vs 6.3%), leukopenia (21.3% vs 8.7%), thrombocytopenia (28.3% vs 15.0%), and nausea (11.8% vs 2.4%).

There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatigue—13.4% in the HU arm and 12.6% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm.

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm had a significantly higher incidence of gamma-glutamyl transferase increase—14.2% vs 0.8% in the HU arm (P<0.01).

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm also had a higher—but non-significant—incidence of endocrine disorders (3.1% vs 0.8%), psychiatric disorders (1.6% vs 0%), cardiac/vascular disorders (3.1% vs 1.6%), and tissue disorders (1.6% vs 0%).

None of the patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm developed secondary related malignancies. In the HU arm, however, there were 2 cases of acute leukemia, 2 cases of basal cell carcinoma, and 1 case of malignant melanoma. (This includes data from the ongoing follow-up trial CONTINUATION-PV.)

Drug development

AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG said that, in the coming months, it will submit data from PROUD-PV and the ongoing follow-up trial, CONTINUATION-PV, to obtain European marketing authorization for ropeginterferon alfa-2b.

PharmaEssentia plans to submit the same data to the US Food and Drug Administration.

PharmaEssentia discovered ropeginterferon alfa-2b and has licensed the rights for development and commercialization of the drug in myeloproliferative neoplasms to AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG in Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and Middle Eastern markets.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

 

Hydroxyurea

Photo by Zak Hubbard

 

SAN DIEGO—Results of the PROUD-PV trial suggest ropeginterferon alfa-2b is safer than hydroxyurea (HU) for patients with polycythemia vera (PV).

In this phase 3 trial, ropeginterferon alfa-2b demonstrated non-inferiority to HU with regard to complete hematologic response (CHR).

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b also had a significantly better overall safety profile.

Unlike the patients who received HU, none of the patients on ropeginterferon alfa-2b developed secondary malignancies.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, presented these results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 475). The PROUD-PV study was sponsored by AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG.

Dr Gisslinger noted that interferons have been successful in treating PV since the 1980s, although toxicities contribute to discontinuation rates of approximately 25%. Still, interferons are the only known drugs with the potential for disease modification by specific targeting of the malignant clone.

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b is a long-acting, mono-pegylated proline interferon with improved pharmacokinetic properties that allow for administration once every 2 weeks.

The goal of PROUD-PV was to determine how this drug stacks up against HU in both treatment-naive and HU-pretreated patients with PV.

“Our results from the first and largest, prospective, controlled trial of an interferon in polycythemia vera confirm previously reported efficacy,” Dr Gisslinger said.

“The observed safety and tolerability profile of ropeginterferon appears to be superior compared to previously reported data of interferon treatment. The unique disease-modification capability of interferon and its potential to improve progression-free survival hold promise for long-term benefit for patients.”

Patients and treatment

PROUD-PV enrolled 254 patients, and they were randomized to receive ropeginterferon alfa-2b (n=127) or HU (n=127). In both arms, 100% of patients were Caucasian, slightly more than half were female, and the median age was 60 (overall range, 21-85).

The median disease duration was 1.9 months in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 3.6 months in the HU arm. Thirty-seven percent (n=47) of patients in each arm had previously received HU.

The mean hematocrit was about 50% in both arms, the median spleen length was about 13 cm, about 90% of patients had a normal/slightly enlarged spleen, and the mean JAK2V617F burden was slightly more than 40%.

The median plateau dose was 450 µg in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 1250 mg in the HU arm.

A quarter (25.2%) of patients had dose reductions due to adverse events (AEs) in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm, as did 51.2% of patients in the HU arm. The 12-month discontinuation rate was 16.5% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 12.6% in the HU arm.

Response

The study’s primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of ropeginterferon alfa-2b compared to HU. For this, the researchers used the 12-month CHR rate. CHR was defined as normalization of red blood cell, white blood cell, and platelet counts (without phlebotomy).

At 12 months, in the intent-to-treat population, the CHR rate was 43.1% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 45.6% in the HU arm (P=0.0028). In the per-protocol population, the CHR rate was 44.3% and 46.5%, respectively (P=0.0036).

The researchers therefore concluded that non-inferiority was demonstrated.

The study’s pre-specified primary endpoint was actually a composite of CHR and spleen length normality. However, this was confounded by the fact that the patients’ median spleen length was almost normal at baseline and the observed change was not clinically relevant.

In the intent-to-treat-population, CHR with spleen normality occurred in 21.3% of patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 27.6% of patients in the HU arm (P=0.2233).

Safety

The incidence of AEs was 81.9% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 87.4% in the HU arm. The incidence of grade 3 AEs was 16.5% and 20.5%, respectively. And the incidence of treatment-related AEs was 59.6% and 75.6%, respectively (P<0.05).

There was a significantly higher incidence (P<0.01) of the following AEs in the HU arm than the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm: anemia (24.4% vs 6.3%), leukopenia (21.3% vs 8.7%), thrombocytopenia (28.3% vs 15.0%), and nausea (11.8% vs 2.4%).

There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatigue—13.4% in the HU arm and 12.6% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm.

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm had a significantly higher incidence of gamma-glutamyl transferase increase—14.2% vs 0.8% in the HU arm (P<0.01).

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm also had a higher—but non-significant—incidence of endocrine disorders (3.1% vs 0.8%), psychiatric disorders (1.6% vs 0%), cardiac/vascular disorders (3.1% vs 1.6%), and tissue disorders (1.6% vs 0%).

None of the patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm developed secondary related malignancies. In the HU arm, however, there were 2 cases of acute leukemia, 2 cases of basal cell carcinoma, and 1 case of malignant melanoma. (This includes data from the ongoing follow-up trial CONTINUATION-PV.)

Drug development

AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG said that, in the coming months, it will submit data from PROUD-PV and the ongoing follow-up trial, CONTINUATION-PV, to obtain European marketing authorization for ropeginterferon alfa-2b.

PharmaEssentia plans to submit the same data to the US Food and Drug Administration.

PharmaEssentia discovered ropeginterferon alfa-2b and has licensed the rights for development and commercialization of the drug in myeloproliferative neoplasms to AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG in Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and Middle Eastern markets.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

 

Hydroxyurea

Photo by Zak Hubbard

 

SAN DIEGO—Results of the PROUD-PV trial suggest ropeginterferon alfa-2b is safer than hydroxyurea (HU) for patients with polycythemia vera (PV).

In this phase 3 trial, ropeginterferon alfa-2b demonstrated non-inferiority to HU with regard to complete hematologic response (CHR).

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b also had a significantly better overall safety profile.

Unlike the patients who received HU, none of the patients on ropeginterferon alfa-2b developed secondary malignancies.

Heinz Gisslinger, MD, of the Medical University of Vienna in Austria, presented these results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 475). The PROUD-PV study was sponsored by AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG.

Dr Gisslinger noted that interferons have been successful in treating PV since the 1980s, although toxicities contribute to discontinuation rates of approximately 25%. Still, interferons are the only known drugs with the potential for disease modification by specific targeting of the malignant clone.

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b is a long-acting, mono-pegylated proline interferon with improved pharmacokinetic properties that allow for administration once every 2 weeks.

The goal of PROUD-PV was to determine how this drug stacks up against HU in both treatment-naive and HU-pretreated patients with PV.

“Our results from the first and largest, prospective, controlled trial of an interferon in polycythemia vera confirm previously reported efficacy,” Dr Gisslinger said.

“The observed safety and tolerability profile of ropeginterferon appears to be superior compared to previously reported data of interferon treatment. The unique disease-modification capability of interferon and its potential to improve progression-free survival hold promise for long-term benefit for patients.”

Patients and treatment

PROUD-PV enrolled 254 patients, and they were randomized to receive ropeginterferon alfa-2b (n=127) or HU (n=127). In both arms, 100% of patients were Caucasian, slightly more than half were female, and the median age was 60 (overall range, 21-85).

The median disease duration was 1.9 months in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 3.6 months in the HU arm. Thirty-seven percent (n=47) of patients in each arm had previously received HU.

The mean hematocrit was about 50% in both arms, the median spleen length was about 13 cm, about 90% of patients had a normal/slightly enlarged spleen, and the mean JAK2V617F burden was slightly more than 40%.

The median plateau dose was 450 µg in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 1250 mg in the HU arm.

A quarter (25.2%) of patients had dose reductions due to adverse events (AEs) in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm, as did 51.2% of patients in the HU arm. The 12-month discontinuation rate was 16.5% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 12.6% in the HU arm.

Response

The study’s primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of ropeginterferon alfa-2b compared to HU. For this, the researchers used the 12-month CHR rate. CHR was defined as normalization of red blood cell, white blood cell, and platelet counts (without phlebotomy).

At 12 months, in the intent-to-treat population, the CHR rate was 43.1% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 45.6% in the HU arm (P=0.0028). In the per-protocol population, the CHR rate was 44.3% and 46.5%, respectively (P=0.0036).

The researchers therefore concluded that non-inferiority was demonstrated.

The study’s pre-specified primary endpoint was actually a composite of CHR and spleen length normality. However, this was confounded by the fact that the patients’ median spleen length was almost normal at baseline and the observed change was not clinically relevant.

In the intent-to-treat-population, CHR with spleen normality occurred in 21.3% of patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 27.6% of patients in the HU arm (P=0.2233).

Safety

The incidence of AEs was 81.9% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm and 87.4% in the HU arm. The incidence of grade 3 AEs was 16.5% and 20.5%, respectively. And the incidence of treatment-related AEs was 59.6% and 75.6%, respectively (P<0.05).

There was a significantly higher incidence (P<0.01) of the following AEs in the HU arm than the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm: anemia (24.4% vs 6.3%), leukopenia (21.3% vs 8.7%), thrombocytopenia (28.3% vs 15.0%), and nausea (11.8% vs 2.4%).

There was no significant difference in the incidence of fatigue—13.4% in the HU arm and 12.6% in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm.

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm had a significantly higher incidence of gamma-glutamyl transferase increase—14.2% vs 0.8% in the HU arm (P<0.01).

Patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm also had a higher—but non-significant—incidence of endocrine disorders (3.1% vs 0.8%), psychiatric disorders (1.6% vs 0%), cardiac/vascular disorders (3.1% vs 1.6%), and tissue disorders (1.6% vs 0%).

None of the patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b arm developed secondary related malignancies. In the HU arm, however, there were 2 cases of acute leukemia, 2 cases of basal cell carcinoma, and 1 case of malignant melanoma. (This includes data from the ongoing follow-up trial CONTINUATION-PV.)

Drug development

AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG said that, in the coming months, it will submit data from PROUD-PV and the ongoing follow-up trial, CONTINUATION-PV, to obtain European marketing authorization for ropeginterferon alfa-2b.

PharmaEssentia plans to submit the same data to the US Food and Drug Administration.

PharmaEssentia discovered ropeginterferon alfa-2b and has licensed the rights for development and commercialization of the drug in myeloproliferative neoplasms to AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG in Europe, the Commonwealth of Independent States, and Middle Eastern markets.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

Micrograph showing

multiple myeloma

BioInvent International has decided to terminate its phase 2 trial of the antibody BI-505 in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

The decision follows a review and discussion with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which put the trial on full clinical hold in November due to an adverse cardiopulmonary event.

The trial was designed to determine if BI-505 could deepen therapeutic response and thereby prevent or delay relapse in MM patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant with high-dose melphalan.

The termination of this trial may not mean the end of BI-505. BioInvent is currently in discussions with the FDA about the potential to develop the drug for use in other patient populations.

BI-505 is a human antibody targeting ICAM-1, a protein that is elevated in MM cells. BI-505 has been shown to attack MM in 2 ways—by inducing apoptosis in MM cells and by engaging macrophages to attack and kill MM cells.

The development strategy for BI-505 has been focused on eliminating residual disease by combining the antibody with modern standard-of-care drugs used to treat MM.

BI-505 has orphan drug designation as a treatment for MM from both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency.

Results of a phase 1 trial of BI-505 in MM patients were published in Clinical Cancer Research in June 2015.

Micrograph showing

multiple myeloma

BioInvent International has decided to terminate its phase 2 trial of the antibody BI-505 in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

The decision follows a review and discussion with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which put the trial on full clinical hold in November due to an adverse cardiopulmonary event.

The trial was designed to determine if BI-505 could deepen therapeutic response and thereby prevent or delay relapse in MM patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant with high-dose melphalan.

The termination of this trial may not mean the end of BI-505. BioInvent is currently in discussions with the FDA about the potential to develop the drug for use in other patient populations.

BI-505 is a human antibody targeting ICAM-1, a protein that is elevated in MM cells. BI-505 has been shown to attack MM in 2 ways—by inducing apoptosis in MM cells and by engaging macrophages to attack and kill MM cells.

The development strategy for BI-505 has been focused on eliminating residual disease by combining the antibody with modern standard-of-care drugs used to treat MM.

BI-505 has orphan drug designation as a treatment for MM from both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency.

Results of a phase 1 trial of BI-505 in MM patients were published in Clinical Cancer Research in June 2015.

Micrograph showing

multiple myeloma

BioInvent International has decided to terminate its phase 2 trial of the antibody BI-505 in patients with multiple myeloma (MM).

The decision follows a review and discussion with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which put the trial on full clinical hold in November due to an adverse cardiopulmonary event.

The trial was designed to determine if BI-505 could deepen therapeutic response and thereby prevent or delay relapse in MM patients undergoing autologous stem cell transplant with high-dose melphalan.

The termination of this trial may not mean the end of BI-505. BioInvent is currently in discussions with the FDA about the potential to develop the drug for use in other patient populations.

BI-505 is a human antibody targeting ICAM-1, a protein that is elevated in MM cells. BI-505 has been shown to attack MM in 2 ways—by inducing apoptosis in MM cells and by engaging macrophages to attack and kill MM cells.

The development strategy for BI-505 has been focused on eliminating residual disease by combining the antibody with modern standard-of-care drugs used to treat MM.

BI-505 has orphan drug designation as a treatment for MM from both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency.

Results of a phase 1 trial of BI-505 in MM patients were published in Clinical Cancer Research in June 2015.

Attendees at the

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

SAN DIEGO—Ibrutinib, a Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia and other hematologic diseases, appears to provide relief for patients suffering from chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) after failing corticosteroid therapy.

At present, no approved therapy exists for these patients. Ibrutinib reduced the severity of cGVHD in preclinical models and has been used successfully in the post-allogeneic transplant setting.

The US Food and Drug Administration granted ibrutinib breakthrough therapy and orphan drug designations as a potential treatment for cGVHD.

David Miklos, MD, of Stanford University in California, explained at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting that, in cGVHD, healthy B cells have been corrupted to produce self-reactive antibody complexes, and the T cells are killing healthy tissues and cells.

This destructive process involves the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase molecule, which can be inhibited and thereby block some of the downstream cGVHD pathogenesis.

“And to this aim, we went about testing the benefits of ibrutinib in the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease,” Dr Miklos said.

In phase 1 of the study, investigators tested the 420 mg oral once-daily dose. They found no dose-limiting toxicities.

“So this dose was carried forward into the phase 2 study,” Dr Miklos said.

He presented results of the phase 2 study at the meeting as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-3).

Study design

Patients were eligible for the study if they had steroid-dependent or -refractory cGVHD. They had to have 3 or fewer prior treatments, and they could continue other systemic immunosuppression if they were using it.

They had to have erythematous rash on more than 25% of their body surface or a total mouth score of more than 4 as defined by National Institutes of Health (NIH) criteria.

Patients with cGVHD had to have failed frontline therapy.

They were treated with the phase 1 dose until progression of cGVHD or unacceptable toxicity.

The primary endpoint was cGVHD response per NIH 2005 response criteria.

Secondary endpoints included rate of sustained response, change in Lee cGVHD symptom scale, changes in corticosteroid requirement over time, and safety endpoints.

Investigators enrolled 42 patients, the first of whom was dosed in July 2014.

Patient demographics

Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 19–74), and 52% were male.

The median time from allogeneic transplant to the diagnosis of cGVHD was 7.6 months (range, 1.5–76.0), and the median time from initial cGVHD diagnosis to start of ibrutinib therapy was 13.7 months (range, 1.1–63.2).

Most patients had mouth (86%), skin (81%), or gastrointestinal (33%) cGVHD involvement.

And most patients had received matched (88%), unrelated (60%), nonmyeloablative (57%) peripheral blood stem cell (88%) transplants.

“This was a heavily treated patient population,” Dr Miklos said.

They had received a median of 2 (range, 1–3) prior regimens, with a median prednisone dose at enrollment of 0.3 mg/kg/day.

Prior cGVHD therapies included corticosteroids (100%), tacrolimus (50%), extracorporeal photopheresis (33%), rituximab (26%), mycophenolate mofetil (24%), cyclosporine (19%), sirolimus (17%), and other immunosuppressants (5%).

Results

The overall response rate was 67%, including 9 complete responses and 19 partial responses. Seventy-nine percent responded by the first assessment, and 71% of the 28 responders had a sustained cGVHD response of at least 5 months.

Investigators observed responses across multiple organs. Eighty percent (20/25) of patients with at least 2 involved organs at baseline responded in at least 2 organs, and 56% (5/9) of patients with 3 or more involved organs at baseline responded in at least 3 organs.

“These responses seen across all organs and in multiple organs suggest that the ibrutinib is actually targeting the underlying process of chronic GVHD and not simply masking the symptoms of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Median corticosteroid use decreased throughout the ibrutinib treatment period. Twenty-six patients (62%) reduced steroid doses to less than 0.15/mg/kg/day while on ibrutinib.

Five responders discontinued all corticosteroid treatment.

Dr Miklos pointed out that baseline steroid dose did not vary between those patients who had responses and those who did not.

And ibrutinib produced clinically meaning improvement in the Lee symptom scale score among patients who responded.

Discontinuation and toxicity

At a median follow-up of 14 months, 12 patients were still on ibrutinib therapy.

“Only 5 patients discontinued for the progression of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Other reasons for discontinuation included adverse events (AEs, n=14), patient decision (n=6), investigator decision (n=2), recurrence or progression of original malignancy (n=2), and noncompliance with study drug (n=1).

“The AE profile largely reflects what has been seen with ibrutinib use in the patients being treated for malignancies,” Dr Miklos said. “They also reflect adverse events that we see in patients receiving corticosteroids for the treatment of chronic GVHD.”

Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in more than 15% of patients included fatigue, diarrhea, muscle spasms, nausea, bruising, upper respiratory tract infection, pneumonia, pyrexia, headache, and fall.

Serious AEs occurred in 22 patients (52%), including pneumonia (n=6), septic shock (n=2), and pyrexia (n=2).

Two patients died while on study due to multilobular pneumonia and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis.

Exploratory endpoints

Investigators measured plasma levels of various factors following ibrutinib therapy through the first 90 days. Proinflammatory, chemotactic, and fibrotic factors decreased significantly while patients were on ibrutinib.

“This indicates that the cellular inflammation, the immune recruitment, and the fibrosis at the root of chronic GVHD was improving,” Dr Mikos said.

These factors included IFNγ, TNFα, IP-10, and CXCL9—biomarkers associated with cGVHD.

“We believe the efficacy of ibrutinib in this population supports further study in frontline treatment of  chronic GVHD in a randomized, double-blinded study,” Dr Miklos concluded.

The current study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics, Inc.

Attendees at the

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

SAN DIEGO—Ibrutinib, a Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia and other hematologic diseases, appears to provide relief for patients suffering from chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) after failing corticosteroid therapy.

At present, no approved therapy exists for these patients. Ibrutinib reduced the severity of cGVHD in preclinical models and has been used successfully in the post-allogeneic transplant setting.

The US Food and Drug Administration granted ibrutinib breakthrough therapy and orphan drug designations as a potential treatment for cGVHD.

David Miklos, MD, of Stanford University in California, explained at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting that, in cGVHD, healthy B cells have been corrupted to produce self-reactive antibody complexes, and the T cells are killing healthy tissues and cells.

This destructive process involves the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase molecule, which can be inhibited and thereby block some of the downstream cGVHD pathogenesis.

“And to this aim, we went about testing the benefits of ibrutinib in the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease,” Dr Miklos said.

In phase 1 of the study, investigators tested the 420 mg oral once-daily dose. They found no dose-limiting toxicities.

“So this dose was carried forward into the phase 2 study,” Dr Miklos said.

He presented results of the phase 2 study at the meeting as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-3).

Study design

Patients were eligible for the study if they had steroid-dependent or -refractory cGVHD. They had to have 3 or fewer prior treatments, and they could continue other systemic immunosuppression if they were using it.

They had to have erythematous rash on more than 25% of their body surface or a total mouth score of more than 4 as defined by National Institutes of Health (NIH) criteria.

Patients with cGVHD had to have failed frontline therapy.

They were treated with the phase 1 dose until progression of cGVHD or unacceptable toxicity.

The primary endpoint was cGVHD response per NIH 2005 response criteria.

Secondary endpoints included rate of sustained response, change in Lee cGVHD symptom scale, changes in corticosteroid requirement over time, and safety endpoints.

Investigators enrolled 42 patients, the first of whom was dosed in July 2014.

Patient demographics

Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 19–74), and 52% were male.

The median time from allogeneic transplant to the diagnosis of cGVHD was 7.6 months (range, 1.5–76.0), and the median time from initial cGVHD diagnosis to start of ibrutinib therapy was 13.7 months (range, 1.1–63.2).

Most patients had mouth (86%), skin (81%), or gastrointestinal (33%) cGVHD involvement.

And most patients had received matched (88%), unrelated (60%), nonmyeloablative (57%) peripheral blood stem cell (88%) transplants.

“This was a heavily treated patient population,” Dr Miklos said.

They had received a median of 2 (range, 1–3) prior regimens, with a median prednisone dose at enrollment of 0.3 mg/kg/day.

Prior cGVHD therapies included corticosteroids (100%), tacrolimus (50%), extracorporeal photopheresis (33%), rituximab (26%), mycophenolate mofetil (24%), cyclosporine (19%), sirolimus (17%), and other immunosuppressants (5%).

Results

The overall response rate was 67%, including 9 complete responses and 19 partial responses. Seventy-nine percent responded by the first assessment, and 71% of the 28 responders had a sustained cGVHD response of at least 5 months.

Investigators observed responses across multiple organs. Eighty percent (20/25) of patients with at least 2 involved organs at baseline responded in at least 2 organs, and 56% (5/9) of patients with 3 or more involved organs at baseline responded in at least 3 organs.

“These responses seen across all organs and in multiple organs suggest that the ibrutinib is actually targeting the underlying process of chronic GVHD and not simply masking the symptoms of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Median corticosteroid use decreased throughout the ibrutinib treatment period. Twenty-six patients (62%) reduced steroid doses to less than 0.15/mg/kg/day while on ibrutinib.

Five responders discontinued all corticosteroid treatment.

Dr Miklos pointed out that baseline steroid dose did not vary between those patients who had responses and those who did not.

And ibrutinib produced clinically meaning improvement in the Lee symptom scale score among patients who responded.

Discontinuation and toxicity

At a median follow-up of 14 months, 12 patients were still on ibrutinib therapy.

“Only 5 patients discontinued for the progression of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Other reasons for discontinuation included adverse events (AEs, n=14), patient decision (n=6), investigator decision (n=2), recurrence or progression of original malignancy (n=2), and noncompliance with study drug (n=1).

“The AE profile largely reflects what has been seen with ibrutinib use in the patients being treated for malignancies,” Dr Miklos said. “They also reflect adverse events that we see in patients receiving corticosteroids for the treatment of chronic GVHD.”

Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in more than 15% of patients included fatigue, diarrhea, muscle spasms, nausea, bruising, upper respiratory tract infection, pneumonia, pyrexia, headache, and fall.

Serious AEs occurred in 22 patients (52%), including pneumonia (n=6), septic shock (n=2), and pyrexia (n=2).

Two patients died while on study due to multilobular pneumonia and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis.

Exploratory endpoints

Investigators measured plasma levels of various factors following ibrutinib therapy through the first 90 days. Proinflammatory, chemotactic, and fibrotic factors decreased significantly while patients were on ibrutinib.

“This indicates that the cellular inflammation, the immune recruitment, and the fibrosis at the root of chronic GVHD was improving,” Dr Mikos said.

These factors included IFNγ, TNFα, IP-10, and CXCL9—biomarkers associated with cGVHD.

“We believe the efficacy of ibrutinib in this population supports further study in frontline treatment of  chronic GVHD in a randomized, double-blinded study,” Dr Miklos concluded.

The current study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics, Inc.

Attendees at the

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

SAN DIEGO—Ibrutinib, a Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved to treat chronic lymphocytic leukemia and other hematologic diseases, appears to provide relief for patients suffering from chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGVHD) after failing corticosteroid therapy.

At present, no approved therapy exists for these patients. Ibrutinib reduced the severity of cGVHD in preclinical models and has been used successfully in the post-allogeneic transplant setting.

The US Food and Drug Administration granted ibrutinib breakthrough therapy and orphan drug designations as a potential treatment for cGVHD.

David Miklos, MD, of Stanford University in California, explained at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting that, in cGVHD, healthy B cells have been corrupted to produce self-reactive antibody complexes, and the T cells are killing healthy tissues and cells.

This destructive process involves the Bruton’s tyrosine kinase molecule, which can be inhibited and thereby block some of the downstream cGVHD pathogenesis.

“And to this aim, we went about testing the benefits of ibrutinib in the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic graft-versus-host disease,” Dr Miklos said.

In phase 1 of the study, investigators tested the 420 mg oral once-daily dose. They found no dose-limiting toxicities.

“So this dose was carried forward into the phase 2 study,” Dr Miklos said.

He presented results of the phase 2 study at the meeting as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-3).

Study design

Patients were eligible for the study if they had steroid-dependent or -refractory cGVHD. They had to have 3 or fewer prior treatments, and they could continue other systemic immunosuppression if they were using it.

They had to have erythematous rash on more than 25% of their body surface or a total mouth score of more than 4 as defined by National Institutes of Health (NIH) criteria.

Patients with cGVHD had to have failed frontline therapy.

They were treated with the phase 1 dose until progression of cGVHD or unacceptable toxicity.

The primary endpoint was cGVHD response per NIH 2005 response criteria.

Secondary endpoints included rate of sustained response, change in Lee cGVHD symptom scale, changes in corticosteroid requirement over time, and safety endpoints.

Investigators enrolled 42 patients, the first of whom was dosed in July 2014.

Patient demographics

Patients were a median age of 56 (range, 19–74), and 52% were male.

The median time from allogeneic transplant to the diagnosis of cGVHD was 7.6 months (range, 1.5–76.0), and the median time from initial cGVHD diagnosis to start of ibrutinib therapy was 13.7 months (range, 1.1–63.2).

Most patients had mouth (86%), skin (81%), or gastrointestinal (33%) cGVHD involvement.

And most patients had received matched (88%), unrelated (60%), nonmyeloablative (57%) peripheral blood stem cell (88%) transplants.

“This was a heavily treated patient population,” Dr Miklos said.

They had received a median of 2 (range, 1–3) prior regimens, with a median prednisone dose at enrollment of 0.3 mg/kg/day.

Prior cGVHD therapies included corticosteroids (100%), tacrolimus (50%), extracorporeal photopheresis (33%), rituximab (26%), mycophenolate mofetil (24%), cyclosporine (19%), sirolimus (17%), and other immunosuppressants (5%).

Results

The overall response rate was 67%, including 9 complete responses and 19 partial responses. Seventy-nine percent responded by the first assessment, and 71% of the 28 responders had a sustained cGVHD response of at least 5 months.

Investigators observed responses across multiple organs. Eighty percent (20/25) of patients with at least 2 involved organs at baseline responded in at least 2 organs, and 56% (5/9) of patients with 3 or more involved organs at baseline responded in at least 3 organs.

“These responses seen across all organs and in multiple organs suggest that the ibrutinib is actually targeting the underlying process of chronic GVHD and not simply masking the symptoms of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Median corticosteroid use decreased throughout the ibrutinib treatment period. Twenty-six patients (62%) reduced steroid doses to less than 0.15/mg/kg/day while on ibrutinib.

Five responders discontinued all corticosteroid treatment.

Dr Miklos pointed out that baseline steroid dose did not vary between those patients who had responses and those who did not.

And ibrutinib produced clinically meaning improvement in the Lee symptom scale score among patients who responded.

Discontinuation and toxicity

At a median follow-up of 14 months, 12 patients were still on ibrutinib therapy.

“Only 5 patients discontinued for the progression of chronic GVHD,” Dr Miklos noted.

Other reasons for discontinuation included adverse events (AEs, n=14), patient decision (n=6), investigator decision (n=2), recurrence or progression of original malignancy (n=2), and noncompliance with study drug (n=1).

“The AE profile largely reflects what has been seen with ibrutinib use in the patients being treated for malignancies,” Dr Miklos said. “They also reflect adverse events that we see in patients receiving corticosteroids for the treatment of chronic GVHD.”

Treatment-emergent AEs occurring in more than 15% of patients included fatigue, diarrhea, muscle spasms, nausea, bruising, upper respiratory tract infection, pneumonia, pyrexia, headache, and fall.

Serious AEs occurred in 22 patients (52%), including pneumonia (n=6), septic shock (n=2), and pyrexia (n=2).

Two patients died while on study due to multilobular pneumonia and bronchopulmonary aspergillosis.

Exploratory endpoints

Investigators measured plasma levels of various factors following ibrutinib therapy through the first 90 days. Proinflammatory, chemotactic, and fibrotic factors decreased significantly while patients were on ibrutinib.

“This indicates that the cellular inflammation, the immune recruitment, and the fibrosis at the root of chronic GVHD was improving,” Dr Mikos said.

These factors included IFNγ, TNFα, IP-10, and CXCL9—biomarkers associated with cGVHD.

“We believe the efficacy of ibrutinib in this population supports further study in frontline treatment of  chronic GVHD in a randomized, double-blinded study,” Dr Miklos concluded.

The current study was sponsored by Pharmacyclics, Inc.

Micrograph showing

acute myeloid leukemia

SAN DIEGO—A next-generation DNA hypomethylating agent has demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), according to researchers.

The agent, guadecitabine, produced a composite complete response (CRc) rate of 23% in a phase 2 study.

CRc was observed in all patient subgroups and was associated with longer survival, regardless of whether patients went on to receive a transplant.

Based on these results, researchers are initiating a phase 3 trial of the drug in relapsed/refractory AML.

Naval Daver, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, presented the phase 2 results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 904). The study was sponsored by Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Guadecitabine (formerly SGI-110) is a hypomethylating dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine that is resistant to cytidine deaminase degradation. It is administered as a small volume subcutaneous injection, which results in extended decitabine exposure.

“Rapid metabolization, elimination shortens the in vivo exposure and may limit the efficacy of decitabine,” Dr Daver noted. “Guadecitabine was engineered to improve the in vivo levels . . . and the efficacy of decitabine by blocking the rapid elimination.”

In the phase 2 trial, Dr Daver and his colleagues investigated guadecitabine in 103 patients with relapsed/refractory AML. The patients’ median age was 60 (range, 22-82), and 60% were male. Eighty-six percent of patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, and 41% had poor-risk cytogenetics.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-7). All patients had received prior chemotherapy, 85% had received prior induction with 7+3 (a continuous infusion of cytarabine for 7 days plus daunorubicin for 3 days), and 18% had a prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

Fifty-three percent of patients had a CR to first induction, and 47% were primary refractory.

Treatment

The researchers tested 2 different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. In the first cohort (5-day regimen), 50 patients were randomized (1:1) to either 60 mg/m²/day (n=24) or 90 mg/m²/day (n=26) on days 1-5.

In the second cohort (10-day regimen), 53 patients were assigned to treatment with 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 and days 8-12 for up to 4 cycles, followed by 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 in subsequent cycles.

Cycles were scheduled every 28 days for both regimens. Dose reductions and delays were allowed based on response and tolerability. And patients remained on treatment as long as they continued to benefit without unacceptable toxicity.

Response

The study’s primary endpoint was the CRc rate, which consisted of CR plus CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) plus CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery (CRi).

The CRc rate was 16% in the 5-day cohort and 30% in the 10-day cohort. The CR rate was 6% and 19%, respectively. The CRp rate was 2% and 7%, respectively. And the CRi rate was 8% and 4%, respectively.

There was a trend toward a higher CR/CRc rate with the 10-day regimen (P=0.074 and 0.106, respectively).

There was no significant difference in CRc according to patient age (65 and older vs younger than 65), cytogenetics, prior HSCT, response to induction, or time from last therapy (less than 6 months vs 6 months or more).

However, the CRc rate was significantly lower for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 than for those with a status of 0-1 (P<0.001).

Survival

For the entire study cohort, the median overall survival (OS) was 6.6 months, the 1-year OS was 28%, and the 2-year OS was 19%.

The median OS was 7.1 months with the 10-day regimen and 5.7 months with the 5-day regimen. This difference was not significant (P=0.51).

The median OS was not reached for patients who achieved a CR or for those who achieved a CRp plus a CRi. For patients who did not achieve a CRc, the median OS was 5.6 months (P<0.01).

The median OS was not reached for patients who had a CRc, whether or not they received a subsequent HSCT. There was no significant difference between patients who received an HSCT post-guadecitabine and those who did not (P=0.87).

Likewise, there was no significant difference in OS according to patient age, prior HSCT, or response to induction.

However, OS was significantly worse for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 (P<0.001), those with poor-risk cytogenetics (P<0.001), and those for whom 6 months or more had elapsed since their last therapy (P=0.015).

Safety

Common grade 3 or higher adverse events (regardless of the relationship to therapy) were febrile neutropenia (60%), pneumonia (36%), thrombocytopenia (36%), anemia (31%), neutropenia (19%), and sepsis (16%).

The 30-day mortality rate was 3.9%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 11.7%.

Micrograph showing

acute myeloid leukemia

SAN DIEGO—A next-generation DNA hypomethylating agent has demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), according to researchers.

The agent, guadecitabine, produced a composite complete response (CRc) rate of 23% in a phase 2 study.

CRc was observed in all patient subgroups and was associated with longer survival, regardless of whether patients went on to receive a transplant.

Based on these results, researchers are initiating a phase 3 trial of the drug in relapsed/refractory AML.

Naval Daver, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, presented the phase 2 results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 904). The study was sponsored by Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Guadecitabine (formerly SGI-110) is a hypomethylating dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine that is resistant to cytidine deaminase degradation. It is administered as a small volume subcutaneous injection, which results in extended decitabine exposure.

“Rapid metabolization, elimination shortens the in vivo exposure and may limit the efficacy of decitabine,” Dr Daver noted. “Guadecitabine was engineered to improve the in vivo levels . . . and the efficacy of decitabine by blocking the rapid elimination.”

In the phase 2 trial, Dr Daver and his colleagues investigated guadecitabine in 103 patients with relapsed/refractory AML. The patients’ median age was 60 (range, 22-82), and 60% were male. Eighty-six percent of patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, and 41% had poor-risk cytogenetics.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-7). All patients had received prior chemotherapy, 85% had received prior induction with 7+3 (a continuous infusion of cytarabine for 7 days plus daunorubicin for 3 days), and 18% had a prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

Fifty-three percent of patients had a CR to first induction, and 47% were primary refractory.

Treatment

The researchers tested 2 different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. In the first cohort (5-day regimen), 50 patients were randomized (1:1) to either 60 mg/m²/day (n=24) or 90 mg/m²/day (n=26) on days 1-5.

In the second cohort (10-day regimen), 53 patients were assigned to treatment with 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 and days 8-12 for up to 4 cycles, followed by 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 in subsequent cycles.

Cycles were scheduled every 28 days for both regimens. Dose reductions and delays were allowed based on response and tolerability. And patients remained on treatment as long as they continued to benefit without unacceptable toxicity.

Response

The study’s primary endpoint was the CRc rate, which consisted of CR plus CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) plus CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery (CRi).

The CRc rate was 16% in the 5-day cohort and 30% in the 10-day cohort. The CR rate was 6% and 19%, respectively. The CRp rate was 2% and 7%, respectively. And the CRi rate was 8% and 4%, respectively.

There was a trend toward a higher CR/CRc rate with the 10-day regimen (P=0.074 and 0.106, respectively).

There was no significant difference in CRc according to patient age (65 and older vs younger than 65), cytogenetics, prior HSCT, response to induction, or time from last therapy (less than 6 months vs 6 months or more).

However, the CRc rate was significantly lower for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 than for those with a status of 0-1 (P<0.001).

Survival

For the entire study cohort, the median overall survival (OS) was 6.6 months, the 1-year OS was 28%, and the 2-year OS was 19%.

The median OS was 7.1 months with the 10-day regimen and 5.7 months with the 5-day regimen. This difference was not significant (P=0.51).

The median OS was not reached for patients who achieved a CR or for those who achieved a CRp plus a CRi. For patients who did not achieve a CRc, the median OS was 5.6 months (P<0.01).

The median OS was not reached for patients who had a CRc, whether or not they received a subsequent HSCT. There was no significant difference between patients who received an HSCT post-guadecitabine and those who did not (P=0.87).

Likewise, there was no significant difference in OS according to patient age, prior HSCT, or response to induction.

However, OS was significantly worse for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 (P<0.001), those with poor-risk cytogenetics (P<0.001), and those for whom 6 months or more had elapsed since their last therapy (P=0.015).

Safety

Common grade 3 or higher adverse events (regardless of the relationship to therapy) were febrile neutropenia (60%), pneumonia (36%), thrombocytopenia (36%), anemia (31%), neutropenia (19%), and sepsis (16%).

The 30-day mortality rate was 3.9%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 11.7%.

Micrograph showing

acute myeloid leukemia

SAN DIEGO—A next-generation DNA hypomethylating agent has demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML), according to researchers.

The agent, guadecitabine, produced a composite complete response (CRc) rate of 23% in a phase 2 study.

CRc was observed in all patient subgroups and was associated with longer survival, regardless of whether patients went on to receive a transplant.

Based on these results, researchers are initiating a phase 3 trial of the drug in relapsed/refractory AML.

Naval Daver, MD, of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, presented the phase 2 results at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 904). The study was sponsored by Astex Pharmaceuticals.

Guadecitabine (formerly SGI-110) is a hypomethylating dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine that is resistant to cytidine deaminase degradation. It is administered as a small volume subcutaneous injection, which results in extended decitabine exposure.

“Rapid metabolization, elimination shortens the in vivo exposure and may limit the efficacy of decitabine,” Dr Daver noted. “Guadecitabine was engineered to improve the in vivo levels . . . and the efficacy of decitabine by blocking the rapid elimination.”

In the phase 2 trial, Dr Daver and his colleagues investigated guadecitabine in 103 patients with relapsed/refractory AML. The patients’ median age was 60 (range, 22-82), and 60% were male. Eighty-six percent of patients had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, and 41% had poor-risk cytogenetics.

The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range, 1-7). All patients had received prior chemotherapy, 85% had received prior induction with 7+3 (a continuous infusion of cytarabine for 7 days plus daunorubicin for 3 days), and 18% had a prior hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT).

Fifty-three percent of patients had a CR to first induction, and 47% were primary refractory.

Treatment

The researchers tested 2 different doses and schedules of guadecitabine. In the first cohort (5-day regimen), 50 patients were randomized (1:1) to either 60 mg/m²/day (n=24) or 90 mg/m²/day (n=26) on days 1-5.

In the second cohort (10-day regimen), 53 patients were assigned to treatment with 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 and days 8-12 for up to 4 cycles, followed by 60 mg/m²/day on days 1-5 in subsequent cycles.

Cycles were scheduled every 28 days for both regimens. Dose reductions and delays were allowed based on response and tolerability. And patients remained on treatment as long as they continued to benefit without unacceptable toxicity.

Response

The study’s primary endpoint was the CRc rate, which consisted of CR plus CR with incomplete platelet recovery (CRp) plus CR with incomplete neutrophil recovery (CRi).

The CRc rate was 16% in the 5-day cohort and 30% in the 10-day cohort. The CR rate was 6% and 19%, respectively. The CRp rate was 2% and 7%, respectively. And the CRi rate was 8% and 4%, respectively.

There was a trend toward a higher CR/CRc rate with the 10-day regimen (P=0.074 and 0.106, respectively).

There was no significant difference in CRc according to patient age (65 and older vs younger than 65), cytogenetics, prior HSCT, response to induction, or time from last therapy (less than 6 months vs 6 months or more).

However, the CRc rate was significantly lower for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 than for those with a status of 0-1 (P<0.001).

Survival

For the entire study cohort, the median overall survival (OS) was 6.6 months, the 1-year OS was 28%, and the 2-year OS was 19%.

The median OS was 7.1 months with the 10-day regimen and 5.7 months with the 5-day regimen. This difference was not significant (P=0.51).

The median OS was not reached for patients who achieved a CR or for those who achieved a CRp plus a CRi. For patients who did not achieve a CRc, the median OS was 5.6 months (P<0.01).

The median OS was not reached for patients who had a CRc, whether or not they received a subsequent HSCT. There was no significant difference between patients who received an HSCT post-guadecitabine and those who did not (P=0.87).

Likewise, there was no significant difference in OS according to patient age, prior HSCT, or response to induction.

However, OS was significantly worse for patients with an ECOG performance status of 2 (P<0.001), those with poor-risk cytogenetics (P<0.001), and those for whom 6 months or more had elapsed since their last therapy (P=0.015).

Safety

Common grade 3 or higher adverse events (regardless of the relationship to therapy) were febrile neutropenia (60%), pneumonia (36%), thrombocytopenia (36%), anemia (31%), neutropenia (19%), and sepsis (16%).

The 30-day mortality rate was 3.9%, and the 60-day mortality rate was 11.7%.

John Mascarenhas, MD

SAN DIEGO—The JAK2/FLT3 inhibitor pacritinib significantly reduces spleen volume and symptoms in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts,

compared to best available therapy (BAT), according to results of the PERSIST-2 trial.

In this phase 3 trial, BAT included the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. And pacritinib demonstrated benefits over BAT despite a truncated trial.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) placed PERSIST-2 on clinical hold in February 2016 due to concerns over interim survival results, bleeding, and cardiovascular events.

Patients randomized at least 22 weeks prior to the clinical hold contributed data to the week 24 endpoint, the results of which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

John Mascarenhas, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, New York, delivered the results as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-5).

Ruxolitinib is FDA-approved to treat myelofibrosis, but it is associated with dose-limiting cytopenias and is not indicated for patients with platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

The earlier PERSIST-1 trial demonstrated sustained spleen volume reduction (SVR) and symptom control with pacritinib therapy regardless of baseline platelet count, but it did not include ruxolitinib in the BAT arm.

PERSIST-2 study design

Patients were randomized on a 1:1:1 basis to pacritinib at 400 mg once daily (PAC QD), pacritinib at 200 mg twice daily (PAC BID), or BAT, including ruxolitinib.

Patients had to have primary or secondary myelofibrosis and platelet counts of 100,000/μL or less. Patients were allowed to have had prior JAK2 inhibitors.

Crossover from BAT was allowed after progression at any time or at week 24.

The study had 2 primary endpoints: percent of patients achieving a 35% or greater SVR and the percent of patients achieving a 50% or more reduction in total symptom score (TSS) by MPN-SAF TSS 2.0.

The primary study objective was the efficacy of pooled QD and BID pacritinib compared to BAT. The secondary objective was the efficacy of QD or BD separately compared to BAT.

Patient demographics

The study randomized 311 patients, and 221 were included in the intent-to-treat efficacy population.

The efficacy population consisted of all patients randomized prior to September 7, 2015, which allowed their data to be included in the week 24 endpoint analysis prior to the clinical hold.

The PAC QD arm consisted of 75 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 39-85). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

About three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 61% had primary myelofibrosis, 21% had primary polycythemia vera (PPV), and 17% had primary essential thrombocythemia (PET). About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 51% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The PAC BID arm consisted of 74 patients with a median age of 67 (range, 39-85). Sixty-two percent were 65 or older, and 65% were male.

Eighty-eight percent had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 74% had primary myelofibrosis, 19% had PPV, and 7% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 42% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The BAT arm consisted of 72 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 32-83). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

Three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 60% had primary myelofibrosis, 22% had PPV, and 18% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 71% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 44% had a platelet count less than 50,000/µL.

Prior ruxolitinib therapy was consistent across the arms—41.3% (PAC QD), 42% (PAC BID), and 46% (BAT).

“Now, it’s important to note,” Dr Mascarenhas said, “that the most common BAT was ruxolitinib, 45%, and hydroxyurea, 19%. And 19% of BAT patients actually had no treatment, watch and wait. This highlights the fact that this is an area where there is really no other viable therapeutic option for these patients.”

Efficacy

Pacritinib-treated patients had significantly greater spleen reduction from baseline to week 24 than BAT-treated patients, with 18% (QD+BID), 15% (QD), and 22% (BID) achieving 35% or more SVR compared to 3% in the BAT arm.

Pacritinib-treated patients also experienced greater TSS reduction, with 25% (QD+BID), 17% (QD), and 32% (BID) reporting 50% or more reduction in TSS compared to 14% in the BAT arm. However, only the PAC BID arm was significantly different from BAT.

SVR in all subgroups—age, gender, JAK2 mutation status, prior treatment, platelet count, hemoglobin, peripheral blasts, and white blood cell count—demonstrated superiority for pacritinib.

Median changes in individual symptom scores were also better in the pacritinib arms than in the BAT arm in almost every category—tiredness, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, night sweats, bone pain, and pain under ribs on the left side.

Pruritus was the only category in which BAT was superior, and that was compared to the QD arm and not the BID arm.

The majority of patients who stopped pacritinib therapy were taken off due to the clinical hold.

There were no significant differences between the groups in overall survival. Hazard ratios for overall survival (95% confidence intervals) were 0.68 (0.30, 1.53) for PAC BID vs BAT, 1.18 (0.57, 2.44) for PAC QD vs BAT, and 0.61 (0.27, 1.35) for PAC BID vs QD.

PAC BID maintained this survival advantage compared with BAT across nearly all demographic and myelofibrosis-associated risk factors.

Patients who were red blood cell transfusion-dependent at baseline experienced a statistically significant decrease in transfusion frequency from baseline to week 24 in both the QD and BID pacritinib arms compared with BAT.

And thrombocytopenia was not a significant factor for patients who were receiving pacritinib and had platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

Toxicity

The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) associated with pacritinib were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. They were generally less frequent for BID compared with QD administration.

The most common serious adverse events (SAEs)—occurring in 5% of patients or more in any arms—were anemia (5%, 8%, and 3%), thrombocytopenia (2%, 6%, and 2%), pneumonia (5%, 6%, and 4%), and acute renal failure (5%, 2%, and 2%) in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

SAEs of interest included congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest, epistaxis, and subdural hematoma, which occurred in 3% or fewer patients in any arm.

“They [the SAEs] were relatively infrequent, and there was not a clear signal of toxicity,” Dr Mascarenhas said.

Deaths

Deaths in the intent-to-treat evaluable population were censored at the time of full clinical hold.

For the entire enrolled population, 15/104 deaths occurred in the QD arm, 10/107 in the BID arm, and 14/100 in the BAT arm.

After the full clinical hold, 7, 10, and 6 deaths occurred in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

Seven of 20 patients died after crossover to pacritinib. Five were due to AEs—3 cardiac, 1 bleeding, and 1 other.

“It’s important to note that progression of disease was the leading cause of death in the PAC BID arm,” Dr Mascarenhas noted. “This is after the patients stopped the drug [when the trial was on clinical hold].”

Conclusions

Despite study truncation, pacritinib (QD+BID) was significantly more effective than BAT for SVR (P=0.001) and trended toward improved TSS (P=0.079).

Pacritinib BID appeared more effective than QD versus BAT for SVR and TSS, and pacritinib BID appeared to have a better benefit/risk profile than BAT.

“This is a well-tolerated drug in many respects,” Dr Mascarenhas said. “This is a patient population that is quite ill, low platelets, poor outcome, and they did pretty well.”

When asked about the future of pacritinib, Dr Mascarenhas said he believes the benefit-to-risk ratio is in favor of the drug.

“Pacritinib offers patients in this vulnerable situation an opportunity for symptom relief, basically spleen and symptoms,” he said. “So I think this is a drug that will hopefully move forward.”

Dr Mascarenhas disclosed research funding from CTI Biopharma, the sponsor of the trial.

John Mascarenhas, MD

SAN DIEGO—The JAK2/FLT3 inhibitor pacritinib significantly reduces spleen volume and symptoms in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts,

compared to best available therapy (BAT), according to results of the PERSIST-2 trial.

In this phase 3 trial, BAT included the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. And pacritinib demonstrated benefits over BAT despite a truncated trial.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) placed PERSIST-2 on clinical hold in February 2016 due to concerns over interim survival results, bleeding, and cardiovascular events.

Patients randomized at least 22 weeks prior to the clinical hold contributed data to the week 24 endpoint, the results of which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

John Mascarenhas, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, New York, delivered the results as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-5).

Ruxolitinib is FDA-approved to treat myelofibrosis, but it is associated with dose-limiting cytopenias and is not indicated for patients with platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

The earlier PERSIST-1 trial demonstrated sustained spleen volume reduction (SVR) and symptom control with pacritinib therapy regardless of baseline platelet count, but it did not include ruxolitinib in the BAT arm.

PERSIST-2 study design

Patients were randomized on a 1:1:1 basis to pacritinib at 400 mg once daily (PAC QD), pacritinib at 200 mg twice daily (PAC BID), or BAT, including ruxolitinib.

Patients had to have primary or secondary myelofibrosis and platelet counts of 100,000/μL or less. Patients were allowed to have had prior JAK2 inhibitors.

Crossover from BAT was allowed after progression at any time or at week 24.

The study had 2 primary endpoints: percent of patients achieving a 35% or greater SVR and the percent of patients achieving a 50% or more reduction in total symptom score (TSS) by MPN-SAF TSS 2.0.

The primary study objective was the efficacy of pooled QD and BID pacritinib compared to BAT. The secondary objective was the efficacy of QD or BD separately compared to BAT.

Patient demographics

The study randomized 311 patients, and 221 were included in the intent-to-treat efficacy population.

The efficacy population consisted of all patients randomized prior to September 7, 2015, which allowed their data to be included in the week 24 endpoint analysis prior to the clinical hold.

The PAC QD arm consisted of 75 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 39-85). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

About three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 61% had primary myelofibrosis, 21% had primary polycythemia vera (PPV), and 17% had primary essential thrombocythemia (PET). About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 51% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The PAC BID arm consisted of 74 patients with a median age of 67 (range, 39-85). Sixty-two percent were 65 or older, and 65% were male.

Eighty-eight percent had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 74% had primary myelofibrosis, 19% had PPV, and 7% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 42% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The BAT arm consisted of 72 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 32-83). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

Three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 60% had primary myelofibrosis, 22% had PPV, and 18% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 71% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 44% had a platelet count less than 50,000/µL.

Prior ruxolitinib therapy was consistent across the arms—41.3% (PAC QD), 42% (PAC BID), and 46% (BAT).

“Now, it’s important to note,” Dr Mascarenhas said, “that the most common BAT was ruxolitinib, 45%, and hydroxyurea, 19%. And 19% of BAT patients actually had no treatment, watch and wait. This highlights the fact that this is an area where there is really no other viable therapeutic option for these patients.”

Efficacy

Pacritinib-treated patients had significantly greater spleen reduction from baseline to week 24 than BAT-treated patients, with 18% (QD+BID), 15% (QD), and 22% (BID) achieving 35% or more SVR compared to 3% in the BAT arm.

Pacritinib-treated patients also experienced greater TSS reduction, with 25% (QD+BID), 17% (QD), and 32% (BID) reporting 50% or more reduction in TSS compared to 14% in the BAT arm. However, only the PAC BID arm was significantly different from BAT.

SVR in all subgroups—age, gender, JAK2 mutation status, prior treatment, platelet count, hemoglobin, peripheral blasts, and white blood cell count—demonstrated superiority for pacritinib.

Median changes in individual symptom scores were also better in the pacritinib arms than in the BAT arm in almost every category—tiredness, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, night sweats, bone pain, and pain under ribs on the left side.

Pruritus was the only category in which BAT was superior, and that was compared to the QD arm and not the BID arm.

The majority of patients who stopped pacritinib therapy were taken off due to the clinical hold.

There were no significant differences between the groups in overall survival. Hazard ratios for overall survival (95% confidence intervals) were 0.68 (0.30, 1.53) for PAC BID vs BAT, 1.18 (0.57, 2.44) for PAC QD vs BAT, and 0.61 (0.27, 1.35) for PAC BID vs QD.

PAC BID maintained this survival advantage compared with BAT across nearly all demographic and myelofibrosis-associated risk factors.

Patients who were red blood cell transfusion-dependent at baseline experienced a statistically significant decrease in transfusion frequency from baseline to week 24 in both the QD and BID pacritinib arms compared with BAT.

And thrombocytopenia was not a significant factor for patients who were receiving pacritinib and had platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

Toxicity

The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) associated with pacritinib were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. They were generally less frequent for BID compared with QD administration.

The most common serious adverse events (SAEs)—occurring in 5% of patients or more in any arms—were anemia (5%, 8%, and 3%), thrombocytopenia (2%, 6%, and 2%), pneumonia (5%, 6%, and 4%), and acute renal failure (5%, 2%, and 2%) in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

SAEs of interest included congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest, epistaxis, and subdural hematoma, which occurred in 3% or fewer patients in any arm.

“They [the SAEs] were relatively infrequent, and there was not a clear signal of toxicity,” Dr Mascarenhas said.

Deaths

Deaths in the intent-to-treat evaluable population were censored at the time of full clinical hold.

For the entire enrolled population, 15/104 deaths occurred in the QD arm, 10/107 in the BID arm, and 14/100 in the BAT arm.

After the full clinical hold, 7, 10, and 6 deaths occurred in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

Seven of 20 patients died after crossover to pacritinib. Five were due to AEs—3 cardiac, 1 bleeding, and 1 other.

“It’s important to note that progression of disease was the leading cause of death in the PAC BID arm,” Dr Mascarenhas noted. “This is after the patients stopped the drug [when the trial was on clinical hold].”

Conclusions

Despite study truncation, pacritinib (QD+BID) was significantly more effective than BAT for SVR (P=0.001) and trended toward improved TSS (P=0.079).

Pacritinib BID appeared more effective than QD versus BAT for SVR and TSS, and pacritinib BID appeared to have a better benefit/risk profile than BAT.

“This is a well-tolerated drug in many respects,” Dr Mascarenhas said. “This is a patient population that is quite ill, low platelets, poor outcome, and they did pretty well.”

When asked about the future of pacritinib, Dr Mascarenhas said he believes the benefit-to-risk ratio is in favor of the drug.

“Pacritinib offers patients in this vulnerable situation an opportunity for symptom relief, basically spleen and symptoms,” he said. “So I think this is a drug that will hopefully move forward.”

Dr Mascarenhas disclosed research funding from CTI Biopharma, the sponsor of the trial.

John Mascarenhas, MD

SAN DIEGO—The JAK2/FLT3 inhibitor pacritinib significantly reduces spleen volume and symptoms in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts,

compared to best available therapy (BAT), according to results of the PERSIST-2 trial.

In this phase 3 trial, BAT included the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. And pacritinib demonstrated benefits over BAT despite a truncated trial.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) placed PERSIST-2 on clinical hold in February 2016 due to concerns over interim survival results, bleeding, and cardiovascular events.

Patients randomized at least 22 weeks prior to the clinical hold contributed data to the week 24 endpoint, the results of which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

John Mascarenhas, MD, of Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, New York, delivered the results as a late-breaking abstract (LBA-5).

Ruxolitinib is FDA-approved to treat myelofibrosis, but it is associated with dose-limiting cytopenias and is not indicated for patients with platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

The earlier PERSIST-1 trial demonstrated sustained spleen volume reduction (SVR) and symptom control with pacritinib therapy regardless of baseline platelet count, but it did not include ruxolitinib in the BAT arm.

PERSIST-2 study design

Patients were randomized on a 1:1:1 basis to pacritinib at 400 mg once daily (PAC QD), pacritinib at 200 mg twice daily (PAC BID), or BAT, including ruxolitinib.

Patients had to have primary or secondary myelofibrosis and platelet counts of 100,000/μL or less. Patients were allowed to have had prior JAK2 inhibitors.

Crossover from BAT was allowed after progression at any time or at week 24.

The study had 2 primary endpoints: percent of patients achieving a 35% or greater SVR and the percent of patients achieving a 50% or more reduction in total symptom score (TSS) by MPN-SAF TSS 2.0.

The primary study objective was the efficacy of pooled QD and BID pacritinib compared to BAT. The secondary objective was the efficacy of QD or BD separately compared to BAT.

Patient demographics

The study randomized 311 patients, and 221 were included in the intent-to-treat efficacy population.

The efficacy population consisted of all patients randomized prior to September 7, 2015, which allowed their data to be included in the week 24 endpoint analysis prior to the clinical hold.

The PAC QD arm consisted of 75 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 39-85). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

About three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 61% had primary myelofibrosis, 21% had primary polycythemia vera (PPV), and 17% had primary essential thrombocythemia (PET). About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 51% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The PAC BID arm consisted of 74 patients with a median age of 67 (range, 39-85). Sixty-two percent were 65 or older, and 65% were male.

Eighty-eight percent had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 74% had primary myelofibrosis, 19% had PPV, and 7% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 80% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 42% had a platelet count less than 50,000/μL.

The BAT arm consisted of 72 patients with a median age of 69 (range, 32-83). Seventy-one percent were 65 or older, and about half were male.

Three-quarters had an ECOG performance status of 0-1, 60% had primary myelofibrosis, 22% had PPV, and 18% had PET. About half were DIPSS Intermediate-2 risk, 71% were JAK2^V617F positive, and 44% had a platelet count less than 50,000/µL.

Prior ruxolitinib therapy was consistent across the arms—41.3% (PAC QD), 42% (PAC BID), and 46% (BAT).

“Now, it’s important to note,” Dr Mascarenhas said, “that the most common BAT was ruxolitinib, 45%, and hydroxyurea, 19%. And 19% of BAT patients actually had no treatment, watch and wait. This highlights the fact that this is an area where there is really no other viable therapeutic option for these patients.”

Efficacy

Pacritinib-treated patients had significantly greater spleen reduction from baseline to week 24 than BAT-treated patients, with 18% (QD+BID), 15% (QD), and 22% (BID) achieving 35% or more SVR compared to 3% in the BAT arm.

Pacritinib-treated patients also experienced greater TSS reduction, with 25% (QD+BID), 17% (QD), and 32% (BID) reporting 50% or more reduction in TSS compared to 14% in the BAT arm. However, only the PAC BID arm was significantly different from BAT.

SVR in all subgroups—age, gender, JAK2 mutation status, prior treatment, platelet count, hemoglobin, peripheral blasts, and white blood cell count—demonstrated superiority for pacritinib.

Median changes in individual symptom scores were also better in the pacritinib arms than in the BAT arm in almost every category—tiredness, early satiety, abdominal discomfort, inactivity, night sweats, bone pain, and pain under ribs on the left side.

Pruritus was the only category in which BAT was superior, and that was compared to the QD arm and not the BID arm.

The majority of patients who stopped pacritinib therapy were taken off due to the clinical hold.

There were no significant differences between the groups in overall survival. Hazard ratios for overall survival (95% confidence intervals) were 0.68 (0.30, 1.53) for PAC BID vs BAT, 1.18 (0.57, 2.44) for PAC QD vs BAT, and 0.61 (0.27, 1.35) for PAC BID vs QD.

PAC BID maintained this survival advantage compared with BAT across nearly all demographic and myelofibrosis-associated risk factors.

Patients who were red blood cell transfusion-dependent at baseline experienced a statistically significant decrease in transfusion frequency from baseline to week 24 in both the QD and BID pacritinib arms compared with BAT.

And thrombocytopenia was not a significant factor for patients who were receiving pacritinib and had platelet counts less than 50,000/μL.

Toxicity

The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) associated with pacritinib were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. They were generally less frequent for BID compared with QD administration.

The most common serious adverse events (SAEs)—occurring in 5% of patients or more in any arms—were anemia (5%, 8%, and 3%), thrombocytopenia (2%, 6%, and 2%), pneumonia (5%, 6%, and 4%), and acute renal failure (5%, 2%, and 2%) in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

SAEs of interest included congestive heart failure, atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest, epistaxis, and subdural hematoma, which occurred in 3% or fewer patients in any arm.

“They [the SAEs] were relatively infrequent, and there was not a clear signal of toxicity,” Dr Mascarenhas said.

Deaths

Deaths in the intent-to-treat evaluable population were censored at the time of full clinical hold.

For the entire enrolled population, 15/104 deaths occurred in the QD arm, 10/107 in the BID arm, and 14/100 in the BAT arm.

After the full clinical hold, 7, 10, and 6 deaths occurred in the QD, BID, and BAT arms, respectively.

Seven of 20 patients died after crossover to pacritinib. Five were due to AEs—3 cardiac, 1 bleeding, and 1 other.

“It’s important to note that progression of disease was the leading cause of death in the PAC BID arm,” Dr Mascarenhas noted. “This is after the patients stopped the drug [when the trial was on clinical hold].”

Conclusions

Despite study truncation, pacritinib (QD+BID) was significantly more effective than BAT for SVR (P=0.001) and trended toward improved TSS (P=0.079).

Pacritinib BID appeared more effective than QD versus BAT for SVR and TSS, and pacritinib BID appeared to have a better benefit/risk profile than BAT.

“This is a well-tolerated drug in many respects,” Dr Mascarenhas said. “This is a patient population that is quite ill, low platelets, poor outcome, and they did pretty well.”

When asked about the future of pacritinib, Dr Mascarenhas said he believes the benefit-to-risk ratio is in favor of the drug.

“Pacritinib offers patients in this vulnerable situation an opportunity for symptom relief, basically spleen and symptoms,” he said. “So I think this is a drug that will hopefully move forward.”

Dr Mascarenhas disclosed research funding from CTI Biopharma, the sponsor of the trial.

A cooler packed with blood

products attached to a

S900-model drone.

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

A proof-of-concept study suggests that large bags of blood products can maintain temperature and cellular integrity when transported by drones.

Researchers say these findings, published in Transfusion, add to evidence that remotely piloted drones are an effective, safe, and timely way to quickly get blood products to remote accident or natural catastrophe sites, or other time-sensitive destinations.

“For rural areas that lack access to nearby clinics, or that may lack the infrastructure for collecting blood products or transporting them on their own, drones can provide that access,” said study author Timothy Amukele, MD, PhD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland.

Drones also can help in urban centers to improve distribution of blood products and the quality of care, he added.

Dr Amukele and his colleagues previously studied the impact of drone transportation on the chemical, hematological, and microbial makeup of drone-flown blood samples and found that none were negatively affected.

Study design, methods

In the new study, the team examined the effects of drone transportation on larger amounts of blood products used for transfusion, which have significantly more complex handling, transport, and storage requirements compared to blood samples for laboratory testing.

The researchers purchased 6 units of red blood cells (RBCs), 6 units of platelets, and 6 units of unthawed plasma from the American Red Cross. They then packed the units into a 5-quart cooler, 2 to 3 units at a time, in keeping with weight restrictions for the transport drone.

The cooler was then attached to a commercial S900-model drone. This particular drone model comes equipped with a camera mount, which the team removed and replaced with the cooler.

For each test, the drone was flown by remote control a distance of approximately 13 to 20 kilometers (8 to 12 miles) while 100 meters (328 feet) above ground. This flight took up to 26.5 minutes.

The researchers designed the test to maintain temperature for the RBCs, platelets, and plasma units. They used wet ice, pre-calibrated thermal packs, and dry ice for each type of blood product, respectively.

Temperature monitoring was constant, keeping with transport and storage requirements for blood components.

The team conducted the tests in an unpopulated area, and a certified, ground-based pilot flew the drone.

Following flight, all units were transported to The Johns Hopkins Hospital and compared to blood products that had not taken a drone trip.

Results

Dr Amukele and his colleagues checked the RBCs for signs of hemolysis. They checked the platelets for changes in pH, the number of platelets, and mean platelet volume. And they checked the plasma units for evidence of air bubbles, which would indicate thawing.

The researchers found no evidence of hemolysis in the control RBCs or the RBCs that had taken the drone flight.

There was no significant difference in pH, platelet counts, or mean platelet volume between control and drone-flown platelets.

And there was no apparent change in the size or shape of air bubbles in the plasma units before and after drone flight.

However, the researchers did find that, for all flown units, there was a decrease in temperature of between 1.5°C and 4°C during the course of the flight. They said the cause of this decrease was probably the ambient temperature in the case of the platelet units, the wet ice in the case of the RBCs, and the dry ice in the case of the plasma.

The team also found an up to 2°C difference between individual flights for both the RBCs and the plasma units. They said this difference is likely due to the differences in the amounts of wet and dry ice placed in the cooler.

The researchers are planning further and larger studies in the US and overseas, and they hope to test methods of active cooling, such as programming a cooler to maintain a specific temperature.

“My vision is that, in the future, when a first responder arrives to the scene of an accident, he or she can test the victim’s blood type right on the spot and send for a drone to bring the correct blood product,” Dr Amukele said.

Funding for this study was provided by Peter Kovler of the Blum-Kovler Foundation.

A cooler packed with blood

products attached to a

S900-model drone.

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

A proof-of-concept study suggests that large bags of blood products can maintain temperature and cellular integrity when transported by drones.

Researchers say these findings, published in Transfusion, add to evidence that remotely piloted drones are an effective, safe, and timely way to quickly get blood products to remote accident or natural catastrophe sites, or other time-sensitive destinations.

“For rural areas that lack access to nearby clinics, or that may lack the infrastructure for collecting blood products or transporting them on their own, drones can provide that access,” said study author Timothy Amukele, MD, PhD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland.

Drones also can help in urban centers to improve distribution of blood products and the quality of care, he added.

Dr Amukele and his colleagues previously studied the impact of drone transportation on the chemical, hematological, and microbial makeup of drone-flown blood samples and found that none were negatively affected.

Study design, methods

In the new study, the team examined the effects of drone transportation on larger amounts of blood products used for transfusion, which have significantly more complex handling, transport, and storage requirements compared to blood samples for laboratory testing.

The researchers purchased 6 units of red blood cells (RBCs), 6 units of platelets, and 6 units of unthawed plasma from the American Red Cross. They then packed the units into a 5-quart cooler, 2 to 3 units at a time, in keeping with weight restrictions for the transport drone.

The cooler was then attached to a commercial S900-model drone. This particular drone model comes equipped with a camera mount, which the team removed and replaced with the cooler.

For each test, the drone was flown by remote control a distance of approximately 13 to 20 kilometers (8 to 12 miles) while 100 meters (328 feet) above ground. This flight took up to 26.5 minutes.

The researchers designed the test to maintain temperature for the RBCs, platelets, and plasma units. They used wet ice, pre-calibrated thermal packs, and dry ice for each type of blood product, respectively.

Temperature monitoring was constant, keeping with transport and storage requirements for blood components.

The team conducted the tests in an unpopulated area, and a certified, ground-based pilot flew the drone.

Following flight, all units were transported to The Johns Hopkins Hospital and compared to blood products that had not taken a drone trip.

Results

Dr Amukele and his colleagues checked the RBCs for signs of hemolysis. They checked the platelets for changes in pH, the number of platelets, and mean platelet volume. And they checked the plasma units for evidence of air bubbles, which would indicate thawing.

The researchers found no evidence of hemolysis in the control RBCs or the RBCs that had taken the drone flight.

There was no significant difference in pH, platelet counts, or mean platelet volume between control and drone-flown platelets.

And there was no apparent change in the size or shape of air bubbles in the plasma units before and after drone flight.

However, the researchers did find that, for all flown units, there was a decrease in temperature of between 1.5°C and 4°C during the course of the flight. They said the cause of this decrease was probably the ambient temperature in the case of the platelet units, the wet ice in the case of the RBCs, and the dry ice in the case of the plasma.

The team also found an up to 2°C difference between individual flights for both the RBCs and the plasma units. They said this difference is likely due to the differences in the amounts of wet and dry ice placed in the cooler.

The researchers are planning further and larger studies in the US and overseas, and they hope to test methods of active cooling, such as programming a cooler to maintain a specific temperature.

“My vision is that, in the future, when a first responder arrives to the scene of an accident, he or she can test the victim’s blood type right on the spot and send for a drone to bring the correct blood product,” Dr Amukele said.

Funding for this study was provided by Peter Kovler of the Blum-Kovler Foundation.

A cooler packed with blood

products attached to a

S900-model drone.

Photo courtesy of

Johns Hopkins Medicine

A proof-of-concept study suggests that large bags of blood products can maintain temperature and cellular integrity when transported by drones.

Researchers say these findings, published in Transfusion, add to evidence that remotely piloted drones are an effective, safe, and timely way to quickly get blood products to remote accident or natural catastrophe sites, or other time-sensitive destinations.

“For rural areas that lack access to nearby clinics, or that may lack the infrastructure for collecting blood products or transporting them on their own, drones can provide that access,” said study author Timothy Amukele, MD, PhD, of the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine in Baltimore, Maryland.

Drones also can help in urban centers to improve distribution of blood products and the quality of care, he added.

Dr Amukele and his colleagues previously studied the impact of drone transportation on the chemical, hematological, and microbial makeup of drone-flown blood samples and found that none were negatively affected.

Study design, methods

In the new study, the team examined the effects of drone transportation on larger amounts of blood products used for transfusion, which have significantly more complex handling, transport, and storage requirements compared to blood samples for laboratory testing.

The researchers purchased 6 units of red blood cells (RBCs), 6 units of platelets, and 6 units of unthawed plasma from the American Red Cross. They then packed the units into a 5-quart cooler, 2 to 3 units at a time, in keeping with weight restrictions for the transport drone.

The cooler was then attached to a commercial S900-model drone. This particular drone model comes equipped with a camera mount, which the team removed and replaced with the cooler.

For each test, the drone was flown by remote control a distance of approximately 13 to 20 kilometers (8 to 12 miles) while 100 meters (328 feet) above ground. This flight took up to 26.5 minutes.

The researchers designed the test to maintain temperature for the RBCs, platelets, and plasma units. They used wet ice, pre-calibrated thermal packs, and dry ice for each type of blood product, respectively.

Temperature monitoring was constant, keeping with transport and storage requirements for blood components.

The team conducted the tests in an unpopulated area, and a certified, ground-based pilot flew the drone.

Following flight, all units were transported to The Johns Hopkins Hospital and compared to blood products that had not taken a drone trip.

Results

Dr Amukele and his colleagues checked the RBCs for signs of hemolysis. They checked the platelets for changes in pH, the number of platelets, and mean platelet volume. And they checked the plasma units for evidence of air bubbles, which would indicate thawing.

The researchers found no evidence of hemolysis in the control RBCs or the RBCs that had taken the drone flight.

There was no significant difference in pH, platelet counts, or mean platelet volume between control and drone-flown platelets.

And there was no apparent change in the size or shape of air bubbles in the plasma units before and after drone flight.

However, the researchers did find that, for all flown units, there was a decrease in temperature of between 1.5°C and 4°C during the course of the flight. They said the cause of this decrease was probably the ambient temperature in the case of the platelet units, the wet ice in the case of the RBCs, and the dry ice in the case of the plasma.

The team also found an up to 2°C difference between individual flights for both the RBCs and the plasma units. They said this difference is likely due to the differences in the amounts of wet and dry ice placed in the cooler.

The researchers are planning further and larger studies in the US and overseas, and they hope to test methods of active cooling, such as programming a cooler to maintain a specific temperature.

“My vision is that, in the future, when a first responder arrives to the scene of an accident, he or she can test the victim’s blood type right on the spot and send for a drone to bring the correct blood product,” Dr Amukele said.

Funding for this study was provided by Peter Kovler of the Blum-Kovler Foundation.

First month’s supply of venetoclax

(US version, Venclexta)

Photo courtesy of Abbvie

The European Commission (EC) has granted conditional marketing authorization for the oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (Venclyxto™) to treat certain patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The drug is now approved as monotherapy to treat adults with CLL who have 17p deletion or TP53 mutation and are unsuitable for or have failed a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is also approved as monotherapy to treat CLL in the absence of 17p deletion or TP53 mutation in adults who have failed both chemoimmunotherapy and a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is the first BCL-2 inhibitor authorized for use in Europe.

Conditional marketing authorization represents an expedited path for approval. The EC grants conditional marketing authorization to products whose benefits are thought to outweigh their risks, products that address unmet needs, and products that are expected to provide a significant public health benefit.

Conditional marketing authorization is granted before pivotal registration studies of a product are completed, but the company developing the product is required to complete post-marketing studies showing that the product provides a clinical benefit.

Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. The drug is jointly commercialized by the companies in the US and by AbbVie outside of the US.

Phase 2 trials

Venetoclax has produced high objective response rates (ORR) in two phase 2 trials of CLL patients.

In one of these trials, researchers tested venetoclax in 107 patients with previously treated CLL and 17p deletion. The results were published in The Lancet Oncology in June.

The ORR in this trial was 79%. At the time of analysis, the median duration of response had not been reached. The same was true for progression-free survival and overall survival.

The progression-free survival estimate for 12 months was 72%, and the overall survival estimate was 87%.

The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 96%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 55%.

Grade 3 laboratory tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was reported in 5 patients. Three of these patients continued on venetoclax, but 2 patients required a dose interruption of 1 day each.

In the second trial, researchers tested venetoclax in 64 patients with CLL who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and/or idelalisib. Results from this trial were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

The ORR was 67%. At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival was 80%.

The incidence of adverse events was 100%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 53%. No clinical TLS was observed, but 1 patient met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

First month’s supply of venetoclax

(US version, Venclexta)

Photo courtesy of Abbvie

The European Commission (EC) has granted conditional marketing authorization for the oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (Venclyxto™) to treat certain patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The drug is now approved as monotherapy to treat adults with CLL who have 17p deletion or TP53 mutation and are unsuitable for or have failed a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is also approved as monotherapy to treat CLL in the absence of 17p deletion or TP53 mutation in adults who have failed both chemoimmunotherapy and a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is the first BCL-2 inhibitor authorized for use in Europe.

Conditional marketing authorization represents an expedited path for approval. The EC grants conditional marketing authorization to products whose benefits are thought to outweigh their risks, products that address unmet needs, and products that are expected to provide a significant public health benefit.

Conditional marketing authorization is granted before pivotal registration studies of a product are completed, but the company developing the product is required to complete post-marketing studies showing that the product provides a clinical benefit.

Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. The drug is jointly commercialized by the companies in the US and by AbbVie outside of the US.

Phase 2 trials

Venetoclax has produced high objective response rates (ORR) in two phase 2 trials of CLL patients.

In one of these trials, researchers tested venetoclax in 107 patients with previously treated CLL and 17p deletion. The results were published in The Lancet Oncology in June.

The ORR in this trial was 79%. At the time of analysis, the median duration of response had not been reached. The same was true for progression-free survival and overall survival.

The progression-free survival estimate for 12 months was 72%, and the overall survival estimate was 87%.

The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 96%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 55%.

Grade 3 laboratory tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was reported in 5 patients. Three of these patients continued on venetoclax, but 2 patients required a dose interruption of 1 day each.

In the second trial, researchers tested venetoclax in 64 patients with CLL who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and/or idelalisib. Results from this trial were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

The ORR was 67%. At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival was 80%.

The incidence of adverse events was 100%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 53%. No clinical TLS was observed, but 1 patient met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

First month’s supply of venetoclax

(US version, Venclexta)

Photo courtesy of Abbvie

The European Commission (EC) has granted conditional marketing authorization for the oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax (Venclyxto™) to treat certain patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

The drug is now approved as monotherapy to treat adults with CLL who have 17p deletion or TP53 mutation and are unsuitable for or have failed a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is also approved as monotherapy to treat CLL in the absence of 17p deletion or TP53 mutation in adults who have failed both chemoimmunotherapy and a B-cell receptor pathway inhibitor.

Venetoclax is the first BCL-2 inhibitor authorized for use in Europe.

Conditional marketing authorization represents an expedited path for approval. The EC grants conditional marketing authorization to products whose benefits are thought to outweigh their risks, products that address unmet needs, and products that are expected to provide a significant public health benefit.

Conditional marketing authorization is granted before pivotal registration studies of a product are completed, but the company developing the product is required to complete post-marketing studies showing that the product provides a clinical benefit.

Venetoclax is being developed by AbbVie and Genentech, a member of the Roche Group. The drug is jointly commercialized by the companies in the US and by AbbVie outside of the US.

Phase 2 trials

Venetoclax has produced high objective response rates (ORR) in two phase 2 trials of CLL patients.

In one of these trials, researchers tested venetoclax in 107 patients with previously treated CLL and 17p deletion. The results were published in The Lancet Oncology in June.

The ORR in this trial was 79%. At the time of analysis, the median duration of response had not been reached. The same was true for progression-free survival and overall survival.

The progression-free survival estimate for 12 months was 72%, and the overall survival estimate was 87%.

The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 96%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 55%.

Grade 3 laboratory tumor lysis syndrome (TLS) was reported in 5 patients. Three of these patients continued on venetoclax, but 2 patients required a dose interruption of 1 day each.

In the second trial, researchers tested venetoclax in 64 patients with CLL who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and/or idelalisib. Results from this trial were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.

The ORR was 67%. At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival was 80%.

The incidence of adverse events was 100%, and the incidence of serious adverse events was 53%. No clinical TLS was observed, but 1 patient met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

© Todd Buchanan 2016

SAN DIEGO—The oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax can produce high objective response rates (ORRs) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients who have failed treatment with at least one B-cell receptor inhibitor, according to investigators.

In a phase 2 study, venetoclax produced an ORR of 67% among all patients enrolled.

The drug produced a 70% ORR among patients who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and a 62% ORR among patients who had failed idelalisib.

“This represents the first prospective study in this patient population and does demonstrate high rates of durable responses, certainly making [venetoclax] a very viable option for a challenging group of patients to treat,” said study investigator Jeffrey Jones, MD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus.

Dr Jones presented results from this trial at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 637*). This study is sponsored by AbbVie in collaboration with Genentech/Roche.

The trial enrolled patients with CLL who relapsed after or were refractory to ibrutinib (arm A) or idelalisib (arm B). At the time of the data cut-off, 64 patients had been enrolled and treated with venetoclax, including 43 patients in arm A and 21 in arm B.

Patients received venetoclax via a recommended dose-titration schedule—20 mg once daily in week 1, 50 mg daily in week 2, 100 mg daily in week 3, 200 mg daily in week 4, and 400 mg daily from week 5 onward. Patients continued to receive the drug until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

To mitigate the risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), patients received prophylaxis with uric acid lowering agents and hydration starting at least 72 hours before the first dose of venetoclax.

Patients with a high tumor burden were hospitalized for the first 20 mg dose and the first 50 mg dose, and they received intravenous hydration and rasburicase. Laboratory values were monitored at the first dose and all dose increases.

Patient characteristics: Arm A

Among patients who had failed ibrutinib, the median age was 66 (range, 48-80). Forty-nine percent of the patients had del(17p), and 35% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 4 (range, 1-12). All patients had received ibrutinib, but 9% had also received idelalisib. Ninety-one percent of patients were refractory to ibrutinib, and 5% were refractory to idelalisib.

The median time on ibrutinib was 17 months (range, 1-56), and the median time on idelalisib was 10 months (range, 2-31).

Patient characteristics: Arm B

Among patients who had failed idelalisib, the median age was 68 (range, 56-85). Ten percent of patients had del(17p), and 52% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 3 (range, 1-11). All patients had received idelalisib, but 24% had also received ibrutinib. Sixty-seven percent of patients were refractory to idelalisib, and 10% were refractory to ibrutinib.

The median time on idelalisib was 8 months (range, 1-27), and the median time on ibrutinib was 6 months (range, 2-11).

Results: Arm A

The median time on study in arm A was 13 months (range, 0.1-18). Eighteen patients in this arm discontinued the study—12 due to disease progression, 3 due to adverse events (AEs), 2 due to stem cell transplant, and 1 patient withdrew consent.

The ORR was 70% according to an independent review committee (IRC) and 67% according to investigators.

The rate of complete response (CR) was 0%, and the rate of CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi) was 2% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 5%, and the CRi rate was 2%.

Sixty-seven percent of patients had a partial response (PR) according to the IRC, and 56% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Arm B

The median time on study in arm B was 9 months (range, 1.3-16). Four patients in this arm discontinued the study—3 related to disease progression and 1 for an “other” reason.

The ORR was 62% according to the IRC and 57% according to investigators.

The rate of CR/CRi was 0% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 10%, and the CRi rate was 5%.

Sixty-two percent of patients had a PR according to the IRC, and 43% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Overall

The ORR was 67% according to the IRC and 64% according to investigators.

Forty-five percent of patient samples analyzed (14/31) demonstrated minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood between weeks 24 and 48. Five patients with sustained MRD negativity had bone marrow evaluations, and 1 was MRD negative.

At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival for all patients was 80%.

“Venetoclax has been well-tolerated,” Dr Jones noted. “The toxicity profile in this study is consistent with previous reports. Most of the toxicity has been cytopenias, which can be managed with dose adjustments or supportive care interventions, such as G-CSF.”

All 64 patients experienced an AE. Common AEs were neutropenia (58%), thrombocytopenia (44%), diarrhea (42%), nausea (41%), anemia (36%), fatigue (31%), decreased white blood cell count (22%), and hyperphosphatemia (22%).

Eighty-three percent of patients had grade 3/4 AEs, including neutropenia (45%), thrombocytopenia (28%), anemia (22%), decreased white blood cell count (13%), febrile neutropenia (11%), and pneumonia (11%).

Fifty-three percent of patients had serious AEs, including febrile neutropenia (9%), pneumonia (8%), multi-organ failure (3%), septic shock (3%), and increased potassium (3%).

There were no cases of clinical TLS. However, 1 patient with high tumor burden met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

© Todd Buchanan 2016

SAN DIEGO—The oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax can produce high objective response rates (ORRs) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients who have failed treatment with at least one B-cell receptor inhibitor, according to investigators.

In a phase 2 study, venetoclax produced an ORR of 67% among all patients enrolled.

The drug produced a 70% ORR among patients who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and a 62% ORR among patients who had failed idelalisib.

“This represents the first prospective study in this patient population and does demonstrate high rates of durable responses, certainly making [venetoclax] a very viable option for a challenging group of patients to treat,” said study investigator Jeffrey Jones, MD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus.

Dr Jones presented results from this trial at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 637*). This study is sponsored by AbbVie in collaboration with Genentech/Roche.

The trial enrolled patients with CLL who relapsed after or were refractory to ibrutinib (arm A) or idelalisib (arm B). At the time of the data cut-off, 64 patients had been enrolled and treated with venetoclax, including 43 patients in arm A and 21 in arm B.

Patients received venetoclax via a recommended dose-titration schedule—20 mg once daily in week 1, 50 mg daily in week 2, 100 mg daily in week 3, 200 mg daily in week 4, and 400 mg daily from week 5 onward. Patients continued to receive the drug until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

To mitigate the risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), patients received prophylaxis with uric acid lowering agents and hydration starting at least 72 hours before the first dose of venetoclax.

Patients with a high tumor burden were hospitalized for the first 20 mg dose and the first 50 mg dose, and they received intravenous hydration and rasburicase. Laboratory values were monitored at the first dose and all dose increases.

Patient characteristics: Arm A

Among patients who had failed ibrutinib, the median age was 66 (range, 48-80). Forty-nine percent of the patients had del(17p), and 35% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 4 (range, 1-12). All patients had received ibrutinib, but 9% had also received idelalisib. Ninety-one percent of patients were refractory to ibrutinib, and 5% were refractory to idelalisib.

The median time on ibrutinib was 17 months (range, 1-56), and the median time on idelalisib was 10 months (range, 2-31).

Patient characteristics: Arm B

Among patients who had failed idelalisib, the median age was 68 (range, 56-85). Ten percent of patients had del(17p), and 52% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 3 (range, 1-11). All patients had received idelalisib, but 24% had also received ibrutinib. Sixty-seven percent of patients were refractory to idelalisib, and 10% were refractory to ibrutinib.

The median time on idelalisib was 8 months (range, 1-27), and the median time on ibrutinib was 6 months (range, 2-11).

Results: Arm A

The median time on study in arm A was 13 months (range, 0.1-18). Eighteen patients in this arm discontinued the study—12 due to disease progression, 3 due to adverse events (AEs), 2 due to stem cell transplant, and 1 patient withdrew consent.

The ORR was 70% according to an independent review committee (IRC) and 67% according to investigators.

The rate of complete response (CR) was 0%, and the rate of CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi) was 2% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 5%, and the CRi rate was 2%.

Sixty-seven percent of patients had a partial response (PR) according to the IRC, and 56% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Arm B

The median time on study in arm B was 9 months (range, 1.3-16). Four patients in this arm discontinued the study—3 related to disease progression and 1 for an “other” reason.

The ORR was 62% according to the IRC and 57% according to investigators.

The rate of CR/CRi was 0% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 10%, and the CRi rate was 5%.

Sixty-two percent of patients had a PR according to the IRC, and 43% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Overall

The ORR was 67% according to the IRC and 64% according to investigators.

Forty-five percent of patient samples analyzed (14/31) demonstrated minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood between weeks 24 and 48. Five patients with sustained MRD negativity had bone marrow evaluations, and 1 was MRD negative.

At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival for all patients was 80%.

“Venetoclax has been well-tolerated,” Dr Jones noted. “The toxicity profile in this study is consistent with previous reports. Most of the toxicity has been cytopenias, which can be managed with dose adjustments or supportive care interventions, such as G-CSF.”

All 64 patients experienced an AE. Common AEs were neutropenia (58%), thrombocytopenia (44%), diarrhea (42%), nausea (41%), anemia (36%), fatigue (31%), decreased white blood cell count (22%), and hyperphosphatemia (22%).

Eighty-three percent of patients had grade 3/4 AEs, including neutropenia (45%), thrombocytopenia (28%), anemia (22%), decreased white blood cell count (13%), febrile neutropenia (11%), and pneumonia (11%).

Fifty-three percent of patients had serious AEs, including febrile neutropenia (9%), pneumonia (8%), multi-organ failure (3%), septic shock (3%), and increased potassium (3%).

There were no cases of clinical TLS. However, 1 patient with high tumor burden met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.

2016 ASH Annual Meeting

© Todd Buchanan 2016

SAN DIEGO—The oral BCL-2 inhibitor venetoclax can produce high objective response rates (ORRs) in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) patients who have failed treatment with at least one B-cell receptor inhibitor, according to investigators.

In a phase 2 study, venetoclax produced an ORR of 67% among all patients enrolled.

The drug produced a 70% ORR among patients who had failed treatment with ibrutinib and a 62% ORR among patients who had failed idelalisib.

“This represents the first prospective study in this patient population and does demonstrate high rates of durable responses, certainly making [venetoclax] a very viable option for a challenging group of patients to treat,” said study investigator Jeffrey Jones, MD, of The Ohio State University in Columbus.

Dr Jones presented results from this trial at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 637*). This study is sponsored by AbbVie in collaboration with Genentech/Roche.

The trial enrolled patients with CLL who relapsed after or were refractory to ibrutinib (arm A) or idelalisib (arm B). At the time of the data cut-off, 64 patients had been enrolled and treated with venetoclax, including 43 patients in arm A and 21 in arm B.

Patients received venetoclax via a recommended dose-titration schedule—20 mg once daily in week 1, 50 mg daily in week 2, 100 mg daily in week 3, 200 mg daily in week 4, and 400 mg daily from week 5 onward. Patients continued to receive the drug until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity.

To mitigate the risk of tumor lysis syndrome (TLS), patients received prophylaxis with uric acid lowering agents and hydration starting at least 72 hours before the first dose of venetoclax.

Patients with a high tumor burden were hospitalized for the first 20 mg dose and the first 50 mg dose, and they received intravenous hydration and rasburicase. Laboratory values were monitored at the first dose and all dose increases.

Patient characteristics: Arm A

Among patients who had failed ibrutinib, the median age was 66 (range, 48-80). Forty-nine percent of the patients had del(17p), and 35% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 4 (range, 1-12). All patients had received ibrutinib, but 9% had also received idelalisib. Ninety-one percent of patients were refractory to ibrutinib, and 5% were refractory to idelalisib.

The median time on ibrutinib was 17 months (range, 1-56), and the median time on idelalisib was 10 months (range, 2-31).

Patient characteristics: Arm B

Among patients who had failed idelalisib, the median age was 68 (range, 56-85). Ten percent of patients had del(17p), and 52% had bulky nodal disease (5 cm or greater).

The median number of prior treatments was 3 (range, 1-11). All patients had received idelalisib, but 24% had also received ibrutinib. Sixty-seven percent of patients were refractory to idelalisib, and 10% were refractory to ibrutinib.

The median time on idelalisib was 8 months (range, 1-27), and the median time on ibrutinib was 6 months (range, 2-11).

Results: Arm A

The median time on study in arm A was 13 months (range, 0.1-18). Eighteen patients in this arm discontinued the study—12 due to disease progression, 3 due to adverse events (AEs), 2 due to stem cell transplant, and 1 patient withdrew consent.

The ORR was 70% according to an independent review committee (IRC) and 67% according to investigators.

The rate of complete response (CR) was 0%, and the rate of CR with incomplete bone marrow recovery (CRi) was 2% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 5%, and the CRi rate was 2%.

Sixty-seven percent of patients had a partial response (PR) according to the IRC, and 56% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Arm B

The median time on study in arm B was 9 months (range, 1.3-16). Four patients in this arm discontinued the study—3 related to disease progression and 1 for an “other” reason.

The ORR was 62% according to the IRC and 57% according to investigators.

The rate of CR/CRi was 0% according to the IRC. According to investigators, the CR rate was 10%, and the CRi rate was 5%.

Sixty-two percent of patients had a PR according to the IRC, and 43% had a PR according to investigators.

Results: Overall

The ORR was 67% according to the IRC and 64% according to investigators.

Forty-five percent of patient samples analyzed (14/31) demonstrated minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity in the peripheral blood between weeks 24 and 48. Five patients with sustained MRD negativity had bone marrow evaluations, and 1 was MRD negative.

At 11.8 months of follow-up, the median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival had not been reached. The estimated 12-month progression-free survival for all patients was 80%.

“Venetoclax has been well-tolerated,” Dr Jones noted. “The toxicity profile in this study is consistent with previous reports. Most of the toxicity has been cytopenias, which can be managed with dose adjustments or supportive care interventions, such as G-CSF.”

All 64 patients experienced an AE. Common AEs were neutropenia (58%), thrombocytopenia (44%), diarrhea (42%), nausea (41%), anemia (36%), fatigue (31%), decreased white blood cell count (22%), and hyperphosphatemia (22%).

Eighty-three percent of patients had grade 3/4 AEs, including neutropenia (45%), thrombocytopenia (28%), anemia (22%), decreased white blood cell count (13%), febrile neutropenia (11%), and pneumonia (11%).

Fifty-three percent of patients had serious AEs, including febrile neutropenia (9%), pneumonia (8%), multi-organ failure (3%), septic shock (3%), and increased potassium (3%).

There were no cases of clinical TLS. However, 1 patient with high tumor burden met Howard criteria for laboratory TLS.

*Information presented at the meeting differs from the abstract.