User login
R-CHOP effective as first-line treatment in FL
Long-term data suggest R-CHOP can be effective as first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL).
In a phase 2-3 trial, investigators compared R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 in a cohort of patients with indolent lymphomas, most of whom had FL.
Ten-year survival rates were similar between the R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 groups, with progression-free survival (PFS) rates of 33% and 39%, respectively, and overall survival (OS) rates of 81% and 85%, respectively.
The investigators did note that 9% of patients in each treatment group developed secondary malignancies, and grade 3 infections were a concern as well.
Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, of Mie University in Japan, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.
The trial (JCOG0203) included 300 patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas from 44 Japanese hospitals.
Most patients (n=248) had grade 1-3a FL, 17 had grade 3b FL, 6 had marginal zone lymphoma, 6 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 4 had mantle cell lymphoma, 2 had small lymphocytic lymphoma, 1 had plasmacytoma, 13 had other indolent B-cell lymphomas, and 3 had other lymphomas.
The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of R-CHOP 21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) or R-CHOP 14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support). Neither group received rituximab maintenance.
Overall results
The median follow-up was 11.2 years (interquartile range, 10.1 to 12.7 years).
The 10-year PFS was 33% in the R-CHOP-21 group and 39% in the R-CHOP-14 group (hazard ratio=0.89). The 10-year OS was 81% and 85%, respectively (hazard ratio=0.87).
At 10 years, the incidence of secondary malignancies was 9% in both the R-CHOP-21 group (14/148) and the R-CHOP-14 group (14/151).
The most frequent solid tumor malignancies were stomach (n=5), lung (n=4), colon (n=3), bladder (n=2), and prostate (n=2) cancers. Hematologic malignancies included myelodysplastic syndromes (n=6), acute myeloid leukemia (n=2), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n=1), and chronic myeloid leukemia (n=1).
There were nine deaths from secondary malignancies, four in the R-CHOP-21 group and five in the R-CHOP-14 group.
The rate of grade 3 adverse events was 18% (n=53) for the entire cohort. Grade 3 infections occurred in 23% of the R-CHOP-21 group and 12% of the R-CHOP-14 group.
Focus on grade 1-3a FL
Among the 248 patients with grade 1-3a FL, the PFS (for both treatment groups) was 45% at 5 years, 39% at 8 years, and 36% at 10 years. The OS was 94% at 5 years, 87% at 8 years, and 85% at 10 years.
Histological transformation was observed in 11% of the patients who had grade 1-3a FL at enrollment. The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 2.4% at 3 years, 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% at 10 years.
Secondary malignancies occurred in 10% (12/125) of the R-CHOP-21 group and 11% (13/123) of the R-CHOP-14 group.
The cumulative incidence of hematologic secondary malignancies at 10 years was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known. They emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up—both of which could lead to death,” the investigators wrote.
This study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan.
Dr. Wantanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple co-authors reported similar relationships.
Long-term data suggest R-CHOP can be effective as first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL).
In a phase 2-3 trial, investigators compared R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 in a cohort of patients with indolent lymphomas, most of whom had FL.
Ten-year survival rates were similar between the R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 groups, with progression-free survival (PFS) rates of 33% and 39%, respectively, and overall survival (OS) rates of 81% and 85%, respectively.
The investigators did note that 9% of patients in each treatment group developed secondary malignancies, and grade 3 infections were a concern as well.
Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, of Mie University in Japan, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.
The trial (JCOG0203) included 300 patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas from 44 Japanese hospitals.
Most patients (n=248) had grade 1-3a FL, 17 had grade 3b FL, 6 had marginal zone lymphoma, 6 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 4 had mantle cell lymphoma, 2 had small lymphocytic lymphoma, 1 had plasmacytoma, 13 had other indolent B-cell lymphomas, and 3 had other lymphomas.
The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of R-CHOP 21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) or R-CHOP 14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support). Neither group received rituximab maintenance.
Overall results
The median follow-up was 11.2 years (interquartile range, 10.1 to 12.7 years).
The 10-year PFS was 33% in the R-CHOP-21 group and 39% in the R-CHOP-14 group (hazard ratio=0.89). The 10-year OS was 81% and 85%, respectively (hazard ratio=0.87).
At 10 years, the incidence of secondary malignancies was 9% in both the R-CHOP-21 group (14/148) and the R-CHOP-14 group (14/151).
The most frequent solid tumor malignancies were stomach (n=5), lung (n=4), colon (n=3), bladder (n=2), and prostate (n=2) cancers. Hematologic malignancies included myelodysplastic syndromes (n=6), acute myeloid leukemia (n=2), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n=1), and chronic myeloid leukemia (n=1).
There were nine deaths from secondary malignancies, four in the R-CHOP-21 group and five in the R-CHOP-14 group.
The rate of grade 3 adverse events was 18% (n=53) for the entire cohort. Grade 3 infections occurred in 23% of the R-CHOP-21 group and 12% of the R-CHOP-14 group.
Focus on grade 1-3a FL
Among the 248 patients with grade 1-3a FL, the PFS (for both treatment groups) was 45% at 5 years, 39% at 8 years, and 36% at 10 years. The OS was 94% at 5 years, 87% at 8 years, and 85% at 10 years.
Histological transformation was observed in 11% of the patients who had grade 1-3a FL at enrollment. The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 2.4% at 3 years, 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% at 10 years.
Secondary malignancies occurred in 10% (12/125) of the R-CHOP-21 group and 11% (13/123) of the R-CHOP-14 group.
The cumulative incidence of hematologic secondary malignancies at 10 years was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known. They emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up—both of which could lead to death,” the investigators wrote.
This study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan.
Dr. Wantanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple co-authors reported similar relationships.
Long-term data suggest R-CHOP can be effective as first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma (FL).
In a phase 2-3 trial, investigators compared R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 in a cohort of patients with indolent lymphomas, most of whom had FL.
Ten-year survival rates were similar between the R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 groups, with progression-free survival (PFS) rates of 33% and 39%, respectively, and overall survival (OS) rates of 81% and 85%, respectively.
The investigators did note that 9% of patients in each treatment group developed secondary malignancies, and grade 3 infections were a concern as well.
Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, of Mie University in Japan, and his colleagues reported these results in The Lancet Haematology.
The trial (JCOG0203) included 300 patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas from 44 Japanese hospitals.
Most patients (n=248) had grade 1-3a FL, 17 had grade 3b FL, 6 had marginal zone lymphoma, 6 had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, 4 had mantle cell lymphoma, 2 had small lymphocytic lymphoma, 1 had plasmacytoma, 13 had other indolent B-cell lymphomas, and 3 had other lymphomas.
The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of R-CHOP 21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) or R-CHOP 14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor support). Neither group received rituximab maintenance.
Overall results
The median follow-up was 11.2 years (interquartile range, 10.1 to 12.7 years).
The 10-year PFS was 33% in the R-CHOP-21 group and 39% in the R-CHOP-14 group (hazard ratio=0.89). The 10-year OS was 81% and 85%, respectively (hazard ratio=0.87).
At 10 years, the incidence of secondary malignancies was 9% in both the R-CHOP-21 group (14/148) and the R-CHOP-14 group (14/151).
The most frequent solid tumor malignancies were stomach (n=5), lung (n=4), colon (n=3), bladder (n=2), and prostate (n=2) cancers. Hematologic malignancies included myelodysplastic syndromes (n=6), acute myeloid leukemia (n=2), acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n=1), and chronic myeloid leukemia (n=1).
There were nine deaths from secondary malignancies, four in the R-CHOP-21 group and five in the R-CHOP-14 group.
The rate of grade 3 adverse events was 18% (n=53) for the entire cohort. Grade 3 infections occurred in 23% of the R-CHOP-21 group and 12% of the R-CHOP-14 group.
Focus on grade 1-3a FL
Among the 248 patients with grade 1-3a FL, the PFS (for both treatment groups) was 45% at 5 years, 39% at 8 years, and 36% at 10 years. The OS was 94% at 5 years, 87% at 8 years, and 85% at 10 years.
Histological transformation was observed in 11% of the patients who had grade 1-3a FL at enrollment. The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 2.4% at 3 years, 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% at 10 years.
Secondary malignancies occurred in 10% (12/125) of the R-CHOP-21 group and 11% (13/123) of the R-CHOP-14 group.
The cumulative incidence of hematologic secondary malignancies at 10 years was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known. They emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up—both of which could lead to death,” the investigators wrote.
This study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan.
Dr. Wantanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple co-authors reported similar relationships.
R-CHOP looks viable as first line in follicular lymphoma
A decade of follow-up data suggest that patients with newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma may derive long-term benefit from first-line therapy with the R-CHOP regimen, according to investigators in Japan.
Among patients with untreated follicular and other indolent B-cell lymphomas enrolled in a randomized phase 2/3 trial, the 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) was 33%, and the 10-year PFS rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF] support] was 39%, and these PFS rates did not differ between the treatment arms, Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, from Mie University in Tsu, Japan, and his colleagues reported in the Lancet Haematology.
They also found that, compared with therapeutic regimens prior to the introduction of rituximab, R-CHOP was associated with a reduced likelihood of histological transformation of follicular lymphoma into a poor-prognosis diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with no apparent increase in risk of secondary malignancies.
“The gold-standard, first-line treatment in patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma remains undetermined. However, because of the reduction in incidence of transformation without an increase in either secondary malignancies or fatal infectious events, the R-CHOP regimen should be a candidate for standard treatment, particularly from the viewpoint of long-term follow-up,” the investigators wrote
The JCOG0203 trial, which began enrollment in September 2002, included patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas, including grades 1-3 follicular lymphoma, from 44 Japanese hospitals. The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of either R-CHOP-14 plus G-CSF or R-CHOP-21 administered once daily for 6 days beginning on day 8 of every cycle). Patients did not receive rituximab maintenance in either group.
In the primary analysis of the trial, published in 2011, the investigators reported that in 299 patients there were no significant differences in either PFS or 6-year overall survival (OS).
In the current analysis, the investigators reported that, for 248 patients with grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma, the 8-year PFS rate was 39% and the 10-year PFS rate was 36%.
The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% 10 years after the last patient was enrolled.
“In our study, survival after histological transformation was still poor; therefore, reducing histological transformation remains a crucial issue for patients with follicular lymphoma,” the investigators wrote.
The cumulative incidence of secondary malignancies at 10 years was 8.1%, and the cumulative incidence of hematological secondary malignancies was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known and emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure that the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up – both of which could lead to death,” they advised.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan. Dr. Watanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships.
SOURCE: Watanabe T et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Nov;5(11):e520-31.
A decade of follow-up data suggest that patients with newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma may derive long-term benefit from first-line therapy with the R-CHOP regimen, according to investigators in Japan.
Among patients with untreated follicular and other indolent B-cell lymphomas enrolled in a randomized phase 2/3 trial, the 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) was 33%, and the 10-year PFS rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF] support] was 39%, and these PFS rates did not differ between the treatment arms, Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, from Mie University in Tsu, Japan, and his colleagues reported in the Lancet Haematology.
They also found that, compared with therapeutic regimens prior to the introduction of rituximab, R-CHOP was associated with a reduced likelihood of histological transformation of follicular lymphoma into a poor-prognosis diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with no apparent increase in risk of secondary malignancies.
“The gold-standard, first-line treatment in patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma remains undetermined. However, because of the reduction in incidence of transformation without an increase in either secondary malignancies or fatal infectious events, the R-CHOP regimen should be a candidate for standard treatment, particularly from the viewpoint of long-term follow-up,” the investigators wrote
The JCOG0203 trial, which began enrollment in September 2002, included patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas, including grades 1-3 follicular lymphoma, from 44 Japanese hospitals. The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of either R-CHOP-14 plus G-CSF or R-CHOP-21 administered once daily for 6 days beginning on day 8 of every cycle). Patients did not receive rituximab maintenance in either group.
In the primary analysis of the trial, published in 2011, the investigators reported that in 299 patients there were no significant differences in either PFS or 6-year overall survival (OS).
In the current analysis, the investigators reported that, for 248 patients with grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma, the 8-year PFS rate was 39% and the 10-year PFS rate was 36%.
The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% 10 years after the last patient was enrolled.
“In our study, survival after histological transformation was still poor; therefore, reducing histological transformation remains a crucial issue for patients with follicular lymphoma,” the investigators wrote.
The cumulative incidence of secondary malignancies at 10 years was 8.1%, and the cumulative incidence of hematological secondary malignancies was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known and emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure that the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up – both of which could lead to death,” they advised.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan. Dr. Watanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships.
SOURCE: Watanabe T et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Nov;5(11):e520-31.
A decade of follow-up data suggest that patients with newly diagnosed follicular lymphoma may derive long-term benefit from first-line therapy with the R-CHOP regimen, according to investigators in Japan.
Among patients with untreated follicular and other indolent B-cell lymphomas enrolled in a randomized phase 2/3 trial, the 10-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-21 (rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone every 3 weeks) was 33%, and the 10-year PFS rate for patients assigned to R-CHOP-14 (R-CHOP every 2 weeks with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor [G-CSF] support] was 39%, and these PFS rates did not differ between the treatment arms, Takashi Watanabe, MD, PhD, from Mie University in Tsu, Japan, and his colleagues reported in the Lancet Haematology.
They also found that, compared with therapeutic regimens prior to the introduction of rituximab, R-CHOP was associated with a reduced likelihood of histological transformation of follicular lymphoma into a poor-prognosis diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), with no apparent increase in risk of secondary malignancies.
“The gold-standard, first-line treatment in patients with advanced-stage follicular lymphoma remains undetermined. However, because of the reduction in incidence of transformation without an increase in either secondary malignancies or fatal infectious events, the R-CHOP regimen should be a candidate for standard treatment, particularly from the viewpoint of long-term follow-up,” the investigators wrote
The JCOG0203 trial, which began enrollment in September 2002, included patients with stage III or IV indolent B-cell lymphomas, including grades 1-3 follicular lymphoma, from 44 Japanese hospitals. The patients were randomly assigned to receive six cycles of either R-CHOP-14 plus G-CSF or R-CHOP-21 administered once daily for 6 days beginning on day 8 of every cycle). Patients did not receive rituximab maintenance in either group.
In the primary analysis of the trial, published in 2011, the investigators reported that in 299 patients there were no significant differences in either PFS or 6-year overall survival (OS).
In the current analysis, the investigators reported that, for 248 patients with grade 1-3a follicular lymphoma, the 8-year PFS rate was 39% and the 10-year PFS rate was 36%.
The cumulative incidence of histological transformation was 3.2% at 5 years, 8.5% at 8 years, and 9.3% 10 years after the last patient was enrolled.
“In our study, survival after histological transformation was still poor; therefore, reducing histological transformation remains a crucial issue for patients with follicular lymphoma,” the investigators wrote.
The cumulative incidence of secondary malignancies at 10 years was 8.1%, and the cumulative incidence of hematological secondary malignancies was 2.9%.
The investigators noted that the actual incidence of secondary solid tumors or hematologic malignancies apart from the setting of autologous stem cell transplants is not known and emphasized that patients should be followed beyond 10 years to ensure that the risk of secondary malignancies is not underestimated.
“Clinicians choosing a first-line treatment for patients with follicular lymphoma should be cautious of secondary malignancies caused by immunochemotherapy and severe complications of infectious diseases in the long-term follow-up – both of which could lead to death,” they advised.
The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare of Japan and by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan. Dr. Watanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy at Mie University. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships.
SOURCE: Watanabe T et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Nov;5(11):e520-31.
FROM LANCET HAEMATOLOGY
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Approximately one-third of patients treated with R-CHOP-14 plus G-CSF or R-CHOP-21 had no disease progression after 10 years of follow-up.
Study details: Long-term analysis of a randomized phase 2/3 trial in 299 patients with indolent B-cell lymphomas, including follicular lymphoma.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare of Japan and by the National Cancer Center Research and Development Fund of Japan. Dr. Wantanabe has received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Taisho Toyama, Celgene, Nippon Shinyaku, and Novartis and funding resources from TakaraBio and United Immunity to support the Department of Immuno-Gene Therapy in Mie University. Multiple coauthors reported similar relationships.
Source: Wantanabe T et al. Lancet Haematol. 2018 Nov;5(11):e520-31.
Bortezomib may unlock resistance in WM with mutations
The use of bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) with CXCR4 mutations, according to new research.
Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and his colleagues compared the effects of treatment with bortezomib/rituximab in patients with WM based on their CXCR4 mutation status. They found no significant difference in progression-free survival (Log-rank, P = .994) or overall survival (Log-rank, P = .407) when comparing patients who have CXCR4 mutations with those who have CXCR4 wild type.
“We report for the first time that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote in Blood. “Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”
The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work may be different than that seen with bortezomib in other cancers.
“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma. However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data,” they wrote.
The researchers recommended that the theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations. Another question to be investigated, they pointed out, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.
The study included 63 patients with WM who were treated with bortezomib/rituximab either as upfront treatment or in the relapsed/refractory setting as part of a phase 2 trial.
Bortezomib was given by IV weekly at 1.6 mg/m2 for six cycles and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.
The researchers excluded 20 patients from the study because of a lack of material for genotyping. However, they noted that their clinical characteristics were not different from those patients who were included.
Out of 43 patients who were genotyped for CXCR4, 17 patients had a mutation. All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations. The median follow-up of the analysis was 90.7 months.
The researchers repeated the analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.
SOURCE: Sklavenitis-Pistofidis R et al. Blood. 2018 Oct 26. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-07-863241.
The use of bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) with CXCR4 mutations, according to new research.
Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and his colleagues compared the effects of treatment with bortezomib/rituximab in patients with WM based on their CXCR4 mutation status. They found no significant difference in progression-free survival (Log-rank, P = .994) or overall survival (Log-rank, P = .407) when comparing patients who have CXCR4 mutations with those who have CXCR4 wild type.
“We report for the first time that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote in Blood. “Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”
The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work may be different than that seen with bortezomib in other cancers.
“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma. However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data,” they wrote.
The researchers recommended that the theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations. Another question to be investigated, they pointed out, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.
The study included 63 patients with WM who were treated with bortezomib/rituximab either as upfront treatment or in the relapsed/refractory setting as part of a phase 2 trial.
Bortezomib was given by IV weekly at 1.6 mg/m2 for six cycles and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.
The researchers excluded 20 patients from the study because of a lack of material for genotyping. However, they noted that their clinical characteristics were not different from those patients who were included.
Out of 43 patients who were genotyped for CXCR4, 17 patients had a mutation. All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations. The median follow-up of the analysis was 90.7 months.
The researchers repeated the analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.
SOURCE: Sklavenitis-Pistofidis R et al. Blood. 2018 Oct 26. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-07-863241.
The use of bortezomib may help overcome treatment resistance in patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM) with CXCR4 mutations, according to new research.
Romanos Sklavenitis-Pistofidis, MD, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, and his colleagues compared the effects of treatment with bortezomib/rituximab in patients with WM based on their CXCR4 mutation status. They found no significant difference in progression-free survival (Log-rank, P = .994) or overall survival (Log-rank, P = .407) when comparing patients who have CXCR4 mutations with those who have CXCR4 wild type.
“We report for the first time that a bortezomib-based combination is impervious to the impact of CXCR4 mutations in a cohort of patients with WM,” the researchers wrote in Blood. “Previously, we had shown this to be true in WM cell lines, whereby genetically engineering BCWM.1 and MWCL-1 to overexpress CXCR4 had no impact on bortezomib resistance.”
The researchers noted, however, that the mechanism at work may be different than that seen with bortezomib in other cancers.
“Different experiments have linked CXCR4 expression and bortezomib in a variety of ways in other hematological malignancies, including multiple myeloma. However, despite the complicated association in those cancer types, in WM there seems to be a consistently neutral effect of CXCR4 mutations on bortezomib resistance in both cell line and patient data,” they wrote.
The researchers recommended that the theory be tested in a prospective trial of bortezomib-based therapy in WM patients with CXCR4 mutations. Another question to be investigated, they pointed out, is the role of rituximab in the survival results seen in the current analysis.
The study included 63 patients with WM who were treated with bortezomib/rituximab either as upfront treatment or in the relapsed/refractory setting as part of a phase 2 trial.
Bortezomib was given by IV weekly at 1.6 mg/m2 for six cycles and rituximab was given at 375 mg/m2 during cycles one and four. Patients were taken off therapy after two cycles if they had progressive disease.
The researchers excluded 20 patients from the study because of a lack of material for genotyping. However, they noted that their clinical characteristics were not different from those patients who were included.
Out of 43 patients who were genotyped for CXCR4, 17 patients had a mutation. All patients who carried a CXCR4 mutation also had MYD88 L265P. Ten patients had frameshift mutations, one patient had a nonsense mutation, and six patients had missense mutations. The median follow-up of the analysis was 90.7 months.
The researchers repeated the analysis after excluding six patients with missense mutations and accounting for different treatment settings and found that survival remained unchanged.
The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.
SOURCE: Sklavenitis-Pistofidis R et al. Blood. 2018 Oct 26. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-07-863241.
FROM BLOOD
Key clinical point:
Major finding: Progression-free and overall survival were not significantly different between WM patients with CXCR4 mutations and those with CXCR4 wild type (log-rank, P = .994 and P = .407, respectively).
Study details: An analysis of 43 WM patients treated with bortezomib/rituximab and genotyped to determine CXCR4 mutation status.
Disclosures: The study was supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, and the International Waldenström Macroglobulinemia Foundation. One of the authors reported consulting and research funding from Takeda, which markets bortezomib, and other companies.
Source: Sklavenitis-Pistofidis R et al. Blood. 2018 Oct 26. doi: 10.1182/blood-2018-07-863241.
Relapsed MCL: Options for treatment
CHICAGO – according to Kristie A. Blum, MD.
Venetoclax and lenalidomide can also be considered in the relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) setting, Dr. Blum, a professor in the department of hematology and medical oncology at Emory University in Atlanta, said at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
“I tend to favor BTK inhibitors as my first line of therapy,” she said, later qualifying that this applies when clinical trial enrollment is unavailable.
Ibrutinib
The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib is well established as a treatment for MCL and for use in the relapsed setting, she said, noting that pooled data from the phase 2 CYC-1104 trial, the phase 2 MCL 2001 (SPARK) trial, and the phase 3 MCL3001 (RAY) trial showed an overall response (OR) rate of 66% in 370 patients and a complete response (CR) rate of 20%.
The median duration of response (DOR) was 18.6 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.8 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 25 months (Br J Haematol. 2017 Nov;179[3]:430-8).
Adding rituximab to ibrutinib (R-ibrutinib) improved outcomes, at least in one single center phase 2 trial of 50 relapsed patients with a median of three prior therapies, she said. The OR rate in that study was 88%, and the CR rate was 58% (Br J Haematol. 2018 May;182[3]:404-11).
“What was really impressive to me was that the median duration of response was about 46 months. PFS was 43 months, and patients were on [treatment] as long as 56 cycles,” she said.
Acalabrutinib
The newer BTK inhibitor acalabrutinib also shows benefit in the relapsed MCL setting, Dr. Blum said.
In a recent multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of 124 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median of two prior therapies, acalabrutinib at a dose of 100 mg twice daily was associated with an OR rate of 81% and a CR rate of 40% (Lancet. 2018 Feb 17;391:659-67).
“Seems a little better than what you’d expect with single agent ibrutinib,” she said, noting that median DOR and PFS have not been reached in that study.
The main toxicities have been “headache and some diarrhea,” but follow-up is currently only about 15 months, she added.
Venetoclax
Another option in this setting is the B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax, which was shown in a recent phase 1 study of patients with various lymphoma subtypes to have activity in relapsed MCL, Dr. Blum said.
The OR rate in 28 relapsed MCL patients in that study was 75%, and the median PFS was 14 months (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Mar;35:826-33).
Additionally, an “intriguing combination study of venetoclax and ibrutinib” was recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine, she noted.
That study included only 23 patients with relapsed MCL, but they were a “pretty high-risk” group with a median age of 68 years, about half having a TP53 abnormality, and 30% having a prior transplant.
The OR and CR rates at 16 weeks by positron emission tomography were 71% and 62%, respectively (N Engl J Med. 2018 Mar 29;378:1211-23).
“Actually, about 40% achieved [minimal residual disease] negativity, but this was only checked in about half the patients,” she said. “So this is an intriguing combination and hopefully something we’ll see more of in the upcoming years.”
Lenalidomide
In the randomized phase 2 SPRINT study, patients received either single-agent lenolidamine or the investigator’s choice of single-agent rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil, or cytarabine.
The expected OR rate in 170 patients treated with lenalidomide was 40% versus 11% in 84 patients treated with investigator’s choice of treatment, and the respective CR rates were 5% and 0% (Lancet Oncol. 2016 Mar 1;17(3):319-31).
Median DOR was 16 months versus 10.4 months, PFS was 8.7 versus 5.2 months, and median OS was 27.9 versus 21.1 months in the groups, respectively.
Other options
Combination regimens, such as R-CHOP and R-bendamustine, are also options for the treatment of relapsed MCL patients who haven’t received combination therapy in the past, Dr. Blum said. Transplant is another option in some patients.
“I will consider transplants for younger patients if they come to me and they actually hadn’t had one in [their] first CR,” she said.
Dr. Blum is a consultant for Acerta, AstraZeneca, and Molecular Templates and has received research funding from Acerta, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Cephalon, Immunomedics, Janssen, Merck, Millennium, Molecular Templates, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics.
CHICAGO – according to Kristie A. Blum, MD.
Venetoclax and lenalidomide can also be considered in the relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) setting, Dr. Blum, a professor in the department of hematology and medical oncology at Emory University in Atlanta, said at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
“I tend to favor BTK inhibitors as my first line of therapy,” she said, later qualifying that this applies when clinical trial enrollment is unavailable.
Ibrutinib
The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib is well established as a treatment for MCL and for use in the relapsed setting, she said, noting that pooled data from the phase 2 CYC-1104 trial, the phase 2 MCL 2001 (SPARK) trial, and the phase 3 MCL3001 (RAY) trial showed an overall response (OR) rate of 66% in 370 patients and a complete response (CR) rate of 20%.
The median duration of response (DOR) was 18.6 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.8 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 25 months (Br J Haematol. 2017 Nov;179[3]:430-8).
Adding rituximab to ibrutinib (R-ibrutinib) improved outcomes, at least in one single center phase 2 trial of 50 relapsed patients with a median of three prior therapies, she said. The OR rate in that study was 88%, and the CR rate was 58% (Br J Haematol. 2018 May;182[3]:404-11).
“What was really impressive to me was that the median duration of response was about 46 months. PFS was 43 months, and patients were on [treatment] as long as 56 cycles,” she said.
Acalabrutinib
The newer BTK inhibitor acalabrutinib also shows benefit in the relapsed MCL setting, Dr. Blum said.
In a recent multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of 124 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median of two prior therapies, acalabrutinib at a dose of 100 mg twice daily was associated with an OR rate of 81% and a CR rate of 40% (Lancet. 2018 Feb 17;391:659-67).
“Seems a little better than what you’d expect with single agent ibrutinib,” she said, noting that median DOR and PFS have not been reached in that study.
The main toxicities have been “headache and some diarrhea,” but follow-up is currently only about 15 months, she added.
Venetoclax
Another option in this setting is the B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax, which was shown in a recent phase 1 study of patients with various lymphoma subtypes to have activity in relapsed MCL, Dr. Blum said.
The OR rate in 28 relapsed MCL patients in that study was 75%, and the median PFS was 14 months (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Mar;35:826-33).
Additionally, an “intriguing combination study of venetoclax and ibrutinib” was recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine, she noted.
That study included only 23 patients with relapsed MCL, but they were a “pretty high-risk” group with a median age of 68 years, about half having a TP53 abnormality, and 30% having a prior transplant.
The OR and CR rates at 16 weeks by positron emission tomography were 71% and 62%, respectively (N Engl J Med. 2018 Mar 29;378:1211-23).
“Actually, about 40% achieved [minimal residual disease] negativity, but this was only checked in about half the patients,” she said. “So this is an intriguing combination and hopefully something we’ll see more of in the upcoming years.”
Lenalidomide
In the randomized phase 2 SPRINT study, patients received either single-agent lenolidamine or the investigator’s choice of single-agent rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil, or cytarabine.
The expected OR rate in 170 patients treated with lenalidomide was 40% versus 11% in 84 patients treated with investigator’s choice of treatment, and the respective CR rates were 5% and 0% (Lancet Oncol. 2016 Mar 1;17(3):319-31).
Median DOR was 16 months versus 10.4 months, PFS was 8.7 versus 5.2 months, and median OS was 27.9 versus 21.1 months in the groups, respectively.
Other options
Combination regimens, such as R-CHOP and R-bendamustine, are also options for the treatment of relapsed MCL patients who haven’t received combination therapy in the past, Dr. Blum said. Transplant is another option in some patients.
“I will consider transplants for younger patients if they come to me and they actually hadn’t had one in [their] first CR,” she said.
Dr. Blum is a consultant for Acerta, AstraZeneca, and Molecular Templates and has received research funding from Acerta, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Cephalon, Immunomedics, Janssen, Merck, Millennium, Molecular Templates, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics.
CHICAGO – according to Kristie A. Blum, MD.
Venetoclax and lenalidomide can also be considered in the relapsed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) setting, Dr. Blum, a professor in the department of hematology and medical oncology at Emory University in Atlanta, said at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
“I tend to favor BTK inhibitors as my first line of therapy,” she said, later qualifying that this applies when clinical trial enrollment is unavailable.
Ibrutinib
The BTK inhibitor ibrutinib is well established as a treatment for MCL and for use in the relapsed setting, she said, noting that pooled data from the phase 2 CYC-1104 trial, the phase 2 MCL 2001 (SPARK) trial, and the phase 3 MCL3001 (RAY) trial showed an overall response (OR) rate of 66% in 370 patients and a complete response (CR) rate of 20%.
The median duration of response (DOR) was 18.6 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.8 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 25 months (Br J Haematol. 2017 Nov;179[3]:430-8).
Adding rituximab to ibrutinib (R-ibrutinib) improved outcomes, at least in one single center phase 2 trial of 50 relapsed patients with a median of three prior therapies, she said. The OR rate in that study was 88%, and the CR rate was 58% (Br J Haematol. 2018 May;182[3]:404-11).
“What was really impressive to me was that the median duration of response was about 46 months. PFS was 43 months, and patients were on [treatment] as long as 56 cycles,” she said.
Acalabrutinib
The newer BTK inhibitor acalabrutinib also shows benefit in the relapsed MCL setting, Dr. Blum said.
In a recent multicenter, open-label, phase 2 study of 124 patients with a median age of 68 years and a median of two prior therapies, acalabrutinib at a dose of 100 mg twice daily was associated with an OR rate of 81% and a CR rate of 40% (Lancet. 2018 Feb 17;391:659-67).
“Seems a little better than what you’d expect with single agent ibrutinib,” she said, noting that median DOR and PFS have not been reached in that study.
The main toxicities have been “headache and some diarrhea,” but follow-up is currently only about 15 months, she added.
Venetoclax
Another option in this setting is the B-cell lymphoma 2 (BCL-2) inhibitor venetoclax, which was shown in a recent phase 1 study of patients with various lymphoma subtypes to have activity in relapsed MCL, Dr. Blum said.
The OR rate in 28 relapsed MCL patients in that study was 75%, and the median PFS was 14 months (J Clin Oncol. 2017 Mar;35:826-33).
Additionally, an “intriguing combination study of venetoclax and ibrutinib” was recently published in the New England Journal of Medicine, she noted.
That study included only 23 patients with relapsed MCL, but they were a “pretty high-risk” group with a median age of 68 years, about half having a TP53 abnormality, and 30% having a prior transplant.
The OR and CR rates at 16 weeks by positron emission tomography were 71% and 62%, respectively (N Engl J Med. 2018 Mar 29;378:1211-23).
“Actually, about 40% achieved [minimal residual disease] negativity, but this was only checked in about half the patients,” she said. “So this is an intriguing combination and hopefully something we’ll see more of in the upcoming years.”
Lenalidomide
In the randomized phase 2 SPRINT study, patients received either single-agent lenolidamine or the investigator’s choice of single-agent rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil, or cytarabine.
The expected OR rate in 170 patients treated with lenalidomide was 40% versus 11% in 84 patients treated with investigator’s choice of treatment, and the respective CR rates were 5% and 0% (Lancet Oncol. 2016 Mar 1;17(3):319-31).
Median DOR was 16 months versus 10.4 months, PFS was 8.7 versus 5.2 months, and median OS was 27.9 versus 21.1 months in the groups, respectively.
Other options
Combination regimens, such as R-CHOP and R-bendamustine, are also options for the treatment of relapsed MCL patients who haven’t received combination therapy in the past, Dr. Blum said. Transplant is another option in some patients.
“I will consider transplants for younger patients if they come to me and they actually hadn’t had one in [their] first CR,” she said.
Dr. Blum is a consultant for Acerta, AstraZeneca, and Molecular Templates and has received research funding from Acerta, AstraZeneca, Celgene, Cephalon, Immunomedics, Janssen, Merck, Millennium, Molecular Templates, Novartis, Pharmacyclics, and Seattle Genetics.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM MHM 2018
CLL: The initial work-up
CHICAGO – A 50-year old otherwise healthy man was found on routine history and physical to have lymphocytosis and was referred for additional work-up. He denied recent infection, had no lymphadenopathy, organomegaly, or rash or other concerning skin lesions. A complete blood count showed a white cell count of 23 x 109/Land absolute lymphocyte count of 19 x 109/L and normal hemoglobin and platelets.
Based on recently updated International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) guidelines, additional work-up for this patient might include peripheral smear and flow cytometry, according to Paul Barr, MD.
“A peripheral smear is still useful in this day and age just to ensure that a patient has a typical look under the microscope. We expect to see small mature lymphocytes, smudge cells, and perhaps a smaller number of prolymphocytes. But to mark CLL based on flow cytometry we need to see greater than 5 x 109/L clonal B lymphocytes in the peripheral blood sustained over time,” Dr. Barr, medical director of the clinical trials office for Wilmot Cancer Institute at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
A nuance in the iwCLL guidelines is that CLL also can be defined by a cytopenia caused by a typical marrow infiltrate, regardless of the number of circulating B lymphocytes, he noted.
Immunophenotype
As for CLL immunophenotype, the cells are CD5- and CD23-positive, and additional B cell markers like CD20 are “often dim, and – understandably – the cells are light-chain restricted,” he said.
A subtle difference between the World Health Organization classification of CLL and the iwCLL guidelines is that, by the former, patients can have “a somewhat atypical immunophenotype.”
“So our pathologists, I like to think, use a commonsense approach where, if there are very minor differences, they will still call it CLL, but not if there are major differences in the immunophenotype,” Dr. Barr said.
Patients with lymphadenopathy, without the critical threshold of circulating B lymphocytes, are considered to have small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).
“In this day and age we treat CLL and SLL relatively similarly, however, monoclonal B lymphocytosis (MBL) is the precursor lesion to CLL where we see less than 5 x 109/L of circulating B lymphocytes and an absence of adenopathy and disease-related cytopenias,” he noted.
Staging
It is still common practice to stage patients given the prognostic value of staging and given that treatment is provided in advanced disease, Dr. Barr said.
“This is simple, easy to apply, applicable worldwide, and only requires laboratory testing and a physical exam,” he said.
The stages include:
- Stage 0: Lymphocytosis, peripheral lymphocyte count greater than 15,000/mcL and greater than 40% lymphocytes in bone marrow (low-risk disease status).
- Stage I: Stage 0 disease plus enlarged lymph nodes (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage II: Stage 0-I disease with splenomegaly and/or hepatomegaly (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage III: Stage 0-II disease with hemoglobin less than 11g/dL or hematocrit less than 33% (high-risk disease status).
- Stage IV: Stage 0-III disease with platelet count less than 100,000/mcL (high-risk disease status).
Prognostic testing
Once a patient is diagnosed with CLL, as was the case with the 50-year-old patient Dr. Barr described, a number of tests can be considered to assess prognosis.
There’s no “perfect answer” when it comes to which tests are considered a reasonable standard of care, he noted.
“I would typically perform [immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene] mutation testing, a [fluorescence in situ hybridization] panel, and TP53 mutation testing,” he said.
Scoring systems such as CLL-IPI, which combine prognostic factors to divide patients into various risk categories, can be useful.
For example, such systems may identify high-risk patients who might be appropriate candidates for clinical trials, or low-risk patients who could be expected to do well over time despite having advanced stage disease, he explained.
“I do think it’s a useful process to go through to understand a patient’s risk over time,” he added.
However, treatment for CLL still is not based on molecular aberrations/prognostic features. In fact, the treatment indications according to the updated iwCLL guidelines remain exactly the same, he said.
Therefore, the case of the 50-year-old man described earlier would be observed as long as he remained asymptomatic.
Dr. Barr is a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead, Infinity, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics and has received research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
CHICAGO – A 50-year old otherwise healthy man was found on routine history and physical to have lymphocytosis and was referred for additional work-up. He denied recent infection, had no lymphadenopathy, organomegaly, or rash or other concerning skin lesions. A complete blood count showed a white cell count of 23 x 109/Land absolute lymphocyte count of 19 x 109/L and normal hemoglobin and platelets.
Based on recently updated International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) guidelines, additional work-up for this patient might include peripheral smear and flow cytometry, according to Paul Barr, MD.
“A peripheral smear is still useful in this day and age just to ensure that a patient has a typical look under the microscope. We expect to see small mature lymphocytes, smudge cells, and perhaps a smaller number of prolymphocytes. But to mark CLL based on flow cytometry we need to see greater than 5 x 109/L clonal B lymphocytes in the peripheral blood sustained over time,” Dr. Barr, medical director of the clinical trials office for Wilmot Cancer Institute at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
A nuance in the iwCLL guidelines is that CLL also can be defined by a cytopenia caused by a typical marrow infiltrate, regardless of the number of circulating B lymphocytes, he noted.
Immunophenotype
As for CLL immunophenotype, the cells are CD5- and CD23-positive, and additional B cell markers like CD20 are “often dim, and – understandably – the cells are light-chain restricted,” he said.
A subtle difference between the World Health Organization classification of CLL and the iwCLL guidelines is that, by the former, patients can have “a somewhat atypical immunophenotype.”
“So our pathologists, I like to think, use a commonsense approach where, if there are very minor differences, they will still call it CLL, but not if there are major differences in the immunophenotype,” Dr. Barr said.
Patients with lymphadenopathy, without the critical threshold of circulating B lymphocytes, are considered to have small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).
“In this day and age we treat CLL and SLL relatively similarly, however, monoclonal B lymphocytosis (MBL) is the precursor lesion to CLL where we see less than 5 x 109/L of circulating B lymphocytes and an absence of adenopathy and disease-related cytopenias,” he noted.
Staging
It is still common practice to stage patients given the prognostic value of staging and given that treatment is provided in advanced disease, Dr. Barr said.
“This is simple, easy to apply, applicable worldwide, and only requires laboratory testing and a physical exam,” he said.
The stages include:
- Stage 0: Lymphocytosis, peripheral lymphocyte count greater than 15,000/mcL and greater than 40% lymphocytes in bone marrow (low-risk disease status).
- Stage I: Stage 0 disease plus enlarged lymph nodes (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage II: Stage 0-I disease with splenomegaly and/or hepatomegaly (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage III: Stage 0-II disease with hemoglobin less than 11g/dL or hematocrit less than 33% (high-risk disease status).
- Stage IV: Stage 0-III disease with platelet count less than 100,000/mcL (high-risk disease status).
Prognostic testing
Once a patient is diagnosed with CLL, as was the case with the 50-year-old patient Dr. Barr described, a number of tests can be considered to assess prognosis.
There’s no “perfect answer” when it comes to which tests are considered a reasonable standard of care, he noted.
“I would typically perform [immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene] mutation testing, a [fluorescence in situ hybridization] panel, and TP53 mutation testing,” he said.
Scoring systems such as CLL-IPI, which combine prognostic factors to divide patients into various risk categories, can be useful.
For example, such systems may identify high-risk patients who might be appropriate candidates for clinical trials, or low-risk patients who could be expected to do well over time despite having advanced stage disease, he explained.
“I do think it’s a useful process to go through to understand a patient’s risk over time,” he added.
However, treatment for CLL still is not based on molecular aberrations/prognostic features. In fact, the treatment indications according to the updated iwCLL guidelines remain exactly the same, he said.
Therefore, the case of the 50-year-old man described earlier would be observed as long as he remained asymptomatic.
Dr. Barr is a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead, Infinity, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics and has received research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
CHICAGO – A 50-year old otherwise healthy man was found on routine history and physical to have lymphocytosis and was referred for additional work-up. He denied recent infection, had no lymphadenopathy, organomegaly, or rash or other concerning skin lesions. A complete blood count showed a white cell count of 23 x 109/Land absolute lymphocyte count of 19 x 109/L and normal hemoglobin and platelets.
Based on recently updated International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) guidelines, additional work-up for this patient might include peripheral smear and flow cytometry, according to Paul Barr, MD.
“A peripheral smear is still useful in this day and age just to ensure that a patient has a typical look under the microscope. We expect to see small mature lymphocytes, smudge cells, and perhaps a smaller number of prolymphocytes. But to mark CLL based on flow cytometry we need to see greater than 5 x 109/L clonal B lymphocytes in the peripheral blood sustained over time,” Dr. Barr, medical director of the clinical trials office for Wilmot Cancer Institute at the University of Rochester (N.Y.), said during a presentation at the American Society of Hematology Meeting on Hematologic Malignancies.
A nuance in the iwCLL guidelines is that CLL also can be defined by a cytopenia caused by a typical marrow infiltrate, regardless of the number of circulating B lymphocytes, he noted.
Immunophenotype
As for CLL immunophenotype, the cells are CD5- and CD23-positive, and additional B cell markers like CD20 are “often dim, and – understandably – the cells are light-chain restricted,” he said.
A subtle difference between the World Health Organization classification of CLL and the iwCLL guidelines is that, by the former, patients can have “a somewhat atypical immunophenotype.”
“So our pathologists, I like to think, use a commonsense approach where, if there are very minor differences, they will still call it CLL, but not if there are major differences in the immunophenotype,” Dr. Barr said.
Patients with lymphadenopathy, without the critical threshold of circulating B lymphocytes, are considered to have small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL).
“In this day and age we treat CLL and SLL relatively similarly, however, monoclonal B lymphocytosis (MBL) is the precursor lesion to CLL where we see less than 5 x 109/L of circulating B lymphocytes and an absence of adenopathy and disease-related cytopenias,” he noted.
Staging
It is still common practice to stage patients given the prognostic value of staging and given that treatment is provided in advanced disease, Dr. Barr said.
“This is simple, easy to apply, applicable worldwide, and only requires laboratory testing and a physical exam,” he said.
The stages include:
- Stage 0: Lymphocytosis, peripheral lymphocyte count greater than 15,000/mcL and greater than 40% lymphocytes in bone marrow (low-risk disease status).
- Stage I: Stage 0 disease plus enlarged lymph nodes (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage II: Stage 0-I disease with splenomegaly and/or hepatomegaly (intermediate-risk disease status).
- Stage III: Stage 0-II disease with hemoglobin less than 11g/dL or hematocrit less than 33% (high-risk disease status).
- Stage IV: Stage 0-III disease with platelet count less than 100,000/mcL (high-risk disease status).
Prognostic testing
Once a patient is diagnosed with CLL, as was the case with the 50-year-old patient Dr. Barr described, a number of tests can be considered to assess prognosis.
There’s no “perfect answer” when it comes to which tests are considered a reasonable standard of care, he noted.
“I would typically perform [immunoglobulin variable heavy-chain gene] mutation testing, a [fluorescence in situ hybridization] panel, and TP53 mutation testing,” he said.
Scoring systems such as CLL-IPI, which combine prognostic factors to divide patients into various risk categories, can be useful.
For example, such systems may identify high-risk patients who might be appropriate candidates for clinical trials, or low-risk patients who could be expected to do well over time despite having advanced stage disease, he explained.
“I do think it’s a useful process to go through to understand a patient’s risk over time,” he added.
However, treatment for CLL still is not based on molecular aberrations/prognostic features. In fact, the treatment indications according to the updated iwCLL guidelines remain exactly the same, he said.
Therefore, the case of the 50-year-old man described earlier would be observed as long as he remained asymptomatic.
Dr. Barr is a consultant for Pharmacyclics, AbbVie, Celgene, Gilead, Infinity, Novartis, and Seattle Genetics and has received research funding from Pharmacyclics and AbbVie.
EXPERT ANALYSIS FROM MHM 2018
FDA puts selinexor on fast track for DLBCL
The Food and Drug Administration has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and who are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (Abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs. Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm, said in a statement.
In October, the FDA accepted an NDA for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and who are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (Abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs. Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm, said in a statement.
In October, the FDA accepted an NDA for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
The Food and Drug Administration has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and who are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (Abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA’s fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs. Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL,” Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm, said in a statement.
In October, the FDA accepted an NDA for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
Selinexor on fast track for DLBCL
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA says its fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“The receipt of fast track designation from the FDA for selinexor in relapsed DLBCL underscores the great unmet medical need for this aggressive form of lymphoma,” said Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL.”
Last month, the FDA accepted a new drug application for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA says its fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“The receipt of fast track designation from the FDA for selinexor in relapsed DLBCL underscores the great unmet medical need for this aggressive form of lymphoma,” said Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL.”
Last month, the FDA accepted a new drug application for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted fast track designation to selinexor for the treatment of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).
The designation is for selinexor to treat DLBCL patients who have received at least two prior therapies and are not eligible for high-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy.
Selinexor is being studied in the phase 2b SADAL trial (NCT02227251), which is enrolling patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who have received two to five prior therapies and are not eligible for stem cell transplant.
Top-line results from this trial are scheduled to be presented at the 2018 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 1677).
Selinexor is an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound being developed by Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.
The company previously received fast track designation for selinexor to treat patients with penta-refractory multiple myeloma who have received at least three prior lines of therapy.
The FDA says its fast track program is designed to facilitate the development and expedite the review of products that are intended to treat serious conditions and have the potential to address unmet medical needs.
Fast track designation provides developers with greater access to the FDA as well as eligibility for accelerated approval, priority review, and rolling review.
“The receipt of fast track designation from the FDA for selinexor in relapsed DLBCL underscores the great unmet medical need for this aggressive form of lymphoma,” said Sharon Shacham, PhD, founder, president, and chief scientific officer of Karyopharm.
“Pending positive results from the phase 2b SADAL study, we plan to submit a second NDA [new drug application] to the FDA in the first half of 2019, with a request for accelerated approval, for oral selinexor as a potential new treatment for patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL.”
Last month, the FDA accepted a new drug application for selinexor as a treatment for penta-refractory multiple myeloma. The agency granted the application priority review and set an action date of April 6, 2019.
Combo appears safe, active in rel/ref NHL
The combination of Hu5F9-G4 (5F9) and rituximab was considered safe and produced durable complete responses (CRs) in patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b trial.
Mainly low-grade adverse events (AEs) were observed with rituximab and 5F9, a macrophage-activating immune checkpoint inhibitor blocking CD47.
In addition, the combination produced an objective response rate (ORR) of 50% and a CR rate of 36%.
Most of the responses were ongoing at the time of data cutoff.
“It was very gratifying to see how the treatment was well-tolerated and showed a clinically meaningful response,” said Ranjana Advani, MD, of Stanford University in California.
She and her colleagues reported these results in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The study included 22 patients with relapsed or refractory NHL. Fifteen had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and seven had follicular lymphoma (FL).
The patients had received a median of four prior therapies (range, 2-10). Twenty-one patients had disease that was refractory to rituximab (all FL and 14 DLBCL patients).
All patients received 5F9 starting with a priming dose of 1 mg/kg followed by weekly maintenance doses of 10 to 30 mg/kg in three dose-escalation cohorts. The treatment was given until disease progression or lack of clinical benefit.
Patients received rituximab at 375 mg/m2 weekly starting on the second week of the first cycle and then monthly for cycles two through six.
Results
The most common treatment-related AEs were chills (41%), headache (41%), anemia (41%), and infusion-related reactions (36%).
Serious AEs included infections (18%), anemia (4.5%), dyspnea (4.5%), pyrexia (4.5%), lactic acidosis (4.5%), retroperitoneal mass (4.5%), pulmonary embolism (4.5%), and infusion-related reaction (4.5%).
For the entire cohort, the ORR was 50% (n=11), and the CR rate was 36% (n=8).
Among DLBCL patients, the ORR was 40% (n=6), and the CR rate was 33% (n=5). In FL patients, the ORR was 71% (n=5), and the CR rate was 43% (n=3).
The median duration of response was not reached in either disease cohort. The median follow-up was 6.2 months for DLBCL and 8.1 months for FL.
Ten of 11 responders (91%) were still in response at the time of data cutoff.
The researchers said a phase 2 trial of 5F9 plus rituximab in relapsed or refractory B-cell NHL is ongoing.
The phase 1b study was supported by Forty Seven, Inc., and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Dr. Advani reported disclosures related to Forty Seven, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, and Roche/Genentech, among others.
The combination of Hu5F9-G4 (5F9) and rituximab was considered safe and produced durable complete responses (CRs) in patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b trial.
Mainly low-grade adverse events (AEs) were observed with rituximab and 5F9, a macrophage-activating immune checkpoint inhibitor blocking CD47.
In addition, the combination produced an objective response rate (ORR) of 50% and a CR rate of 36%.
Most of the responses were ongoing at the time of data cutoff.
“It was very gratifying to see how the treatment was well-tolerated and showed a clinically meaningful response,” said Ranjana Advani, MD, of Stanford University in California.
She and her colleagues reported these results in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The study included 22 patients with relapsed or refractory NHL. Fifteen had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and seven had follicular lymphoma (FL).
The patients had received a median of four prior therapies (range, 2-10). Twenty-one patients had disease that was refractory to rituximab (all FL and 14 DLBCL patients).
All patients received 5F9 starting with a priming dose of 1 mg/kg followed by weekly maintenance doses of 10 to 30 mg/kg in three dose-escalation cohorts. The treatment was given until disease progression or lack of clinical benefit.
Patients received rituximab at 375 mg/m2 weekly starting on the second week of the first cycle and then monthly for cycles two through six.
Results
The most common treatment-related AEs were chills (41%), headache (41%), anemia (41%), and infusion-related reactions (36%).
Serious AEs included infections (18%), anemia (4.5%), dyspnea (4.5%), pyrexia (4.5%), lactic acidosis (4.5%), retroperitoneal mass (4.5%), pulmonary embolism (4.5%), and infusion-related reaction (4.5%).
For the entire cohort, the ORR was 50% (n=11), and the CR rate was 36% (n=8).
Among DLBCL patients, the ORR was 40% (n=6), and the CR rate was 33% (n=5). In FL patients, the ORR was 71% (n=5), and the CR rate was 43% (n=3).
The median duration of response was not reached in either disease cohort. The median follow-up was 6.2 months for DLBCL and 8.1 months for FL.
Ten of 11 responders (91%) were still in response at the time of data cutoff.
The researchers said a phase 2 trial of 5F9 plus rituximab in relapsed or refractory B-cell NHL is ongoing.
The phase 1b study was supported by Forty Seven, Inc., and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Dr. Advani reported disclosures related to Forty Seven, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, and Roche/Genentech, among others.
The combination of Hu5F9-G4 (5F9) and rituximab was considered safe and produced durable complete responses (CRs) in patients with relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) in a phase 1b trial.
Mainly low-grade adverse events (AEs) were observed with rituximab and 5F9, a macrophage-activating immune checkpoint inhibitor blocking CD47.
In addition, the combination produced an objective response rate (ORR) of 50% and a CR rate of 36%.
Most of the responses were ongoing at the time of data cutoff.
“It was very gratifying to see how the treatment was well-tolerated and showed a clinically meaningful response,” said Ranjana Advani, MD, of Stanford University in California.
She and her colleagues reported these results in The New England Journal of Medicine.
The study included 22 patients with relapsed or refractory NHL. Fifteen had diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), and seven had follicular lymphoma (FL).
The patients had received a median of four prior therapies (range, 2-10). Twenty-one patients had disease that was refractory to rituximab (all FL and 14 DLBCL patients).
All patients received 5F9 starting with a priming dose of 1 mg/kg followed by weekly maintenance doses of 10 to 30 mg/kg in three dose-escalation cohorts. The treatment was given until disease progression or lack of clinical benefit.
Patients received rituximab at 375 mg/m2 weekly starting on the second week of the first cycle and then monthly for cycles two through six.
Results
The most common treatment-related AEs were chills (41%), headache (41%), anemia (41%), and infusion-related reactions (36%).
Serious AEs included infections (18%), anemia (4.5%), dyspnea (4.5%), pyrexia (4.5%), lactic acidosis (4.5%), retroperitoneal mass (4.5%), pulmonary embolism (4.5%), and infusion-related reaction (4.5%).
For the entire cohort, the ORR was 50% (n=11), and the CR rate was 36% (n=8).
Among DLBCL patients, the ORR was 40% (n=6), and the CR rate was 33% (n=5). In FL patients, the ORR was 71% (n=5), and the CR rate was 43% (n=3).
The median duration of response was not reached in either disease cohort. The median follow-up was 6.2 months for DLBCL and 8.1 months for FL.
Ten of 11 responders (91%) were still in response at the time of data cutoff.
The researchers said a phase 2 trial of 5F9 plus rituximab in relapsed or refractory B-cell NHL is ongoing.
The phase 1b study was supported by Forty Seven, Inc., and the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Dr. Advani reported disclosures related to Forty Seven, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, and Roche/Genentech, among others.
Sandoz won’t seek U.S. approval for rituximab biosimilar
Sandoz has decided not to pursue U.S. approval for its rituximab product (GP2013), a proposed biosimiliar of Rituxan/Mabthera.
GP2013 (Rixathon, Riximyo) is already approved outside the U.S.
Sandoz was seeking U.S. approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017.
In May of this year, the FDA issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission for GP2013.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market. Now, the company’s position has changed.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab, but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” said Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by the ASSIST-FL trial (NCT01419665), in which researchers compared GP2013 to the reference product. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Haematology in July 2017.
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received 8 cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% (271/311) in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm (274/313). Complete response rates were 15% (n=46) and 13% (n=42), respectively.
Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 93% in the GP2013 arm and 91% in the rituximab arm. Rates of serious AEs were 23% and 20%, respectively. The rate of discontinuation due to AEs was 7% in both arms.
The most common AE was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% of patients in the GP2013 arm and 30% of those in the rituximab arm in the combination phase. Rates of neutropenia in the maintenance phase were 10% and 6%, respectively.
Sandoz has decided not to pursue U.S. approval for its rituximab product (GP2013), a proposed biosimiliar of Rituxan/Mabthera.
GP2013 (Rixathon, Riximyo) is already approved outside the U.S.
Sandoz was seeking U.S. approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017.
In May of this year, the FDA issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission for GP2013.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market. Now, the company’s position has changed.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab, but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” said Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by the ASSIST-FL trial (NCT01419665), in which researchers compared GP2013 to the reference product. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Haematology in July 2017.
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received 8 cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% (271/311) in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm (274/313). Complete response rates were 15% (n=46) and 13% (n=42), respectively.
Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 93% in the GP2013 arm and 91% in the rituximab arm. Rates of serious AEs were 23% and 20%, respectively. The rate of discontinuation due to AEs was 7% in both arms.
The most common AE was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% of patients in the GP2013 arm and 30% of those in the rituximab arm in the combination phase. Rates of neutropenia in the maintenance phase were 10% and 6%, respectively.
Sandoz has decided not to pursue U.S. approval for its rituximab product (GP2013), a proposed biosimiliar of Rituxan/Mabthera.
GP2013 (Rixathon, Riximyo) is already approved outside the U.S.
Sandoz was seeking U.S. approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product—B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017.
In May of this year, the FDA issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission for GP2013.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market. Now, the company’s position has changed.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab, but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” said Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by the ASSIST-FL trial (NCT01419665), in which researchers compared GP2013 to the reference product. Results from this trial were published in The Lancet Haematology in July 2017.
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received 8 cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% (271/311) in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm (274/313). Complete response rates were 15% (n=46) and 13% (n=42), respectively.
Rates of adverse events (AEs) were 93% in the GP2013 arm and 91% in the rituximab arm. Rates of serious AEs were 23% and 20%, respectively. The rate of discontinuation due to AEs was 7% in both arms.
The most common AE was neutropenia, which occurred in 26% of patients in the GP2013 arm and 30% of those in the rituximab arm in the combination phase. Rates of neutropenia in the maintenance phase were 10% and 6%, respectively.
Sandoz halts pursuit of U.S. approval for rituximab biosimilar
.
Sandoz, a division of Novartis, was seeking Food and Drug Administration approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product – B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
GP2013 already is approved in the European Union and elsewhere.
The FDA had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017. In May 2018, the agency issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said in a statement.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by results from the ASSIST-FL trial, in which researchers compared GP2013 with the reference product (Lancet Haematol. 2017 Aug;4[8]:e350-61).
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm.
.
Sandoz, a division of Novartis, was seeking Food and Drug Administration approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product – B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
GP2013 already is approved in the European Union and elsewhere.
The FDA had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017. In May 2018, the agency issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said in a statement.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by results from the ASSIST-FL trial, in which researchers compared GP2013 with the reference product (Lancet Haematol. 2017 Aug;4[8]:e350-61).
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm.
.
Sandoz, a division of Novartis, was seeking Food and Drug Administration approval of GP2013 for all the same indications as the reference product – B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, rheumatoid arthritis, granulomatosis with polyangiitis, microscopic polyangiitis, and pemphigus vulgaris.
GP2013 already is approved in the European Union and elsewhere.
The FDA had accepted the biologics license application (BLA) for GP2013 in September 2017. In May 2018, the agency issued a complete response letter saying it could not approve GP2013. The agency also requested additional information to complement the BLA submission.
At the time of the complete response letter, Sandoz said it was still committed to bringing GP2013 to the U.S. market.
“We appreciate the important conversations with the FDA, which have provided specific requirements for our potential U.S. biosimilar rituximab but believe the patient and marketplace needs in the U.S. will be satisfied before we can generate the data required,” Stefan Hendriks, global head of biopharmaceuticals at Sandoz, said in a statement.
“We are disappointed to have to make this decision and stand behind the safety, efficacy, and quality of our medicine, which met the stringent criteria for approval in the European Union, Switzerland, Japan, New Zealand, and Australia.”
The BLA for GP2013 was supported, in part, by results from the ASSIST-FL trial, in which researchers compared GP2013 with the reference product (Lancet Haematol. 2017 Aug;4[8]:e350-61).
The phase 3 trial included adults with previously untreated, advanced-stage follicular lymphoma. Patients received eight cycles of cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone with either GP2013 or reference rituximab. Responders then received GP2013 or rituximab monotherapy as maintenance for up to 2 years.
At a median follow-up of 11.6 months, the overall response rate was 87% in the GP2013 arm and 88% in the rituximab arm.