Leukemia, Myelodysplasia, Transplantation

ORLANDO – Adding the PI3K inhibitor idelalisib to a standard regimen of bendamustine and rituximab significantly reduced the risk of both disease progression and death for patients with relapsed and/or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, results of a phase III randomized trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 12 months, the primary endpoint of median progression-free survival was 23.1 months for patients treated with idelalisib (Zydelig), bendamustine, and rituximab (idel+BR), compared with 11.1 months for bendamustine and rituximab (BR) plus a placebo, reported Dr. Andrew Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. However, there was a significant improvement in overall survival, with a 45% reduction in the risk of death [with idel+BR],” he said in a late-breaking abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial was stopped early after a data review at the first planned interim analysis showed significant superiority for the three-drug combination.

The results were consistent across subgroups, including patients with high-risk features such as deletion 17p and mutated TP53 (del[17p]/TP53), unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV), and treatment-refractory disease.

The rationale behind adding idelalisib, an inhibitor of the phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K), is that signaling via the PI3K pathway is hyperactive and can be targeted, Dr. Zelenetz explained.

Study 115 was a phase III trial with accrual from June 2012 through August 2015. Investigators enrolled 416 patients with relapsed /refractory CLL and randomly assigned them to receive BR for six 28-day cycles of bendamustine (70 mg/m² on days 1 and 2 of each cycle) and rituximab (375 mg/m² for cycle 1, and 500 mg/m² for cycles 2 through 6), plus either idelalisib 150 mg b.i.d. or placebo, each administered continuously until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death.

The patients were stratified by mutational and disease status (refractory defined as CLL progression less than 6 months from completion of prior therapy, or relapsed CLL progression 6 months or more from completion of prior therapy.

The trial was halted early after the first planned interim analysis, which was conducted after 75% of the total number of 260 planned events of CLL progression or death from any cause had occurred. The data cutoff was June 15, 2015.

The intention-to-treat analysis included 207 patients assigned to idelalisib and 209 assigned to placebo. Three-fourths (76%) of the patients were male.

In all, 46% of patients had Rai stage III/IV disease. The median time since the completion of the last therapy was 16 months.

The proportions of patients with high-risk features included del(17p)/p53 mutation in 32.9%, unmutated IgHV in 83.2%, and treatment-refractory disease in 29.8%.

As noted, the median progression-free survival with idelalisib at a median follow-up of 12 months was 23.1 months vs. 11.1 months for placebo. That translated into a hazard ratio of 0.33 (P less than .0001).

Among patients with neither del(17p) nor TP53 mutations, the HR for progression was 0.22. Among patients with either del(17p) or a TP53 mutation, the HR was 0.50 (95% confidence intervals show statistical significance for both).

Overall response rates were 68% among patients who received idelalisib, and 45% for those who received placebo. There were five complete responses (2%) in the idelalisib group and none in the placebo group.

The idelalisib group also had a higher proportion of patients with a greater than 50% reduction in involved lymph nodes (96% vs. 61%), and had better organomegaly responses (spleen and liver) and hematologic responses (hemoglobin, neutrophils, and platelets).

Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurred in 93% of patients on idelalisib, compared with 76% of those on placebo. The proportion of patients with any serious adverse event was 66% vs. 44%, respectively.

Adverse events leading to drug dose reduction were seen in 11% of idelalisib-treated patients, compared with 6% of placebo controls, and therapy was discontinued in 26% vs. 13%, respectively.

Ten patients in the idelalisib arm and seven in the placebo arm died during the study.

Adverse events that occurred more commonly with idelalisib included neutropenia, pyrexia, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, rash, and elevated liver enzymes.

Session moderator Dr. David P. Steensma of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston asked Dr. Zelenetz how idelalisib plus BR stacked up to ibrutinib (Imbruvica) plus BR in this population.

Dr. Zelenetz noted that patients were excluded from the HELIOS trial of ibrutinib plus BR if they had del(17p). Comparing the subset of patients in Study 115 without del(17p) with patients in the ibrutinib study, “the results are virtually superimposable,” Dr. Zelenetz said, and “the two treatments are really remarkably similar.”

The overall survival benefit was larger in the HELIOS trial, Dr. Zelenetz noted, but that was largely because the trial allowed patients to cross over from placebo to the active drug.

Gilead Sciences funded Study 115. Dr. Zelenetz disclosed receiving research funding from the company and discussing off-label use of idelalisib for relapsed/refractory CLL.

ORLANDO – Adding the PI3K inhibitor idelalisib to a standard regimen of bendamustine and rituximab significantly reduced the risk of both disease progression and death for patients with relapsed and/or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, results of a phase III randomized trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 12 months, the primary endpoint of median progression-free survival was 23.1 months for patients treated with idelalisib (Zydelig), bendamustine, and rituximab (idel+BR), compared with 11.1 months for bendamustine and rituximab (BR) plus a placebo, reported Dr. Andrew Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. However, there was a significant improvement in overall survival, with a 45% reduction in the risk of death [with idel+BR],” he said in a late-breaking abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial was stopped early after a data review at the first planned interim analysis showed significant superiority for the three-drug combination.

The results were consistent across subgroups, including patients with high-risk features such as deletion 17p and mutated TP53 (del[17p]/TP53), unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV), and treatment-refractory disease.

The rationale behind adding idelalisib, an inhibitor of the phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K), is that signaling via the PI3K pathway is hyperactive and can be targeted, Dr. Zelenetz explained.

Study 115 was a phase III trial with accrual from June 2012 through August 2015. Investigators enrolled 416 patients with relapsed /refractory CLL and randomly assigned them to receive BR for six 28-day cycles of bendamustine (70 mg/m² on days 1 and 2 of each cycle) and rituximab (375 mg/m² for cycle 1, and 500 mg/m² for cycles 2 through 6), plus either idelalisib 150 mg b.i.d. or placebo, each administered continuously until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death.

The patients were stratified by mutational and disease status (refractory defined as CLL progression less than 6 months from completion of prior therapy, or relapsed CLL progression 6 months or more from completion of prior therapy.

The trial was halted early after the first planned interim analysis, which was conducted after 75% of the total number of 260 planned events of CLL progression or death from any cause had occurred. The data cutoff was June 15, 2015.

The intention-to-treat analysis included 207 patients assigned to idelalisib and 209 assigned to placebo. Three-fourths (76%) of the patients were male.

In all, 46% of patients had Rai stage III/IV disease. The median time since the completion of the last therapy was 16 months.

The proportions of patients with high-risk features included del(17p)/p53 mutation in 32.9%, unmutated IgHV in 83.2%, and treatment-refractory disease in 29.8%.

As noted, the median progression-free survival with idelalisib at a median follow-up of 12 months was 23.1 months vs. 11.1 months for placebo. That translated into a hazard ratio of 0.33 (P less than .0001).

Among patients with neither del(17p) nor TP53 mutations, the HR for progression was 0.22. Among patients with either del(17p) or a TP53 mutation, the HR was 0.50 (95% confidence intervals show statistical significance for both).

Overall response rates were 68% among patients who received idelalisib, and 45% for those who received placebo. There were five complete responses (2%) in the idelalisib group and none in the placebo group.

The idelalisib group also had a higher proportion of patients with a greater than 50% reduction in involved lymph nodes (96% vs. 61%), and had better organomegaly responses (spleen and liver) and hematologic responses (hemoglobin, neutrophils, and platelets).

Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurred in 93% of patients on idelalisib, compared with 76% of those on placebo. The proportion of patients with any serious adverse event was 66% vs. 44%, respectively.

Adverse events leading to drug dose reduction were seen in 11% of idelalisib-treated patients, compared with 6% of placebo controls, and therapy was discontinued in 26% vs. 13%, respectively.

Ten patients in the idelalisib arm and seven in the placebo arm died during the study.

Adverse events that occurred more commonly with idelalisib included neutropenia, pyrexia, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, rash, and elevated liver enzymes.

Session moderator Dr. David P. Steensma of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston asked Dr. Zelenetz how idelalisib plus BR stacked up to ibrutinib (Imbruvica) plus BR in this population.

Dr. Zelenetz noted that patients were excluded from the HELIOS trial of ibrutinib plus BR if they had del(17p). Comparing the subset of patients in Study 115 without del(17p) with patients in the ibrutinib study, “the results are virtually superimposable,” Dr. Zelenetz said, and “the two treatments are really remarkably similar.”

The overall survival benefit was larger in the HELIOS trial, Dr. Zelenetz noted, but that was largely because the trial allowed patients to cross over from placebo to the active drug.

Gilead Sciences funded Study 115. Dr. Zelenetz disclosed receiving research funding from the company and discussing off-label use of idelalisib for relapsed/refractory CLL.

ORLANDO – Adding the PI3K inhibitor idelalisib to a standard regimen of bendamustine and rituximab significantly reduced the risk of both disease progression and death for patients with relapsed and/or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia, results of a phase III randomized trial showed.

At a median follow-up of 12 months, the primary endpoint of median progression-free survival was 23.1 months for patients treated with idelalisib (Zydelig), bendamustine, and rituximab (idel+BR), compared with 11.1 months for bendamustine and rituximab (BR) plus a placebo, reported Dr. Andrew Zelenetz of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York.

“Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. However, there was a significant improvement in overall survival, with a 45% reduction in the risk of death [with idel+BR],” he said in a late-breaking abstract session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The trial was stopped early after a data review at the first planned interim analysis showed significant superiority for the three-drug combination.

The results were consistent across subgroups, including patients with high-risk features such as deletion 17p and mutated TP53 (del[17p]/TP53), unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV), and treatment-refractory disease.

The rationale behind adding idelalisib, an inhibitor of the phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase (PI3K), is that signaling via the PI3K pathway is hyperactive and can be targeted, Dr. Zelenetz explained.

Study 115 was a phase III trial with accrual from June 2012 through August 2015. Investigators enrolled 416 patients with relapsed /refractory CLL and randomly assigned them to receive BR for six 28-day cycles of bendamustine (70 mg/m² on days 1 and 2 of each cycle) and rituximab (375 mg/m² for cycle 1, and 500 mg/m² for cycles 2 through 6), plus either idelalisib 150 mg b.i.d. or placebo, each administered continuously until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death.

The patients were stratified by mutational and disease status (refractory defined as CLL progression less than 6 months from completion of prior therapy, or relapsed CLL progression 6 months or more from completion of prior therapy.

The trial was halted early after the first planned interim analysis, which was conducted after 75% of the total number of 260 planned events of CLL progression or death from any cause had occurred. The data cutoff was June 15, 2015.

The intention-to-treat analysis included 207 patients assigned to idelalisib and 209 assigned to placebo. Three-fourths (76%) of the patients were male.

In all, 46% of patients had Rai stage III/IV disease. The median time since the completion of the last therapy was 16 months.

The proportions of patients with high-risk features included del(17p)/p53 mutation in 32.9%, unmutated IgHV in 83.2%, and treatment-refractory disease in 29.8%.

As noted, the median progression-free survival with idelalisib at a median follow-up of 12 months was 23.1 months vs. 11.1 months for placebo. That translated into a hazard ratio of 0.33 (P less than .0001).

Among patients with neither del(17p) nor TP53 mutations, the HR for progression was 0.22. Among patients with either del(17p) or a TP53 mutation, the HR was 0.50 (95% confidence intervals show statistical significance for both).

Overall response rates were 68% among patients who received idelalisib, and 45% for those who received placebo. There were five complete responses (2%) in the idelalisib group and none in the placebo group.

The idelalisib group also had a higher proportion of patients with a greater than 50% reduction in involved lymph nodes (96% vs. 61%), and had better organomegaly responses (spleen and liver) and hematologic responses (hemoglobin, neutrophils, and platelets).

Grade 3 or greater adverse events occurred in 93% of patients on idelalisib, compared with 76% of those on placebo. The proportion of patients with any serious adverse event was 66% vs. 44%, respectively.

Adverse events leading to drug dose reduction were seen in 11% of idelalisib-treated patients, compared with 6% of placebo controls, and therapy was discontinued in 26% vs. 13%, respectively.

Ten patients in the idelalisib arm and seven in the placebo arm died during the study.

Adverse events that occurred more commonly with idelalisib included neutropenia, pyrexia, diarrhea, febrile neutropenia, pneumonia, rash, and elevated liver enzymes.

Session moderator Dr. David P. Steensma of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston asked Dr. Zelenetz how idelalisib plus BR stacked up to ibrutinib (Imbruvica) plus BR in this population.

Dr. Zelenetz noted that patients were excluded from the HELIOS trial of ibrutinib plus BR if they had del(17p). Comparing the subset of patients in Study 115 without del(17p) with patients in the ibrutinib study, “the results are virtually superimposable,” Dr. Zelenetz said, and “the two treatments are really remarkably similar.”

The overall survival benefit was larger in the HELIOS trial, Dr. Zelenetz noted, but that was largely because the trial allowed patients to cross over from placebo to the active drug.

Gilead Sciences funded Study 115. Dr. Zelenetz disclosed receiving research funding from the company and discussing off-label use of idelalisib for relapsed/refractory CLL.

James N. Kochenderfer, MD

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—Allogeneic chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells directed against CD19 can have “significant” activity against resistant B-cell malignancies, even when given without prior chemotherapy, according to a presentation at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting.

Nine of 20 patients responded to treatment with the CAR T cells, despite having failed prior allogeneic transplant. The best responses were observed in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

“Malignancies that were resistant to allogeneic transplants and standard donor lymphocyte infusions regressed after infusions of allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells,” said James N. Kochenderfer, MD, of the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland.

“Allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells seem to be particularly effective against ALL and CLL, suggesting a possible antigenic stimulation that may be more pronounced in these malignancies.”

Adverse events associated with these CAR T cells included severe but reversible cytokine release syndrome, mild aphasia, and muscle damage. There were no cases of acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD).

Dr Kochenderfer presented these results at ASH as abstract 99.

For this phase 1 study, researchers tested a CAR T-cell therapy that was originally developed by Dr Kochenderfer and his colleagues. The therapy is now known as KTE-C19 and is under development by Kite Pharmaceuticals. However, the company did not sponsor this trial.

The study was open to patients with any CD19+ B-cell malignancy that persisted after allogeneic transplant.

All patients except those with ALL were required to have received at least one standard donor lymphocyte infusion. In addition, patients were only eligible if they had minimal or no GVHD and were not receiving any systemic immunosuppressive drugs.

The trial included 20 patients—5 each with ALL, CLL, mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

All patients received a single infusion of CAR T cells derived from their original transplant donor. Production of these cells took 8 days. The highest dose of CAR T cells given was 10⁷ cells/kg.

Four of the ALL patients obtained a minimal-residual disease-negative complete response (CR), but 2 of these patients subsequently relapsed. Of the other 2 patients, 1 remains in CR at 18 months of follow-up, and the other went on to receive a second allogeneic transplant. That patient remains in CR today.

Among the CLL patients, 1 achieved a CR, and 1 achieved a partial response (PR). One patient had stable disease (SD), and the other 2 progressed. Both the CR and the PR are ongoing at 36 and 18 months of follow-up, respectively.

One MCL patient achieved a CR, 1 had a PR, and 3 had SD. The CR is ongoing at 31 months. One DLBCL patient achieved a CR, 3 had SD, and 1 progressed.

Dr Kochenderfer noted that response was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. There was a significant difference in CAR T-cell levels between responders and nonresponders (P=0.001).

In addition, the presence of blood B-cell levels before CAR T-cell infusion was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. Patients with normal or high B lymphocytes had higher levels of CAR T cells in their blood (P=0.04).

Patients with high tumor burdens developed severe cytokine-release syndrome with fever, tachycardia, and hypotension. The ALL patients were particularly susceptible to cytokine-release syndrome.

Dr Kochenderfer said neurologic toxicity was rare and mild. There was 1 case of mild aphasia.

There were 2 patients with elevations in CPK, indicating muscle damage. Those patients also reported muscle pain, and 1 patient reported weakness.

“This is one of the first reports, I think, of muscle damage in CAR T-cell patients,” Dr Kochenderfer said.

None of the patients developed acute GVHD after CAR T-cell therapy. One patient had continued worsening of pre-existing chronic GVHD after treatment, and 1 patient developed mild chronic eye GVHD more than a year after CAR T-cell infusion.

Dr Kochenderfer said additional details from this trial will be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

James N. Kochenderfer, MD

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—Allogeneic chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells directed against CD19 can have “significant” activity against resistant B-cell malignancies, even when given without prior chemotherapy, according to a presentation at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting.

Nine of 20 patients responded to treatment with the CAR T cells, despite having failed prior allogeneic transplant. The best responses were observed in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

“Malignancies that were resistant to allogeneic transplants and standard donor lymphocyte infusions regressed after infusions of allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells,” said James N. Kochenderfer, MD, of the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland.

“Allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells seem to be particularly effective against ALL and CLL, suggesting a possible antigenic stimulation that may be more pronounced in these malignancies.”

Adverse events associated with these CAR T cells included severe but reversible cytokine release syndrome, mild aphasia, and muscle damage. There were no cases of acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD).

Dr Kochenderfer presented these results at ASH as abstract 99.

For this phase 1 study, researchers tested a CAR T-cell therapy that was originally developed by Dr Kochenderfer and his colleagues. The therapy is now known as KTE-C19 and is under development by Kite Pharmaceuticals. However, the company did not sponsor this trial.

The study was open to patients with any CD19+ B-cell malignancy that persisted after allogeneic transplant.

All patients except those with ALL were required to have received at least one standard donor lymphocyte infusion. In addition, patients were only eligible if they had minimal or no GVHD and were not receiving any systemic immunosuppressive drugs.

The trial included 20 patients—5 each with ALL, CLL, mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

All patients received a single infusion of CAR T cells derived from their original transplant donor. Production of these cells took 8 days. The highest dose of CAR T cells given was 10⁷ cells/kg.

Four of the ALL patients obtained a minimal-residual disease-negative complete response (CR), but 2 of these patients subsequently relapsed. Of the other 2 patients, 1 remains in CR at 18 months of follow-up, and the other went on to receive a second allogeneic transplant. That patient remains in CR today.

Among the CLL patients, 1 achieved a CR, and 1 achieved a partial response (PR). One patient had stable disease (SD), and the other 2 progressed. Both the CR and the PR are ongoing at 36 and 18 months of follow-up, respectively.

One MCL patient achieved a CR, 1 had a PR, and 3 had SD. The CR is ongoing at 31 months. One DLBCL patient achieved a CR, 3 had SD, and 1 progressed.

Dr Kochenderfer noted that response was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. There was a significant difference in CAR T-cell levels between responders and nonresponders (P=0.001).

In addition, the presence of blood B-cell levels before CAR T-cell infusion was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. Patients with normal or high B lymphocytes had higher levels of CAR T cells in their blood (P=0.04).

Patients with high tumor burdens developed severe cytokine-release syndrome with fever, tachycardia, and hypotension. The ALL patients were particularly susceptible to cytokine-release syndrome.

Dr Kochenderfer said neurologic toxicity was rare and mild. There was 1 case of mild aphasia.

There were 2 patients with elevations in CPK, indicating muscle damage. Those patients also reported muscle pain, and 1 patient reported weakness.

“This is one of the first reports, I think, of muscle damage in CAR T-cell patients,” Dr Kochenderfer said.

None of the patients developed acute GVHD after CAR T-cell therapy. One patient had continued worsening of pre-existing chronic GVHD after treatment, and 1 patient developed mild chronic eye GVHD more than a year after CAR T-cell infusion.

Dr Kochenderfer said additional details from this trial will be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

James N. Kochenderfer, MD

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—Allogeneic chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells directed against CD19 can have “significant” activity against resistant B-cell malignancies, even when given without prior chemotherapy, according to a presentation at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting.

Nine of 20 patients responded to treatment with the CAR T cells, despite having failed prior allogeneic transplant. The best responses were observed in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

“Malignancies that were resistant to allogeneic transplants and standard donor lymphocyte infusions regressed after infusions of allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells,” said James N. Kochenderfer, MD, of the National Cancer Institute in Bethesda, Maryland.

“Allogeneic anti-CD19 CAR T cells seem to be particularly effective against ALL and CLL, suggesting a possible antigenic stimulation that may be more pronounced in these malignancies.”

Adverse events associated with these CAR T cells included severe but reversible cytokine release syndrome, mild aphasia, and muscle damage. There were no cases of acute graft-vs-host disease (GVHD).

Dr Kochenderfer presented these results at ASH as abstract 99.

For this phase 1 study, researchers tested a CAR T-cell therapy that was originally developed by Dr Kochenderfer and his colleagues. The therapy is now known as KTE-C19 and is under development by Kite Pharmaceuticals. However, the company did not sponsor this trial.

The study was open to patients with any CD19+ B-cell malignancy that persisted after allogeneic transplant.

All patients except those with ALL were required to have received at least one standard donor lymphocyte infusion. In addition, patients were only eligible if they had minimal or no GVHD and were not receiving any systemic immunosuppressive drugs.

The trial included 20 patients—5 each with ALL, CLL, mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL).

All patients received a single infusion of CAR T cells derived from their original transplant donor. Production of these cells took 8 days. The highest dose of CAR T cells given was 10⁷ cells/kg.

Four of the ALL patients obtained a minimal-residual disease-negative complete response (CR), but 2 of these patients subsequently relapsed. Of the other 2 patients, 1 remains in CR at 18 months of follow-up, and the other went on to receive a second allogeneic transplant. That patient remains in CR today.

Among the CLL patients, 1 achieved a CR, and 1 achieved a partial response (PR). One patient had stable disease (SD), and the other 2 progressed. Both the CR and the PR are ongoing at 36 and 18 months of follow-up, respectively.

One MCL patient achieved a CR, 1 had a PR, and 3 had SD. The CR is ongoing at 31 months. One DLBCL patient achieved a CR, 3 had SD, and 1 progressed.

Dr Kochenderfer noted that response was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. There was a significant difference in CAR T-cell levels between responders and nonresponders (P=0.001).

In addition, the presence of blood B-cell levels before CAR T-cell infusion was associated with higher blood CAR T-cell levels. Patients with normal or high B lymphocytes had higher levels of CAR T cells in their blood (P=0.04).

Patients with high tumor burdens developed severe cytokine-release syndrome with fever, tachycardia, and hypotension. The ALL patients were particularly susceptible to cytokine-release syndrome.

Dr Kochenderfer said neurologic toxicity was rare and mild. There was 1 case of mild aphasia.

There were 2 patients with elevations in CPK, indicating muscle damage. Those patients also reported muscle pain, and 1 patient reported weakness.

“This is one of the first reports, I think, of muscle damage in CAR T-cell patients,” Dr Kochenderfer said.

None of the patients developed acute GVHD after CAR T-cell therapy. One patient had continued worsening of pre-existing chronic GVHD after treatment, and 1 patient developed mild chronic eye GVHD more than a year after CAR T-cell infusion.

Dr Kochenderfer said additional details from this trial will be published in an upcoming issue of the Journal of Clinical Oncology.

ORLANDO – Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens failed to show a significant survival benefit over high-intensity regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia in the phase III MAVERICK trial.

Pretransplant reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) also resulted in a significantly higher risk of relapse and inferior relapse-free survival vs. myeloablative conditioning (MAC).

The findings, reported in the late-breaking abstract (LBA-8) session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, generated a lively debate over the study construct and whether its conclusion that MAC remain “the treatment of choice” in appropriate candidates should be applied to both diseases.

Session comoderator Dr. David P. Steensma, a myelodysplasia physician at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, said in an interview that the data will not change his practice and that physicians should continue to “push the envelope” and provide as intense a conditioning regimen as their patients can tolerate.

“The take-home message is that using a reduced conditioning regimen whatever your choice might be, even though it is gentler on the patient and may be easier for them to go through the transplant, the biggest risk is still the disease, the underlying leukemia or myelodysplasia coming back. And the benefit from reduced intensity is not enough to outweigh that risk.”

To sort out this complex trial, we spoke with study author Dr. Bart L. Scott of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center at the University of Washington, Seattle.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens failed to show a significant survival benefit over high-intensity regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia in the phase III MAVERICK trial.

Pretransplant reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) also resulted in a significantly higher risk of relapse and inferior relapse-free survival vs. myeloablative conditioning (MAC).

The findings, reported in the late-breaking abstract (LBA-8) session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, generated a lively debate over the study construct and whether its conclusion that MAC remain “the treatment of choice” in appropriate candidates should be applied to both diseases.

Session comoderator Dr. David P. Steensma, a myelodysplasia physician at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, said in an interview that the data will not change his practice and that physicians should continue to “push the envelope” and provide as intense a conditioning regimen as their patients can tolerate.

“The take-home message is that using a reduced conditioning regimen whatever your choice might be, even though it is gentler on the patient and may be easier for them to go through the transplant, the biggest risk is still the disease, the underlying leukemia or myelodysplasia coming back. And the benefit from reduced intensity is not enough to outweigh that risk.”

To sort out this complex trial, we spoke with study author Dr. Bart L. Scott of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center at the University of Washington, Seattle.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – Reduced-intensity conditioning regimens failed to show a significant survival benefit over high-intensity regimens in myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia in the phase III MAVERICK trial.

Pretransplant reduced intensity conditioning (RIC) also resulted in a significantly higher risk of relapse and inferior relapse-free survival vs. myeloablative conditioning (MAC).

The findings, reported in the late-breaking abstract (LBA-8) session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology, generated a lively debate over the study construct and whether its conclusion that MAC remain “the treatment of choice” in appropriate candidates should be applied to both diseases.

Session comoderator Dr. David P. Steensma, a myelodysplasia physician at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, said in an interview that the data will not change his practice and that physicians should continue to “push the envelope” and provide as intense a conditioning regimen as their patients can tolerate.

“The take-home message is that using a reduced conditioning regimen whatever your choice might be, even though it is gentler on the patient and may be easier for them to go through the transplant, the biggest risk is still the disease, the underlying leukemia or myelodysplasia coming back. And the benefit from reduced intensity is not enough to outweigh that risk.”

To sort out this complex trial, we spoke with study author Dr. Bart L. Scott of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center at the University of Washington, Seattle.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – Idelalisib given as first-line therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia carries a high risk of early fulminant hepatotoxicity requiring drug interruption and steroids, investigators reported.

Among 24 patients who received idelalisib (Zydelig) monotherapy in a phase II trial of a combination of idelalisib followed by idelalisib concurrent with ofatumumab (Arzerra) as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 12 patients developed acute hepatotoxicity, marked by rapidly soaring levels of transaminase within about 28 days of starting therapy. An additional four patients developed hepatotoxicity at around 130 days, noted Dr. Benjamin L. Lampson, a clinical fellow in medicine at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.

“Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this early hepatotoxicity is immune mediated. The proportion of regulatory T cells in the peripheral blood decrease on idelalisib therapy, providing a possible explanation for the development of early hepatotoxicity,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The toxicities occur more frequently among younger and less heavily pretreated patients, and are likely due to on-target, immune-mediated effects, he noted.

Dr. Lampson presented data on the first 24 patients in an ongoing phase II trial. Patients with previously untreated CLL receive idelalisib 150 mg twice daily for 56 days, in an attempt to mobilize neoplastic B cells from the peripheral lymphoid tissues and into the bloodstream.

Following the monotherapy phase, patients are given ofatumumab in an attempt to clear the disease from peripheral blood.

“This dosing strategy is slightly different than what has been previously been used in trials combining these particular drugs. Specifically, previously reported trials have started these agents simultaneously without a lead-in period of monotherapy,” Dr. Lampson explained.

When the lead-in phase is completed, patients receive idelalisib plus ofatumumab infusions once weekly for 8 weeks, followed by once-monthly infusions for 4 months. Patients then continue on idelalisib indefinitely. The primary endpoint is the overall response rate assessed 2 months after the completion of the combination therapy.

For the first 24 patients treated as of Nov. 9, 2015, the median time on therapy was 7.7 months and median follow-up was 14.7 months.

The median patient age was 67.4 years (range 57.6-84.9). CLL genetics showed that 13 patients had unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV) disease, 4 had the 17p deletion and TP53 mutation, 1 had deletion 11q, and 13 had deletion 13q; some patients had more than one mutation.

“What we began to notice after enrolling just a few subjects on the trial was that severe hepatotoxicity was occurring shortly after initiating idelalisib,” Dr. Lampson said.

He presented one case, a 58-year-old man who was in the idelalisib monotherapy phase of the study. He developed grade 3 hepatotoxicity 28 days after starting the drug, despite having a normal liver function test just 1 day earlier. The drug was stopped, but his liver function tests continued to rise, suggesting a self-perpetuating or self-sustaining process.

On day 32, the patient was admitted to the hospital, and on day 33 he was started on steroids, based on the hypothesis that the hepatotoxicity might have been immune mediated. Two days after initiation of steroids, his liver function tests continued to rise, whereupon he was started on mycophenolate mofetil.

“With these two forms of immunosuppression, the [liver function tests] did eventually normalize, although the steroids and mycophenolate had to be tapered over a period of many weeks. And this patient was not the only patient to experience toxicity; in fact, hepatotoxicity was frequent and often severe,” he said.

At the time of maximum incidence, week 4, the percentage of patients with any hepatotoxicity was 46%, with 13% at grade 4, and 21% at grade 3.

“The median time to initial development of hepatotoxicity is 28 days. This suggests that the mechanism of hepatotoxicity is not immediate, but takes time to develop, consistent with an adaptive immune response. Furthermore, hepatotoxicity is typically occurring before the first dose of ofatumumab is occurring at week 8, suggesting idelalisib alone is the cause of the hepatotoxicity,” Dr. Lampson said.

A comparison of data from the ongoing study and from three previous studies – two with idelalisib in relapsed refractory disease, and one as first-line therapy in patients 65 and older – showed that grade 3 or greater hepatotoxicity was lowest in a phase I trial of idelalisib in which patients had received a median of five prior lines of therapy, occurring in only 1.9% of patients. In contrast, in the current study, 52% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 transaminitis at some point in the trial.

Evidence for the hepatotoxicity being an on-target immune-mediated effect comes from lymphocytic infiltrate on liver biopsy and lymphocytic colitis in idelalisib-treated patients. Additional evidence comes from the fact that the toxicity is both treatable and preventable with steroids, he said.

He cautioned that hepatotoxicity can recur rapidly when the drug is reintroduced.

“In general, our experience has been if idelalisib is resumed while the subject remains on steroids, the drug is more likely to be tolerated and the subject eventually can be tapered off steroids,” he said.

Asked by an audience member whether patients who are receiving idelalisib in the first-line setting should also receive steroids, Dr. Lampson said that they closely monitor patient liver enzymes around 28 days, and if grade 1 transaminitis is detected, patients are automatically started on low-dose steroids.

The study is sponsored by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in collaboration with Gilead Sciences and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. Lampson and colleagues declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

ORLANDO – Idelalisib given as first-line therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia carries a high risk of early fulminant hepatotoxicity requiring drug interruption and steroids, investigators reported.

Among 24 patients who received idelalisib (Zydelig) monotherapy in a phase II trial of a combination of idelalisib followed by idelalisib concurrent with ofatumumab (Arzerra) as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 12 patients developed acute hepatotoxicity, marked by rapidly soaring levels of transaminase within about 28 days of starting therapy. An additional four patients developed hepatotoxicity at around 130 days, noted Dr. Benjamin L. Lampson, a clinical fellow in medicine at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.

“Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this early hepatotoxicity is immune mediated. The proportion of regulatory T cells in the peripheral blood decrease on idelalisib therapy, providing a possible explanation for the development of early hepatotoxicity,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The toxicities occur more frequently among younger and less heavily pretreated patients, and are likely due to on-target, immune-mediated effects, he noted.

Dr. Lampson presented data on the first 24 patients in an ongoing phase II trial. Patients with previously untreated CLL receive idelalisib 150 mg twice daily for 56 days, in an attempt to mobilize neoplastic B cells from the peripheral lymphoid tissues and into the bloodstream.

Following the monotherapy phase, patients are given ofatumumab in an attempt to clear the disease from peripheral blood.

“This dosing strategy is slightly different than what has been previously been used in trials combining these particular drugs. Specifically, previously reported trials have started these agents simultaneously without a lead-in period of monotherapy,” Dr. Lampson explained.

When the lead-in phase is completed, patients receive idelalisib plus ofatumumab infusions once weekly for 8 weeks, followed by once-monthly infusions for 4 months. Patients then continue on idelalisib indefinitely. The primary endpoint is the overall response rate assessed 2 months after the completion of the combination therapy.

For the first 24 patients treated as of Nov. 9, 2015, the median time on therapy was 7.7 months and median follow-up was 14.7 months.

The median patient age was 67.4 years (range 57.6-84.9). CLL genetics showed that 13 patients had unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV) disease, 4 had the 17p deletion and TP53 mutation, 1 had deletion 11q, and 13 had deletion 13q; some patients had more than one mutation.

“What we began to notice after enrolling just a few subjects on the trial was that severe hepatotoxicity was occurring shortly after initiating idelalisib,” Dr. Lampson said.

He presented one case, a 58-year-old man who was in the idelalisib monotherapy phase of the study. He developed grade 3 hepatotoxicity 28 days after starting the drug, despite having a normal liver function test just 1 day earlier. The drug was stopped, but his liver function tests continued to rise, suggesting a self-perpetuating or self-sustaining process.

On day 32, the patient was admitted to the hospital, and on day 33 he was started on steroids, based on the hypothesis that the hepatotoxicity might have been immune mediated. Two days after initiation of steroids, his liver function tests continued to rise, whereupon he was started on mycophenolate mofetil.

“With these two forms of immunosuppression, the [liver function tests] did eventually normalize, although the steroids and mycophenolate had to be tapered over a period of many weeks. And this patient was not the only patient to experience toxicity; in fact, hepatotoxicity was frequent and often severe,” he said.

At the time of maximum incidence, week 4, the percentage of patients with any hepatotoxicity was 46%, with 13% at grade 4, and 21% at grade 3.

“The median time to initial development of hepatotoxicity is 28 days. This suggests that the mechanism of hepatotoxicity is not immediate, but takes time to develop, consistent with an adaptive immune response. Furthermore, hepatotoxicity is typically occurring before the first dose of ofatumumab is occurring at week 8, suggesting idelalisib alone is the cause of the hepatotoxicity,” Dr. Lampson said.

A comparison of data from the ongoing study and from three previous studies – two with idelalisib in relapsed refractory disease, and one as first-line therapy in patients 65 and older – showed that grade 3 or greater hepatotoxicity was lowest in a phase I trial of idelalisib in which patients had received a median of five prior lines of therapy, occurring in only 1.9% of patients. In contrast, in the current study, 52% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 transaminitis at some point in the trial.

Evidence for the hepatotoxicity being an on-target immune-mediated effect comes from lymphocytic infiltrate on liver biopsy and lymphocytic colitis in idelalisib-treated patients. Additional evidence comes from the fact that the toxicity is both treatable and preventable with steroids, he said.

He cautioned that hepatotoxicity can recur rapidly when the drug is reintroduced.

“In general, our experience has been if idelalisib is resumed while the subject remains on steroids, the drug is more likely to be tolerated and the subject eventually can be tapered off steroids,” he said.

Asked by an audience member whether patients who are receiving idelalisib in the first-line setting should also receive steroids, Dr. Lampson said that they closely monitor patient liver enzymes around 28 days, and if grade 1 transaminitis is detected, patients are automatically started on low-dose steroids.

The study is sponsored by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in collaboration with Gilead Sciences and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. Lampson and colleagues declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

ORLANDO – Idelalisib given as first-line therapy for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia carries a high risk of early fulminant hepatotoxicity requiring drug interruption and steroids, investigators reported.

Among 24 patients who received idelalisib (Zydelig) monotherapy in a phase II trial of a combination of idelalisib followed by idelalisib concurrent with ofatumumab (Arzerra) as first-line therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), 12 patients developed acute hepatotoxicity, marked by rapidly soaring levels of transaminase within about 28 days of starting therapy. An additional four patients developed hepatotoxicity at around 130 days, noted Dr. Benjamin L. Lampson, a clinical fellow in medicine at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston.

“Multiple lines of evidence suggest that this early hepatotoxicity is immune mediated. The proportion of regulatory T cells in the peripheral blood decrease on idelalisib therapy, providing a possible explanation for the development of early hepatotoxicity,” he said at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

The toxicities occur more frequently among younger and less heavily pretreated patients, and are likely due to on-target, immune-mediated effects, he noted.

Dr. Lampson presented data on the first 24 patients in an ongoing phase II trial. Patients with previously untreated CLL receive idelalisib 150 mg twice daily for 56 days, in an attempt to mobilize neoplastic B cells from the peripheral lymphoid tissues and into the bloodstream.

Following the monotherapy phase, patients are given ofatumumab in an attempt to clear the disease from peripheral blood.

“This dosing strategy is slightly different than what has been previously been used in trials combining these particular drugs. Specifically, previously reported trials have started these agents simultaneously without a lead-in period of monotherapy,” Dr. Lampson explained.

When the lead-in phase is completed, patients receive idelalisib plus ofatumumab infusions once weekly for 8 weeks, followed by once-monthly infusions for 4 months. Patients then continue on idelalisib indefinitely. The primary endpoint is the overall response rate assessed 2 months after the completion of the combination therapy.

For the first 24 patients treated as of Nov. 9, 2015, the median time on therapy was 7.7 months and median follow-up was 14.7 months.

The median patient age was 67.4 years (range 57.6-84.9). CLL genetics showed that 13 patients had unmutated immunoglobulin heavy chain variable region (IgHV) disease, 4 had the 17p deletion and TP53 mutation, 1 had deletion 11q, and 13 had deletion 13q; some patients had more than one mutation.

“What we began to notice after enrolling just a few subjects on the trial was that severe hepatotoxicity was occurring shortly after initiating idelalisib,” Dr. Lampson said.

He presented one case, a 58-year-old man who was in the idelalisib monotherapy phase of the study. He developed grade 3 hepatotoxicity 28 days after starting the drug, despite having a normal liver function test just 1 day earlier. The drug was stopped, but his liver function tests continued to rise, suggesting a self-perpetuating or self-sustaining process.

On day 32, the patient was admitted to the hospital, and on day 33 he was started on steroids, based on the hypothesis that the hepatotoxicity might have been immune mediated. Two days after initiation of steroids, his liver function tests continued to rise, whereupon he was started on mycophenolate mofetil.

“With these two forms of immunosuppression, the [liver function tests] did eventually normalize, although the steroids and mycophenolate had to be tapered over a period of many weeks. And this patient was not the only patient to experience toxicity; in fact, hepatotoxicity was frequent and often severe,” he said.

At the time of maximum incidence, week 4, the percentage of patients with any hepatotoxicity was 46%, with 13% at grade 4, and 21% at grade 3.

“The median time to initial development of hepatotoxicity is 28 days. This suggests that the mechanism of hepatotoxicity is not immediate, but takes time to develop, consistent with an adaptive immune response. Furthermore, hepatotoxicity is typically occurring before the first dose of ofatumumab is occurring at week 8, suggesting idelalisib alone is the cause of the hepatotoxicity,” Dr. Lampson said.

A comparison of data from the ongoing study and from three previous studies – two with idelalisib in relapsed refractory disease, and one as first-line therapy in patients 65 and older – showed that grade 3 or greater hepatotoxicity was lowest in a phase I trial of idelalisib in which patients had received a median of five prior lines of therapy, occurring in only 1.9% of patients. In contrast, in the current study, 52% of patients experienced grade 3 or 4 transaminitis at some point in the trial.

Evidence for the hepatotoxicity being an on-target immune-mediated effect comes from lymphocytic infiltrate on liver biopsy and lymphocytic colitis in idelalisib-treated patients. Additional evidence comes from the fact that the toxicity is both treatable and preventable with steroids, he said.

He cautioned that hepatotoxicity can recur rapidly when the drug is reintroduced.

“In general, our experience has been if idelalisib is resumed while the subject remains on steroids, the drug is more likely to be tolerated and the subject eventually can be tapered off steroids,” he said.

Asked by an audience member whether patients who are receiving idelalisib in the first-line setting should also receive steroids, Dr. Lampson said that they closely monitor patient liver enzymes around 28 days, and if grade 1 transaminitis is detected, patients are automatically started on low-dose steroids.

The study is sponsored by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in collaboration with Gilead Sciences and GlaxoSmithKline. Dr. Lampson and colleagues declared no relevant conflicts of interest.

Wendy Landier, PhD, CRNP

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—A study comparing subjective versus objective reporting of treatment compliance in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has shown that about a fourth of patients over-report how compliant they are with taking 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) as part of their maintenance therapy.

An earlier analysis of the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) AALL03N1 compliance study showed that adherence rates of less than 95% were associated with a 3.7-fold increased risk of relapse.

And about 40% of patients were non-adherent. Yet patients indicate they are taking their medication when questioned.

“We ask our patients if they are taking their meds,” said Wendy Landier, PhD, “and they tell us they are.”

“Even in this cohort who were being closely monitored and knew that they were being closely monitored electronically and were asked to self-report, we found over-reporting.”

Dr Landier, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, reported these findings comparing self-reported adherence with electronic monitoring of 6MP intake at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 82).

The investigators collected data over 6 months from 416 ALL patients who were 21 years at diagnosis or younger and were receiving 6MP as part of their maintenance therapy.

Investigators measured subjective self-reporting by a patient questionnaire, which included patient demographic information in addition to the number of days the patient took 6MP over the past month.

For the objective medication event-monitoring system (MEMS), patients received a 6MP bottle that was fitted with a TrackCap^TM. The cap had a microprocessor chip that recorded the date and time of each bottle opening.

Investigators downloaded the data at the end of the study. They then compared the MEMS with the self-reported data.

The investigators classified perfect reporters as those whose self-report corresponded to their MEMS.

They classified over-reporters as those whose self-report was greater than their MEMS data for 5 days or more and 50% of the months.

The rest they classified as others.

Patients were a median age of 6.0 years, and 277 (66.6%) were male. Parents completed the survey for patients younger than 12.

Two hundred forty-two patients (60.9%) had fathers whose education was less than some college, 159 (38.4%) had NCI high-risk disease, and 168 (40.4%) were non-adherent to 6MP as determined by earlier analysis of the COG AALL03N1 study.

Thirty-six percent were non-Hispanic white, 37% were Hispanic, 14% Asian, and 13% African American.

The investigators monitored the patients’ 6MP intake for a total of 1344 patient-months at 87 COG sites.

And the correlation between subjective and objective reporting was moderate, Dr Landier said, with the correlation ranging from 0.36 to 0.58.

Twelve percent of the patients were perfect reporters, with no difference between the reporting methods.

Twenty-four percent over-reported their intake, 1% under-reported their intake, and 64% were other.

The investigators analyzed variables associated with over-reporting and found that age 12 years or older (P=0.02), being Hispanic (P=0.02), Asian (P=0.02), or African American (P<0.001), paternal education less than college (P=0.02), and being classified as 6MP non-adherent (P<0.001) were all significant.

“Over-reporting of 6MP ingestion is common,” Dr Landier said, with 88% of patients or parents over-reporting the number of days 6MP was taken.

“What we’ve learned from this study is that we cannot rely on patients’ self-report in the clinic,” she said. “What we found is that only 12% of our patients are perfect, so to speak, and that the others mainly over-estimate, and I don’t believe intentionally.”

“[W]e need to have a better way of identifying which patients are at risk for over-reporting their intake, whether they’re aware of it or not,” she added.

Wendy Landier, PhD, CRNP

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—A study comparing subjective versus objective reporting of treatment compliance in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has shown that about a fourth of patients over-report how compliant they are with taking 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) as part of their maintenance therapy.

An earlier analysis of the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) AALL03N1 compliance study showed that adherence rates of less than 95% were associated with a 3.7-fold increased risk of relapse.

And about 40% of patients were non-adherent. Yet patients indicate they are taking their medication when questioned.

“We ask our patients if they are taking their meds,” said Wendy Landier, PhD, “and they tell us they are.”

“Even in this cohort who were being closely monitored and knew that they were being closely monitored electronically and were asked to self-report, we found over-reporting.”

Dr Landier, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, reported these findings comparing self-reported adherence with electronic monitoring of 6MP intake at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 82).

The investigators collected data over 6 months from 416 ALL patients who were 21 years at diagnosis or younger and were receiving 6MP as part of their maintenance therapy.

Investigators measured subjective self-reporting by a patient questionnaire, which included patient demographic information in addition to the number of days the patient took 6MP over the past month.

For the objective medication event-monitoring system (MEMS), patients received a 6MP bottle that was fitted with a TrackCap^TM. The cap had a microprocessor chip that recorded the date and time of each bottle opening.

Investigators downloaded the data at the end of the study. They then compared the MEMS with the self-reported data.

The investigators classified perfect reporters as those whose self-report corresponded to their MEMS.

They classified over-reporters as those whose self-report was greater than their MEMS data for 5 days or more and 50% of the months.

The rest they classified as others.

Patients were a median age of 6.0 years, and 277 (66.6%) were male. Parents completed the survey for patients younger than 12.

Two hundred forty-two patients (60.9%) had fathers whose education was less than some college, 159 (38.4%) had NCI high-risk disease, and 168 (40.4%) were non-adherent to 6MP as determined by earlier analysis of the COG AALL03N1 study.

Thirty-six percent were non-Hispanic white, 37% were Hispanic, 14% Asian, and 13% African American.

The investigators monitored the patients’ 6MP intake for a total of 1344 patient-months at 87 COG sites.

And the correlation between subjective and objective reporting was moderate, Dr Landier said, with the correlation ranging from 0.36 to 0.58.

Twelve percent of the patients were perfect reporters, with no difference between the reporting methods.

Twenty-four percent over-reported their intake, 1% under-reported their intake, and 64% were other.

The investigators analyzed variables associated with over-reporting and found that age 12 years or older (P=0.02), being Hispanic (P=0.02), Asian (P=0.02), or African American (P<0.001), paternal education less than college (P=0.02), and being classified as 6MP non-adherent (P<0.001) were all significant.

“Over-reporting of 6MP ingestion is common,” Dr Landier said, with 88% of patients or parents over-reporting the number of days 6MP was taken.

“What we’ve learned from this study is that we cannot rely on patients’ self-report in the clinic,” she said. “What we found is that only 12% of our patients are perfect, so to speak, and that the others mainly over-estimate, and I don’t believe intentionally.”

“[W]e need to have a better way of identifying which patients are at risk for over-reporting their intake, whether they’re aware of it or not,” she added.

Wendy Landier, PhD, CRNP

Photo courtesy of ASH

ORLANDO, FL—A study comparing subjective versus objective reporting of treatment compliance in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has shown that about a fourth of patients over-report how compliant they are with taking 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) as part of their maintenance therapy.

An earlier analysis of the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) AALL03N1 compliance study showed that adherence rates of less than 95% were associated with a 3.7-fold increased risk of relapse.

And about 40% of patients were non-adherent. Yet patients indicate they are taking their medication when questioned.

“We ask our patients if they are taking their meds,” said Wendy Landier, PhD, “and they tell us they are.”

“Even in this cohort who were being closely monitored and knew that they were being closely monitored electronically and were asked to self-report, we found over-reporting.”

Dr Landier, of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, reported these findings comparing self-reported adherence with electronic monitoring of 6MP intake at the 2015 ASH Annual Meeting (abstract 82).

The investigators collected data over 6 months from 416 ALL patients who were 21 years at diagnosis or younger and were receiving 6MP as part of their maintenance therapy.

Investigators measured subjective self-reporting by a patient questionnaire, which included patient demographic information in addition to the number of days the patient took 6MP over the past month.

For the objective medication event-monitoring system (MEMS), patients received a 6MP bottle that was fitted with a TrackCap^TM. The cap had a microprocessor chip that recorded the date and time of each bottle opening.

Investigators downloaded the data at the end of the study. They then compared the MEMS with the self-reported data.

The investigators classified perfect reporters as those whose self-report corresponded to their MEMS.

They classified over-reporters as those whose self-report was greater than their MEMS data for 5 days or more and 50% of the months.

The rest they classified as others.

Patients were a median age of 6.0 years, and 277 (66.6%) were male. Parents completed the survey for patients younger than 12.

Two hundred forty-two patients (60.9%) had fathers whose education was less than some college, 159 (38.4%) had NCI high-risk disease, and 168 (40.4%) were non-adherent to 6MP as determined by earlier analysis of the COG AALL03N1 study.

Thirty-six percent were non-Hispanic white, 37% were Hispanic, 14% Asian, and 13% African American.

The investigators monitored the patients’ 6MP intake for a total of 1344 patient-months at 87 COG sites.

And the correlation between subjective and objective reporting was moderate, Dr Landier said, with the correlation ranging from 0.36 to 0.58.

Twelve percent of the patients were perfect reporters, with no difference between the reporting methods.

Twenty-four percent over-reported their intake, 1% under-reported their intake, and 64% were other.

The investigators analyzed variables associated with over-reporting and found that age 12 years or older (P=0.02), being Hispanic (P=0.02), Asian (P=0.02), or African American (P<0.001), paternal education less than college (P=0.02), and being classified as 6MP non-adherent (P<0.001) were all significant.

“Over-reporting of 6MP ingestion is common,” Dr Landier said, with 88% of patients or parents over-reporting the number of days 6MP was taken.

“What we’ve learned from this study is that we cannot rely on patients’ self-report in the clinic,” she said. “What we found is that only 12% of our patients are perfect, so to speak, and that the others mainly over-estimate, and I don’t believe intentionally.”

“[W]e need to have a better way of identifying which patients are at risk for over-reporting their intake, whether they’re aware of it or not,” she added.

ORLANDO – Adding rituximab to standard intensive chemotherapy significantly improved event-free survival in adults with Philadelphia-negative, CD20-positive B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the phase III GRAALL-R 2005 study.

Rituximab (Rituxan) is already being used to improve outcomes in patients with lymphoma, and non-randomized data support addition of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody to chemotherapy in B-cell precursor (BCP) ALL, where the CD20 antigen is expressed in 30% to 40% of patients at diagnosis.

In the randomized GRAALL-R 2005, 2-year event-free survival (EFS) was 65% in the rituximab arm vs. 52% in the control arm (hazard ratio, 0.66; P = .038).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News

This difference is not explained by the early response rates, which were very close in both arms after one or two induction courses (92% vs. 90%; P = .63), Dr. Sébastien Maury, Hôpital Henri Mondor in Créteil, France, said during the plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology (Ab. 1).

The beneficial effect of rituximab, however, was clearly related to the cumulative incidence of relapse at 18% with vs. 32% without rituximab (HR, 0.52; P = .017).

Despite this advantage, overall survival was similar between patients given chemotherapy with and without rituximab (71% vs. 64%; HR, 0.70; P = .095), he said.

After censoring for patients not receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant in first complete remission, however, rituximab significantly prolonged 2-year EFS (HR, 0.59; P = .021) as well as overall survival (HR, 0.55; P = .018), Dr. Maury said.

“We thus recommend that the addition of rituximab become a new standard of care for these patients, although some aspects including the definition of the optimal dose needs to be determined in further studies,” he concluded.

Dr. Adele Fielding of University College London, who introduced the study at the meeting, said, “For me, the prior knowledge that the drug can be safely already added to chemotherapy in other settings provides profound comfort in a disease in which so many people are already damaged by the current therapies we offer.”

Also, of importance is the potential relevance of rituximab in patients in whom CD20 is present on fewer than 20% of blasts at diagnosis.

Key questions that remain in rituximab therapy of ALL beyond overall benefit include early and late toxicities and how best to judge response and when, she said. Synergies with other agents and the mechanism of action will also require clarification, especially which effector cells are relevant to ensure that agents are not used with rituximab that destroy the optimal chance for response.

“Finally, the cost of introducing novel agents cannot be ignored, even in well-developed economies, and I am hopeful that the cost of this drug will be variable for many countries and many patients.” Dr. Fielding said.

Study details

A total of 220 patients, aged 18-59 years, with newly diagnosed CD20-positive Ph-negative BCP-ALL were randomized to the pediatric-inspired Group for Research on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (GRAALL) chemotherapy protocol with or without rituximab 375 mg/m² given during induction (day 1 and 7), salvage reinduction when needed (day 1 and 7), consolidation blocks (6 infusions), late intensification (day 1 and 7, and the first year of maintenance [6 infusions], for a total of 16-18 infusions. Allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) was offered after consolidation blocks 1 or 2 to patients with one or more high-risk criteria and an available donor. CD20-positivity was defined as expression of CD20 in more than 20% of leukemia blasts.

Eleven patients were excluded from the analysis because of non–ineligibility criteria, leaving 209 patients in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. Their median age was 40.2 years and 67% had high-risk ALL.

Rates of postinduction minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 65% and 61% in the rituximab and control arms among 85 evaluable patients(P = .82), and rates of postconsolidation minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 91% and 82% among 80 evaluable patients (P = .31), Dr. Maury reported.

Notably, more patients in the rituximab arm received allogeneic SCT in their first complete remission (34% vs. 20%; P = .029).

The cumulative incidence of death in first complete remission was 12% in both arms.

In multivariate analysis, rituximab impacted EFS, together with age, central nervous system involvement, white blood cells, or CD20 expression at diagnosis. A preferential effect with rituximab was seen in patients with high CD20 levels that deserves further evaluation, he observed.

There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the rituximab and control arms, although there was a trend for more infectious events with rituximab (71 events vs. 55 events), Dr. Maury said.

Allergic events – all but one from aspergillosis – were significantly more common in the control arm (2 events vs. 14 events; P = .002).

The Group for Research in Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia sponsored the study. Dr. Maury reported having no disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – Adding rituximab to standard intensive chemotherapy significantly improved event-free survival in adults with Philadelphia-negative, CD20-positive B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the phase III GRAALL-R 2005 study.

Rituximab (Rituxan) is already being used to improve outcomes in patients with lymphoma, and non-randomized data support addition of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody to chemotherapy in B-cell precursor (BCP) ALL, where the CD20 antigen is expressed in 30% to 40% of patients at diagnosis.

In the randomized GRAALL-R 2005, 2-year event-free survival (EFS) was 65% in the rituximab arm vs. 52% in the control arm (hazard ratio, 0.66; P = .038).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News

This difference is not explained by the early response rates, which were very close in both arms after one or two induction courses (92% vs. 90%; P = .63), Dr. Sébastien Maury, Hôpital Henri Mondor in Créteil, France, said during the plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology (Ab. 1).

The beneficial effect of rituximab, however, was clearly related to the cumulative incidence of relapse at 18% with vs. 32% without rituximab (HR, 0.52; P = .017).

Despite this advantage, overall survival was similar between patients given chemotherapy with and without rituximab (71% vs. 64%; HR, 0.70; P = .095), he said.

After censoring for patients not receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant in first complete remission, however, rituximab significantly prolonged 2-year EFS (HR, 0.59; P = .021) as well as overall survival (HR, 0.55; P = .018), Dr. Maury said.

“We thus recommend that the addition of rituximab become a new standard of care for these patients, although some aspects including the definition of the optimal dose needs to be determined in further studies,” he concluded.

Dr. Adele Fielding of University College London, who introduced the study at the meeting, said, “For me, the prior knowledge that the drug can be safely already added to chemotherapy in other settings provides profound comfort in a disease in which so many people are already damaged by the current therapies we offer.”

Also, of importance is the potential relevance of rituximab in patients in whom CD20 is present on fewer than 20% of blasts at diagnosis.

Key questions that remain in rituximab therapy of ALL beyond overall benefit include early and late toxicities and how best to judge response and when, she said. Synergies with other agents and the mechanism of action will also require clarification, especially which effector cells are relevant to ensure that agents are not used with rituximab that destroy the optimal chance for response.

“Finally, the cost of introducing novel agents cannot be ignored, even in well-developed economies, and I am hopeful that the cost of this drug will be variable for many countries and many patients.” Dr. Fielding said.

Study details

A total of 220 patients, aged 18-59 years, with newly diagnosed CD20-positive Ph-negative BCP-ALL were randomized to the pediatric-inspired Group for Research on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (GRAALL) chemotherapy protocol with or without rituximab 375 mg/m² given during induction (day 1 and 7), salvage reinduction when needed (day 1 and 7), consolidation blocks (6 infusions), late intensification (day 1 and 7, and the first year of maintenance [6 infusions], for a total of 16-18 infusions. Allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) was offered after consolidation blocks 1 or 2 to patients with one or more high-risk criteria and an available donor. CD20-positivity was defined as expression of CD20 in more than 20% of leukemia blasts.

Eleven patients were excluded from the analysis because of non–ineligibility criteria, leaving 209 patients in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. Their median age was 40.2 years and 67% had high-risk ALL.

Rates of postinduction minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 65% and 61% in the rituximab and control arms among 85 evaluable patients(P = .82), and rates of postconsolidation minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 91% and 82% among 80 evaluable patients (P = .31), Dr. Maury reported.

Notably, more patients in the rituximab arm received allogeneic SCT in their first complete remission (34% vs. 20%; P = .029).

The cumulative incidence of death in first complete remission was 12% in both arms.

In multivariate analysis, rituximab impacted EFS, together with age, central nervous system involvement, white blood cells, or CD20 expression at diagnosis. A preferential effect with rituximab was seen in patients with high CD20 levels that deserves further evaluation, he observed.

There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the rituximab and control arms, although there was a trend for more infectious events with rituximab (71 events vs. 55 events), Dr. Maury said.

Allergic events – all but one from aspergillosis – were significantly more common in the control arm (2 events vs. 14 events; P = .002).

The Group for Research in Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia sponsored the study. Dr. Maury reported having no disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – Adding rituximab to standard intensive chemotherapy significantly improved event-free survival in adults with Philadelphia-negative, CD20-positive B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia in the phase III GRAALL-R 2005 study.

Rituximab (Rituxan) is already being used to improve outcomes in patients with lymphoma, and non-randomized data support addition of the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody to chemotherapy in B-cell precursor (BCP) ALL, where the CD20 antigen is expressed in 30% to 40% of patients at diagnosis.

In the randomized GRAALL-R 2005, 2-year event-free survival (EFS) was 65% in the rituximab arm vs. 52% in the control arm (hazard ratio, 0.66; P = .038).

Patrice Wendling/Frontline Medical News

This difference is not explained by the early response rates, which were very close in both arms after one or two induction courses (92% vs. 90%; P = .63), Dr. Sébastien Maury, Hôpital Henri Mondor in Créteil, France, said during the plenary session at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology (Ab. 1).

The beneficial effect of rituximab, however, was clearly related to the cumulative incidence of relapse at 18% with vs. 32% without rituximab (HR, 0.52; P = .017).

Despite this advantage, overall survival was similar between patients given chemotherapy with and without rituximab (71% vs. 64%; HR, 0.70; P = .095), he said.

After censoring for patients not receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant in first complete remission, however, rituximab significantly prolonged 2-year EFS (HR, 0.59; P = .021) as well as overall survival (HR, 0.55; P = .018), Dr. Maury said.

“We thus recommend that the addition of rituximab become a new standard of care for these patients, although some aspects including the definition of the optimal dose needs to be determined in further studies,” he concluded.

Dr. Adele Fielding of University College London, who introduced the study at the meeting, said, “For me, the prior knowledge that the drug can be safely already added to chemotherapy in other settings provides profound comfort in a disease in which so many people are already damaged by the current therapies we offer.”

Also, of importance is the potential relevance of rituximab in patients in whom CD20 is present on fewer than 20% of blasts at diagnosis.

Key questions that remain in rituximab therapy of ALL beyond overall benefit include early and late toxicities and how best to judge response and when, she said. Synergies with other agents and the mechanism of action will also require clarification, especially which effector cells are relevant to ensure that agents are not used with rituximab that destroy the optimal chance for response.

“Finally, the cost of introducing novel agents cannot be ignored, even in well-developed economies, and I am hopeful that the cost of this drug will be variable for many countries and many patients.” Dr. Fielding said.

Study details

A total of 220 patients, aged 18-59 years, with newly diagnosed CD20-positive Ph-negative BCP-ALL were randomized to the pediatric-inspired Group for Research on Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (GRAALL) chemotherapy protocol with or without rituximab 375 mg/m² given during induction (day 1 and 7), salvage reinduction when needed (day 1 and 7), consolidation blocks (6 infusions), late intensification (day 1 and 7, and the first year of maintenance [6 infusions], for a total of 16-18 infusions. Allogeneic stem cell transplant (SCT) was offered after consolidation blocks 1 or 2 to patients with one or more high-risk criteria and an available donor. CD20-positivity was defined as expression of CD20 in more than 20% of leukemia blasts.

Eleven patients were excluded from the analysis because of non–ineligibility criteria, leaving 209 patients in the modified intent-to-treat analysis. Their median age was 40.2 years and 67% had high-risk ALL.

Rates of postinduction minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 65% and 61% in the rituximab and control arms among 85 evaluable patients(P = .82), and rates of postconsolidation minimal residual disease less than 10^–4 were 91% and 82% among 80 evaluable patients (P = .31), Dr. Maury reported.

Notably, more patients in the rituximab arm received allogeneic SCT in their first complete remission (34% vs. 20%; P = .029).

The cumulative incidence of death in first complete remission was 12% in both arms.

In multivariate analysis, rituximab impacted EFS, together with age, central nervous system involvement, white blood cells, or CD20 expression at diagnosis. A preferential effect with rituximab was seen in patients with high CD20 levels that deserves further evaluation, he observed.

There was no difference in the incidence of adverse events between the rituximab and control arms, although there was a trend for more infectious events with rituximab (71 events vs. 55 events), Dr. Maury said.

Allergic events – all but one from aspergillosis – were significantly more common in the control arm (2 events vs. 14 events; P = .002).

The Group for Research in Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia sponsored the study. Dr. Maury reported having no disclosures.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – The oral multikinase inhibitor midostaurin improved overall survival by 23% when added to standard chemotherapy and given as maintenance therapy for 1 year in newly diagnosed patients with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the global phase III CALGB 10603/RATIFY trial.

The results struck a chord at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology because the benefits of targeted therapy have so far eluded AML patients despite transforming the treatment of other blood cancers. Currently, there are no approved, targeted treatments for AML.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY is the first large, controlled trial to show an overall survival benefit in the roughly 30% of AML patients with a mutation in the FLT3 gene.

“This is exciting because we haven’t had a new treatment in AML for 30 years,” Dr. Robert Hromas of the University of Florida, Gainesville, said while moderating a press conference highlighting the plenary abstract.

The results were a decade in the making after midostaurin failed previously when used in all AML patients rather than the subset with the FLT3 mutation. But the persistence of researchers, the international collaboration, and funding in cancer research paid off, Dr. Hromas said.

Study author Dr. Richard M. Stone, chief of staff at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, reviewed the results of CALGB 10603/RATIFY in an interview.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY was sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Dr. Stone reported financial relationships with several drug companies including Novartis, which provided the study drug and sponsored the trial outside North America. Dr. Hromas disclosed serving as an uncompensated advisory board member without equity for Cloud Pharmaceuticals.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – The oral multikinase inhibitor midostaurin improved overall survival by 23% when added to standard chemotherapy and given as maintenance therapy for 1 year in newly diagnosed patients with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the global phase III CALGB 10603/RATIFY trial.

The results struck a chord at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology because the benefits of targeted therapy have so far eluded AML patients despite transforming the treatment of other blood cancers. Currently, there are no approved, targeted treatments for AML.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY is the first large, controlled trial to show an overall survival benefit in the roughly 30% of AML patients with a mutation in the FLT3 gene.

“This is exciting because we haven’t had a new treatment in AML for 30 years,” Dr. Robert Hromas of the University of Florida, Gainesville, said while moderating a press conference highlighting the plenary abstract.

The results were a decade in the making after midostaurin failed previously when used in all AML patients rather than the subset with the FLT3 mutation. But the persistence of researchers, the international collaboration, and funding in cancer research paid off, Dr. Hromas said.

Study author Dr. Richard M. Stone, chief of staff at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, reviewed the results of CALGB 10603/RATIFY in an interview.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY was sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Dr. Stone reported financial relationships with several drug companies including Novartis, which provided the study drug and sponsored the trial outside North America. Dr. Hromas disclosed serving as an uncompensated advisory board member without equity for Cloud Pharmaceuticals.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

ORLANDO – The oral multikinase inhibitor midostaurin improved overall survival by 23% when added to standard chemotherapy and given as maintenance therapy for 1 year in newly diagnosed patients with FLT3-mutated acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in the global phase III CALGB 10603/RATIFY trial.

The results struck a chord at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology because the benefits of targeted therapy have so far eluded AML patients despite transforming the treatment of other blood cancers. Currently, there are no approved, targeted treatments for AML.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY is the first large, controlled trial to show an overall survival benefit in the roughly 30% of AML patients with a mutation in the FLT3 gene.

“This is exciting because we haven’t had a new treatment in AML for 30 years,” Dr. Robert Hromas of the University of Florida, Gainesville, said while moderating a press conference highlighting the plenary abstract.

The results were a decade in the making after midostaurin failed previously when used in all AML patients rather than the subset with the FLT3 mutation. But the persistence of researchers, the international collaboration, and funding in cancer research paid off, Dr. Hromas said.

Study author Dr. Richard M. Stone, chief of staff at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, reviewed the results of CALGB 10603/RATIFY in an interview.

CALGB 10603/RATIFY was sponsored by the Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program. Dr. Stone reported financial relationships with several drug companies including Novartis, which provided the study drug and sponsored the trial outside North America. Dr. Hromas disclosed serving as an uncompensated advisory board member without equity for Cloud Pharmaceuticals.

pwendling@frontlinemedcom.com

Chemotherapy drugs

Photo by Bill Branson

The price of cancer drugs varies widely between European countries, Australia, and New Zealand, according to a study published in The Lancet Oncology.

The study indicates that, overall, the UK and Mediterranean countries such as Greece, Spain, and Portugal pay the lowest average unit manufacturer prices for a group of 31 originator cancer drugs (new drugs under patent).

And Sweden, Switzerland, and Germany pay the highest prices.

The greatest differences in price were noted for gemcitabine, which costs €209 per vial in New Zealand and €43 in Australia, and zoledronic acid, which costs €330 per vial in New Zealand but €128 in Greece.*

“Public payers in Germany are paying 223% more in terms of official prices for interferon alfa 2b for melanoma and leukemia treatment than those in Greece,” noted study author Sabine Vogler, PhD, of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies in Vienna, Austria.

“For gefitinib to treat non-small-lung cancer, the price in Germany is 172% higher than in New Zealand.”

To uncover these price differences, Dr Vogler and her colleagues reviewed official drug price data from the Pharma Price Information (PPI) service of the Austrian Public Health Institute for 16 European countries**, and from the pharmaceutical schedules in Australia and New Zealand.

The researchers compared what manufacturers charged for a unit (ie, price per tablet or vial) of 31 originator cancer drugs in June 2013.

None of these drugs had a unit price lower than €10. Four drugs (13%) had an average unit manufacturer price between €250 and €500, and 2 drugs (6%) had an average unit price between €500 and €1000.

Seven drugs (23%) had an average unit price higher than €1000. For example, plerixafor cost over €5000 per injection.

The price differences between the highest- and lowest-priced countries ranged from 28% to 50% for a third of the drugs sampled, between 50% and 100% for half of the drugs, and between 100% and 200% for 3 drugs (10%).

The researchers noted that information on real drug prices is scarce. The cancer drug prices they surveyed did not include confidential discounts such as those agreed upon in managed-entry arrangements that are increasingly used in countries such as Australia, Italy, the UK, and the Netherlands.

“Some high-income countries have managed to barter the manufacturers down to lower prices, but these agreements, including the agreed prices, are confidential,” Dr Vogler explained.

“Although these agreements ensure patient access to new drugs, other countries risk overpaying when setting drug prices through the common practice of external price referencing, or international price comparison, because they can only use the official undiscounted prices as a benchmark. There needs to be far more transparency.”

“We hope that our findings will provide concrete evidence for policymakers to take action to address high prices and ensure more transparency in cancer drug pricing so that costs and access to new drugs does not depend on where a patient lives.”

*Gemcitabine and zoledronic acid have generic versions in several countries, and originator prices were decreased in some countries following patent expiry but not in others.

**Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Finland, France, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK.

Chemotherapy drugs

Photo by Bill Branson

The price of cancer drugs varies widely between European countries, Australia, and New Zealand, according to a study published in The Lancet Oncology.

The study indicates that, overall, the UK and Mediterranean countries such as Greece, Spain, and Portugal pay the lowest average unit manufacturer prices for a group of 31 originator cancer drugs (new drugs under patent).

And Sweden, Switzerland, and Germany pay the highest prices.

The greatest differences in price were noted for gemcitabine, which costs €209 per vial in New Zealand and €43 in Australia, and zoledronic acid, which costs €330 per vial in New Zealand but €128 in Greece.*

“Public payers in Germany are paying 223% more in terms of official prices for interferon alfa 2b for melanoma and leukemia treatment than those in Greece,” noted study author Sabine Vogler, PhD, of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies in Vienna, Austria.

“For gefitinib to treat non-small-lung cancer, the price in Germany is 172% higher than in New Zealand.”

To uncover these price differences, Dr Vogler and her colleagues reviewed official drug price data from the Pharma Price Information (PPI) service of the Austrian Public Health Institute for 16 European countries**, and from the pharmaceutical schedules in Australia and New Zealand.

The researchers compared what manufacturers charged for a unit (ie, price per tablet or vial) of 31 originator cancer drugs in June 2013.

None of these drugs had a unit price lower than €10. Four drugs (13%) had an average unit manufacturer price between €250 and €500, and 2 drugs (6%) had an average unit price between €500 and €1000.

Seven drugs (23%) had an average unit price higher than €1000. For example, plerixafor cost over €5000 per injection.

The price differences between the highest- and lowest-priced countries ranged from 28% to 50% for a third of the drugs sampled, between 50% and 100% for half of the drugs, and between 100% and 200% for 3 drugs (10%).

The researchers noted that information on real drug prices is scarce. The cancer drug prices they surveyed did not include confidential discounts such as those agreed upon in managed-entry arrangements that are increasingly used in countries such as Australia, Italy, the UK, and the Netherlands.

“Some high-income countries have managed to barter the manufacturers down to lower prices, but these agreements, including the agreed prices, are confidential,” Dr Vogler explained.

“Although these agreements ensure patient access to new drugs, other countries risk overpaying when setting drug prices through the common practice of external price referencing, or international price comparison, because they can only use the official undiscounted prices as a benchmark. There needs to be far more transparency.”

“We hope that our findings will provide concrete evidence for policymakers to take action to address high prices and ensure more transparency in cancer drug pricing so that costs and access to new drugs does not depend on where a patient lives.”

*Gemcitabine and zoledronic acid have generic versions in several countries, and originator prices were decreased in some countries following patent expiry but not in others.

**Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Finland, France, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK.

Chemotherapy drugs

Photo by Bill Branson

The price of cancer drugs varies widely between European countries, Australia, and New Zealand, according to a study published in The Lancet Oncology.

The study indicates that, overall, the UK and Mediterranean countries such as Greece, Spain, and Portugal pay the lowest average unit manufacturer prices for a group of 31 originator cancer drugs (new drugs under patent).

And Sweden, Switzerland, and Germany pay the highest prices.

The greatest differences in price were noted for gemcitabine, which costs €209 per vial in New Zealand and €43 in Australia, and zoledronic acid, which costs €330 per vial in New Zealand but €128 in Greece.*

“Public payers in Germany are paying 223% more in terms of official prices for interferon alfa 2b for melanoma and leukemia treatment than those in Greece,” noted study author Sabine Vogler, PhD, of the WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies in Vienna, Austria.

“For gefitinib to treat non-small-lung cancer, the price in Germany is 172% higher than in New Zealand.”

To uncover these price differences, Dr Vogler and her colleagues reviewed official drug price data from the Pharma Price Information (PPI) service of the Austrian Public Health Institute for 16 European countries**, and from the pharmaceutical schedules in Australia and New Zealand.

The researchers compared what manufacturers charged for a unit (ie, price per tablet or vial) of 31 originator cancer drugs in June 2013.

None of these drugs had a unit price lower than €10. Four drugs (13%) had an average unit manufacturer price between €250 and €500, and 2 drugs (6%) had an average unit price between €500 and €1000.

Seven drugs (23%) had an average unit price higher than €1000. For example, plerixafor cost over €5000 per injection.

The price differences between the highest- and lowest-priced countries ranged from 28% to 50% for a third of the drugs sampled, between 50% and 100% for half of the drugs, and between 100% and 200% for 3 drugs (10%).

The researchers noted that information on real drug prices is scarce. The cancer drug prices they surveyed did not include confidential discounts such as those agreed upon in managed-entry arrangements that are increasingly used in countries such as Australia, Italy, the UK, and the Netherlands.

“Some high-income countries have managed to barter the manufacturers down to lower prices, but these agreements, including the agreed prices, are confidential,” Dr Vogler explained.

“Although these agreements ensure patient access to new drugs, other countries risk overpaying when setting drug prices through the common practice of external price referencing, or international price comparison, because they can only use the official undiscounted prices as a benchmark. There needs to be far more transparency.”

“We hope that our findings will provide concrete evidence for policymakers to take action to address high prices and ensure more transparency in cancer drug pricing so that costs and access to new drugs does not depend on where a patient lives.”

*Gemcitabine and zoledronic acid have generic versions in several countries, and originator prices were decreased in some countries following patent expiry but not in others.

**Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Finland, France, Italy, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the UK.

ORLANDO – Variants in mesenchymal stem cell genes that are important to bone and fat differentiation were associated with the risk of developing osteonecrosis in children under age 10 with acute lymphocytic leukemia, Dr. Seth E. Karol, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Mary Jo Dales

In a second study of children with ALL, Dr. Peter D. Cole, of Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, reported that patients under age 10 and homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase were at increased risk for avascular necrosis. For children over age 10 with ALL, homozygosity for the 2R polymorphism was linked with an increased risk of fracture.

The pathophysiology of bony morbidity differs depending on the patient’s age, Dr. Cole noted. “This is the first report identifying a genetic risk factor for avascular necrosis specifically among children younger than 10 years, a group where AVN is significantly less frequent.”

Bony morbidity is more common in children over age 10 with ALL, and related to exposure to crucial components of leukemia therapy including corticosteroids, asparaginase, and methotrexate. Therapy-induced osteonecrosis has become a limiting toxicity in the intensification of treatment for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), particularly among patients 10-20 years old.

However, children under 10 make up 75% of new pediatric ALL diagnoses, Dr. Karol said. So even though osteonecrosis occurs in just 3%-10% of children under age 10, those patients make up 40% of the cases.

In Dr. Cole’s study, research focused on 19 common genetic polymorphisms in peripheral blood or bone marrow collected at remission from 637 children treated for ALL.

Mary Jo Dales

The research targeted common variants within genes related to glucocorticoid metabolism, oxidative damage, and folate physiology. Children above and below the age of 10 years were evaluated separately. Multivariable models for bony morbidity included sex, WBC at diagnosis, race, final risk group, and asparaginase randomization. Blood was collected during treatment for analysis of serum and RBC folate.

Of the 637 patients tested, 627 achieved a complete remission and received post-induction therapy; about 10% of patients experienced avascular necrosis and 22% had at least 1 fracture. Both morbidities were significantly more common in patients aged 10 and older; 23% had avascular necrosis and 31% had a fracture. In younger children, 5.5% had avascular necrosis and 19% had fractures.

Of 626 patients tested, about 21% were homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase. In children less than age 10, this 2R/2R genotype was associated with nearly three times the rate of 5-year estimated incidence of avascular necrosis, almost 12%, as compared to the 4% rate seen in children with 2R/3R or 3R/3R genotypes.

Among children over age 10, this polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of bony fracture (multivariable HR 2.13; 95% CI 1.13-3.99; P=0.019).

Bony morbidity was not associated with the other tested polymorphisms previously linked to risk of avascular necrosis, including PAI-1 (rs6092), ABCB1 (rs1045642), and the vitamin D receptor Fok1 restriction site (rs228570). No significant association was observed between thymidylate synthase genotype and serum or RBC folate at any time point during therapy.

In the study reported by Dr. Karol, the researchers studied a discovery cohort of 82 cases of osteonecrosis and 287 controls treated on the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) NCI standard risk ALL protocol and tested for replication in 817 children less than 10 treated on the COG high risk ALL protocol.

Both discovery and replication genome-wide association studies adjusted for demographic and therapy variables known to modify the risk of osteonecrosis. Genes associated with the identified single nucleotide polymorphisms were evaluated for enrichment in biologically relevant pathways.

Within the discovery cohort and replication cohorts, top ranked variants were located near bone morphogenic protein 7 (BMP7) and PROX1-antisense RNA1. The top replicated non-synonymous SNP, rs34144324, was in a glutamate receptor gene, and the genotyping of this variant was verified in the whole exome sequencing data.

Pathway analysis of genes linked to top SNPs demonstrated enrichment in glutamate receptor signaling and adipogenesis pathways.

“Patients with osteonecrosis are 8-15 times more likely to possesses genetic variants near a gene important to bone development (BMP7) and between 3-6 times more likely to have variants near a gene important to fat levels in the blood (PROX1),” Dr. Karol reported.

Dr. Cole and Dr. Karol had no relevant financial disclosures.

mdales@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @maryjodales

ORLANDO – Variants in mesenchymal stem cell genes that are important to bone and fat differentiation were associated with the risk of developing osteonecrosis in children under age 10 with acute lymphocytic leukemia, Dr. Seth E. Karol, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Mary Jo Dales

In a second study of children with ALL, Dr. Peter D. Cole, of Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, reported that patients under age 10 and homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase were at increased risk for avascular necrosis. For children over age 10 with ALL, homozygosity for the 2R polymorphism was linked with an increased risk of fracture.

The pathophysiology of bony morbidity differs depending on the patient’s age, Dr. Cole noted. “This is the first report identifying a genetic risk factor for avascular necrosis specifically among children younger than 10 years, a group where AVN is significantly less frequent.”

Bony morbidity is more common in children over age 10 with ALL, and related to exposure to crucial components of leukemia therapy including corticosteroids, asparaginase, and methotrexate. Therapy-induced osteonecrosis has become a limiting toxicity in the intensification of treatment for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), particularly among patients 10-20 years old.

However, children under 10 make up 75% of new pediatric ALL diagnoses, Dr. Karol said. So even though osteonecrosis occurs in just 3%-10% of children under age 10, those patients make up 40% of the cases.

In Dr. Cole’s study, research focused on 19 common genetic polymorphisms in peripheral blood or bone marrow collected at remission from 637 children treated for ALL.

Mary Jo Dales

The research targeted common variants within genes related to glucocorticoid metabolism, oxidative damage, and folate physiology. Children above and below the age of 10 years were evaluated separately. Multivariable models for bony morbidity included sex, WBC at diagnosis, race, final risk group, and asparaginase randomization. Blood was collected during treatment for analysis of serum and RBC folate.

Of the 637 patients tested, 627 achieved a complete remission and received post-induction therapy; about 10% of patients experienced avascular necrosis and 22% had at least 1 fracture. Both morbidities were significantly more common in patients aged 10 and older; 23% had avascular necrosis and 31% had a fracture. In younger children, 5.5% had avascular necrosis and 19% had fractures.

Of 626 patients tested, about 21% were homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase. In children less than age 10, this 2R/2R genotype was associated with nearly three times the rate of 5-year estimated incidence of avascular necrosis, almost 12%, as compared to the 4% rate seen in children with 2R/3R or 3R/3R genotypes.

Among children over age 10, this polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of bony fracture (multivariable HR 2.13; 95% CI 1.13-3.99; P=0.019).

Bony morbidity was not associated with the other tested polymorphisms previously linked to risk of avascular necrosis, including PAI-1 (rs6092), ABCB1 (rs1045642), and the vitamin D receptor Fok1 restriction site (rs228570). No significant association was observed between thymidylate synthase genotype and serum or RBC folate at any time point during therapy.

In the study reported by Dr. Karol, the researchers studied a discovery cohort of 82 cases of osteonecrosis and 287 controls treated on the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) NCI standard risk ALL protocol and tested for replication in 817 children less than 10 treated on the COG high risk ALL protocol.

Both discovery and replication genome-wide association studies adjusted for demographic and therapy variables known to modify the risk of osteonecrosis. Genes associated with the identified single nucleotide polymorphisms were evaluated for enrichment in biologically relevant pathways.

Within the discovery cohort and replication cohorts, top ranked variants were located near bone morphogenic protein 7 (BMP7) and PROX1-antisense RNA1. The top replicated non-synonymous SNP, rs34144324, was in a glutamate receptor gene, and the genotyping of this variant was verified in the whole exome sequencing data.

Pathway analysis of genes linked to top SNPs demonstrated enrichment in glutamate receptor signaling and adipogenesis pathways.

“Patients with osteonecrosis are 8-15 times more likely to possesses genetic variants near a gene important to bone development (BMP7) and between 3-6 times more likely to have variants near a gene important to fat levels in the blood (PROX1),” Dr. Karol reported.

Dr. Cole and Dr. Karol had no relevant financial disclosures.

mdales@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @maryjodales

ORLANDO – Variants in mesenchymal stem cell genes that are important to bone and fat differentiation were associated with the risk of developing osteonecrosis in children under age 10 with acute lymphocytic leukemia, Dr. Seth E. Karol, of St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, reported at the annual meeting of the American Society of Hematology.

Mary Jo Dales

In a second study of children with ALL, Dr. Peter D. Cole, of Montefiore Medical Center, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, reported that patients under age 10 and homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase were at increased risk for avascular necrosis. For children over age 10 with ALL, homozygosity for the 2R polymorphism was linked with an increased risk of fracture.

The pathophysiology of bony morbidity differs depending on the patient’s age, Dr. Cole noted. “This is the first report identifying a genetic risk factor for avascular necrosis specifically among children younger than 10 years, a group where AVN is significantly less frequent.”

Bony morbidity is more common in children over age 10 with ALL, and related to exposure to crucial components of leukemia therapy including corticosteroids, asparaginase, and methotrexate. Therapy-induced osteonecrosis has become a limiting toxicity in the intensification of treatment for pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), particularly among patients 10-20 years old.

However, children under 10 make up 75% of new pediatric ALL diagnoses, Dr. Karol said. So even though osteonecrosis occurs in just 3%-10% of children under age 10, those patients make up 40% of the cases.

In Dr. Cole’s study, research focused on 19 common genetic polymorphisms in peripheral blood or bone marrow collected at remission from 637 children treated for ALL.

Mary Jo Dales

The research targeted common variants within genes related to glucocorticoid metabolism, oxidative damage, and folate physiology. Children above and below the age of 10 years were evaluated separately. Multivariable models for bony morbidity included sex, WBC at diagnosis, race, final risk group, and asparaginase randomization. Blood was collected during treatment for analysis of serum and RBC folate.

Of the 637 patients tested, 627 achieved a complete remission and received post-induction therapy; about 10% of patients experienced avascular necrosis and 22% had at least 1 fracture. Both morbidities were significantly more common in patients aged 10 and older; 23% had avascular necrosis and 31% had a fracture. In younger children, 5.5% had avascular necrosis and 19% had fractures.

Of 626 patients tested, about 21% were homozygous for the 2R polymorphism in thymidylate synthase. In children less than age 10, this 2R/2R genotype was associated with nearly three times the rate of 5-year estimated incidence of avascular necrosis, almost 12%, as compared to the 4% rate seen in children with 2R/3R or 3R/3R genotypes.

Among children over age 10, this polymorphism was associated with an increased risk of bony fracture (multivariable HR 2.13; 95% CI 1.13-3.99; P=0.019).

Bony morbidity was not associated with the other tested polymorphisms previously linked to risk of avascular necrosis, including PAI-1 (rs6092), ABCB1 (rs1045642), and the vitamin D receptor Fok1 restriction site (rs228570). No significant association was observed between thymidylate synthase genotype and serum or RBC folate at any time point during therapy.

In the study reported by Dr. Karol, the researchers studied a discovery cohort of 82 cases of osteonecrosis and 287 controls treated on the Children’s Oncology Group (COG) NCI standard risk ALL protocol and tested for replication in 817 children less than 10 treated on the COG high risk ALL protocol.

Both discovery and replication genome-wide association studies adjusted for demographic and therapy variables known to modify the risk of osteonecrosis. Genes associated with the identified single nucleotide polymorphisms were evaluated for enrichment in biologically relevant pathways.

Within the discovery cohort and replication cohorts, top ranked variants were located near bone morphogenic protein 7 (BMP7) and PROX1-antisense RNA1. The top replicated non-synonymous SNP, rs34144324, was in a glutamate receptor gene, and the genotyping of this variant was verified in the whole exome sequencing data.

Pathway analysis of genes linked to top SNPs demonstrated enrichment in glutamate receptor signaling and adipogenesis pathways.

“Patients with osteonecrosis are 8-15 times more likely to possesses genetic variants near a gene important to bone development (BMP7) and between 3-6 times more likely to have variants near a gene important to fat levels in the blood (PROX1),” Dr. Karol reported.

Dr. Cole and Dr. Karol had no relevant financial disclosures.

mdales@frontlinemedcom.com

On Twitter @maryjodales

ORLANDO – Pill containers are not known for eloquence, but they tell a disturbing tale of patient over-reporting of adherence to essential leukemia maintenance therapy.

Among 416 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first remission, the number of days patients or their guardians reported that the child took his/her daily oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) for maintenance was significantly higher than the number of days the pill bottles were opened, as reported by an electronic medication management system.

“Over-reporting was more likely in patients who were non-adherent, older, of non-white race, and came from households with lower paternal education,” said Dr. Wendy Landier from the Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The results suggest that patient self-reports of adherence to 6MP oral maintenance therapy may be unreliable, and should be taken with a grain of salt, Dr. Landier said in a briefing at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting.

The investigators had previously reported that poor adherence to oral 6MP maintenance therapy was associated with a nealy four-fold increased risk for relapse (JCO 30[17]:2094-101, Blood 124[15]:2345-53).

To better understand why some patients are poorly adherent to 6MP maintenance therapy, the investigator provided 416 children with ALL in first remission with pill containers equipped with a Medication Event Management System (MEMS) that electronically recorded the dates and times that each pill bottle was opened over a 16-week period. Patients age 12 and older or the parents/guardians of younger children were also asked to report the date and time of each daily oral dose at the end of each 28-day study month.

The authors collected and evaluated a total of 1344 patient-months of self-report and MEMS data, compared the records, and stratified patients as either “perfect reporters”, whose self-reports matched the objective MEMS data; “over-reporters”, who self-report exceeded the MEMS data on 5 or more days per month for more than half of study months, and “others.”The median patient age at study entry was 6 years (range 2 to 20 years).

The authors reported in their study that 40.4% of patients were not adherent to oral 6MP therapy, as evidence by a mismatch between self-report and objective (MEMS) reporting.

The overall adjusted mean number of self-reported days per month that patients took their pills ranged from a low of 25.8+5.3 to a high of 26.1+4.5. The pill bottles, however, told a different tale, reporting that they had been opened from a low of 22.8 ± 6.4 to a high of 25.4 ± 4.5 days per month.

Month-by-month correlations between self-report and MEMS 0.36 to 0.58, and were all statistically significant.

In logistic regression models adjusted for thiopurine methyltransferase (TMPT) genotype, 6MP dose intensity, and 6-thiogaunine levels in red cells, significant predictors for over-reporting included older age, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 for every 1-year increase in age (P = .04); Hispanic origin (OR 2.4, P = .02); Asian origin, (OR 3.1 P = .02; African-American origin (OR 5.3, P < .001); paternal education level lower than college (OR 2.1, P = .02); and 6MP non-adherence (OR 8.6, P < .0001).

Dr. Landier noted that 78.6% of over-reporters were non-adherent, compared with only 2% of perfect reporters.

“The real importance of this paper from my perspective is this: there is a famous quote that if the patient doesn’t take the medication it can’t work and in an era where we’re trying to improve the care of patients, one of the things we oftentimes forget that if the medication isn’t being taken, the patient can’t get better from it,” said Dr. Mark Crowther, Professor and Chair in the Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Crowther moderated a briefing where Dr. Cserti-Gazdewich presented the data.

The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health and from St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Landier and Dr. Crowther reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

ORLANDO – Pill containers are not known for eloquence, but they tell a disturbing tale of patient over-reporting of adherence to essential leukemia maintenance therapy.

Among 416 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first remission, the number of days patients or their guardians reported that the child took his/her daily oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) for maintenance was significantly higher than the number of days the pill bottles were opened, as reported by an electronic medication management system.

“Over-reporting was more likely in patients who were non-adherent, older, of non-white race, and came from households with lower paternal education,” said Dr. Wendy Landier from the Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The results suggest that patient self-reports of adherence to 6MP oral maintenance therapy may be unreliable, and should be taken with a grain of salt, Dr. Landier said in a briefing at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting.

The investigators had previously reported that poor adherence to oral 6MP maintenance therapy was associated with a nealy four-fold increased risk for relapse (JCO 30[17]:2094-101, Blood 124[15]:2345-53).

To better understand why some patients are poorly adherent to 6MP maintenance therapy, the investigator provided 416 children with ALL in first remission with pill containers equipped with a Medication Event Management System (MEMS) that electronically recorded the dates and times that each pill bottle was opened over a 16-week period. Patients age 12 and older or the parents/guardians of younger children were also asked to report the date and time of each daily oral dose at the end of each 28-day study month.

The authors collected and evaluated a total of 1344 patient-months of self-report and MEMS data, compared the records, and stratified patients as either “perfect reporters”, whose self-reports matched the objective MEMS data; “over-reporters”, who self-report exceeded the MEMS data on 5 or more days per month for more than half of study months, and “others.”The median patient age at study entry was 6 years (range 2 to 20 years).

The authors reported in their study that 40.4% of patients were not adherent to oral 6MP therapy, as evidence by a mismatch between self-report and objective (MEMS) reporting.

The overall adjusted mean number of self-reported days per month that patients took their pills ranged from a low of 25.8+5.3 to a high of 26.1+4.5. The pill bottles, however, told a different tale, reporting that they had been opened from a low of 22.8 ± 6.4 to a high of 25.4 ± 4.5 days per month.

Month-by-month correlations between self-report and MEMS 0.36 to 0.58, and were all statistically significant.

In logistic regression models adjusted for thiopurine methyltransferase (TMPT) genotype, 6MP dose intensity, and 6-thiogaunine levels in red cells, significant predictors for over-reporting included older age, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 for every 1-year increase in age (P = .04); Hispanic origin (OR 2.4, P = .02); Asian origin, (OR 3.1 P = .02; African-American origin (OR 5.3, P < .001); paternal education level lower than college (OR 2.1, P = .02); and 6MP non-adherence (OR 8.6, P < .0001).

Dr. Landier noted that 78.6% of over-reporters were non-adherent, compared with only 2% of perfect reporters.

“The real importance of this paper from my perspective is this: there is a famous quote that if the patient doesn’t take the medication it can’t work and in an era where we’re trying to improve the care of patients, one of the things we oftentimes forget that if the medication isn’t being taken, the patient can’t get better from it,” said Dr. Mark Crowther, Professor and Chair in the Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Crowther moderated a briefing where Dr. Cserti-Gazdewich presented the data.

The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health and from St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Landier and Dr. Crowther reported no relevant conflicts of interest.

ORLANDO – Pill containers are not known for eloquence, but they tell a disturbing tale of patient over-reporting of adherence to essential leukemia maintenance therapy.

Among 416 children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) in first remission, the number of days patients or their guardians reported that the child took his/her daily oral 6-mercaptopurine (6MP) for maintenance was significantly higher than the number of days the pill bottles were opened, as reported by an electronic medication management system.

“Over-reporting was more likely in patients who were non-adherent, older, of non-white race, and came from households with lower paternal education,” said Dr. Wendy Landier from the Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The results suggest that patient self-reports of adherence to 6MP oral maintenance therapy may be unreliable, and should be taken with a grain of salt, Dr. Landier said in a briefing at the American Society of Hematology annual meeting.

The investigators had previously reported that poor adherence to oral 6MP maintenance therapy was associated with a nealy four-fold increased risk for relapse (JCO 30[17]:2094-101, Blood 124[15]:2345-53).

To better understand why some patients are poorly adherent to 6MP maintenance therapy, the investigator provided 416 children with ALL in first remission with pill containers equipped with a Medication Event Management System (MEMS) that electronically recorded the dates and times that each pill bottle was opened over a 16-week period. Patients age 12 and older or the parents/guardians of younger children were also asked to report the date and time of each daily oral dose at the end of each 28-day study month.

The authors collected and evaluated a total of 1344 patient-months of self-report and MEMS data, compared the records, and stratified patients as either “perfect reporters”, whose self-reports matched the objective MEMS data; “over-reporters”, who self-report exceeded the MEMS data on 5 or more days per month for more than half of study months, and “others.”The median patient age at study entry was 6 years (range 2 to 20 years).

The authors reported in their study that 40.4% of patients were not adherent to oral 6MP therapy, as evidence by a mismatch between self-report and objective (MEMS) reporting.

The overall adjusted mean number of self-reported days per month that patients took their pills ranged from a low of 25.8+5.3 to a high of 26.1+4.5. The pill bottles, however, told a different tale, reporting that they had been opened from a low of 22.8 ± 6.4 to a high of 25.4 ± 4.5 days per month.

Month-by-month correlations between self-report and MEMS 0.36 to 0.58, and were all statistically significant.

In logistic regression models adjusted for thiopurine methyltransferase (TMPT) genotype, 6MP dose intensity, and 6-thiogaunine levels in red cells, significant predictors for over-reporting included older age, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.07 for every 1-year increase in age (P = .04); Hispanic origin (OR 2.4, P = .02); Asian origin, (OR 3.1 P = .02; African-American origin (OR 5.3, P < .001); paternal education level lower than college (OR 2.1, P = .02); and 6MP non-adherence (OR 8.6, P < .0001).

Dr. Landier noted that 78.6% of over-reporters were non-adherent, compared with only 2% of perfect reporters.

“The real importance of this paper from my perspective is this: there is a famous quote that if the patient doesn’t take the medication it can’t work and in an era where we’re trying to improve the care of patients, one of the things we oftentimes forget that if the medication isn’t being taken, the patient can’t get better from it,” said Dr. Mark Crowther, Professor and Chair in the Department of Pathology and Molecular Medicine of McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Dr. Crowther moderated a briefing where Dr. Cserti-Gazdewich presented the data.

The study was supported by grants from the National Institutes of Health and from St. Baldrick’s Foundation. Dr. Landier and Dr. Crowther reported no relevant conflicts of interest.