User login
Drug receives priority review for FL
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).
With this sBLA, Genentech is seeking approval for obinutuzumab to be used, first in combination with chemotherapy and then alone as maintenance, in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for obinutuzumab by December 23, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by results of the GALLIUM study, which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.
About obinutuzumab
Obinutuzumab is a glycoengineered, humanized, monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to the extracellular domain of the CD20 antigen on B cells.
The drug is FDA-approved for use in combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Obinutuzumab is also approved to treat FL patients who relapse after, or are refractory to, a rituximab-containing regimen. In these patients, obinutuzumab is given first in combination with bendamustine and then alone as maintenance.
The full prescribing information for obinutuzumab is available at http://www.Gazyva.com.
About the GALLIUM study
GALLIUM enrolled 1401 patients with previously untreated, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, including 1202 with FL.
Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).
The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisolone), and bendamustine.
Patients who received obinutuzumab had significantly better progression-free survival than patients who received rituximab. The 3-year progression-free survival rate was 73.3% in the rituximab arm and 80% in the obinutuzumab arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66, P=0.0012).
There was no significant difference between the treatment arms with regard to overall survival. The 3-year overall survival was 92.1% in the rituximab arm and 94% in the obinutuzumab arm (HR=0.75, P=0.21).
The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 98.3% in the rituximab arm and 99.5% in the obinutuzumab arm. The incidence of serious AEs was 39.9% and 46.1%, respectively.
The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was higher among patients who received obinutuzumab.
Grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in at least 5% of patients in either arm (rituximab and obinutuzumab, respectively) included neutropenia (67.8% and 74.6%), leukopenia (37.9% and 43.9%), febrile neutropenia (4.9% and 6.9%), infections and infestations (3.7% and 6.7%), and thrombocytopenia (2.7% and 6.1%). 
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).
With this sBLA, Genentech is seeking approval for obinutuzumab to be used, first in combination with chemotherapy and then alone as maintenance, in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for obinutuzumab by December 23, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by results of the GALLIUM study, which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.
About obinutuzumab
Obinutuzumab is a glycoengineered, humanized, monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to the extracellular domain of the CD20 antigen on B cells.
The drug is FDA-approved for use in combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Obinutuzumab is also approved to treat FL patients who relapse after, or are refractory to, a rituximab-containing regimen. In these patients, obinutuzumab is given first in combination with bendamustine and then alone as maintenance.
The full prescribing information for obinutuzumab is available at http://www.Gazyva.com.
About the GALLIUM study
GALLIUM enrolled 1401 patients with previously untreated, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, including 1202 with FL.
Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).
The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisolone), and bendamustine.
Patients who received obinutuzumab had significantly better progression-free survival than patients who received rituximab. The 3-year progression-free survival rate was 73.3% in the rituximab arm and 80% in the obinutuzumab arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66, P=0.0012).
There was no significant difference between the treatment arms with regard to overall survival. The 3-year overall survival was 92.1% in the rituximab arm and 94% in the obinutuzumab arm (HR=0.75, P=0.21).
The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 98.3% in the rituximab arm and 99.5% in the obinutuzumab arm. The incidence of serious AEs was 39.9% and 46.1%, respectively.
The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was higher among patients who received obinutuzumab.
Grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in at least 5% of patients in either arm (rituximab and obinutuzumab, respectively) included neutropenia (67.8% and 74.6%), leukopenia (37.9% and 43.9%), febrile neutropenia (4.9% and 6.9%), infections and infestations (3.7% and 6.7%), and thrombocytopenia (2.7% and 6.1%).
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) for obinutuzumab (Gazyva®).
With this sBLA, Genentech is seeking approval for obinutuzumab to be used, first in combination with chemotherapy and then alone as maintenance, in patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for obinutuzumab by December 23, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by results of the GALLIUM study, which were presented at the 2016 ASH Annual Meeting.
About obinutuzumab
Obinutuzumab is a glycoengineered, humanized, monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to the extracellular domain of the CD20 antigen on B cells.
The drug is FDA-approved for use in combination with chlorambucil to treat patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
Obinutuzumab is also approved to treat FL patients who relapse after, or are refractory to, a rituximab-containing regimen. In these patients, obinutuzumab is given first in combination with bendamustine and then alone as maintenance.
The full prescribing information for obinutuzumab is available at http://www.Gazyva.com.
About the GALLIUM study
GALLIUM enrolled 1401 patients with previously untreated, indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma, including 1202 with FL.
Half of the FL patients (n=601) were randomized to receive obinutuzumab plus chemotherapy (followed by obinutuzumab maintenance for up to 2 years), and half were randomized to rituximab plus chemotherapy (followed by rituximab maintenance for up to 2 years).
The different chemotherapies used were CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone), CVP (cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisolone), and bendamustine.
Patients who received obinutuzumab had significantly better progression-free survival than patients who received rituximab. The 3-year progression-free survival rate was 73.3% in the rituximab arm and 80% in the obinutuzumab arm (hazard ratio [HR]=0.66, P=0.0012).
There was no significant difference between the treatment arms with regard to overall survival. The 3-year overall survival was 92.1% in the rituximab arm and 94% in the obinutuzumab arm (HR=0.75, P=0.21).
The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was 98.3% in the rituximab arm and 99.5% in the obinutuzumab arm. The incidence of serious AEs was 39.9% and 46.1%, respectively.
The incidence of grade 3 or higher AEs was higher among patients who received obinutuzumab.
Grade 3 or higher AEs occurring in at least 5% of patients in either arm (rituximab and obinutuzumab, respectively) included neutropenia (67.8% and 74.6%), leukopenia (37.9% and 43.9%), febrile neutropenia (4.9% and 6.9%), infections and infestations (3.7% and 6.7%), and thrombocytopenia (2.7% and 6.1%).
Drug granted breakthrough designation for CTCL
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted breakthrough therapy designation to mogamulizumab for the treatment of adults with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) who have received at least 1 prior systemic therapy.
Mogamulizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4. It is being developed by Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.
The breakthrough designation for mogamulizumab in CTCL is based on data from the phase 3 MAVORIC study, the largest randomized trial in CTCL.
In MAVORIC, researchers are comparing mogamulizumab and vorinostat in patients with CTCL (both mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome) who have failed at least 1 prior systemic treatment.
In April, Kyowa Hakko Kirin announced results from this trial, which showed that patients treated with mogamulizumab have significantly better progression-free survival than patients treated with vorinostat. The company also said mogamulizumab has a tolerable safety profile.
Kyowa Hakko Kirin has not provided any data from MAVORIC but is working with investigators on the future presentation and publication of results from this trial.
Results of a phase 1/2 study of mogamulizumab in previously treated CTCL patients were published in Blood in March 2015.
About breakthrough designation
The FDA’s breakthrough designation is intended to expedite the development and review of new treatments for serious or life-threatening conditions.
The designation entitles the company developing a therapy to more intensive FDA guidance on an efficient and accelerated development program, as well as eligibility for other actions to expedite FDA review, such as rolling submission and priority review.
To earn breakthrough designation, a treatment must show encouraging early clinical results demonstrating substantial improvement over available therapies with regard to a clinically significant endpoint, or it must fulfill an unmet need.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted breakthrough therapy designation to mogamulizumab for the treatment of adults with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) who have received at least 1 prior systemic therapy.
Mogamulizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4. It is being developed by Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.
The breakthrough designation for mogamulizumab in CTCL is based on data from the phase 3 MAVORIC study, the largest randomized trial in CTCL.
In MAVORIC, researchers are comparing mogamulizumab and vorinostat in patients with CTCL (both mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome) who have failed at least 1 prior systemic treatment.
In April, Kyowa Hakko Kirin announced results from this trial, which showed that patients treated with mogamulizumab have significantly better progression-free survival than patients treated with vorinostat. The company also said mogamulizumab has a tolerable safety profile.
Kyowa Hakko Kirin has not provided any data from MAVORIC but is working with investigators on the future presentation and publication of results from this trial.
Results of a phase 1/2 study of mogamulizumab in previously treated CTCL patients were published in Blood in March 2015.
About breakthrough designation
The FDA’s breakthrough designation is intended to expedite the development and review of new treatments for serious or life-threatening conditions.
The designation entitles the company developing a therapy to more intensive FDA guidance on an efficient and accelerated development program, as well as eligibility for other actions to expedite FDA review, such as rolling submission and priority review.
To earn breakthrough designation, a treatment must show encouraging early clinical results demonstrating substantial improvement over available therapies with regard to a clinically significant endpoint, or it must fulfill an unmet need.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted breakthrough therapy designation to mogamulizumab for the treatment of adults with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL) who have received at least 1 prior systemic therapy.
Mogamulizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CCR4. It is being developed by Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.
The breakthrough designation for mogamulizumab in CTCL is based on data from the phase 3 MAVORIC study, the largest randomized trial in CTCL.
In MAVORIC, researchers are comparing mogamulizumab and vorinostat in patients with CTCL (both mycosis fungoides and Sézary syndrome) who have failed at least 1 prior systemic treatment.
In April, Kyowa Hakko Kirin announced results from this trial, which showed that patients treated with mogamulizumab have significantly better progression-free survival than patients treated with vorinostat. The company also said mogamulizumab has a tolerable safety profile.
Kyowa Hakko Kirin has not provided any data from MAVORIC but is working with investigators on the future presentation and publication of results from this trial.
Results of a phase 1/2 study of mogamulizumab in previously treated CTCL patients were published in Blood in March 2015.
About breakthrough designation
The FDA’s breakthrough designation is intended to expedite the development and review of new treatments for serious or life-threatening conditions.
The designation entitles the company developing a therapy to more intensive FDA guidance on an efficient and accelerated development program, as well as eligibility for other actions to expedite FDA review, such as rolling submission and priority review.
To earn breakthrough designation, a treatment must show encouraging early clinical results demonstrating substantial improvement over available therapies with regard to a clinically significant endpoint, or it must fulfill an unmet need.
Researchers estimate risk of death from BIA-ALCL
The risk of death from breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is less than 1 in a million, according to a study published in Aesthetic Surgery Journal.
Researchers analyzed data on breast implants and estimated the risk of death from BIA-ALCL to be 0.4 micromorts for a woman with bilateral, textured implants.
One micromort means a person’s risk of dying is 1 in a million. For context, a person who drives a car for 1 hour per day is said to have a micromort of 2, which is 5 times the BIA-ALCL micromort.
The researchers noted that there are no documented cases of BIA-ALCL in patients who have only received smooth-surface breast implants. Therefore, the risk of death from BIA-ALCL in a woman with smooth breast implants is “essentially 0.”
“We conducted this micromort study to bring real-life perspective for all existing and potential breast augmentation patients who might have reservations about implants based on the recent media coverage indicating that breast implants can be fatal—a sensationalized take on a very rare and very treatable condition,” said study author William P. Adams, Jr, MD, a professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas.
“This analysis resonates with patients. They get it when you explain to a patient that their micromort risk from skiing for 1 day is 2 times higher than the micromort risk of having a textured breast implant for their lifetime—or that traveling 8 hours by car carries a 40-times higher micromort risk than having 2 textured breast implants for their lifetime.”
Dr Adams and his co-author analyzed data from the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, and the Austrian Breast Implant Register, as well as studies by Allergan and Sientra.
This led to a “conservative estimate” that approximately 30 million patients have textured breast implants worldwide (not including breast reconstructions).
This figure and the report of 12 deaths from BIA-ALCL worldwide suggest the risk of death from BIA-ALCL is 0.4 micromorts per patient (with 2 textured implants) or 0.2 micromorts per textured implant.
“The findings of this study are very important for patient education,” said study author David A. Sieber, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in San Francisco, California.
“The clear lymphoproliferative nature of BIA-ALCL, along with the calculated risks associated with its diagnosis, should be used for discussion during new consultations or at the time of presentation for evaluation of delayed-onset seromas.”
The risk of death from breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is less than 1 in a million, according to a study published in Aesthetic Surgery Journal.
Researchers analyzed data on breast implants and estimated the risk of death from BIA-ALCL to be 0.4 micromorts for a woman with bilateral, textured implants.
One micromort means a person’s risk of dying is 1 in a million. For context, a person who drives a car for 1 hour per day is said to have a micromort of 2, which is 5 times the BIA-ALCL micromort.
The researchers noted that there are no documented cases of BIA-ALCL in patients who have only received smooth-surface breast implants. Therefore, the risk of death from BIA-ALCL in a woman with smooth breast implants is “essentially 0.”
“We conducted this micromort study to bring real-life perspective for all existing and potential breast augmentation patients who might have reservations about implants based on the recent media coverage indicating that breast implants can be fatal—a sensationalized take on a very rare and very treatable condition,” said study author William P. Adams, Jr, MD, a professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas.
“This analysis resonates with patients. They get it when you explain to a patient that their micromort risk from skiing for 1 day is 2 times higher than the micromort risk of having a textured breast implant for their lifetime—or that traveling 8 hours by car carries a 40-times higher micromort risk than having 2 textured breast implants for their lifetime.”
Dr Adams and his co-author analyzed data from the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, and the Austrian Breast Implant Register, as well as studies by Allergan and Sientra.
This led to a “conservative estimate” that approximately 30 million patients have textured breast implants worldwide (not including breast reconstructions).
This figure and the report of 12 deaths from BIA-ALCL worldwide suggest the risk of death from BIA-ALCL is 0.4 micromorts per patient (with 2 textured implants) or 0.2 micromorts per textured implant.
“The findings of this study are very important for patient education,” said study author David A. Sieber, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in San Francisco, California.
“The clear lymphoproliferative nature of BIA-ALCL, along with the calculated risks associated with its diagnosis, should be used for discussion during new consultations or at the time of presentation for evaluation of delayed-onset seromas.”
The risk of death from breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is less than 1 in a million, according to a study published in Aesthetic Surgery Journal.
Researchers analyzed data on breast implants and estimated the risk of death from BIA-ALCL to be 0.4 micromorts for a woman with bilateral, textured implants.
One micromort means a person’s risk of dying is 1 in a million. For context, a person who drives a car for 1 hour per day is said to have a micromort of 2, which is 5 times the BIA-ALCL micromort.
The researchers noted that there are no documented cases of BIA-ALCL in patients who have only received smooth-surface breast implants. Therefore, the risk of death from BIA-ALCL in a woman with smooth breast implants is “essentially 0.”
“We conducted this micromort study to bring real-life perspective for all existing and potential breast augmentation patients who might have reservations about implants based on the recent media coverage indicating that breast implants can be fatal—a sensationalized take on a very rare and very treatable condition,” said study author William P. Adams, Jr, MD, a professor in the Department of Plastic Surgery at the University of Texas Southwestern in Dallas.
“This analysis resonates with patients. They get it when you explain to a patient that their micromort risk from skiing for 1 day is 2 times higher than the micromort risk of having a textured breast implant for their lifetime—or that traveling 8 hours by car carries a 40-times higher micromort risk than having 2 textured breast implants for their lifetime.”
Dr Adams and his co-author analyzed data from the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, the American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, and the Austrian Breast Implant Register, as well as studies by Allergan and Sientra.
This led to a “conservative estimate” that approximately 30 million patients have textured breast implants worldwide (not including breast reconstructions).
This figure and the report of 12 deaths from BIA-ALCL worldwide suggest the risk of death from BIA-ALCL is 0.4 micromorts per patient (with 2 textured implants) or 0.2 micromorts per textured implant.
“The findings of this study are very important for patient education,” said study author David A. Sieber, MD, a plastic surgeon in private practice in San Francisco, California.
“The clear lymphoproliferative nature of BIA-ALCL, along with the calculated risks associated with its diagnosis, should be used for discussion during new consultations or at the time of presentation for evaluation of delayed-onset seromas.”
High healthcare costs follow CCSs into adulthood
New research suggests survivors of childhood cancer can incur high out-of-pocket medical costs into adulthood and may forgo healthcare to lessen this financial burden.
The study showed that childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) were more likely than non-CCSs to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income.
And these high costs were associated with delaying care or skipping it altogether.
These findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“Survivors who reported spending a higher percentage of their income on out-of-pocket medical costs were not only more likely to report financial burden, they also were at risk for undertaking behaviors potentially detrimental to their health in order to save money,” said study author Ryan Nipp, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston.
“While studies have identified associations between financial burden and patients’ treatment outcomes, quality of life, and even survival among adults with cancer, as far as we know, this is the first to report these associations in survivors of childhood cancer.”
For this research, Dr Nipp and his colleagues surveyed participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. This included adults who had been treated for childhood cancers between 1970 and 1986 along with a control group of siblings not affected by cancer.
In 2011 and 2012, participants were asked to provide information about their health insurance, the out-of-pocket healthcare costs they paid during the previous year, and sociodemographic information such as annual income and employment status.
The researchers also asked participants whether medical costs posed a financial burden and, if so, what measures they had taken to deal with that burden.
Study population
The researchers received complete responses from 580 CCSs and 173 of their siblings without a history of cancer. The most common cancer diagnosis was leukemia (33%), followed by Hodgkin lymphoma (14%), while non-Hodgkin lymphoma was less common (7%).
CCSs were a mean of 30.2 years from diagnosis. Use of chemotherapy (77%), radiation (66%), and surgery (81%) were common. Few patients had cancer recurrence (13%) or second cancers (5%).
There was no significant difference between CCSs and their siblings with regard to age at the time of the survey (P=0.071), household income (P=0.053), education (P=0.345), health insurance status (P=0.317), or having at least 1 hospitalization in the past year (P=0.270).
However, CCSs were significantly more likely than siblings to have chronic health conditions (P<0.001). Forty percent of CCSs had severe or life-threatening chronic conditions, compared to 17% of siblings.
Seventy-six percent of CCSs and 80% of siblings were employed. Twenty-nine percent of CCSs and 39% of siblings had household incomes exceeding $100,000. Twelve percent of CCSs and 5% of siblings had household incomes below $20,000.
Ninety-one percent of CCSs and 93% of siblings were insured. Most subjects in both groups (81% and 87%, respectively) had employer-sponsored insurance.
Results
CCSs were significantly more likely than their siblings to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income—10% and 3%, respectively (P<0.001).
Among CCSs, those with higher out-of-pocket costs (≥10% vs <10% of income) were more likely to have household incomes below $50,000 (odds ratio [OR]=5.5) and to report being hospitalized in the past year (OR=2.3).
CCSs with a higher percentage of their income spent on out-of-pocket costs were also more likely to:
- Have problems paying their medical bills (OR=8.8)
- Report inability to pay for basic costs of living such as food, heat, or rent (OR=6.1)
- Defer healthcare for a medical problem (OR=3.1)
- Skip a test, treatment, or follow-up (OR=2.1)
- Consider filing for bankruptcy (OR=6.4).
“A more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between high out-of-pocket medical costs and the adverse effects of increased financial burden on cancer survivors could be instrumental in helping us identify those at risk for higher costs to help us address their financial challenges and improve health outcomes,” Dr Nipp said.
“It could also help inform policy changes to help meet the unique needs of cancer survivors and improve our understanding of how both higher costs and resulting financial burden influence patients’ approach to their medical care and decision-making.”
New research suggests survivors of childhood cancer can incur high out-of-pocket medical costs into adulthood and may forgo healthcare to lessen this financial burden.
The study showed that childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) were more likely than non-CCSs to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income.
And these high costs were associated with delaying care or skipping it altogether.
These findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“Survivors who reported spending a higher percentage of their income on out-of-pocket medical costs were not only more likely to report financial burden, they also were at risk for undertaking behaviors potentially detrimental to their health in order to save money,” said study author Ryan Nipp, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston.
“While studies have identified associations between financial burden and patients’ treatment outcomes, quality of life, and even survival among adults with cancer, as far as we know, this is the first to report these associations in survivors of childhood cancer.”
For this research, Dr Nipp and his colleagues surveyed participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. This included adults who had been treated for childhood cancers between 1970 and 1986 along with a control group of siblings not affected by cancer.
In 2011 and 2012, participants were asked to provide information about their health insurance, the out-of-pocket healthcare costs they paid during the previous year, and sociodemographic information such as annual income and employment status.
The researchers also asked participants whether medical costs posed a financial burden and, if so, what measures they had taken to deal with that burden.
Study population
The researchers received complete responses from 580 CCSs and 173 of their siblings without a history of cancer. The most common cancer diagnosis was leukemia (33%), followed by Hodgkin lymphoma (14%), while non-Hodgkin lymphoma was less common (7%).
CCSs were a mean of 30.2 years from diagnosis. Use of chemotherapy (77%), radiation (66%), and surgery (81%) were common. Few patients had cancer recurrence (13%) or second cancers (5%).
There was no significant difference between CCSs and their siblings with regard to age at the time of the survey (P=0.071), household income (P=0.053), education (P=0.345), health insurance status (P=0.317), or having at least 1 hospitalization in the past year (P=0.270).
However, CCSs were significantly more likely than siblings to have chronic health conditions (P<0.001). Forty percent of CCSs had severe or life-threatening chronic conditions, compared to 17% of siblings.
Seventy-six percent of CCSs and 80% of siblings were employed. Twenty-nine percent of CCSs and 39% of siblings had household incomes exceeding $100,000. Twelve percent of CCSs and 5% of siblings had household incomes below $20,000.
Ninety-one percent of CCSs and 93% of siblings were insured. Most subjects in both groups (81% and 87%, respectively) had employer-sponsored insurance.
Results
CCSs were significantly more likely than their siblings to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income—10% and 3%, respectively (P<0.001).
Among CCSs, those with higher out-of-pocket costs (≥10% vs <10% of income) were more likely to have household incomes below $50,000 (odds ratio [OR]=5.5) and to report being hospitalized in the past year (OR=2.3).
CCSs with a higher percentage of their income spent on out-of-pocket costs were also more likely to:
- Have problems paying their medical bills (OR=8.8)
- Report inability to pay for basic costs of living such as food, heat, or rent (OR=6.1)
- Defer healthcare for a medical problem (OR=3.1)
- Skip a test, treatment, or follow-up (OR=2.1)
- Consider filing for bankruptcy (OR=6.4).
“A more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between high out-of-pocket medical costs and the adverse effects of increased financial burden on cancer survivors could be instrumental in helping us identify those at risk for higher costs to help us address their financial challenges and improve health outcomes,” Dr Nipp said.
“It could also help inform policy changes to help meet the unique needs of cancer survivors and improve our understanding of how both higher costs and resulting financial burden influence patients’ approach to their medical care and decision-making.”
New research suggests survivors of childhood cancer can incur high out-of-pocket medical costs into adulthood and may forgo healthcare to lessen this financial burden.
The study showed that childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) were more likely than non-CCSs to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income.
And these high costs were associated with delaying care or skipping it altogether.
These findings were published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“Survivors who reported spending a higher percentage of their income on out-of-pocket medical costs were not only more likely to report financial burden, they also were at risk for undertaking behaviors potentially detrimental to their health in order to save money,” said study author Ryan Nipp, MD, of Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston.
“While studies have identified associations between financial burden and patients’ treatment outcomes, quality of life, and even survival among adults with cancer, as far as we know, this is the first to report these associations in survivors of childhood cancer.”
For this research, Dr Nipp and his colleagues surveyed participants in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study. This included adults who had been treated for childhood cancers between 1970 and 1986 along with a control group of siblings not affected by cancer.
In 2011 and 2012, participants were asked to provide information about their health insurance, the out-of-pocket healthcare costs they paid during the previous year, and sociodemographic information such as annual income and employment status.
The researchers also asked participants whether medical costs posed a financial burden and, if so, what measures they had taken to deal with that burden.
Study population
The researchers received complete responses from 580 CCSs and 173 of their siblings without a history of cancer. The most common cancer diagnosis was leukemia (33%), followed by Hodgkin lymphoma (14%), while non-Hodgkin lymphoma was less common (7%).
CCSs were a mean of 30.2 years from diagnosis. Use of chemotherapy (77%), radiation (66%), and surgery (81%) were common. Few patients had cancer recurrence (13%) or second cancers (5%).
There was no significant difference between CCSs and their siblings with regard to age at the time of the survey (P=0.071), household income (P=0.053), education (P=0.345), health insurance status (P=0.317), or having at least 1 hospitalization in the past year (P=0.270).
However, CCSs were significantly more likely than siblings to have chronic health conditions (P<0.001). Forty percent of CCSs had severe or life-threatening chronic conditions, compared to 17% of siblings.
Seventy-six percent of CCSs and 80% of siblings were employed. Twenty-nine percent of CCSs and 39% of siblings had household incomes exceeding $100,000. Twelve percent of CCSs and 5% of siblings had household incomes below $20,000.
Ninety-one percent of CCSs and 93% of siblings were insured. Most subjects in both groups (81% and 87%, respectively) had employer-sponsored insurance.
Results
CCSs were significantly more likely than their siblings to have out-of-pocket medical costs that were at least 10% of their annual income—10% and 3%, respectively (P<0.001).
Among CCSs, those with higher out-of-pocket costs (≥10% vs <10% of income) were more likely to have household incomes below $50,000 (odds ratio [OR]=5.5) and to report being hospitalized in the past year (OR=2.3).
CCSs with a higher percentage of their income spent on out-of-pocket costs were also more likely to:
- Have problems paying their medical bills (OR=8.8)
- Report inability to pay for basic costs of living such as food, heat, or rent (OR=6.1)
- Defer healthcare for a medical problem (OR=3.1)
- Skip a test, treatment, or follow-up (OR=2.1)
- Consider filing for bankruptcy (OR=6.4).
“A more comprehensive understanding of the relationship between high out-of-pocket medical costs and the adverse effects of increased financial burden on cancer survivors could be instrumental in helping us identify those at risk for higher costs to help us address their financial challenges and improve health outcomes,” Dr Nipp said.
“It could also help inform policy changes to help meet the unique needs of cancer survivors and improve our understanding of how both higher costs and resulting financial burden influence patients’ approach to their medical care and decision-making.”
Drug granted orphan designation for chemo-induced ototoxicity
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation to SENS-401 to be used for the prevention of platinum-induced ototoxicity in pediatric patients.
Platinum-based chemotherapies, particularly cisplatin, can induce severe hearing loss in cancer patients, but there is no pharmaceutical agent approved to treat this side effect.
“Hearing loss in pediatric oncology patients is one of the most frequent side effects of cisplatin treatment and may disable them for the rest of their lives,” said Nawal Ouzren, CEO of Sensorion, the company developing SENS-401.
“Based on its unique profile and the data generated to date, we believe SENS-401 has the potential to be a safe and effective treatment for this serious medical condition where a significant unmet need exists. As such, we look forward to working with the FDA and EMA [European Medicines Agency] to set up an IND [investigational new drug application] and design a phase 2 clinical trial in order to evaluate SENS-401 in this indication.”
About SENS-401
SENS-401 (R-azasetron besylate) is a small molecule intended to protect and preserve inner ear tissue when lesions cause progressive or sequelar hearing impairments. The drug can be taken orally or via an injection.
SENS-401 is one of the two enantiomer forms of SENS-218 (azasetron), a racemic molecule belonging to the family of setrons marketed in Asia under the name Serotone. Pharmacological and pharmacokinetic tests have shown a superior profile for SENS-401 compared with the other enantiomer or the racemic form.
Healthy subjects demonstrated a “very good clinical tolerance” to SENS-401 in a phase 1 study, according to Sensorion. The company is planning to launch a phase 2 trial of the drug for platinum-induced ototoxicity in 2018.
About orphan designation
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation to SENS-401 to be used for the prevention of platinum-induced ototoxicity in pediatric patients.
Platinum-based chemotherapies, particularly cisplatin, can induce severe hearing loss in cancer patients, but there is no pharmaceutical agent approved to treat this side effect.
“Hearing loss in pediatric oncology patients is one of the most frequent side effects of cisplatin treatment and may disable them for the rest of their lives,” said Nawal Ouzren, CEO of Sensorion, the company developing SENS-401.
“Based on its unique profile and the data generated to date, we believe SENS-401 has the potential to be a safe and effective treatment for this serious medical condition where a significant unmet need exists. As such, we look forward to working with the FDA and EMA [European Medicines Agency] to set up an IND [investigational new drug application] and design a phase 2 clinical trial in order to evaluate SENS-401 in this indication.”
About SENS-401
SENS-401 (R-azasetron besylate) is a small molecule intended to protect and preserve inner ear tissue when lesions cause progressive or sequelar hearing impairments. The drug can be taken orally or via an injection.
SENS-401 is one of the two enantiomer forms of SENS-218 (azasetron), a racemic molecule belonging to the family of setrons marketed in Asia under the name Serotone. Pharmacological and pharmacokinetic tests have shown a superior profile for SENS-401 compared with the other enantiomer or the racemic form.
Healthy subjects demonstrated a “very good clinical tolerance” to SENS-401 in a phase 1 study, according to Sensorion. The company is planning to launch a phase 2 trial of the drug for platinum-induced ototoxicity in 2018.
About orphan designation
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted orphan drug designation to SENS-401 to be used for the prevention of platinum-induced ototoxicity in pediatric patients.
Platinum-based chemotherapies, particularly cisplatin, can induce severe hearing loss in cancer patients, but there is no pharmaceutical agent approved to treat this side effect.
“Hearing loss in pediatric oncology patients is one of the most frequent side effects of cisplatin treatment and may disable them for the rest of their lives,” said Nawal Ouzren, CEO of Sensorion, the company developing SENS-401.
“Based on its unique profile and the data generated to date, we believe SENS-401 has the potential to be a safe and effective treatment for this serious medical condition where a significant unmet need exists. As such, we look forward to working with the FDA and EMA [European Medicines Agency] to set up an IND [investigational new drug application] and design a phase 2 clinical trial in order to evaluate SENS-401 in this indication.”
About SENS-401
SENS-401 (R-azasetron besylate) is a small molecule intended to protect and preserve inner ear tissue when lesions cause progressive or sequelar hearing impairments. The drug can be taken orally or via an injection.
SENS-401 is one of the two enantiomer forms of SENS-218 (azasetron), a racemic molecule belonging to the family of setrons marketed in Asia under the name Serotone. Pharmacological and pharmacokinetic tests have shown a superior profile for SENS-401 compared with the other enantiomer or the racemic form.
Healthy subjects demonstrated a “very good clinical tolerance” to SENS-401 in a phase 1 study, according to Sensorion. The company is planning to launch a phase 2 trial of the drug for platinum-induced ototoxicity in 2018.
About orphan designation
The FDA grants orphan designation to products intended to treat, diagnose, or prevent diseases/disorders that affect fewer than 200,000 people in the US.
The designation provides incentives for sponsors to develop products for rare diseases. This may include tax credits toward the cost of clinical trials, prescription drug user fee waivers, and 7 years of market exclusivity if the product is approved.
Antibody could treat AML, MM, and NHL
An investigational antibody has demonstrated activity against acute myeloid leukemia (AML), multiple myeloma (MM), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to researchers.
PF-06747143 is a humanized CXCR4 immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) antibody that binds to CXCR4 and inhibits both CXCL12-mediated signaling pathways and cell migration.
Whether given alone or in combination with chemotherapy, PF-06747143 demonstrated efficacy in mouse models of NHL, MM, and AML.
Treatment involving PF-06747143—alone or in combination—eradicated more cancer cells than did standard treatment options.
These results were published in Blood Advances. The research was sponsored by Pfizer, Inc., the company developing PF-06747143.
“One of the major limitations we see in treating blood cancers is the failure to clear cancer cells from the bone marrow,” said study author Flavia Pernasetti, PhD, of Pfizer Oncology Research and Development.
“Because the bone marrow allows the cancer cells to flourish, removing these cells is an essential step in treating these malignancies effectively.”
With this goal in mind, Dr Pernasetti and her colleagues looked to the mechanisms that control the movement of cells into the bone marrow (BM) in the first place—the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12.
The researchers created PF-06747143, which attacks and kills cancer cells directly but also removes cancer cells from the BM so they can be killed by other treatments.
Results in NHL
The researchers first tested PF-06747143 in an NHL Ramos xenograft model. Mice received PF-06747143 or a control IgG1 antibody at 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 8.
PF-06747143 significantly inhibited tumor growth compared to the control antibody (P<0.0001). Seventy percent of PF-06747143-treated mice had tumor volumes below their initial size at the end of the study.
PF-06747143 produced a dose-dependent response that was sustained until the end of the study, even after treatment was stopped.
Results in MM
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in a disseminated MM model, in which the OPM2-Luc tumor cells were implanted intravenously and migrated spontaneously to the BM.
Mice received PF-06747143 or IgG1 control at 10 mg/kg weekly for 5 doses. Other mice received melphalan at 1 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles.
On day 30, PF-06747143 had significantly inhibited BM tumor growth compared to the control antibody or melphalan (P<0.0001).
PF-06747143-treated mice also had a significant survival benefit. The median survival was 33.5 days for mice that received the control antibody and 36 days for mice treated with melphalan. However, there were no deaths in the PF-06747143-treated mice by day 50, which marked the end of the study (P<0.0001).
The researchers also tested PF-06747143 at a lower dose (1 mg/kg weekly for a total of 7 doses), both alone and in combination with bortezomib (0.5 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles).
The median survival was 34 days in the control mice, 44 days in mice that received bortezomib alone, and 47 days in mice that received PF-06747143 alone. However, there were no deaths in the combination arm at day 51, which was the end of the study (P<0.0003).
Results in AML
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in an AML disseminated tumor model using MV4-11 cells.
They compared PF-06747143 (given at 0.1, 1, or 10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses) to the chemotherapeutic agent daunorubicin (2 mg/kg on days 1, 3, and 5), the FLT3 inhibitor crenolanib (7.5 mg/kg twice a day, on days 11-15 and 25-29), and a control IgG1 antibody (10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses).
PF-06747143 (at 10 mg/kg), daunorubicin, and crenolanib all significantly reduced the number of tumor cells in the peripheral blood and BM when compared with the control antibody (P<0.05).
PF-06746143 treatment (at 10 mg/kg) reduced the number of AML cells in the BM by 95.9%, while daunorubicin reduced them by 84.5% and crenolanib by 80.5%.
The median survival was 36 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 0.1 mg/kg, 41 days for mice that received the control antibody, 47 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 1 mg/kg, and 63 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 10 mg/kg.
The researchers also found that PF-06747143 had a “strong combinatorial effect” with daunorubicin and cytarabine in a chemotherapy-resistant model of AML. The team noted that only 36% of BM cells are positive for CXCR4 in this model.
Treatment with PF-06747143 alone reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 80%, combination daunorubicin and cytarabine reduced it to 27%, and combination PF-06747143, daunorubicin, and cytarabine reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 0.3%.
“Our preliminary preclinical results are encouraging,” Dr Pernasetti said, “and we are very excited to see how our antibody fares in clinical testing.”
PF-06747143 is currently being evaluated in a phase 1 trial of AML patients.
An investigational antibody has demonstrated activity against acute myeloid leukemia (AML), multiple myeloma (MM), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to researchers.
PF-06747143 is a humanized CXCR4 immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) antibody that binds to CXCR4 and inhibits both CXCL12-mediated signaling pathways and cell migration.
Whether given alone or in combination with chemotherapy, PF-06747143 demonstrated efficacy in mouse models of NHL, MM, and AML.
Treatment involving PF-06747143—alone or in combination—eradicated more cancer cells than did standard treatment options.
These results were published in Blood Advances. The research was sponsored by Pfizer, Inc., the company developing PF-06747143.
“One of the major limitations we see in treating blood cancers is the failure to clear cancer cells from the bone marrow,” said study author Flavia Pernasetti, PhD, of Pfizer Oncology Research and Development.
“Because the bone marrow allows the cancer cells to flourish, removing these cells is an essential step in treating these malignancies effectively.”
With this goal in mind, Dr Pernasetti and her colleagues looked to the mechanisms that control the movement of cells into the bone marrow (BM) in the first place—the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12.
The researchers created PF-06747143, which attacks and kills cancer cells directly but also removes cancer cells from the BM so they can be killed by other treatments.
Results in NHL
The researchers first tested PF-06747143 in an NHL Ramos xenograft model. Mice received PF-06747143 or a control IgG1 antibody at 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 8.
PF-06747143 significantly inhibited tumor growth compared to the control antibody (P<0.0001). Seventy percent of PF-06747143-treated mice had tumor volumes below their initial size at the end of the study.
PF-06747143 produced a dose-dependent response that was sustained until the end of the study, even after treatment was stopped.
Results in MM
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in a disseminated MM model, in which the OPM2-Luc tumor cells were implanted intravenously and migrated spontaneously to the BM.
Mice received PF-06747143 or IgG1 control at 10 mg/kg weekly for 5 doses. Other mice received melphalan at 1 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles.
On day 30, PF-06747143 had significantly inhibited BM tumor growth compared to the control antibody or melphalan (P<0.0001).
PF-06747143-treated mice also had a significant survival benefit. The median survival was 33.5 days for mice that received the control antibody and 36 days for mice treated with melphalan. However, there were no deaths in the PF-06747143-treated mice by day 50, which marked the end of the study (P<0.0001).
The researchers also tested PF-06747143 at a lower dose (1 mg/kg weekly for a total of 7 doses), both alone and in combination with bortezomib (0.5 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles).
The median survival was 34 days in the control mice, 44 days in mice that received bortezomib alone, and 47 days in mice that received PF-06747143 alone. However, there were no deaths in the combination arm at day 51, which was the end of the study (P<0.0003).
Results in AML
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in an AML disseminated tumor model using MV4-11 cells.
They compared PF-06747143 (given at 0.1, 1, or 10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses) to the chemotherapeutic agent daunorubicin (2 mg/kg on days 1, 3, and 5), the FLT3 inhibitor crenolanib (7.5 mg/kg twice a day, on days 11-15 and 25-29), and a control IgG1 antibody (10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses).
PF-06747143 (at 10 mg/kg), daunorubicin, and crenolanib all significantly reduced the number of tumor cells in the peripheral blood and BM when compared with the control antibody (P<0.05).
PF-06746143 treatment (at 10 mg/kg) reduced the number of AML cells in the BM by 95.9%, while daunorubicin reduced them by 84.5% and crenolanib by 80.5%.
The median survival was 36 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 0.1 mg/kg, 41 days for mice that received the control antibody, 47 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 1 mg/kg, and 63 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 10 mg/kg.
The researchers also found that PF-06747143 had a “strong combinatorial effect” with daunorubicin and cytarabine in a chemotherapy-resistant model of AML. The team noted that only 36% of BM cells are positive for CXCR4 in this model.
Treatment with PF-06747143 alone reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 80%, combination daunorubicin and cytarabine reduced it to 27%, and combination PF-06747143, daunorubicin, and cytarabine reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 0.3%.
“Our preliminary preclinical results are encouraging,” Dr Pernasetti said, “and we are very excited to see how our antibody fares in clinical testing.”
PF-06747143 is currently being evaluated in a phase 1 trial of AML patients.
An investigational antibody has demonstrated activity against acute myeloid leukemia (AML), multiple myeloma (MM), and non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), according to researchers.
PF-06747143 is a humanized CXCR4 immunoglobulin G1 (IgG1) antibody that binds to CXCR4 and inhibits both CXCL12-mediated signaling pathways and cell migration.
Whether given alone or in combination with chemotherapy, PF-06747143 demonstrated efficacy in mouse models of NHL, MM, and AML.
Treatment involving PF-06747143—alone or in combination—eradicated more cancer cells than did standard treatment options.
These results were published in Blood Advances. The research was sponsored by Pfizer, Inc., the company developing PF-06747143.
“One of the major limitations we see in treating blood cancers is the failure to clear cancer cells from the bone marrow,” said study author Flavia Pernasetti, PhD, of Pfizer Oncology Research and Development.
“Because the bone marrow allows the cancer cells to flourish, removing these cells is an essential step in treating these malignancies effectively.”
With this goal in mind, Dr Pernasetti and her colleagues looked to the mechanisms that control the movement of cells into the bone marrow (BM) in the first place—the chemokine receptor CXCR4 and its ligand CXCL12.
The researchers created PF-06747143, which attacks and kills cancer cells directly but also removes cancer cells from the BM so they can be killed by other treatments.
Results in NHL
The researchers first tested PF-06747143 in an NHL Ramos xenograft model. Mice received PF-06747143 or a control IgG1 antibody at 10 mg/kg on days 1 and 8.
PF-06747143 significantly inhibited tumor growth compared to the control antibody (P<0.0001). Seventy percent of PF-06747143-treated mice had tumor volumes below their initial size at the end of the study.
PF-06747143 produced a dose-dependent response that was sustained until the end of the study, even after treatment was stopped.
Results in MM
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in a disseminated MM model, in which the OPM2-Luc tumor cells were implanted intravenously and migrated spontaneously to the BM.
Mice received PF-06747143 or IgG1 control at 10 mg/kg weekly for 5 doses. Other mice received melphalan at 1 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles.
On day 30, PF-06747143 had significantly inhibited BM tumor growth compared to the control antibody or melphalan (P<0.0001).
PF-06747143-treated mice also had a significant survival benefit. The median survival was 33.5 days for mice that received the control antibody and 36 days for mice treated with melphalan. However, there were no deaths in the PF-06747143-treated mice by day 50, which marked the end of the study (P<0.0001).
The researchers also tested PF-06747143 at a lower dose (1 mg/kg weekly for a total of 7 doses), both alone and in combination with bortezomib (0.5 mg/kg twice a week for a total of 4 cycles).
The median survival was 34 days in the control mice, 44 days in mice that received bortezomib alone, and 47 days in mice that received PF-06747143 alone. However, there were no deaths in the combination arm at day 51, which was the end of the study (P<0.0003).
Results in AML
The researchers tested PF-06747143 in an AML disseminated tumor model using MV4-11 cells.
They compared PF-06747143 (given at 0.1, 1, or 10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses) to the chemotherapeutic agent daunorubicin (2 mg/kg on days 1, 3, and 5), the FLT3 inhibitor crenolanib (7.5 mg/kg twice a day, on days 11-15 and 25-29), and a control IgG1 antibody (10 mg/kg weekly for 4 doses).
PF-06747143 (at 10 mg/kg), daunorubicin, and crenolanib all significantly reduced the number of tumor cells in the peripheral blood and BM when compared with the control antibody (P<0.05).
PF-06746143 treatment (at 10 mg/kg) reduced the number of AML cells in the BM by 95.9%, while daunorubicin reduced them by 84.5% and crenolanib by 80.5%.
The median survival was 36 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 0.1 mg/kg, 41 days for mice that received the control antibody, 47 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 1 mg/kg, and 63 days for mice that received PF-06747143 at 10 mg/kg.
The researchers also found that PF-06747143 had a “strong combinatorial effect” with daunorubicin and cytarabine in a chemotherapy-resistant model of AML. The team noted that only 36% of BM cells are positive for CXCR4 in this model.
Treatment with PF-06747143 alone reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 80%, combination daunorubicin and cytarabine reduced it to 27%, and combination PF-06747143, daunorubicin, and cytarabine reduced the percentage of AML cells in the BM to 0.3%.
“Our preliminary preclinical results are encouraging,” Dr Pernasetti said, “and we are very excited to see how our antibody fares in clinical testing.”
PF-06747143 is currently being evaluated in a phase 1 trial of AML patients.
Obinutuzumab-CHOP not superior to rituximab-CHOP in new DLBCL
Obinutuzumab with CHOP therapy did not improve progression-free survival, compared with rituximab plus CHOP, in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to results from a phase 3 trial published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. (2017 Aug 10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.73.3402)
The findings suggest that obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered, type II, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, might not offer a benefit over standard treatment with rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, when used with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone).
A total of 1,418 patients were enrolled at 207 centers in 29 countries in the GOYA trial and were randomly assigned to one regimen or the other. The mean duration of exposure to the drugs was 25 weeks for both. The progression-free survival was 69.6% for obinutuzumab-CHOP – also known as G-CHOP – and 66.9% for rituximab-CHOP, not a statistically significant difference, wrote Umberto Vitolo, MD, of University-Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy, and his fellow investigators.
The rate of adverse events was similar between the two groups. The lack of superiority of obinutuzumab comes after findings of its superiority in untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The investigators suggested that this may be a sign that obinutuzumab’s efficacy is best seen in less aggressive disease types.
“Given the advantages of G-based therapy in patients with FL and CLL, the lack of benefit of G-CHOP in patients with DLBCL in the GOYA study was unexpected, and the reasons for it are unclear,” they wrote. “This lack of benefit might simply have resulted from the differences in biologic and clinical profiles between indolent lymphoproliferative diseases, such as FL and CLL, and aggressive ones, such as DLBCL.”
The study was sponsored by F. Hoffman-La Roche, the manufacturer of the two drugs, and had support from Fondazione Italiana Linfomi.
Obinutuzumab with CHOP therapy did not improve progression-free survival, compared with rituximab plus CHOP, in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to results from a phase 3 trial published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. (2017 Aug 10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.73.3402)
The findings suggest that obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered, type II, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, might not offer a benefit over standard treatment with rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, when used with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone).
A total of 1,418 patients were enrolled at 207 centers in 29 countries in the GOYA trial and were randomly assigned to one regimen or the other. The mean duration of exposure to the drugs was 25 weeks for both. The progression-free survival was 69.6% for obinutuzumab-CHOP – also known as G-CHOP – and 66.9% for rituximab-CHOP, not a statistically significant difference, wrote Umberto Vitolo, MD, of University-Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy, and his fellow investigators.
The rate of adverse events was similar between the two groups. The lack of superiority of obinutuzumab comes after findings of its superiority in untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The investigators suggested that this may be a sign that obinutuzumab’s efficacy is best seen in less aggressive disease types.
“Given the advantages of G-based therapy in patients with FL and CLL, the lack of benefit of G-CHOP in patients with DLBCL in the GOYA study was unexpected, and the reasons for it are unclear,” they wrote. “This lack of benefit might simply have resulted from the differences in biologic and clinical profiles between indolent lymphoproliferative diseases, such as FL and CLL, and aggressive ones, such as DLBCL.”
The study was sponsored by F. Hoffman-La Roche, the manufacturer of the two drugs, and had support from Fondazione Italiana Linfomi.
Obinutuzumab with CHOP therapy did not improve progression-free survival, compared with rituximab plus CHOP, in patients with previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), according to results from a phase 3 trial published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. (2017 Aug 10. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2017.73.3402)
The findings suggest that obinutuzumab, a glycoengineered, type II, anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, might not offer a benefit over standard treatment with rituximab, an anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, when used with CHOP (cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, prednisone).
A total of 1,418 patients were enrolled at 207 centers in 29 countries in the GOYA trial and were randomly assigned to one regimen or the other. The mean duration of exposure to the drugs was 25 weeks for both. The progression-free survival was 69.6% for obinutuzumab-CHOP – also known as G-CHOP – and 66.9% for rituximab-CHOP, not a statistically significant difference, wrote Umberto Vitolo, MD, of University-Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza, Torino, Italy, and his fellow investigators.
The rate of adverse events was similar between the two groups. The lack of superiority of obinutuzumab comes after findings of its superiority in untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The investigators suggested that this may be a sign that obinutuzumab’s efficacy is best seen in less aggressive disease types.
“Given the advantages of G-based therapy in patients with FL and CLL, the lack of benefit of G-CHOP in patients with DLBCL in the GOYA study was unexpected, and the reasons for it are unclear,” they wrote. “This lack of benefit might simply have resulted from the differences in biologic and clinical profiles between indolent lymphoproliferative diseases, such as FL and CLL, and aggressive ones, such as DLBCL.”
The study was sponsored by F. Hoffman-La Roche, the manufacturer of the two drugs, and had support from Fondazione Italiana Linfomi.
FROM THE JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
Key clinical point: Obinutuzumab with CHOP therapy did not improve progression-free survival for diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, compared with standard treatment with rituximab used with CHOP.
Major finding: The estimated PFS was 69.6% for obinutuzumab-CHOP and 66.9% for rituximab-CHOP, an insignificant difference.
Data source: A randomized phase 3 trial of 1,418 patients at 207 centers in 29 countries.
Disclosures: The study was sponsored by F. Hoffman-La Roche, the manufacturer of the two drugs, and had support from Fondazione Italiana Linfomi..
Drug granted priority review for CTCL
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) seeking approval for brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) as a treatment for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for brentuximab vedotin by December 16, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by data from the phase 3 ALCANZA trial and a pair of phase 2 investigator-sponsored trials.
About brentuximab vedotin
Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate directed to CD30, which is expressed on skin lesions in approximately 50% of patients with CTCL. The drug is being developed by Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.
Brentuximab vedotin is currently FDA-approved for 3 indications.
The drug is approved to treat patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or after failure of at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not auto-HSCT candidates. Brentuximab vedotin initially had accelerated approval for this indication, but it was later converted to full approval.
Brentuximab vedotin also has full approval as consolidation for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have a high risk of relapse or progression after auto-HSCT.
And the drug has accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (sALCL) after failure of at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. This accelerated approval is based on overall response rate. Continued approval for the sALCL indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
Brentuximab vedotin previously received breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of patients with CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides (MF) and patients with primary cutaneous ALCL who require systemic therapy and have received 1 prior systemic therapy.
Brentuximab vedotin also has orphan drug designation from the FDA for the treatment of MF.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) seeking approval for brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) as a treatment for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for brentuximab vedotin by December 16, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by data from the phase 3 ALCANZA trial and a pair of phase 2 investigator-sponsored trials.
About brentuximab vedotin
Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate directed to CD30, which is expressed on skin lesions in approximately 50% of patients with CTCL. The drug is being developed by Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.
Brentuximab vedotin is currently FDA-approved for 3 indications.
The drug is approved to treat patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or after failure of at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not auto-HSCT candidates. Brentuximab vedotin initially had accelerated approval for this indication, but it was later converted to full approval.
Brentuximab vedotin also has full approval as consolidation for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have a high risk of relapse or progression after auto-HSCT.
And the drug has accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (sALCL) after failure of at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. This accelerated approval is based on overall response rate. Continued approval for the sALCL indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
Brentuximab vedotin previously received breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of patients with CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides (MF) and patients with primary cutaneous ALCL who require systemic therapy and have received 1 prior systemic therapy.
Brentuximab vedotin also has orphan drug designation from the FDA for the treatment of MF.
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted priority review to a supplemental biologics license application (sBLA) seeking approval for brentuximab vedotin (Adcetris) as a treatment for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL).
The FDA grants priority review to applications for products that may provide significant improvements in the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of serious conditions.
The agency’s goal is to take action on a priority review application within 6 months of receiving it, rather than the standard 10 months.
The FDA plans to make a decision on the sBLA for brentuximab vedotin by December 16, 2017.
The sBLA is supported by data from the phase 3 ALCANZA trial and a pair of phase 2 investigator-sponsored trials.
About brentuximab vedotin
Brentuximab vedotin is an antibody-drug conjugate directed to CD30, which is expressed on skin lesions in approximately 50% of patients with CTCL. The drug is being developed by Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited.
Brentuximab vedotin is currently FDA-approved for 3 indications.
The drug is approved to treat patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma after failure of autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT) or after failure of at least 2 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens in patients who are not auto-HSCT candidates. Brentuximab vedotin initially had accelerated approval for this indication, but it was later converted to full approval.
Brentuximab vedotin also has full approval as consolidation for patients with classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have a high risk of relapse or progression after auto-HSCT.
And the drug has accelerated approval for the treatment of patients with systemic anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (sALCL) after failure of at least 1 prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimen. This accelerated approval is based on overall response rate. Continued approval for the sALCL indication may be contingent upon verification and description of clinical benefit in confirmatory trials.
Brentuximab vedotin previously received breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for the treatment of patients with CD30-expressing mycosis fungoides (MF) and patients with primary cutaneous ALCL who require systemic therapy and have received 1 prior systemic therapy.
Brentuximab vedotin also has orphan drug designation from the FDA for the treatment of MF.
Post-approval trials for accelerated drugs fall short
New research has revealed shortcomings of post-approval studies for drugs granted accelerated approval in the US.
Researchers found that, for drugs granted accelerated approval from 2009 to 2013, both pre-approval and post-approval trials had limitations in their design and the endpoints used.
“One might expect accelerated approval confirmatory trials to be much more rigorous than the pre-approval trials,” said study author Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.
“But we found that there were few differences in these key design features of the trials conducted before or after approval.”
Dr Kesselheim and his colleagues reported these findings in JAMA.
The researchers examined pre- and post-approval clinical trials of drugs granted accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2009 and 2013.
During that time, the FDA granted 22 drugs accelerated approval for 24 indications (15 of them for hematologic disorders).
Fourteen of the indications were approved on the basis of single-intervention-group studies that enrolled a median of 132 patients.
The FDA ordered 38 post-approval studies to confirm the safety and efficacy of the drugs.
Three years after the last drug’s approval, half of those studies (n=19) were not complete. Eight (42%) of the incomplete studies were either terminated or delayed by more than 1 year.
For 14 of the 24 indications (58%), results from the post-approval studies were not available after a median of 5 years of follow-up.
Study comparison
Published reports were available for 18 of the 19 completed post-approval studies. The characteristics of these studies did not differ much from the 30 pre-approval studies.
There were no statistically significant differences with regard to median patient enrollment (P=0.17), the use of randomized (P=0.31) or double-blind trials (P=0.17), the use of placebo as a comparator (P=0.17), or the lack of a comparator (P=0.21).
However, there was a significant difference in the use of an active comparator (P=0.02), with more post-approval studies using an active comparator.
The researchers also found that 17 of the 18 post-approval trials still used surrogate measures of effect as primary endpoints.
There was no significant difference between pre- and post-approval trials when it came to the use of disease response (P=0.17) or most other surrogate measures (P=0.21) as the trials’ primary endpoint.
The same was true for overall survival (P=0.20), although significantly more post-approval studies used progression-free survival (P=0.001) as a primary endpoint.
“It is important to use clinical endpoints in testing investigational drugs whenever possible because there are numerous cases of drugs approved on the basis of a surrogate measure that turn out to later not effect actual clinical outcomes—or even make them worse,” Dr Kesselheim said.
To address these issues and improve the quality of confirmatory studies, Dr Kesselheim suggested the FDA clearly describe the limitations in the pre-approval data that will need to be addressed in post-approval studies.
He also suggested the agency work with manufacturers to ensure that post-approval studies are conducted using design features that will be optimally useful for confirming the efficacy of the drug.
New research has revealed shortcomings of post-approval studies for drugs granted accelerated approval in the US.
Researchers found that, for drugs granted accelerated approval from 2009 to 2013, both pre-approval and post-approval trials had limitations in their design and the endpoints used.
“One might expect accelerated approval confirmatory trials to be much more rigorous than the pre-approval trials,” said study author Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.
“But we found that there were few differences in these key design features of the trials conducted before or after approval.”
Dr Kesselheim and his colleagues reported these findings in JAMA.
The researchers examined pre- and post-approval clinical trials of drugs granted accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2009 and 2013.
During that time, the FDA granted 22 drugs accelerated approval for 24 indications (15 of them for hematologic disorders).
Fourteen of the indications were approved on the basis of single-intervention-group studies that enrolled a median of 132 patients.
The FDA ordered 38 post-approval studies to confirm the safety and efficacy of the drugs.
Three years after the last drug’s approval, half of those studies (n=19) were not complete. Eight (42%) of the incomplete studies were either terminated or delayed by more than 1 year.
For 14 of the 24 indications (58%), results from the post-approval studies were not available after a median of 5 years of follow-up.
Study comparison
Published reports were available for 18 of the 19 completed post-approval studies. The characteristics of these studies did not differ much from the 30 pre-approval studies.
There were no statistically significant differences with regard to median patient enrollment (P=0.17), the use of randomized (P=0.31) or double-blind trials (P=0.17), the use of placebo as a comparator (P=0.17), or the lack of a comparator (P=0.21).
However, there was a significant difference in the use of an active comparator (P=0.02), with more post-approval studies using an active comparator.
The researchers also found that 17 of the 18 post-approval trials still used surrogate measures of effect as primary endpoints.
There was no significant difference between pre- and post-approval trials when it came to the use of disease response (P=0.17) or most other surrogate measures (P=0.21) as the trials’ primary endpoint.
The same was true for overall survival (P=0.20), although significantly more post-approval studies used progression-free survival (P=0.001) as a primary endpoint.
“It is important to use clinical endpoints in testing investigational drugs whenever possible because there are numerous cases of drugs approved on the basis of a surrogate measure that turn out to later not effect actual clinical outcomes—or even make them worse,” Dr Kesselheim said.
To address these issues and improve the quality of confirmatory studies, Dr Kesselheim suggested the FDA clearly describe the limitations in the pre-approval data that will need to be addressed in post-approval studies.
He also suggested the agency work with manufacturers to ensure that post-approval studies are conducted using design features that will be optimally useful for confirming the efficacy of the drug.
New research has revealed shortcomings of post-approval studies for drugs granted accelerated approval in the US.
Researchers found that, for drugs granted accelerated approval from 2009 to 2013, both pre-approval and post-approval trials had limitations in their design and the endpoints used.
“One might expect accelerated approval confirmatory trials to be much more rigorous than the pre-approval trials,” said study author Aaron S. Kesselheim, MD, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts.
“But we found that there were few differences in these key design features of the trials conducted before or after approval.”
Dr Kesselheim and his colleagues reported these findings in JAMA.
The researchers examined pre- and post-approval clinical trials of drugs granted accelerated approval by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 2009 and 2013.
During that time, the FDA granted 22 drugs accelerated approval for 24 indications (15 of them for hematologic disorders).
Fourteen of the indications were approved on the basis of single-intervention-group studies that enrolled a median of 132 patients.
The FDA ordered 38 post-approval studies to confirm the safety and efficacy of the drugs.
Three years after the last drug’s approval, half of those studies (n=19) were not complete. Eight (42%) of the incomplete studies were either terminated or delayed by more than 1 year.
For 14 of the 24 indications (58%), results from the post-approval studies were not available after a median of 5 years of follow-up.
Study comparison
Published reports were available for 18 of the 19 completed post-approval studies. The characteristics of these studies did not differ much from the 30 pre-approval studies.
There were no statistically significant differences with regard to median patient enrollment (P=0.17), the use of randomized (P=0.31) or double-blind trials (P=0.17), the use of placebo as a comparator (P=0.17), or the lack of a comparator (P=0.21).
However, there was a significant difference in the use of an active comparator (P=0.02), with more post-approval studies using an active comparator.
The researchers also found that 17 of the 18 post-approval trials still used surrogate measures of effect as primary endpoints.
There was no significant difference between pre- and post-approval trials when it came to the use of disease response (P=0.17) or most other surrogate measures (P=0.21) as the trials’ primary endpoint.
The same was true for overall survival (P=0.20), although significantly more post-approval studies used progression-free survival (P=0.001) as a primary endpoint.
“It is important to use clinical endpoints in testing investigational drugs whenever possible because there are numerous cases of drugs approved on the basis of a surrogate measure that turn out to later not effect actual clinical outcomes—or even make them worse,” Dr Kesselheim said.
To address these issues and improve the quality of confirmatory studies, Dr Kesselheim suggested the FDA clearly describe the limitations in the pre-approval data that will need to be addressed in post-approval studies.
He also suggested the agency work with manufacturers to ensure that post-approval studies are conducted using design features that will be optimally useful for confirming the efficacy of the drug.
Vitamin D level linked to post-alloSCT relapse risk in myeloma
Patients with myeloid malignancies who have vitamin D deficiency prior to an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) are significantly more likely to experience a relapse and have worse overall survival after transplant than patients with adequate vitamin D levels at baseline, investigators have found.
Among 492 patients with lymphoid or myeloid malignancies who had an alloSCT at a single center, those with vitamin D deficiency had a risk of post-transplant relapse that was nearly double the risk of patients with sufficient vitamin D levels. Also, this relapse risk contributed to significantly worse overall survival for the vitamin D–deficient patients, reported Thomas Luft, MD, PhD, and his colleagues from the University of Heidelberg, Germany.
In multivariate analysis, the risk for relapse was limited to patients with myeloid rather than lymphatic disease, they reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“[O]ur study suggests that VitD deficiency might affect disease control after alloSCT, in particular, in patients allografted for myeloid malignancies. However, the question of whether improving VitD status before alloSCT has an impact on outcome can only be answered by clinical trial,” they wrote.
To see whether pre-transplant vitamin D deficiency – serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 less than 20 ng/mL – might have prognostic significance, the investigators looked at a training cohort of 492 patients who underwent alloSCT at their center from 2002 through 2013, and a validation cohort consisting of 398 additional patients with myeloid malignancies treated at the University of Essen, Germany.
Overall survival for the 396 patients (80%) in the training cohort with vitamin D deficiency was significantly worse than for patients with adequate levels (hazard ratio, 1.78; P = .007) in a multivariate analysis adjusted for type of malignancy, disease stage, conditioning intensity, patient age, donor type, and recipient/donor sex match.
Analysis also showed that the excess hazard was accounted for by higher risk of relapse than nonrelapse mortality (HR, 1.96; P = .006).
When the investigators looked at relapse risk by disease type, they found a significantly higher risk among vitamin D–deficient patients with myeloid malignancies (HR, 2.55; P = .014) but not with lymphoid malignancies.
The risk for relapse among patients with myeloid malignancies in the validation cohort was similarly high (HR, 2.60; P = .017).
“The growth inhibitory, pro-differentiation, and pro-apoptotic effects of VitD in vitro are well recognized, and low VitD levels have been shown to enhance clonal proliferation of leukemic cells. Therefore, with regard to treatment before alloSCT but also to conditioning, one might speculate that VitD deficiency facilitates resistance to chemotherapy,” the researchers wrote.
Low vitamin D levels have been associated in other studies with shorter relapse-free and overall survival in patients with acute myeloid leukemia apart from alloSCT.
The researchers recommend clinical trials to explore the possibility that vitamin D supplementation pre-transplant could improve post-transplant outcomes.
The study was supported by a grant from the BLUT Foundation and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program. Dr. Luft disclosed consulting with Alexion and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and institutional research funding and travel support from Medac, Neovii, and Jazz.
Patients with myeloid malignancies who have vitamin D deficiency prior to an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) are significantly more likely to experience a relapse and have worse overall survival after transplant than patients with adequate vitamin D levels at baseline, investigators have found.
Among 492 patients with lymphoid or myeloid malignancies who had an alloSCT at a single center, those with vitamin D deficiency had a risk of post-transplant relapse that was nearly double the risk of patients with sufficient vitamin D levels. Also, this relapse risk contributed to significantly worse overall survival for the vitamin D–deficient patients, reported Thomas Luft, MD, PhD, and his colleagues from the University of Heidelberg, Germany.
In multivariate analysis, the risk for relapse was limited to patients with myeloid rather than lymphatic disease, they reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“[O]ur study suggests that VitD deficiency might affect disease control after alloSCT, in particular, in patients allografted for myeloid malignancies. However, the question of whether improving VitD status before alloSCT has an impact on outcome can only be answered by clinical trial,” they wrote.
To see whether pre-transplant vitamin D deficiency – serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 less than 20 ng/mL – might have prognostic significance, the investigators looked at a training cohort of 492 patients who underwent alloSCT at their center from 2002 through 2013, and a validation cohort consisting of 398 additional patients with myeloid malignancies treated at the University of Essen, Germany.
Overall survival for the 396 patients (80%) in the training cohort with vitamin D deficiency was significantly worse than for patients with adequate levels (hazard ratio, 1.78; P = .007) in a multivariate analysis adjusted for type of malignancy, disease stage, conditioning intensity, patient age, donor type, and recipient/donor sex match.
Analysis also showed that the excess hazard was accounted for by higher risk of relapse than nonrelapse mortality (HR, 1.96; P = .006).
When the investigators looked at relapse risk by disease type, they found a significantly higher risk among vitamin D–deficient patients with myeloid malignancies (HR, 2.55; P = .014) but not with lymphoid malignancies.
The risk for relapse among patients with myeloid malignancies in the validation cohort was similarly high (HR, 2.60; P = .017).
“The growth inhibitory, pro-differentiation, and pro-apoptotic effects of VitD in vitro are well recognized, and low VitD levels have been shown to enhance clonal proliferation of leukemic cells. Therefore, with regard to treatment before alloSCT but also to conditioning, one might speculate that VitD deficiency facilitates resistance to chemotherapy,” the researchers wrote.
Low vitamin D levels have been associated in other studies with shorter relapse-free and overall survival in patients with acute myeloid leukemia apart from alloSCT.
The researchers recommend clinical trials to explore the possibility that vitamin D supplementation pre-transplant could improve post-transplant outcomes.
The study was supported by a grant from the BLUT Foundation and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program. Dr. Luft disclosed consulting with Alexion and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and institutional research funding and travel support from Medac, Neovii, and Jazz.
Patients with myeloid malignancies who have vitamin D deficiency prior to an allogeneic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) are significantly more likely to experience a relapse and have worse overall survival after transplant than patients with adequate vitamin D levels at baseline, investigators have found.
Among 492 patients with lymphoid or myeloid malignancies who had an alloSCT at a single center, those with vitamin D deficiency had a risk of post-transplant relapse that was nearly double the risk of patients with sufficient vitamin D levels. Also, this relapse risk contributed to significantly worse overall survival for the vitamin D–deficient patients, reported Thomas Luft, MD, PhD, and his colleagues from the University of Heidelberg, Germany.
In multivariate analysis, the risk for relapse was limited to patients with myeloid rather than lymphatic disease, they reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
“[O]ur study suggests that VitD deficiency might affect disease control after alloSCT, in particular, in patients allografted for myeloid malignancies. However, the question of whether improving VitD status before alloSCT has an impact on outcome can only be answered by clinical trial,” they wrote.
To see whether pre-transplant vitamin D deficiency – serum levels of 25-hydroxyvitamin D3 less than 20 ng/mL – might have prognostic significance, the investigators looked at a training cohort of 492 patients who underwent alloSCT at their center from 2002 through 2013, and a validation cohort consisting of 398 additional patients with myeloid malignancies treated at the University of Essen, Germany.
Overall survival for the 396 patients (80%) in the training cohort with vitamin D deficiency was significantly worse than for patients with adequate levels (hazard ratio, 1.78; P = .007) in a multivariate analysis adjusted for type of malignancy, disease stage, conditioning intensity, patient age, donor type, and recipient/donor sex match.
Analysis also showed that the excess hazard was accounted for by higher risk of relapse than nonrelapse mortality (HR, 1.96; P = .006).
When the investigators looked at relapse risk by disease type, they found a significantly higher risk among vitamin D–deficient patients with myeloid malignancies (HR, 2.55; P = .014) but not with lymphoid malignancies.
The risk for relapse among patients with myeloid malignancies in the validation cohort was similarly high (HR, 2.60; P = .017).
“The growth inhibitory, pro-differentiation, and pro-apoptotic effects of VitD in vitro are well recognized, and low VitD levels have been shown to enhance clonal proliferation of leukemic cells. Therefore, with regard to treatment before alloSCT but also to conditioning, one might speculate that VitD deficiency facilitates resistance to chemotherapy,” the researchers wrote.
Low vitamin D levels have been associated in other studies with shorter relapse-free and overall survival in patients with acute myeloid leukemia apart from alloSCT.
The researchers recommend clinical trials to explore the possibility that vitamin D supplementation pre-transplant could improve post-transplant outcomes.
The study was supported by a grant from the BLUT Foundation and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program. Dr. Luft disclosed consulting with Alexion and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and institutional research funding and travel support from Medac, Neovii, and Jazz.
FROM JCO
Key clinical point: Vitamin D deficiency pre–allogenic stem cell transplant was associated with greater risk of relapse and lower survival for patients with myeloid malignancies.
Major finding: The hazard for relapse among patients with myeloid malignancies and low pre-transplant vitamin D was 2.55 (P = .014), compared with patients with adequate vitamin D.
Data source: Retrospective cohort study of 492 patients with myeloid or lymphoid malignancies, and a validation cohort of 398 patients.
Disclosures: The study was supported by a grant from the BLUT Foundation and the European Union’s Seventh Framework Program. Dr. Luft disclosed consulting with Alexion and Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and institutional research funding and travel support from Medac, Neovii, and Jazz.