To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Bureau of Corporations.
Journal articles on the topic 'Bureau of Corporations'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Bureau of Corporations.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Chausovsky, Jonathan. "From Bureau to Trade Commission: Agency Reputation in the Statebuilding Enterprise." Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 12, no. 3 (June 18, 2013): 343–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1537781413000200.
Full textAbstract:
When studying the formation of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 1914, scholars have usually focused on interest groups and electoral politics. This essay, by contrast, suggests that the reputation and network influences of an existing federal agency, the Bureau of Corporations, also shaped the creation of its successor, the FTC. Building on the concept of bureaucratic autonomy, the essay examines the structure of the bureau, its connections, and its preferences. The bureau's leaders favored a clear separation from the Department of Justice and argued for a quasi-judicial process for antitrust, which they felt would be more effective than the courts. They advocated discretion in covering small firms and mandatory annual reports, while seeking to avoid being assigned authority to clear business agreements in advance. Well before the 1914 debates, leaders at the bureau directed substantial funds toward influencing trust legislation. They contacted academics and civic leaders, tracked existing legislative proposals, and analyzed key legal terms. Internal studies examined major questions, such as how to define and regulate unfair trade practices. Bureau officials came to argue Congress could never define these in legislation. Instead a bureaucracy with appropriate authority could adapt definitions of unfair practices to changes in business. When the bureau became the nucleus of the FTC, it received much of the discretionary power it sought.
2
Weru, Jane Muthoni, Dr Hazel Gachunga, Prof Romano Odhiambo, and Dr Robert Arasa. "INFLUENCE OF COMPETENCE MANAGEMENT IN ADOPTION OF QMS IN KENYA’S ISO CERTIFIED STATE CORPORATIONS." Human Resource and Leadership Journal 2, no. 2 (May 19, 2017): 82. http://dx.doi.org/10.47941/hrlj.162.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of competence management in adoption of QMS in Kenya ISO certified state corporations.Methodology: The proposed research consisted of a descriptive survey. The population comprised of fifty nine state corporations that were ISO certified on 9001:2008 series by the Kenya Bureau of Statistics. The study applied a stratified random sampling technique to select a sample size of twenty one state corporations. Purposive sampling technique was further applied to select a total of four respondents in each of the twenty one selected state corporations. Questionnaires were used as the main data collection instruments and a pilot study was undertaken to pretest the questionnaires for validity and reliability. The gathered data was analyzed by use of Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 20. The analysis involved factor analysis; descriptive statistics where the means Standard Deviations and variances were established for all the factors tested in the questionnaires; Correlation analysis was done between the independent sub variables and the dependent variable; Linear regression analysis was also done; and t-test was used for the test of significance of individual coefficients. R-squared was used for the explanatory power of the model. The analysis was presented using tables and charts. The interpretations of data were also given as per the research objectives of the studies.Results: Results indicate that the organization does not carry out competence management base assessment regularly. Further findings indicate that Kenya’s state corporation lack best hiring practices as a result competence is not emphasized in the organizations. Additional results indicate that employees in State owned corporations in Kenya are not well motivated thus there is no drive to achieve organizational goals and in adoption of organizational motivation. Inferential statistics indicate that competence management has a strong positive influence on the adoption of quality management systems.Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Hiring should be done in line with the competence required to fill in a particular vacancy. Managing competence may be costly to any organization but through proper planning and budgeting organizations are able to achieve this.Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of competence management in adoption of QMS in Kenya ISO certified state corporations.Methodology: The proposed research consisted of a descriptive survey. The population comprised of fifty nine state corporations that were ISO certified on 9001:2008 series by the Kenya Bureau of Statistics. The study applied a stratified random sampling technique to select a sample size of twenty one state corporations. Purposive sampling technique was further applied to select a total of four respondents in each of the twenty one selected state corporations. Questionnaires were used as the main data collection instruments and a pilot study was undertaken to pretest the questionnaires for validity and reliability. The gathered data was analyzed by use of Statistical Package for Social Scientists (SPSS) version 20. The analysis involved factor analysis; descriptive statistics where the means Standard Deviations and variances were established for all the factors tested in the questionnaires; Correlation analysis was done between the independent sub variables and the dependent variable; Linear regression analysis was also done; and t-test was used for the test of significance of individual coefficients. R-squared was used for the explanatory power of the model. The analysis was presented using tables and charts. The interpretations of data were also given as per the research objectives of the studies.Results: Results indicate that the organization does not carry out competence management base assessment regularly. Further findings indicate that Kenya’s state corporation lack best hiring practices as a result competence is not emphasized in the organizations. Additional results indicate that employees in State owned corporations in Kenya are not well motivated thus there is no drive to achieve organizational goals and in adoption of organizational motivation. Inferential statistics indicate that competence management has a strong positive influence on the adoption of quality management systems.Unique Contribution to Theory, Practice and Policy: Hiring should be done in line with the competence required to fill in a particular vacancy. Managing competence may be costly to any organization but through proper planning and budgeting organizations are able to achieve this.
3
Feinberg, Susan E., and Michael P. Keane. "Accounting for the Growth of MNC-Based Trade Using a Structural Model of U.S. MNCs." American Economic Review 96, no. 5 (November 1, 2006): 1515–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.96.5.1515.
Full textAbstract:
In recent decades, U.S. foreign trade grew much faster than GDP, but there is no consensus why. Notably lacking is an understanding of the role of multinational corporations (MNCs), which mediate over half of world trade. We use Bureau of Economic Analysis data on U.S. MNCs to study the rapid growth of MNC-based trade from 1983 to 1996. Using a model of U.S. MNCs and Canadian affiliates, we decompose this growth by source. Tariff reductions can largely explain increases in arms-length MNC-based trade. But intra-firm trade growth is attributed mostly to “technical change.” We present additional evidence suggesting just-in-time production facilitated intra-firm trade. (JEL F13, F14, F23)
4
Huang, Min. "Study on System for Monitoring Mine Belt Conveyor Fire." Applied Mechanics and Materials 226-228 (November 2012): 734–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.226-228.734.
Full textAbstract:
According to the statistical data offered by US Bureau of Mines, belt conveyor fires account for about 20 percent of the mine fires Technologies on belt conveyor fire-monitoring system have drawn the attention from both scientific research institutions and manufacturing corporations. However, most methods and techniques available for monitoring the belt conveyor fire in mines are still not satisfactory. This paper presents a set of new methods and techniques for monitoring and forecasting the mine belt conveyor fire, and introduces a new practical system which is developed on the basis of them, including the design and installation of transducers, the design of conversion circuits, the design of monitoring and fault diagnosis software. Industrial applications as well as laboratory experiments have proved that this system is characterized by its simplicity in structure, convenience in installation, reliability in performance and strong environment adaptability, etc.
5
Botha, Martin, and Rossouw von Solms. "The utilization of trend analysis in the effective monitoring of information security. Part 2: the model." Information Management & Computer Security 10, no. 1 (March 1, 2002): 5–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09685220210417454.
Full textAbstract:
A survey recently completed by the Computer Security Institute (CSI) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) revealed that corporations, banks, and governments all face a growing threat from computer crime, and in particular computer hacking. Computer hacking activities caused well over US$100 million in losses last year in the USA and the trend toward professional computer crime, such as computer hacking, is on the rise. Different methods are currently used to control the computer crime problem, for example, by controling access to and from a network by implementing a firewall. As the survey highlighted, most of these methods are insufficient. New means and ways which will minimise and control the hacking problem must therefore continuously be researched and defined. Proposes a method, using trend analysis, that could be utilized to minimise and control the hacking problem in an organisation.
6
Blouin, Jennifer L., Linda K. Krull, and Leslie A. Robinson. "Is U.S. Multinational Dividend Repatriation Policy Influenced by Reporting Incentives?" Accounting Review 87, no. 5 (April 1, 2012): 1463–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.2308/accr-50193.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACT This study finds evidence that public-company reporting by U.S. multinational corporations (MNCs) creates disincentives to repatriate foreign earnings to the U.S. and contributes to the accumulation of cash abroad. MNCs operate under U.S. international tax laws and financial reporting rules and face two potential consequences when they repatriate foreign earnings: a cash payment for repatriation taxes and a reduction in reported accounting earnings. Using a confidential dataset of financial and operating characteristics of foreign affiliates of MNCs combined with public-company data, we examine how repatriation amounts vary across firms that face relatively strong reporting incentives to defer an accounting expense. Our results suggest that reporting incentives reduce repatriations by about 17 to 21 percent annually. Data Availability: Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data were made available to the authors under a legal confidentiality arrangement; all non-BEA data are available from public sources.
7
Mosca, Joseph B., and Steven Pressman. "Unions in the 21st Century." Public Personnel Management 24, no. 2 (June 1995): 159–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/009102609502400205.
Full textAbstract:
There have been no specific causes as to why declines in unionization have occurred over the past 20 or 30 years. The Bureau of Labor Statistics' Surveys indicate that between 1961 and 1984, a significant number of employees in unions declined to 51 % from 73%. This decline was among production employees within metropolitan areas, and dipped to 12% from 17% for non-supervisory clerical workers. It has been found that declines in union membership can be attributed to employment shifts, and that job change has different affects depending on if the shift entails an employee change. Unions have been fighting to maintain both membership and public approval. Although union approval declined until 1981, people's attitudes toward organized labor never became negative. This study has found that the percentage of the general public that approves of unions has increased recently in many important areas. The key to success of unions in the 21st Century seems to lie in the creation of a cooperative atmosphere between organized labor and management. In order to do so, unions must realize and address issues of importance to the changing work force and give voice to the skill demands of workers, more women in the work force, and the current health care crisis. The 21st Century holds in store for unions an image of reduced health care costs, greater participation by previously unorganized segments of the work force, and better understanding and an adaption to technological changes. All of these things will help corporations keep their costs lower and retain more employees, leading to greater job security, improved relations between labor and management, and more satisfied workers.
8
Posner, Michael. "Business & human rights: a commentary from the inside." Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal 29, no. 4 (May 16, 2016): 705–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/aaaj-03-2016-2454.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to first, provide an overview of the genesis of the business and human rights agenda; second, to identify key areas of focus in the emerging business and human rights agenda; and, finally, to argue for an approach to engaging business in the human rights agenda that is both challenging and practically orientated. Design/methodology/approach – The paper draws on the author’s ethnographic experiences both as a human rights advocate with Human Rights First (1978-2009) and as Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor at the US State Department (2009-2013). Findings – The paper links the business and human rights agenda to the growth in size and power of corporations. It identifies six key areas of focus in this emerging agenda, specifically, supply chains and labor rights, the extractive industries especially relating to security, information technology and issues of freedom of expression, agriculture and issues of child and forced labor, and investment and socially responsible investors. The paper contends that business schools have a crucial role to play in engaging businesses in a challenging and practical way to provide them with workable solutions to these challenges. Research limitations/implications – The paper contends that we have come to the end of the beginning of the discussion of business and human rights and are now in the phase of defining what the rules are in this twenty-first century global economy. The paper provides important considerations for taking this phase forward. Originality/value – This paper provides original insights into the emergence of the business and human rights agenda. It identifies key areas of focus along with a valuable approach to making progress in these areas.
9
Raimi, Lukman, Innocent Akhuemonkhan, and Olakunle Dare Ogunjirin. "Corporate Social Responsibility and Entrepreneurship (CSRE): antidotes to poverty, insecurity and underdevelopment in Nigeria." Social Responsibility Journal 11, no. 1 (March 2, 2015): 56–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/srj-11-2012-0138.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose – This paper aims to examine the prospect of utilising corporate social responsibility and entrepreneurship (CSRE) as antidotes for mitigating the incidences of poverty, insecurity and underdevelopment in Nigeria. The paper derives its theoretical foundation from the stakeholder, instrumental and legitimacy theories, which all justify the use of CSRE for actualisation of Triple Bottom Line (i.e. the social, economic and environmental concerns of business organisations). Design/methodology/approach – The study used the quantitative research method relying on the use of secondary data published by institutional bodies. The quantitative method entail a systematic extraction of reliable data on corporate social responsibility (CSR), insecurity, poverty and development from the publications of Office of the Millennium Development Goals in Nigeria, CLEEN Foundation, National Bureau of Statistics and Central Bank of Nigeria, respectively. For missing years, the authors improvised using projections as well as proxies. The extracted data, which spanned a period of 13 years, were subjected to econometric tests using SPSS, on the basis of which informed conclusions were drawn. Findings – The first econometric result indicates a negative relationship between gross domestic product and poverty. The second result indicates that there is a positive significant relationship between gross domestic product and total crime rate. The third result indicates that there exists a positive relationship between gross domestic product and unemployment rate. The fourth result indicates that there is a negative relationship between gross domestic product and industrial growth rate. The last result indicates that there is a significant positive relationship between gross domestic product and CSR. Research limitations/implications – The results of this research have macro-level application, hence the outcomes cannot be narrowed to any particular sector of the economy. A micro-level analysis across diverse sectors of the economy is recommended in future studies. The implication of this empirical research is that policymakers in the Nigerian private sector need to reinvent their CSR programmes as mechanisms for poverty eradication, entrepreneurship development (CSRE), dousing tension of restive youth, empowerment/support for security agencies for better crime prevention and for impacting on sustainable development. Practical implications – In the face of dwindling financial resources in the treasury of governments, the reinvention of CSRE by private sector organisations as complementary mechanisms for combating social problems is becoming acceptable in both developed and developing nations. This paper therefore boldly recommends that policymakers reinvent CSRE as development mechanisms through a sound partnership between government, advocacy groups and business corporations in Nigeria. Social implications – The paper explicates that CSR can indeed be reinvented by corporations as part of their social concerns to their operating environment instead of leaving all social problems to governments. Originality/value – The research lends credence to stakeholder, instrumental and legitimacy theories of CSR. It also justifies the plausibility of CSRE, a novel concept being promoted in this research.
10
Siegel, David S., Gary Schiller, Kevin Song, Richy Agajanian, Keith Stockerl-Goldstein, Hakan Kaya, Michael Sebag, et al. "Investigating Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarkers in a Phase 2 Trial of Pomalidomide + Low-Dose Dexamethasone (POM + LoDEX) Following Second-Line Lenalidomide-Based Therapy (Tx) in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 1853. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.1853.1853.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: Preclinical studies indicate that lenalidomide (LEN) and POM are not cross-resistant (Ocio et al Leukemia, 2015) and that POM remains active in LEN-resistant myeloma cells (Lopez-Girona et al Leukemia, 2012). Likewise, POM + LoDEX showed comparable efficacy in patients (pts) refractory to LEN administered as last prior Tx vs the full population in subanalyses of the clinical trials MM-002 and MM-003 (San Miguel et al Lancet Oncol, 2013; Richardson et al Blood, 2014). To confirm these observations, we initiated a single-arm, phase 2 trial evaluating POM + LoDEX immediately following second-line LEN-based Tx in advanced RRMM (MM-014; NCT01946477). Methods: Eligible pts (aged ≥ 18 yrs) had received 2 prior lines of Tx, with ≥ 2 cycles of LEN-based Tx in the second line. Pts must have had documented progressive disease (PD) during or after their last antimyeloma Tx and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status ≤ 2. POM was administered 4 mg/day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle with LoDEX 40 mg/day (20 mg/day for pts aged > 75 yrs) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 until PD or discontinuation for any reason. Pts received mandatory thromboprophylaxis. The primary end point was overall response rate by modified International Myeloma Working Group criteria (including minor response). Secondary end points included progression-free survival, overall survival, time to progression, safety, and duration of response. Exploratory end points were included to identify molecular, immune, and cellular biomarkers that might inform POM + LoDEX response, resistance, or mechanism of action. Results: As of March 20, 2015, 27 of the 85 planned pts were enrolled and received POM + LoDEX. Twelve pts remain on Tx, whereas 15 have discontinued, due to PD (n = 7) and withdrawal (n = 5), but not adverse events (n = 0). Males comprised 59% of pts; 85% were white and the median age was 69 yrs (range, 44-85 yrs), with 67% of pts aged ≥ 65 yrs. The median time since diagnosis was 3.9 yrs (range, 1.3-13.3 yrs), and 59% of pts received prior stem cell transplant. Most pts (81%) were refractory to the most recent prior LEN-containing Tx, and the median duration of the most recent prior LEN Tx was 8.3 mos (range, 0.3-56.3 mos). The 19% of pts who were not refractory to the most recent prior LEN-containing Tx remain on Tx. Pts predominantly had ECOG performance status 0 or 1 (30% and 63%, respectively) vs 2 (7%). Of the 19 pts with International Staging System assessment reported, most were stage I (n = 7) or II (n = 11) vs III (n = 1). Efficacy and safety data will be presented. Conclusions: The MM-014 study is assessing the efficacy and safety of POM + LoDEX in pts with RRMM who have received second-line LEN-based Tx. MM-014 is designed to confirm and expand the results from MM-002 and MM-003 with translational data. Clonality and biomarkers, including Aiolos, Ikaros, IRF-4, and c-Myc, will be evaluated to determine association with POM + LoDEX synergy, high-risk MM-associated genetic aberrations, clonal evolution, and minimal residual disease. Disclosures Siegel: Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Schiller:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Song:Celgene Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Stockerl-Goldstein:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Speakers Bureau. Kaya:Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Sebag:Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Reu:Takeda/Millennium: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Mouro:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sturniolo:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Srinivasan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thakurta:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nagarwala:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bahlis:Johnson & Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Johnson & Johnson: Research Funding.
11
Uy, Geoffrey L., Mark D. Minden, Pau Montesinos, Daniel J. DeAngelo, Jessica K. Altman, Jamie Koprivnikar, Paresh Vyas, et al. "Clinical Activity of CC-90009, a Cereblon E3 Ligase Modulator and First-in-Class GSPT1 Degrader, As a Single Agent in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (R/R AML): First Results from a Phase I Dose-Finding Study." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 232. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-123966.
Full textAbstract:
Background: CC-90009 is a cereblon (CRBN) E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD) and a first-in-class small molecule that drives the binding of a novel target protein, G1 to S phase transition 1 (GSPT1), to CRBN, resulting in the proteasome-dependent degradation of GSPT1. GSPT1 plays a central role in mRNA translation, and loss of GSPT1 activates an integrated stress response that leads to AML cell death (Matyskiela ME, et al. Nature. 2016;535:252-7; Zhouravleva G, et al. EBMO J. 1995;14:4065-72). In preclinical testing, CC-90009 is active across a range of AML cell lines and primary AML patient (pt) samples in vitro and in vivo and exerts its GSPT1- and CRBN-dependent effects through rapid induction of apoptosis. Here we share the first clinical results in pts with R/R AML. Methods: Adult pts with R/R AML enrolled in the dose-finding phase of this first-in-human, multicenter, open-label phase 1 study to evaluate tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary efficacy of CC-90009; and to establish the recommended phase 2 dose and schedule (RP2D) (CC-90009-AML-001; NCT02848001). Dose escalation proceeded via a modified 3 + 3 design. Treatment was by daily intravenous administration on either Days 1-5 (D1-5) or Days 1-3 and 8-10 (D1-3/8-10) of a 28-day cycle. Treatment response was assessed after Cycles 1, 2, and 4 by modified International Working Group 2003 criteria. Safety and preliminary response data are presented for all treated pts. PK and PD were analyzed for evaluable pts. Results: As of May 15, 2019, 45 pts with R/R AML had been treated, including 35 pts on the D1-5 and 10 pts on the D1-3/D8-10 schedule. Median age was 66 years (range 27-81); 73% were male. Most pts (n = 36; 80%) were refractory to their last therapy and 17 pts (38%) were refractory to all prior therapy; 14 pts (31%) had secondary AML. Pts were treated at dose levels from 0.3 to 3.6 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) reported (only in dose levels from 2.4 to 3.6 mg) included hypotension, systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS), hyperbilirubinemia, pneumonitis, and pericarditis with tamponade. Exploration of the 3.6 mg dose level is ongoing; the RP2D has not yet been determined. CC-90009-related grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 23 pts (51%); those occurring in >1 pt were hypocalcemia (22%); hypotension (13%); and hyperbilirubinemia, hyperglycemia, hypophosphatemia, pneumonitis, sepsis, thrombocytopenia, and tumor lysis syndrome (4%). Preclinically identified hypocalcemia was confirmed as a CC-90009 on-target toxicity in the clinic; it was reversible, manageable and did not lead to any treatment discontinuations. The majority of treated pts experienced ≥1 serious TEAE (80%); most were infections (47%). Two (4%) pts experienced TEAEs leading to permanent discontinuation of the study drug. Dose interruptions due to TEAEs occurred in 12 pts (27%) and dose reductions in 2 pts (4%). Of 40 pts who discontinued treatment, 24 (60%) discontinued due to progressive disease or lack of efficacy. Seven pts discontinued treatment due to death; 4 deaths were secondary to progression from AML, 2 due to sepsis and 1 due to hyperglycemic hyperosmolar nonketotic syndrome. Responses to single-agent treatment were observed in pts treated at 3.0 or 3.6 mg on the D1-5 schedule, with a best response of complete remission (CR; n = 1), morphologic CR with incomplete blood count recovery (CRi; n = 1) and morphologic leukemia-free state (MLFS; n = 1). A dose-dependent decrease in GSPT1 levels in peripheral blood blasts and T cells was observed, with a >90% decrease observed for higher dose levels. Evidence of antileukemic activity (decreases in bone marrow and/or peripheral blasts) was seen in pts treated with CC-90009 at 1.2 mg and above with a trend to more sustained reductions at the highest dose levels. Plasma PK analysis demonstrated dose-dependent exposure. Conclusions: In this phase 1 study of CC-90009, a first-in-class agent, evidence of deep GSPT1 degradation, on-target activity and promising antileukemic activity was observed. The observed TEAEs, in addition to those expected in this heavily pretreated R/R AML pt population, were generally well manageable. The study is ongoing with further optimization of dose, schedule and toxicity mitigation. Expansion cohorts in R/R AML and higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes are planned. Disclosures Uy: GlycoMimetics: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; Astellas: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Montesinos:Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. DeAngelo:Blue print Medicines: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; Pfizer, Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Research Funding; AbbVie, Inc.: Research Funding; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Altman:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Biosight: Other: US Lead; France Foundation: Speakers Bureau; PeerView: Speakers Bureau; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; Theradex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy; prIME Oncology: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Koprivnikar:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vyas:Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Fløisand:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Gjertsen:BerGenBio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EU Horizon 2020: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; The Norwegian Cancer Society: Research Funding; KinN Therapeutics AS: Equity Ownership; ACTII AS: Equity Ownership; ERA PerMed: Research Funding; Helse Vest Health Trust: Research Funding; Research Council of Norway: Research Funding. Esteve:Astellas: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Buchholz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Couto:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Fan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hanna:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Li:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pierce:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Mersana Therapuetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Arcus Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Pourdehnad:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zeidan:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astellas: Honoraria.
12
Fan, Jinhong, Hongbin Wang, Suzana Couto, Tsun-Wen Sheena Yao, Geoffrey L. Uy, Amer M. Zeidan, Mark D. Minden, et al. "Pharmacodynamic Responses to CC-90009, a Novel Cereblon E3 Ligase Modulator, in a Phase I Dose-Escalation Study in Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (R/R AML)." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 2547. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-124291.
Full textAbstract:
Background: CC-90009 is a novel cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD), which is currently under investigation in a first-in-human, phase I study (CC-90009-AML-001; NCT02848001) in patients with R/R AML. In preclinical models, CC-90009 drives the binding of the target protein, translation termination factor G1 to S phase transition 1 (GSPT1), to cereblon and induces its ubiquitination and proteasome-dependent degradation. Loss of GSPT1 results in activation of the integrated stress response (ISR), inhibition of nonsense-mediated decay (NMD), and induction of apoptosis. Deep degradation of GSPT1, mediated by CC-90009, led to AML cell death in vitro and potent antitumor activity in patient-derived AML xenograft models. In the ongoing phase I study, CC-90009 has demonstrated antileukemic activity. Here, we characterize the pharmacodynamic responses using a suite of novel assays to support CC-90009 dose and schedule optimization. Methods: Adult patients with R/R AML received intravenous CC-90009 daily on Days 1-5 (D1-5 schedule) or on Days 1-3 and 8-10 (D1-3/8-10 schedule) of a 28-day cycle. Peripheral blood samples taken before, during, and after dosing in the first treatment cycle were analyzed. Levels of intracellular GSPT1 in blasts and normal blood cell types were quantitated by flow cytometry analysis. Transcript levels of ISR and NMD variants in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were measured by qPCR. Bone marrow (BM) core biopsies at screening, Cycle 1 Day 5 and 28, and Cycle 2 and 4 Day 28, were analyzed for GSPT1, cleaved caspase 3, and CD34 protein expression by immunohistochemistry. ATF3 and DDIT3 mRNA levels were assessed in BM samples by RNA in situ hybridization. Results: The rate and depth of GSPT1 loss in T cells and in circulating AML blasts increased with dose. A marked reduction in GSPT1 was observed in T cells and blast cells of most patients after the first dose of CC-90009 at all dose levels, and GSPT1 levels approached the assay floor between Days 2 and 5 at doses of 1.2 mg and higher on the D1-5 schedule. At 2.4 mg and higher on the D1-5 schedule, a reduction in GSPT1 levels of > 90% was observed in T cells (19 of 29 patients) and in blast cells (11 of 29 patients), with stronger GSPT1 reductions detected in AML blasts and normal T cells compared with B cells or granulocytes. In the 3 mg D1-5 cohort, patients with sustained GSPT1 reduction in peripheral blasts in the days following treatment had more persistent blast suppression compared with patients showing an earlier rebound of GSPT1. At 3 mg and 3.6 mg dose levels, continuous treatment (D1-5) resulted in slower kinetics of GSPT1 rebound and conferred superior antileukemic activity compared with the intermittent dosing schedule (D1-3/D8-10). In addition to measuring the direct target of CC-90009, GSPT1, we also investigated markers downstream of GSPT1 degradation. Several patients with deep and sustained GSPT1 loss in the high-dose cohorts (2.4 mg and above) showed increased levels of ISR-related transcripts (ATF3 and DDIT3) and NMD-associated splice variants (SRSF3 and SRSF6) in on-treatment PBMC samples. Similarly, in BM, deep GSPT1 loss coincided with induction of ATF3 and DDIT3 mRNA, increased cleaved caspase 3 expression, and reduced CD34+ blasts. These clinical findings are consistent with our preclinical studies in which GSPT1 loss culminated in apoptosis, which may be mediated through activation of ISR and inhibition of NMD pathways. Conclusions: CC-90009 is a novel CELMoD and a first-in-class GSPT1 degrader. A suite of novel pharmacodynamic assays performed on patient-derived peripheral blood cells and BM demonstrated a dose-dependent modulation of GSPT1, and showed that the preclinical mechanisms of ISR induction, NMD inhibition, and apoptosis can be confirmed in AML cells in patients. Deeper and more rapid GSPT1 degradation as well as delayed rebound were associated with more rapid, deeper, and more persistent blast reductions. Characterization of these pharmacodynamic responses in ongoing dose-schedule explorations will help identify the optimal scheme for the expansion phase and provide further insight into the mechanism of clinical response. Disclosures Fan: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Couto:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Yao:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Uy:Astellas: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy. Zeidan:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Montesinos:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. DeAngelo:Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Research Funding; Pfizer, Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie, Inc.: Research Funding; Blue print Medicines: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Altman:Novartis: Consultancy; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; Biosight: Other: US Lead; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; France Foundation: Speakers Bureau; prIME Oncology: Speakers Bureau; PeerView: Speakers Bureau; Theradex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee. Koprivnikar:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vyas:Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding. Fløisand:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Gjertsen:Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EU Horizon 2020: Research Funding; KinN Therapeutics AS: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BerGenBio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ERA PerMed: Research Funding; The Norwegian Cancer Society: Research Funding; Helse Vest Health Trust: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research Council of Norway: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ACTII AS: Equity Ownership. Buchholz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pourdehnad:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pierce:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership.
13
Siegel, David S., Paul G. Richardson, Meletios A. Dimopoulos, Christine I. Chen, Kevin Song, Ravi Vij, Nizar J. Bahlis, et al. "Efficacy and Safety Of Pomalidomide Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone In Advanced Multiple Myeloma: Results Of Randomized Phase 2 and 3 Trials (MM-002/MM-003)." Blood 122, no. 21 (November 15, 2013): 3185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v122.21.3185.3185.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction Few treatments options are available for patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who have previously been treated with lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT), and their prognosis is poor. Pomalidomide (POM) is a distinct IMiD® immunomodulatory agent with a mechanism of action consisting of direct anti-myeloma, stromal-support inhibitory, and immunomodulatory effects. In randomized phase 2 and 3 trials (MM-002 and MM-003), POM plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM+LoDEX) demonstrated marked efficacy in RRMM pts who had received multiple prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. This side-by-side analysis presents the most recent survival and safety data from these trials. Methods The MM-002 and MM-003 trials enrolled pts with ≥ 2 prior therapies, including LEN and BORT. In MM-002, pts received POM (4 mg/day on days 1–21 of each 28-day cycle) alone or in combination with LoDEX (40 mg/week). In MM-003, pts were randomized 2:1 to receive POM+LoDEX or high-dose DEX alone (HiDEX) (40 mg/days 1–4, 9–12, 17–20 in a 28-day cycle); HiDEX was chosen as the comparator to isolate the effects of POM, as at the time of trial design it was the standard salvage therapy for heavily pretreated pts. Thromboprophylaxis was required for all pts treated with POM and pts at high risk of developing venous thromboembolism. Data cutoff was February 1, 2013 for MM-002 and March 1, 2013 for MM-003. The primary endpoint in both trials was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), response rates, duration of response, and safety. Results In each study, pts had received a median of 5 prior therapies (range 1-17), and all pts had received prior LEN and BORT. In MM-002, 113 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 108 were treated with POM alone (60% of POM alone pts subsequently received DEX). A total of 79% of pts were LEN refractory; 62% were refractory to both LEN and BORT; and 35% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. With a median follow-up of 14.2 months (mos), median PFS was 4.2 mos, OS was 16.5 mos, and overall response rate (ORR, defined as at least a partial response) was 33% with POM+LoDEX (Table 1). In MM-003, 302 pts were treated with POM+LoDEX and 153 pts were treated with HiDEX (50% of HiDEX pts subsequently received POM). A total of 94% of pts were LEN refractory; 74% were both LEN and BORT refractory; and 29% had received LEN as their last prior therapy. Survival outcomes were similar in MM-003; with a median follow-up of 10 mos, median PFS was 4.0 mos, OS was 12.7 mos, and ORR was 31% with POM+LoDEX. In both trials, LEN as last prior therapy did not impact response, PFS, or OS vs the overall population. Commonly observed adverse events (AEs) are presented in Table 2 for pts treated with POM+LoDEX. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was 28% and 13% in MM-002, and 26% and 22% in MM-003 for the POM+LoDEX arms, respectively. AEs were generally manageable for POM+LoDEX in MM-002 and MM-003 with dose interruptions (67% for both) and reductions (29% and 26%, respectively), and standard supportive care, including growth factor support (46% and 43%), red blood cell transfusions (45% and 49%), platelet transfusions (14% and 20%), and anti-infective agents (89% in both trials). Rates of POM discontinuation due to treatment-related AEs were low (2–4% with POM+LoDEX). In MM-002 and MM-003, 49% and 51% of pts in the POM+LoDEX arms experienced neutropenia of any grade. With appropriate AE management, 9% and 23% had dose interruptions, 4% and 8% had dose reductions, and 1 pt in both MM-002 and MM-003 discontinued due to neutropenia. Febrile neutropenia developed in 3% and 10% of pts; 1% and 4% had dose interruptions, 0% and 2% had dose reductions, and no pts discontinued due to febrile neutropenia in the MM-002 and MM-003 studies, respectively. The majority of infections occurred in the absence of neutropenia of any grade (54% in MM-002 and 66% in MM-003). The rate of POM discontinuation due to infection was low (1% in MM-002 and 2% in MM-003). Conclusion In both the MM-002 and MM-003 trials, POM+LoDEX consistently extended PFS in advanced RRMM pts. PFS, OS, and ORR were not negatively impacted in patients who were refractory to LEN or BORT, even as last prior therapy. Both trials demonstrated that with dose modifications and supportive care POM was well tolerated, leading to few discontinuations. POM+LoDEX should be considered a standard of care for pts with advanced RRMM who have exhausted LEN and BORT. Disclosures: Siegel: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Richardson:Millennium: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Song:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vij:Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millenium: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Baz:Millenium: Research Funding; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Hofmeister:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Weisel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jagannath:Millennium: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Lonial:Millennium: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Talpaz:Ariad, Sanofi, Novartis: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad, Novartis, BMS, Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Ariad, BMS, Sanofi, INCYTE: Research Funding. Moreau:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. San Miguel:Jansen, Celgene Corporation, Onyx, Novartis, Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Karlin:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Expert board committee Other, Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Oriol:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Alegre:Janssen: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Cavo:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Martinez-Lopez:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Casey:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sternas:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Jacques:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Onyx: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Gilead: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; sanofi aventis: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Oncopep: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Acetylon: Consultancy, Equity Ownership; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Equity Ownership.
14
Mease, P. J., A. Kavanaugh, A. Ogdie, A. F. Wells, M. Bergman, D. D. Gladman, F. Behrens, et al. "FRI0352 PROBABILITY OF ACHIEVING LOW DISEASE ACTIVITY OR REMISSION WITH APREMILAST TREATMENT AMONG DMARD-NAIVE SUBJECTS WITH ACTIVE PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS." Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 79, Suppl 1 (June 2020): 771.2–772. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-eular.1530.
Full textAbstract:
Background:Apremilast (APR) is associated with comparable ACR response rates in DMARD-naive vs DMARD-experienced patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA).1,2A question that remains is if DMARD-naive pts treated with APR have greater chances of achieving treatment targets than DMARD-experienced pts. cDAPSA is a commonly used treatment target.Objectives:To assess the predictive value of baseline (BL) clinical disease status on achieving long-term cDAPSA treatment targets at Wk 52 among DMARD-naive subjects in PALACE 4; to compare these findings vs those recently reported from the PALACE 1-3 studies in subjects with prior exposure to DMARDs; and to provide further evidence that at a group level, achievement of cDAPSA disease targets with APR is associated with no or mild articular and extra-articular disease activity by Wk 52.Methods:This post hoc analysis included subjects assigned to APR 30 mg twice daily at BL who had available cDAPSA data at BL. We calculated the probabilities of shifting across different cDAPSA categories (remission [REM]: ≤4; low disease activity [LDA]: >4 to ≤13; moderate disease activity [Mod]: >13 to ≤27; high disease activity [HDA]: >273) from BL to Wk 52. Mean values of articular and non-articular variables (e.g., PASI, SJC/TJC, MASES, dactylitis) from BL to Wk 52 were assessed by cDAPSA category achieved at Wk 52 to determine the association between achievement of targets and control of articular and non-articular manifestations. Results from the current analyses were compared with the previously reported results from PALACE 1-3.Results:A total of 175 subjects receiving APR were included; at BL, 66.3% were in HDA, 31.4% in Mod, and 2.3% were in LDA. Overall, subjects who achieved treatment targets (LDA or REM) by Wk 52 had lower levels of disease activity at BL, as shown by a lower number of swollen and tender joints and lower presence of enthesitis and dactylitis. Higher prevalence of psoriasis-involved body surface area ≥3% at BL was observed. Subjects in Mod at BL were estimated to be more than twice as likely to achieve REM or LDA at Wk 52 vs subjects in HDA at BL; for subjects in LDA at BL, the estimated probability of achieving cDAPSA treatment targets was 100% (Figure). PALACE 4 subjects with LDA and Mod at BL exhibited higher estimated probabilities of achieving treatment targets (100.0% and 61.7%, respectively) than those observed in the DMARD-experienced population of PALACE 1-3 (71.1% and 46.9%). Subjects in PALACE 4 who achieved REM or LDA by Wk 52 showed no or mild articular and extra-articular disease activity by Wk 52, similar to what was observed in the PALACE 1-3 population.4Conclusion:DMARD-naive subjects in PALACE 4 who had LDA or Mod at BL had the highest likelihood of achieving treatment targets (cDAPSA REM or LDA) by Wk 52 with continued APR treatment. Results from the current probability analyses revealed higher probability rates than those observed in the DMARD-experienced PALACE 1-3 population; control of articular and extra-articular manifestations was observed in the DMARD-naive and DMARD-experienced populations.References:[1]Wells AF, et al. Rheumatology. 2018;57:1253-63. 2. Kavanaugh A, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2019;21:118. 3. Machado PM. Ann Rheum Dis. 2016;75:787-90. 4. Mease PJ, et al. Arthritis Care Res. 2020 Jan 7.Disclosure of Interests:Philip J Mease Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharmaceutical, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, BMS, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau, Arthur Kavanaugh Grant/research support from: Abbott, Amgen, AstraZeneca, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Centocor-Janssen, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – grant/research support, Alexis Ogdie Grant/research support from: Novartis, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Takeda – consultant, Alvin F. Wells Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Lilly – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Alexion, Amgen, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Horizon, Lilly, Novartis, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Alexion, Amgen, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Horizon, Lilly, Novartis, UCB – speakers bureau, Martin Bergman Shareholder of: Johnson & Johnson – stockholder, Consultant of: AbbVie, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Genentech, Janssen, Merck, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Novartis, Pfizer, Sanofi – speakers bureau, Dafna D Gladman Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., BMS, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Frank Behrens Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Chugai, Janssen, Roche, Pfizer – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie Biotest, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene Corporation, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Biotest, BMS, Celgene Corporation, Chugai, Eli Lilly, Genzyme, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sandoz, UCB - speaker, Sven Richter Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Michele Brunori Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Lichen Teng Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Benoit Guerette Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene Corporation – employment at the time of study conduct, Josef S. Smolen Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Roche – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene Corporation, Celtrion, Eli Lilly, Glaxo, ILTOO, Janssen, Medimmune, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Astro, Celgene Corporation, Celtrion, Eli Lilly, Glaxo, ILTOO, Janssen, Medimmune, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Samsung, Sanofi, UCB – speaker
15
Fazal, Salman, Carole B. Miller, John O. Mascarenhas, Maureen Thyne, Sara Goldberger, Dilan C. Paranagama, Shreekant V. Parasuraman, Ahmad B. Naim, James Mangan, and Ruben A. Mesa. "Phlebotomy Frequency and Quality of Life and Productivity in Patients with Polycythemia Vera: Results from the MPN Landmark Survey in the United States." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 5184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.5184.5184.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: Phlebotomy is a common and established treatment in patients diagnosed with polycythemia vera (PV) to reduce the risk of thromboembolic events, in both acute and chronic settings. However, phlebotomy may not alleviate all PV-related symptoms and its frequent application can cause moderate to profound iron deficiency, which may worsen PV-related symptoms. This analysis of MPN Landmark survey data examined patient-reported quality of life (QoL) and productivity outcomes in patients with PV based on phlebotomy treatment history. Methods: Patients who were diagnosed with a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) were recruited to participate in the MPN Landmark survey in the US (fielded May - July 2014). This analysis describes responses from patients with PV on questions regarding PV-related symptom burden, QoL, and productivity. Patient responses were analyzed based on phlebotomy treatment history and included patients who were actively receiving phlebotomy within the last 3 months (≥1 per month, every other month, and every 3 months or longer), had discontinued phlebotomy, or were phlebotomy-naive. Descriptive statistical analyses were used to evaluate these outcomes based on phlebotomy frequency, as appropriate. Results: Overall, 813 patients completed the Landmark survey, and 274 out of the 380 patients with PV who completed the survey were evaluable for this analysis. Mean age ranged from 61.6-65.4 years among phlebotomy subgroups (Table 1). The average duration of PV was longest among patients with PV who had discontinued phlebotomy (12.0 years) compared with phlebotomy-naive patients (6.3 years) and patients actively treated with phlebotomy (5.9-8.9 years). The percentage of patients diagnosed within 1 year of the survey ranged from 4.1% to 11.5% among the patients who had been treated with phlebotomy and was 15.4% in the phlebotomy-naive subgroup. Most patients reported PV-related symptoms; symptom burden was similar in all phlebotomy subgroups. Fatigue was the most common symptom reported in all subgroups (range, 71.4%-80.8%). QoL measures were generally worse with higher phlebotomy frequency (Table 1). Similarly, more frequent phlebotomy procedures was found to be associated with reduced productivity: patients who received ≥1 phlebotomy per month had the highest mean number (in the preceding 30 days) of sick days (among patients employed), days spent in bed, and days with plans canceled. Of note, approximately one third of patients receiving more frequent phlebotomy procedures were also receiving concomitant hydroxyurea to manage their PV (≥1 per month, 38.5%; every other month, 36.4%). Conclusion: Patients with PV may experience disease-related symptoms and reductions in QoL and work productivity. Frequent phlebotomy procedures were associated with increasingly worsened QoL and decreased work productivity. Further research is needed to better understand the impact of phlebotomy on patient-reported outcomes in patients with PV. Disclosures Fazal: Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Miller:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Kalobios: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Thyne:Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Paranagama:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mangan:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.
16
Hari, Parameswaran, Haris Ali, Yi-Bin Chen, Salman Fazal, Tara K. Gregory, Sarah M. Anand, Ahmad Naim, et al. "Safety Analysis of Patients Who Received Ruxolitinib for the Treatment of Steroid-Refractory Chronic Graft-Versus-Host Disease in an Expanded Access Program." Blood 136, Supplement 1 (November 5, 2020): 39–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2020-140541.
Full textAbstract:
Background Graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a serious, potentially fatal complication of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Ruxolitinib (RUX), a Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor, is in phase 3 development for patients (pts) with steroid-refractory chronic GVHD (SR cGVHD), and is approved for the treatment of steroid-refractory acute GVHD (SR aGVHD) in the United States. Outside of clinical trials, access to RUX is provided to pts with SR cGVHD through an expanded access program (EAP) sponsored by Incyte Corporation in the United States. The primary objective of this analysis was to report safety data from pts with SR cGVHD who received RUX in the Incyte-sponsored US EAP. Study Design and Methods Patients eligible to enroll in the open-label, multicenter US EAP from September 2017-May 2020 were ≥12 years of age, developed SR aGVHD or SR cGVHD after allogeneic HCT, and had an ECOG PS of 0-3. Pts with SR aGVHD and those with incomplete or missing data were excluded from the analysis. Based on clinical experience, the recommended starting dose of oral RUX for pts with cGVHD was 10 mg twice daily (BID). Doses could not be escalated above 10 mg BID, but dose reductions were permitted during treatment based on safety and laboratory assessments. The dose of RUX could be re-escalated if toxicity management thresholds were met or if pts experienced GVHD flares and had adequate hematologic parameters. Any GVHD treatments received before RUX initiation were recorded, and concurrent therapy with other cGVHD treatments was permitted. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were assessed according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03 from the time of consent until 30 days after end of treatment. Pt characteristics, prior treatments, and RUX dosing were summarized using descriptive statistics. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan-Meier methodology. Results The analysis included 481 pts with SR cGVHD and complete data (data cutoff, 08 May 2020). Median (range) age was 60.0 (15-81) years; 51.8% of pts were male. At the time of RUX initiation, the organs involved included the skin (70.7%), eyes (59.3%), mouth (55.7%), joints (38.0%), lungs (34.9%), gastrointestinal tract (28.1%), liver (18.9%), and genitals (11.0%). Most pts (65.3%) received ≥2 prior treatments for GVHD, including systemic corticosteroids (54.9%), calcineurin inhibitors (25.6%), sirolimus (20.8%), mycophenolate mofetil (14.6%), ibrutinib (7.1%), and RUX (3.1%); 26.6% of pts received topical corticosteroids and 12.3% received other topical treatments. Most pts initially received RUX 5 mg BID (n=228 [47.4%]) or 10 mg BID (n=229 [47.6%]); 276 pts (57.4%) received RUX 10 mg BID as their last dose at the time of discontinuation or data cutoff. At data cutoff, 332 pts (69.0%) were still receiving RUX. Primary reasons for treatment discontinuations were death (7.1%), GVHD progression (5.4%), malignancy relapse (3.5%), and adverse events (2.5%). The median (range) duration of RUX treatment was 7.2 (0.03-33.0) months. SAEs, regardless of causality, were reported in 162 pts (33.7%). Median (range) time to first SAE from RUX initiation was 77.0 (1-693) days. The most common SAEs were sepsis (n=18 [3.7%]), pyrexia (n=9 [1.9%]), dyspnea (n=8 [1.7%]), respiratory failure (n=8 [1.7%]), acute kidney injury (n=7 [1.5%]), failure to thrive (n=7 [1.5%]), influenza (n=7 [1.5%]), diarrhea (n=6 [1.2%]), fall (n=6 [1.2%]), pulmonary embolism (n=6 [1.2%]), and upper respiratory tract infection (n=6 [1.2%]). One pt (0.2%) had a cytomegalovirus viremia SAE. There were few SAEs reported for cytopenias (febrile neutropenia, n=2 [0.4%]) or fungal infections (fungal pneumonia, n=1 [0.2%]); SAEs for neoplasms were reported for 8 pts (1.7%). There were no SAEs of thrombotic microangiopathy. Forty-six pts (9.6%) had fatal SAEs, most commonly attributed, at least in part, to infections (n=13 [28.3% of SAE-related fatalities]). Thirty-six pts (7.5%) had SAEs deemed related to RUX. The OS rates (95% CI) were 88% (84-91) at 1 year and 82% (74-88) at 2 years (Figure). Conclusions Patients with SR cGVHD in the RUX EAP program were heavily pretreated and primarily had organ involvement of the skin, eyes, and mouth. SAEs were reported in one-third of pts, including 7% of pts with RUX-related SAEs. Ten percent of pts had fatal SAEs, primarily due to infectious complications of cGVHD. No new or unexpected SAEs were reported. Figure 1 Disclosures Hari: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy. Chen:Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Equillium: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board Member; Actinium: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board Member; Magenta: Consultancy; Kiadis: Consultancy; AbbVie: Other: Data and Safety Monitoring Board Member. Fazal:Agios: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jansen: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Glaxosmith Kline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Karyopham: Speakers Bureau; Gilead/Kite: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Gregory:Bluebird: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; CURIS: Research Funding; Celularity: Research Funding; Constellation: Research Funding; CRISP Therapeutics: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Vivolux: Research Funding; Teva: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; Poseida: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Kesios: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Glenmark: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; EMD Sorono: Research Funding. Anand:AltruBio: Research Funding; CSL Behring: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Equillium: Research Funding; Kadmon: Research Funding. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Paranagama:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Bhatt:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Blithe:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. DiPersio:Magenta Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. OffLabel Disclosure: Ruxolitinib is a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor approved by the FDA for the treatment of adults with steroid-refractory acute GVHD. Ruxolitinib is in phase 3 testing for the treatment of steroid-refractory chronic GVHD but is currently not approved for this indication.
17
Lonial, Sagar, Michael Amatangelo, Rakesh Popat, Monique C. Minnema, Jeffrey A. Zonder, Jeremy Larsen, Albert Oriol Rocafiguera, et al. "Translational and Clinical Evidence of a Differentiated Profile for the Novel CELMoD, Iberdomide (CC-220)." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 3119. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-124298.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Despite advances in treatment strategy, multiple myeloma (MM) remains a challenging, incurable disease as patients (pts) often relapse. Here we describe preclinical data of a novel cereblon (CRBN) E3 ligase modulatory compound (CELMoD), iberdomide (IBER; CC-220), as well as clinical and translational data from a current phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT02773030). These data support a differentiated profile for IBER from immunomodulatory agents (IMiD agents), and development of IBER as a foundation of combination therapy for the treatment of relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). Methods: Preclinical analyses were performed on pomalidomide (POM)-sensitive and acquired-resistant MM cell lines and peripheral blood mononuclear cells from healthy volunteers. Eligible pts enrolled on the clinical trial had RRMM and had received ≥ 2 prior regimens, containing at least an IMiD agent and proteasome inhibitor (PI), and had experienced disease progression within 60 days of last MM therapy. Escalating doses of IBER were given on Days 1-21, in combination with dexamethasone (DEX; 40 mg; 20 mg in pts aged > 75 years) on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22, of each 28-day cycle. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) data on CRBN, Ikaros, Aiolos, and ZFP91 expression was obtained from pt bone marrow specimens at screening and at Cycle 2, Day 15. Immune profiling was evaluated by flow cytometry of peripheral blood at Cycle 1, Day 1 and Cycle 2, Day 15. Primary objectives were to evaluate maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), safety, and preliminary efficacy. Results: Preclinically, IBER exhibited potent tumoricidal anti-MM and immunostimulatory activity. IBER was more potent than lenalidomide (LEN) or POM in overcoming the immunosuppressive activity of bortezomib (BORT), inducing a more than twofold increase in T cell proliferation in the presence of BORT. IBER also enhanced the antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity and complement-dependent cytotoxicity of daratumumab (DARA), leading to deeper responses than combinations with LEN or POM. Further differentiating from both LEN and POM, IBER showed activity alone and in combination with BORT or DARA in POM-resistant MM cell lines. As of June 28, 2019, 69 pts with RRMM had received IBER + DEX. Median age was 65 years (range 33-80), and median number of prior regimens was 5 (range 2-12). Prior therapies included autologous stem cell transplantation (80%), LEN (100%), POM (70%), PIs (100%), DARA (71%) and anti-BCMA (6%), including CAR T cells. Clinical activity was observed across all dose levels with an overall response rate (ORR) of 29%, clinical benefit rate of 45%, and disease control rate of 80%. ORR was 30%, 28% and 29% in IMiD agent-refractory, DARA-refractory and Quad-class (IMiD agents/PIs/steroids/CD-38 antibodies)-refractory pts, respectively. IBER + DEX showed a favorable safety profile, with grade 3-4 neutropenia, infections, and thrombocytopenia, occurring in 29%, 25%, and 12% of pts, respectively. To date, IBER doses range from 0.3 to 1.3 mg and the MTD/RP2D has not yet been reached. Pharmacodynamic immunophenotyping changes were dose-dependent. Treatment with IBER (at doses > 0.75mg) + DEX doubled the percentage of proliferating T cells and NK cells (P < 0.001 for each) and increased activated and effector memory CD8+ and CD4+ T cells by > 50% (P < 0.01 for each subset). Pharmacodynamic changes in pt bone marrow by quantitative IHC scoring showed significant degradation of substrates (Ikaros, P = 0.006; Aiolos, P < 0.001; ZFP91, P < 0.001) and downregulation of c-myc (P = 0.027), including in pts refractory to POM and with low CRBN expression. Conclusions: IBER + DEX has shown notable clinical activity and favorable tolerability in heavily pretreated pts with RRMM, including pts refractory to prior IMiD therapy. Preclinical and translational data suggest a differentiated profile of IBER from IMiD agents in regard to activity in POM-resistant models, potency in combination with BORT and DARA, and by inducing changes in CD4+ T cells that were not observed in pts treated with POM from prior studies. Taken together, these data support a differentiated profile for IBER from IMiD agents, and the clinical development of IBER as a foundation of combination therapy for the treatment of RRMM. This study is ongoing, and includes cohorts evaluating the combinations of IBER + DEX with DARA, BORT, and carfilzomib. Updated results will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Lonial: Karyopharm: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy. Amatangelo:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Popat:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel support to meetings. Minnema:Gilead: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; Jansen Cilag: Honoraria. Zonder:Alnylam: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncopeptides: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Intellia: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Caelum: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Larsen:Janssen Oncology: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Oriol Rocafiguera:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Rodriguez Otero:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Consultancy. Badros:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy. Siegel:Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Jagannath:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Merck & Co.: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Bringhen:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy. Gironella:Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kaiser:Takeda, Janssen, Celgene, Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel Expenses; Abbvie, Celgene, Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Abbvie, Karyopharm: Consultancy; Celgene, Janssen: Research Funding. Cook:Janssen, Takeda, Sanofi, Karyopharm, Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squib, GlycoMimetics, Seattle Genetics, Sanofi: Honoraria; Celgene, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Gamberi:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Sonneveld:SkylineDx: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Nguyen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Homan:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Bjorklund:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pierceall:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bensmaine:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thakurta:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Peluso:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Van De Donk:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Servier: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AMGEN: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
18
Farber, Charles M., Anthony Mato, Chadi Nabhan, Thomas J. Kipps, Christopher Flowers, Neil E. Kay, Nicole Lamanna, et al. "Analysis of Early Mortality of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL) Patients Treated in US Practices in the Connect CLL® Registry." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 5270. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.5270.5270.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction The natural history of patients (pts) with CLL varies considerably. Some pts may have asymptomatic, indolent disease, while others may require therapy soon after diagnosis. Clinical staging systems cannot identify early-stage pts at risk for inferior survival. Genetic and molecular markers can provide additional information regarding prognosis and response prediction, however their utilization is limited in routine practice (Mato, ASCO 2015) and results can be conflicting. There is a need to identify characteristics of early-stage CLL pts at highest risk of early progression and/or death. Such characteristics, if readily available and reproducible, may identify such pts as candidates for early-intervention studies; particularly in the era of kinase inhibitor therapy. The Connect CLL registry is the largest prospective study describing real-world management of a diverse cohort of 1494 CLL pts. In this analysis, we evaluate key factors that are associated with early CLL-associated mortality in clinical practice. Methods Connect CLL is a multicenter, observational cohort study aimed at understanding patterns of CLL management without a study-specific intervention. Eligible pts were adults with a clinical diagnosis of CLL, enrolled between 2010-2014 at 179 community (n=1311), 17 academic (n=155), and 3 government (n=28) sites within ≤ 2 months of initiating either a first line of therapy (LOT1), or a second-line or subsequent LOT (LOT≥2). The goal of this analysis was to assess potential predictors of death occurring within 18 months following initiation of frontline therapy (LOT1). Because CLL usually presents as an indolent disease associated with a prolonged clinical course, we chose to define early mortality as any death occurring ≤ 18 months following enrollment. Univariate logistic regression was performed against potential predictor variables including several clinical characteristics and comorbid conditions, race, treatment (Tx) site, insurance type, geographic region, presence of prior malignancies, genetic prognostic factors (FISH and cytogenetics) at enrollment, cell surface markers (Zap70, CD38), reasons for Tx initiation and Tx choice for LOT1 (BR or FCR). IgVH mutation status and genetic mutations (P53, Notch1, etc.) were not included as these tests were not readily performed in community practice. Predictors that were found to be significant at the 0.15 significance level were included in the multivariable logistic regression using a stepwise variable selection process, to identify factors associated with early mortality. Results 1344 pts completed 18 months of follow-up (n=1111) or died (n=233) within the first 18 months of study enrollment. Of these, 801 pts were enrolled in LOT1 (median time from diagnosis to LOT1 was 1.3 yrs; IQR, 0.1-3.7 yrs). 82 of 801 pts (10.2%) died within 18 months of LOT1 initiation; 41% of pts with available clinical information who died, were defined as early-stage (Rai stage 0-1). Of 26 potential predictors evaluated, 12 were associated with early mortality among LOT1 pts at the 0.15 significance level in univariate analyses including site, race, age>75, CD-38, del(17p), ECOG PS, CCI group, RAI stage, creatinine clearance, insurance status, reasons for Tx initiation, anemia and lymphocytosis. In multivariable logistic regression analyses we identified 4 independent predictors of mortality within 18 months of LOT1 initiation (Table): pt age, CD38 expression, baseline decreased hemoglobin (as a reason for Tx initiation), and race. Conclusions In CLL pts with Rai stage 0-1, we have identified 4 factors which are associated with increased risk of death within 18 months of initiation of frontline therapy. Interestingly, neither choice of FCR vs BR chemoimmunotherapy nor the presence of del(17p)/del(11q) were predictors of early mortality. Using these results, we are currently designing a model to predict early mortality in early-stage pts. Once validated, these results may provide a framework for trials targeting the "early stage, symptomatic" CLL pts for novel interventions. Table. Multivariable Analysis: Predictors of Early Mortality Odds ratio estimate 95% CI P -value LOT1, n=781 Age ≥75 years, yes vs no 2.2 1.4-3.5 0.0012 CD38 expression, positive vs negative/not specified 1.8 1.1-2.9 0.0182 Anemia as reason for treatment, yes vs no 2.1 1.3-3.4 0.0040 Race, other vs Caucasian 1.9 1.0-3.8 0.0501 Disclosures Farber: Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Mato:TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pronai Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy. Nabhan:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Kipps:Pharmacyclics Abbvie Celgene Genentech Astra Zeneca Gilead Sciences: Other: Advisor. Flowers:Spectrum: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; OptumRx: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Infinity Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Acerta: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celegene: Other: Unpaid consultant, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding. Kay:Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Hospira: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Tolero Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Lamanna:Genentech-Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Grinblatt:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Kozloff:Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; AbbVie: Consultancy. Sullivan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flick:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kiselev:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Bhushan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Swern:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sharman:TG Therapeutics, Inc.: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding; Calistoga: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.
19
Casulo, Carla, Armando Santoro, Kiyoshi Ando, Steven Le Gouill, Jia Ruan, John Radford, Luca Arcaini, et al. "Durvalumab (Anti PD-L1) As Monotherapy or in Combination Therapy for Relapsed/Refractory (r/r) Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL) and Follicular Lymphoma (FL): A Subgroup Analysis from the Phase 1/2 Fusion NHL-001 Global Multicenter Trial." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 5320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-124102.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Targeting immune cells in the tumor microenvironment is an attractive approach to improving antitumor activity of standard therapy in r/r hematologic malignancies. Durvalumab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), allowing T cells to recognize and kill tumor cells. Methods: The FUSION NHL-001 study (NCT02733042) is a phase 1/2 study assessing safety and efficacy of durvalumab as monotherapy or in combination. Eligible patients (pts) must have had r/r DLBCL or FL after ≥1 systemic therapy requiring therapeutic intervention. Other inclusion criteria include ECOG performance status 0-2 and ≥1 CT-measurable lesion. Pretreatment tumor biopsies were collected to assess biomarkers of response to durvalumab combination therapies. Pts with r/r B-cell neoplasms were enrolled into 1 of 4 arms that included durvalumab monotherapy (Arm D) or in combination with lenalidomide ± rituximab (Arm A), ibrutinib (Arm B), or rituximab ± bendamustine (Arm C). Durvalumab was given at a fixed dose of 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The study consisted of 2 parts: dose finding (except for Arm D) to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for each combination and dose confirmation. We present final subset analyses for pts with DLBCL and FL treated in Arms A, C, and D. Results: A total of 38 DLBCL and 22 FL pts were enrolled. Baseline characteristics are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Arm A was prematurely closed after an FDA announcement regarding safety concerns with combination of lenalidomide and checkpoint inhibitors in multiple myeloma; therefore, RP2D for lenalidomide ± rituximab could not be defined. However, 4 pts (DLBCL, n=1; FL, n=3) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): febrile neutropenia (lenalidomide 10 mg + rituximab), headache, hepatitis, and thrombocytopenia (lenalidomide 20 mg + rituximab). One pt with DLBCL experienced DLT in Arm C (neutropenia) when treated with bendamustine 90 mg/m2 + rituximab. RP2D for bendamustine was established as 70 mg/m2. Durvalumab treatment (13 infusions) was completed for 10 (DLBCL, n=4; FL, n=6) pts (17%), 2 in Arm A and 8 in Arm C; the main reason for durvalumab withdrawal was disease progression. During the study, 38 pts (63%) experienced 81 serious adverse events (SAEs), most frequently related to infections (Figure 1). A total of 22 immune-mediated AEs (imAEs) related to durvalumab were reported in 13 pts (grade 1, 2, and 3 in 9, 7, and 6 cases, respectively): transaminitis and increased bilirubin (9 events), diarrhea (5 events), rash and pruritus (5 events), thyroid disorder (2 events), and infusion-related reaction (1 event). Two pts were treated with systemic steroids, both for grade 3 transaminitis. Others received symptomatic treatment. Ten pts experienced AEs that led to any drug discontinuation: 4 in Arm A (cerebral ischemia, febrile neutropenia, myalgia, hyponatremia), 3 in Arm C (transaminitis; neutropenia in 2 pts) and 3 in Arm D (drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, gastrointestinal perforation, prolonged QT). There were 6 grade 5 AEs, none considered related to study drugs. For pts with DLBCL (Table 3), overall response rate (ORR) was 18% and complete response rate (CRR) was 8%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) (Figure 2) was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.25-5.13). There were 30 deaths on study (2, 19, and 9 pts in Arms A, C, and D, respectively), 24 (80%) related to disease progression. Median overall survival (OS) was 7.9 months (2.66-15.31). For pts with FL (Table 3), ORR was 59% and CRR was 27%. Median PFS (Figure 3) was 10.6 months (4.63-NE). There were 6 deaths on study (2 and 4 pts in Arms A and D, respectively); 3 (50%) were related to disease progression and 1 to second primary malignancy (bladder cancer, Arm A). Median OS was not reached. An interferon-γ signature comprising 4 genes, IFN-γ, CD274, LAG3, and CXCL9, trended higher with best ORR in pts with r/r DLBCL (N=30, P=0.06) and FL (N=18, P=0.01) independent of treatment arm (Arms A, C, and D included in analysis). Conclusions: Durvalumab as monotherapy or in combination in DLBCL and FL is tolerable without unexpected safety signals but requires close monitoring. Durvalumab alone or in combination appeared to add limited benefit to therapy for r/r DLBCL or FL. However, use of an interferon-γ gene signature may serve as a biomarker by which to enrich for r/r NHL pts that may be more responsive to anti-PD-L1-based therapy and will require further investigation. Disclosures Casulo: Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Roche: Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Celgene: Research Funding. Santoro:MSD: Speakers Bureau; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Abb-Vie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ando:Eisai: Research Funding. Le Gouill:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Roche-Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support. Ruan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie company: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy. Radford:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Equity Ownership. Arcaini:Celgene, Roche, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead: Other: Travel expenses; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Bayer, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Roche, Sandoz, Janssen-Cilag, VERASTEM: Consultancy. Pinto:Roche: Speakers Bureau; Roche, Takeda: Other: Travel grants; EDO-Mundipharma: Patents & Royalties; Roche, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier: Honoraria; Servier, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Izutsu:Eisai, Chugai, Zenyaku: Honoraria; Eisai, Symbio, Chugai, Zenyaku: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Chugai, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Astra Zeneca, Eisai, Symbio, Ono, Bayer, Solasia, Zenyaku, Incyte, Novartis, Sanofi, HUYA Bioscience, MSD, Astellas Amgen, Abbvie, ARIAD, Takeda, Pfizer: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin, Eisai, Takeda, MSD, Chugai, Nihon Medi-physics, Janssen, Ono, Abbvie, Dainihon Sumitomo, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, HUYA Japan, Novartis, Bristol-Byers Squibb, Mundi, Otsuka, Daiichi Sankyo, Astellas, Asahi Kasei: Honoraria. Rule:Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Napp: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy. Munoz:Pharmacyclics /Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Fosunkite: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Casadebaig:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fox:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rettby:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dell'Aringa:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delarue:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Newhall:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cartron:Roche, Celgene: Consultancy; Sanofi, Gilead, Janssen, Roche, Celgene: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Durvalumab is a PD-L1 blocking antibody indicated for the treatment of patients with 1) locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have disease progression during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy, or who have disease progression within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy, or 2) unresectable, stage 3 NSCLC whose disease has not progressed following concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy and radiation therapy.
20
Avet-Loiseau, Herve, Cyrille Hulin, Lofti Benboubker, Meletios A. Dimopoulos, Andrew Belch, Donna Reece, John Catalano, et al. "Impact of Cytogenetics on Outcomes of Transplant-Ineligible Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treated with Continuous Lenalidomide Plus Low-Dose Dexamethasone in the First (MM-020) Trial." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 730. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.730.730.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction: Cytogenetic abnormalities in patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) are of prognostic importance and can be associated with poor outcomes (Bergsagel, Blood, 2011). The FIRST trial is a pivotal phase 3 study with the largest data set in transplant-ineligible pts with newly diagnosed MM (NDMM). This subanalysis evaluates the impact of cytogenetics on outcomes in transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM continuously treated with lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression (Rd continuous). Methods: Transplant-ineligible pts with NDMM were randomized to 1 of 3 treatment arms: Rd continuous, Rd18 (Rd for 18 cycles [72 weeks]), or melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT; for 12 cycles [72 weeks]). Cytogenetics were assessed using fluorescence in situ hybridization. Pts were categorized into cytogenetic risk groups according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria. High-risk cytogenetics included del(17p), t(4;14), and t(14;16); all other pts were categorized as non-high risk. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS; primary comparators were Rd continuous vs MPT), and key secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety. Results: A total of 762 of 1623 pts from the intent-to-treat population had validated cytogenetic profiles, with 142 pts in the high-risk group and 620 pts in the non-high-risk group. Baseline characteristics were well balanced across cytogenetic risk groups (Table 1). The median follow-up for OS was 40.2 months for the 762 pts in this analysis (data cutoff, March 03, 2014). In the non-high-risk group, median duration of treatment was 19.4 months with Rd continuous and 16.6 months with both Rd18 and MPT. In the high-risk group, median duration of treatment was 10.0 months with Rd continuous, 8.2 months with Rd18, and 12.0 months with MPT. Rd continuous treatment resulted in a 24% reduced risk of death or progression compared with MPT and an even greater 32% reduced risk in pts without high-risk cytogenetics (Table 2). In non-high-risk pts, median PFS was 31.1 months with Rd continuous compared with 21.2 and 24.9 months with Rd18 and MPT, respectively (Figure). However, in high-risk pts, the observed numerical median PFS favoring Rd18 is mainly due to small pt numbers influenced by long runners (n = 5), and the greatly overlapping 95% CIs from all 3 arms show the difference is likely to be minimal. Rd continuous treatment resulted in a 28% reduced risk of death vs MPT overall and a 34% reduced risk in pts without high-risk cytogenetics. OS was similar across treatment arms for high-risk pts. ORRs in all cytogenetic risk groups favored Rd continuous vs MPT. In pts with high-risk cytogenetics, higher-quality responses were also observed with Rd continuous vs MPT treatment. Similar results were seen with Rd continuous compared with Rd18, although OS and ORR benefits overall and in pts without high-risk cytogenetics were not as pronounced. In all 3 treatment arms, adverse events were consistent across cytogenetic risk groups. Conclusions: Rd continuous treatment resulted in PFS and OS benefits vs MPT in pts with validated cytogenetic profiles. This was largely due to PFS and OS improvements in pts without high-risk cytogenetics. In the high-risk group, the longest PFS was observed with Rd18 treatment and OS was similar across treatment arms. Despite being on the continuous vs fixed duration treatment arm, high-risk pts on Rd continuous received a shorter duration of treatment than those on MPT, which may explain why PFS favored MPT vs Rd continuous. Higher response rates were observed with Rd continuous vs MPT, regardless of cytogenetic risk, and greater quality responses were observed in pts with high-risk cytogenetics. The safety profile of Rd continuous was manageable and consistent between cytogenetic risk groups. Results support Rd continuous as a standard treatment option for pts with NDMM who are ineligible for transplant, especially those without high-risk cytogenetics. Additional PFS and OS benefits may be achieved in pts with high-risk cytogenetics when Rd continuous is used as a backbone for combination therapy with a novel agent. Promising activity in pts with high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities has been demonstrated using this approach (Lonial et al, N Engl J Med, 2015; Stewart et al, N Engl J Med, 2015). Disclosures Hulin: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria; Onyx: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Genesis: Honoraria. Reece:Lundbeck: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Merck: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Millennium Takeda: Research Funding; Otsuka: Research Funding. Catalano:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pinto:Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Spectrum: Honoraria. Ludwig:Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Bahlis:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cavo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Amgen, BMS: Honoraria. Moreau:Takeda: Other: Adboard; Janssen: Other: Adboard; Novartis: Other: Adboard; Amgen: Other: Adboard; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Adboard. Qiu:Johnson & Johnson: Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau. Schots:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Marek:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yiu:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Facon:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
21
Vujanic, Ana. "The future of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in Australia’s ‘chilling’ mediascape." Australian Journalism Review 43, no. 1 (June 1, 2021): 115–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00060_7.
Full textAbstract:
Two decades after Pierre Bourdieu published On Television and Journalism chronicling the decline of French public broadcasting and serious news, Australia’s national broadcaster, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), is in the throes of a similar decline. Besieged by a combination of funding cuts, allegations of political interference, pressure from the commercial media sector, nepotism and legislative frameworks at both federal and state levels that have sent a chill through Australian journalism, the ABC is facing challenging times. Through long-form interviews with journalists and senior bureau figures from the ABC Brisbane Bureau, this study seeks to gauge the extent to which the landscape for conducting public interest journalism in Australia has changed since 2018 and what the future of the ABC may look like.
22
Gerds, Aaron T., Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Francesco Passamonti, Marina Kremyanskaya, Jason R. Gotlib, Jeanne M. Palmer, Kelly McCaul, et al. "A Phase 2 Study of Luspatercept in Patients with Myelofibrosis-Associated Anemia." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 557. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-122546.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Approximately two-thirds of patients with primary or post-essential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (MF) have anemia, many of whom require red blood cell (RBC) transfusions. In this heavily transfused population there are severely limited treatment options; effective treatment for anemia in MF is a critically unmet medical need. Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent which binds to select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. Here we report the interim results of the ongoing open-label, phase 2 trial evaluating luspatercept in patients with MF and anemia. Methods: Seventy-four patients with MF and anemia were enrolled, including 41 not receiving concomitant ruxolitinib at study entry who received either no RBC transfusions (n = 20; Cohort 1) or 2-4 RBC U/28 d in the 12 wks prior to treatment (n = 21; Cohort 2). Thirty-three enrolled patients were receiving a stable dose of ruxolitinib for at least 16 wks, of which 14 were not receiving RBC transfusions (Cohort 3A) and 19 were (Cohort 3B). Patients in Cohorts 3A and 3B received a median dose of ruxolitinib of 20 mg/d (range, 5-50 mg/d) for a median of 41 and 43 wks, respectively. Patients received luspatercept every 21 d at a starting dose of 1.0 mg/kg in doses escalating up to 1.75 mg/kg. The primary endpoint in patients not receiving transfusions was a hemoglobin (Hb) increase ≥ 1.5 g/L at every assessment from baseline for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. In patients receiving RBC transfusions, the primary endpoint was RBC transfusion-independence (RBC-TI) for ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within the first 24 wks on study. Additional endpoints included proportion of patients achieving mean Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL in Cohorts 1 and 3A, and ≥ 50% decrease in RBC transfusions (minimum 4 RBC U decrease from baseline) in Cohorts 2 and 3B, with both responses lasting ≥ 12 consecutive wks, within 24 wks of study entry. Intent-to-treat (ITT) data were analyzed as of May 10, 2019. Results: Median age was 71 y (range, 50-88 y) and 42 (57%) were male. Median interval from MF diagnosis to study entry was 3.3 y (range, 19 d-13.5 y). Seven patients were Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) intermediate-1, 58 were intermediate-2, and 8 were high risk. Median Hb concentration at study entry was 8.8 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.8 g/dL) for Cohort 1 and 8.6 g/dL (range, 6.7-9.1 g/dL) for Cohort 3A. Patients in Cohort 2 received a median of 2.7 RBC U/28 d (range, 1-5 U/28 d) and patients in Cohort 3B received a median of 2.3 RBC U/28 d (range, 2-4 U/28 d). Patients received a median of 8 cycles of luspatercept (range, 1-24 cycles). Efficacy data are displayed in the Table, per ITT data. Two of twenty (10%) and 3/14 (21%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved an absolute Hb increase ≥ 1.5 g/dL at every measurement from baseline over any consecutive 12 wks. Two of twenty-one (10%) and 6/19 (32%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved RBC-TI over any consecutive 12 wks. Median duration of Hb response was 20 wks (range, 12-27 wks) in Cohort 1 and 12 wks (range, 12-13 wks) in Cohort 3A. Median duration of RBC-TI was 23 wks (range, 16-31 wks) in Cohort 2 and 32 wks (range, 12-65 wks) in Cohort 3B. Three (15%) and 8 (57%) patients in Cohorts 1 and 3A, respectively, achieved a mean Hb increase of ≥ 1.5 g/dL. Eight (38%) and 10 (53%) patients in Cohorts 2 and 3B, respectively, achieved a ≥ 50% reduction in RBC transfusion burden from baseline. Ruxolitinib exposure remained stable throughout the 24-wk treatment period in both Cohorts 3A and 3B. There was no difference in spleen size between responders and non-responders. Four (5%) patients had grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs). There were no treatment-related deaths. Treatment-related AEs occurring in ≥ 3% of patients were hypertension (11%), bone pain (8%), and diarrhea (4%). Seven (9%) patients had ≥ 1 AE resulting in treatment discontinuation; 23 (31%) remain on study. Conclusions: The initial results from this ongoing study suggest clinically significant activity of luspatercept in patients with MF-associated anemia, including those receiving concomitant ruxolitinib. A minority of AEs were grade 3-4 in severity, consistent with previous studies in MDS and beta-thalassemia. Disclosures Gerds: CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy; Imago Biosciences: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Italfarmaco: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Passamonti:Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Kremyanskaya:La Jolla: Consultancy; Incyte, Celgene, Constellation, Protagonist.: Research Funding. Gotlib:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Promedior: Consultancy, Research Funding; Kartos: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding. Ribrag:BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AZ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; argenX: Research Funding; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Epizyme: Honoraria, Research Funding; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Mead:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel/accommodation expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol Myers-Squibb: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy. Harrison:Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; CTI: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; AOP: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Shire: Honoraria; Promedior: Research Funding; Genotech: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; LaJolla: Consultancy; AbbVie: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Samus: Research Funding; Baxalta: Consultancy; Galena Biopharma: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses; Incyte: Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy. Gale:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pariseau:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Gerike:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Reynolds:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership. Verstovsek:Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Genetech: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Research Funding; Pharma Essentia: Research Funding; Astrazeneca: Research Funding; Ital Pharma: Research Funding; Protaganist Therapeutics: Research Funding; Constellation: Consultancy; Pragmatist: Consultancy; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.
23
Parasuraman, Shreekant V., Ahmad B. Naim, Dilan C. Paranagama, Maureen Thyne, Sara Goldberger, John O. Mascarenhas, James Mangan, Salman Fazal, Carole B. Miller, and Ruben A. Mesa. "Financial Burden of Myeloproliferative Neoplasms on Patients: Results from the MPN Landmark Survey in the United States." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 5561. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.5561.5561.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: Myelofibrosis (MF), polycythemia vera (PV), and essential thrombocythemia (ET) are chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). Patients across all 3 MPNs experience marked disease burden in terms of symptoms and negative effects on quality of life (QoL), productivity, and activities of daily living (ADL). To improve the lives and health of patients with MPNs, it is also important to have a current understanding of these burdens from a financial standpoint. This analysis of MPN Landmark survey data examined the financial burden of patients who reported that their MPN affected their employment (ie, reduced work hours, discontinued employment, or went on medical disability) or experienced no such effects on their employment. Methods: Patients diagnosed with MF, PV, or ET were recruited to participate in a real-world retrospective study (MPN Landmark survey) in the US (fielded May - July 2014). Only respondents who were diagnosed before 2013 and were 16 to 65 years of age at the time of diagnosis were eligible for this analysis. Participants were asked if their MPN had an impact in terms of reduced work hours, discontinued employment, medical disability, or no impact; the first 3 categories were not mutually exclusive. Participants provided information on their annual household income in 2013 before taxes by selecting from the following categories: ≤$15,000, $15,001-$25,000, $25,001-$35,000, $35,001-$50,000, $50,001-$75,000, $75,001-$100,000, and >$100,000. The mid value of each range was used to calculate mean income levels within each subgroup evaluated. Results: A total of 813 patients completed the web-based Landmark survey and 369 eligible patients were included in this analysis (MF, 85; PV, 172; ET, 112). Median age among patients with ET was slightly lower than among patients with MF and PV at time of MPN diagnosis (ET, 48 years; MF, 56 years; PV, 53 years). The majority of respondents were women (MF, 62%; PV, 52%; ET, 75%). Almost all patients (99%) had health insurance, primarily group commercial insurance through an employer (MF, 46%; PV, 53%; ET, 57%) and Medicare (MF, 40%; PV, 34%; ET, 24%). Most patients had at least some college education (ie, some college, 4-year degree, or postgraduate degree): MF, 86%; PV, 90%; ET, 88%. The mean 2013 household income of patients with MF, PV, and ET were similar to each other ($79,800, $80,200, and $80,400, respectively) and slightly higher than the total 2013 US mean household income of $75,839. A notable proportion of patients in each MPN group reported that their disease led to reduced work hours, discontinued employment, and medical disability: MF, 38%, 35%, and 33%, respectively; PV, 33%, 28%, and 15%; ET, 28%, 21%, and 4%. Patient demographics, such as age and health insurance status, were similar among patients who reported MPN-associated effects on employment and patients who did not within each MPN. In each MPN group, the mean percentage household income loss in patients with reduced work hours, discontinued employment, and medical disability were: MF, 16%, 18%, and 28%, respectively; PV, 15%, 24%, and 17%; and ET, 0%, 24%, and 37%, compared with patients who did not experience any effects of their MPN on employment (Figure 1). Discontinued employment and medical disability tended to have a greater impact compared with reduced work hours across MPNs. Conclusion: Patients withMPNs may experience a considerable negative impact on their employment status, which in turn may be associated with reduced annual household income. Therefore, across all MPNs, forestalling or reversing discrete aspects of the diseases that negatively impact individual productivity is an important factor in the management of these chronic neoplasms. Disclosures Parasuraman: Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Paranagama:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Thyne:Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Mascarenhas:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Kalobios: Research Funding. Mangan:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fazal:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Miller:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mesa:Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Genentech: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding.
24
Stein, Brady L., Ahmad Naim, Michael R. Grunwald, Alison R. Moliterno, Stephen T. Oh, Dilan Paranagama, Joseph A. Cordaro, et al. "Examining the Clinical Features and Underlying Cardiovascular Risk Among Patients with Polycythemia Vera in the REVEAL Study." Blood 128, no. 22 (December 2, 2016): 1934. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v128.22.1934.1934.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background:Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) often present with a broad range of clinical characteristics that may contribute to increased risks of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality, including thrombotic events (TE). Limited contemporary real-world data have been reported about the clinical burden of PV and treatment patterns in the United States. The ongoing REVEAL study collects data on disease burden, clinical management, patient-reported outcomes, and healthcare resource utilization for patients with PV in the United States. This analysis reports clinical characteristics, including underlying CV risk factors, for patients enrolled in the REVEAL study as of April 28, 2016. Methods: REVEAL is a multicenter, nonrandomized, prospective, observational study enrolling patients ≥18 years of age with a PV diagnosis who are actively managed in an academic or community setting. For this analysis, data regarding PV disease and diagnosis, clinical characteristics, and treatment patterns were collected at enrollment during usual-care visits and were based on physician assessment, electronic medical records, and local laboratory values. Ten-year CV risk factors selected for this analysis were adapted from the Framingham Heart Study for CV diseases. Results: At data cutoff, 2307 patients were available for this analysis. Mean (SD) age was 66.3 (12.2) years, 54.4% were male, 89.9% were white, 62.7% had at least some college education, and 51.1% were retired. Approximately 6% of patients had a family history of PV, primarily in parents (35.1%) and siblings (33.8%). A history of second malignancies was reported for 344 patients (14.9%). The majority of patients (84.6%) were diagnosed with PV based on an abnormal blood test alone or in combination with a bone marrow test. Among patients who were diagnosed with a mutational test (n=1078), 95.2% were diagnosed via an abnormal JAK2V617F test result. Abnormal hemoglobin (57.3%), hematocrit (55.4%), or both (47.5%) were among the most common blood values assessed for PV diagnosis. At diagnosis, 58.5% of patients were classified with high-risk PV (age ≥60 years or history of a TE); this percentage increased to 77.3% at REVEAL enrollment. The average (SD) disease duration from diagnosis to enrollment was 5.8 (6.1) years. At enrollment, 91.5% of patients were under active management for PV (phlebotomy ± aspirin, 34.0%; hydroxyurea ± aspirin, 27.0%; and phlebotomy + hydroxyurea ± aspirin, 23.2%). Underlying CV risk factors that were either diagnosed or treated in 86.0% of enrolled patients included hypertension (66.5%), history of smoking (46.2%), current smoking at enrollment (10.9%), obesity (34.2%), hyperlipidemia (27.4%), and diabetes (14.8%). At enrollment, 431 (18.7%) patients reported having ≥1 TE, including 181 patients who had a TE between PV diagnosis and enrollment. Venous and arterial TEs were reported in 11.1% and 8.6% of patients, respectively. Most commonly reported venous TEs were deep vein thrombosis (5.9%) and pulmonary embolism (2.5%); most common arterial TEs were cerebrovascular arterial thrombosis including transient ischemic attack (5.1%) and acute myocardial infarction (1.7%). Increased rates of TEs were observed among patients with hyperlipidemia (23.6%) and hypertension (21.0%; Table 1), compared with patients who did not have any risk factors (10.5%). Conclusion: A large proportion of patients in the REVEAL study had 1 or more underlying CV risks, including age, hypertension, smoking, obesity, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes, which may contribute to the risk of thrombosis. Longitudinal data from REVEAL will provide a better understanding of how these factors affect CV outcomes over time. Disclosures Stein: Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Grunwald:Janssen: Research Funding; Forma Therapeutics: Research Funding; Medtronic: Equity Ownership; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ariad: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Oh:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding. Paranagama:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cordaro:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boccia:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen/Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Genentech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Mesa:Ariad: Consultancy; CTI: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Promedior: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding.
25
Costa, Luciano J., Sandy W. Wong, Arancha Bermúdez, Javier de la Rubia, María-Victoria Mateos, Enrique M. Ocio, Paula Rodríguez-Otero, et al. "First Clinical Study of the B-Cell Maturation Antigen (BCMA) 2+1 T Cell Engager (TCE) CC-93269 in Patients (Pts) with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM): Interim Results of a Phase 1 Multicenter Trial." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 143. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-122895.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: BCMA is a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) receptor superfamily transmembrane glycoprotein essential for the maturation and survival of plasma cells. CC-93269 is an asymmetric 2-arm humanized IgG TCE that binds bivalently to BCMA and monovalently to CD3ε in a 2+1 format (Seckinger A, et al. Cancer Cell. 2017;31:396-410). The CC-93269-mediated interaction between T cells and BCMA-expressing myeloma cells induces T cell receptor/CD3 crosslinking leading to T cell activation, and release of proinflammatory cytokines and cytolytic enzymes, resulting in myeloma cell death. In preclinical studies with CC-93269 and related molecules, 2+1 BCMA TCEs induced tumor regression in animal models and promoted myeloma cell death in primary pt myeloma cells. Here we report interim results from a phase 1 dose-finding study (CC-93269-MM-001; NCT03486067) evaluating CC-93269 in pts with RRMM. Methods: Eligible pts had RRMM and had received ≥ 3 prior regimens without prior BCMA-directed therapy. In dose escalation, CC-93269 was administered intravenously over 2 hours on Days 1, 8, 15, and 22 for Cycles 1-3; Days 1 and 15 for Cycles 4-6; and on Day 1 for Cycle 7 and beyond, all in 28-day cycles. Dose escalation involved 2 stages: in stage 1, CC-93269 was given in fixed doses; in stage 2, pts received a fixed first dose on Cycle 1 Day 1, followed by intrapatient dose escalation on Cycle 1 Day 8. Primary objectives were to assess the safety and tolerability of CC-93269 and define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), non-tolerated dose (NTD), and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Minimal residual disease (MRD) was assessed after clinical response in pt bone marrow aspirate samples by Next Generation Flow using the EuroFlow panel. MRD negativity was reported only if a minimum sensitivity of < 1 tumor cell in 105 nucleated cells was achieved. Results: As of May 24, 2019, 19 pts had received CC-93269. Median age was 64 years (range 51-78), with a median of 6.2 years (range 1.4-13.9) since initial diagnosis. The median number of prior regimens was 6 (range 3-12) and included treatment with autologous stem cell transplantation (73.7%), allogenic stem cell transplantation (10.5%), lenalidomide (100%), pomalidomide (84.2%), bortezomib (100%), carfilzomib (84.2%), and daratumumab (DARA; 94.7%). All pts had MM refractory to their last line of therapy, with 16 (88.9%) refractory to DARA, 17 (89.5%) to their last proteasome inhibitor, and 16 (84.2%) to their last immunomodulatory agent. CC-93269 doses ranged from 0.15 to 10 mg; median duration of treatment was 14.6 weeks (range 1.6-32.0) with pts receiving a median of 4 cycles (range 1-8). Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 15 (78.9%) pts and included 10 (52.6%) pts with neutropenia, 8 (42.1%) with anemia, 5 (26.3%) with infections, and 4 (21.1%) with thrombocytopenia. No pt required dose modifications. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) was reported in 17 (89.5%) pts, the majority of whom reported a maximum grade 1 (n = 11 [57.9%]) or grade 2 (n = 5 [26.3%]), and occurred most frequently with the first or second dose (n = 22 of 27 events [81.5%]). CRS prophylaxis was implemented with dexamethasone for first dose and dose increases in pts receiving ≥ 6 mg. Of 27 CRS events, 8 (29.6%) were managed with dexamethasone and 10 (37.0%) with tocilizumab. One pt receiving 6 mg CC-93269 as first dose and 10 mg on Cycle 1 Day 8 died on study in the setting of CRS, with a potential infection as a contributing factor. Dose-related pharmacodynamic activity, including peripheral blood immune cell redistribution and transient release of pro- and anti-inflammatory cytokines, was observed in pts. Of the 12 pts treated with ≥ 6 mg CC-93269 in Cycle 1, 10 pts achieved a partial response (PR) or better (overall response rate; 83.3%), including 7 (58.3%) with a very good partial response (VGPR) or better and 4 (33.3%) with a stringent complete response (sCR) (Table); 9 (75.0%) pts achieved MRD negativity. The median time to response was 4.2 weeks (range 4.0-13.1), and 10 of 10 responses were ongoing with follow-up ranging from 2.1 to 4.7 months. The NTD, MTD, and RP2D have not yet been reached. Conclusions: CC-93269, a 2+1 BCMA TCE, shows a manageable safety profile and promising efficacy, including MRD-negative sCRs, in pts with heavily pretreated RRMM. The study continues to enroll in the dose escalation phase. Updated safety and efficacy data will be presented at the meeting. Disclosures Costa: Fujimoto Pharmaceutical Corporation Japan: Other: Advisor; Karyopharm: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; GSK: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Wong:Genentech: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Fortis: Research Funding; Juno: Research Funding. Bermúdez:MSD: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Fresenius: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. de la Rubia:AMGEN: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy. Mateos:Pharmamar: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive: Honoraria; EDO: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ocio:BMS: Honoraria; Sanofi: Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Array Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmamar: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Rodríguez-Otero:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy; BMS: Honoraria; Kite Pharma: Consultancy. San-Miguel:Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Roche, Sanofi, and Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Li:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sarmiento:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Lardelli:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gaudy:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Boss:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kelly:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Burgess:University of California: Other: Volunteer clinical faculty, without salary, Patents & Royalties: Patent - T315A and F317I mutations of BCR-ABL kinase domain; Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: Patent - CD47 antibodies and methods of use thereof. Hege:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Arcus Biosciences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mersana Therapuetics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bensinger:Amgen, Celgene: Other: Personal Fees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda, Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Merck, Karyopharm: Other: Grant.
26
Gupta, Vikas, Srdan Verstovsek, Ronald Paquette, Jason R. Gotlib, Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Jean-Jacques Kiladjian, Francisco Cervantes, et al. "Clinical Outcomes with Ruxolitinib (RUX) in Patients with Myelofibrosis (MF) Stratified By Transfusion Status: A Pooled Analysis of the COMFORT-I and -II Trials." Blood 128, no. 22 (December 2, 2016): 3118. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v128.22.3118.3118.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: The phase 3 COMFORT trials demonstrated that the Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor RUX reduces spleen volume, prolongs overall survival (OS), and improves MF−related symptoms and measures of quality of life in patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk MF, compared with either placebo (COMFORT-I) or best available treatment (BAT; COMFORT-II). Many patients with MF are anemic or transfusion-dependent; the impact of these features on clinical outcomes is unknown. We evaluated the relationship between transfusion requirement and clinical outcomes in patients treated with RUX in the COMFORT studies. Methods: Analyses of data pooled from COMFORT-I and -II were stratified by baseline anemia status (defined as receiving ≥2 units of red blood cells [RBCs] within the 12 weeks before baseline or baseline hemoglobin [Hb] <10 g/dL). Transfusion independence was defined as the absence of RBC transfusions and maintenance of Hb levels ≥8 g/dL for ≥12 weeks; transfusion dependence was defined as a requirement for ≥4 units of RBCs or Hb levels <8 g/dL during an 8-week interval (Gupta V, et al. JCO [ASCO Abstracts]. 2015;33[s15]:abstract TPS7102). Patients achieving transfusion independence during Weeks 13-24 were considered responders for independence by Week 24; those developing transfusion dependence during Weeks 17-24 were considered dependent by Week 24. Effects of transfusion status at Week 24 on MF Symptom Assessment Form total symptom scores (TSS), spleen volume, and body weight were assessed descriptively. The effect on OS was evaluated using the landmark approach (including patients completing ≥24 weeks of study treatment) with stratified log-rank tests for responder vs nonresponder comparisons. Times to first occurrence of transfusion independence and first occurrence of transfusion dependence in the ITT population (censored at last clinical visit), and time to discontinuation among patients in the RUX group who were anemic at baseline (censored at Week 240) were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Overall, 301 patients were randomized to RUX (baseline anemia, n=138 [45.8%]) and 227 to the control group (placebo or BAT; baseline anemia, n=113 [49.8%]). In the RUX group, a greater proportion of patients who were nonanemic at baseline (range, 73.4%-73.8%) achieved transfusion independence compared with those who had anemia at baseline (range, 15.5%-22.4%). Week 24 transfusion independence vs nonindependence status did not significantly affect OS in the RUX group (P=0.1322; Figure A), whereas it was significant (P=0.0004; Figure B) in the control group. Similarly, Week 24 transfusion dependence vs nondependence status did not significantly affect OS in the RUX group (P=0.4547; Figure C), whereas it was significant (P=0.0323; Figure D) in the control group. Median OS was significantly longer in the RUX vs control group for patients who were not transfusion independent (baseline anemia, 200 vs 137 weeks; nonanemic, 271 vs 166 weeks; overall P=0.002) or became transfusion dependent (baseline anemia, 210 vs 127 weeks; nonanemic, 292 vs 90 weeks; overall P=0.0323). Changes from baseline in spleen volume, body weight, and TSS at Week 24 were not affected by transfusion or anemia status in the RUX group; however, TSS worsened in the control group among patients who did not achieve transfusion independence vs those who did. Risk of transfusion dependence decreased after Week 24 in the RUX group. The probability of becoming transfusion independent after 1 year of treatment was similar in both treatment groups (approximately 0.75); median time to transfusion independence for the RUX and control groups was 16.6 and 12.0 weeks, respectively. For patients in the RUX group who became transfusion dependent, the mean monthly units of RBCs peaked at Week 20 (2.82 units), decreasing thereafter to 0.52 units at Week 240. Transfusion dependence did not affect RUX discontinuation rates or dosage. Conclusion: Transfusion requirement had little impact on clinical outcomes or treatment discontinuation within the RUX group but was associated with reduced OS and worsened TSS in the control group. The risk of becoming transfusion dependent, units of RBCs administered, and the monthly proportion of patients requiring transfusions decreased rapidly after 24 weeks of RUX treatment. Disclosures Gupta: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Verstovsek:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; CTI BioPharma Corp: Research Funding; Galena BioPharma: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Geron: Research Funding; Lilly Oncology: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Paquette:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Cervantes:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Langmuir:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau.
27
Seymour, Frances, Mary H. Young, Mark Tometsko, Jamie Cavenagh, Ethan G. Thompson, Elizabeth Whalen, Sam A. Danziger, et al. "Immune Microenvironment Analysis of Bone Marrow By Mass Cytometry and RNA Sequencing in Multiple Myeloma Patients Treated with Daratumumab and Durvalumab." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 3296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-114453.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction Relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) remains a challenging disease to treat due to its heterogeneity and complexity. There is an urgent need for novel combination strategies, including immunotherapy. The study of the tumour and immune microenvironment before and after treatment with combination therapy is a crucial part of understanding the underpinning of disease response. Methods Longitudinal samples of bone marrow aspirates and whole blood were collected from a phase II clinical trial, MEDI4736-MM-003 (NCT02807454) where daratumumab and durvalumab naïve patients were exposed simultaneously to both these drugs. A combination of mass cytometry (CyTOF), RNAseq and flow cytometry were performed on a subset of samples from these subjects. Specifically, paired bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMMC) samples from nine patients taken at screening and six weeks post-treatment were analysed by mass cytometry (CyTOF) using a 37-marker pan-immune panel that included both lineage and functional intracellular/extracellular markers. In addition, whole blood sample specimens were collected at screening and on treatment (8, 15, 30, and 45 days after treatment) and analysed by flow cytometry. Flow cytometry panels were designed to allow interrogation of the abundance and activation status of immune cell subsets. Finally, RNA from bone marrow aspirates at screening and C2D15 were analysed by RNA sequencing. Expression profiles from the aspirates were used to estimate cell proportions by computational deconvolution. Individual cell types in these microenvironments were estimated using the DCQ algorithm and a gene expression signature matrix based on the published LM22 leukocyte matrix (Newman et al., 2015) augmented with 5 bone marrow- and myeloma-specific cell types. Results In a heavily pre-treated population with RRMM, treatment with durvalumab and daratumumab leads to shifts in a number of key immunological populations when compared to pre-treatment. In the bone marrow, CD8 and CD4 populations rise (by CyTOF and RNAseq), while NK, DC and B cell populations fall (by CyTOF). In the bone marrow within CD8+ T lymphocyte populations, we observed a post-treatment rise in markers of degranulation (granzyme p=0.0195, perforin p=0.0078, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). This is also accompanied by a fall in PD1 expression (p=0.0078) and rise in the co-stimulatory receptor DNAM1 (p=0.0273). These changes are most marked on cells with an effector memory CD45RA+ CD8+ T cell phenotype. In the blood, similar to the bone marrow, CD8+ T cells proliferate over the course of treatment (flow cytometry). A fall in both naïve and active NK cell populations is seen following treatment in bone marrow. NK cells express high levels of CD38 and are therefore depleted by daratumumab. Those NK cells which remain have an active phenotype with increased expression of TNFa (p=0.0039) and IFNg (p=0.0195) following treatment. Across the time points sampled in peripheral blood, NK cells were also decreased and those that remained were proliferating. Dendritic cells with a tolerogenic phenotype can be identified prior to treatment and are seen to fall in abundance following treatment with durvalumab and daratumumab. Conclusions The combination of durvalumab and daratumumab leads to several immune microenvironment changes that biologically portend clinical effect. We see increases in the abundance of cell populations with functional anti-tumour activity, including granzyme B+ CD8 T cells and a reduction in PD1high T cells. Despite the treatment expectedly reducing NK cell numbers, many functionally competent NK cells remain, as evidenced by the presence of anti-tumour cytokines. This combination strategy also reduces immunosuppressive tolerogenic DCs, which suppress CD4 and CD8 T cell activity. Taken together, this suggests that this chemotherapy free, doublet treatment has the potential to up-regulate anti-tumour immunological responses, which may restore immunosurveillance mechanisms critically needed in these highly refractory patients. Disclosures Seymour: Celgene: Research Funding. Young:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Tometsko:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cavenagh:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Thompson:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Whalen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Danziger:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fitch:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fox:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dervan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Foy:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Newhall:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gribben:Acerta Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Cancer Research UK: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; NIH: Research Funding; Medical Research Council: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Honoraria; Kite: Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Wellcome Trust: Research Funding; Unum: Equity Ownership.
28
Gooding, Sarah, Naser Ansari-Pour, Fadi Towfic, Maria Ortiz, Dan Rozelle, Victoria Zadorozhny, Michael Amatangelo, et al. "Genetic and Transcript Changesin Cereblon in IMiD-Treated Myeloma Patients." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 1793. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-126828.
Full textAbstract:
Myeloma survival has been significantly improved by novel therapies over the past two decades. Immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs, Lenalidomide (LEN) and Pomalidomide (POM)) are a backbone of current treatment strategies. But myeloma (MM) remains incurable, because patients ultimately relapse. IMiD drug resistance mechanisms are multifactorial, and can be either dependent or independent of IMiDs binding to Cereblon (CRBN) (a component of an E3 ligase) in tumor and immune cells. A small series of relapsed patients demonstrated sub-clonal mutation rates of 12% in CRBN and 10% in other CRBN pathway genes (Kortum et al, Blood 2016), but the clinical implication of this observation is unknown. In contrast, baseline gene expression of CRBN was not associated with clinical outcome to POM-DEX therapy (Qian et al, Leukemia & Lymphoma 2018). An integrated assessment of the burden of different mechanisms of CRBN function loss, the selective pressure for their survival, and their effects on response to CRBN-modulating agents, is lacking. For patients that progress on IMiD-based therapies, there is a need to develop drugs that will overcome their resistance. To appropriately target the right novel agents to the right patients, resistance mechanisms must be understood. A deeper understanding of the mechanistic basis for IMiD-specific resistance mechanisms is critical for differentiating new Cereblon modulating agents (eg CELMoDs) from the IMiDs. Here, we present the largest comprehensive analysis of the burden of CRBN mutation or transcript variants in relapsed refractory myeloma (RRMM) patients. We analysed WGS and RNASeq data from 298 MM samples from 268 patients across 4 clinical trials (CC-4047-MM-010 (N=226), CC-4047-MM-013 (N=17), CC-220-MM-001 (N=45) and CC-122-ST-001MM2 (N=10), for whom outcome data were available. All patients had been exposed to LEN-based therapy and a subset (69/268) were also exposed to POM-based therapy. The overall incidence of single nucleotide variants in CRBN was 17/298 (5.7%). The incidence of at least monoalleleic deletion at the CRBN gene locus was 21/298 (5.5%). CRBN has different transcript isoforms (Gandhi et al, BJHaem 2014). As high levels of isoform ENST00000424814.5, with deletion of exon 10, was previously correlated with poorer survival (Neri et al, Blood 2016), we assessed incidence of a high ratio (>2) of exon 10-deleted CRBN transcript to full length CRBN transcript. 92 samples had sufficient purity (>90% tumor cells) for this analysis. 13/92 samples (14.1%) had a high exon10-deleted transcript ratio. Overall, 43/268 (16.0%) patients had genetic or transcript variants in CRBN. In contrast, 27/514 (5.2%) newly diagnosed myeloma (NDMM) patients from the Myeloma Genome Project had genetic or transcript variants in CBRN; 2/514 (0.4%) had CRBN mutations, 11/514 (2.1%) had CRBN gene deletion and 14/514 (2.7%) had a high exon10-deleted transcript ratio. Thus, there was an increase in CRBN variants from NDMM to RRMM. In patients exposed to LEN but not POM (219/268), there were 5 CRBN mutations, 14 monoallelic CRBN deletions and 13/92 patients with high exon10-deleted transcript ratio. In 69/268 patients exposed to POM (baseline from CC-220-MM-001 (N=35), CC-122-ST-001MM2 (N=10), or follow up samples from CC-4047-MM-010 (N=24)), there were 12 CRBN mutations in 8 patients (11.6%) and 7 CRBN deletions (10.1%), approximately double the incidence seen in the whole cohort. 3 CRBN deletions were homozygous, which was not observed in non-POM-exposed individuals. Sample purity was insufficient to measure transcript ratios. In summary, 16.0% of RRMM patients that received LEN or POM have genetic or transcript variants in CRBN, a higher proportion than in NDMM. The impact of these aberrations on CRBN function, especially related to binding of CRBN-modulating drugs, remains to be ascertained. Analysis of the correlation between CRBN variation and response to therapy, clinical outcomes, and the incidence and effect of mutation or copy loss of CRBN interactors (E3 Ligase members and regulators, CRBN substrates) is underway and will be presented. Disclosures Gooding: Celgene: Research Funding. Ansari-Pour:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Towfic:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ortiz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rozelle:Celgene Corporation: Other: Contractor for Celgene. Zadorozhny:Celgene Corporation: Other: Contractor for Celgene. Amatangelo:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Flynt:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Tsai:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Neri:Celgene, Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bahlis:AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Vyas:Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding. Thakurta:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership.
29
Richardson, Paul G., Craig Hofmeister, Noopur S. Raje, David Siegel, Sagar Lonial, Jacob P. Laubach, Yvonne A. Efebera, et al. "A Phase 1, Multicenter Study of Pomalidomide, Bortezomib, and Low-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients with Proteasome Inhibitor Exposed and Lenalidomide-Refractory Myeloma (Trial MM-005)." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 3036. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.3036.3036.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: The combination of an immunomodulatory drug with the proteasome inhibitor (PI), bortezomib (BORT), and low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) has demonstrated preclinical synergy and considerable clinical activity in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM; Mitsiades et al Blood, 2002; Richardson et al Blood, 2014). Treatment (Tx) with the immunomodulatory drug pomalidomide (POM) + LoDEX has been shown to delay disease progression and extend survival in patients (pts) with myeloma previously treated with lenalidomide (LEN) and BORT (Richardson et al Blood, 2014; San Miguel et al Lancet Oncol, 2013). This approach was tested using POM + BORT + LoDEX (PVd) in MM-005; preliminary results showed that PVd was effective and well tolerated in LEN-refractory and BORT-exposed pts. Subcutaneous (SC) BORT was shown to be non-inferior to intravenous (IV) BORT and had an improved safety profile in RRMM (Moreau et al Lancet Oncol, 2011). In addition to a cohort of PVd with IV BORT, MM-005 included a cohort of PVd with SC BORT. Methods: In this phase 1 dose-escalation trial, pts must have received 1-4 lines of prior Tx, with ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of LEN plus a PI. Pts had to be PI exposed and refractory to LEN but not to BORT. A 3 + 3 design with 21-day cycles was used to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Cycles 1-8 of dose-escalation cohorts received POM (1-4 mg/day on days 1-14), IV or SC BORT (1-1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11), and LoDEX (20 mg/day, or 10 mg/day for pts aged > 75 years, on days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12) until progressive disease (PD) or unacceptable adverse event (AE). After cycle 8, BORT was administered on days 1 and 8, and LoDEX was administered on days 1, 2, 8, and 9. The primary endpoint was MTD, and secondary endpoints included safety, overall response rate (ORR; ≥ partial response [PR]), duration of response (DOR), and time to response. Results: Of the 34 pts enrolled from March 2012 to August 2014, the median age was 58.5 years (range, 36-76 years) and 59% were male. The median number of prior antimyeloma Tx lines (PAMTL) was 2 (range, 1-4), the proportion of pts with ≥ 2 PAMTL was 56%, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was ≤ 1 for all pts. All pts were refractory to LEN, and all were exposed to prior PI (33 pts [97%] received prior BORT and 2 pts [6%] received prior ixazomib). All pts discontinued Tx, most commonly due to PD (n = 23), but none due to Tx-related AEs. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported in the dose-escalation cohorts or at the maximum planned dose (MPD) of POM 4 mg, BORT 1.3 mg/m2, and LoDEX 20 mg (10 mg for pts aged > 75 years). The median number of Tx cycles received was 9 (range, 2-36) for all pts and was 11 (range, 2-19) vs 8 (range, 3-15) in the MPD with IV BORT (n = 10) vs SC BORT (n = 12) cohorts. The ORR for all pts was 65% (n = 22), with 2 complete responses (CRs), 1 stringent CR, 10 very good PRs (VGPRs), and 9 PRs; all pts achieved at least stable disease. The median DOR for the 22 responders was 7.4 months. Commonly reported grade 3/4 AEs were more frequent at the MPD level with IV BORT vs SC BORT (90% vs 75%), including neutropenia (60% vs 17%), thrombocytopenia (40% vs 8%), and pneumonia (30% vs 8%). There were no reports of grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy (PN) or deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in any of the cohorts. Conclusions: PVd was effective, with an ORR of 65% in pts with LEN-refractory and PI-exposed myeloma. PVd was well tolerated, with no grade 3/4 PN or DVT and no Tx discontinuation due to Tx-related AE; toxicities were well managed. Moreover, AEs were generally less frequent with SC vs IV BORT. Thus, the favorable tolerability and efficacy of PVd, which could be a highly attractive therapeutic option in pts with RRMM, is under further evaluation in the large ongoing phase 3 trial MM-007. Disclosures Richardson: Millennium Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentium S.p.A.: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Pomalidomide in combination with bortezomib. Raje:BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding. Siegel:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Merck: Speakers Bureau. Lonial:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding. Laubach:Novartis: Research Funding; Millennium: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Vesole:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Idera Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Nooka:Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Zaki:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Herring:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Li:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shah:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anderson:Oncocorp: Equity Ownership; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; acetylon pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership; Gilead: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Millennium: Consultancy.
30
Saini, Kamal S., Marco Tagliamento, Matteo Lambertini, Richard McNally, Adrianne Kelly, Marco Romano, Isagani Chico, et al. "Estimating Mortality in Patients with Hematological Malignancy and COVID-19: A Pooled Analysis of 10 Studies." Blood 136, Supplement 1 (November 5, 2020): 13–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2020-141749.
Full textAbstract:
Patients with COVID-19 and underlying hematological malignancy seem to have a higher mortality rate compared with those patients without malignancy, however, the extent of such excess risk is unclear. We performed a systematic review of literature and a pooled analysis to provide precise estimates of the mortality rate among patients with both hematological malignancy and COVID-19. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search including peer-reviewed publications, preprints, and conference proceedings up to July 16, 2020. Only studies including exclusively patients with hematological malignancies were considered. The primary endpoint was the case fatality rate (CFR), which was defined as rate of death in patients with hematological malignancy and COVID-19. A random effects model was used to derive a pooled CFR and its 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: In total, 10 studies including 751 patients with both COVID-19 and hematological malignancy were selected for the pooled analysis (Table 1). A total of 257 deaths were recorded in this population. The probability of death was 37·48% (95% CI 27·74% to 48.36%; I2=48·1%) in this patient population (Figure 1). [Data will be updated closer to the ASH 2020 meeting]. Conclusions: Patients with both COVID-19 and hematological malignancy have a higher probability of mortality compared to patients with COVID-19 but without underlying malignancy. Optimally and tailored preventive measures are needed to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection in patients with hematological malignancies; this patient population should be priority for vaccine campaigns. Figure Disclosures Saini: Covance Inc.: Current Employment; European Commission: Other: Consulting fees. Tagliamento:Roche: Other: Travel grant; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Travel grant; AstraZeneca: Other: Travel grant; Takeda: Other: Travel Grant; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Lambertini:Roche: Other: Consultant; Novartis: Other: Consultant; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Theramex: Speakers Bureau. McNally:Covance Inc.: Current Employment. Kelly:Covance Inc.: Current Employment. Romano:Covance Inc.: Current Employment. Chico:Covance Inc.: Current Employment. Jenson:Laboratory Corporation of America: Current Employment. Anderson:Laboratory Corporation of America: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company; OmniSeq: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Curigliano:Novartis: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Pfizer: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Lilly: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Foundation Medicine: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Samsung: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Daichii-Sankyo: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau ; Ellipses Pharma: Honoraria; Roche/Genentech: Other: fees for travel and accommodation ; Pfizer: Other: fees for travel and accommodation ; Roche/Genentech: Other: personal fees for consulting, advisory role and speakers' bureau . de Azambuja:Roche/Genentech: Other: honoraria and advisory board fees and travel grant, and research grant to institution; Novartis: Other: honoraria and advisory board fees and travel grant and research grant to institution; Seattle Genetics: Other: honoraria and advisory board fees ; GSK: Other: Travel grant and research grant to institution; AstraZeneca: Other: Research grant to institution.
31
Verstovsek, Srdan, Shreekant Parasuraman, Jingbo Yu, Anne Shah, Shambhavi Kumar, Ann Xi, and Claire Harrison. "Real-World Survival Among Patients with Intermediate- to High-Risk Myelofibrosis in the United States: Impact of Ruxolitinib Approval." Blood 136, Supplement 1 (November 5, 2020): 46–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2020-140820.
Full textAbstract:
Background The myeloproliferative neoplasm myelofibrosis (MF) is associated with reduced overall survival (OS) compared with the general population (Hultcrantz M, et al. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30[24]:2995-3001; Price GL, et al. PLoS One. 2014;9[3]:e90299). The Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in November 2011 for the treatment of adult patients with intermediate- or high-risk MF based on data from the phase 3 COMFORT trials, which showed significantly improved OS in patients who received RUX (Verstovsek S, et al. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10:156). Understanding the clinical benefit of RUX in real-world practice requires an understanding of changes in patient outcomes for those exposed to RUX compared with those never exposed to RUX, both before and after approval. The aim of this analysis was to assess the OS of patients newly diagnosed with intermediate- to high-risk MF before RUX approval, and for those who were RUX-unexposed vs -exposed in the post-RUX approval time frame. Study Design and Methods All data from the Medicare Fee-for-Service claims database (Parts A/B/D) from January 2010 to December 2017 were used to identify patients who were ≥65 years old (intermediate-1 or higher risk MF due to age) with ≥1 inpatient claim or ≥2 outpatient claims with a documented MF diagnosis. The index date was the date of the first qualifying MF claim; ≥12 months of pre-index continuous medical and pharmacy enrollment was required. Patients with evidence of an MF diagnosis ≤12 months before the index date were excluded. Patients with a diagnosis of myelodysplastic syndrome, hematologic malignancies (leukemias, multiple myeloma, and lymphomas), or solid tumors either ≤12 months before, on, or any time after index were also excluded in a stepwise manner. The study sample was classified into 3 groups: patients diagnosed with MF pre-RUX approval (index year 2010-2011; no post-index exposure to RUX); those diagnosed with MF post-RUX approval and unexposed to RUX (index year 2012-2017); and those diagnosed with MF post-RUX approval and exposed to RUX (index year 2012-2017). One-year survival rate and risk of mortality were estimated using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses, adjusting for baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. OS was measured from the index date until death or end of follow-up. Patients without a death date were censored at disenrollment or the end of the study period, whichever occurred first. Results Among eligible patients with an MF diagnosis (N=1677), median age was 78 years, 39.8% were male, and 84.1% were white. The analysis included 278 patients diagnosed pre-RUX approval (all RUX-unexposed) and 1399 diagnosed post-RUX approval (RUX-unexposed, n=1127; RUX-exposed, n=272). Median follow-up for the pre- and post-RUX approval groups was 12.5 and 11.3 mo (RUX-unexposed, 10.2 mo; RUX-exposed, 14.0 mo), respectively. In the pre-RUX approval group, 119 (42.8%) patients had a valid death date compared with 436 (31.2%) in the post-RUX approval group (RUX unexposed, n=382 [33.9%]; RUX exposed, n=54 [19.9%]). The 1-year survival rate (95% CI) was 55.6% (49.4%-61.3%) for the pre-RUX approval group, 72.5% (69.5%-75.2%) for the post-RUX approval RUX-unexposed group, and 82.3% (76.7%-86.7%) for the post-RUX approval RUX-exposed group (Figure). The risk of mortality was lowest among RUX-exposed patients (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.26-0.50; P<0.0001 vs the pre-RUX approval group). Patients in the post-RUX approval group who had never been exposed to RUX also had a lower risk of mortality, although less pronounced than RUX-exposed patients, compared with the pre-RUX approval group (adjusted HR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.56-0.80; P<0.0001). Conclusions In this real-world study of US patients diagnosed with intermediate- or high-risk MF, 1-year OS was improved in patients diagnosed after RUX approval compared with before RUX approval. Notably, in the post-RUX approval time frame, 1-year OS was greater for those who received RUX than for those who did not receive RUX. These findings complement the survival benefit results demonstrated in the COMFORT studies using real-world data. Disclosures Verstovsek: Gilead: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; CTI Biopharma Corp: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sierra Oncology: Consultancy, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; ItalPharma: Research Funding; Protagonist Therapeutics: Research Funding; PharmaEssentia: Research Funding; Blueprint Medicines Corp: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Yu:Incyte Corporation: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Shah:Avalere Health: Current Employment. Kumar:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Xi:Avalere Health: Current Employment; Incyte Corporation: Other: Avalere Health is a paid consultant of Incyte Corporation. Harrison:Gilead Sciences: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma Corp: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Honoraria; Sierra Oncology: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau; AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Promedior: Honoraria.
32
Wang, Luhua, Luis Fayad, Fredrick B. Hagemeister, Sattva Neelapu, Felipe Samaniego, Peter McLaughlin, Barry Samuels, et al. "A Phase I/II Study of Lenalidomide in Combination with Rituximab in Relapsed/Refractory Mantle Cell Lymphoma." Blood 114, no. 22 (November 20, 2009): 2719. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v114.22.2719.2719.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Abstract 2719 Poster Board II-695 Background: Rituximab directly targets CD20 positive lymphoma cells while lenalidomide targets the microenvironment. This combination was proven effective in vitro and in vivo in mantle cell lymphoma (Wu et al, Clin Cancer Res 2008; Zhang et al, Am J Hematol 2009). Clinically, lenalidomide (Habermann et al, Br J Haematol 2009) and rituximab have single-agent activity in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) and may be an effective combination. The goal of our study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in phase 1 and evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide plus rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL in phase 2. Methods: Patients with relapsed/refractory MCL received lenalidomide on days 1–21 of every 28-day cycle, and rituximab (375 mg/m2) weekly during cycle 1. Dose escalation was used to determine the MTD with lenalidomide (10 mg, 15 mg, 20 mg, and 25 mg). Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 3 or 4 non-hematologic, or grade 4 hematologic adverse events in cycle 1. Phase 2 has reached targeted enrolment with 45 patients treated at MTD. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate progression free survival rate and response duration. Median time to event in months with 95% confidence interval was calculated. Of 45 patients treated at the MTD, the median age was 66 (46–85), 91% were males. All patients had received prior rituximab and were enrolled regardless of prior rituximab sensitivity or resistance. Results: The median follow-up time for the censored observations was 11.4 months. Two DLTs occurred at 25 mg in phase 1 (hypercalcemia, non-neutropenic fever); therefore, the MTD was 20 mg. The grade 3–4 non-hematologic events included elevated AST, elevated ALT, fatigue, myalgia, tremors, ataxia, cough, deep vein thrombosis, dyspnea, edema (facial), infection, neuropathy sensory, rash, and respiratory failure. Grade 3–4 hematologic adverse events included neutropenia (37 events), neutropenic fever (4 events), and thrombocytopenia (16 events). There were no responses in patients treated at 10 mg or 15 mg. Thirty six patients (36) were evaluable for response. Nine (9) patients are too early in their treatment and are not yet eligible for response evaluation. Among the 36 evaluable patients, 11 (31%) patients achieved CR, 8 (22%) patients achieved PR, 3 (8%) patients had minor response, 6 (17%) patients had stable disease and 8 (22%) patients had progressive mantle cell lymphoma. The overall response rate (CR + PR) was 53%. Seventy eight (78%) patients achieved stable disease or better and benefited from oral Lenalidomide plus 4 doses of rituximab. The median time to response was 2 months (2–8), and the median duration of response for the 19 patients with CR or PR was 18 months (95% CI: 10.6, NA) (range1–30 months). The median progression free survival for all patients on phase 2 was 14 months (95% CI: 9.8, NA) (ranging from 1–32 months). Conclusion: Oral lenalidomide plus rituximab resulted in durable responses in relapsed/refractory MCL with a favourable toxicity profile. Disclosures: Wang: Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Hagemeister:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Samaniego:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Yi:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Shah:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Elan: Consultancy; Millennium: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Bell:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Knight:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Zeldis:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
33
Mesa, Ruben A., Carole B. Miller, John O. Mascarenhas, Maureen Thyne, Sara Goldberger, Dilan C. Paranagama, Shreekant V. Parasuraman, Salman Fazal, Ahmad B. Naim, and James Mangan. "Hydroxyurea Treatment History and Quality of Life in Patients with Polycythemia Vera: Results from the MPN Landmark Survey in the United States." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 4077. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.4077.4077.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: Patients with the myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) polycythemia vera (PV) require treatment to manage blood cell counts and reduce the risks of cardiovascular/thromboembolic events. Hydroxyurea (HU) is a common cytoreductive treatment; however, some patients discontinue HU treatment because of resistance, intolerance, or frequently a combination of both limitations. Patients may also continue to receive HU despite diminishing or nonexistent clinical benefit, sometimes in combination with persistent need for phlebotomy procedures. This analysis of MPN Landmark survey data examined patient-reported quality of life (QoL) outcomes in patients with PV who were naive to HU (HU-N), were continuing HU (HU-C), or had discontinued HU (HU-D). Methods: Patients with an MPN under active management in the US were eligible to complete an online survey (fielded May - July 2014). This is a report of responses given by patients with PV to questions about symptom burden, QoL, activities of daily living (ADL), and work/productivity. PV-related effects on patients feeling depressed/discouraged, patients feeling anxious/worried, or interference with ADLs were considered to be at high levels if the patient-reported score was ≥4 on a scale of 1 (not at all) to 5 (a great deal). Symptom severity was rated on a scale of 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable). Results: The survey respondents included 380 patients with PV (HU-N, n=159; HU-C, n=181; HU-D, n=40). Mean age was 62.2 years, 65.1 years, and 64.2 years in the HU-N, HU-C, and HU-D groups, respectively. Mean duration of PV was 8.3 years, 10.3 years, and 13.9 years in the HU-N, HU-C, and HU-D groups, respectively. Patients who had not received HU were currently or previously treated with phlebotomy (87.4%), interferon (11.3%), or anagrelide (9.4%); 66.0% of HU-N patients were classified as high-risk based on information provided by the patients in the survey (ie, age 60 or older or history of thrombosis). Among HU-C and HU-D patients, treatment history included phlebotomy (89.5% and 100%, respectively), interferon (7.2% and 52.5%), or anagrelide (15.5% and 35.0%); 79.6% and 82.5%, respectively, were classified as high-risk. Ruxolitinib was not FDA-approved for PV at the time of this survey. Patients reported high levels of feeling anxious/worried and depressed/discouraged as a result of their PV across all subgroups: HU-N, 27.7% and 15.1%, respectively; HU-C, 22.7% and 15.5%; HU-D, 32.5% and 22.5%. Many patients also experienced a high level of PV-related interference with ADLs, which was more common in the HU-D group (30.0%) than the HU-N (11.3%) or HU-C (18.2%) groups. HU-D patients were more likely to have reported ever reducing their work hours (54.2% of the patients who responded) compared with the HU-N (33.3%) and HU-C groups (36.8%). Among all patients, HU-D patients reported a mean of 8.3 doctor visits in the past 12 months, compared with 5.6 in the HU-N group and 6.6 in the HU-C group. Most patients had experienced PV-related symptoms in the past 12 months (Table 1), particularly fatigue, itching, and day/night sweats; fatigue was ranked first as the symptom that patients would most like to resolve. Conclusion: Patients with PV in a large retrospective real-world survey across the US are found to experience burdensome PV-related symptoms and reduced QoL. The findings from this study also show that standard treatments do not address these aspects of PV in many patients, and patients who have discontinued HU may experience an even greater disease burden, possibly because of a lack of effective and/or safe alternative treatment options. Importantly, while 66.0% of the patients in the HU-N group were classified as high-risk, the majority of the high-risk patients in the HU-N group (81.0%) were not treated with cytoreductive agents, suggesting a potential knowledge deficit regarding recommendations for PV management. Collectively, these results illustrate the adverse impact of PV-related symptom burden on patient QoL and reinforce the importance of unmet control of PV-related symptoms in choosing PV therapy. Disclosures Mesa: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; NS Pharma: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Miller:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Promedior: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; CTI Biopharma: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding; Kalobios: Research Funding. Thyne:Incyte Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Paranagama:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Parasuraman:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fazal:Bristol Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mangan:Incyte Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
34
Fenaux, Pierre, Ghulam J. Mufti, Rena Buckstein, Valeria Santini, María Díez-Campelo, Carlo Finelli, Mario Cazzola, et al. "Assessment of Longer-Term Efficacy and Safety in the Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled MEDALIST Trial of Luspatercept to Treat Anemia in Patients (Pts) with Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS-R) Very Low-, Low-, or Intermediate-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) with Ring Sideroblasts (RS) Who Require Red Blood Cell (RBC) Transfusions." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 841. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-123064.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Few treatment options are available to RBC transfusion-dependent pts with lower-risk MDS (LR-MDS) who are refractory/ineligible for erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). Luspatercept is a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent that binds select TGF-β superfamily ligands to reduce aberrant Smad2/3 signaling and enhance late-stage erythropoiesis. In the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled MEDALIST study (NCT02631070), luspatercept significantly reduced transfusion burden vs placebo. Longer-term efficacy analyses of the MEDALIST study (data cutoff Jan 7, 2019), including multiple responses, and safety are presented here. Methods: Eligible pts were ≥ 18 years of age with IPSS-R-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS (World Health Organization 2016 criteria); were refractory, intolerant, or unlikely to respond to ESAs (serum erythropoietin > 200 U/L); and required regular RBC transfusions. Pts were randomized 2:1 to luspatercept (1.0 mg/kg titrated up to 1.75 mg/kg, if needed) or placebo, subcutaneously every 3 weeks (wks). This analysis assessed the achievement and number of individual response periods of RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) ≥ 8 wks. Clinical benefit, defined as achieving RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks and/or modified hematologic improvement-erythroid (HI-E) response per International Working Group 2006 criteria, was also assessed, along with total duration of clinical benefit (time from achieving clinical benefit to discontinuation due to loss of benefit, adverse events [AEs], or other reasons). Longer-term efficacy and safety were also evaluated. Results: Pts were assessed for RBC transfusion burden/8 wks in the 16 wks before randomization: 66 pts received 2 to < 4 U RBCs (30.1% and 26.3% of pts receiving luspatercept and placebo, respectively), 64 received ≥ 4 to < 6 U (26.8% and 30.2%, respectively), and 99 received ≥ 6 U (43.1% and 43.4%, respectively); both arms had a median baseline burden of 5 RBC U/8 wks. Compared with our previous analysis and earlier data cutoff of May 8, 2018 (Fenaux P, et al. Blood. 2018;132:1), we now report that as of Jan 7, 2019, 72 (47.1%) pts treated with luspatercept and 12 (15.8%) treated with placebo achieved RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks. Analysis of multiple response periods of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks in the luspatercept responders (i.e. initial RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks, followed by transfusion, followed by another period of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks) demonstrated that 48 (66.7%) pts had ≥ 2 separate response periods, 22 (30.6%) had ≥ 3, 12 (16.7%) had ≥ 4 , and 7 (9.7%) had ≥ 5. Of the 12 pts achieving RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks with placebo, 4 (33.3%) had ≥ 2 responses; none had > 3. Overall, 48 (31.4%) pts receiving luspatercept and none receiving placebo remained on treatment as of the Jan 7, 2019 data cutoff. Median treatment duration was 50.9 (range 5.9-147.0) wks in pts receiving luspatercept vs 24.0 (range 7.4-103.0) wks in pts receiving placebo. Median duration of the longest period of RBC-TI ≥ 8 wks during Wks 1-48 was 30.6 (95% confidence interval [CI] 20.6-50.9) wks with luspatercept and 18.6 (95% CI 10.9-not evaluable) wks with placebo. Median total duration of clinical benefit was 83.6 and 26.8 wks for pts responding to luspatercept (n = 97) and placebo (n = 20), respectively. Of the 97 luspatercept-treated pts evaluable for clinical benefit, median duration of clinical benefit in pts with baseline transfusion burden of 4 to < 6 U/8 wks was 87.9 (range 13-125) wks, of < 4 U/8 wks was 84.7 (range 21-147) wks, and of ≥ 6 U/8 wks was 64.9 (range 8-122) wks. Twelve luspatercept-treated pts did not require a transfusion after the first dose of luspatercept up to Wk 48 or until time of analysis; as of Jan 7, 2019 data cutoff, 3 (25%) of those pts maintained response. AEs occurring more frequently with luspatercept vs placebo (fatigue, diarrhea, asthenia, dizziness) occurred early (Cycles 1-4), were mainly grade 1 or 2, decreased over time, and were not associated with a higher dose level. Progression to acute myeloid leukemia was similar in pts receiving luspatercept (n = 3 [2.0%]) and those receiving placebo (n = 1 [1.3%]). Conclusions: Most LR-MDS pts achieving RBC-TI and/or HI-E with luspatercept in the MEDALIST study had multiple responses with durable clinical benefit superior to that of pts receiving placebo, including those with a high baseline transfusion burden. AEs were mainly grade 1 or 2, decreased over time, and were not correlated with a higher dose level. Disclosures Fenaux: Aprea: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Mufti:Cellectis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Buckstein:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Santini:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Johnson & Johnson: Honoraria; Acceleron: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Menarini: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Díez-Campelo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Finelli:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ilhan:Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sekeres:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Komrokji:DSI: Consultancy; JAZZ: Consultancy; celgene: Consultancy; Agios: Consultancy; pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; JAZZ: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy. List:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Zeidan:Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Verma:Stelexis: Equity Ownership, Honoraria; Acceleron: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; BMS: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Laadem:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ito:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rampersad:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sinsimer:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Linde:Acceleron Pharma: Employment, Equity Ownership; Fibrogen, Inc.: Equity Ownership; Abbott Laboratories, Inc.: Equity Ownership. Garcia-Manero:Amphivena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Helsinn: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astex: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onconova: Research Funding; H3 Biomedicine: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding. Platzbecker:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Luspatercept is an investigational therapy that is not approved for any use in any country. Luspatercept is currently being evaluated for potential use in patients with anemia due to myelodysplastic syndromes, beta-thalassemia, or myelofibrosis.
35
Verstovsek, Srdan, Vikas Gupta, Jason R. Gotlib, Ruben A. Mesa, Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Jean-Jacques Kiladjian, Francisco Cervantes, et al. "A Pooled Overall Survival (OS) Analysis of 5-Year Data from the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II Trials of Ruxolitinib for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis (MF)." Blood 128, no. 22 (December 2, 2016): 3110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v128.22.3110.3110.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background:The Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib has been evaluated for patients with MF in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. In both trials, ruxolitinib prolonged OS, reduced splenomegaly, and improved MF-related symptoms and quality of life compared with controls. Here, we report the results of an exploratory pooled analysis of OS in the COMFORT studies at 5 years of follow-up. Methods: The double-blind COMFORT-I trial and the open-label COMFORT-II trial were randomized phase 3 studies that evaluated the safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate-2 (int-2) or high-risk primary MF (PMF), post-polycythemia vera MF (PPV-MF), or post-essential thrombocythemia MF (PET-MF). The comparator was placebo in COMFORT-I and best available therapy (BAT) in COMFORT-II. The ruxolitinib starting dose was 15 or 20 mg twice daily based on baseline platelet counts (100-200 and >200 × 109/L, respectively); dose modifications were permitted for safety and efficacy. Patients were allowed to cross over to ruxolitinib from the control arm for progressive splenomegaly, defined as a ≥25% increase in spleen volume from baseline (COMFORT-I) or study nadir (COMFORT-II), or select protocol-defined progression events; crossover was mandatory following treatment unblinding in COMFORT-I. OS was a secondary endpoint in both studies and was evaluated in an intent-to-treat (ITT) analysis using a Cox proportional hazard model that estimated the treatment effect stratified by clinical trial and International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk. The crossover-corrected treatment effect was estimated using a rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) method. Results: Overall, 528 patients were randomized: 301 to ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n=155; COMFORT-II, n=146) and 227 to placebo (n=154) or BAT (n=73). All ongoing patients in the control arms crossed over to ruxolitinib by the 3-year follow-up. Patient populations were similar between the two trials and their details were previously published. In the combined ruxolitinib group, 162 patients (53.8%) had high-risk MF and 139 (46.2%) had int-2 risk MF based on IPSS criteria. At the 5-year ITT analysis, 128 patients (42.5%) died in the ruxolitinib group compared with 117 (51.5%) in the control group. The risk of death was reduced by 30% with ruxolitinib compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 45.9 mo; HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.54-0.91; P=0.0065; Figure A). After correcting for crossover using RPSFT, OS advantage was more pronounced for patients originally randomized to ruxolitinib (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 27 mo; HR, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.23-0.59; Figure B). An analysis of OS censoring patients at the time of crossover also demonstrated that ruxolitinib prolonged survival compared with control (median OS: ruxolitinib, 63.5 mo; control, 28.3 mo; HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.36−0.78; P=0.0013; Figure C). Among all patients treated with ruxolitinib, those with lower-risk disease had longer survival compared with those with high-risk disease (median OS: int-2, not reached [estimated, 102 mo]; high-risk, 50 mo; HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.95-4.20; P<0.0001; Figure D). In a subgroup analysis, OS favored ruxolitinib compared with placebo for patients with int-2 or high-risk MF (data not shown). At 5 years, median OS appeared to favor patients with int-2 (n=58) or high-risk (n=89) PMF who were originally randomized to ruxolitinib compared with historical (Cervantes et al; J Clin Oncol 30:2981-2987) controls (int-2 PMF, not reached [estimated, 70 mo] vs 48 mo; high-risk PMF, 34 vs 27 mo); OS was longer among patients with int-2 vs high-risk PMF (P=0.0003). Subgroup analyses showed that ruxolitinib provided an OS advantage regardless of age (>65 or ≤65 y), sex, disease type (PMF, PPV-MF, PET-MF), risk status (int-2 or high), JAK2V617F mutation status, baseline spleen volume (>10 or ≤10 cm), anemia, white blood cell count (>25 or ≤25 × 109L), or platelet count (>200 or ≤200 × 109/L). Conclusion: Long-term treatment with ruxolitinib up to 5 years prolonged survival in patients with MF compared with BAT or placebo. Corrections for patients who crossed over to ruxolitinib suggested that the separation between ruxolitinib and control OS curves was primarily caused by a delay in ruxolitinib treatment. The results suggest that earlier treatment with ruxolitinib may provide a greater survival advantage for patients with MF. Disclosures Gupta: Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Mesa:Incyte: Research Funding; Ariad: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; CTI: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Galena: Consultancy; Gilead: Research Funding. Vannucchi:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kiladjian:AOP Orphan: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding. Cervantes:AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gao:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dong:Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Naim:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment, Equity Ownership. Harrison:Incyte Corporation: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Baxaltra: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Shire: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel, accommodations, expenses, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau.
36
Patnaik, Mrinal M., Vikas Gupta, Jason R. Gotlib, Hetty E. Carraway, Martha Wadleigh, Gary J. Schiller, Moshe Talpaz, et al. "Results from Ongoing Phase 2 Trial of SL-401 in Patients with Advanced, High-Risk Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Including Chronic Myelomonocytic Leukemia." Blood 128, no. 22 (December 2, 2016): 4245. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v128.22.4245.4245.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: SL-401 is a novel targeted therapy directed to the interleukin-3 receptor (CD123), a target overexpressed by many hematologic malignancies. SL-401 is currently being advanced through clinical trials in patients with a variety of CD123+ malignancies including blastic plasmacytoid dendritic cell neoplasm (BPDCN), acute myeloid leukemia (AML) in remission with high relapse risk, and multiple myeloma. CD123 has been shown to be expressed on myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) cells as well as microenvironmental immune cells, namely plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs), in the bone marrows of some patients with MPN including chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML). Microenvironmental pDCs have been implicated in promoting plasma cell disorders and preliminary data suggest that pDCs could play a related role in some myeloid neoplasms. Accordingly, a therapy directed at both CD123-expressing myeloid cells and neighboring CD123-expressing pDCs could provide therapeutic benefit. SL-401 is being evaluated in patients with advanced, high-risk MPN, including systemic mastocytosis (SM), myelofibrosis (MF), primary eosinophilic disorders (PED), and CMML. Preliminary results are reported here. Methods & Results: This multicenter, single-arm Phase 2 trial of patients with advanced, high risk MPN includes a lead-in (stage 1) and expansion (stage 2). In stage 1, patients receive SL-401 as a daily IV infusion at 7, 9, 12 ug/kg/day, or higher for days 1-3 of a 21-28 day cycle in a 3x3 design. In stage 2, patients receive SL-401 at the dose determined in stage 1. Study objectives include characterization of the safety profile, including determination of the maximum tolerated or tested dose, and detection of preliminary efficacy signals including evaluation of tumor response and progression free survival by standard criteria. As of 7/20/16, 6 patients with MPN (MF, n=3; CMML-2, n=2; CMML-1, n=1) received SL-401 (7 ug/kg, n=3; 9 ug/kg, n=3). The median age was 66 years (range: 42-81 years). Patients treated at all doses received 1+ to 2+ cycles (ongoing) of SL-401. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were thrombocytopenia (2/6; 33%) and fatigue (2/6; 33%); the most common ≥ Grade 3 treatment-related AEs were thrombocytopenia (2/6; 33%) and anemia (1/6; 17%); there has been no DLT. Efficacy assessments are ongoing. Patients are currently enrolling in the 12 ug/kg/day cohort. Conclusions: Initial dosing of SL-401 appears to be well-tolerated in patients with MPN and CMML, with no unexpected AEs observed. Given CD123 expression on myeloid neoplastic cells as well as microenvironmental immune cells (namely, pDCs), SL-401 may offer a novel, targeted therapeutic approach in patients with high-risk MPN and CMML of unmet medical need. Enrollment continues in stage 1 of this ongoing Phase 2 trial and updated safety and efficacy data will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02268253. Disclosures Gupta: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Carraway:Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Baxalta: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Schiller:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Talpaz:Incyte Corporation: Other: Travel expense reimbursement, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Expense reimbursement, travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: travel accomodation expenses, Research Funding. McCloskey:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau. Lee:Alexion Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Baxalta: Consultancy; Boehringer Ingelheim: Consultancy; Pfizer Inc: Consultancy. Yacoub:Alexion: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Ali:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Chen:Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Shemesh:Stemline Therapeutics: Employment, Equity Ownership. Brooks:Stemline Therapeutics, Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties.
37
Chiappella, Annalisa, Thomas E. Witzig, Kim Cocks, Mike Greenwood, Abi Williams, David W. Scott, Randy D. Gascoyne, et al. "Quality of Life Was Not Negatively Impacted By the Addition of Lenalidomide to R-CHOP Chemotherapy (R2-CHOP) Compared with Placebo Plus R-CHOP Chemotherapy in Patients with Previously Untreated Activated B-Cell (ABC)-Type Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma (DLBCL): Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) Analysis of the International Robust Study." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 3475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-123948.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: The phase 3 international, randomized, double-blind ROBUST clinical trial (NCT02285062) compared progression-free survival between patients with previously untreated ABC-type DLBCL treated with placebo plus rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (placebo-R-CHOP) versus lenalidomide + R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) for 6 21-day cycles. HRQoL, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lymphoma (FACT-Lym) and the EuroQoL 5-dimension 3-level (EQ-5D-3L) patient-reported questionnaires, was evaluated as a secondary endpoint for the 2 treatment arms. Methods: For each treatment group, FACT-Lym and EQ-5D-3L scores were measured at baseline (BL), mid-, end-of-treatment (EOT), and post-treatment, in 12-week intervals from Week 34 onward. Patients were evaluated if they had completed BL and ≥ 1 post-BL calculable FACT-Lym subscale measurements. Non-inferiority (NI) of R2-CHOP versus placebo-R-CHOP was measured for 4 key FACT-Lym subscales: Physical Well-Being (PWB), Additional Concerns (AC), Functional Well-Being (FWB), and Trial Outcome Index (TOI). NI was assessed at EOT (typically 3-4 weeks after completing Cycle 6) and at post-treatment follow-up at Week 34 by analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). The NI margins were prespecified as 1 less than the higher published minimal important difference (MID) for each subscale. Since a range of MIDs have been published, a more conservative value was also used as a sensitivity analysis. Time to improvement (TTI), using published responder definitions, was also assessed for the FACT-Lym subscales. EQ-5D-3L scores were summarized descriptively. Results: Demographic and baseline disease characteristics were balanced across the 2 treatment arms (N = 285 per arm). The percentage of patients who completed the FACT-Lym out of the expected population remained > 85% at all time points with > 50 patients still on the study in each treatment arm up to Week 142. Completion rates and reasons for missing assessments were balanced across the 2 treatment arms. FACT-Lym subscale scores were generally higher after EOT, similar for both treatment groups, and mean changes from BL were close to or above MID (where defined), except for the Social/Family Well-Being subscale. Mean differences in FACT-Lym TOI between treatment arms are shown in Table 1. As positive treatment differences favor R2-CHOP and -10 was the predefined NI margin, NI was demonstrated for the FACT-Lym TOI subscale at both EOT and Week 34 assessments. Superiority of R2-CHOP was demonstrated at EOT as the confidence interval (CI) lies completely above 0 (P < 0.04); however, this difference was not clinically meaningful. Furthermore, NI was also demonstrated when using the sensitivity analysis margin of -4.5. ANCOVA models were also fitted for the other key subscales of PWB, AC and FWB (Table 2). NI was demonstrated for all NI margins at both time points for the PWB and AC subscales. The FACT-Lym FWB subscale demonstrated NI for both margins at EOT and Week 34 for the primary NI margin of -2 based on the MID minus 1, but did not demonstrate NI when an NI margin of -1, based on an alternative published MID, was used. The TTI curves and associated summary statistics were similar for the 2 treatment arms, with a median TTI for the FACT-Lym TOI of 21 weeks (95% CI 15-22) for patients treated with R2-CHOP and 18 weeks (95% CI 15-22) for patients treated with placebo-R-CHOP. Mean EQ-5D-3L visual analogue scale (VAS) and Utility Index (UK weights) change from baseline scores were higher in both treatment arms and the mean changes were above, or close to, the published MID (7 for VAS, 0.1 for Utility Index) at EOT assessments. Prespecified sensitivity and subgroup analyses supported the conclusions from the primary HRQoL analyses. Conclusions: The predefined NI levels were met for the 4 key FACT-Lym subscales. Similar results were observed across the other HRQoL assessments, sensitivity, and subgroup analyses. Adding lenalidomide to the R-CHOP regimen did not adversely affect the HRQoL of patients with DLBCL as measured by FACT-Lym and EQ-5D-3L. These data serve as a benchmark for future clinical trials combining next-generation immunomodulatory drugs with standard R-CHOP to improve clinical efficacy while maintaining HRQoL in patients with DLBCL. HRQoL analyses should become an integral part of future clinical trials of novel combination regimens in DLBCL. Disclosures Chiappella: Roche: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Servier: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Cocks:Adelphi Values: Employment; Amgen: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Endomag Ltd.: Consultancy. Greenwood:Adelphi Values: Employment. Williams:Adelphi Values: Employment. Scott:Celgene: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution], Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding. Yamamoto:SymBio: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon: Honoraria; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Solasia Pharma: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ARIAD: Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; HUYA/IQVIA Services Japan: Consultancy, Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Jurczak:Bayer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Morphosys: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding. Özcan:Sanofi: Other: Travel support; Abdi Ibrahim: Other: Travel support; BMS: Other: Travel support; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Archigen: Research Funding; Roche: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Janssen: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding, Travel support; AbbVie: Other: Travel support, Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Jazz: Other: Travel support; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Belada:Roche: Consultancy; Gilead Sciences: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy. Margunato-Debay:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhai:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Braverman:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Vitolo:Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Nowakowski:Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding.
38
Awasthi, Rakesh, Karen Thudium Mueller, Gregory A. Yanik, Constantine S. Tam, Susana Rives, Joseph P. McGuirk, Michael A. Pulsipher, et al. "Evaluation of In Vivo CAR Transgene Levels in Relapsed/Refractory Pediatric and Young Adult ALL and Adult DLBCL Tisagenlecleucel-Treated Patients." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 899. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-116385.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background Quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) is an analytical method that has been used to investigate the in vivo kinetics of chimeric receptor antigen (CAR) transgene following the infusion of tisagenlecleucel. B cell aplasia, likely an "on-target toxicity" of tisagenlecleucel, has been considered a measure of functional persistence. (Maude SL et al. Blood 2015;125(26):4017-4023) Although the CAR transgene can be detected in peripheral blood of tisagenlecleucel treated patients, it is unclear whether CAR transgene detection by qPCR could be reliably used to inform treatment decision in an individual patient. Methods Transgene levels in blood measured by qPCR from pivotal phase II studies in relapsed/refractory (r/r) pediatric and young adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL) patients (pts) (ELIANA [NCT02435849, N=75]; ENSIGN [NCT02228096, N=29]) and adult diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) pts (JULIET [NCT02445248, N=93]) were used to investigate the relationship between transgene persistence and clinical response. Results To determine whether CAR qPCR measurements are associated with or predictive of response, CAR transgene levels and timing of peak levels were examined. In both ALL and DLBCL pts, there were detectable CAR transgene levels by qPCR in both responders and non-responders. The geometric mean maximal expansion (geo mean Cmax) was similar between responding and non-responding adult DLBCL pts, while 1.7 fold differences were observed in pediatric ALL pts (geo mean Cmax in copies/µg: responders, 32700, n=79; non-responders, 19500, n=10; Table 1). For both DLBCL and ALL pts, high inter-individual variability in transgene levels was noted. Similarly, higher CAR-T cell expansion from flow cytometry data pooled from responding pediatric ALL and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) pts were observed relative to non-responding pts (Mueller KT et al. Blood 2017;130(21):2317-2325), while the levels in DLBCL pts were comparatively lower in blood, likely due to partitioning of functional CAR-T cells to the target sites including lymph nodes. The median time to maximal transgene level ranged from 9-10 days in DLBCL responders and non-responders and pediatric ALL responders, while non-responding pediatric ALL pts showed delayed expansion with median Tmax of 20 days. The median time corresponding to last quantifiable transgene level (Tlast), an indicator of persistence, was higher in responding pts compared to non-responding pts, indicating a trend for longer persistence in both DLBCL and ALL pts with continued response (Table 1). Similarly, the half-life estimated from the terminal slope of the cellular kinetic profile, an additional indicator of persistence, was higher in responding pts relative to non-responding pts for both DLBCL and ALL (Table 1). Despite this general trend, in some cases, transgene levels were not detectable at later time points in pts with continued response. The swimmer plot for representative responder ALL (Figure 1a) and DLBCL pts (Figure 1b) with responses and transgene levels demonstrate that although the majority of responding pts show persistent transgene levels, some pts maintained a favorable clinical response despite a decline in transgene levels to below the level of quantification of 50 copies/µg. Conclusion In both ALL and DLBCL, CAR transgene is initially detected at high levels with high variability in both responders and non-responders. While the majority of responding pts tend to have persistent transgene levels, some pts maintain favorable clinical responses despite a lack of quantifiable transgene. These results indicate that qPCR testing for CAR transgene in blood of tisagenlecleucel treated pts should not be used for making treatment decisions for individual pts. In addition, the qPCR measurements in peripheral blood do not reflect on the trafficking of CAR positive cells to sites outside peripheral blood. The assessment by flow cytometry remains an important assay to distinguish high expression in responding vs non-responding pts in ALL and CLL, and further evaluation of target tissue is needed in DLBCL to understand the utility of CAR expression as a means to distinguish responder and non-responders. Also, further data are needed to improve our understanding of how CAR transgene levels relate to disease burden and duration of response and whether this information is clinically useful. Disclosures Awasthi: Exelixis: Equity Ownership; Celgene: Equity Ownership; Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment. Mueller:Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Equity Ownership, Other: Patent pending. Tam:Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BeiGene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Rives:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: advisory board ; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Shire: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards . McGuirk:Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Other: speaker, Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expenses, speaker ; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding. Pulsipher:Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Jaeger:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Baruchel:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Shire: Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations or expenses; Amgen: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Myers:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Balke-Want:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria. Schuster:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding. Stefanski:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Bishop:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Speakers Bureau; Juneau Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; United Healthcare: Employment. Waldron:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Anak:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Chakraborty:Novartis Institutes for Biomedical Research: Employment. Bleickardt:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Wong:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Bubuteishvili Pacaud:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Waller:Kalytera: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Other: Travel Expenses, EHA, Research Funding; Cambium Medical Technologies: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Maude:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
39
De Vlam, K., A. Nzeusseu Toukap, M. J. Kaiser, J. Vanhoof, P. Remans, S. DI Romana, F. Van den Bosch, V. Vanhoof, and R. Lories. "AB0758 REAL-WORLD EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF APREMILAST IN BELGIAN PATIENTS WITH PSORIATIC ARTHRITIS: FINAL ANALYSIS OF THE MULTICENTRE, PROSPECTIVE APOLO STUDY." Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases 79, Suppl 1 (June 2020): 1676. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-eular.2935.
Full textAbstract:
Background:Real-world evidence on the efficacy and safety for patients (pts) with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) treated with apremilast (APR) is lacking but required to understand the uptake and potential of the drug.Objectives:To assess the efficacy and safety of APR in pts with active PsA from routine clinical practice in Belgium.Methods:In this multicentre, prospective study, the primary endpoint was the PsA Response Criteria (PsARC) response 6 months after APR initiation, defined as improvement in ≥2 (at least 1 must be joint swelling or tenderness) and no worsening in any of 4 criteria: swollen joint count (SJC [0-66]), tender joint count (TJC [0-68]), Physician’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity and Pt’s Global Assessment of Disease Activity. Other endpoints included the 12-item PsA Impact of the Disease (PsAID12) questionnaire, Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (HAQ-DI), Physician’s and Pt’s Numerical Rating Scale assessing disease activity for the most affected joint, psoriasis-involved body surface area, enthesitis, dactylitis and pain.Results:In total, 107 pts were enrolled and included in the baseline (BL) demographics/disease characteristics and safety analyses. The efficacy population comprised 69 pts (pts who started APR ≤30 days before inclusion in the study and completed ≥150 days of treatment). Mean age was 53 years, mean body mass index was 29 kg/m2and 56% were female. Mean duration of PsA was ≈8 years (87.1 months). One-third of pts presented with short disease duration (time since diagnosis of PsA: ≤2 years); 84% were biologic naive. The most frequently reported comorbidities were cardiovascular disease (30%) and hypercholesterolemia (24%). At BL, mean (SD) SJC was 8.0 (6.5); mean (SD) TJC was 14.2 (12.5). Pts from the efficacy population were representative of the overall population. Fifty-four pts (60%) continued APR treatment for 6 months; 38 (36%) had discontinued APR (insufficient efficacy: n=15; adverse events [AEs]: n=16; intolerance: n=6; other reason: n=1). AEs were mostly mild or moderate in nature and consistent with APR’s known safety and tolerability profile.1At Month 6, data were available for 49 pts, 65% of whom were PsARC responders. Mean change from BL in SJC was −5.23, with improvements (defined as ≥30% decrease per PsARC) observed in 80% of pts; 42% had no swollen joints at 6 months. Comparable results were seen for TJC, with mean changes from BL of −5.34 and improvements observed in 71% of pts; 27% had no tender joints at 6 months. Among pts with enthesitis at BL (n=21), 43% achieved a score of 0 by Month 6. Among pts with dactylitis at BL (n=18), 83% achieved a count of 0 by Month 6. Impact of PsA on quality of life (QoL) from the pt’s perspective was assessed using the PsAID12 questionnaire and characterized by physical and psychological domains. After 3 and 6 months of treatment, 33% and 50% of pts with PsAID >4 at BL (n=60) achieved PsAID12 ≤4, respectively (cutoff value for Pt Acceptable Symptom State2). Improvements were observed in all 12 domains at Months 3 and 6 compared with BL (Figure). In all, 66% of pts showed a decrease ≥0.35 in HAQ-DI; the proportion of pts reaching a global HAQ-DI <0.5 increased over time (14% at 3 months; 20% at 6 months).Conclusion:Results from APOLO, a study assessing the impact of APR in routine settings, indicated that APR is associated with rapid and sustained improvements in PsA signs and symptoms and QoL in an important proportion of pts. Safety and tolerability were consistent with the known profile of APR.References:[1]Kavanaugh A, et al. Arthritis Res Ther. 2019;21:118. 2. Gossec L, et al. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73:1012-1019.Disclosure of Interests:Kurt de Vlam Consultant of: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, UCB – speakers bureau and honoraria, Adrien Nzeusseu Toukap Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Janssen, Pfizer, UCB – grant/research support, Consultant of: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB – consultant, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, UCB – advisory board member, Marie-Joëlle Kaiser Consultant of: Celgene Corporation – consultant, Johan Vanhoof: None declared, Philip Remans: None declared, Silvana Di Romana: None declared, Filip van den Bosch Consultant of: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and UCB, Virginie Vanhoof Employee of: Amgen Inc. – employment; Celgene BeLux – employment at the time of study conduct, Rik Lories Grant/research support from: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samumed and UCB – grant/research support (on behalf of Leuven Research and Development), Consultant of: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samumed and UCB – consultant (on behalf of Leuven Research and Development), Speakers bureau: AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene Corporation, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Janssen, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Samumed and UCB – speaker (on behalf of Leuven Research and Development)
40
Rosenbloom, Barry E., Sarah Kulke, John Taylor, and Neal J. Weinreb. "Thrombocytopenia in the Absence of Splenomegaly in Patients with Type 1 Gaucher Disease: A Preliminary Analysis From the ICGG Gaucher Registry,." Blood 118, no. 21 (November 18, 2011): 4217. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v118.21.4217.4217.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Abstract 4217 Background: Patients with Gaucher disease frequently experience a delay in diagnosis despite clinical signs and/or symptoms. This delay is thought to stem from the rarity of the disease and physicians' inexperience with the constellation of disease manifestations that often overlap those of more common hematological illnesses. It has been the authors' experience that, in the absence of palpable splenomegaly, physicians are even less likely to consider the possibility of Gaucher disease in patients who have other typical manifestations such as chronic bone pain or hematological cytopenias. Using data submitted to the International Collaborative Gaucher Group (ICGG) Gaucher Registry, the largest single repository of Gaucher disease clinical information in existence, we sought to determine how commonly such patients are likely to be encountered. Purpose: To determine the frequency of patients with Gaucher disease who have little to no splenomegaly at diagnosis despite having concurrent moderate or severe thrombocytopenia. Methods: Data were evaluated from all patients with Gaucher disease type 1 enrolled in the ICGG Gaucher Registry as of June 3, 2011 who had not been splenectomized before diagnosis and whose spleen volumes and platelet counts at the time of diagnosis were reported to the Registry. Splenomegaly was quantitated by MRI, CT or ultrasonic volumetric measurements and categorized as mild/none (≤5 multiples of normal [MN] based on a normal value of 0.2% of body weight), moderate (>5 to ≤15 MN) and severe (> 15 MN). Platelet counts were categorized according to thrombocytopenia categories of mild/none (≥120 ×103/mm3), moderate (>60 to ≤120 × 103/mm3) and severe (<60 × 103/mm3). Results: A total of 612 patients with platelet counts and spleen volumes were identified. Of these, 96/612 (15.7%) had mild or no splenomegaly at the time of Gaucher diagnosis. Of these 96 patients, 37 (38.5%) had moderate thrombocytopenia and 6 (6.3%) had severe thrombocytopenia. Conclusions: Type 1 Gaucher patients often present with moderate to severe thrombocytopenia but with either normal spleen volumes or with splenomegaly that is not likely to be clinically apparent. These patients may be at particular risk for diagnostic delay but no less susceptible to Gaucher disease morbidity than patients with a more typical presentation. Further description of this cohort with respect to genotype, demographics, and other disease manifestations will be presented. Disclosures: Rosenbloom: Genzyme Corporation ; Shire Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genzyme Corp: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kulke:Genzyme, a Sanofi Company: Employment. Taylor:Genzyme, a Sanofi Company: Employment. Weinreb:Genzyme Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Shire HGT: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Actelion Corporation: Speakers Bureau.
41
Weisel, Katja, Dan T. Vogl, Michel Delforge, Kevin Song, Meletios Dimopoulos, Jamie Cavenagh, Cyrille Hulin, et al. "Healthcare Resource Utilization Trends over Time with Continuous Lenalidomide Treatment (Tx) in Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM)." Blood 124, no. 21 (December 6, 2014): 1326. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v124.21.1326.1326.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic condition that is associated with high Tx costs. Resource consumption is driven by hospitalization and medical utilization, which is highest during periods of uncontrolled disease, such as after diagnosis and during relapses (De Portu 2013). In the pivotal phase 3 FIRST trial, continuous Tx with lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) was compared with fixed-duration Rd (Rd18) or fixed-duration combination Tx with melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT), each for 18 months (mos), in NDMM pts who were ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Continuous Rd extended progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (interim analysis) vs. MPT. However, it is still unclear whether extending Tx duration with Rd adversely affects healthcare resource utilization. This analysis quantifies the rates of hospitalizations and medical utilization with continuous Rd over time based on data collected in the FIRST trial. Methods: The FIRST trial (N = 1,623) was a pivotal multinational, randomized, open-label study with a median follow up of 37 mos. Non-protocol-driven resource-use data was collected until subjects discontinued study Tx. To assess whether continuous Rd increases healthcare resource utilization over time, the rates of resource utilization for subjects treated with continuous Rd (N = 535) were plotted for up to 48 mos. In addition, hospitalization and medical utilization rates during the Tx period (18 mos) were estimated and compared between the 2 fixed-duration Tx arms. Results: Resource utilization amongst pts treated with continuous Rd declined over time (Figure). The annualized hospitalization rate in the first 3 mos was 3.2 times higher than the average rate for the remaining 45 mos of follow-up (2.02 vs. 0.62), and 4.2 times higher for medical utilization (5.66 vs. 1.34). After 4 years (yrs) of continuous Rd Tx, hospitalization and medical utilization rates were estimated to be 83% and 84% lower than those observed in the first 3 mos of Tx, reflecting the long-term disease control observed with continuous Rd in the FIRST trial. The highest hospitalization rates were associated with infections (0.20 per patient year), cardiovascular disorders (0.06), and respiratory and thoracic disorders (0.05). The mean (standard deviation) length of stay per admission was 14.08 (21.19) days. The highest medical utilization rates were associated with blood transfusions (0.76 interventions per patient year), general imaging procedures (0.21), respiratory and thoracic imaging procedures (0.20), and therapeutic interventions (0.09).The hospitalization rates for the fixed dose Tx arms were 0.91 (Rd18) and 0.79 (MPT) per patient year of follow-up during the Tx period of 18 mos, resulting in a rate ratio (RR) of 1.15 (1.01–1.30). The equivalent rates for medical utilization were 3.00 (Rd18) and 2.86 (MPT) medical interventions per patient year (RR = 1.05 [0.98–1.12]). Conclusions: The rates of resource utilization among pts treated with continuous Rd dropped substantially after the first 3 mos of Tx, and then gradually declined as Tx duration increased. The findings suggest that continuous Tx with Rd does not further increase resource utilization in hospitalizations and medical utilization compared to fixed-duration Tx. A comparison between the 2 fixed arms showed a 15% increase in hospitalization with Rd18 vs. MPT, and no differences in medical utilization between the 2 arms. A limitation of this analysis is that the resources were collected only while pts were receiving their respective Txs. Future analysis should include all costs generated by healthcare resources throughout pts Tx, including Tx-free intervals, and the costs associated with relapses. Figure 1: Hospitalization and medical utilization rates per patient year for patients treated with continuous Rd Figure 1:. Hospitalization and medical utilization rates per patient year for patients treated with continuous Rd Disclosures Weisel: BMS: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; Noxxon: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Vogl:Amgen: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Song:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavenagh:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Hulin:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Foá:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Oriol:Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Guo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Monzini:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Van Oostendorp:Celgene: Employment. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment. Facon:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.
42
Nowakowski, Grzegorz, Annalisa Chiappella, Fangxin Hong, Randy D. Gascoyne, David W. Scott, William R. Macon, Rebecca L. King, et al. "Potential Factors That Impact Lenalidomide/R-CHOP Efficacy in Previously Untreated Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma in the ROBUST and ECOG-ACRIN 1412 Studies." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 4092. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-123083.
Full textAbstract:
Background: Standard first-line treatment for patients diagnosed with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is the R-CHOP regimen. Despite numerous efforts to improve on this regimen, in all comers and specifically in those with activated B-cell (ABC)-type DLBCL, results from large randomized studies have failed to show a significant clinical advantage above this standard. Recently, 2 large clinical trials in previously untreated DLBCL evaluated the combination of lenalidomide/R-CHOP (R2-CHOP) vs standard R-CHOP and demonstrated discordant results. We analyzed data from these trials to identify differences that may have impacted the disparate trial outcomes while identifying patient characteristics associated with benefit from the addition of lenalidomide across the trials. Methods: The 2 trials included in this evaluation are ROBUST, an international, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase III study of R2-CHOP vs placebo/R-CHOP, and the Intergroup ECOG-ACRIN 1412 (E1412) trial, a US-only, randomized, open-label, phase II study of R2-CHOP vs R-CHOP. Additional key study design differences included dosing, and subtype timing and inclusion (both studies used gene expression profiling [GEP] by NanoString). R-CHOP dosing differed only for prednisone, which was a flat 100 mg dose, d1-5 in ROBUST and 100 mg/m2, d1-5 in E1412. The lenalidomide dose and schedule varied between studies: 15 mg/d, d1-14/21 for ROBUST (210 mg/cycle) and 25 mg/d, d1-10/21 (250 mg/cycle) for E1412. ROBUST enrolled only patients prospectively identified with the ABC subtype, whereas E1412 enrolled all otherwise eligible patients and retrospectively evaluated for ABC-type with prespecified ABC-type accrual and power parameters. Both studies enrolled patients with IPI status ≥ 2, ECOG PS 0-2, and Ann Arbor stage II-IV (E1412 stage II with mass > 10 cm). The primary endpoint in both was progression-free survival (PFS; central review for ROBUST and investigator-assessed for E1412). Secondary endpoints included event-free survival (EFS; key for ROBUST), overall and complete response rates, overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: ROBUST enrolled 570 ABC patients and E1412 enrolled 280 GCB, ABC, and unclassified DLBCL patients. Patient profiles in both studies (ROBUST [ABC]/E1412 [all COO]) were similar in terms of median ages (65 y/66 y), male sex (58%/61%), and ECOG PS 1-2 (55%/63%). Patients in E1412 were more high risk: IPI 2 (42% ROBUST/34% E1412), IPI ≥ 3 (58%/66%), and Ann Arbor stage III/IV disease (87%/97%). Importantly, there was a notable difference in the time from patient diagnosis to treatment: median 31 days for ROBUST and 21 days (22% > 31 d) for E1412. Only 6% of patients in ROBUST were treated within 2 weeks of diagnosis vs 30% in E1412. At a median follow-up of ~2.5 y for both studies, E1412 met its primary endpoint of improvement in PFS with 34% reduction in the risk of PD/death (2-y PFS: 76% vs 70%) for all patients, but did not reach statistical significance in ABC-DLBCL patients for 2-y PFS (71% vs 61%) or 2-y OS (88% vs 76%). ROBUST showed no significant improvement in the primary PFS endpoint (2-y PFS: 67% vs 64%) or 2-y OS (79% vs 80%) in ABC patients. Subgroup analyses of PFS comparing R2-CHOP vs R-CHOP control within each study suggested that certain baseline factors favor the R2-CHOP arm, including: female sex, high IPI score (≥ 3), non-bulky disease (< 7 cm), and high Ann Arbor stage IV disease. Conclusion: While the ROBUST study design integrated state-of-the-art, real-time GEP to prospectively identify ABC-DLBCL patients with rapid lab turnaround time, cases of logistical delays in tissue submission for central analysis and staging procedures may have resulted in accrual of patients with lower-risk DLBCL and prolonged time from diagnosis to treatment. In contrast, E1412 retrospectively stratified patients by COO through GEP and was able to accrue higher-risk patients irrespective of COO within a shorter time from diagnosis to treatment, which among other differences (eg, smaller population size, study phase), could contribute to the improvement over R-CHOP control. Our comparative findings have significant implications for the design of future biomarker-driven trials and provide momentum for studies of novel combinations with R-CHOP in DLBCL. Further investigation into other factors, including dose intensity and their correlation with outcomes, will be presented. Disclosures Nowakowski: Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Research Funding; MorphoSys: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech, Inc.: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding; Selvita: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Curis: Research Funding; Bayer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Chiappella:Servier: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Hong:Dana Farber Cancer Institute: Employment; Merck: Consultancy. Scott:Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; NanoString: Patents & Royalties: Named inventor on a patent licensed to NanoSting [Institution], Research Funding. Amengual:Appia Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Epizyme: Speakers Bureau. Leonard:BeiGene: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy; Epizyme, Inc: Consultancy; Miltenyi: Consultancy; Genentech, Inc./F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Karyopharm Therapeutics: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Akcea Therapeutics: Consultancy; Bayer Corporation: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; MorphoSys: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; BeiGene: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Consultancy; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy; Sutro Biopharma: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy. Friedberg:Bayer: Honoraria, Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee; Acerta: Other: Data & Safety Monitoring Committee. Kostakoglu:F. Hoffman-La Roche: Consultancy; Genentech: Consultancy. Jurczak:Morphosys: Research Funding; Bayer: Research Funding; Roche: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novo Nordisk: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Research Funding; Celtrion: Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Loxo: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Yamamoto:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Research Funding; Eisai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Meiji Seika Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; ARIAD: Research Funding; MSD: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Ono: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; SymBio: Research Funding; HUYA/IQVIA Services Japan: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Chugai: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Sumitomo Dainippon: Honoraria; Incyte: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Kyowa Kirin: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Otsuka: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Solasia Pharma: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Russo:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hudak:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership; Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Zhang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wade:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Kahl:ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BeiGene: Consultancy; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy. Vitolo:Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche: Speakers Bureau; Juno Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Kite: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: Yes, these trials discuss off-label clinical trial investigation of lenalidomide plus R-CHOP in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.
43
Schuster, Stephen J., Michael R. Bishop, Constantine Tam, Peter Borchmann, Ulrich Jaeger, Edmund K. Waller, Harald Holte, et al. "Sustained Disease Control for Adult Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma: An Updated Analysis of Juliet, a Global Pivotal Phase 2 Trial of Tisagenlecleucel." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 1684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-115252.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract BACKGROUND JULIET (NCT02445248) is a single-arm, open-label, multicenter, global, pivotal phase 2 trial of tisagenlecleucel, a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy targeting CD19, that has shown a high rate of durable complete responses (CR) and a manageable safety profile in adult patients with clinically active relapsed/refractory (r/r) diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The primary objective was met at the interim analysis, with an overall response rate (ORR) of 59% (CR, 43%; partial response [PR], 16%). Here, we present an updated analysis of the JULIET trial, with a median of 19 months of follow-up, an additional 5 months since the previous report (Schuster et al. EHA 2018), demonstrating sustained activity in this patient population. METHODS Eligible patients were ≥18 years with r/r DLBCL, had received ≥2 lines of therapy, including rituximab and an anthracycline, and were ineligible for or had failed autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT). Tisagenlecleucel was centrally manufactured at 2 facilities (Morris Plains, NJ, USA [main cohort] and Leipzig, Germany [cohort A]) using cryopreserved apheresis material and provided to patients at 27 treatment sites across 10 countries on 4 continents using a global supply chain. The primary endpoint was ORR (CR + PR) per independent review committee. Efficacy results are reported for patients in the main cohort with ≥3 months of follow-up or earlier discontinuation; safety is reported for all infused patients. RESULTS At data cutoff (May 21, 2018), 167 patients were enrolled and 115 were infused (99 in the main cohort and 16 in cohort A) with a single dose of tisagenlecleucel (median, 3.0×108 [range, 0.1-6.0×108] CAR-positive viable T cells). 90% of infused patients received bridging therapy and 93% received lymphodepleting chemotherapy. Median time from infusion to data cutoff was 19.3 months. Median age was 56 years (range, 22-76 years); 23% were aged ≥65 years. At study entry, 77% of infused patients had stage III/IV disease and 17% had double/triple hit disease. 55% and 43% had germinal center and activated B-cell molecular subtypes, respectively. 51% of patients had received ≥3 prior lines of antineoplastic therapy (range, 1-6); 49% had undergone a prior ASCT. All 99 patients in the main cohort had ≥3 months of follow-up or discontinued earlier and were evaluable for efficacy. ORR was 54% (95% CI, 43%-64%), with 40% CR and 13% PR. ORR was consistent across prognostic subgroups (including prior ASCT and double/triple-hit lymphoma). Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached; the probability of being relapse free was 66% (95% CI, 51%-78%) at 6 months and 64% (95% CI, 48%-76%) at 12 and 18 months. DOR was similar by age group (≥ vs < 65 years) and by relapsed or refractory status (Figure). No relapses were observed beyond 11 months after infusion. Median OS for all infused patients was 11.1 months (95% CI, 6.6 months-NE) and not reached (95% CI, 21 months-NE) for patients in CR. OS probability was 48% (95% CI, 38%-57%) at 12 months and 43% (95%CI, 33%-53%) at 18 months (max follow-up, 29 months). No patients proceeded to allogeneic SCT or ASCT while in remission. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) of special interest within 8 weeks of infusion included cytopenias lasting >28 days (34%), cytokine release syndrome (CRS; 23%, by the Penn scale), infections (19%), febrile neutropenia (15%), neurological events (11%; 1 case of grade 2 cerebral edema), and tumor lysis syndrome (2%). 16% of patients received tocilizumab for CRS management. 3 patients died within 30 days of infusion (all due to disease progression). No treatment-related mortality was reported. Since the previous report, no new deaths occurred due to causes other than disease progression. CONCLUSION Results from this longer-term follow-up show that tisagenlecleucel produced high response rates and durable responses in a cohort of heavily pretreated adult patients with r/r DLBCL. Efficacy was consistent in all predefined subgroups, including elderly patients, patients with r/r disease, and other clinical or biological subgroups expected to have a worse prognosis with available treatments, as demonstrated by similar and sustained DOR and OS following tisagenlecleucel treatment. Figure. Figure. Disclosures Schuster: Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Gilead: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nordic Nanovector: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Dava Oncology: Consultancy, Honoraria. Bishop:Juneau Therapeutics: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; United Healthcare: Employment; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Tam:AbbVie: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Beigene: Honoraria. Borchmann:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Jaeger:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Infinity: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mundipharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda-Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MSD: Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Bioverativ: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GSK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Waller:Pharmacyclics: Other: Travel Expenses, EHA, Research Funding; Celldex: Research Funding; Kalytera: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Cambium Medical Technologies: Consultancy, Equity Ownership. Holte:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche, Norway: Research Funding. McGuirk:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Other: speaker, Research Funding; Kite Pharma: Honoraria, Other: travel accommodations, expenses, speaker ; Fresenius Biotech: Research Funding; Pluristem Ltd: Research Funding; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; Bellicum Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma: Research Funding. Jaglowski:Kite Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy. Tobinai:Abbvie: Research Funding; SERVIER: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; Eisai: Honoraria, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ono Pharmaceutical: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin: Honoraria, Research Funding; Chugai Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding; HUYA Bioscience International: Consultancy, Honoraria; Zenyaku Kogyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Andreadis:Cellerant Therapeutics: Research Funding; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Genentech Inc.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Gilead Sciences: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria. Fleury:F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy; Lundbeck: Consultancy; Gilead: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Mielke:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; KIADIS Pharma: Speakers Bureau; Miltenyi Biotec: Speakers Bureau; DGHO: Speakers Bureau; EHA: Speakers Bureau. Westin:Apotex: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bachanova:Kite Pharma: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gamida Cell: Research Funding; GT Biopharma: Research Funding. Foley:Celgene: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel expenses ; Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharma: Other: Travel expenses . Ho:Amgen: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: travel to meeting; Celgene: Other: travel to meeting. Wagner-Johnston:JUNO: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ASTEX: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding. Kersten:Millennium/Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria. Chu:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Jary:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Anak:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Salles:Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Merck: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Acerta: Honoraria; Morphosys: Honoraria; Servier: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Epizyme: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria. Maziarz:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria; Juno Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Kite Therapeutics: Honoraria; Athersys, Inc.: Patents & Royalties.
44
Tomiyama, Yoshiaki, Jun Ho Jang, Jong-Wook Lee, Koji Miyazaki, Koji Nagafuji, Kensuke Usuki, Nobuhiko Uoshima, et al. "Efficacy and Safety of Romiplostim in Patients with Acquired Aplastic Anemia Ineligible or Refractory to Immunosuppressive Therapy: Interim Analysis of Phase 2/3 Clinical Trial." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 1306. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-112478.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction: Romiplostim is a thrombopoietin mimetic protein that increases platelet production. Romiplostim has already been approved in numerous countries for treatment of immune thrombocytopenia. We previously reported a clinical trial to identify the dosage of romiplostim in aplastic anemia (AA) patients with thrombocytopenia refractory to immunosuppressive therapy (IST). Platelet, erythroid, and neutrophil responses were achieved at high rates with the initial dose at 10 μg/kg in the previous studies (Lee JW et al, ASH2016, 2017). Based on these findings, we conducted a Phase 2/3 clinical study in Japan and Korea for the purpose of evaluating the efficacy and safety of romiplostim in patients with AA who were ineligible or refractory to IST. This abstract shows the efficacy and safety results as of cut-off date (17 Nov 2017), which will be updated with 1-year follow-up result on the ASH2018 annual meeting. Methods: This study was a multi-center, open-label, intra-individual dose adjustment study in adult AA patients in Japan and Korea (NCT02773290). Patients with AA who were ineligible or refractory to IST and having thrombocytopenia with platelet count equal to or less than 30×109/L were enrolled in this study. The dosage of romiplostim was set at the initial level of 10 μg/kg and fixed for the first 4 weeks. The dose was adjusted from 5 to 20 μg/kg according to dose adjustment procedure. Patients who did not achieve a platelet response after the treatment with 20 μg/kg during 8 consecutive weeks were withdrawn from the study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving a hematological response (any of the platelet, erythroid, and neutrophil response) at Week 27. Each response was defined as Table1. The secondary endpoints included the proportion of patients achieving hematological response at Week 53; and the time from the first romiplostim administration to hematological response; and the proportion of patients with transfusion independence or decreased platelet transfusion requirement among patients receiving platelet transfusion within 8 weeks prior to the first romiplostim administration. The bone marrow and cytogenetic analyses were performed prior to enrollment and every 6 months after treatment. Results: Of 46 patients with screening, a total of 31 patients (24 Japanese patients, and 7 Korean patients) were enrolled in this study. The median age was 46.0 years old (range: 20-78 years old). All patients had received at least 1 AA treatment, most of which were antithymocyte globulin (71.0%) and cyclosporin (96.8%). As of cut-off date (17 Nov 2017), 28 patients completed assessment of Week 27, and 18 patients completed assessment of Week 53. Three patients discontinued before Week 27, and 1 patient discontinued after Week 27 but before Week 53. In total (31 patients), 26 patients (83.9% [95% CI; 66.3%, 94.5%]) achieved any hematological response at Week 27. Eight patients (25.8%) achieved tri-lineage hematological response at Week 27. The median days to reach any hematological response were 37.0 [95% CI; 36.0, 44.0] days. Of the patients who depended on platelet transfusion before romiplostim administration (15 patients), 12 patients (80.0%) achieved transfusion independence or showed a reduction of transfusion requirements until Week 53. The frequently reported adverse events (AEs) were nasopharyngitis (38.7%) followed by upper respiratory tract infection (22.6%); pyrexia (19.4%); headache (16.1%); and diarrhoea (12.9%). The frequently reported drug-related AEs were headache (12.9%) followed by muscle spasms (9.7%); and alanine aminotransferase increased, fibrin D dimer increased, malaise, and pain in extremity (each 6.5%). In bone marrow test, 2 patients showed abnormality in karyotypes after romiplostim dosing. Monosomy 7 was shown at Week16 in 1 patient who had been receiving granulocyte-colony stimulating factor prior to the start of romiplostim. This patient did not show the transformation into acute myeloblastic leukemia and/or myelodysplastic syndrome. The other patient showed the gains of chromosomes 3, 4, 14, 16, 17, 19 and 21 at Week 27, but did not show any abnormality at Week 53. None of patient discontinued the study because of AE or karyotype abnormality. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that romiplostim is quite effective and well-tolerated in adult patients with AA ineligible or refractory to IST. Disclosures Tomiyama: Sysmex Corporation: Consultancy; Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; Novartis Pharma Co., Ltd.: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lee:Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Miyazaki:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis Pharma Co., Ltd.: Honoraria. Usuki:Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Ono Pharmaceutical: Speakers Bureau; Chugai Pharmaceutical: Speakers Bureau; Takeda Pharmaceutical: Speakers Bureau; Janssen Pharmaceutical K.K: Research Funding; Pfizer Japan: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Boehringer-Ingelheim Japan: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; SymBio Pharmaceuticals Limited.: Research Funding; Shire Japan: Research Funding; Sanofi K.K.: Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline K.K.: Research Funding; Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Astellas Pharma Inc.: Research Funding; Nippon Shinyaku: Speakers Bureau; Mochida Pharmaceutical: Speakers Bureau; MSD K.K.: Speakers Bureau. Kizaki:Nippon Shinyaku,: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Sawa:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria; Novartis International AG: Honoraria; CHUGAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD.: Honoraria; Mundipharma K.K.: Honoraria. Yonemura:Alexion Pharma: Honoraria, Research Funding. Keta:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Employment. Matsuda:Novartis Pharma K. K.: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline K.K.: Honoraria; Chugai Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd.: Honoraria; Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co, Ltd.: Honoraria; Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; Nippon Shinyaku Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Honoraria; Sanofi K.K.: Honoraria; Beckman Coulter K.K.: Honoraria. Mitani:Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myesr Squibb: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Sumitomo Dainippon: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Toyama Chemical: Research Funding. Nakao:Novartis: Honoraria; Kyowa Hakko Kirin Co., Ltd.: Honoraria; Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria.
45
Michot, Jean-Marie, Reda Bouabdallah, Jeanette K. Doorduijn, Umberto Vitolo, Marie José Kersten, Annalisa Chiappella, Pier Luigi Zinzani, et al. "Avadomide (CC-122), a Novel Cereblon Modulating Agent, in Combination with Obinutuzumab (GA101) in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 449. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-110213.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Background: Relapsed or refractory (R/R) non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), remains a clinical challenge with limited second- and third-line treatment options. Patients (pts) with follicular lymphoma (FL) experiencing early relapse (ER) within 2 years of initial diagnosis and those double refractory (DR) to both rituximab and chemotherapy have particularly poor outcomes (Casulo et al. J Clin Oncol 2015; Gopal et al. N Engl J Med 2014).Avadomide (CC-122) is a cereblon modulating agent that promotes degradation of transcription factors Aiolos and Ikaros, resulting in potent antilymphoma and immunomodulatory effects on T- and NK-cell function. Phase I clinical data from the CC-122-NHL-001 study (NCT02417285) revealed promising activity with avadomide plus obinutuzumab in pts with R/R B-cell NHL (Michot et al. Blood 2017). Herein, we report results from CC-122-NHL-001 in pts with R/R FL. Methods: CC-122-NHL-001 is a phase Ib, open-label, dose escalation/expansion study of avadomide in combination with obinutuzumab. Eligible pts were aged ≥18 y with histologically or cytologically confirmed CD20+ B-cell NHL after ≥1 prior regimen for FL/marginal zone lymphoma (MZL). Upon informed consent, pts received escalating doses of avadomide for 5 out of 7 d/wk in 28-d cycles plus a fixed dose of intravenous obinutuzumab 1000 mg on d 2, 8, and 15 of cycle 1 (C1), and d 1 of C2-8. Avadomide active ingredient in capsule (AIC) formulation at doses of 1, 2, 3, and 4 mg and avadomide formulated capsules (F6) of 3 and 4 mg were evaluated in separate cohorts. Primary endpoints included safety and tolerability, non-tolerated dose, and maximum-tolerated dose. Response was assessed using the Cheson 2007 criteria every 2 cycles to C6, every 3 cycles to C12, and every 6 cycles thereafter. Results: As of May 1, 2018, 58 pts with R/R B-cell NHL were treated in the study, including 19 with R/R DLBCL,38 with R/R FL, and 1 with R/R MZL. Among the 38 pts with R/R FL, 18 were treated in the dose escalation phase (median of 16.5 cycles; 78% initiated ≥6 cycles) and 20 were treated in the expansion phase (median of 4 cycles; 40% initiated ≥6 cycles). Of the 38 pts, 36 pts received 3 mg of 4 mg of avadomide (F6 or AIC); 2 pts received 2 mg of avadomide (AIC). The median age among R/R FL pts was 60 y (range, 41-83), 22 pts (58%) were male, and 32 (84%) had stage III/IV disease. The median number of prior antilymphoma therapies was 3 (range, 1-8), and 12 (32%) pts had 1 prior autologous stem cell transplant. As of data cutoff, 19 pts (50%) were ongoing treatment. One pt experienced a dose-limiting toxicity, consisting of grade 4 neutropenia (avadomide 3 mg AIC). Among the 38 pts in the dose escalation/dose expansion phases, the most common (≥25%) any-grade treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were neutropenia (66%), thrombocytopenia (29%), and pyrexia (29%). The most common (≥10%) grade 3/4 TEAEs were neutropenia (58%) and thrombocytopenia (11%). Nine pts (24%) had ≥1 serious TEAE related to avadomide; only cytokine release syndrome (11%) and infusion related reactions (8%) occurred in >1 pt. Avadomide dose reduction and temporary interruption occurred in 10 pts (26%; all due to AEs), and 27 pts (71%; 25 pts due to AEs), respectively. Median duration of interruption due to AEs was 15 d (range, 2-48). The overall response rate (ORR) among all R/R FL pts (n=38) was 68%, with 16 pts (42%) achieving complete response (CR). Median duration of response was 19.4 mo (95% CI, 8.4-not reached). Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 16.6 mo (95% CI, 11.4-24.9) with a median follow up time for PFS of 5.4 mo. Subgroup analysis examined activity of the combination in standard-risk and high-risk (ER and/or DR) FL pts (Table). Both response rates and mPFS were similar in standard-risk and high-risk FL pts (ORR: 70% vs 67%, P=0.83; CR: 40% vs 44%, P=0.78; mPFS: 16.6 mo [95% CI, 5.4-not reached] vs 21.2 mo [3.7-24.9], P=0.60). The median duration of PFS follow up in the expansion phase (n=20/38) is 3.5 mo. Updated data will be presented at ASH. Conclusions: Avadomide given in combination with obinutuzumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated promising clinical activity, with encouraging response rates and mPFS observed in pts with R/R FL, irrespective of their disease risk status. Avadomide plus obinutuzumab may provide a new chemotherapy-free treatment option for pts with R/R FL failing standard therapies. Disclosures Vitolo: Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Kersten:Millennium/Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Kite/Gilead: Honoraria; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Honoraria. Chiappella:Roche: Other: lecture fees; Amgen: Other: lecture fees; Nanostring: Other: lecture fees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: lecture fees; Teva: Other: lecture fees. Zinzani:Astra Zeneca: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BMS: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; MSD: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; TG Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; PFIZER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SERVIER: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Verastem: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Salles:ACERTA: Honoraria; SERVIER: Honoraria; TAKEDA: Honoraria; GILEAD: Honoraria; CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding; AMGEN: Honoraria; JANSSEN: Honoraria; MERCK: Honoraria; MORPHOSYS: Honoraria; PFIZER: Honoraria; ABBVIE: Honoraria; EPIZYME: Honoraria; NOVARTIS: Consultancy, Honoraria; ROCHE: Honoraria, Research Funding. Sarmiento:Celgene Institute for Translational Research Europe: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mosulen:Celgene Institute for Translational Research Europe: Employment, Equity Ownership. Mendez:Celgene Institute for Translational Research Europe: Employment, Equity Ownership. Uttamsingh:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pourdehnad:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Hege:Arcus Biosicences: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; SITC: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Mersana: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties: multiple. Li:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Nikolova:Celgene International Sarl: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ribrag:argenX: Research Funding; Infinity: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: travel; epizyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; NanoString Technologies: Consultancy, Honoraria; pharmamar: Other: travel; MSD: Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Servier: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria, Other: travel; Amgen: Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy.
46
Cappellini, Maria Domenica, Photis Beris, Pierre Brissot, John B. Porter, Ali Taher, Patty Peterson, and Elaine Rudell. "Iron Overload Diagnosis and Management Among Clinicians: International Survey Showing Gaps In Knowledge and Need for Continuing Educational Programs." Blood 116, no. 21 (November 19, 2010): 2562. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v116.21.2562.2562.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Abstract 2562 Objective: Clinical competence and practice performance among clinicians are difficult to measure. Self-assessments, while subjective, may determine gaps in knowledge and competence that affect performance. To determine the current knowledge level, competence, and clinical practices in diagnosing and managing iron overload (IO), an international survey was conducted among clinicians participating in the European School of Haematology (ESH) Iron Metabolism & Related Disorders Curriculum on the ESH website. Methods: An online survey was sent to 1197 participants in the ESH Curriculum to self-assess their level of competence and clinical practices in IO and its treatment in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes, thalassemia, sickle cell disease, hereditary hemochromatosis, and rare anemias. Results: Seventy-three of the 1197 participants responded to the survey, showing interest in the topic. Sixty-three (86.3%) were physicians, the majority of whom were hematologists (49.3%) or pediatric oncologists/pediatric hematologic oncologists (21.9%). Although 66.7% stated they always screen patients at risk for IO, only 50% said they always institute early iron chelation therapy (ICT) in patients with IO. While 73.4% of respondents stated they always instruct patients on the importance of adherence to ICT, only 58.5% always monitor their patients for adherence. Similarly, 60.9% of respondents stated that they always monitor patients for change in status and treatment response to ensure optimal dosing, but only 37.3% consider titration of ICT to reduce or maintain iron levels. Respondents were especially interested in further information on methods for monitoring iron load (77.6%), clinical guidelines for treatment of IO (74.6%), effect of IO on cardiac function/toxicity (67.2%), early identification of patients at risk for IO (65.7%), efficacy/safety of oral ICT (61.2%), and safety issues as they relate to IO treatment (61.2%). By self-assessment, 64.4% of the survey responders rated their current level of competence as high/very high regarding their ability to diagnose IO, evaluate techniques for assessing tissue iron levels, and interpret the findings; 70.2% also rated their ability to assess which patients were at risk of IO, the organs affected by IO, and the clinical sequelae/disease burden of IO as high/very high. Although 70.3% rated their ability to describe the rationale for using ICT and the mechanisms of action of various ICTs as high/very high, only 62.5% felt an equivalent ability to differentiate across various ICTs regarding their efficacy/safety, frequency/methods of administration, and approved indications for specific patient populations. More than 80% rated their desired level of competence as high/very high in terms of the ability to diagnose IO, assess tissue IO, and interpret the findings (84.0%); the ability to assess patients at risk for IO (89.4%); the rationale for using ICTs and the mechanisms of action of various ICTs (87.3%); and, most important, the ability to differentiate across ICTs regarding efficacy and safety, administration, and approved indications in specific populations (93.5%). The gaps between current level of competence and desired level of competence signal a need for continuous education on this topic. Conclusions: The survey points out significant gaps between clinicians' self-assessed levels of knowledge and competence in diagnosing and managing IO and implementation of this knowledge into practice. This was particularly evident in the gap between clinicians' desired level of competence in differentiating between various ICTs and their current level of competence in this area. The gaps uncovered in this survey highlight the fact that continuous educational reinforcement is critical for information to be incorporated into practice. The response rate to the survey among clinicians currently participating in an iron metabolism curriculum demonstrates their strong interest in these programs and their desire for continuing education in the areas identified. Disclosures: Cappellini: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Beris:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Vifor International: Consultancy. Brissot:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Porter:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Genzyme Corporation: Consultancy; Resonance Health Ltd: Consultancy. Taher:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.
47
Pulsipher, Michael A., Xia Han, Máire Quigley, Gabor Kari, Susana Rives, Theodore W. Laetsch, Gary Douglas Myers, et al. "Molecular Detection of Minimal Residual Disease Precedes Morphological Relapse and Could be Used to Identify Relapse in Pediatric and Young Adult B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Patients Treated with Tisagenlecleucel." Blood 132, Supplement 1 (November 29, 2018): 1551. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2018-99-115460.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction Detection of minimal residual disease (MRD) is an important predictor of patient outcome following treatment of B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). We assessed concordance between two MRD assays, with different assay sensitivities, to determine which MRD detection method could support early relapse detection. Immunoglobulin next generation sequencing (Ig NGS) and flow cytometry (FC) were tested in samples from two clinical trials ELIANA (NCT02435849) and ENSIGN (NCT02228096) for pediatric relapsed and refractory B-ALL patients treated with tisagenlecleucel. We also assessed whether using blood with Ig NGS would be comparable to BM testing with FC. Finally we analyzed whether clonal evolution, as detected by Ig NGS, occurred during of the course of therapy for both CD19+ and CD19- relapse patients. Methods In this analysis, bone marrow and peripheral blood specimens at screening (pre-tisagenlecleucel infusion), post-infusion and relapse were tested. Ig NGS was performed in 300 samples from 88 patients. 237 samples from 83 patients also had FC MRD results available. MRD was measured on fresh blood and bone marrow using a 3-tube FC assay (CD10, CD19, CD13, CD20, CD22, CD33, CD34, CD38, CD45, CD58, CD123). The FC MRD assay has a lower limit of sensitivity of 0.01% of white blood cells. Ig NGS detection of MRD was performed using the Adaptive Biotechnology's NGS MRD assay. MRD quantitative values, along with the qualitative MRD calls at each assay sensitivity level (10-4, 10-5 and 10-6) were reported. At baseline, 85 out of 88 samples had informative clones. Results and Conclusions To examine the comparability of flow cytometry and Ig NGS methods in assessing MRD, baseline and post-treatment samples were tested. Baseline samples, which had a high disease burden, showed 100% MRD concordance between both assays. However, post-treatment, where the leukemic burden was dramatically reduced, Ig NGS detected a greater number of MRD positive samples compared to FC, at each sensitivity level tested (10-4, 10-5 and 10-6). At the highest sensitivity level of 10-6, Ig NGS was able to detect 18% more MRD positive post-treatment samples. Importantly, Ig NGS was able to detect MRD positivity 1-4 months ahead of clinical relapse in a small number of relapsed patients, whether relapse was CD19+ or CD19-. This may provide an important window of opportunity for pre-emptive treatment while a patients' tumor burden is still low. In B-ALL, it has previously been described that MRD levels can be one to three logs lower in blood compared to bone marrow (VanDongen JJ et al. Blood 2015). Our results support these findings whereby MRD burden in bone marrow was higher than in blood using both FC and Ig NGS. We next set out to determine if the increased sensitivity afforded by the Ig NGS assay could provide a level of MRD detection in the blood comparable to FC in the bone marrow. In patients with matching data available, Ig NGS was able to detect more MRD positive blood samples than FC MRD positive bone marrow samples. This suggests that monitoring of MRD using Ig NGS in the blood holds the potential to be used as a surrogate for FC MRD in bone marrow. The relationship between MRD and prognosis was examined. Patients who were MRD negative by both Ig NGS and FC at the end of first month post-infusion had better progression-free survival and overall survival compared to those with detectable MRD. Tumor clonality will be further analyzed to understand sub-clone composition at baseline and clonal evolution following tisagenlecleucel treatment. Taken together, these results highlight the importance of using a highly sensitive assay, such as Ig NGS, when monitoring for MRD. MRD detection by Ig NGS holds the potential to identify early response/relapse in patients, which could provide a window of opportunity for additional intervention before morphological relapse. Ongoing studies with larger patient groups will provide further information on the applicability of Ig NGS MRD detection and its association with long-term outcome in tisagenlecleucel-treated pediatric r/r B-ALL patients. Disclosures Pulsipher: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy; Amgen: Honoraria; Adaptive Biotech: Consultancy, Research Funding. Han:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Quigley:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Kari:Adaptimmune LLC: Other: previous employment within 2 years; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Rives:Shire: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Amgen: Consultancy, Other: advisory board ; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards ; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Other: Symposia, advisory boards . Laetsch:Bayer: Consultancy; Eli Lilly: Consultancy; Pfizer: Equity Ownership; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy; Loxo Oncology: Consultancy. Myers:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Qayed:Novartis: Consultancy. Stefanski:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Baruchel:Shire: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amgen: Consultancy; Servier: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodations or expenses; Celgene: Consultancy. Bader:Cellgene: Consultancy; Riemser: Research Funding; Medac: Patents & Royalties, Research Funding; Neovii: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Yi:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Kalfoglou:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Robins:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Consultancy, Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Yusko:Adaptive Biotechnologies: Employment, Equity Ownership. Görgün:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Bleickardt:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Wong:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Grupp:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Adaptimmune: Consultancy; University of Pennsylvania: Patents & Royalties.
48
Shah, Jatin J., Rafat Abonour, Mohit Narang, Jayesh Mehta, Howard R. Terebelo, Cristina J. Gasparetto, Kathleen Toomey, et al. "Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Receiving Triplet Therapy in the Connect MM® Disease Registry." Blood 126, no. 23 (December 3, 2015): 4229. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood.v126.23.4229.4229.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Introduction: Triplet therapies are used for treatment (Tx) of both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Actual patterns and outcomes of Tx are not fully understood. Connect MM® is the first and largest multicenter, US-based, prospective observational cohort study designed to characterize Tx patterns and outcomes for pts with NDMM. This analysis describes demographic and disease characteristics of pts who received triplet Tx as an induction regimen and for whom transplant was or was not intended. The analysis explores the relationship of these factors with overall survival (OS) and other efficacy endpoints. Patients and Methods: Pts aged ≥ 18 y with NDMM within 60 days of diagnosis were eligible for enrollment regardless of disease severity, medical history, or comorbidities. Data including transplant intent (yes/no) was collected at baseline; follow-up data was collected quarterly thereafter. Based on the initial intent, 2 groups were identified: patients with intent to transplant who received transplant (TT) and pts with no intent to transplant who did not receive a transplant (NT). Triplet Tx was defined as the combination of ≥ 3 concurrent therapeutic agents in the first course of Tx (within 56 days of study entry). KM analysis adjusted for age was conducted for OS. Because decisions on use of transplant and triplet therapy are influenced by multiple factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the contribution of the triplet therapy (yes/no) to OS and was adjusted for other variables, including age, comorbidities, and ISS staging. Results: Between September 2009 and December 2011, 1493 pts were enrolled. This analysis was on 1436 pts: 650 pts with transplant intent and 786 pts without transplant intent. The data cutoff date was November 30, 2014, and the median follow-up for overall survival (OS) was 33.8 mos. Of pts with transplant intent, 451 (69%) received transplant (TT) and 199 (31%) did not. Of pts without transplant intent, 62 (8%) received transplant and 724 (92%) did not (NT). The abstract focuses on TT and NT groups only. NT pts tended to be older and have more advanced ISS staging and higher β2-microglobulin levels than TT pts (Table). The most common triplet regimen given during the first course treatment (within 56 days) was lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd). RVd was administered to 34% of the NT pts (76/225) and 59% of the TT pts (152/257). The most common non-triplet regimen was bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), which was given to 31% of NT pts (156/499) and 38% of TT pts (73/194). Within the NT group, pts given triplet Tx had a lower risk of death than those who did not receive triplet Tx (P = .0013). The multivariable analysis found triplet Tx to be associated with a 36% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50-0.82]; P = .001). ISS disease stage (HR = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.21-1.69]; P < .001) and history of diabetes (HR = 1.38 [95% CI, 1.08-1.78]; P = .012) were negative prognostic factors for OS. Within the TT group, pts who received triplet Tx did not attain an OS benefit (P = .8993), and no baseline characteristics were significantly associated with OS. These results may be limited by other factors not considered that may have influenced physicians' choice of treatment, including the use of maintenance therapy and a short follow-up period of 33.8 months. Conclusions: Triplet Tx as a first regimen is associated with longer OS in pts without transplant intent who did not receive a transplant. RVd and Vd were the most common first Tx regimens, respectively. Continued follow-up of these pts and enrollment of an additional cohort will provide additional data with mature follow-up. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Shah: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abonour:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacylics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Other: Export Board Committee, Speakers Bureau. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Srinivasan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nagarwala:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.
49
Deshpande, Sohan, Monica Turner, Michael Byrnes, Christopher Pelligra, Amy Rines-MacEachern, Madhura Chitnis, Austin Kulasekararaj, Derek Tang, Jessica Morison, and Esther Natalie Oliva. "A Systematic Literature Review on the Burden of Illness in Lower-Risk Transfusion-Dependent Myelodysplastic Syndromes." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 5838. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-124300.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction: Anemia occurs in 80-90% of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS), nearly half of whom are red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependent (TD) at diagnosis. The presence of anemia, transfusion dependency, and the resulting complications exacerbate the burden of MDS. Patients with lower-risk MDS have longer overall survival (OS) than patients with higher-risk MDS; however, TD status and higher transfusion load significantly reduce OS. Treatment of lower-risk TD MDS aims to achieve RBC transfusion independence (TI), hematologic improvements and alterations in erythroid response according to IWG 2006 criteria, and improved health-related quality of life (HRQoL). To evaluate these points, we performed a systematic literature review (SLR) to assess the burden experienced by adult patients with RBC TD anemia in lower-risk MDS. Methods: Embase®, MEDLINE®, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched from inception to March 2019 to identify observational studies reporting on the HRQoL, clinical, and epidemiological burden as well as treatment patterns for adult patients with lower-risk MDS who were RBC TD. Conference proceedings from the last 2 years were searched to identify recent data not yet published as a full text article. Only English language articles and conference abstracts were included. References were screened at the title/abstract and full-text levels by 2 independent reviewers, with methodology following Cochrane guidelines. Results: Database searches yielded 1,175 records. After removing duplicates, 837 abstracts were reviewed, with 152 publications progressing to full-text review. Ten studies met the eligibility criteria. Two additional records were identified from hand searching (Figure). Many studies reported on mixed MDS patient populations, where only a subset were lower-risk and TD, limiting the amount of data available. Nine studies were from the USA or EU5 (France Germany, Italy, Spain, United Kingdom) as well as 1 international study encompassing Europe, the USA, and Australia. The majority of studies defined risk status using the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) risk score, with only 1 study reporting both IPSS and Revised-IPSS (IPSS-R) score. Where reported, patients were mostly older (mean age > 70 years). Burden data were sparse, with few outcomes reported across multiple studies (Table). One study from Italy (mean age 72 years) reporting EuroQoL 5-dimension Visual Analogue Scale data indicated that patients with TD MDS had worse scores (53.0) compared with patients aged 65-74 years in the general Italian population (67.8). Clinical data indicated a variable OS rate across studies conducted in Spain and France, as well as in the 1 international study, with a 2-year OS rate of 73.2% and 4-year OS rates ranging from 27.6% to 73%. The data consistently reported that patients with TD MDS had shorter OS than patients with TI MDS. Differences in timepoints for assessment, types of treatments, and RBC transfusion load increased the variation in OS data. TI was defined as a transfusion-free period of ≥ 56 days, or 8 weeks, in most studies. Median time to reach TI (when reported) ranged from 32-97 weeks, although the prolonged length of time it took to reach TI and the proportion of patients achieving TI indicated an extensive time on treatment. Similar conclusions were drawn in 3 studies that compared OS in patients who became TI with those who remained TD. Epidemiology data were limited to mortality data, and no data were available on morbidity, incidence, or prevalence of disease. Mortality data provided an incomplete picture; deaths were reported as overall mortality or non-leukemic deaths, obscuring mortality rates specifically associated with lower-risk TD MDS. Treatment patterns were reported in 3 studies; erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and hypomethylating agents were the most common treatments reported. Conclusions: Data on the burden of illness in patients with lower-risk MDS with TD anemia were limited and reported inconsistently across studies. Despite this heterogeneity, HRQoL outcomes had a trend toward worse scores in patients with TD MDS than in the general population. OS rate at 2 and 4 years indicated worse prognosis in patients with TD MDS compared with the general population. To better understand the burden of illness, further robust observational studies are needed to close the evidence gaps in this population. Disclosures Deshpande: Evidera: Employment; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Turner:Evidera: Employment; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Byrnes:Evidera: Employment. Pelligra:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding; Evidera: Employment. Rines-MacEachern:Evidera: Employment. Chitnis:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Evidera: Employment. Kulasekararaj:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Alexion: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Achilleon: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Ra Pharma: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Akari Therapeutics: Consultancy. Tang:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Morison:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Oliva:Apellis: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.
50
Berenson, James R., Jennifer To, Tanya M. Spektor, Daisy Martinez, Armando J. Sanchez, Carley Turner, Regina Swift, et al. "A Phase 1 Trial of Ruxolitinib, Lenalidomide and Methylprednisolone for Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (MM)." Blood 134, Supplement_1 (November 13, 2019): 1903. http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2019-131370.
Full textAbstract:
Introduction Ruxolitinib (RUX) is an FDA-approved oral, selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 for the treatment of patients with polycythemia vera who have had an inadequate response to or are intolerant of hydroxyurea or intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF). Preclinical studies from our laboratory have demonstrated that RUX in combination with the immunomodulatory agent lenalidomide (LEN) and dexamethasone shows marked anti-myeloma effects both in vitro and in vivo. Furthermore, MUC1 (Mucin 1) is responsible for LEN resistance in MM cells, and RUX blocks its expression in multiple myeloma (MM) cells. Thus, RUX may restore sensitivity to LEN. RUX also downregulates PD-L1 and PD-L2 expression on MM cells and reduces tumor stimulatory M2 macrophage polarization in MM bone marrow. Therefore, a phase 1 trial was conducted to determine the safety and efficacy of RUX in combination with LEN and the steroid methylprednisolone (MP) for relapsed/refractory (RR) MM patients who had previously been treated with LEN/steroids and a proteasome inhibitor (PI) and showed progressive disease at study entry. Methods A traditional 3+3 dose escalation design was used to enroll subjects in four cohorts with planned total enrollment to be 49 patients. Subjects received RUX twice daily continuously, LEN daily on d1-21 of a 28-d cycle and MP orally every other day. In DL0, patients received RUX 5 mg, LEN 5 mg, and MP 40 mg. In DL+1 and +2, both doses of LEN and MP remained unchanged and RUX was escalated to 10 and 15 mg, respectively. DL+3 escalated LEN to 10 mg with MP unchanged and RUX at 15 mg. Primary endpoints were safety, clinical benefit rate (CBR) and overall response rate (ORR). Results As of March 1, 2019, 43 patients were enrolled, and 40 were evaluable for efficacy. The median age was 65 years (range, 46-81), and 25 (58%) were male. Patients received a median of 6 prior treatments including LEN and steroids to which they were all refractory. No DLTs occurred, and DL+3 was expanded. Among all 40 evaluable patients, the CBR and ORR were 47% and 37%, respectively (1 CR, 4 VGPR, 10 PR and 4 MR), and 16 and 5 patients showed SD and PD. Notably, all 19 patients achieving > MR were refractory to LEN (i.e. progressed while on or within 8 weeks of last dosage). The median PFS for all evaluable patients was 4 months. G3/4 AEs included anemia (16%), sepsis (14%), lymphocytopenia (14%), pneumonia (12%), neutropenia (12%) and hypokalaemia (12%). Most common SAEs included sepsis (14%) and pneumonia (12%). Conclusions This phase 1 trial demonstrates for the first time that a JAK inhibitor, RUX, can overcome refractoriness to LEN and steroids for RRMM patients. This all oral regimen was well tolerated, and reversible Grade 3/4 cytopenias occurred in only a small minority of patients. These promising results are leading to expansion of the current clinical trial to 78 patients, and represent a potential novel therapeutic approach for treating MM. Disclosures Berenson: Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy; OncoTracker: Equity Ownership, Other: Officer; OncoTracker: Equity Ownership, Other: Officer; Takeda: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Incyte Corporation.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation.: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Research Funding. Swift:Bristol Mayers Squib: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Jansen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Eades:Celgene: Other: Stock. Boccia:Genentech: Speakers Bureau; DSI: Speakers Bureau; AMAG: Consultancy; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau. OffLabel Disclosure: The goal of this clinical trial is to establish ruxolitinib in combination with lenalidomide and methylprednisolone as the therapy for relapse/refractory multiple myeloma patients.