Health-related quality of life in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma treated with melflufen and dexamethasone: analyses from the phase III OCEAN study

Not available.

PORT: A Randomized, Cross-Over, Phase 2 Study of Melflufen Peripheral Versus Central Intravenous Administration in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Melflufen, a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, rapidly enters tumor cells and metabolizes to melphalan. In previous studies, melflufen was administered via central venous catheter (CVC). However, administration by peripheral venous catheter (PVC) may be preferable.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PORT was a two-period, phase 2 crossover study of CVC versus PVC melflufen administration in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Adults with ≥ 2 prior therapies refractory to/intolerant of an immunomodulatory drug and a proteasome inhibitor were randomized 1:1 to weekly oral dexamethasone plus melflufen (40 mg) via CVC or PVC infusion on day 1 of 28-day cycle 1. In cycle 2, patients continued dexamethasone and crossed over to the other melflufen administration route. In cycle 3, all patients received melflufen until progression; PVC or CVC routes were allowed based upon investigator decision. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed during and after melflufen infusion. Primary endpoints were melphalan pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC(0-t), and AUC(0-∞)) and frequency and severity of PVC-related local reactions.

RESULTS

The 90% CIs for adjusted geometric mean ratios for pharmacokinetic parameters following CVC versus PVC administration were within the 0.8-1.25 bioequivalence range (Cmax 0.946 [90% CI: 0.849, 1.053]; AUC(0-t) 0.952 [90% CI: 0.861, 1.053]; AUC(0-∞) 0.955 [90% CI: 0.863, 1.058]). In both arms, adverse events were primarily hematological and similar; no phlebitis or local infusion-related reactions occurred.

CONCLUSION

Melflufen PVC and CVC administrations are bioequivalent based on melphalan pharmacokinetic parameters. Melflufen via PVC was well tolerated, with no infusion-related reactions or new safety signals and may represent an alternative route of administration.

Efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin versus pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (DREAMM-3): a phase 3, open-label, randomised study

BACKGROUND

Multiple myeloma remains incurable, and heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory disease have few good treatment options. Belantamab mafodotin showed promising results in a phase 2 study of patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma at second or later relapse and a manageable adverse event profile. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of belantamab mafodotin in a phase 3 setting.

METHODS

In the DREAMM-3 open-label phase 3 study, conducted at 108 sites across 18 countries, adult patients were enrolled who had confirmed multiple myeloma (International Myeloma Working Group criteria), ECOG performance status of 0-2, had received two or more previous lines of therapy, including two or more consecutive cycles of both lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor, and progressed on, or within, 60 days of completion of the previous treatment. Participants were randomly allocated using a central interactive response technology system (2:1) to receive belantamab mafodotin 2·5 mg/kg intravenously every 21 days, or oral pomalidomide 4·0 mg daily (days 1-21) and dexamethasone 40·0 mg (20·0 mg if >75 years) weekly in a 28-day cycle. Randomisation was stratified by previous anti-CD38 therapy, International Staging System stage, and number of previous therapies. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in all patients who were randomly allocated. The safety population included all randomly allocated patients who received one or more doses of study treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04162210, and is ongoing. Data cutoff for this analysis was Sept 12, 2022.

FINDINGS

Patients were recruited between April 2, 2020, and April 18, 2022. As of September, 2022, 325 patients were randomly allocated (218 to the belantamab mafodotin group and 107 to the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group); 184 (57%) of 325 were male and 141 (43%) of 325 were female, 246 (78%) of 316 were White. Median age was 68 years (IQR 60-74). Median follow-up was 11·5 months (5·5-17·6) for belantamab mafodotin and 10·8 months (5·6-17·1) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone. Median progression-free survival was 11·2 months (95% CI 6·4-14·5) for belantamab mafodotin and 7·0 months (4·6-10·6) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone (hazard ratio 1·03 [0·72-1·47]; p=0·56). Most common grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (49 [23%] of 217) and anaemia (35 [16%]) for belantamab mafodotin, and neutropenia (34 [33%] of 102) and anaemia (18[18%]) for pomalidomide-dexamethasone. Serious adverse events occurred in 94 (43%) of 217 and 40 (39%) of 102 patients, respectively. There were no treatment-related deaths in the belantamab mafodotin group and one (1%) in the pomalidomide-dexamethasone group due to sepsis.

INTERPRETATION

Belantamab mafodotin was not associated with statistically improved progression-free survival compared with standard-of-care, but there were no new safety signals associated with its use. Belantamab mafodotin is being tested in combination regimens for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

FUNDING

GSK (study number 207495).

Overall Survival With Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (CASTOR): A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase III Trial

PURPOSE

At the primary analysis of CASTOR (median follow-up, 7.4 months), daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (D-Vd) significantly prolonged progression-free survival versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) alone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). We report updated efficacy and safety results at the final analysis for overall survival (OS).

METHODS

CASTOR was a multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase III study during which eligible patients with ≥ 1 line of prior therapy were randomly assigned to Vd (up to eight cycles) with or without daratumumab (until disease progression). After positive primary analysis and protocol amendment, patients receiving Vd were offered daratumumab monotherapy after disease progression.

RESULTS

At a median (range) follow-up of 72.6 months (0.0-79.8), significant OS benefit was observed with D-Vd (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.92; P = .0075). Median OS was 49.6 months with D-Vd versus 38.5 months with Vd. Prespecified subgroup analyses demonstrated an OS advantage with D-Vd versus Vd for most subgroups, including patients age ≥ 65 years and patients with one or two prior lines of therapy, International Staging System stage III disease, high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities, and prior bortezomib treatment. The most common (≥ 10%) grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events with D-Vd versus Vd were thrombocytopenia (46.1% v 32.9%), anemia (16.0% v 16.0%), neutropenia (13.6% v 4.6%), lymphopenia (10.3% v 2.5%), and pneumonia (10.7% v 10.1%).

CONCLUSION

D-Vd significantly prolonged OS in patients with RRMM, with the greatest OS benefit observed in patients with one prior line of therapy. To our knowledge, our results, together with the OS benefit observed with daratumumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in the phase III POLLUX study, demonstrate for the first time an OS benefit with daratumumab-containing regimens in RRMM (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02136134 [CASTOR]).

Impact of venetoclax monotherapy on the quality of life of patients with relapsed or refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia: results from the phase 3b VENICE II trial

Venetoclax, a potent B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) inhibitor, has demonstrated clinical efficacy in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). VENICE II is an open-label, single-arm, phase 3b study (NCT02980731) evaluating the impact of venetoclax monotherapy (400 mg once daily) for ≤2 years on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) of patients with relapsed/refractory CLL. The primary endpoint was mean change in the global health status (GHS)/quality of life (QoL) subscale of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30) from baseline to Week 48. Overall, 210 patients received ≥1 dose of venetoclax; median treatment duration was 67.4 weeks. The primary endpoint was met with mean improvement of +9.3 points (n = 156, 95% confidence interval 6.1-12.5; p=.004) in GHS/QoL. At Week 48, clinically meaningful improvements were observed for role functioning, fatigue, and insomnia domains of EORTC QLQ-C30, suggesting venetoclax monotherapy has a positive impact on HRQoL. No new safety signals were reported.

Health-related quality of life maintained over time in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma treated with daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone: results from the phase III CASTOR trial

In the phase III CASTOR trial, daratumumab, bortezomib and dexamethasone (D-Vd) significantly extended progression-free survival compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) alone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here, we present patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the CASTOR trial. PROs were assessed using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item (EORTC QLQ-C30) and the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system questionnaire. Treatment effects through Cycle 8 were measured by a repeated measures mixed-effects model. After Cycle 8, PROs were only collected for patients in the D-Vd group who continued on daratumumab monotherapy. Compliance rates for PRO assessments were high and similar between treatment groups. Mean changes from baseline were generally similar between treatment groups for EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS), functioning and symptoms, and did not exceed 10 points for either treatment group. Subgroup analyses were consistent with the results observed in the overall population. There was no change in patients' health-related quality of life for the first eight cycles of therapy; thereafter, patients treated with daratumumab over the long-term reported improvements in GHS and pain. These results complement the significant clinical benefits observed with D-Vd in patients with RRMM and support its use in this patient population.

Daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: subgroup analysis of CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk

Background

Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with high cytogenetic risk have poor outcomes. In CASTOR, daratumumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone (D-Vd) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus bortezomib/dexamethasone (Vd) alone and exhibited tolerability in patients with relapsed or refractory MM (RRMM).

Methods

This subgroup analysis evaluated D-Vd versus Vd in CASTOR based on cytogenetic risk, determined using fluorescence in situ hybridization and/or karyotype testing performed locally. High-risk patients had t(4;14), t(14;16), and/or del17p abnormalities. Minimal residual disease (MRD; 10⁻⁵ sensitivity threshold) was assessed via the clonoSEQ® assay V2.0. Of the 498 patients randomized, 40 (16%) in the D-Vd group and 35 (14%) in the Vd group were categorized as high risk.

Results

After a median follow-up of 40.0 months, D-Vd prolonged median PFS versus Vd in patients with standard (16.6 vs 6.6 months; HR, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.19-0.37; P < 0.0001) and high (12.6 vs 6.2 months; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.21–0.83; P = 0.0106) cytogenetic risk. D-Vd achieved deep responses, including higher rates of MRD negativity and sustained MRD negativity versus Vd, regardless of cytogenetic risk. The safety profile was consistent with the overall population of CASTOR.

Conclusion

These updated data reinforce the effectiveness and tolerability of daratumumab-based regimens for RRMM, regardless of cytogenetic risk status.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02136134. Registered 12 May 2014

Results from a multicenter, noninterventional registry study for multiple myeloma patients who received stem cell mobilization regimens with and without plerixafor

Plerixafor plus granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) enhances the mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) for collection and subsequent autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). This international, multicenter, noninterventional registry study (NCT01362972), evaluated long-term outcomes for MM patients who received plerixafor versus other mobilization regimens. The comparisons were: G-CSF + plerixafor (G-CSF + P) versus G-CSF-; G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + chemotherapy (G-CSF + C); and G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C. Propensity score matching was used to balance groups. Primary outcome measures were progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR) after transplantation. After propensity matching, 77 versus 41 patients in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF cohorts, 129 versus 129 in the G-CSF + P versus G-CSF + C cohorts, and 117 versus 117 in the G-CSF + P + C versus G-CSF + C cohorts were matched, respectively. Propensity score matching resulted in a smaller sample size and imbalances were not completely overcome. For both PFS and OS, the upper limits of the hazard ratio 95% confidence intervals exceeded prespecified boundaries; noninferiority was not demonstrated. CIR rates were higher in the plerixafor cohorts. G-CSF + P remains an option for the mobilization of HSCs in poor mobilizers with MM with no substantial differences in PFS, OS, and CIR in comparison with other regimens.

Long-term efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in polycythaemia vera (RESPONSE): 5-year follow up of a phase 3 study

BACKGROUND

Polycythaemia vera is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterised by excessive proliferation of erythroid, myeloid, and megakaryocytic components in the bone marrow due to mutations in the Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) gene. Ruxolitinib, a JAK 1 and JAK 2 inhibitor, showed superiority over best available therapy in a phase 2 study in patients with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. We aimed to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib with best available therapy in patients with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea.

METHODS

We report the 5-year results for a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study (RESPONSE) that enrolled patients at 109 sites across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (18 years or older) with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either ruxolitinib or best available therapy. Patients randomly assigned to the ruxolitinib group received the drug orally at a starting dose of 10 mg twice a day. Single-agent best available therapy comprised hydroxyurea, interferon or pegylated interferon, pipobroman, anagrelide, approved immunomodulators, or observation without pharmacological treatment. The primary endpoint, composite response (patients who achieved both haematocrit control without phlebotomy and 35% or more reduction from baseline in spleen volume) at 32 weeeks was previously reported. Patients receiving best available therapy could cross over to ruxolitinib after week 32. We assessed the durability of primary composite response, complete haematological remission, overall clinicohaematological response, overall survival, patient-reported outcomes, and safety after 5-years of follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01243944.

FINDINGS

We enrolled patients between Oct 27, 2010, and Feb 13, 2013, and the study concluded on Feb 9, 2018. Of 342 individuals screened for eligibility, 222 patients were randomly assigned to receive ruxolitinib (n=110, 50%) or best available therapy (n=112, 50%). The median time since polycythaemia vera diagnosis was 8·2 years (IQR 3·9-12·3) in the ruxolitinib group and 9·3 years (4·9-13·8) in the best available therapy group. 98 (88%) of 112 patients initially randomly assigned to best available therapy crossed over to receive ruxolitinib and no patient remained on best available therapy after 80 weeks of study. Among 25 primary responders in the ruxolitinib group, six had progressed at the time of final analysis. At 5 years, the probability of maintaining primary composite response was 74% (95% CI 51-88). The probability of maintaining complete haematological remission was 55% (95% CI 32-73) and the probability of maintaining overall clinicohaematological responses was 67% (54-77). In the intention-to-treat analysis not accounting for crossover, the probability of survival at 5 years was 91·9% (84·4-95·9) with ruxolitinib therapy and 91·0% (82·8-95·4) with best available therapy. Anaemia was the most common adverse event in patients receiving ruxolitinib (rates per 100 patient-years of exposure were 8·9 for ruxolitinib and 8·8 for the crossover population), though most anaemia events were mild to moderate in severity (grade 1 or 2 anaemia rates per 100 patient-years of exposure were 8·0 for ruxolitinib and 8·2 for the crossover population). Non-haematological adverse events were generally lower with long-term ruxolitinib treatment than with best available therapy. Thromboembolic events were lower in the ruxolitinib group than the best available therapy group. There were two on-treatment deaths in the ruxolitinib group. One of these deaths was due to gastric adenocarcinoma, which was assessed by the investigator as related to ruxolitinib treatment.

INTERPRETATION

We showed that ruxolitinib is a safe and effective long-term treatment option for patients with polycythaemia vera who are resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. Taken together, ruxolitinib treatment offers the first widely approved therapeutic alternative for this post-hydroxyurea patient population.

FUNDING

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Donor KIR2DS1 reduces the risk of transplant related mortality in HLA-C2 positive young recipients with hematological malignancies treated by myeloablative conditioning

Background

Recognition of HLA-C2 group alleles on recipient cells by activating killer immunoglobulin like receptors, KIR2DS1 on donor natural killer cells may lead to increased graft-versus-leukemia effect or immunomodulation in patients treated by allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) influencing disease free and overall survival (OS).

Objective

In the present study, 314 consecutive, allo-HSCT recipient and donor pairs were included with retrospective donor KIR-genotyping and clinical parameters analyzes.

Results

After a median follow-up of 23.6 months, recipients with HLA-C2 group allele (rC2) showed improved (p = 0.046) OS if transplanted with KIR2DS1 positive donors (d2DS1) compared to those without one or both of this genetic attribute. Within the myeloablative conditioning (MAC) subgroup (n = 227), rC2 homozygous+d2DS1 patients (n = 14) showed a 5 years OS of 93% followed by rC2 heterozygous+d2DS1 patients (n = 48, 65%) compared to rC2 and/or d2DS1 negatives (47%, p = 0.018). Multivariate analyses indicated rC2+d2DS1 positivity as an independent predictor of OS (HR:0.47, 0.26–0.86, p = 0.014) besides donor type, presence of CMV-reactivation or chemoresistant disease. Among MAC-treated patients, the combined rC2+d2DS1 presence was associated with a markedly decreased cumulative incidence of transplant related mortality (p = 0.0045).

Conclusion

The combination of rC2+d2DS1 may be a favorable genetic constellation in allo-HSCT with MAC potentially reducing transplant related mortality.

Treatment-free remission (TFR) following frontline (1L) nilotinib (NIL) in patients (pts) with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP): 192-week data from the ENESTfreedom study

7013

Background: In ENESTfreedom (NCT01784068), which evaluated TFR following 1L NIL in CML-CP pts, 51.6% remained in TFR 48 wks after stopping treatment (primary endpoint) and durability of TFR was demonstrated at 144 wks. Data from longer follow-up (192 wks) evaluating maintenance of TFR are reported. Methods: Pts with MR4.5 ( BCR-ABL1IS ≤0.0032%) and ≥2y of 1L NIL entered a 1y consolidation; pts with sustained deep molecular response (MR) were eligible for TFR. NIL was resumed after loss of major MR (MMR; BCR-ABL1IS ≤0.1%). At the latest data cut-off (Sep 17 2018), all pts had completed ≥192 wks of TFR, resumed NIL, or discontinued the study. Results: By the data cut-off, of 190 pts entering TFR, 87 were ongoing, 91 had resumed NIL, and 12 had permanently discontinued. The TFR rate at 192 wks was 44.2% (84/190, 95% CI: 37.0–51.6%). Of 89 pts with successful TFR at 144 wks, 5 were not assessable for TFR at 192 wks as 2 had discontinued by 192 wks due to pt/physician decision, and 3 with MR4.5 previously did not have 192 wk PCR data. Of 91 pts who resumed NIL, 90 (98.9%) regained MMR and 84 (92.3%) regained MR4.5. 75/90 and 73/84 pts, respectively, had stable MMR and MR4.5 at 48 wks later. There were no cases of disease progression or new deaths. 10 deaths were reported in the 144-wk analysis, none due to CML. The 192-wk treatment-free survival rate was 48.7% (95% CI 41.4–55.6%). Of 89 pts remaining in TFR for > 144 wks (including 87 pts for > 192 wks), all-grade AE rates during consolidation and each subsequent 48 wk period of TFR were 84.3%, 77.5%, 70.8%, 48.3%, and 52.8%, respectively. All-grade musculoskeletal pain AE rates were 15.7%, 40.4%, 9.0%, 3.4% and 3.4%, respectively; cardiovascular event rates were low across these periods. Among pts who resumed NIL, most common AEs were nasopharyngitis (18.7%) and pruritus, fatigue, and increased lipase (14.3% each); the majority of AEs were grade 1/2. Conclusions: Results continue to support the long-term durability and safety of TFR at 192 wks after stopping 1L NIL; overall AE rates declined during the TFR phase and musculoskeletal pain AEs were transient. Pts should continue to be regularly monitored during TFR. Clinical trial information: NCT01784068.

Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: updated analysis of CASTOR

Daratumumab, a CD38 human monoclonal antibody, demonstrated significant clinical activity in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone versus bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in the primary analysis of CASTOR, a phase 3 study in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma. A post hoc analysis based on treatment history and longer follow up is presented. After 19.4 (range: 0–27.7) months of median follow up, daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone prolonged progression-free survival (median: 16.7 versus 7.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.39; P<0.0001) and improved the overall response rate (83.8% versus 63.2%; P<0.0001) compared with bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. The progression-free survival benefit of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was most apparent in patients with 1 prior line of therapy (median: not reached versus 7.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.12-0.29; P<0.0001). Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone was also superior to bortezomib and dexamethasone alone in subgroups based on prior treatment exposure (bortezomib, thalidomide, or lenalidomide), lenalidomide-refractory status, time since last therapy (≤12, >12, ≤6, or >6 months), or cytogenetic risk. Minimal residual disease–negative rates were >2.5-fold higher with daratumumab across subgroups. The safety profile of daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone remained consistent with longer follow up. Daratumumab plus bortezomib and dexamethasone demonstrated significant clinical activity across clinically relevant subgroups and provided the greatest benefit to patients treated at first relapse. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 02136134.

Patient-reported health-related quality of life from the phase III TOURMALINE-MM1 study of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone versus placebo-lenalidomide-dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

TOURMALINE-MM1 is a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of ixazomib plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (IRd) versus placebo-Rd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma following 1-3 prior lines of therapy. The study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) in the IRd arm versus placebo-Rd arm (median 20.6 vs 14.7 months, hazard ratio 0.74, P = .01), with limited additional toxicity. Patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was a secondary endpoint of TOURMALINE-MM1. The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core-30 (QLQ-C30) and Multiple Myeloma Module 20 (QLQ-MY20) were completed at screening, the start of cycles 1 and 2, every other cycle, the end of treatment, and every 4 weeks until progression. Over median follow-up of 23.3 and 22.9 months in the IRd and placebo-Rd arms, mean QLQ-C30 global health status (GHS)/QoL scores were maintained from baseline over the course of treatment in both groups, with no statistically significant differences between groups. EORTC QLQ-C30 function domain scores were also generally maintained from baseline; similarly, physical, emotional, and social function domains were maintained with IRd versus placebo-Rd, with slightly higher mean change from baseline scores at earlier time points with IRd. Findings from this double-blind study demonstrate that addition of ixazomib to Rd significantly improved efficacy while HRQoL was maintained, reflecting the limited additional toxicity seen with IRd versus placebo-Rd, and support the feasibility of long-term IRd administration.

Durable treatment-free remission in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase following frontline nilotinib: 96-week update of the ENESTfreedom study

PURPOSE

ENESTfreedom is evaluating treatment-free remission (TFR) following frontline nilotinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase. Following our primary analysis at 48 weeks, we here provide an updated 96-week analysis.

METHODS

Attempting TFR required ≥ 3 years of nilotinib, a molecular response of MR4.5 [BCR-ABL1 ≤ 0.0032% on the International Scale (BCR-ABL1IS)], and sustained deep molecular response (DMR) during a 1-year consolidation phase. Patients restarted nilotinib following loss of major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL1IS ≤ 0.1%).

RESULTS

Ninety-six weeks after stopping treatment (3.6-year median prior nilotinib duration), 93 of 190 patients (48.9%) remained in TFR. Of 88 patients who restarted nilotinib following loss of MMR, 87 regained MMR and 81 regained MR4.5 by the data cut-off. Ninety-six-week TFR rates were 61.3, 50.0, and 28.6% in patients with low, intermediate, and high Sokal risk scores at diagnosis, respectively. Patients consistently in MR4.5 during consolidation had higher TFR rates (50.6%) than patients with ≥ 1 assessment without MR4.5 during consolidation (35.0%). In a landmark analysis, 96-week TFR rates for patients with MR4.5, MR4 (BCR-ABL1IS ≤ 0.01%) but not MR4.5, and MMR but not MR4 at TFR week 12 were 82.6, 23.1, and 0%, respectively. There were no reports of disease progression or death due to CML; overall adverse event frequency decreased following TFR. Within the follow-up period, TFR did not adversely affect disease outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate the feasibility and durability of TFR following frontline nilotinib and emphasize the importance of sustained DMR for TFR.

High dose chemotherapy and autologous stem cell transplantation in nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma: A retrospective study by the European society for blood and marrow transplantation-lymphoma working party

Whilst autologous stem cell transplantation (auto-SCT) is considered standard of care for relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma, the role of auto-SCT in nodular lymphocyte-predominant Hodgkin lymphoma (NLPHL) is not well defined due to limited data. We report the first study on auto-SCT for NLPHL with a larger cohort. Eligible for this retrospective registry study were patients reported to the EBMT between 2003 and 2013, aged 18 or older with relapsed/refractory NLPHL who underwent first auto-SCT with disease chemosensitive to salvage therapy. NLPHL transformed to diffuse large B cell lymphoma were excluded. Sixty patients (83% male; median age 40 years) met the eligibility criteria. The median time between diagnosis and transplant was 21 months (IQR 13-58), and the median number of prior treatment lines was 2 (range 1-5), including rituximab in 63% of the patients. At auto-SCT, 62% of the patients were in complete remission (CR) and 38% in partial remission. Seventy-two percent of the patients received BEAM as high-dose therapy. With a median follow-up of 56 months (range 3-105), 5-year progression-free and overall survival (OS) were 66% and 87%, respectively. Univariate comparisons considering age, time from diagnosis to transplant, prior chemotherapy lines, and prior rituximab use failed to identify significant predictors for any survival endpoint except for being in CR at the time of auto-SCT (vs PR, P = .049) for OS. Auto-SCT in patients with relapsed/refractory NLPHL who are sensitive to salvage therapy gives excellent disease control and long-term survival independent of the time interval between diagnosis and transplant.

Sex-specific survival difference in association with HLA-DRB1∗04 following allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for lymphoid malignancies

The role of HLA system in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) outcome is unarguable. In this study we investigated association of HLA-A,-B and-DRB1 alleles with overall survival (OS) in 186 patients undergoing allo-HSCT for lymphoid malignancies. Analyses confirmed significantly better OS for HLA-DRB1∗04 carriers compared with non-carriers (p = 0.01). Survival benefit was confined to male patients (in multivariate analyses p = 0.034, hazard ratio 0.35, 95% confidence interval 0.13-0.92), whereas in females no difference was noted (p = 0.82). Furthermore, donor gender also affected outcome and transplantation from female HLA-DRB1∗04 carrier donors resulted in superior survival compared with female non-carrier donors (p = 0.01). Combined analyses including recipient/donor gender and HLA-DRB1∗04 showed that survival of male patients varied significantly according to donor gender and HLA-DRB1∗04 carriership (p = 0.04) with best survival among HLA-DRB1∗04 carriers transplanted from female donors. Of relevance to our results, HLA-DRB1∗04 has been documented as risk allele group for lymphoid malignancies, and studies described a male-specific risk. We believe that our findings provide further supporting evidence for sex-specific alterations secondary to HLA-DRB1∗04 or related genes. Further studies are warranted to evaluate whether in contrast to general favour of male donors HLA-DRB1∗04 carrier patients with lymphoid malignancies could benefit from transplantation from female donors.

Impact of prior therapy on the efficacy and safety of oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone vs. placebo-lenalidomide-dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in TOURMALINE-MM1

Prior treatment exposure in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma may affect outcomes with subsequent therapies. We analyzed efficacy and safety according to prior treatment in the phase 3 TOURMALINE-MM1 study of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (ixazomib-Rd) versus placebo-Rd. Patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma received ixazomib-Rd or placebo-Rd. Efficacy and safety were evaluated in subgroups defined according to type (proteasome inhibitor [PI] and immunomodulatory drug) and number (1 vs. 2 or 3) of prior therapies received. Of 722 patients, 503 (70%) had received a prior PI, and 397 (55%) prior lenalidomide/thalidomide; 425 patients had received 1 prior therapy, and 297 received 2 or 3 prior therapies. At a median follow up of ~15 months, PFS was prolonged with ixazomib-Rd vs. placebo-Rd regardless of type of prior therapy received; HR 0.739 and 0.749 in PI-exposed and –naïve patients, HR 0.744 and 0.700 in immunomodulatory-drug-exposed and -naïve patients, respectively. PFS benefit with ixazomib-Rd vs. placebo-Rd appeared greater in patients with 2 or 3 prior therapies (HR 0.58) and in those with 1 prior therapy without prior transplant (HR 0.60) versus those with 1 prior therapy and transplant (HR 1.23). Across all subgroups, toxicity was consistent with that seen in the intent-to-treat population. In patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, ixazomib-Rd was associated with a consistent clinical benefit vs. placebo-Rd regardless of prior treatment with bortezomib or immunomodulatory drugs. Patients with 2 or 3 prior therapies, or 1 prior therapy without transplant seemed to have greater benefit than patients with 1 prior therapy and transplant. TOURMALINE-MM1 registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 01564537.

The adverse effect of FOPNL genomic variant is reversed by bortezomib-based treatment protocols in multiple myeloma

Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 oncogene partner N-terminal like gene (FOPNL) rs72773978 polymorphism was identified as an adverse prognostic factor in multiple myeloma (MM). We aimed to investigate the associations of rs72773978 with clinical characteristics and treatment outcome in 373 Hungarian MM patients. In our cohort, FOPNL polymorphism showed differential prognostic effect that depended on the treatment applied. Among patients treated with non-proteasome inhibitor (PI)-based therapy, carriership of the minor allele was significantly associated with adverse overall survival (p=.022). In contrast, the adverse effect was overcome by the application of PI-containing treatment (p=.048). Multivariate analyses revealed the independent adverse effect of rs72773978 on survival in the non-PI-treated group (p=.045), but not in PI treatment (OS: p=.093). We confirmed the adverse prognostic effect of rs72773978 associated with non-PI-based treatment regimens. Our results point to the importance of genotypic prognostic information associated with complex clinical background MM.

Management of adverse events associated with ixazomib plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

The oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib is approved in the United States, European Union and other countries, in combination with oral lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd), for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy. Approval was based on the global, randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled Phase III TOURMALINE‐MM1 study of ixazomib‐Rd (IRd) versus placebo‐Rd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. IRd resulted in a significant improvement in progression‐free survival versus placebo‐Rd (median: 20·6 vs. 14·7 months; hazard ratio 0·74). Common toxicities observed more commonly with IRd versus placebo‐Rd were thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, constipation, rash, peripheral neuropathy, peripheral oedema and back pain; these were generally grade 1/2 in severity except for thrombocytopenia (19% vs. 9% grade 3/4), which appeared manageable and reversible, with no differences between arms in significant bleeding or dose discontinuations. No cumulative toxicities were observed, indicating the potential feasibility of long‐term IRd treatment. Safety data from TOURMALINE‐MM1 are reviewed and guidance for managing clinically relevant adverse events associated with IRd is provided. Most toxicities were manageable with supportive care and dose delays or reductions as needed. Clinicians should be aware of and understand these potential side effects to optimise and prolong patient benefit.

Treatment-free remission following frontline nilotinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase: results from the ENESTfreedom study

The single-arm, phase 2 ENESTfreedom trial assessed the potential for treatment-free remission (TFR; i.e., the ability to maintain a molecular response after stopping therapy) following frontline nilotinib treatment. Patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase with MR^4.5 (BCR-ABL1⩽0.0032% on the International Scale (BCR-ABL1^IS)) and ⩾2 years of frontline nilotinib therapy were enrolled. Patients with sustained deep molecular response during the 1-year nilotinib consolidation phase were eligible to stop treatment and enter the TFR phase. Patients with loss of major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL1^IS⩽0.1%) during the TFR phase reinitiated nilotinib. In total, 215 patients entered the consolidation phase, of whom 190 entered the TFR phase. The median duration of nilotinib before stopping treatment was 43.5 months. At 48 weeks after stopping nilotinib, 98 patients (51.6% 95% confidence interval, 44.2–58.9%) remained in MMR or better (primary end point). Of the 86 patients who restarted nilotinib in the treatment reinitiation phase after loss of MMR, 98.8% and 88.4%, respectively, regained MMR and MR^4.5 by the data cutoff date. Consistent with prior reports of imatinib-treated patients, musculoskeletal pain-related events were reported in 24.7% of patients in the TFR phase (consolidation phase, 16.3%).

Early Versus Delayed Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation and Interferon Maintenance in Multiple Myeloma: Single-Center Experience of 18 Years

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) has become the mainstay of 1st-line treatment in younger patients with multiple myeloma (MM), but statistical confirmation of its superiority over other therapies, especially in the era of novel agents, is still lacking.

METHODS

We reviewed the results of all 548 myeloma ASCTs performed in our institute over the past 18 years.

RESULTS

More than one-half of the patients had access to novel agents before their transplantations. Although the age of the transplanted patients increased significantly over the years, treatment-related mortality (TRM) was remarkably low, especially in 1st-line transplanted patients (100-day TRM, 0.3%). The median overall survival (OS) of the entire cohort was 98.4 months. Patients transplanted within 12 months from the start of their therapy had significantly better responses than those having delayed ASCT (complete response rate, 58.1% vs 46.8%; P = .016) and significant post-ASCT progression-free survival (PFS) benefit (30.2 [26.1-34.3] mo vs 23.3 [16.8-29.8] mo; P = .036), but we found no significant overall survival difference. The results were similar in patients treated with or without novel agents before ASCT. During a period of time, interferon maintenance was our standard approach to post-ASCT maintenance. Our analysis showed not only a significant PFS advantage with interferon, but also a highly significant overall survival benefit (150.4 [105.1-195.8] mo vs 86.1 [72.5-99.7] mo; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings demonstrate that delayed ASCT can be feasible in selected patients.

Quality of life results from a phase 3 study of brentuximab vedotin consolidation following autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplant for persons with Hodgkin lymphoma

Brentuximab vedotin (BV) significantly improved progression-free survival in a phase 3 study in patients with relapsed or refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (RR-HL) post-autologous-haematopoietic stem cell transplant (auto-HSCT); we report the impact of BV on quality of life (QOL) from this trial. The European Quality of Life five dimensions questionnaire was administered at the beginning of each cycle, end of treatment, and every 3 months during follow-up; index value scores were calculated using the time trade-off (TTO) method for UK-weighted value sets. Questionnaire adherence during the trial was 87·5% (N = 329). In an intent-to-treat analysis, compared with placebo, TTO scores in the BV arm did not exceed the minimally important difference (MID) of 0·08 except at month 15 (-0·084; 95% confidence interval, -0·143 to -0·025). On-treatment index scores were similar between arms and did not reach the MID at any time point; mixed-effect modelling showed that BV treatment effect was not significant (P = 0·2127). BV-associated peripheral neuropathy did not meaningfully impact QOL. Utility scores for patients who progressed declined compared with those who did not; TTO scores between these patients exceeded the MID beginning at month 15. In conclusion, QOL decreased modestly with BV consolidation treatment in patients with RR-HL at high risk of relapse after auto-HSCT.

Daratumumab, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Daratumumab, a human IgGκ monoclonal antibody that targets CD38, induces direct and indirect antimyeloma activity and has shown substantial efficacy as monotherapy in heavily pretreated patients with multiple myeloma, as well as in combination with bortezomib in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

METHODS

In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 498 patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg per square meter of body-surface area) and dexamethasone (20 mg) alone (control group) or in combination with daratumumab (16 mg per kilogram of body weight) (daratumumab group). The primary end point was progression-free survival.

RESULTS

A prespecified interim analysis showed that the rate of progression-free survival was significantly higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group; the 12-month rate of progression-free survival was 60.7% in the daratumumab group versus 26.9% in the control group. After a median follow-up period of 7.4 months, the median progression-free survival was not reached in the daratumumab group and was 7.2 months in the control group (hazard ratio for progression or death with daratumumab vs. control, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.28 to 0.53; P<0.001). The rate of overall response was higher in the daratumumab group than in the control group (82.9% vs. 63.2%, P<0.001), as were the rates of very good partial response or better (59.2% vs. 29.1%, P<0.001) and complete response or better (19.2% vs. 9.0%, P=0.001). Three of the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events reported in the daratumumab group and the control group were thrombocytopenia (45.3% and 32.9%, respectively), anemia (14.4% and 16.0%, respectively), and neutropenia (12.8% and 4.2%, respectively). Infusion-related reactions that were associated with daratumumab treatment were reported in 45.3% of the patients in the daratumumab group; these reactions were mostly grade 1 or 2 (grade 3 in 8.6% of the patients), and in 98.2% of these patients, they occurred during the first infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, daratumumab in combination with bortezomib and dexamethasone resulted in significantly longer progression-free survival than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone and was associated with infusion-related reactions and higher rates of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia than bortezomib and dexamethasone alone. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02136134.).

Recipient and donor JAK2 46/1 haplotypes are associated with acute graft-versus-host disease following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Several genetic polymorphisms have been implicated to affect the outcome of allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). The role of cytokines in acute graft-versus-host disease (aGvHD) is well established and many of the involved cytokines signal through the Janus kinase (JAK) pathways. In this study, we assessed the association of recipient and donor JAK2 46/1 haplotypes and allo-HSCT outcome in a cohort of 124 acute myeloid leukemia patients. Both, recipient and donor 46/1 haplotypes significantly affected aGvHD grades II-IV development (p = 0.006 and p = 0.031, respectively), furthermore the influence of the haplotypes seemed to be additive. In multivariate analyses the recipient haplotype remained independently related (p = 0.012) to aGvHD, while the donor not (p = 0.08). We observed significantly less relapses among haplotype carriers (p = 0.004), but overall survival did not differ (p = 0.732). Our findings suggest that recipient and donor JAK2 46/1 haplotypes might be involved in the regulation of aGvHD.

A randomized phase III study of carfilzomib vs low-dose corticosteroids with optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (FOCUS)

This randomized, phase III, open-label, multicenter study compared carfilzomib monotherapy against low-dose corticosteroids and optional cyclophosphamide in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients were randomized (1:1) to receive carfilzomib (10-min intravenous infusion; 20 mg/m² on days 1 and 2 of cycle 1; 27 mg/m² thereafter) or a control regimen of low-dose corticosteroids (84 mg of dexamethasone or equivalent corticosteroid) with optional cyclophosphamide (1400 mg) for 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Three-hundred and fifteen patients were randomized to carfilzomib (n=157) or control (n=158). Both groups had a median of five prior regimens. In the control group, 95% of patients received cyclophosphamide. Median OS was 10.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8.4-14.4) vs 10.0 months (95% CI 7.7-12.0) with carfilzomib vs control (hazard ratio=0.975; 95% CI 0.760-1.249; P=0.4172). Progression-free survival was similar between groups; overall response rate was higher with carfilzomib (19.1 vs 11.4%). The most common grade ⩾3 adverse events were anemia (25.5 vs 30.7%), thrombocytopenia (24.2 vs 22.2%) and neutropenia (7.6 vs 12.4%) with carfilzomib vs control. Median OS for single-agent carfilzomib was similar to that for an active doublet control regimen in heavily pretreated RRMM patients.

Phase III randomized controlled study of daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (DVd) versus bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients (pts) with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): CASTOR study

LBA4

Background: Daratumumab (D), a human anti-CD38 IgGκ mAb, induces deep and durable responses with a favorable safety profile in RRMM pts. We report a pre-specified interim analysis of the first randomized controlled study of D (CASTOR; NCT02136134). Methods: Pts with ≥1 prior line of therapy were randomized (1:1) to 8 cycles (q3w) of bortezomib (V)/dexamethasone (d) (V: 1.3 mg/m2sc on Days 1, 4, 8, 11; d: 20 mg po on Days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, 12) ± D (16 mg/kg iv qw in Cycles 1-3, Day 1 of Cycles 4-8, then q4w until progression). Primary endpoint was PFS. Results: 498 pts (DVd, 251; Vd, 247) were randomized. Baseline demographics and disease characteristics were well balanced. Pts received a median of 2 prior lines of therapy (range 1-10). 66% received prior V; 76% received prior IMiD; 48% received prior PI and IMiD; 33% were IMiD-refractory; 32% were refractory to last line of prior therapy. With median follow-up of 7.4 months, D significantly improved median PFS (61% reduction in risk of progression) and TTP for DVd vs Vd (Table). D significantly increased ORR (83% vs 63%, P <0.0001), and doubled rates of ≥VGPR (59% vs 29%, P <0.0001), and ≥CR (19% vs 9%, P= 0.0012) for DVd vs Vd, respectively; median duration of response was NR vs 7.9 months, respectively. Most common (>25%) AEs (DVd/Vd) were thrombocytopenia (59%/44%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (47%/ 38%), diarrhea (32%/22%) and anemia (26%/31%). Most common grade 3/4 AEs (>10%) were thrombocytopenia (45%/33%), anemia (14%/16%), neutropenia (13%/4%). 7%/9% of pts discontinued due to a TEAE. D-associated infusion-related reactions (45% of pts) mostly occurred during the first infusion; most were grade 1/2 (grade 3/4, 9%/0%). Conclusions: D significantly improved PFS, TTP, and ORR in combination with Vd vs Vd alone. DVd doubled both VGPR and sCR/CR rates vs Vd alone. Safety of DVd is consistent with the known safety profile of D and Vd. The addition of D to Vd should be considered a new standard of care for RRMM pts currently receiving Vd alone. Clinical trial information: NCT02136134. [Table: see text]

Ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in patients with polycythemia vera: 80-week follow-up from the RESPONSE trial

RESPONSE is an open-label phase 3 study evaluating the Janus kinase 1/Janus kinase 2 inhibitor ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for efficacy/safety in hydroxyurea-resistant or intolerant patients with polycythemia vera. This preplanned analysis occurred when all patients completed the Week 80 visit or discontinued. Objectives included evaluating the durability of the primary response (Week 32 phlebotomy-independent hematocrit control plus ≥35% spleen volume reduction), its components, and that of complete hematologic remission; and long-term safety. Median exposure was 111 weeks; 91/110 (82.7%) patients randomized to ruxolitinib remained on treatment. No patients continued best available therapy (98/112 [87.5%] crossed over to ruxolitinib, most at/soon after Week 32). At Week 32, primary response was achieved by 22.7% vs. 0.9% of patients randomized to ruxolitinib and best available therapy, respectively (hematocrit control, 60.0% vs. 18.8%; spleen response, 40.0% vs. 0.9%). The probability of maintaining primary and hematocrit responses for ≥80 weeks was 92% and 89%, respectively; 43/44 spleen responses were maintained until Week 80. Complete hematologic remission at Week 32 was achieved in 23.6% of ruxolitinib-randomized patients; the probability of maintaining complete hematologic remission for ≥80 weeks was 69%. Among ruxolitinib crossover patients, 79.2% were not phlebotomized, and 18.8% achieved a ≥35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume after 32 weeks of treatment. New or worsening hematologic laboratory abnormalities in ruxolitinib-treated patients were primarily grade 1/2 decreases in hemoglobin, lymphocytes, and platelets. The thromboembolic event rate per 100 patient-years was 1.8 with randomized ruxolitinib treatment vs. 8.2 with best available therapy. These data support ruxolitinib as an effective long-term treatment option for hydroxyurea-resistant or intolerant patients with polycythemia vera. This trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 01243944.

Bortezomib, thalidomide and dexamethasone, with or without cyclophosphamide, for patients with previously untreated multiple myeloma: 5-year follow-up

This follow-up extension of a randomised phase II study assessed differences in long-term outcomes between bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD) and VTD-cyclophosphamide (VTDC) induction therapy in multiple myeloma. Newly diagnosed patients (n = 98) were randomised 1:1 to intravenous bortezomib (1·3 mg/m(2); days 1, 4, 8, 11), thalidomide (100 mg; days 1-21), and dexamethasone (40 mg; days 1-4, 9-12), with/without cyclophosphamide (400 mg/m(2); days 1, 8), for four 21-day cycles before stem-cell mobilisation/transplantation. After a median follow-up of 64·8 months, median time-to-next therapy was 51·8 and 47·9 months with VTD and VTDC, respectively. Type of subsequent therapy was similar in both arms. After adjusting for asymmetric censoring, median time to progression was not significantly different between VTD and VTDC [35·7 vs. 34·5 months; Hazard ratio (HR) 1·26, 95% confidence interval: 0·76-2·09; P = 0·370]. Five-year survival was 69·1% and 65·3% with VTD and VTDC, respectively. When analysed by minimal residual disease (MRD) status, overall survival was longer in MRD-negative versus MRD-positive patients with bone marrow-confirmed complete response (HR 3·66, P = 0·0318). VTD induction followed by transplantation provides long-term disease control and, consistent with the primary analysis, there is no additional benefit from adding cyclophosphamide. This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00531453).

Brentuximab vedotin as consolidation therapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma at risk of relapse or progression (AETHERA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

High-dose therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard of care for patients with relapsed or primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma. Roughly 50% of patients might be cured after autologous stem-cell transplantation; however, most patients with unfavourable risk factors progress after transplantation. We aimed to assess whether brentuximab vedotin improves progression-free survival when given as early consolidation after autologous stem-cell transplantation.

METHODS

We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 78 sites in North America and Europe. Patients with unfavourable-risk relapsed or primary refractory classic Hodgkin's lymphoma who had undergone autologous stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned, by fixed-block randomisation with a computer-generated random number sequence, to receive 16 cycles of 1·8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks, starting 30-45 days after transplantation. Randomisation was stratified by best clinical response after completion of salvage chemotherapy (complete response vs partial response vs stable disease) and primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma versus relapsed disease less than 12 months after completion of frontline therapy versus relapse 12 months or more after treatment completion. Patients and study investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent review, defined as the time from randomisation to the first documentation of tumour progression or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01100502.

FINDINGS

Between April 6, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 329 patients to the brentuximab vedotin group (n=165) or the placebo group (n=164). Progression-free survival by independent review was significantly improved in patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with those in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·40-0·81; p=0·0013). Median progression-free survival by independent review was 42·9 months (95% CI 30·4-42·9) for patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 24·1 months (11·5-not estimable) for those in the placebo group. We recorded consistent benefit (HR <1) of brentuximab vedotin consolidation across subgroups. The most frequent adverse events in the brentuximab vedotin group were peripheral sensory neuropathy (94 [56%] of 167 patients vs 25 [16%] of 160 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (58 [35%] vs 19 [12%] patients). At time of analysis, 28 (17%) of 167 patients had died in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 25 (16%) of 160 patients in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

Early consolidation with brentuximab vedotin after autologous stem-cell transplantation improved progression-free survival in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma with risk factors for relapse or progression after transplantation. This treatment provides an important therapeutic option for patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation.

FUNDING

Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceuticals International.

Brentuximab vedotin as consolidation therapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma at risk of relapse or progression (AETHERA): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

High-dose therapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation is standard of care for patients with relapsed or primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma. Roughly 50% of patients might be cured after autologous stem-cell transplantation; however, most patients with unfavourable risk factors progress after transplantation. We aimed to assess whether brentuximab vedotin improves progression-free survival when given as early consolidation after autologous stem-cell transplantation.

METHODS

We did this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 78 sites in North America and Europe. Patients with unfavourable-risk relapsed or primary refractory classic Hodgkin's lymphoma who had undergone autologous stem-cell transplantation were randomly assigned, by fixed-block randomisation with a computer-generated random number sequence, to receive 16 cycles of 1·8 mg/kg brentuximab vedotin or placebo intravenously every 3 weeks, starting 30-45 days after transplantation. Randomisation was stratified by best clinical response after completion of salvage chemotherapy (complete response vs partial response vs stable disease) and primary refractory Hodgkin's lymphoma versus relapsed disease less than 12 months after completion of frontline therapy versus relapse 12 months or more after treatment completion. Patients and study investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent review, defined as the time from randomisation to the first documentation of tumour progression or death. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01100502.

FINDINGS

Between April 6, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 329 patients to the brentuximab vedotin group (n=165) or the placebo group (n=164). Progression-free survival by independent review was significantly improved in patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with those in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·40-0·81; p=0·0013). Median progression-free survival by independent review was 42·9 months (95% CI 30·4-42·9) for patients in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 24·1 months (11·5-not estimable) for those in the placebo group. We recorded consistent benefit (HR <1) of brentuximab vedotin consolidation across subgroups. The most frequent adverse events in the brentuximab vedotin group were peripheral sensory neuropathy (94 [56%] of 167 patients vs 25 [16%] of 160 patients in the placebo group) and neutropenia (58 [35%] vs 19 [12%] patients). At time of analysis, 28 (17%) of 167 patients had died in the brentuximab vedotin group compared with 25 (16%) of 160 patients in the placebo group.

INTERPRETATION

Early consolidation with brentuximab vedotin after autologous stem-cell transplantation improved progression-free survival in patients with Hodgkin's lymphoma with risk factors for relapse or progression after transplantation. This treatment provides an important therapeutic option for patients undergoing autologous stem-cell transplantation.

FUNDING

Seattle Genetics and Takeda Pharmaceuticals International.

Ruxolitinib versus standard therapy for the treatment of polycythemia vera

BACKGROUND

Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, was shown to have a clinical benefit in patients with polycythemia vera in a phase 2 study. We conducted a phase 3 open-label study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus standard therapy in patients with polycythemia vera who had an inadequate response to or had unacceptable side effects from hydroxyurea.

METHODS

We randomly assigned phlebotomy-dependent patients with splenomegaly, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive ruxolitinib (110 patients) or standard therapy (112 patients). The primary end point was both hematocrit control through week 32 and at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 32, as assessed by means of imaging.

RESULTS

The primary end point was achieved in 21% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group versus 1% of those in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). Hematocrit control was achieved in 60% of patients receiving ruxolitinib and 20% of those receiving standard therapy; 38% and 1% of patients in the two groups, respectively, had at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume. A complete hematologic remission was achieved in 24% of patients in the ruxolitinib group and 9% of those in the standard-therapy group (P=0.003); 49% versus 5% had at least a 50% reduction in the total symptom score at week 32. In the ruxolitinib group, grade 3 or 4 anemia occurred in 2% of patients, and grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 5%; the corresponding percentages in the standard-therapy group were 0% and 4%. Herpes zoster infection was reported in 6% of patients in the ruxolitinib group and 0% of those in the standard-therapy group (grade 1 or 2 in all cases). Thromboembolic events occurred in one patient receiving ruxolitinib and in six patients receiving standard therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients who had an inadequate response to or had unacceptable side effects from hydroxyurea, ruxolitinib was superior to standard therapy in controlling the hematocrit, reducing the spleen volume, and improving symptoms associated with polycythemia vera. (Funded by Incyte and others; RESPONSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01243944.).