Phase 1/2 Study of the Pan-PIM Kinase Inhibitor INCB053914 Alone or in Combination With Standard-of-Care Agents in Patients With Advanced Hematologic Malignancies

BACKGROUND

The Proviral Integration site of Moloney murine leukemia virus (PIM) kinases are implicated in tumorigenesis; the pan-PIM kinase inhibitor, INCB053914, demonstrated antitumor activity in hematologic malignancy preclinical models.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This phase 1/2 study evaluated oral INCB053914 alone or combined with standard-of-care agents for advanced hematologic malignancies (NCT02587598). In Parts 1/2 (monotherapy), patients (≥18 years) had acute leukemia, high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), MDS/myeloproliferative neoplasm, myelofibrosis (MF), multiple myeloma, or lymphoproliferative neoplasms. In Parts 3/4 (combination therapy), patients had relapsed/refractory or newly diagnosed (≥65 years, unfit for intensive chemotherapy) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or MF with suboptimal ruxolitinib response.

RESULTS

Parts 1/2 (n = 58): 6 patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), most commonly aspartate aminotransferase/alanine aminotransferase-elevated (AST/ALT; each n = 4). Fifty-seven patients (98.3%) had treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), most commonly ALT-elevated and fatigue (36.2% each); 48 (82.8%) had grade ≥3 TEAEs, most commonly anemia (31.0%); 8 (13.8%) had grade ≥3 ALT/AST-elevated TEAEs. Parts 3/4 (n = 39): for INCB053914 + cytarabine (AML; n = 6), 2 patients experienced DLTs (grade 3 maculopapular rash, n = 1; grade 3 ALT-elevated and grade 4 hypophosphatemia, n = 1); for INCB053914 + azacitidine (AML; n = 16), 1 patient experienced a DLT (grade 3 maculopapular rash). Two complete responses were observed (1 with incomplete count recovery). For INCB053914 + ruxolitinib (MF; n = 17), no DLTs occurred; 3 patients achieved best reduction of >25% spleen volume at week 12 or 24.

CONCLUSION

INCB053914 was generally well tolerated as monotherapy and in combinations; TEAEs were most commonly ALT/AST-elevated. Limited responses were observed with combinations. Future studies are needed to identify rational, effective combination strategies.

Post-remission cytopenia management in patients with AML treated with venetoclax in combination with hypomethylating agents: Pre- versus post-VIALE-A real-world experience from a predominantly US community setting

BACKGROUND

This retrospective cohort study used an electronic health record-derived, de-identified, US patient-level database to better understand the real-world treatment experience, in a predominantly community setting (80.3% of patients), of venetoclax+hypomethylating agents (HMAs) in routine clinical care, pre- and post-VIALE-A, to determine whether the post-remission cytopenia management insight from VIALE-A was reflected in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML; N = 498), who initiated venetoclax+HMA ≤30 days from AML diagnosis from June 1, 2018, to March 31, 2021, were stratified into pre-(n = 330) and post-(n = 168) VIALE-A cohorts.

RESULTS

More patients in the post-(61%) versus pre-(45%) VIALE-A cohort had their first biopsy by 28 ± 14 days post-treatment initiation. Patients underwent bone marrow (BM) assessment earlier in the post- versus pre-VIALE-A cohort, and first identification of response was also earlier (2.5 vs 5.1 months, respectively). More venetoclax schedule modifications post-remission occurred among post-(82.1%) versus pre-(73.8%) VIALE-A responders; the most common reason for modification was treatment toxicities, specifically cytopenia. Treatment survival outcomes were comparable with or without venetoclax schedule modifications.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that venetoclax schedule modifications can be used to manage cytopenia events without adversely affecting outcomes. Opportunities remain to improve earlier BM assessment to determine venetoclax schedule modifications, providing the best chance for optimal treatment outcomes.

First-in-human study of JNJ-63709178, a CD123/CD3 targeting antibody, in relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia

This study aimed to identify a recommended phase II dose and evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and preliminary clinical activity of JNJ-63709178, a CD123/CD3 dual-targeting antibody, in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia. Intravenous (i.v.) and subcutaneous (s.c.) administration of JNJ-63709178 were evaluated. The i.v. infusions were administered once every 2 weeks (cohorts 1-5 [n = 17]) or twice weekly (cohorts 6-11 [n = 36]). A twice-weekly s.c. dosing regimen with step-up dosing was also studied (s.c. cohorts 1-2 [n = 9]). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) greater than or equal to grade 3 were observed in 11 (65%) patients in cohorts 1-5 and 33 (92%) patients in cohorts 6-11. At the highest i.v. dose (4.8 μg/kg), 5 (71%) patients discontinued treatment due to TEAEs. For s.c. administration (n = 9), eight (89%) patients experienced TEAEs greater than or equal to grade 3 and injection site reactions (≤ grade 3) emerged in all patients. At 4.8 μg/kg (i.v. and s.c.), the mean maximum serum concentrations were 30.3 and 3.59 ng/ml, respectively. Increases in multiple cytokines were observed following i.v. and s.c. administrations, and step-up dosing strategies did not mitigate cytokine production or improve the safety profile and led to limited duration of treatment. Minimal clinical activity was observed across all cohorts. The i.v. and s.c. dosing of JNJ-63709178 was associated with suboptimal drug exposure, unfavorable safety profiles, limited clinical activity, and inability to identify a recommended phase II dose.

The impact of early versus late tocilizumab administration in patients with cytokine release syndrome secondary to immune effector cell therapy

INTRODUCTION

Cytokine release syndrome is a life-threatening hyper-inflammatory state induced by immune effector cell therapy. Anti-interleukin 6-(IL-6) therapy, such as tocilizumab, is the standard treatment for cytokine release syndrome since it reverses symptoms without compromising immune effector cell therapy efficacy. Glucocorticoids are reserved for refractory or severe cytokine release syndrome due to concern for attenuating antitumor activity. Optimizing the timing of tocilizumab could avoid glucocorticoid use and improve outcomes. This study assesses tocilizumab timing on patient outcomes and healthcare resource utilization.

METHODS

This is a retrospective single-institution analysis of 28 patients who received tocilizumab for cytokine release syndrome secondary to immune effector cell therapy. Patients were categorized into two groups: Early Tocilizumab (within 24 h) or Late Tocilizumab groups (more than 24 h) from fever onset. The composite primary endpoint was glucocorticoid use, intensive care unit admission, or inpatient mortality. Secondary outcomes include comparing the various presentations of cytokine release syndrome, need for vasopressors, length of stay, rates of neurotoxicity, and C-reactive protein and ferritin trends.

RESULTS

The Early Tocilizumab group presented with more rapid fever onset (35 vs.113 h, P = 0.017) and higher maximum cytokine release syndrome grade (Median, Grade 2 vs. Grade 1, P = 0.025). Additionally, the Early Tocilizumab group required more doses of tocilizumab (Median, 2 vs. 1, P = 0.037). Despite the difference in cytokine release syndrome presentation, the primary composite endpoint was not statistically different between groups.

CONCLUSION

Earlier onset of fever appears to be associated with more severe, progressive cytokine release syndrome requiring multiple doses of anti-interleukin-6 therapy. Prompt and aggressive tocilizumab treatment could be protective against the negative consequences of cytokine release syndrome.

Venetoclax and Hypomethylating Agents as First-line Treatment in Newly Diagnosed Patients with AML in a Predominately Community Setting in the US

BACKGROUND

Treatment with venetoclax + hypomethylating agents (HMAs) is standard-of-care for newly diagnosed (ND) patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) aged ≥75 years, or with comorbidities precluding intensive chemotherapy. We describe real-world venetoclax + HMA treatment practices and outcomes in patients with ND AML in the US.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study used an electronic health record-derived, US nationwide, de-identified database, and included adults with ND AML, initiating venetoclax + HMA treatment ≤30 days from diagnosis (June 1, 2018-January 31, 2020). Venetoclax treatment variables included dosing information, schedule modifications, and drug-drug interactions. The median venetoclax + HMA treatment duration and overall survival (OS) from venetoclax initiation to discontinuation, death, or end of follow-up (August 31, 2020) were examined by Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 169 patients were included. The median age at diagnosis was 77 years; 85.2% of patients were treated in community practice. Ninety-five of 169 patients (56.2%) had evaluable bone marrow response data following the start of treatment; 53.7% were assessed approximately at the end of cycle 1. Following the first treatment cycle, treatment schedule modifications were recorded in 101 patients and dose changes in 56, primarily due to toxicity. The median treatment duration was 5.2 months; the median OS was 8.6 months (median follow-up was 7.2 months). Venetoclax dose changes did not modify efficacy outcomes, but longer median OS was associated with venetoclax treatment schedule modifications (P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

This study reflects early real-world experience with venetoclax + HMAs in a predominantly community setting and emphasizes the importance of appropriate venetoclax management in optimizing patient outcomes.

A phase Ib study to assess the efficacy and safety of vismodegib in combination with ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND

The JAK inhibitor (JAKi) ruxolitinib is standard treatment for myelofibrosis (MF), but some patients are unresponsive. Pre-clinical and clinical data suggest that addition of a Hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI) to ruxolitinib might improve response. Vismodegib is an HPI approved for treatment of locally advanced and metastatic basal cell carcinoma. The MYLIE study assessed the safety and efficacy of combining ruxolitinib with vismodegib in ruxolitinib-naive patients with MF and characterized the pharmacokinetics (PK) of vismodegib in this setting.

METHODS

In this phase Ib study, ten patients with intermediate- or high-risk primary or secondary MF received open-label vismodegib (150 mg/day orally) and ruxolitinib (15 or 20 mg orally twice daily, depending on baseline platelet count) for up to 48 weeks, or until withdrawal or discontinuation. PK samples were collected throughout the study for comparison with other patient populations. Efficacy outcomes at week 24 included spleen response (≥ 35% reduction in volume by imaging) and improvement in bone marrow fibrosis by central and investigator assessment, symptom response (≥ 50% reduction in Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom score), and anemia response (per International Working Group for Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Research and Treatment revised response criteria).

RESULTS

As of November 17, 2017, eight patients had completed 48 weeks of treatment with vismodegib and ruxolitinib; two discontinued treatment early. At week 24 (± 1 week), three patients experienced a spleen response by central review and no patients showed a 1-grade improvement in bone marrow fibrosis by central review. Five patients experienced symptom response at week 24, and no patients experienced an anemia response. The most common adverse events were muscle spasm (100% of patients), alopecia (70%), dysgeusia (50%), thrombocytopenia (50%), and nausea (40%); these events were predominantly grade 1/2. Three patients experienced a total of six serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of vismodegib and ruxolitinib was tolerable and no new safety signals were seen, but there was no evidence that the addition of vismodegib to ruxolitinib improved any of the efficacy outcome measures assessed. Further evaluation of this combination will not be pursued.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02593760 . Registered November 2, 2015.

A Phase II Trial Evaluating the Safety of Rapid Infusion of Ofatumumab in Patients with Previously Treated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia

LESSONS LEARNED

Ofatumumab infusion reactions can be diminished by escalating the dose rate in individual patients in sequential infusions.

BACKGROUND

Ofatumumab (OFA) is a fully humanized, anti-CD20 antibody approved for use in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The recommended administration requires long infusion times. We evaluated an accelerated infusion regimen of 2 hours.

METHODS

The first dose of OFA (300 mg) was given on week 1 day 1 starting at 3.6 mg/hour and doubling every 30 minutes until a rate of 240 mg/hour was reached. If tolerated, the second dose (1,000 mg) was given on week 1 day 3 starting at 50 mg/hour and doubling every 30 minutes until a rate of 800 mg/hour was reached. If tolerated, the third dose (2,000 mg) was given on week 2 day 1 at 800 mg/hour over the first 30 minutes and, if tolerated, at 1,068 mg/hour over the next 90 minutes (goal infusion time: 120 minutes). Subsequent OFA infusions were administered weekly in the same manner for 8 weeks, and then monthly for 4 months.

RESULTS

Thirty-four patients were treated. Most infusion-related reactions occurred during the first and second infusion. Eighty-seven percent (87%) of patients finished the third infusion within 15 minutes of the planned 2 hours and only one had an infusion reaction.

CONCLUSION

Using this stepped-up dosing regimen, a rapid infusion of OFA is safe and well tolerated.

Phase II study of bendamustine, bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD) in the first-line treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who are not candidates for high dose chemotherapy

The combination of bendamustine, bortezomib and dexamethasone (BBD) was evaluated as a first-line therapy for multiple myeloma. The original treatment regimen of bendamustine 80 mg/m² , days 1, 4; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m² , days 1, 4, 8, 11; dexamethasone 40 mg, days 1, 2, 3, 4 on a 28-day cycle (up to 8 cycles) was efficacious but determined relatively toxic in an interim analysis. The regimen was amended to bendamustine 80 mg/m² , days 1, 2; bortezomib 1·3 mg/m² , days 1, 8, 15; dexamethasone 20 mg, days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16 every 28 days (up to 8 cycles), then maintenance 1·3 mg/m² IV bortezomib every 2 weeks. Fifty-nine patients were enrolled. Primary endpoint was complete response (CR) rate. The original schema was given for a median of 7 cycles (range 1-8); modified schema was given for a median of 8 cycles (range 1-8) plus maintenance. Overall response was 91%, CR was 9%. Median follow-up was 19·1 months; median progression-free survival was 11·1 months and 18·9 months on the original and modified regimens, respectively. The most common Grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue and neuropathy. The combination of BBD is tolerable and efficacious in this patient population. Modifications to decrease intensity but increase duration translated to better outcomes.