RESONATE-2 is a phase 3 study of first-line ibrutinib versus chlorambucil in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). Patients aged ≥65 years (n = 269) were randomized 1:1 ...to once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg continuously or chlorambucil 0.5-0.8 mg/kg for ≤12 cycles. With a median (range) follow-up of 60 months (0.1-66), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefits for ibrutinib versus chlorambucil were sustained (PFS estimates at 5 years: 70% vs 12%; HR 95% CI: 0.146 0.098-0.218; OS estimates at 5 years: 83% vs 68%; HR 95% CI: 0.450 0.266-0.761). Ibrutinib benefit was also consistent in patients with high prognostic risk (TP53 mutation, 11q deletion, and/or unmutated IGHV) (PFS: HR 95% CI: 0.083 0.047-0.145; OS: HR 95% CI: 0.366 0.181-0.736). Investigator-assessed overall response rate was 92% with ibrutinib (complete response, 30%; 11% at primary analysis). Common grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) included neutropenia (13%), pneumonia (12%), hypertension (8%), anemia (7%), and hyponatremia (6%); occurrence of most events as well as discontinuations due to AEs decreased over time. Fifty-eight percent of patients continue to receive ibrutinib. Single-agent ibrutinib demonstrated sustained PFS and OS benefit versus chlorambucil and increased depth of response over time.
Tisagenlecleucel is an autologous anti-CD19 chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy with clinically meaningful outcomes demonstrated in patients with relapsed/refractory (r/r) B-cell lymphoma. In a ...previous pilot study of tisagenlecleucel in r/r follicular lymphoma (FL), 71% of patients achieved a complete response (CR). Here we report the primary, prespecified interim analysis of the ELARA phase 2 multinational trial of tisagenlecleucel in adults with r/r FL after two or more treatment lines or who relapsed after autologous stem cell transplant (no. NCT03568461). The primary endpoint was CR rate (CRR). Secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, progression-free survival, overall survival, pharmacokinetics and safety. As of 29 March 2021, 97/98 enrolled patients received tisagenlecleucel (median follow-up, 16.59 months; interquartile range, 13.8-20.21). The primary endpoint was met. In the efficacy set (n = 94), CRR was 69.1% (95% confidence interval, 58.8-78.3) and ORR 86.2% (95% confidence interval, 77.5-92.4). Within 8 weeks of infusion, rates of cytokine release syndrome were 48.5% (grade ≥3, 0%), neurological events 37.1% (grade ≥3, 3%) and immune effector cell-associated neurotoxicity syndrome (ICANS) 4.1% (grade ≥3, 1%) in the safety set (n = 97), with no treatment-related deaths. Tisagenlecleucel is safe and effective in extensively pretreated r/r FL, including in high-risk patients.
Patients with indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma typically respond well to first-line immunochemotherapy. At relapse, single-agent rituximab is commonly administered. Data suggest the immunomodulatory ...agent lenalidomide could increase the activity of rituximab.
A phase III, multicenter, randomized trial of lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab was conducted in patients with relapsed and/or refractory follicular or marginal zone lymphoma. Patients received lenalidomide or placebo for 12 cycles plus rituximab once per week for 4 weeks in cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2 through 5. The primary end point was progression-free survival per independent radiology review.
A total of 358 patients were randomly assigned to lenalidomide plus rituximab (n = 178) or placebo plus rituximab (n = 180). Infections (63%
49%), neutropenia (58%
23%), and cutaneous reactions (32%
12%) were more common with lenalidomide plus rituximab. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (50%
13%) and leukopenia (7%
2%) were higher with lenalidomide plus rituximab; no other grade 3 or 4 adverse event differed by 5% or more between groups. Progression-free survival was significantly improved for lenalidomide plus rituximab versus placebo plus rituximab, with a hazard ratio of 0.46 (95% CI, 0.34 to 0.62;
< .001) and median duration of 39.4 months (95% CI, 22.9 months to not reached) versus 14.1 months (95% CI, 11.4 to 16.7 months), respectively.
Lenalidomide improved efficacy of rituximab in patients with recurrent indolent lymphoma, with an acceptable safety profile.
Duvelisib (also known as IPI-145) is an oral, dual inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase δ and γ (PI3K-δ,γ) being developed for treatment of hematologic malignancies. PI3K-δ,γ signaling can ...promote B-cell proliferation and survival in clonal B-cell malignancies, such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL). In a phase 1 study, duvelisib showed clinically meaningful activity and acceptable safety in CLL/SLL patients. We report here the results of DUO, a global phase 3 randomized study of duvelisib vs ofatumumab monotherapy for patients with relapsed or refractory (RR) CLL/SLL. Patients were randomized 1:1 to oral duvelisib 25 mg twice daily (n = 160) or ofatumumab IV (n = 159). The study met the primary study end point by significantly improving progression-free survival per independent review committee assessment compared with ofatumumab for all patients (median, 13.3 months vs 9.9 months; hazard ratio HR = 0.52; P < .0001), including those with high-risk chromosome 17p13.1 deletions del(17p) and/or TP53 mutations (HR = 0.40; P = .0002). The overall response rate was significantly higher with duvelisib (74% vs 45%; P < .0001) regardless of del(17p) status. The most common adverse events were diarrhea, neutropenia, pyrexia, nausea, anemia, and cough on the duvelisib arm, and neutropenia and infusion reactions on the ofatumumab arm. The DUO trial data support duvelisib as a potentially effective treatment option for patients with RR CLL/SLL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02004522.
•Duvelisib significantly improved progression-free survival and overall response rates compared with ofatumumab in RR CLL/SLL patients.•Duvelisib's efficacy and manageable safety profile support its consideration as a novel, oral monotherapy for RR CLL/SLL patients.
Display omitted
To compare the long-term outcome of patients with previously untreated follicular lymphoma (FL) needing therapy, after treatment with cyclophosphamide, vincristine and prednisone (CVP) versus CVP ...plus rituximab (R-CVP) and to evaluate the predictive value of known prognostic factors after treatment with R-CVP.
Patients with previously untreated CD20-positive stage III/IV FL were randomly assigned to eight cycles of R-CVP (n = 159) or CVP alone (n = 162). The median follow-up period was 53 months.
The primary end point-time to treatment failure (TTF), which included patients without a response after four cycles as an event-was significantly prolonged in patients receiving R-CVP versus CVP (P < .0001). Improvements in all other end points, including overall and complete response rates (P < .0001), time to progression (TTP; P < .0001), response duration (P < .0001), time to next antilymphoma treatment (P < .0001), and overall survival (OS; P = .029; 4-year OS: 83% v 77%;) were achieved with R-CVP versus CVP alone. Univariate analyses demonstrated an improvement in TTP with R-CVP versus CVP irrespective of the Follicular Lymphoma International Prognostic Index (FLIPI) subgroup, the International Prognostic Index (IPI) subgroup, baseline histology, and the presence or absence of B symptoms or bulky disease. By multivariate analysis, FLIPI retains a strong predictive power for TTP in the presence of the trial treatment effect.
Analysis of all outcome measures, including OS, confirm the benefit of adding R to CVP in the front-line treatment of FL.
Summary Background Mantle-cell lymphoma is an aggressive B-cell lymphoma with a poor prognosis. Both ibrutinib and temsirolimus have shown single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or ...refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. We undertook a phase 3 study to assess the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib versus temsirolimus in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. Methods This randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 3 clinical trial enrolled patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma confirmed by central pathology in 21 countries who had received one or more rituximab-containing treatments. Patients were stratified by previous therapy and simplified mantle-cell lymphoma international prognostic index score, and were randomly assigned with a computer-generated randomisation schedule to receive daily oral ibrutinib 560 mg or intravenous temsirolimus (175 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of cycle 1; 75 mg on days 1, 8, and 15 of subsequent 21-day cycles). Randomisation was balanced by using randomly permuted blocks. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by a masked independent review committee with the primary hypothesis that ibrutinib compared with temsirolimus significantly improves progression-free survival. The analysis followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is ongoing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01646021 ) and with the EU Clinical Trials Register, EudraCT (number 2012-000601-74). Findings Between Dec 10, 2012, and Nov 26, 2013, 280 patients were randomised to ibrutinib (n=139) or temsirolimus (n=141). Primary efficacy analysis showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (p<0·0001) for patients treated with ibrutinib versus temsirolimus (hazard ratio 0·43 95% CI 0·32–0·58; median progression-free survival 14·6 months 95% CI 10·4–not estimable vs 6·2 months 4·2–7·9, respectively). Ibrutinib was better tolerated than temsirolimus, with grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse events reported for 94 (68%) versus 121 (87%) patients, and fewer discontinuations of study medication due to adverse events for ibrutinib versus temsirolimus (9 6% vs 36 26%). Interpretation Ibrutinib treatment resulted in significant improvement in progression-free survival and better tolerability versus temsirolimus in patients with relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. These data lend further support to the positive benefit–risk ratio for ibrutinib in relapsed or refractory mantle-cell lymphoma. Funding Janssen Research & Development, LLC.
Summary Background Treatment for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who are elderly or who have comorbidities is challenging because fludarabine-based chemoimmunotherapies are mostly not ...suitable. Chlorambucil remains the standard of care in many countries. We aimed to investigate whether the addition of ofatumumab to chlorambucil could lead to better clinical outcomes than does treatment with chlorambucil alone, while also being tolerable for patients who have few treatment options. Methods We carried out a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial for treatment-naive patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia in 109 centres in 16 countries. We included patients who had active disease needing treatment, but in whom fludarabine-based treatment was not possible. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) to receive oral chlorambucil (10 mg/m2 ) on days 1–7 of a 28 day treatment course or to receive chlorambucil by this schedule plus intravenous ofatumumab (cycle 1: 300 mg on day 1 and 1000 mg on day 8; subsequent cycles: 1000 mg on day 1) for three to 12 cycles. Assignment was done with a randomisation list that was computer generated at GlaxoSmithKline, and was stratified, in a block size of two, by age, disease stage, and performance status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population and assessment was done by an independent review committee that was masked to group assignment. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00748189. Findings We enrolled 447 patients, median age 69 years (range 35–92). Between Dec 22, 2008, and May 26, 2011, we randomly assigned 221 patients to chlorambucil plus ofatumumab and 226 patients to chlorambucil alone. Median progression-free survival was 22·4 months (95% CI 19·0–25·2) in the group assigned to chlorambucil plus ofatumumab compared with 13·1 months (10·6–13·8) in the group assigned to chlorambucil only (hazard ratio 0·57, 95% CI 0·45–0·72; p<0·0001). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were more common in the chlorambucil plus ofatumumab group (109 50% patients; vs 98 43% given chlorambucil alone), with neutropenia being the most common event (56 26% vs 32 14%). Grade 3 or greater infections had similar frequency in both groups. Grade 3 or greater infusion-related adverse events were reported in 22 (10%) patients given chlorambucil plus ofatumumab. Five (2%) patients died during treatment in each group. Interpretation Addition of ofatumumab to chlorambucil led to clinically important improvements with a manageable side-effect profile in treatment-naive patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who were elderly or had comorbidities. Chlorambucil plus ofatumumab is therefore an important treatment option for these patients who cannot tolerate more intensive therapy. Funding GlaxoSmithKline, Genmab A/S.
Temsirolimus, a specific inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin kinase, has shown clinical activity in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). We evaluated two dose regimens of temsirolimus in comparison ...with investigator's choice single-agent therapy in relapsed or refractory disease.
In this multicenter, open-label, phase III study, 162 patients with relapsed or refractory MCL were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive one of two temsirolimus regimens: 175 mg weekly for 3 weeks followed by either 75 mg (175/75-mg) or 25 mg (175/25-mg) weekly, or investigator's choice therapy from prospectively approved options. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) by independent assessment.
Median PFS was 4.8, 3.4, and 1.9 months for the temsirolimus 175/75-mg, 175/25-mg, and investigator's choice groups, respectively. Patients treated with temsirolimus 175/75-mg had significantly longer PFS than those treated with investigator's choice therapy (P = .0009; hazard ratio = 0.44); those treated with temsirolimus 175/25-mg showed a trend toward longer PFS (P = .0618; hazard ratio = 0.65). Objective response rate was significantly higher in the 175/75-mg group (22%) compared with the investigator's choice group (2%; P = .0019). Median overall survival for the temsirolimus 175/75-mg group and the investigator's choice group was 12.8 months and 9.7 months, respectively (P = .3519). The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events in the temsirolimus groups were thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, and asthenia.
Temsirolimus 175 mg weekly for 3 weeks followed by 75 mg weekly significantly improved PFS and objective response rate compared with investigator's choice therapy in patients with relapsed or refractory MCL.
Obinutuzumab (GA101), a novel glycoengineered type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody, demonstrated responses in single-arm studies of patients with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma. This is ...the first prospective, randomized study comparing safety and efficacy of obinutuzumab with rituximab in relapsed indolent lymphoma. The primary end point of this study was the overall response rate (ORR) in patients with follicular lymphoma after induction and safety in patients with indolent lymphoma.
A total of 175 patients with relapsed CD20(+) indolent lymphoma requiring therapy and with previous response to a rituximab-containing regimen were randomly assigned (1:1) to four once-per-week infusions of either obinutuzumab (1,000 mg) or rituximab (375 mg/m(2)). Patients without evidence of disease progression after induction therapy received obinutuzumab or rituximab maintenance therapy every 2 months for up to 2 years.
Among patients with follicular lymphoma (n = 149), ORR seemed higher for obinutuzumab than rituximab (44.6% v 33.3%; P = .08). This observation was also demonstrated by a blinded independent review panel that measured a higher ORR for obinutuzumab (44.6% v 26.7%; P = .01). However, this difference did not translate into an improvement in progression-free survival. No new safety signals were observed for obinutuzumab, and the incidence of adverse events was balanced between arms, with the exception of infusion-related reactions and cough, which were higher in the obinutuzumab arm.
Obinutuzumab demonstrated a higher ORR without appreciable differences in safety compared with rituximab. However, the clinical benefit of obinutuzumab in this setting remains unclear and should be evaluated within phase III trials.
PDF
