Search

Novel therapies have improved outcomes for multiple myeloma (MM) patients, but most ultimately relapse, making treatment decisions for relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) patients increasingly challenging. We report the final analysis of a single-arm, phase 2 study evaluating the oral proteasome inhibitor (PI) ixazomib combined with daratumumab and dexamethasone (IDd; NCT03439293). Sixty-one RRMM patients (ixazomib/daratumumab-naïve; 1-3 prior therapies) were enrolled to receive IDd (28-day cycles) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Median age was 69 years; 14.8% of patients had International Staging System stage III disease; 14.8% had received three prior therapies. Patients received a median of 16 cycles of IDd. In 59 response-evaluable patients, the overall response rate was 64.4%; the confirmed ≥very good partial response (VGPR) rate (primary endpoint) was 30.5%. Rates of ≥VGPR in patient subgroups were: high-risk cytogenetics (n = 15, 26.7%), expanded high-risk cytogenetics (n = 24, 29.2%), aged ≥75 years (n = 12, 16.7%), lenalidomide-refractory (n = 21, 28.6%), and prior PI/IMiD therapy (n = 58, 31.0%). With a median follow-up of 31.6 months, median progression-free survival was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval: 10.1-23.7). Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 54.1% of patients; 44.3% had serious TEAEs; TEAEs led to dose modifications/reductions/discontinuations in 62.3%/36.1%/16.4%. There were five on-study deaths. Any-grade and grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 18.0% and 1.6% of patients. Quality of life was generally maintained throughout treatment. IDd showed a positive risk-benefit profile in RRMM patients and was active in clinically relevant subgroups with no new safety signals., (© 2024 The Author(s). American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Purpose: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III iNNOVATE study showed sustained efficacy of ibrutinib-rituximab in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM). Here, we present the final analysis from iNNOVATE., Methods: Patients had confirmed symptomatic WM, either previously untreated or previously treated; patients with prior rituximab had at least a minor response to their last rituximab-based regimen. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab (n = 75 per arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included response rate, time to next treatment, hemoglobin improvement, overall survival, and safety., Results: With a median follow-up of 50 (range, 0.5-63) months, median (95% CI) PFS was not reached (57.7 months to not evaluable) with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 20.3 months (13.0 to 27.6) with placebo-rituximab (hazard ratio, 0.250; P < .0001). PFS benefit was regardless of prior treatment status, MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status, or key patient characteristics. Higher response rates (partial response or better) were observed with ibrutinib-rituximab (76% v 31% with placebo-rituximab; P < .0001) and were sustained over time. Median time to next treatment was not reached with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 18 months with placebo-rituximab. More patients receiving ibrutinib-rituximab versus placebo-rituximab had sustained hemoglobin improvement (77% v 43%; P < .0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. Ibrutinib-rituximab maintained a manageable safety profile; the prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events of clinical interest generally decreased over time., Conclusion: In the final analysis of iNNOVATE with a median follow-up of 50 months, ibrutinib-rituximab showed ongoing superiority across clinical outcomes in patients with WM regardless of MYD88 or CXCR4 mutation status, prior treatment, and key patient characteristics., Competing Interests: Christian BuskeHonoraria: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, BeiGene, Novartis, Pfizer, Incyte, AbbVie, Gilead Sciences, Celltrion, MorphoSys, RegeneronConsulting or Advisory Role: Gilead Sciences, Janssen, Roche, Pfizer, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Incyte, Regeneron, MorphoSys, NovartisSpeakers' Bureau: Roche, Janssen, BeiGene, Celltrion, AbbVie, Pfizer, Gilead SciencesResearch Funding: Roche/Genentech, Janssen, Celltrion, MSD, Pfizer, Amgen, Alessandra TedeschiConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, BeiGene, AstraZeneca, AbbVieSpeakers' Bureau: AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Janssen, BeiGene Judith TrotmanResearch Funding: BeiGene, Roche/Genentech, Pharmacyclics, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, CelgeneTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Roche/Genentech Ramón García-SanzHonoraria: Janssen, Takeda, Amgen, BeiGene, NovartisConsulting or Advisory Role: JanssenResearch Funding: Gilead Sciences, IncytePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: BIOMED-2 primersTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen, Takeda (I)Other Relationship: Spanish Society of Hematology (SEHH) David MacDonaldResearch Funding: Celgene, Servier Veronique LeblondHonoraria: AstraZeneca, Roche Pharma AG, BeiGene, Amgen, Janssen Oncology, AbbVie, MSD Oncology, LillyConsulting or Advisory Role: BeiGene, Janssen, AstraZeneca, Lilly, AbbVieSpeakers' Bureau: BeiGene, AstraZeneca, AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Charles HerbauxHonoraria: Roche, Janssen-Cilag, AbbVieResearch Funding: TakedaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Roche Jeffrey V. MatousConsulting or Advisory Role: Pharmacyclics, BeiGene Constantine S. TamHonoraria: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Novartis, BeiGene, PharmacyclicsConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Loxo, Roche, AbbVieResearch Funding: Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie Leonard T. HeffnerSpeakers' Bureau: Kite, a Gilead companyResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Genentech, Kite, a Gilead Company, ADC Therapeutics, Astex Pharmaceuticals, Loxo, Cellectar Marzia VarettoniConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen-Cilag, Roche, Janssen, AstraZenecaTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Gilead Sciences, Janssen-Cilag, AbbVie, Janssen Lia PalombaStock and Other Ownership Interests: Seres Therapeutics (I)Honoraria: Flagship Biosciences (I), Evelo Therapeutics (I), Jazz Pharmaceuticals (I), Therakos (I), Amgen (I), Merck (I), Seres Therapeutics (I)Consulting or Advisory Role: Flagship Biosciences (I), Novartis (I), Evelo Therapeutics (I), Jazz Pharmaceuticals (I), Therakos (I), Amgen (I), Merck (I), Seres Therapeutics (I), Kite, a Gilead Company, BeiGeneResearch Funding: Seres Therapeutics (I)Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Intellectual Property Rights (I), Juno Intellectual Property Rights Chaim ShustikExpert Testimony: Janssen Oncology Efstathios KastritisHonoraria: Amgen, Genesis Pharma, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Prothena, PfizerConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen Oncology, Takeda, Genesis Pharma, Prothena, PfizerResearch Funding: Janssen Oncology, AmgenTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen Oncology, Genesis Pharma, Takeda, Pfizer Steven P. TreonConsulting or Advisory Role: Janssen, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene, X4 Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers SquibbResearch Funding: Pharmacyclics, Bristol Myers Squibb, X4 Pharmaceuticals, Lilly, BeiGene, AbbViePatents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: My institution holds patents related to the use of MYD88 and CXCR4 testing for which a predetermined financial distribution to the laboratory and individuals is provided. I have not received any income to this date related to these patents.Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Janssen OncologyOther Relationship: Janssen, Pharmacyclics, BeiGene Jerry PingEmployment: AbbVieStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Bernhard HaunsEmployment: AbbVie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: AbbVieTravel, Accommodations, Expenses: AbbVie Israel Arango-HisijaraEmployment: Janssen Oncology, Abbvie/PharmacyclicsStock and Other Ownership Interests: Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, AbbvieHonoraria: Janssen Oncology, Abbvie/Pharmacyclics Meletios A. DimopoulosHonoraria: Amgen, Takeda, Janssen-Cilag, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGeneConsulting or Advisory Role: Amgen, Janssen-Cilag, Takeda, Bristol Myers Squibb, BeiGeneNo other potential conflicts of interest were reported.

The maximum tolerated dose of the panobinostat and carfilzomib combination in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) was not reached in our previous dose-escalation study. We report additional dose levels in the phase I/II, single-arm, multicenter, standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation expansion-cohort study (NCT01496118). Patients with RRMM were treated with panobinostat 30 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m 2 (N = 3), or panobinostat 20 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m 2 (N = 33). Treatment cycles lasted 28 days; panobinostat: days 1, 3, 5, 15, 17, 19; carfilzomib: days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16. For dose level 6 (DL 6), median age was 63 years (range, 49-91 years), 60.6% were male, 42.4% were high risk. Patients received a median of two prior therapies (range 1-7); proteasome inhibitors (PI; 100%), immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiD; 78.8%), and stem cell transplant (36.4%); 48.5%, 51.1%, and 24.2% were refractory to prior PI or prior IMiD treatment or both, respectively. Patients completed a median of seven (range 1-40) treatment cycles. Overall response rate (primary endpoint) of evaluable patients in the expansion cohort (N = 32): 84.4%; clinical benefit rate: 90.6%. With a median follow-up of 26.1 months (range, 0-72.5 months), median (95% CI) progression-free survival, time-to-progression and overall survival of patients was 10.3 (6.1, 13.9), 11.7 (5.6, 14.5), and 44.6 (20.8, N/A) months, respectively. Common adverse events (AEs) included thrombocytopenia (78.8%), nausea (63.6%), fatigue (63.6%), diarrhea (51.5%), and vomiting (51.5%). Seven patients had serious treatment-related AEs. There was one treatment-related death. In conclusion, panobinostat plus carfilzomib is an effective steroid-sparing regimen for RRMM., (© 2021 The Authors. American Journal of Hematology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK) inhibition is an effective treatment approach for patients with Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). The phase 3 ASPEN study compared the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib, a first-generation BTK inhibitor, with zanubrutinib, a novel highly selective BTK inhibitor, in patients with WM. Patients with MYD88L265P disease were randomly assigned 1:1 to treatment with ibrutinib or zanubrutinib. The primary end point was the proportion of patients achieving a complete response (CR) or a very good partial response (VGPR) by independent review. Key secondary end points included major response rate (MRR), progression-free survival (PFS), duration of response (DOR), disease burden, and safety. A total of 201 patients were randomized, and 199 received ≥1 dose of study treatment. No patient achieved a CR. Twenty-nine (28%) zanubrutinib patients and 19 (19%) ibrutinib patients achieved a VGPR, a nonstatistically significant difference (P = .09). MRRs were 77% and 78%, respectively. Median DOR and PFS were not reached; 84% and 85% of ibrutinib and zanubrutinib patients were progression free at 18 months. Atrial fibrillation, contusion, diarrhea, peripheral edema, hemorrhage, muscle spasms, and pneumonia, as well as adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation, were less common among zanubrutinib recipients. Incidence of neutropenia was higher with zanubrutinib, although grade ≥3 infection rates were similar in both arms (1.2 and 1.1 events per 100 person-months). These results demonstrate that zanubrutinib and ibrutinib are highly effective in the treatment of WM, but zanubrutinib treatment was associated with a trend toward better response quality and less toxicity, particularly cardiovascular toxicity., (© 2020 by The American Society of Hematology.)

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) inevitably relapse on initial treatment regimens, and novel combination therapies are needed. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, an enzyme implicated in growth and survival of MM cells. Preclinical data suggest supra-additivity or synergy between ibrutinib and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) against MM. This phase 1/2b study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib plus the PI carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). In this final analysis, we report results in patients who received the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D; ibrutinib 840 mg and carfilzomib 36 mg/m 2 with dexamethasone), which was determined in phase 1. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Fifty-nine patients with RRMM received the RP2D (18 in phase 1 and 41 in phase 2b). These patients had received a median of three prior lines of therapy; 69% were refractory to bortezomib, and 90% were refractory to their last treatment. ORR in the RP2D population was 71% (stringent complete response and complete response: 3% each). Median duration of clinical benefit and median duration of response were both 6.5 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.4 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 35.9 months. High-risk patients had comparable ORR and median PFS (67% and 7.7 months, respectively) to non-high-risk patients, whose ORR was 73% and median PFS was 6.9 months, whereas median OS in high-risk patients was 13.9 months and not reached in non-high-risk patients. The most common grade ≥3 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were anemia and thrombocytopenia (17% each); the most common grade ≥3 non-hematologic TEAE was hypertension (19%). In patients with RRMM treated with multiple previous lines of therapy, ibrutinib plus carfilzomib demonstrated anticancer activity within the expected efficacy range. No new safety signals were identified and the combination was well-tolerated., (© 2020 The Authors. Hematological Oncology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Duvelisib, a potent δ- and γ-PI3K inhibitor, is a potential therapeutic for hematologic malignancies. Rituximab and bendamustine have demonstrated activity in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Combining duvelisib with either rituximab alone or rituximab and bendamustine may improve response rates and remission durability. We conducted this Phase one study in relapsed/refractory NHL and CLL patients. During expansion, each arm enrolled to disease-specific cohorts to assess efficacy. Arm one received rituximab 375 mg/m 2 IV weekly for two 4-week cycles plus duvelisib until progression/intolerance. Arm two received rituximab 375 mg/m 2 IV Day one, bendamustine 90 mg/m 2 IV (NHL patients) or 70 mg/m 2 IV (CLL patients) Days one-two for six cycles, plus duvelisib until progression/intolerance. Duvelisib doses of 50 mg and 75 mg BID were tested during dose escalation. Forty-six patients (27 NHL, 19 CLL) were treated. The adverse events of the drug combinations were consistent with single agent toxicities. The most common AEs were neutropenia (47.7%), fatigue (41.3%), and rash (41.3%). A duvelisib expansion dose of 25 mg BID was chosen based on the monotherapy phase one study, IPI-145-02, which confirmed that dose for further clinical development. Overall response rate was 71.8%. Median progression-free survival was 13.7 months. Median overall survival has not been reached, but 30-month overall survival probability was 62%. Duvelisib combined with rituximab, or bendamustine and rituximab did not appear to increase toxicities beyond the known safety profile of the individual agents. Further study is needed to determine if these combinations improve efficacy., (© 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

This phase 1, dose-finding study investigated ibrutinib and carfilzomib ± dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (≥2 lines of therapy including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent). Of 43 patients enrolled, 74% were refractory to bortezomib and 23% had high-risk cytogenetics. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The recommended phase 2 dose was ibrutinib 840 mg and carfilzomib 36 mg/m 2 with dexamethasone. The most common ≥ grade 3 (>10%) treatment-emergent adverse events were hypertension, anemia, pneumonia, fatigue, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia. Overall response rate was 67% (very good partial response, 21%; stringent complete response, 2%), with an additional 9% minimal response. Median progression-free survival was 7.2 months and was not inferior in refractory nor high-risk patients. Median overall survival was not reached. Ibrutinib plus carfilzomib demonstrated encouraging responses with a manageable safety profile in this advanced population.

Background: Single-agent ibrutinib has shown substantial activity in patients with relapsed Waldenström's macroglobulinemia, a rare form of B-cell lymphoma. We evaluated the effect of adding ibrutinib to rituximab in patients with this disease, both in those who had not received previous treatment and in those with disease recurrence., Methods: We randomly assigned 150 symptomatic patients to receive ibrutinib plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab. The primary end point was progression-free survival, as assessed by an independent review committee. Key secondary end points were response rates, sustained hematologic improvement from baseline, and safety. The mutational status of MYD88 and CXCR4 was assessed in bone marrow samples., Results: At 30 months, the progression-free survival rate was 82% with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 28% with placebo-rituximab (hazard ratio for progression or death, 0.20; P<0.001). The benefit in the ibrutinib-rituximab group over that in the placebo-rituximab group was independent of the MYD88 or CXCR4 genotype. The rate of major response was higher with ibrutinib-rituximab than with placebo-rituximab (72% vs. 32%, P<0.001). More patients had sustained increases in hemoglobin level with ibrutinib-rituximab than with placebo-rituximab (73% vs. 41%, P<0.001). The most common adverse events of any grade with ibrutinib-rituximab included infusion-related reactions, diarrhea, arthralgia, and nausea. Events of grade 3 or higher that occurred more frequently with ibrutinib-rituximab than with placebo-rituximab included atrial fibrillation (12% vs. 1%) and hypertension (13% vs. 4%); those that occurred less frequently included infusion reactions (1% vs. 16%) and any grade of IgM flare (8% vs. 47%). The major hemorrhage rate was the same in the two trial groups (4%)., Conclusions: Among patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia, the use of ibrutinib-rituximab resulted in significantly higher rates of progression-free survival than the use of placebo-rituximab, both among those who had received no previous treatment and among those with disease recurrence. Atrial fibrillation and hypertension were more common with ibrutinib-rituximab, whereas infusion reactions and IgM flare were more common with placebo-rituximab. (Funded by Pharmacyclics and Janssen Research and Development; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02165397 .).

Background: In the era of widespread rituximab use for Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia, new treatment options for patients with rituximab-refractory disease are an important clinical need. Ibrutinib has induced durable responses in previously treated patients with Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia. We assessed the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib in a population with rituximab-refractory disease., Methods: This multicentre, open-label substudy was done at 19 sites in seven countries in adults aged 18 years and older with confirmed Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia, refractory to rituximab and requiring treatment. Disease refractory to the last rituximab-containing therapy was defined as either relapse less than 12 months since last dose of rituximab or failure to achieve at least a minor response. Key exclusion criteria included: CNS involvement, a stroke or intracranial haemorrhage less than 12 months before enrolment, clinically significant cardiovascular disease, hepatitis B or hepatitis C viral infection, and a known bleeding disorder. Patients received oral ibrutinib 420 mg once daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The substudy was not prospectively powered for statistical comparisons, and as such, all the analyses are descriptive in nature. This study objectives were the proportion of patients with an overall response, progression-free survival, overall survival, haematological improvement measured by haemoglobin, time to next treatment, and patient-reported outcomes according to the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Anemia (FACT-An) and the Euro Qol 5 Dimension Questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L). All analyses were per protocol. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02165397, and follow-up is ongoing but enrolment is complete., Findings: Between Aug 18, 2014, and Feb 18, 2015, 31 patients were enrolled. Median age was 67 years (IQR 58-74); 13 (42%) of 31 patients had high-risk disease per the International Prognostic Scoring System Waldenström Macroglobulinaemia, median number of previous therapies was four (IQR 2-6), and all were rituximab-refractory. At a median follow-up of 18·1 months (IQR 17·5-18·9), the proportion of patients with an overall response was 28 [90%] of 31 (22 [71%] of patients had a major response), the estimated 18 month progression-free survival rate was 86% (95% CI 66-94), and the estimated 18 month overall survival rate was 97% (95% CI 79-100). Baseline median haemoglobin of 10·3 g/dL (IQR 9·3-11·7) increased to 11·4 g/dL (10·9-12·4) after 4 weeks of ibrutinib treatment and reached 12·7 g/dL (11·8-13·4) at week 49. A clinically meaningful improvement from baseline in FACT-An score, anaemia subscale score, and the EQ-5D-5L were reported at all post-baseline visits. Time to next treatment will be presented at a later date. Common grade 3 or worse adverse events included neutropenia in four patients (13%), hypertension in three patients (10%), and anaemia, thrombocytopenia, and diarrhoea in two patients each (6%). Serious adverse events occurred in ten patients (32%) and were most often infections. Five (16%) patients discontinued ibrutinib: three due to progression and two due to adverse events, while the remaining 26 [84%] of patients are continuing ibrutinib at the time of this report., Interpretation: The sustained responses and median progression-free survival time, combined with a manageable toxicity profile observed with single-agent ibrutinib indicate that this chemotherapy-free approach is a potential new treatment choice for patients who had heavily pretreated, rituximab-refractory Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia., Funding: Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The aims of this multicenter study were to evaluate the response rate, progression-free survival, and toxicity of the combination of bortezomib, bendamustine, and rituximab in patients with follicular lymphoma whose disease was relapsed or refractory to prior treatment., Patients and Methods: Patients received five 35-day cycles of bortezomib, bendamustine, and rituximab: bortezomib administered intravenously (IV) at a dose of 1.6 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, cycles one to five; bendamustine 50, 70, or 90 mg/m(2) IV over a 60-minute infusion on days 1 and 2, cycles one to five; and rituximab 375 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycle one and day 1 of subsequent cycles. Patients were assessed using the International Workshop Response Criteria, with the primary end point of 60% complete response rate., Results: Seventy-three patients were enrolled. During the dose-escalation phase, the maximum-tolerated dose for bendamustine was not reached; the 90 mg/m(2) dose level was expanded for the efficacy assessment, and a total of 63 patients received bendamustine 90 mg/m(2). In these 63 patients, the overall response rate was 88% (including 53% complete response). Median duration of response was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 13.3). Median progression-free survival was 14.9 months (95% CI, 11.1 to 23.7). Toxicities were manageable; myelosuppression was the main toxicity (25% and 14% of patients experienced grade 3 to 4 neutropenia and grade 3 to 4 thrombocytopenia, respectively). Transient grade 3 to 4 neuropathy occurred in 11% of patients., Conclusion: The combination of bortezomib, bendamustine, and rituximab is highly active in patients with follicular lymphoma who have received previous treatment.