Brentuximab vedotin with dacarbazine or nivolumab as frontline cHL therapy for older patients ineligible for chemotherapy.

ABSTRACT: Older patients with advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) have inferior outcomes compared with younger patients, potentially due to comorbidities and frailty. This noncomparative phase 2 study enrolled patients aged ≥60 years with cHL unfit for conventional chemotherapy to receive frontline brentuximab vedotin (BV; 1.8 mg/kg) with dacarbazine (DTIC; 375 mg/m2) (part B) or nivolumab (part D; 3 mg/kg). In parts B and D, 50% and 38% of patients, respectively, had ≥3 general comorbidities or ≥1 significant comorbidity. Of the 22 patients treated with BV-DTIC, 95% achieved objective response, and 64% achieved complete response (CR). With a median follow-up of 63.6 months, median duration of response (mDOR) was 46.0 months. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 47.2 months; median overall survival (mOS) was not reached. Of 21 patients treated with BV-nivolumab, 86% achieved objective response, and 67% achieved CR. With 51.6 months of median follow-up, mDOR, mPFS, and mOS were not reached. Ten patients (45%) with BV-DTIC and 16 patients (76%) with BV-nivolumab experienced grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events; sensory peripheral neuropathy (PN; 27%) and neutropenia (9%) were most common with BV-DTIC, and increased lipase (24%), motor PN (19%), and sensory PN (19%) were most common with BV-nivolumab. Despite high median age, inclusion of patients aged ≤88 years, and frailty, these results demonstrate safety and promising durable efficacy of BV-DTIC and BV-nivolumab combinations as frontline treatment, suggesting potential alternatives for older patients with cHL unfit for initial conventional chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01716806.

Rilzabrutinib, an Oral BTK Inhibitor, in Immune Thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Rilzabrutinib, an oral, reversible covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, may increase platelet counts in patients with immune thrombocytopenia by means of dual mechanisms of action: decreased macrophage (Fcγ receptor)-mediated platelet destruction and reduced production of pathogenic autoantibodies. METHODS: In an international, adaptive, open-label, dose-finding, phase 1-2 clinical trial, we evaluated rilzabrutinib therapy in previously treated patients with immune thrombocytopenia. We used intrapatient dose escalation of oral rilzabrutinib over a period of 24 weeks; the lowest starting dose was 200 mg once daily, with higher starting doses of 400 mg once daily, 300 mg twice daily, and 400 mg twice daily. The primary end points were safety and platelet response (defined as at least two consecutive platelet counts of ≥50×103 per cubic millimeter and an increase from baseline of ≥20×103 per cubic millimeter without the use of rescue medication). RESULTS: Sixty patients were enrolled. At baseline, the median platelet count was 15×103 per cubic millimeter, the median duration of disease was 6.3 years, and patients had received a median of four different immune thrombocytopenia therapies previously. All the treatment-related adverse events were of grade 1 or 2 and transient. There were no treatment-related bleeding or thrombotic events of grade 2 or higher. At a median of 167.5 days (range, 4 to 293) of treatment, 24 of 60 patients (40%) overall and 18 of the 45 patients (40%) who had started rilzabrutinib treatment at the highest dose met the primary end point of platelet response. The median time to the first platelet count of at least 50×103 per cubic millimeter was 11.5 days. Among patients with a primary platelet response, the mean percentage of weeks with a platelet count of at least 50×103 per cubic millimeter was 65%. CONCLUSIONS: Rilzabrutinib was active and associated with only low-level toxic effects at all dose levels. The dose of 400 mg twice daily was identified as the dose for further testing. Overall, rilzabrutinib showed a rapid and durable clinical activity that improved with length of treatment. (Funded by Sanofi; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03395210; EudraCT number, 2017-004012-19.).

Ruxolitinib and methylprednisolone for treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Although Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors have demonstrated efficacy for treating autoimmune disorders and myeloproliferative neoplasms, their efficacy in treating other types of cancer has not been clearly demonstrated. We evaluated oral ruxolitinib (15 mg twice daily) with oral methylprednisolone (40 mg every other day) for multiple myeloma (MM) patients with progressive disease who had received a proteasome inhibitor, lenalidomide, glucocorticosteroids and three or more prior regimens. All of the planned 29 patients had been enrolled with follow-up until 28 April 2022. Median lines of prior therapy were 6 (range 3-12). Cytogenetics and fluorescent in situ hybridization were evaluable in 28 patients; 9 (32%) and 17 (70%) patients showed high-risk cytogenetics and/or 1q+, respectively. The overall response rate was 31%. The median duration of response was 13.1 (range 2.8-22.0) months. Median progression-free survival rate was 3.4 (range 0.5-24.6) months, Overall, the treatment was well tolerated. The combination of ruxolitinib and methylprednisolone demonstrated significant clinical activity among previously heavily-treated MM patients, and responses were achieved among patients who had high-risk cytogenetics. This is the first clinical study to show activity of JAK inhibitors in combination with steroids for MM patients and expands the potential use of these drugs to those with cancers other than myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Safety and efficacy of parsaclisib in combination with obinutuzumab and bendamustine in patients with relapsed or refractory follicular lymphoma (CITADEL-102): A phase 1 study.

Parsaclisib is a potent and highly selective PI3Kδ inhibitor that has shown clinical benefit with monotherapy in a phase 2 study in relapsed or refractory (R/R) follicular lymphoma (FL). CITADEL-102 (NCT03039114), a phase 1, multicenter study, assessed the efficacy of parsaclisib in combination with obinutuzumab and bendamustine in patients with R/R FL. Patients were ≥18 years of age with histologically confirmed and documented CD20-positive FL, and R/R to previous rituximab-containing treatment regimens. Part one (safety run-in) determined the maximum tolerated dose of parsaclisib in combination with standard dosage regimens of obinutuzumab and bendamustine. Part two (dose expansion) was an open-label, single-group design evaluating safety, tolerability (primary endpoint), and efficacy (secondary endpoint) of parsaclisib combination therapy. Twenty-six patients were enrolled in CITADEL-102 and all patients received parsaclisib 20 mg once daily for 8 weeks, followed by 20 mg once weekly thereafter, in combination with obinutuzumab and bendamustine. One patient in safety run-in experienced a dose-limiting toxicity of grade 4 QT interval prolongation that was considered related to parsaclisib. Eight patients (30.8%) discontinued treatment due to treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of colitis (2 [7.7%]), alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase increase (both in one patient [3.8%]), neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, QT prolongation, tonsil cancer, and maculopapular rash (each 1 [3.8%]). The most common reported TEAEs were pyrexia (53.8%), neutropenia (50.0%), and diarrhea (46.2%). Twenty-three patients (88.5%) experienced grade 3 or 4 TEAEs; the most common were neutropenia (34.6%), febrile neutropenia (23.1%), and thrombocytopenia (19.2%). Seventeen patients (65.4%) had a complete response and 3 patients (11.5%) had a partial response, for an objective response rate of 76.9%. Overall, results from CITADEL-102 suggest that the combination of parsaclisib with obinutuzumab and bendamustine did not result in unexpected safety events, with little evidence of synergistic toxicity, and demonstrated preliminary efficacy in patients with R/R FL who progressed following prior rituximab-containing regimens.

Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia and Febrile Neutropenia in the US: A Beast of Burden That Needs to Be Tamed?

Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia (FN) are common complications of myelosuppressive chemotherapy. This review provides an up-to-date assessment of the patient and cost burden of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia/FN in the US, and summarizes recommendations for FN prophylaxis, including the interim guidance that was recommended during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. This review indicates that neutropenia/FN place a significant burden on patients in terms of hospitalizations and mortality. Most patients with neutropenia/FN presenting to the emergency department will be hospitalized, with an average length of stay of 6, 8, and 10 days for elderly, pediatric, and adult patients, respectively. Reported in-hospital mortality rates for neutropenia/FN range from 0.4% to 3.0% for pediatric patients with cancer, 2.6% to 7.0% for adults with solid tumors, and 7.4% for adults with hematologic malignancies. Neutropenia/FN also place a significant cost burden on US healthcare systems, with average costs per neutropenia/FN hospitalization estimated to be up to $40 000 for adult patients and $65 000 for pediatric patients. Evidence-based guidelines recommend prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs), which have been shown to reduce FN incidence while improving chemotherapy dose delivery. Availability of biosimilars may improve costs of care. Efforts to decrease hospitalizations by optimizing outpatient care could reduce the burden of neutropenia/FN; this was particularly pertinent during the COVID-19 pandemic since avoidance of hospitalization was needed to reduce exposure to the virus, and resulted in the adaptation of recommendations to prevent FN, which expanded the indications for G-CSF and/or lowered the threshold of use to >10% risk of FN.

Carfilzomib vs bortezomib in patients with multiple myeloma and renal failure: a subgroup analysis of ENDEAVOR.

In ENDEAVOR, carfilzomib (56 mg/m2) and dexamethasone (Kd56) demonstrated longer progression-free survival (PFS) over bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here we evaluated Kd56 vs Vd by baseline renal function in a post hoc exploratory subgroup analysis. The intent-to-treat population included 929 patients (creatinine clearance [CrCL] ≥15 to <50 mL/min, n = 85 and n = 99; CrCL 50 to <80 mL/min, n = 186 and n = 177; and CrCL ≥80 mL/min, n = 193 and n = 189 for Kd56 and Vd arms, respectively). In these respective subgroups, median PFS was 14.9 vs 6.5 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.49; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.320-0.757), 18.6 vs 9.4 months (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.351-0.652), and not reached (NR) vs 12.2 months (HR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.434-0.827) for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively; median overall survival (OS) was 42.1 vs 23.7 months (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.443-0.989), 42.5 vs 32.8 months (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.626-1.104), and NR vs 42.3 months (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.554-1.009). Complete renal response (ie, CrCL improvement to ≥60 mL/min in any 2 consecutive visits if baseline CrCL <50 mL/min) rates were 15.3% (95% CI, 8.4-24.7) and 14.1% (95% CI, 8.0-22.6) for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively. In a combined Kd56 and Vd analysis, complete renal responders had longer median PFS (14.1 vs 9.4 months; HR, 0.805; 95% CI, 0.438-1.481) and OS (35.3 vs 29.7 months; HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.524-1.577) vs nonresponders. Grade ≥3 adverse event rates in the respective subgroups were 87.1% vs 79.4%, 84.4% vs 71.8%, and 77.1% vs 65.9% for those receiving Kd56 vs Vd, respectively. Thus, Kd56 demonstrated PFS and OS improvements over Vd in RRMM patients regardless of their baseline renal function. The ENDEAVOR trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01568866.

Efficacy and safety of ferric carboxymaltose infusion in reducing anemia in patients receiving chemotherapy for nonmyeloid malignancies: A randomized, placebo-controlled study (IRON-CLAD).

Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) are effective for chemotherapy-induced anemia (CIA) but associated with serious adverse events. Safer alternatives would be beneficial in this population. The efficacy and safety of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) as monotherapy for CIA was evaluated. This Phase 3, 18-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study randomized adults with ≥ 4 weeks of chemotherapy remaining for treatment of nonmyeloid malignancies with CIA to FCM (two 15 mg/kg infusions 7 days apart; maximum dose, 750 mg single/1500 mg total) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients with decreases in hemoglobin (Hb) ≥ 0.5 g/dL from weeks 3 to 18; the key secondary efficacy endpoint was change in Hb from baseline to week 18. Inclusion criteria included: (Hb) 8-11 g/dL, ferritin 100-800 ng/mL, and transferrin saturation (TSAT) ≤35%. In 244 patients (n = 122, both groups), the percent of patients who maintained Hb within 0.5 g/dL of baseline from weeks 3 to 18 was significantly higher with FCM versus placebo (50.8% vs. 35.3%; p = 0.01). Mean change in Hb from baseline to week 18 was similar between FCM and placebo (1.04 vs. 0.87 g/dL) but significantly greater with FCM with baseline Hb ≤ 9.9 g/dL (1.08 vs. 0.42 g/dL; p = 0.01). The percent with ≥ 1 g/dL increase from baseline was significantly higher with FCM versus placebo (71% vs. 54%; p = 0.01), occurring in a median 43 versus 85 days (p = 0.001). Common adverse events in the FCM arm included neutropenia (17%), hypophosphatemia (16%), and fatigue (15%). FCM monotherapy effectively maintained Hb and was well tolerated in CIA.

Fostamatinib is an effective second-line therapy in patients with immune thrombocytopenia.

Fostamatinib demonstrated efficacy in phase 3 trials of adults with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). Post hoc analysis compared patients who received fostamatinib as second-line therapy (after steroids ± immunoglobulins) versus third-or-later-line therapy (after ≥2 prior lines of therapy including a second-line agent). Platelet responses ≥50 000/µl were observed in 25/32 (78%) second-line and 54/113 (48%) third-or-later-line patients. Bleeding events were less frequent in second-line (28%) versus third-or-later-line (45%) patients. Responses once achieved tended to be durable in both groups. The safety profile was similar in both groups. In this post hoc analysis, fostamatinib was more effective as second-line than third-or-later-line therapy for ITP.

Hypersensitivity and infusion-site adverse events with intravenous fosaprepitant after anthracycline-containing chemotherapy: a retrospective study.

AIM: Fosaprepitant, an intravenous neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, contains polysorbate 80, which is associated with infusion-site adverse events (ISAEs) and hypersensitivity systemic reactions (HSRs). This study investigated ISAEs/HSRs following fosaprepitant with anthracycline-containing chemotherapy. PATIENTS & METHODS: This retrospective chart review noted ISAEs/HSRs following the anthracycline doxorubicin+cyclophosphamide and a three-drug fosaprepitant regimen, via peripheral line. RESULTS: 35/127 patients (28%) developed ISAEs/HSRs with chemotherapy and antiemetic therapy: 32 developed 137 individual ISAEs, primarily erythema, pain and catheter-site swelling; 16 developed 50 individual HSRs, primarily edema/swelling, erythema or dermatitis (no anaphylaxis). CONCLUSION: Fosaprepitant is associated with a significant ISAE/HSR rate following anthracycline-containing chemotherapy via peripheral line. Polysorbate 80-free intravenous neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist may provide a safer chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting prophylaxis option.

Bendamustine, bortezomib and rituximab produces durable complete remissions in patients with previously untreated, low grade lymphoma.

This Phase II trial evaluated the efficacy of bendamustine, bortezomib and rituximab in patients with previously untreated low-grade lymphoma. Eligible patients had low grade lymphoma with no previous systemic disease treatment. Treatment for all patients was given in 28-day cycles for a maximum of 6 cycles. Patients received rituximab 375 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1, 8 and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2-6; bendamustine 90 mg/m2 IV on days 1 and 2; and bortezomib 1·6 mg/m2 IV on days 1, 8 and 15. Patients were permitted to begin maintenance treatment with rituximab 6 months after completion of study treatment and after 6-month follow-up assessments had been conducted. Fifty-four eligible patients were enrolled. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were leucopenia (28%), neutropenia (30%) and lymphopenia (17%). There were no treatment-related deaths and 1 unrelated death on study (embolic stroke). The overall response rate was 94% for all patients. The median follow-up was 54 months. Kaplan-Meier estimates of progression-free survival and overall survival at 36 months were 75% and 88%, respectively. The treatment regimen was well tolerated and produced high response rates. Further study of this regimen in patients with previously untreated lymphoma is warranted.

Avelumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer: a phase 1b JAVELIN Solid Tumor study.

PURPOSE: Agents targeting programmed death receptor 1 (PD-1) or its ligand (PD-L1) have shown antitumor activity in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The aim of this study was to assess the activity of avelumab, a PD-L1 inhibitor, in patients with MBC. METHODS: In a phase 1 trial (JAVELIN Solid Tumor; NCT01772004), patients with MBC refractory to or progressing after standard-of-care therapy received avelumab intravenously 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Tumors were assessed every 6 weeks by RECIST v1.1. Adverse events (AEs) were graded by NCI-CTCAE v4.0. Membrane PD-L1 expression was assessed by immunohistochemistry (Dako PD-L1 IHC 73-10 pharmDx). RESULTS: A total of 168 patients with MBC, including 58 patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), were treated with avelumab for 2-50 weeks and followed for 6-15 months. Patients were heavily pretreated with a median of three prior therapies for metastatic or locally advanced disease. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs occurred in 13.7% of patients, including two treatment-related deaths. The confirmed objective response rate (ORR) was 3.0% overall (one complete response and four partial responses) and 5.2% in patients with TNBC. A trend toward a higher ORR was seen in patients with PD-L1+ versus PD-L1- tumor-associated immune cells in the overall population (16.7% vs. 1.6%) and in the TNBC subgroup (22.2% vs. 2.6%). CONCLUSION: Avelumab showed an acceptable safety profile and clinical activity in a subset of patients with MBC. PD-L1 expression in tumor-associated immune cells may be associated with a higher probability of clinical response to avelumab in MBC.

CHAMPION-1: a phase 1/2 study of once-weekly carfilzomib and dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

Carfilzomib, a proteasome inhibitor, is approved in the United States as a single agent, and in combination with dexamethasone or lenalidomide/dexamethasone (KRd) for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Under the single-agent and KRd approvals, carfilzomib is administered as a 10-minute IV infusion on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of 28-day cycles (20 mg/m(2) [cycle 1, days 1-2]; 27 mg/m(2) thereafter). This multicenter, single-arm, phase 1/2 study, Community Harmonized Assessment of Myeloma Patients via an Integrated Oncology Network-1 (CHAMPION-1), evaluated once-weekly carfilzomib with dexamethasone in relapsed, or relapsed and refractory MM (1-3 prior therapies). Patients received carfilzomib (30-minute IV infusion) on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles. The phase 1 portion used a 3 + 3 dose-escalation scheme to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of carfilzomib. During phase 2, patients received carfilzomib on the same schedule at the MTD. Patients received dexamethasone (40 mg) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22; dexamethasone was omitted on day 22 for cycles 9+. A total of 116 patients were enrolled. The MTD was 70 mg/m(2), and 104 patients (phase 1/2) received carfilzomib 70 mg/m(2) At 70 mg/m(2), the median number of prior regimens was 1; and 52% were bortezomib-refractory. At 70 mg/m(2), the most common grade ≥3 adverse events were fatigue (11%) and hypertension (7%). Overall response rate at 70 mg/m(2) was 77%. Median progression-free survival was 12.6 months. These findings merit additional evaluation of the once-weekly dosing regimen. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01677858.

Hydration requirements with emetogenic chemotherapy: granisetron extended-release subcutaneous versus palonosetron.

AIM: This retrospective analysis evaluated chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)-related hydration needs with palonosetron or granisetron extended-release subcutaneous (GERSC), approved in 2016 for CINV prevention. MATERIALS & METHODS: At a community practice, CINV-related hydration per chemotherapy cycle was determined following highly (HEC) or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) and a guideline-recommended antiemetic regimen: NK-1 receptor antagonist, dexamethasone and either palonosetron only, GERSC only, or palonosetron switched to GERSC. RESULTS: Palonosetron-only patients (n = 93) had a significantly higher mean (standard deviation) hydration rate (0.9 [1.1]) than GERSC-only patients (n = 91; 0.3 [0.6]; p < 0.0001). Switched patients' (n = 48) hydration rates were significantly higher in the HEC subgroup with palonosetron (0.7 [1.2]) versus GERSC (0.5 [1.0]; p = 0.028). CONCLUSION: GERSC in a three-drug antiemetic regimen may reduce hydration needs following HEC or MEC. [Formula: see text].

Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of pracinostat in combination with azacitidine in patients with untreated, higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) remains poor despite available therapies. Histone deacetylase inhibitors have demonstrated activity in patients with MDS and in vitro synergy with azacitidine. METHODS: A phase 2 randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of azacitidine and pracinostat was conducted in patients who had International Prognostic Scoring System intermediate-2-risk or high-risk MDS. The primary endpoint was the complete response (CR) rate by cycle 6 of therapy. RESULTS: Of 102 randomized patients, there were 51 in the pracinostat group and 51 in the placebo group. The median age was 69 years. The CR rate by cycle 6 of therapy was 18% and 33% (P = .07) in the pracinostat and placebo groups, respectively. No significant differences in overall survival (median, 16 vs 19 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.66-2.23) or progression-free survival (11 vs 9 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% confidence interval, 0.546-1.46) were observed between groups. Grade ≥3 adverse events occurred more frequently in the pracinostat group (98% vs 74%), leading to more treatment discontinuations (20% vs 10%). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of azacitidine with pracinostat did not improve outcomes in patients with higher-risk MDS. Higher rates of treatment discontinuation may partially explain these results, suggesting alternative dosing and schedules to improve tolerability may be required to determine the potential of the combination. Cancer 2017;123:994-1002. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

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.

Phase 2 study of frontline brentuximab vedotin monotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma patients aged 60 years and older.

Outcomes in older patients with Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) tend to be poor following conventional chemotherapy regimens. Treatment-related toxicity is significant and comorbidities often limit therapeutic options. This phase 2, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of brentuximab vedotin, a CD30-directed antibody-drug conjugate, as frontline therapy in 27 HL patients aged ≥60 years. The objective response rate (ORR) was 92%, with 73% achieving complete remission. All patients achieved stable disease or better, and had decreased tumor volume following treatment. At the time of this analysis, the median duration of objective response for efficacy-evaluable patients (N = 26) was 9.1 months (range, 2.8 to 20.9+ months), median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (range, 2.6+ to 22.3+ months), and median overall survival had not been reached (range, 4.6+ to 24.9+ months). The observed adverse events (AEs) were generally consistent with the known safety profile of brentuximab vedotin. The most common AEs were peripheral sensory neuropathy (78%), fatigue (44%), and nausea (44%), and were ≤ grade 2 for most patients. The incidence of grade 3 peripheral neuropathy events was relatively high (30% overall), particularly among patients with the known risk factors of diabetes and/or hypothyroidism (46% vs 14% for those without). However, these risk factors were not associated with delayed time to resolution/improvement of peripheral neuropathy. Preliminary data showed no substantial age-related changes in brentuximab vedotin pharmacokinetics. Brentuximab vedotin monotherapy may provide a frontline treatment option for older patients who cannot tolerate conventional combination chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01716806.

Refining the role of pegfilgrastim (a long-acting G-CSF) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: consensus guidance recommendations.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (FN) causes treatment delays and interruptions and can have fatal consequences. Current guidelines provide recommendations on granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSF) for prevention of FN, but guidance is unclear regarding use of short- vs long-acting G-CSF (e.g., filgrastim vs pegfilgrastim/lipegfilgrastim, respectively). An international panel of experts convened to develop guidance on appropriate use of pegfilgrastim for prevention of chemotherapy-induced FN. METHODS: Guidance recommendations were developed following a literature review, survey, evaluation of current practice, and an expert meeting. Consensus was established using an anonymous Delphi-based approach. RESULTS: Guidance recommendations for prevention of treatment-associated FN were as follows: for treatment with curative intent, maintenance of dose intensity using G-CSF to prevent dose delays/reduction should be standard of care; for treatment-associated FN risk ≥ 20%, short-acting G-CSF/pegfilgrastim should be given from cycle 1 onwards; and for treatment-associated FN risk < 20%, short-acting G-CSF/pegfilgrastim should be given if factors suggest overall risk (including treatment-related and patient-related risk factors) is ≥ 20%. It was agreed that pegfilgrastim and 11 days' filgrastim have similar efficacy and safety and that pegfilgrastim is preferred to < 11 days' filgrastim (and may be preferred to ≥ 11 days' filgrastim based on adherence and convenience); pegfilgrastim is not appropriate in weekly chemotherapy; in split-dose chemotherapy, pegfilgrastim is recommended 24 h after last chemotherapy dose; and during palliative chemotherapy, patient adherence and convenience may favor pegfilgrastim. CONCLUSION: In this era of targeted therapies, additional trials with G-CSF are still required. These recommendations should be used with existing guidelines to optimize pegfilgrastim use in clinical practice.

A Phase II Study of FOLFOXIRI Plus Panitumumab Followed by Evaluation for Resection in Patients With Metastatic KRAS Wild-Type Colorectal Cancer With Liver Metastases Only.

BACKGROUND: Patients with liver-only metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) who are not candidates for potentially curative resection may become resectable with more aggressive chemotherapy regimens. In this nonrandomized trial, we evaluated folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor panitumumab as first-line treatment for KRAS wild-type mCRC with liver-only metastasis. METHODS: Patients received FOLFOXIRI (5-FU, 3,200 mg/m(2), 48-hour continuous intravenous (i.v.) infusion; leucovorin, 200 mg/m(2) i.v.; irinotecan, 125 mg/m(2); oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m(2) i.v.) and panitumumab (6 mg/kg i.v.) on day 1 of 14-day cycles. Patients were restaged and evaluated for surgery every four cycles. Planned enrollment was originally 49 patients. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. RESULTS: Fifteen patients (median age: 55 years; 87% male) received a median 6 cycles of treatment (range: 1-33 cycles); 10 patients (67%) were surgical candidates at baseline. Twelve patients were evaluable for clinical response; 9 (60%) achieved partial response. Ten patients underwent surgery; all were complete resections and pathologic partial response. Treatment-related grade 3 adverse events included diarrhea (33%) and rash (20%). Enrollment was halted because of emerging data on expanded KRAS/NRAS mutations beyond the region we initially examined, and the potential for negative interaction with oxaliplatin-based therapy. Eight patients underwent expanded KRAS/NRAS analysis outside exon 2; no additional mutations were found. CONCLUSION: KRAS/NRAS mutations outside the region tested in this study were recently shown to be associated with inferior survival on similar treatment regimens. Therefore, this trial was stopped early. This regimen remains a viable option for patients with liver-only mCRC in the KRAS/NRAS wild-type population. Enrollment criteria on future studies should include testing for the newly identified mutations.

Randomized phase III trial of APF530 versus palonosetron in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting in a subset of patients with breast cancer receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: APF530 provides controlled, sustained-release granisetron for preventing acute (0-24 h) and delayed (24-120 h) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). In a phase III trial, APF530 was noninferior to palonosetron in preventing acute CINV following single-dose moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and delayed CINV in MEC (MEC and HEC defined by Hesketh criteria). This exploratory subanalysis was conducted in the breast cancer subpopulation. METHODS: Patients were randomized to subcutaneous APF530 250 or 500 mg (granisetron 5 or 10 mg) or intravenous palonosetron 0.25 mg during cycle 1. Palonosetron patients were randomized to APF530 for cycles 2 to 4. The primary efficacy end point was complete response (CR, no emesis or rescue medication) in cycle 1. RESULTS: Among breast cancer patients (n = 423 MEC, n = 185 HEC), > 70 % received anthracycline-containing regimens in each emetogenicity subgroup. There were no significant between-group differences in CRs in cycle 1 for acute (APF530 250 mg: MEC 71 %, HEC 77 %; 500 mg: MEC 73 %, HEC 73 %; palonosetron: MEC 68 %, HEC 66 %) and delayed (APF530 250 mg: MEC 46 %, HEC 58 %; 500 mg: MEC 48 %, HEC 63 %; palonosetron: MEC 52 %, HEC 52 %) CINV. There were no significant differences in within-cycle CRs between APF530 doses for acute and delayed CINV in MEC or HEC in cycles 2 to 4; CRs trended higher in later cycles, with no notable differences in adverse events between breast cancer and overall populations. CONCLUSIONS: APF530 effectively prevented acute and delayed CINV over 4 chemotherapy cycles in breast cancer patients receiving MEC or HEC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00343460 (June 22, 2006).