Cusatuzumab plus azacitidine in newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia ineligible for intensive chemotherapy (CULMINATE): part one of a randomised, phase 2, dose optimisation study.

BACKGROUND: Cusatuzumab, a high-affinity anti-CD70 antibody, has shown preliminary activity as a treatment for acute myeloid leukaemia when combined with azacitidine. We aimed to determine the optimum dose for future trials of cusatuzumab in combination with azacitidine in patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukaemia who are not eligible for intensive chemotherapy. METHODS: In this randomised, phase 2, open-label, dose-optimisation study we enrolled adult patients aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukaemia not eligible for intensive chemotherapy, and with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores of 0-2, from 40 hospitals and centres across seven countries. In part one of the trial, participants were randomly allocated 1:1 to 10 mg/kg or 20 mg/kg intravenous cusatuzumab on days 3 and 17, combined with subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine 75 mg/m2 on days 1-7 in 28-day cycles. The primary efficacy outcome was the rate of complete remission in the intention-to-treat group. The two dose cohorts were evaluated independently without between-cohort statistical comparison. Safety analyses were performed in all patients who received one dose of study drug. Part two of the trial was planned to be a single-arm expansion to evaluate cusatuzumab plus azacitidine at the cusatuzumab dose level selected in part one (primary hypothesis ≥35% rate of complete remission vs null hypothesis of 20%); however, changes in the acute myeloid leukaemia treatment landscape during this trial made it unlikely that enrolment to part two of the study would be clinically feasible, so the study stopped at the end of part one. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04023526. FINDINGS: 103 patients were enrolled between Aug 30, 2019, and Feb 25, 2020, and randomly assigned to either cusatuzumab 10 mg/kg (n=51) or 20 mg/kg (n=52). Median follow-up was 7·2 months (IQR 10·7 months). 57 of 103 (55%) patients were male and 46 (45%) patients were female, 78 (76%) were White, one (1%) was Asian, and 24 (23%) did not report their race. In the 10 mg/kg group, complete remission rate was 12% (six of 51 patients; 95% CI 6-23) and in the 20 mg/kg group was 27% (14 of 52; 17-40). Grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were similar between the cusatuzumab 10 mg/kg (n=51) and 20 mg/kg (n=51) cohorts and included thrombocytopenia (24 patients [47%] vs 29 [57%]), anaemia (24 [47%] vs 17 [33%]), and neutropenia (20 [39%] in both cohorts). Serious TEAEs were also similar in the two cohorts (44 [86%] vs 40 [78%]). Treatment-related TEAEs leading to death were reported in both groups (three patients [6%] in the 10 mg/kg group vs one patient [2%] in the 20 mg/kg group); the reported causes of death were pneumonia (n=2) and septic shock (n=2). INTERPRETATION: Although part one of this study was not designed to formally compare the two dose cohorts for efficacy, the totality of clinical data for cusatuzumab studies performed to date indicate that cusatuzumab 20 mg/kg plus azacitidine represents the optimal dose for further studies. A phase 1b study investigating the triple combination of cusatuzumab with venetoclax and azacitidine is underway (NCT04150887). FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development and argenx.

Ibrutinib in combination with rituximab is highly effective in treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia patients with steroid refractory and relapsed autoimmune cytopenias.

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) and pure red cell aplasia (PRCA) are common complications of CLL. The optimal treatment of steroid refractory AIHA/PRCA is not well established. We conducted a multicenter study of ibrutinib and rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory to steroids AIHA/PRCA and underlying CLL. Protocol included induction (ibrutinib 420 mg/day and rituximab, 8 weekly and 4 monthly infusions) and maintenance phase with ibrutinib alone until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Fifty patients were recruited (44-warm AIHA, 2-cold AIHA, 4-PRCA). After the induction 34 patients (74%) have achieved complete response, 10 (21.7%) partial response. Median time to hemoglobin normalization was 85 days. With regards to CLL response 9 (19%) patients have achieved CR, 2 (4%) patients-stabilization and 39 (78%)-PR. The median follow-up was 37.56 months. In AIHA group 2 patients had a relapse. Among 4 patients with PRCA 1 patient did not respond, and 1 patient had a relapse after CR, 2 remained in CR. The most common adverse events were neutropenia (62%), infections (72%), gastrointestinal complications (54%). In conclusion ibrutinib in combination with rituximab is an active second-line treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory AIHA/PRCA and underlying CLL.

Impact of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy on overall survival in multiple myeloma patients: Analysis of the emerging-markets subgroup of the TOURMALINE-MM1 trial.

Ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (ixazomib-Rd) showed clinical efficacy over placebo-Rd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) in the TOURMALINE-MM1 trial. Over a median follow-up of ∼85 months, as patients showed disease progression, they received subsequent novel therapies that confounded the overall survival (OS) benefit. Here, we conducted a post hoc analysis in 148 patients from seven countries defined as emerging markets, with limited access to novel therapies for MM during the trial period, to describe the impact of these therapies on OS. Patients were randomised to ixazomib-Rd (n = 71) or placebo-Rd (n = 77). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18.7 versus 10.2 months, with ixazomib-Rd versus placebo-Rd (hazard ratio [HR], 0.504; p = 0.008) demonstrating a statistically significant improvement as observed in the primary trial. The median OS improved by 32.6 months with ixazomib-Rd over placebo-Rd (63.5 vs. 30.9 months; HR, 0.794; p = 0.261); however, the statistically significant benefit seen in PFS was not observed for OS. Improvement with ixazomib-Rd over placebo-Rd was observed in overall response (81.7% vs. 64.9%; odds ratio [OR], 2.38; p = 0.019) and complete response (22.5% vs. 3.9%; OR, 7.57; p < 0.001). Patient-reported quality of life and use of subsequent therapies were similar across treatment groups. No new safety concerns were identified. Compared with the main cohort, median OS was 10 months longer with ixazomib-Rd and 21 months shorter with placebo-Rd in this subgroup, indicating a clinically meaningful survival benefit of ixazomib-Rd treatment in this patient population with limited access to subsequent novel therapies.

Al0.25CoCrFeNiV High Entropy Alloy Coating Deposited by Laser Cladding on Stainless Steel.

This paper studies the microstructure, composition and properties of a Al0.25CoCrFeNiV high entropy alloy coating (HEAC) deposited by laser cladding on austenitic-grade stainless steel. Laser cladding was carried out in an argon atmosphere on a FL-Clad-R-4 laser metal deposition complex with the following parameters: the laser power was 1400 W, the spot diameter was 3 mm, the track displacement was 1.2 mm, and the scanning speed was set to 10 mm/s. A change in the microstructure of the coating after laser cladding was revealed in comparison with as-cast high entropy alloy (HEA) Al0.25CoCrFeNiV. A significant decrease was found in the size of vanadium precipitates, from 20-40 µm in the as-cast state to 1-3 µm after laser cladding. A change in microhardness over the thickness of the coating from 370 HV0.3 at the outer surface to 270 HV0.3 at the boundary with the substrate was established, which may be due to the diffusion of Fe from the stainless steel into the coating material during laser cladding. Despite these features, the resulting coating adheres tightly to the substrate, and has no cracks or other defects, which indicates the possibility of using laser cladding to create coatings from high entropy alloys.

Efficacy and Safety of CT-P10 Versus Rituximab in Untreated Low-Tumor-Burden Follicular Lymphoma: Final Results of a Randomized Phase III Study.

INTRODUCTION: This double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled phase III trial (NCT02260804) assessed CT-P10 and rituximab safety and efficacy in patients with previously untreated low-tumor-burden follicular lymphoma (LTBFL), including after a single switch from rituximab to CT-P10. PATIENTS AND METHODS: LTBFL patients were randomized (1:1) to receive CT-P10 or rituximab (375 mg/m2 intravenously; day 1 of 4 7-day cycles). Patients achieving disease control entered a 2-year maintenance period. CT-P10 or rituximab were administered every 8 weeks (6 cycles) in year 1; all patients could receive CT-P10 (every 8 weeks; 6 cycles) in year 2. Secondary endpoints (reported here) were overall response rate (ORR) during the study period, progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression (TTP), and overall survival (OS). Safety and immunogenicity were evaluated. RESULTS: Between  November 9, 2015 and  January 4, 2018, 258 patients were randomized (130 for CT-P10; 128 for rituximab). ORR was similar between groups over the study period (CT-P10: 88%; rituximab: 87%). After 29.2 months' median follow-up, median PFS, TTP, and OS were not estimable; 24-month Kaplan-Meier estimates suggested similarity between groups. Overall, 114 (CT-P10: 88%), and 104 (rituximab: 81%) patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events. The single switch was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: These updated data support therapeutic similarity of CT-P10 and rituximab and support the use of CT-P10 monotherapy for previously untreated LTBFL.

Final 5-year findings from the phase 3 HELIOS study of ibrutinib plus bendamustine and rituximab in patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma.

We report final analysis outcomes from the phase 3 HELIOS study (NCT01611090). Patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma without deletion 17p (n = 578) were randomized 1:1 to 420 mg daily ibrutinib or placebo plus ≤6 cycles of bendamustine plus rituximab (BR), followed by ibrutinib or placebo alone. Median follow-up was 63.7 months. Median investigator-assessed progression-free survival was longer with ibrutinib plus BR (65.1 months) than placebo plus BR (14.3 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.229 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.183-0.286]; p < .0001). Despite crossover of 63.3% of patients from the placebo plus BR arm to ibrutinib treatment upon disease progression, ibrutinib plus BR versus placebo plus BR demonstrated an overall survival benefit (HR 0.611 [95% CI 0.455-0.822]; p = .0010; median not reached in either arm). Long-term follow-up data confirm the survival benefit of ibrutinib plus BR over BR alone. Safety profiles were consistent with those known for ibrutinib and BR.

Venetoclax plus LDAC for newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy: a phase 3 randomized placebo-controlled trial.

Effective treatment options are limited for patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) who cannot tolerate intensive chemotherapy. Adults age ≥18 years with newly diagnosed AML ineligible for intensive chemotherapy were enrolled in this international phase 3 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. Patients (N = 211) were randomized 2:1 to venetoclax (n = 143) or placebo (n = 68) in 28-day cycles, plus low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) on days 1 to 10. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included response rate, transfusion independence, and event-free survival. Median age was 76 years (range, 36-93 years), 38% had secondary AML, and 20% had received prior hypomethylating agent treatment. Planned primary analysis showed a 25% reduction in risk of death with venetoclax plus LDAC vs LDAC alone (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-1.07; P = .11), although not statistically significant; median OS was 7.2 vs 4.1 months, respectively. Unplanned analysis with additional 6-month follow-up demonstrated median OS of 8.4 months for the venetoclax arm (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-0.98; P = .04). Complete remission (CR) plus CR with incomplete blood count recovery rates were 48% and 13% for venetoclax plus LDAC and LDAC alone, respectively. Key grade ≥3 adverse events (venetoclax vs LDAC alone) were febrile neutropenia (32% vs 29%), neutropenia (47% vs 16%), and thrombocytopenia (45% vs 37%). Venetoclax plus LDAC demonstrates clinically meaningful improvement in remission rate and OS vs LDAC alone, with a manageable safety profile. Results confirm venetoclax plus LDAC as an important frontline treatment for AML patients unfit for intensive chemotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03069352.

A Study of Characteristics of Aluminum Bronze Coatings Applied to Steel Using Additive Technologies.

The influence of laser power on the microstructural, strength, and tribological characteristics of aluminum bronze coatings applied to steel by laser cladding was studied. It was found that with an increase in laser power, the morphology of the coating surface becomes more uniform without extreme height differences. This study revealed that the coating microstructure corresponds to that of a composite material and consists of a bronze matrix and iron dendrites of different sizes (depending on the laser power). Such a microstructure affects the microhardness indices, which have a scatter of values over the coating thickness. There is a diffusion zone at the steel-bronze interface, which promotes adhesion of the matrix and coating materials. According to the results of tribological tests, the dry friction coefficient for the studied samples is in the range of 0.389-0.574.

Can Less Intensive Chemotherapy and an Autotransplant Cure Adult T-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia?

T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) is a rare disease usually treated with intensive, high-dose consolidation chemotherapy followed by an allotransplant in a substantial number of patients. The data of the RALL-2009 study on 125 adult T-ALL patients suggest that similar total chemotherapy doses given less intensively over a longer interval without interruptions and with an auto- rather than an allotransplant produce outcomes like current more intensive protocols and an allotransplant: 9-year cumulative incidence of relapse (CIR), leukemia-free survival (LFS), and survival were 24% (95% CI 16-33%), 70% (95% CI 59-79%) and 62% (95% CI 51-72%). In a landmark analysis, subjects achieving a complete remission and receiving an autotransplant had a lower 9-year CIR (9% [95% CI 2-22%] vs. 29% [95% CI 16-43%]; p = 0.0076) and better LFS (91% [95% CI 79-98%] vs. 58% [95% CI 41-74%]; p = 0.0009) and survival (92% [95% CI 77-99%] vs. 60% [95% CI 44-77%]; p = 0.001) compared with subjects not receiving an autotransplant. In a multivariate analysis, white blood cells ≥100 × 109/L at study entry were significantly associated with worse LFS (HR = 2.842 [95% CI 1.131-7.143]; p = 0.0263) and survival (HR = 6.085 [95% CI 1.918-19.3]; p = 0.0022) because of more early deaths (HR = 2.42 [95% CI 1.04-5.67]; p = 0.041). Receiving an autotransplant correlated with a lower CIR (HR = 0.23 [95% CI 0.07-0.73]; p = 0.0136) and better LFS (HR = 0.27 [95% CI 0.08-0.85]; p = 0.0256) and survival (HR = 0.158 [95% CI 0.045-0.550]; p = 0.0037).

Systemic Exposure of Rituximab Increased by Ibrutinib: Pharmacokinetic Results and Modeling Based on the HELIOS Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the HELIOS trial, bendamustine/rituximab (BR) plus ibrutinib (BR-I) improved disease outcomes versus BR plus placebo in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukemia/small lymphocytic lymphoma. Here, we describe the pharmacokinetic (PK) observations, along with modeling to further explore the interaction between ibrutinib and rituximab. METHODS: 578 subjects were randomized to ibrutinib or placebo with BR (6 cycles). Ibrutinib PK samples and tumor measurements were obtained from all subjects; a subset was evaluated for bendamustine and rituximab PK. Population rituximab PK was assessed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. RESULTS: Dose-normalized plasma concentration-time bendamustine data were comparable between the arms. Systemic rituximab exposure was higher with BR-I versus BR; mean trough serum concentrations were 2- to 3-fold higher in the first three cycles and 1.2- to 1.7-fold higher subsequently. No relevant safety differences were observed. In the modeling, including treatment arm as a categorical covariate and tumor burden as a continuous time-varying covariate on overall rituximab clearance significantly improved fitting of the data. CONCLUSIONS: BR-I led to higher dose-normalized systemic rituximab exposure versus BR and more rapid steady-state achievement. The modeling data suggest that rituximab disposition is, at least in part, target mediated. Determining the clinical significance of these findings requires further assessments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01611090 .

Randomized Phase III Trial of Ibrutinib and Rituximab Plus Cyclophosphamide, Doxorubicin, Vincristine, and Prednisone in Non-Germinal Center B-Cell Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Ibrutinib has shown activity in non-germinal center B-cell diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This double-blind phase III study evaluated ibrutinib and rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) in untreated non-germinal center B-cell DLBCL. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned at a one-to-one ratio to ibrutinib (560 mg per day orally) plus R-CHOP or placebo plus R-CHOP. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and the activated B-cell (ABC) DLBCL subgroup. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 838 patients were randomly assigned to ibrutinib plus R-CHOP (n = 419) or placebo plus R-CHOP (n = 419). Median age was 62.0 years; 75.9% of evaluable patients had ABC subtype disease, and baseline characteristics were balanced. Ibrutinib plus R-CHOP did not improve EFS in the ITT (hazard ratio [HR], 0.934) or ABC (HR, 0.949) population. A preplanned analysis showed a significant interaction between treatment and age. In patients age younger than 60 years, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP improved EFS (HR, 0.579), PFS (HR, 0.556), and OS (HR, 0.330) and slightly increased serious adverse events (35.7% v 28.6%), but the proportion of patients receiving at least six cycles of R-CHOP was similar between treatment arms (92.9% v 93.0%). In patients age 60 years or older, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP worsened EFS, PFS, and OS, increased serious adverse events (63.4% v 38.2%), and decreased the proportion of patients receiving at least six cycles of R-CHOP (73.7% v 88.8%). CONCLUSION: The study did not meet its primary end point in the ITT or ABC population. However, in patients age younger than 60 years, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP improved EFS, PFS, and OS with manageable safety. In patients age 60 years or older, ibrutinib plus R-CHOP was associated with increased toxicity, leading to compromised R-CHOP administration and worse outcomes. Further investigation is warranted.

Association between bortezomib dose intensity and overall survival in mantle cell lymphoma patients on frontline VR-CAP in the phase 3 LYM-3002 study.

The pivotal LYM-3002 study compared frontline rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP) with bortezomib, rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (VR-CAP) in newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients for whom stem cell transplantation was not an option. This post hoc subanalysis of the VR-CAP data from LYM-3002 evaluated the effect of bortezomib dose intensity on OS in patients who completed ≥6 cycles of treatment. From the end of cycle 6, patients receiving ≥4.6 mg/m2/cycle of bortezomib had significantly longer OS (but not PFS) compared with those receiving <4.6 mg/m2/cycle by univariate analysis (HR 0.43 [95% CI: 0.23-0.80]; p = .0059). This association remained significant in multivariate analysis adjusting for baseline patient and disease characteristics (HR 0.40 [95% CI: 0.20-0.79]; p = .008]. Higher bortezomib dose intensity was the strongest predictor of OS in newly diagnosed MCL patients receiving VR-CAP. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00722137.

Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in first-line treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (iLLUMINATE): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Both single-agent ibrutinib and chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab have shown superior efficacy to chlorambucil monotherapy and are standard first-line treatments in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compared the efficacy of the combination of ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in first-line chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma. METHODS: iLLUMINATE is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 74 academic and community hospitals in Australia, Canada, Israel, New Zealand, Russia, Turkey, the EU, and the USA in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, either aged 65 years or older or younger than 65 years with coexisting conditions. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using a blocked randomisation schedule, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status and cytogenetics, to receive ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (oral ibrutinib [420 mg once daily continuously] combined with intravenous obinutuzumab [100 mg on day 1, 900 mg on day 2, 1000 mg on day 8, and 1000 mg on day 15 of cycle 1 and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles, for a total of six cycles]) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (oral chlorambucil [0·5 mg/kg bodyweight on days 1 and 15 of each 28-day cycle for six cycles] combined with the same obinutuzumab regimen). Allocation concealment was achieved using an interactive web response system. Patients and investigators were not masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by a masked independent review committee in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02264574), and patient enrolment is complete. FINDINGS: Between Oct 6, 2014, and Oct 12, 2015, 229 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab (n=113) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (n=116). After a median follow-up of 31·3 months (IQR 29·4-33·2), median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group (median not reached [95% CI 33·6-non-estimable]) than in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (19·0 months [15·1-22·1]; hazard ratio 0·23; 95% CI 0·15-0·37; p<0·0001). Estimated 30-month progression-free survival was 79% (95% CI 70-85) in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group and 31% (23-40) in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events in both groups were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Serious adverse events occurred in 65 (58%) of 113 patients treated with ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab and 40 (35%) of 115 patients treated with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab. Ibrutinib or chlorambucil treatment-related deaths were reported in one (1%) of 113 patients in the ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab group (sudden death) and one (1%) of 115 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (neuroendocrine carcinoma of the skin). INTERPRETATION: Ibrutinib plus obinutuzumab is an efficacious and safe chemotherapy-free combination treatment in previously untreated patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma independent of high-risk features and provides an alternative first-line treatment option for these patients. FUNDING: Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie Company, and Janssen Research and Development.

Efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety of the biosimilar CT-P10 in comparison with rituximab in patients with previously untreated low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma: a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Studies in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and advanced follicular lymphoma have shown that CT-P10, a rituximab biosimilar, has equivalent or non-inferior efficacy and pharmacokinetics to rituximab. We aimed to assess the therapeutic equivalence of single-agent CT-P10 and rituximab in patients with newly diagnosed low-tumour burden follicular lymphoma. METHODS: In this ongoing, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, active-controlled, phase 3 trial, adult patients (≥18 years) with stage II-IV low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive web or voice response system stratified by region, stage, and age to CT-P10 or US-sourced rituximab. Patients received CT-P10 or rituximab (375 mg/m2 intravenous) on day 1 of four 7-day cycles (induction period). Patients who had disease control after the induction period continued to a maintenance period of CT-P10 or rituximab administered every 8 weeks for six cycles and, if completed, a second year of maintenance therapy of additional CT-P10 (every 8 weeks for six cycles) was offered. The study was partially unmasked after database lock (Feb 23, 2018) for all data up to 7 months (before cycle 3 of the maintenance period). The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an overall response by 7 months in the intention-to-treat population. Efficacy equivalence was shown if the two-sided 90% CIs for the treatment difference in the proportion of responders between CT-P10 and rituximab was within the equivalence margin of 17%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02260804. FINDINGS: Between Nov 9, 2015, and Jan 4, 2018, 402 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 258 were randomly assigned: 130 to CT-P10 and 128 to rituximab. 108 (83%) of 130 patients assigned to CT-P10 and 104 (81%) of 128 assigned to rituximab achieved an overall response by month 7 (treatment difference estimate 1·8%; 90% CI -6·43 to 10·20). Therapeutic equivalence was shown (90% CIs were within the prespecified margin of 17%). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events were decreased neutrophil count (two grade 3 in the CT-P10 group) and neutropenia (one in each group); all other grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in one patient each. Six (5%) of 130 patients who received CT-P10 and three (2%) of 128 who received rituximab experienced at least one treatment-emergent serious adverse event. INTERPRETATION: CT-P10 was equivalent to rituximab in terms of efficacy and was well tolerated. CT-P10 monotherapy is suggested as a new therapeutic option for patients with low-tumour-burden follicular lymphoma. FUNDING: Celltrion, Inc.

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.

Efficacy and safety of frontline rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone plus bortezomib (VR-CAP) or vincristine (R-CHOP) in a subset of newly diagnosed mantle cell lymphoma patients medically eligible for transplantation in the randomized, phase 3 LYM-3002 study.

This post-hoc subanalysis of the LYM-3002 phase 3 study assessed the efficacy and safety of substituting vincristine in rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin and prednisone (R-CHOP; n = 42) for bortezomib (VR-CAP; n = 38) in a subgroup of 80 mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) patients aged <60 years who did not receive stem cell transplantation (SCT) despite medical eligibility. Complete response (CR)/unconfirmed CR (CRu) rates were 67 vs. 39% (odds ratio 3.69 [95% CI(confidence interval): 1.31, 10.41]; p = .012). After 40 months median follow-up, median progression-free survival by independent radiology committee with VR-CAP vs. R-CHOP was 32.6 vs. 12.0 months (hazard ratio (HR) 0.59 [95% CI: 0.31, 1.13]; p = .108); median overall survival was not reached vs. 47.3 months (HR 0.81 [95% CI: 0.33, 1.96]; p = .634). Adverse events included neutropenia (92/76%), thrombocytopenia (70/10%) and leukopenia (65/50%). VR-CAP represents a potential alternative to R-CHOP in combined and/or alternating regimens for younger, SCT-eligible MCL patients.

Ibrutinib combined with bendamustine and rituximab compared with placebo, bendamustine, and rituximab for previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (HELIOS): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma relapse after initial therapy. Bendamustine plus rituximab is often used in the relapsed or refractory setting. We assessed the efficacy and safety of adding ibrutinib, an oral covalent inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK), to bendamustine plus rituximab in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma. METHODS: The HELIOS trial was an international, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in adult patients (≥18 years of age) who had active chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma with measurable lymph node disease (>1·5 cm) by CT scan, and had relapsed or refractory disease following one or more previous lines of systemic therapy consisting of at least two cycles of a chemotherapy-containing regimen, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and adequate bone marrow, liver, and kidney function. Patients with del(17p) were excluded because of known poor response to bendamustine plus rituximab. Patients who had received previous treatment with ibrutinib or other BTK inhibitors, refractory disease or relapse within 24 months with a previous bendamustine-containing regimen, or haemopoietic stem-cell transplant were also excluded. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by a web-based system to receive bendamustine plus rituximab given in cycles of 4 weeks' duration (bendamustine: 70 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 2-3 in cycle 1, and days 1-2 in cycles 2-6; rituximab: 375 mg/m(2) on day 1 of cycle 1, and 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 of cycles 2-6 for a maximum of six cycles) with either ibrutinib (420 mg daily orally) or placebo until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were stratified according to whether they were refractory to purine analogues and by number of previous lines of therapy. The primary endpoint was independent review committee (IRC)-assessed progression-free survival. Crossover to ibrutinib was permitted for patients in the placebo group with IRC-confirmed disease progression. Analysis was by intention-to-treat and is continuing for further long-term follow-up. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01611090. FINDINGS: Between Sept 19, 2012, and Jan 21, 2014, 578 eligible patients were randomly assigned to ibrutinib or placebo in combination with bendamustine plus rituximab (289 in each group). The primary endpoint was met at the preplanned interim analysis (March 10, 2015). At a median follow-up of 17 months (IQR 13·7-20·7), progression-free survival was significantly improved in the ibrutinib group compared with the placebo group (not reached in the ibrutinib group (95% CI not evaluable) vs 13·3 months (11·3-13·9) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·203, 95% CI 0·150-0·276; p<0·0001). IRC-assessed progression-free survival at 18 months was 79% (95% CI 73-83) in the ibrutinib group and 24% (18-31) in the placebo group (HR 0·203, 95% CI 0·150-0·276; p<0·0001). The most frequent all-grade adverse events were neutropenia and nausea. 222 (77%) of 287 patients in the ibrutinib group and 212 (74%) of 287 patients in the placebo group reported grade 3-4 events; the most common grade 3-4 adverse events in both groups were neutropenia (154 [54%] in the ibrutinib group vs 145 [51%] in the placebo group) and thrombocytopenia (43 [15%] in each group). A safety profile similar to that previously reported with ibrutinib and bendamustine plus rituximab individually was noted. INTERPRETATION: In patients eligible for bendamustine plus rituximab, the addition of ibrutinib to this regimen results in significant improvements in outcome with no new safety signals identified from the combination and a manageable safety profile. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development.

Frontline rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone with bortezomib (VR-CAP) or vincristine (R-CHOP) for non-GCB DLBCL.

This phase 2 study evaluated whether substituting bortezomib for vincristine in frontline rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy could improve efficacy in non-germinal center B-cell-like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (non-GCB DLBCL), centrally confirmed by immunohistochemistry (Hans method). In total, 164 patients were randomized 1:1 to receive six 21-day cycles of rituximab 375 mg/m(2), cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m(2), and doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), all IV day 1, prednisone 100 mg/m(2) orally days 1-5, plus either bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) IV days 1, 4, 8, 11 (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone with bortezomib [VR-CAP]; n = 84) or vincristine 1.4 mg/m(2) (maximum 2 mg) IV day 1 (R-CHOP; n = 80). There were no significant differences between VR-CAP and R-CHOP in complete response rate (64.5%, 66.2%; odds ratio [OR], 0.91; P = .80), overall response rate (93.4%, 98.6%; OR, 0.21; P = .11), progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.12; P = .76), or overall survival (HR, 0.89; P = .75). Rates of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs; 88%, 89%), serious AEs (38%, 34%), discontinuations due to AEs (7%, 3%), and deaths due to AEs (2%, 5%) were similar with VR-CAP and R-CHOP. Grade ≥3 peripheral neuropathy rates were 6% and 3%, respectively. VR-CAP did not improve efficacy vs R-CHOP in non-GCB DLBCL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01040871.

Bortezomib-based therapy for newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib was initially approved for the treatment of relapsed mantle-cell lymphoma. We investigated whether substituting bortezomib for vincristine in frontline therapy with R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone) could improve outcomes in patients with newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned 487 adults with newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma who were ineligible or not considered for stem-cell transplantation to receive six to eight 21-day cycles of R-CHOP intravenously on day 1 (with prednisone administered orally on days 1 to 5) or VR-CAP (R-CHOP regimen, but replacing vincristine with bortezomib at a dose of 1.3 mg per square meter of body-surface area on days 1, 4, 8, and 11). The primary end point was progression-free survival. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 40 months, median progression-free survival (according to independent radiologic review) was 14.4 months in the R-CHOP group versus 24.7 months in the VR-CAP group (hazard ratio favoring the VR-CAP group, 0.63; P<0.001), a relative improvement of 59%. On the basis of investigator assessment, the median durations of progression-free survival were 16.1 months and 30.7 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.51; P<0.001), a relative improvement of 96%. Secondary end points were consistently improved in the VR-CAP group, including the complete response rate (42% vs. 53%), the median duration of complete response (18.0 months vs. 42.1 months), the median treatment-free interval (20.5 months vs. 40.6 months), and the 4-year overall survival rate (54% vs. 64%). Rates of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were higher in the VR-CAP group. CONCLUSIONS: VR-CAP was more effective than R-CHOP in patients with newly diagnosed mantle-cell lymphoma but at the cost of increased hematologic toxicity. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development and Millennium Pharmaceuticals; LYM-3002 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00722137.).