Long-Term Safety and Effectiveness of Rituximab Biosimilar RTXM83: A Retrospective Extension Study in Brazilian Patients with Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma.

INTRODUCTION: RTXM83, a biosimilar of rituximab, was approved after physicochemical, functional, non-clinical, and clinical studies demonstrated their similarity; these studies included RTXM83-AC-01-11, a multicentric double-blind international prospective pivotal study. Long-term data on biosimilars can potentially elucidate their clinical robustness and facilitate their broader adoption. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, we analyzed a dataset from a Brazilian cohort previously randomized in the RTXM83-AC-01-11 study followed by the assessment of long-term outcomes in an observational extension phase from randomization in the RTXM83-AC-01-11 study to the last recorded evaluation. Patients with diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) received either reference rituximab (R) or RTXM83 plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) as adjuvant treatment. RESULTS: The median follow-up period was 77.0 months. Patients with initial DLBCL stages III and IV comprised 50% of the R-CHOP group and 40% of the biosimilar group. Five (18.5%) patients, including two RTXM83-CHOP-treated and three R-CHOP-treated individuals, experienced late adverse events (AEs) of interest. No new safety signs were established. At the final assessment, the progression-free survival (PFS) rates were 93.3% and 50.0% in the RTXM83-CHOP and R-CHOP groups, respectively. Median PFS was not achieved in the RTXM83-CHOP group, which was 40.5 months in the R-CHOP group. The overall survival (OS) rates were 100% and 66.7% in the RTXM83-CHOP and R-CHOP groups, respectively. The median OS was not reached in any group. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated the long-term safety and effectiveness of RTXM83 in treating DLBCL; outcomes comparable to those of the reference product and potentially improved access to treatment have been indicated. However, further research with more diverse patient groups can validate these findings and advocate the broader adoption of biosimilars in cancer care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04928573. June 16, 2021, "retrospectively registered".

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.

Aspects of laboratory characteristics, analysis of alloimmunization, and searching for predictors related to survival in patients with Autoimmune Hemolytic Anemia.

Autoimmune hemolytic anemia (AIHA) is characterized by hemolysis caused by autoantibodies. However, many patients do not respond to therapies and may have an unfavorable outcome. It has been hypothesized that patients with AIHA and alloantibodies have a lower survival compared to patients with this disease and without alloimmunization. To this end, the clinical and laboratory profile was described and sought to identify features associated with survival in patients with AIHA. This is a single-site retrospective observational study that included patients (children, adolescents, adults and elderly) diagnosed with AIHA from January 2000 to June 2019. Epidemiological data, laboratory tests, treatment response, alloantibody and autoantibody profile, red cell transfusion and clinical course were analyzed. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards regression. The study included 138 patients, mostly caucasians and female. The median age at diagnosis was 48.5 years (0.16-88) and 82 (59.4 %) patients had secondary AIHA. In addition, 33 % (25/75) of subjects had alloantibodies at the time of AIHA diagnosis and 40 % (16/40) detected alloantibody emergence later. The overall 10-year survival rate was 51 % (median follow-up was 39 months). Monocytosis, IgM class autoantibody and Direct Antiglobulin Test (DAT) intensity had a significant impact on predicting mortality in this population. On the other hand, alloimmunization at diagnosis and after did not affect survival in this population.

Pembrolizumab in relapsed or refractory primary mediastinal large B-cell lymphoma: final analysis of KEYNOTE-170.

Previous analyses of the phase 2 KEYNOTE-170 (NCT02576990) study demonstrated effective antitumor activity and acceptable safety of pembrolizumab 200 mg given every 3 weeks for up to 35 cycles (∼2 years) in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma (PMBCL) whose disease progressed after or who were ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation. The end points included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and duration of response (DOR) according to the investigator per 2007 Response Criteria; overall survival (OS); and safety. In this final analysis, median duration of follow-up was 48.7 months (range, 41.2-56.2). The ORR was 41.5% (complete response, 20.8%; partial response, 20.8%). The median DOR was not reached; no patients who achieved a complete response progressed at the data cutoff. The median PFS was 4.3 months; the 4-year PFS rate was 33.0%. The median OS was 22.3 months; the 4-year OS rate was 45.3%. At the data cutoff, 30 patients (56.6%) had any-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs); the most common were neutropenia, asthenia, and hypothyroidism. Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 22.6% of the patients; no grade 5 AEs occurred. After 4 years of follow-up, pembrolizumab continued to provide durable responses, with promising trends for long-term survival and acceptable safety in R/R PMBCL.

Asciminib vs bosutinib in chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukemia previously treated with at least two tyrosine kinase inhibitors: longer-term follow-up of ASCEMBL.

Asciminib, the first BCR::ABL1 inhibitor that Specifically Targets the ABL Myristoyl Pocket (STAMP), is approved worldwide for the treatment of adults with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) treated with ≥2 prior tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). In ASCEMBL, patients with CML-CP treated with ≥2 prior TKIs were randomized (stratified by baseline major cytogenetic response [MCyR]) 2:1 to asciminib 40 mg twice daily or bosutinib 500 mg once daily. Consistent with previously published primary analysis results, after a median follow-up of 2.3 years, asciminib continued to demonstrate superior efficacy and better safety and tolerability than bosutinib. The major molecular response (MMR) rate at week 96 (key secondary endpoint) was 37.6% with asciminib vs 15.8% with bosutinib; the MMR rate difference between the arms, after adjusting for baseline MCyR, was 21.7% (95% CI, 10.53-32.95; two-sided p = 0.001). Fewer grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (56.4% vs 68.4%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (7.7% vs 26.3%) occurred with asciminib than with bosutinib. A higher proportion of patients on asciminib than bosutinib remained on treatment and continued to derive benefit over time, supporting asciminib as a standard of care for patients with CML-CP previously treated with ≥2 TKIs.

Volumetric dried blood microsampling for monitoring imatinib mesylate therapy: Method development and clinical application in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia.

Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML) is a hematologic neoplasia, characterized as a proliferative disease of the hematopoietic system. Imatinib mesylate (IM), a selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is considered a first-line therapy for CML, indicated for both adult and pediatric patients presenting the Philadelphia chromosome (Ph+). However, patients in treatment with IM may show different responses due to interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. Therapeutic drug monitoring should be routinely performed to identify treatment response profile, adherence to treatment, or possible drug interactions, thus supporting better treatment management. Volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) are innovative devices for blood collection whose advantages include the possibility of home collection by the patient or at the physician's office. The assay was fully validated according to bioanalytical validation guidelines. Estimated plasma concentrations of IM were not statistically different between groups according to adherence (p = 0.15), with median of 789 ng ml-1 in the group with some level of non-adherence versus 1141.9 ng ml-1 in the group with adherence, classified with the Morisky-Green questionnaire. This study included 33 patients with CML in treatment with IM. These patients answered socioeconomic, sociodemographic, and adherence profile (Morisky-Green) questionnaires. Patients also received instructions for home blood collection with VAMS devices. Afterwards, the samples were analyzed by LC-MS/MS. The mean age of the patients was 52 years, 84.8% were ingesting doses of 400 mg/day and the majority were male (69.7%). IM and its metabolite NIM were extracted from VAMS with an aqueous solution with 0.1% formic acid, followed by protein precipitation with acetonitrile. The methodology developed in this study was satisfactory for the determination of IM and NIM in VAMS and can be used in hospital and office routines for the therapeutic monitoring of patients with CML.

Lower access to risk stratification tests and drugs, and worse survival of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia patients treated in public as compared to private hospitals in Brazil: A retrospective analysis of the Brazilian registry of chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

Chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL) has a highly variable clinical course. In addition to biological factors, socioeconomic factors and health system characteristics may influence CLL outcome. Data from the Brazilian Registry of CLL were analyzed to compare clinical and treatment-related characteristics in patients with CLL, from public or private institutions. A total of 3326 patients from 43 centres met the eligibility criteria, of whom 81% were followed up at public hospitals and 19% at private hospitals. The majority were male (57%), with a median age of 65 years. Comparing public and private hospitals, patients in public hospitals were older, had more advanced disease at diagnosis, and more frequently had elevated creatinine levels. All investigated prognostic markers were evaluated more often in private hospitals. First-line treatment was predominantly based on chlorambucil in 41% of the cases and fludarabine in 38%. Anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody was used in only 36% of cases. In public hospitals, significantly fewer patients received fludarabine-based regimens and anti-CD20 monoclonal antibodies. Patients from public hospitals had significantly worse overall survival (71% vs. 90% for private hospitals, p < 0.0001) and treatment-free survival (32% vs. 40%, for private hospitals, p < 0.0001) at seven years. Our data indicate striking differences between patients followed in public and private hospitals in Brazil. A worse clinical condition and lack of accessibility to basic laboratory tests and adequate therapies may explain the worse outcomes of patients treated in public institutions.

Advanced clinical parameters: A complementary hydroxyurea adherence evaluation in sickle cell anemia treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Given the complex pathology of sickle cell anemia (SCA) and low adherence to hydroxyurea (HU) treatment, there is a need to seek parameters that identify recent changes in patient status. The advanced clinical parameters (ACPs) allow an early analysis of hematopoiesis. We aimed to draw the demographic profile of non-adherent SCA patients and to verify the use of ACPs as a measure of HU treatment adherence. METHOD: In a cross-sectional study, we divided 83 SCA subjects treated with HU into Children (<12 years old) and adolescents/adults (≥12 years old). Their hemogram with the ACPs, electronic medical charts and pharmacy claim data were analyzed. RESULTS: Non-adherent ≥12 years old patients had significantly increased WBC, absolute neutrophil, lymphocyte, monocyte, and basophil counts, RBC, RET, RDW, and PLT, and significantly decreased MCV and MCH. Subjects in the adolescent/adult group with IG† ≥0.035 cells/mm3 had the RR for non-adherence increased by 4.6 times (p = .014), and the systemic immune inflammation index (SII) of non-adherent patients was also significantly higher (p = .042). CONCLUSION: IG† presents clinical utility in early identification of non-adherence to HU, especially when combined with other parameters, suggesting the evaluation of ACPs in laboratory routine, as they can be easily implemented.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients With B-Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma in Real-World Settings: Findings From the Hemato-Oncology Latin America Observational Registry Study.

PURPOSE: Real-world evidence on non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) management in Latin America is currently lacking. The objective of this study was to describe treatment characteristics and outcomes of NHL in Latin America. METHODS: A total of 2,967 patients with NHL with aggressive and indolent subtypes, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL), follicular lymphoma (FL), mantle-cell lymphoma (MCL), and mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma, with incident or prevalent diagnosis between 2006 and 2015, were retrospectively identified using clinical charts registered in the Hemato-Oncology Latin America Observational Registry. Associations between treatment regimen and age at diagnosis with clinical outcomes within each subtype were estimated using Cox proportional hazard regression. RESULTS: Most patients with NHL received 1L chemoimmunotherapy, most commonly cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (CHOP) with/without rituximab. Five-year survival rates were higher for MALT lymphoma (90.8%) and FL (87.6%) versus DLBCL (69.0%) and MCL (57.1%), with variations between countries. The median overall survival from first relapse for patients with DLBCL was 6.6 years, with lower risk of death for those diagnosed at age < 65 years (hazard ratio = 0.732; P = .0161). Patients achieved a longer median progression-free survival with 1L rituximab-CHOP (R-CHOP) versus CHOP or rituximab, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone (RCVP) (7.7 v 3.0 or 1.8 years, respectively). Use of regimens other than R-CHOP was associated with a higher risk of death/progression for patients with DLBCL (rituximab, ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide/ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide) and FL (CHOP). There was no relationship between treatment prescribed and age at diagnosis with outcomes from first/second relapse in DLBCL and FL. CONCLUSION: Differences in treatment outcomes between NHL subtypes were observed, reflecting variations in NHL management and barriers to treatment access in Latin America. These data provide necessary evidence to understand NHL management in this region and highlight the need to improve treatment outcomes for these patients.

A phase 3, open-label, randomized study of asciminib, a STAMP inhibitor, vs bosutinib in CML after 2 or more prior TKIs.

Patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP) resistant/intolerant to ≥2 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are at high risk of experiencing poor outcomes because of disease biology and inadequate efficacy and/or safety of current therapies. Asciminib, a first-in-class BCR-ABL1 inhibitor Specifically Targeting the ABL Myristoyl Pocket (STAMP), has the potential to overcome resistance/intolerance to approved TKIs. In this phase 3, open-label study, patients with CML-CP previously treated with ≥2 TKIs were randomized (2:1) to receive asciminib 40 mg twice daily vs bosutinib 500 mg once daily. Randomization was stratified by major cytogenetic response (MCyR) status at baseline. The primary objective was to compare the major molecular response (MMR) rate at week 24 for asciminib vs bosutinib. A total of 233 patients were randomized to asciminib (n = 157) or bosutinib (n = 76). Median follow-up was 14.9 months. The MMR rate at week 24 was 25.5% with asciminib and 13.2% with bosutinib. The difference in MMR rate between treatment arms, after adjusting for MCyR at baseline, was 12.2% (95% confidence interval, 2.19-22.30; 2-sided P = .029). Fewer grade ≥3 adverse events (50.6% vs 60.5%) and adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation (5.8% vs 21.1%) occurred with asciminib than with bosutinib. The study showed a superior efficacy of asciminib compared with that of bosutinib, together with a favorable safety profile. These results support the use of asciminib as a new therapy in patients with CML-CP who are resistant/intolerant to ≥2 prior TKIs. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT03106779.

Recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia on tyrosine kinase inhibitors: risk assessment, stratification, treatment and monitoring

ABSTRACT This manuscript summarizes the results of the consensus meeting composed of hematologists and cardiologists to establish recommendations for the prevention and follow-up of cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treated with BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) from the point of view of clinical practice and from the perspective of hematology consultation.In the first medical appointment, the CV risk factors should be identified to perform the baseline risk stratification, based on the Brazilian Guideline of Dyslipidemia and Atherosclerosis Prevention Update (risk levels: very high, high, intermediate and low).Once stratified, the treatment of the CV risk factors should be administered. If the patient presents risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes, renal disease, smoking and hypercholesterolemia, the evaluation and initial treatment may be done by the hematologist, being an option the request for evaluation by a specialist. If the patient has a history of previous CV disease, we recommend referral to a specialist. As the CV risk score is dynamic and the control of risk factors can reduce the patient risk, this expert consensus recommends that the re-evaluation of the CV risk after the baseline should be performed at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. After this period, it should be done annually and, for specific patients, at the clinician's discretion.The evaluation of the baseline CV risk and the safe administration of a TKI allow the patient to benefit from the maximum treatment, avoiding unwanted effects.

Pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin in relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma (KEYNOTE-204): an interim analysis of a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: PD-1 blockade via pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumour activity and toxicity in patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Here, we present interim analyses from the KEYNOTE-204 study evaluating pembrolizumab versus brentuximab vedotin for relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma. METHODS: In this randomised, open-label, phase 3 study, patients aged 18 years or older with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma with measurable disease and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 who were ineligible for or had relapsed after autologous haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) were enrolled at 78 hospitals and cancer centres in 20 countries and territories. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with an interactive voice response system to pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks or brentuximab vedotin 1·8 mg/kg intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by previous autologous HSCT and status after front-line therapy. Results from the second interim analysis are presented here, with a database cutoff of Jan 16, 2020. The dual primary endpoints assessed in the intention-to-treat population were progression-free survival as assessed by blinded independent central review, and overall survival (not analysed at this interim analysis). Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of the study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02684292. Recruitment for this trial is closed. FINDINGS: Between July 8, 2016, and July 13, 2018, 151 patients were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab and 153 to brentuximab vedotin. After a median time from randomisation to data cutoff of 25·7 months (IQR 23·4-33·0), median progression-free survival was 13·2 months (95% CI 10·9-19·4) for pembrolizumab versus 8·3 months (5·7-8·8) for brentuximab vedotin (hazard ratio 0·65 [95% CI 0·48-0·88]; p=0·0027). The most common grade 3-5 treatment-related adverse events were pneumonitis (six [4%] of 148 patients in the pembrolizumab group vs one [1%] of 152 patients in the brentuximab vedotin group), neutropenia (three [2%] vs 11 [7%]), decreased neutrophil count (one [1%] vs seven [5%]), and peripheral neuropathy (one [1%] vs five [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 24 (16%) of 148 patients receiving pembrolizumab and 16 (11%) of 152 patients receiving brentuximab vedotin. One treatment-related death due to pneumonia occurred in the pembrolizumab group. INTERPRETATION: Pembrolizumab showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival compared with brentuximab vedotin, with safety consistent with previous reports. These data support pembrolizumab as the preferred treatment option for patients with relapsed or refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma who have relapsed post-autologous HSCT or are ineligible for autologous HSCT. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp (a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USA).

Recommendations for the management of cardiovascular risk in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia on tyrosine kinase inhibitors: risk assessment, stratification, treatment and monitoring.

This manuscript summarizes the results of the consensus meeting composed of hematologists and cardiologists to establish recommendations for the prevention and follow-up of cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) treated with BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) from the point of view of clinical practice and from the perspective of hematology consultation. In the first medical appointment, the CV risk factors should be identified to perform the baseline risk stratification, based on the Brazilian Guideline of Dyslipidemia and Atherosclerosis Prevention Update (risk levels: very high, high, intermediate and low). Once stratified, the treatment of the CV risk factors should be administered. If the patient presents risk factors, such as hypertension, diabetes, renal disease, smoking and hypercholesterolemia, the evaluation and initial treatment may be done by the hematologist, being an option the request for evaluation by a specialist. If the patient has a history of previous CV disease, we recommend referral to a specialist. As the CV risk score is dynamic and the control of risk factors can reduce the patient risk, this expert consensus recommends that the re-evaluation of the CV risk after the baseline should be performed at 3 months, 6 months and 12 months. After this period, it should be done annually and, for specific patients, at the clinician's discretion. The evaluation of the baseline CV risk and the safe administration of a TKI allow the patient to benefit from the maximum treatment, avoiding unwanted effects.

Venetoclax plus obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab for previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CLL14): follow-up results from a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Venetoclax plus obinutuzumab has been established as a fixed-duration treatment regimen for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compared the long-term efficacy after treatment cessation of the combination of venetoclax plus obinutuzumab with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: CLL14 is a multicentre, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial done at 196 sites in 21 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, and coexisting conditions with a cumulative illness rating scale greater than 6, a creatinine clearance of 30-69 mL/min, or both. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a web and voicemail system with allocation concealment and based on a computer-generated randomisation schedule with a block size of six and stratified by Binet stage and geographical region. Patients received either venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (oral venetoclax initiated on day 22 of cycle 1 [28-day cycles], with a 5-week dose ramp-up [20 mg, 50 mg, 100 mg, and 200 mg, then 400 mg daily for 1 week], thereafter continuing at 400 mg daily until completion of cycle 12; combined with intravenous obinutuzumab for six cycles starting with 100 mg on day 1 and 900 mg on day 2 [or 1000 mg on day 1], 1000 mg on days 8 and day 15 of cycle 1, and subsequently 1000 mg on day 1 of cycles 2 through 6) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (oral chlorambucil at 0·5 mg/kg bodyweight on days 1 and 15 of each cycle for 12 cycles combined with the same obinutuzumab regimen). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. Patient enrolment is complete, and the study is registered with ClinicalTrails.gov, NCT02242942. FINDINGS: Between Aug 7, 2015, and Aug 4, 2016, 432 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either venetoclax plus obinutuzumab (n=216) or chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (n=216). All patients had been off treatment for at least 24 months at data collection. At a median follow-up of 39·6 months (IQR 36·8-43·0), patients given venetoclax plus obinutuzumab had a significantly longer progression-free survival than did patients given chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab (HR 0·31, 95% CI 0·22-0·44; p<0·0001). Median progression-free survival was not reached (95% CI not estimable to not estimable) in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group vs 35·6 months (33·7-40·7) in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse event in both groups was neutropenia (112 [53%] of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group versus 102 [48%] of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group). Serious adverse events occurred in 115 (54%) of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group and 95 (44%) of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group. Venetoclax or chlorambucil treatment-related deaths were reported in one (1%) of 212 patients in the venetoclax plus obinutuzumab group (n=1 sepsis) and two (1%) of 214 patients in the chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab group (n=1 septic shock, n=1 metastatic skin squamous carcinoma). INTERPRETATION: 2 years after treatment cessation, venetoclax plus obinutuzumab continues to significantly improve progression-survival compared with chlorambucil plus obinutuzumab, thereby providing a limited duration treatment option for patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche and AbbVie.

How to manage lymphoid malignancies during novel 2019 coronavirus (CoVid-19) outbreak: a Brazilian task force recommendation

ABSTRACT: The novel Coronavirus (CoVid-19) outbreak is now consider a world pandemic, affecting more than 1,300,000 people worldwide. Cancer patients are in risk for severe disease, including a higher risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for invasive ventilation or death. Management of patients with lymphoid malignancies can be challenging during the outbreak, due to need of multiple hospital visits and admissions, immunosuppression and need for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and stem cell transplantation. In this article, we will focus on the practical management of patients with lymphoid malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on minimizing the risk for patients.

Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil and obinutuzmab for treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (ELEVATE TN): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Acalabrutinib is a selective, covalent Bruton tyrosine-kinase inhibitor with activity in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compare the efficacy of acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab against chlorambucil with obinutuzumab in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. METHODS: ELEVATE TN is a global, phase 3, multicentre, open-label study in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia done at 142 academic and community hospitals in 18 countries. Eligible patients had untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and were aged 65 years or older, or older than 18 years and younger than 65 years with creatinine clearance of 30-69 mL/min (calculated by use of the Cockcroft-Gault equation) or Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score greater than 6. Additional criteria included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less and adequate haematologic, hepatic, and renal function. Patients with significant cardiovascular disease were excluded, and concomitant treatment with warfarin or equivalent vitamin K antagonists was prohibited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally via an interactive voice or web response system to receive acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab, acalabrutinib monotherapy, or obinutuzumab and oral chlorambucil. Treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. To reduce infusion-related reactions, acalabrutinib was administered for one cycle before obinutuzumab administration. Oral acalabrutinib was administered (100 mg) twice a day until progressive disease or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. In the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 2 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 3-7. In the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 1 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 2-6. Oral chlorambucil was given (0·5 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of each cycle, for six cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival between the two combination-therapy groups, assessed by independent review committee. Crossover to acalabrutinib was allowed in patients who progressed on obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. Enrolment for this trial is complete, and the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02475681. FINDINGS: Between Sept 14, 2015, and Feb 8, 2017, we recruited 675 patients for assessment. 140 patients did not meet eligibility criteria, and 535 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 177 patients were assigned to receive obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. At median follow-up of 28·3 months (IQR 25·6-33·1), median progression-free survival was longer with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab and acalabrutinib monotherapy, compared with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (median not reached with acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, hazard ratio [HR] 0·1; 95% CI 0·06-0·17, p<0·0001; and not reached with acalabrutinib monotherapy vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, 0·20; 0·13-0·3, p<0·0001). Estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 93% with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (95% CI 87-96%), 87% with acalabrutinib monotherapy (81-92%), and 47% with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (39-55%). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event across groups was neutropenia (53 [30%] of 178 patients in the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, 17 [9%] of 179 patients in the acalabrutinib group, and 70 [41%] of 169 patients in the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group). All-grade infusion reactions were less frequent with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (24 [13%] of 178 patients) than obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (67 [40%] of 169 patients). Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 37 (21%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 25 (14%) patients given acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 14 (8%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Deaths occurred in eight (4%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 12 (7%) patients given acalabrutinib, and 15 (9%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. INTERPRETATION: Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab significantly improved progression-free survival over obinutuzumab-chlorambucil chemoimmunotherapy, providing a chemotherapy-free treatment option with an acceptable side-effect profile that was consistent with previous studies. These data support the use of acalabrutinib in combination with obinutuzumab or alone as a new treatment option for patients with treatment-naive symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. FUNDING: Acerta Pharma, a member of the AstraZeneca Group, and R35 CA198183 (to JCB).

How to manage lymphoid malignancies during novel 2019 coronavirus (CoVid-19) outbreak: a Brazilian task force recommendation.

The novel Coronavirus (CoVid-19) outbreak is now consider a world pandemic, affecting more than 1,300,000 people worldwide. Cancer patients are in risk for severe disease, including a higher risk of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, need for invasive ventilation or death. Management of patients with lymphoid malignancies can be challenging during the outbreak, due to need of multiple hospital visits and admissions, immunosuppression and need for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and stem cell transplantation. In this article, we will focus on the practical management of patients with lymphoid malignancies during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on minimizing the risk for patients.