Ixazomib plus daratumumab and dexamethasone: Final analysis of a phase 2 study among patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

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

BTK Inhibitors in the Frontline Management of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia.

The discovery of MYD88 (L265P) mutation led to investigating BTK inhibitors in Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM). Ibrutinib, the first-in-class agent, was approved based on a phase II trial in relapsed/refractory patients. In the phase III iNNOVATE study, the combination of rituximab and ibrutinib was compared with rituximab and placebo in treatment-naïve and relapsed/refractory patients. Second-generation BTK inhibitor, zanubrutinib, was compared with Ibrutinib in MYD88-mutated WM patients in the phase III ASPEN trial, whereas acalabrutinib was investigated in a phase II trial. Here, we discuss the role of BTK inhibitors in treatment-naïve patients with WM based on currently available evidence.

Report of consensus panel 1 from the 11th International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia on management of symptomatic, treatment-naïve patients.

Consensus Panel 1 (CP1) of the 11th International Workshop on Waldenstrom's Macroglobulinemia (IWWM-11) was tasked with updating guidelines for the management of symptomatic, treatment-naïve patients with WM. The panel reiterated that watchful waiting remains the gold standard for asymptomatic patients without critically elevated IgM or compromised hematopoietic function. For first-line treatment, chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) regimens such as dexamethasone, cyclophosphamide, rituximab (DRC), or bendamustine, rituximab (Benda-R) continue to play a central role in managing WM, as they are effective, of fixed duration, generally well-tolerated, and affordable. Covalent BTK inhibitors (cBTKi) offer a continuous, generally well-tolerated alternative for the primary treatment of WM patients, particularly those unsuitable for CIT. In a Phase III randomized trial updated at IWWM-11, the second-generation cBTKi, zanubrutinib, was less toxic than ibrutinib and induced deeper remissions, thus categorizing zanubrutinib as a suitable treatment option in WM. While the overall findings of a prospective, randomized trial updated at IWWM-11 did not show superiority of fixed duration rituximab maintenance over observation following attainment of a major response to Benda-R induction, a subset analysis showed benefit in patients >65 years and those with a high IPPSWM score. Whenever possible, the mutational status of MYD88 and CXCR4 should be determined before treatment initiation, as alterations in these 2 genes predict sensitivity towards cBTKi activity. Treatment approaches for WM-associated cryoglobulins, cold agglutinins, AL amyloidosis, Bing-Neel syndrome (BNS), peripheral neuropathy, and hyperviscosity syndrome follow the common principle of reducing tumor and abnormal protein burden rapidly and deeply to improve symptoms. In BNS, ibrutinib can be highly active and produce durable responses. In contrast, cBTKi are not recommended for treating AL amyloidosis. The panel emphasized that continuous improvement of treatment options for symptomatic, treatment-naïve WM patients critically depends on the participation of patients in clinical trials, whenever possible.

Plain Language Summary of the iNNOVATE study: ibrutinib plus rituximab is well-tolerated and effective in people with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This article provides a short summary of 5-year results from the iNNOVATE trial. The original paper was published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology in October 2021. People with Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM) were randomly divided into two groups of 75 people each. One group received a combination treatment composed of two drugs, ibrutinib plus rituximab, and the other group took placebo ("sugar pill") plus rituximab. Ibrutinib (also known by the brand name Imbruvica®) is a drug that reduces cancer cells' ability to multiply and survive. Ibrutinib is an FDA-approved drug for the treatment of WM. Rituximab is a drug that helps the immune system find and kill cancer cells. Participants in the trial were treated and their health monitored for up to 5 years (63 months). WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: During the 5 years of monitoring, more people who took ibrutinib plus rituximab experienced an improvement in their disease and lived longer without their disease getting worse compared to those who took placebo plus rituximab. Side effects from ibrutinib and rituximab were manageable and generally decreased over time. Participants in both study groups reported improvements in quality of life, but those who took ibrutinib plus rituximab reported significantly greater improvement in their quality of life (as measured by FACT-An score) compared to those who took placebo plus rituximab. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: These results show that ibrutinib plus rituximab is better than rituximab alone in people with WM and that ibrutinib plus rituximab is safe and effective in the long term. This information confirms the role of ibrutinib plus rituximab as a standard of care for WM. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT02165397 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Allogeneic BCMA-targeting CAR T cells in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: phase 1 UNIVERSAL trial interim results.

ALLO-715 is a first-in-class, allogeneic, anti-BCMA CAR T cell therapy engineered to abrogate graft-versus-host disease and minimize CAR T rejection. We evaluated escalating doses of ALLO-715 after lymphodepletion with an anti-CD52 antibody (ALLO-647)-containing regimen in 43 patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma as part A of the ongoing first-in-human phase 1 UNIVERSAL trial. Primary objectives included determination of the safety and tolerability of ALLO-715 and the safety profile of the ALLO-647-containing lymphodepletion regimen. Key secondary endpoints were response rate and duration of response. Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 38 (88.0%) of patients. Cytokine release syndrome was observed in 24 patients (55.8%), with 1 grade ≥3 event (2.3%) and neurotoxicity in 6 patients (14%), with no grade ≥3 events. Infections occurred in 23 patients (53.5%), with 10 (23.3%) of grade ≥3. Overall, 24 patients (55.8%) had a response. Among patients treated with 320 × 106 CAR+ T cells and a fludarabine-, cyclophosphamide- and ALLO-647-based lymphodepletion regimen (n = 24), 17 (70.8%) had a response including 11 (45.8%) with very good partial response or better and 6 (25%) with a complete response/stringent complete response. The median duration of response was 8.3 months. These initial results support the feasibility and safety of allogeneic CAR T cell therapy for myeloma.

Ibrutinib Plus Rituximab Versus Placebo Plus Rituximab for Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia: Final Analysis From the Randomized Phase III iNNOVATE Study.

PURPOSE: The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III iNNOVATE study showed sustained efficacy of ibrutinib-rituximab in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM). Here, we present the final analysis from iNNOVATE. METHODS: Patients had confirmed symptomatic WM, either previously untreated or previously treated; patients with prior rituximab had at least a minor response to their last rituximab-based regimen. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab (n = 75 per arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included response rate, time to next treatment, hemoglobin improvement, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 50 (range, 0.5-63) months, median (95% CI) PFS was not reached (57.7 months to not evaluable) with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 20.3 months (13.0 to 27.6) with placebo-rituximab (hazard ratio, 0.250; P < .0001). PFS benefit was regardless of prior treatment status, MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status, or key patient characteristics. Higher response rates (partial response or better) were observed with ibrutinib-rituximab (76% v 31% with placebo-rituximab; P < .0001) and were sustained over time. Median time to next treatment was not reached with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 18 months with placebo-rituximab. More patients receiving ibrutinib-rituximab versus placebo-rituximab had sustained hemoglobin improvement (77% v 43%; P < .0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. Ibrutinib-rituximab maintained a manageable safety profile; the prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events of clinical interest generally decreased over time. CONCLUSION: In the final analysis of iNNOVATE with a median follow-up of 50 months, ibrutinib-rituximab showed ongoing superiority across clinical outcomes in patients with WM regardless of MYD88 or CXCR4 mutation status, prior treatment, and key patient characteristics.

Single-Agent Ibrutinib for Rituximab-Refractory Waldenström Macroglobulinemia: Final Analysis of the Substudy of the Phase III InnovateTM Trial.

PURPOSE: The first report from the open-label substudy of the phase III iNNOVATE study (PCYC-1127; NCT02165397) demonstrated that single-agent ibrutinib was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with heavily pretreated, rituximab-refractory Waldenström macroglobulinemia. Results from the final analysis are now reported. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Ibrutinib 420 mg was administered once daily to patients (N = 31) who failed to achieve at least a minor response (MR) or who relapsed <12 months after their last rituximab-containing therapy. Endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall response rate (ORR; MR or better) per independent review committee, hemoglobin improvement, overall survival (OS), and safety; serum IgM was also assessed. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 58 months (range: 9-61), median PFS was 39 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 25-not evaluable]; 60-month PFS rate was 40%. In MYD88L265P/CXCR4WHIM and MYD88L265P/CXCR4WT subtypes, median PFS was 18 months and not reached, respectively. In all patients, ORR was 87%; responses deepened over time with major response (≥ partial response) rates increasing from 61% at 6 months to 77% at 60 months. Median OS was not reached. Seventeen of 21 patients (81%) with baseline hemoglobin ≤11.0 g/dL had sustained hemoglobin improvement. Improvements in serum IgM levels were sustained, reaching a maximum median change of -37 g/L at 54 months. Ibrutinib maintained a manageable safety profile, with no new safety signals identified. There were no events of major hemorrhage or atrial fibrillation. CONCLUSIONS: In the final analysis from iNNOVATE, single-agent ibrutinib continued to show sustained efficacy in patients with heavily pretreated, rituximab-refractory Waldenström macroglobulinemia.

A phase I/II study of the combination of panobinostat and carfilzomib in patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Final analysis of second dose-expansion cohort.

The maximum tolerated dose of the panobinostat and carfilzomib combination in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) was not reached in our previous dose-escalation study. We report additional dose levels in the phase I/II, single-arm, multicenter, standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation expansion-cohort study (NCT01496118). Patients with RRMM were treated with panobinostat 30 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2 (N = 3), or panobinostat 20 mg, carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2 (N = 33). Treatment cycles lasted 28 days; panobinostat: days 1, 3, 5, 15, 17, 19; carfilzomib: days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, 16. For dose level 6 (DL 6), median age was 63 years (range, 49-91 years), 60.6% were male, 42.4% were high risk. Patients received a median of two prior therapies (range 1-7); proteasome inhibitors (PI; 100%), immunomodulatory imide drugs (IMiD; 78.8%), and stem cell transplant (36.4%); 48.5%, 51.1%, and 24.2% were refractory to prior PI or prior IMiD treatment or both, respectively. Patients completed a median of seven (range 1-40) treatment cycles. Overall response rate (primary endpoint) of evaluable patients in the expansion cohort (N = 32): 84.4%; clinical benefit rate: 90.6%. With a median follow-up of 26.1 months (range, 0-72.5 months), median (95% CI) progression-free survival, time-to-progression and overall survival of patients was 10.3 (6.1, 13.9), 11.7 (5.6, 14.5), and 44.6 (20.8, N/A) months, respectively. Common adverse events (AEs) included thrombocytopenia (78.8%), nausea (63.6%), fatigue (63.6%), diarrhea (51.5%), and vomiting (51.5%). Seven patients had serious treatment-related AEs. There was one treatment-related death. In conclusion, panobinostat plus carfilzomib is an effective steroid-sparing regimen for RRMM.

A randomized phase 3 trial of zanubrutinib vs ibrutinib in symptomatic Waldenström macroglobulinemia: the ASPEN study.

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

Final analysis of a phase 1/2b study of ibrutinib combined with carfilzomib/dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) inevitably relapse on initial treatment regimens, and novel combination therapies are needed. Ibrutinib is a first-in-class, once-daily inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase, an enzyme implicated in growth and survival of MM cells. Preclinical data suggest supra-additivity or synergy between ibrutinib and proteasome inhibitors (PIs) against MM. This phase 1/2b study evaluated the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib plus the PI carfilzomib and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM). In this final analysis, we report results in patients who received the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D; ibrutinib 840 mg and carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 with dexamethasone), which was determined in phase 1. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR). Fifty-nine patients with RRMM received the RP2D (18 in phase 1 and 41 in phase 2b). These patients had received a median of three prior lines of therapy; 69% were refractory to bortezomib, and 90% were refractory to their last treatment. ORR in the RP2D population was 71% (stringent complete response and complete response: 3% each). Median duration of clinical benefit and median duration of response were both 6.5 months. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.4 months, and median overall survival (OS) was 35.9 months. High-risk patients had comparable ORR and median PFS (67% and 7.7 months, respectively) to non-high-risk patients, whose ORR was 73% and median PFS was 6.9 months, whereas median OS in high-risk patients was 13.9 months and not reached in non-high-risk patients. The most common grade ≥3 hematologic treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were anemia and thrombocytopenia (17% each); the most common grade ≥3 non-hematologic TEAE was hypertension (19%). In patients with RRMM treated with multiple previous lines of therapy, ibrutinib plus carfilzomib demonstrated anticancer activity within the expected efficacy range. No new safety signals were identified and the combination was well-tolerated.

Randomized Trial of Lenalidomide Versus Observation in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma.

PURPOSE: Observation is the current standard of care for smoldering multiple myeloma. We hypothesized that early intervention with lenalidomide could delay progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma. METHODS: We conducted a randomized trial that assessed the efficacy of single-agent lenalidomide compared with observation in patients with intermediate- or high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma. Lenalidomide was administered orally at a dose of 25 mg on days 1 to 21 of a 28-day cycle. The primary end point was progression-free survival, with disease progression requiring the development of end-organ damage attributable to multiple myeloma and biochemical progression. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-two patients were randomly assigned-92 patients to the lenalidomide arm and 90 to the observation arm. Median follow-up is 35 months. Response to therapy was observed in 50% (95% CI, 39% to 61%) of patients in the lenalidomide arm, with no responses in the observation arm. Progression-free survival was significantly longer with lenalidomide compared with observation (hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12 to 0.62; P = .002). One-, 2-, and 3-year progression-free survival was 98%, 93%, and 91% for the lenalidomide arm versus 89%, 76%, and 66% for the observation arm, respectively. Only six deaths have been reported, two in the lenalidomide arm versus four in the observation arm (hazard ratio for death, 0.46; 95% CI, 0.08 to 2.53). Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events occurred in 25 patients (28%) on lenalidomide. CONCLUSION: Early intervention with lenalidomide in smoldering multiple myeloma significantly delays progression to symptomatic multiple myeloma and the development of end-organ damage.

Combination trial of duvelisib (IPI-145) with rituximab or bendamustine/rituximab in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Duvelisib, a potent δ- and γ-PI3K inhibitor, is a potential therapeutic for hematologic malignancies. Rituximab and bendamustine have demonstrated activity in non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). Combining duvelisib with either rituximab alone or rituximab and bendamustine may improve response rates and remission durability. We conducted this Phase one study in relapsed/refractory NHL and CLL patients. During expansion, each arm enrolled to disease-specific cohorts to assess efficacy. Arm one received rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV weekly for two 4-week cycles plus duvelisib until progression/intolerance. Arm two received rituximab 375 mg/m2 IV Day one, bendamustine 90 mg/m2 IV (NHL patients) or 70 mg/m2 IV (CLL patients) Days one-two for six cycles, plus duvelisib until progression/intolerance. Duvelisib doses of 50 mg and 75 mg BID were tested during dose escalation. Forty-six patients (27 NHL, 19 CLL) were treated. The adverse events of the drug combinations were consistent with single agent toxicities. The most common AEs were neutropenia (47.7%), fatigue (41.3%), and rash (41.3%). A duvelisib expansion dose of 25 mg BID was chosen based on the monotherapy phase one study, IPI-145-02, which confirmed that dose for further clinical development. Overall response rate was 71.8%. Median progression-free survival was 13.7 months. Median overall survival has not been reached, but 30-month overall survival probability was 62%. Duvelisib combined with rituximab, or bendamustine and rituximab did not appear to increase toxicities beyond the known safety profile of the individual agents. Further study is needed to determine if these combinations improve efficacy.

Phase 3 Trial of Ibrutinib plus Rituximab in Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia.

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

Phase 1 trial of ibrutinib and carfilzomib combination therapy for relapsed or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

This phase 1, dose-finding study investigated ibrutinib and carfilzomib ± dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (≥2 lines of therapy including bortezomib and an immunomodulatory agent). Of 43 patients enrolled, 74% were refractory to bortezomib and 23% had high-risk cytogenetics. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. The recommended phase 2 dose was ibrutinib 840 mg and carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 with dexamethasone. The most common ≥ grade 3 (>10%) treatment-emergent adverse events were hypertension, anemia, pneumonia, fatigue, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia. Overall response rate was 67% (very good partial response, 21%; stringent complete response, 2%), with an additional 9% minimal response. Median progression-free survival was 7.2 months and was not inferior in refractory nor high-risk patients. Median overall survival was not reached. Ibrutinib plus carfilzomib demonstrated encouraging responses with a manageable safety profile in this advanced population.

Ibrutinib for patients with rituximab-refractory Waldenström's macroglobulinaemia (iNNOVATE): an open-label substudy of an international, multicentre, phase 3 trial.

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

Brentuximab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with CD30-positive haematologic malignancies and hepatic or renal impairment.

AIMS: Brentuximab vedotin, an antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), selectively delivers the microtubule-disrupting agent monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) into CD30-expressing cells. The pharmacokinetics of brentuximab vedotin have been characterized in patients with CD30-positive haematologic malignancies. The primary objective of this phase 1 open label evaluation was to assess the pharmacokinetics of brentuximab vedotin in patients with hepatic or renal impairment. METHODS: Systemic exposures were evaluated following intravenous administration of 1.2 mg kg(-1) brentuximab vedotin in patients with CD30-positive haematologic malignancies and hepatic (n = 7) or renal (n = 10) impairment and compared with those of unimpaired patients (n = 8) who received 1.2 mg kg(-1) brentuximab vedotin in another arm of the study. RESULTS: For any hepatic impairment, the ratios of geometric means (90% confidence interval) for AUC(0,∞) were 0.67 (0.48, 0.93) for ADC and 2.29 (1.27, 4.12) for MMAE. Mild or moderate renal impairment caused no apparent change in ADC or MMAE exposures. Severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance <30 ml min(-1) ; n = 3) decreased ADC exposures (0.71 [0.54, 0.94]) and increased MMAE exposures (1.90 [0.85, 4.21]). No consistent pattern of specific adverse events was evident, but analysis of the safety data was confounded by the patients' poor baseline conditions. Five patients died due to adverse events considered unrelated to brentuximab vedotin. All had substantial comorbidities and most had poor baseline performance status. CONCLUSIONS: Hepatic impairment and severe renal impairment may cause decreases in brentuximab vedotin ADC exposures and increases in MMAE exposures.

Active idiotypic vaccination versus control immunotherapy for follicular lymphoma.

PURPOSE: Idiotypes (Ids), the unique portions of tumor immunoglobulins, can serve as targets for passive and active immunotherapies for lymphoma. We performed a multicenter, randomized trial comparing a specific vaccine (MyVax), comprising Id chemically coupled to keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) plus granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) to a control immunotherapy with KLH plus GM-CSF. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with previously untreated advanced-stage follicular lymphoma (FL) received eight cycles of chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, vincristine, and prednisone. Those achieving sustained partial or complete remission (n=287 [44%]) were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 to receive one injection per month for 7 months of MyVax or control immunotherapy. Anti-Id antibody responses (humoral immune responses [IRs]) were measured before each immunization. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included IR and time to subsequent antilymphoma therapy. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 58 months, no significant difference was observed in either PFS or time to next therapy between the two arms. In the MyVax group (n=195), anti-Id IRs were observed in 41% of patients, with a median PFS of 40 months, significantly exceeding the median PFS observed in patients without such Id-induced IRs and in those receiving control immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: This trial failed to demonstrate clinical benefit of specific immunotherapy. The subset of vaccinated patients mounting specific anti-Id responses had superior outcomes. Whether this reflects a therapeutic benefit or is a marker for more favorable underlying prognosis requires further study.