Fixed-duration ibrutinib-venetoclax versus chlorambucil-obinutuzumab in previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (GLOW): 4-year follow-up from a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: In the GLOW study, fixed-duration ibrutinib-venetoclax showed superior progression-free survival versus chlorambucil-obinutuzumab in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who were older or had comorbidities, or both, at a median follow up of 27·7 months. In this Article, we report updated outcomes from GLOW after a 46-month median follow-up. METHODS: GLOW was a randomised, multicentre, phase 3 study done at 67 hospital centres across 14 countries. Patients aged 65 years and older or 18-64 years with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and a cumulative illness rating scale score of more than 6 or creatinine clearance less than 70 mL/min, or both, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less were randomly assigned (1:1) via an interactive web system with permuted blocks (block size of four) and stratified by IGHV mutational status and the presence of del11q aberration to the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (three cycles of ibrutinib lead-in [420 mg/day, orally], followed by 12 cycles of ibrutinib plus venetoclax [400 mg/day, orally, including a 5-week dose ramp-up]) or the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group (six cycles of chlorambucil [0·5 mg/kg, orally, on days 1 and 15 of each cycle], and obinutuzumab [1000 mg, intravenously, on days 1 (or 100 mg on day 1 and 900 mg on day 2), 8, and 15 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycles 2-6]). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population, assessed by an independent review committee. The safety population included all randomised patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03462719) and the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2017-004699-77). FINDINGS: Between May 4, 2018, and April 5, 2019, 211 patients (122 [58%] were male and 89 [42%] were female) were randomly assigned to receive ibrutinib-venetoclax (n=106) or chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (n=105). At a median of 46 months (IQR 43-47) of follow-up, progression-free survival remained superior for the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (hazard ratio 0·214 [95% CI 0·138-0·334]; p<0·0001); 42-month progression-free survival rates were 74·6% (95% CI 65·0-82·0) for ibrutinib-venetoclax and 24·8% (16·5-34·1) for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab. Following the primary analysis, one patient in the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group had a serious adverse event of myelodysplastic syndrome. Treatment-related deaths were reported in one patient receiving ibrutinib-venetoclax (cardiac failure, pneumonia, and sinus node dysfunction) and in one patient receiving chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (pneumonia). There were 15 deaths in the ibrutinib-venetoclax group (of which three were due to post-treatment infections) and 30 deaths in the chlorambucil-obinutuzumab group (of which 10 were due to post-treatment infections). INTERPRETATION: After 4 years of follow-up, ibrutinib-venetoclax continues to significantly prolong progression-free survival (vs chemoimmunotherapy) in patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia, supporting its use as a first-line option. FUNDING: Janssen Research & Development and Pharmacyclics.

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.

Lenalidomide versus investigator's choice in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma (MCL-002; SPRINT): a phase 2, randomised, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Lenalidomide, an immunomodulatory drug with antineoplastic and antiproliferative effects, showed activity in many single-group studies in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma. The aim of this randomised study was to examine the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide versus best investigator's choice of single-agent therapy in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma. METHODS: The MCL-002 (SPRINT) study was a randomised, phase 2 study of patients with mantle cell lymphoma aged 18 years or older at 67 clinics and academic centres in 12 countries who relapsed one to three times, had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, at least one measurable lesion to be eligible, and who were ineligible for intensive chemotherpy or stem-cell transplantation. Using a centralised interactive voice response system, we randomly assigned (2:1) patients in a permuted block size of six to receive lenalidomide (25 mg orally on days 1-21 every 28 days) until progressive disease or intolerability, or single-agent investigator's choice of either rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil, or cytarabine. Randomisation was stratified by time from diagnosis, time from last anti-lymphoma therapy, and previous stem-cell transplantation. Individual treatment assignment between lenalidomide and investigator's choice was open label, but investigators had to register their choice of comparator drug before randomly assigning a patient. Patients who progressed on investigator's choice could cross over to lenalidomide treatment. We present the prespecified primary analysis results in the intention-to-treat population for the primary endpoint of progression-free survival, defined as the time from randomisation to progressive disease or death, whichever occurred first. Patient enrolment is complete, although treatment and collection of additional time-to-event data are ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00875667. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2009, and March 7, 2013, we enrolled 254 patients in the intention-to-treat population (170 [67%] were randomly assigned to receive lenalidomide, 84 [33%] to receive investigator's choice monotherapy). Patients had a median age of 68·5 years and received a median of two previous regimens. With a median follow-up of 15·9 months (IQR 7·6-31·7), lenalidomide significantly improved progression-free survival compared with investigator's choice (median 8·7 months [95% CI 5·5-12·1] vs 5·2 months [95% CI 3·7-6·9]) with a hazard ratio of 0·61 (95% CI 0·44-0·84; p=0·004). In the 167 patients in the lenalidomide group and 83 patients in the investigator's choice group who received at least one dose of treatment the most common grade 3-4 adverse events included neutropenia (73 [44%] of 167 vs 28 [34%] of 83) without increased risk of infection, thrombocytopenia (30 [18%] vs 23 [28%]), leucopenia (13 [8%] vs nine [11%]), and anaemia (14 [8%] vs six [7%]). INTERPRETATION: Patients with relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma ineligible for intensive chemotherapy or stem-cell transplantation have longer progression-free survival, with a manageable safety profile when treated with lenalidomide compared with monotherapy investigator's choice options. FUNDING: Celgene Corporation.

Long-term outcomes of third-line therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia: A real-life experience.

Introduction: Tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy has greatly improved the prognosis of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), improving the survival expectancy of patients with chronic phase (CP) CML to that of the general population. However, despite these advances, nearly 50% of patients with CP CML experience failure to respond to frontline therapy, and most fail to respond to the subsequent second-line TKI. Treatment guidelines for patients failing second-line therapy are lacking. This study aimed to determine the efficacy of TKIs as third-line therapy in a "real-world" clinical practice setting and identify factors favorably influencing the long-term outcomes of therapy. Methods: We have retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 100 patients with CP CML. Results: The median age of the patients was 51 (range, 21-88) years, and 36% of the patients were men. The median duration of the third-line TKI therapy was 22 (range, 1- 147) months. Overall, the rate of achieving complete cytogenetic response (CCyR) was 35%. Among the four patient groups with different levels of responses at baseline, the best results were achieved in the groups with any CyR at the baseline of third-line therapy. Thus, СCyR was reached in all 15 and 8/ 16 (50%) patients with partial cytogenetic response (PCyR) or minimal or minor CyR (mmCyR), respectively, whereas CCyR was detected only in 12/69 (17%) patients without any CyR at baseline (p < 0.001). Univariate regression analysis revealed that the factors negatively associated with CCyR achievement in thirdline TKI therapy were the absence of any CyR on first- or second-line TKI therapy (p < 0.001), absence of CHR prior to third-line TKI (p = 0.003), and absence of any CyR prior to third-line TKI (p < 0.001). During the median observation time from treatment initiation to the last visit [56 (4-180) months], 27% of cases progressed into accelerated phase or blast phase CML, and 32% of patients died. Discussion: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly higher in patients with CCyR on third-line than in the group without CCyR on third-line therapy. At the last visit, third-line TKI therapy was ongoing in 18% of patients, with a median time of treatment exposure of 58 (range, 6-140) months; 83% of these patients had stable and durable CCyR, suggesting that patients without CHR at baseline and without CCyR at least by 12 months on third-line TKI should be candidates for allogeneic stem cell transplantation, third-generation TKIs, or experimental therapies.

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.

Impact of Minimal Residual Disease on Progression-Free Survival Outcomes After Fixed-Duration Ibrutinib-Venetoclax Versus Chlorambucil-Obinutuzumab in the GLOW Study.

PURPOSE: In GLOW, fixed-duration ibrutinib + venetoclax showed superior progression-free survival (PFS) versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab in older/comorbid patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The current analysis describes minimal residual disease (MRD) kinetics and any potential predictive value for PFS, as it has not yet been evaluated for ibrutinib + venetoclax treatment. METHODS: Undetectable MRD (uMRD) was assessed by next-generation sequencing at <1 CLL cell per 10,000 (<10-4) and <1 CLL cell per 100,000 (<10-5) leukocytes. PFS was analyzed by MRD status at 3 months after treatment (EOT+3). RESULTS: Ibrutinib + venetoclax achieved deeper uMRD (<10-5) rates in bone marrow (BM) and peripheral blood (PB), respectively, in 40.6% and 43.4% of patients at EOT+3 versus 7.6% and 18.1% of patients receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. Of these patients, uMRD (<10-5) in PB was sustained during the first year post-treatment (EOT+12) in 80.4% of patients receiving ibrutinib + venetoclax and 26.3% receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. Patients with detectable MRD (dMRD; ≥10-4) in PB at EOT+3 were more likely to sustain MRD levels through EOT+12 with ibrutinib + venetoclax versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. PFS rates at EOT+12 were high among patients treated with ibrutinib + venetoclax regardless of MRD status at EOT+3: 96.3% and 93.3% in patients with uMRD (<10-4) and dMRD (≥10-4) in BM, respectively, versus 83.3% and 58.7% for patients receiving chlorambucil + obinutuzumab. PFS rates at EOT+12 also remained high in patients with unmutated immunoglobulin heavy-chain variable region (IGHV) receiving ibrutinib + venetoclax, independent of MRD status in BM. CONCLUSION: Molecular and clinical relapses were less frequent during the first year post-treatment with ibrutinib + venetoclax versus chlorambucil + obinutuzumab regardless of MRD status at EOT+3 and IGHV status. Even for patients not achieving uMRD (<10-4), PFS rates remained high with ibrutinib + venetoclax; this is a novel finding and requires additional follow-up to confirm its persistence over time.

Fixed-Duration Ibrutinib-Venetoclax in Patients with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia and Comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: GLOW is a phase 3 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of ibrutinib-venetoclax in older patients and/or those with comorbidities with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). METHODS: We randomly assigned (1:1) patients 65 years of age or older or those 18 to 64 years of age who also had a Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) score greater than 6 (CIRS scores range from 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating more impaired function of organ systems) or creatinine clearance of less than 70 ml/min, to ibrutinib-venetoclax (3 cycles ibrutinib lead-in, then 12 cycles ibrutinib-venetoclax) or chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (6 cycles). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) assessed by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included undetectable minimal residual disease (uMRD), response rates, and safety. RESULTS: This study enrolled 211 patients, with 106 randomly assigned to ibrutinib-venetoclax and 105 to chlorambucil-obinutuzumab. With a median follow-up of 27.7 months, there were 22 PFS events for ibrutinib-venetoclax and 67 events for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab. PFS was significantly longer for ibrutinib-venetoclax than for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.216; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.131 to 0.357; P<0.001). The improvement in PFS with ibrutinib-venetoclax was consistent across predefined subgroups, including patients 65 years of age or older or with a CIRS score greater than 6. The best uMRD rate in bone marrow by next-generation sequencing was significantly higher for ibrutinib-venetoclax (55.7%) than for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (21.0%; P<0.001). The proportion of patients with sustained uMRD in peripheral blood from 3 to 12 months after end of treatment was 84.5% for ibrutinib-venetoclax and 29.3% for chlorambucil-obinutuzumab. Four patients treated with ibrutinib-venetoclax required subsequent therapy compared with 27 patients receiving chlorambucil-obinutuzumab (hazard ratio, 0.143; 95% CI, 0.050 to 0.410). Adverse events grade 3 or greater occurred for 80 (75.5%) and 73 (69.5%) patients receiving ibrutinib-venetoclax and chlorambucil-obinutuzumab, respectively, with neutropenia being most common in both arms (37 [34.9%] and 52 [49.5%]). There were 11 (10.4%) and 12 (11.4%) all-cause deaths in the ibrutinib-venetoclax and chlorambucil-obinutuzumab arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ibrutinib-venetoclax, an all-oral, once-daily, fixed-duration combination, demonstrated superior PFS and deeper and better sustained responses versus chlorambucil-obinutuzumab as first-line CLL treatment in older patients and/or those with comorbidities. (Funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC, and Pharmacyclics; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03462719.)