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.

Rapid Efficacy of Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin in Refractory AML Patients with Pulmonary and Kidney Failure.

OBJECTIVES: To the best of our knowledge, data from Gemtuzumab ozogamicin in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) patients with failure of organ functions and poor performance status are extremely lacking. Moreover, the fast recovery from organ failure, after Gemtuzumab ozogamicin administration, has never been reported. This study aimed to demonstrate the efficacy and rapid response of Gemtuzumab ozogamicin in refractory acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with pulmonary and kidney failure and poor performance status. Three refractory AML patients, with organ dysfunction, are described. One patient was pre-treated with intensive chemotherapy, and two other patients progressed during Azacitidine treatment. Two patients had respiratory failure grade 2 and one patient suffered from acute kidney insufficiency. Two patients were highly febrile with an elevated С-Reactive Protein (CRP) level. The WHO performance status of three was measured in all patients. Gemtuzumab ozogamicin administration was performed in three patients, followed by a further switch to Gemtuzumab ozogamicin + Azacitidine or "7+3" treatment. RESULTS: Gemtuzumab ozogamicin administration resulted in abrupt fever cessation in two febrile patients simultaneously with a rapid decrease in CRP level and fast resolution of respiratory failure. Recovery of kidney function was noticed rapidly in patients with renal insufficiency. The WHO performance status was elevated in all three patients. No adverse grade II-III effects were noticed. Further treatment made two patients eligible for intensive chemotherapy, one patient underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation, and the patient with kidney failure obtained complete remission. CONCLUSIONS: Gemtuzumab ozogamicin therapy appeared to be safe and highly efficacious in relapsed/refractory AML patients with organ dysfunction, like pulmonary or renal failure and poor performance status, and may contribute to rapid recovery from organ failures.

Prospective subgroup analyses of the randomized MCL-002 (SPRINT) study: lenalidomide versus investigator's choice in relapsed or refractory mantle cell lymphoma.

In the mantle cell lymphoma (MCL)-002 study, lenalidomide demonstrated significantly improved median progression-free survival (PFS) compared with investigator's choice (IC) in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL. Here we present the long-term follow-up data and results of preplanned subgroup exploratory analyses from MCL-002 to evaluate the potential impact of demographic factors, baseline clinical characteristics and prior therapies on PFS. In MCL-002, patients with relapsed/refractory MCL were randomized 2:1 to receive lenalidomide (25 mg/day orally on days 1-21; 28-day cycles) or single-agent IC therapy (rituximab, gemcitabine, fludarabine, chlorambucil or cytarabine). The intent-to-treat population comprised 254 patients (lenalidomide, n = 170; IC, n = 84). Subgroup analyses of PFS favoured lenalidomide over IC across most characteristics, including risk factors, such as high MCL International Prognostic Index score, age ≥65 years, high lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), stage III/IV disease, high tumour burden, and refractoriness to last prior therapy. By multivariate Cox regression analysis, factors associated with significantly longer PFS (other than lenalidomide treatment) included normal LDH levels (P < 0·001), nonbulky disease (P = 0·045), <3 prior antilymphoma treatments (P = 0·005), and ≥6 months since last prior treatment (P = 0·032). Overall, lenalidomide improved PFS versus single-agent IC therapy in patients with relapsed/refractory MCL, irrespective of many demographic factors, disease characteristics and prior treatment history.

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.

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.).

VMP (Bortezomib, Melphalan, and Prednisone) is active and well tolerated in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma with moderately impaired renal function, and results in reversal of renal impairment: cohort analysis of the phase III VISTA study.

PURPOSE To assess bortezomib plus melphalan and prednisone (VMP) and melphalan and prednisone (MP) in previously untreated patients with multiple myeloma (MM) with renal impairment enrolled on the phase III VISTA study, and to evaluate renal impairment reversibility. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received nine 6-week cycles of VMP (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), melphalan 9 mg/m(2), prednisone 60 mg/m(2)) or MP. Patients with serum creatinine higher than 2 mg/dL were excluded. Results In the VMP/MP arms, 6%/4%, 27%/30%, and 67%/66% of patients had baseline glomerular filtration rate (GFR) of < or = 30, 31 to 50, and higher than 50 mL/min, respectively. Response rates were higher and time to progression (TTP) and overall survival (OS) longer with VMP versus MP across renal cohorts. Response rates with VMP and TTP in both arms did not appear significantly different between patients with GFR < or = 50 or higher than 50 mL/min; OS appeared somewhat longer in patients with normal renal function in both arms. Renal impairment reversal (baseline GFR < 50 improving to > 60 mL/min) was seen in 49 (44%) of 111 patients receiving VMP versus 40 (34%) of 116 patients receiving MP. By multivariate analysis, younger age (< 75 years; P = .006) and less severe impairment (GFR > or = 30 mL/min; P = .027) were associated with higher reversal rates. In addition, treatment with VMP approached significance (P = .07). In both arms, rates of grade 4 and 5 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs appeared higher in patients with renal impairment; with VMP, rates of discontinuations/bortezomib dose reductions due to AEs did not appear affected. CONCLUSION VMP is a feasible, active, and well-tolerated treatment option for previously untreated patients with MM with moderate renal impairment, resulting in 44% renal impairment reversal.

A randomized phase 3 study of tipifarnib compared with best supportive care, including hydroxyurea, in the treatment of newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia in patients 70 years or older.

This phase 3, multicenter, open-label study evaluated the efficacy and safety of tipifarnib compared with best supportive care (BSC), including hydroxyurea, as first-line therapy in elderly patients (>or=70 years) with newly diagnosed, de novo, or secondary acute myeloid leukemia. A total of 457 patients were enrolled with 24% 80 years of age or older. Tipifarnib 600 mg orally twice a day was administered for the first 21 consecutive days, in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The median survival was 107 days for the tipifarnib arm and 109 days for the BSC arm. The hazard ratio (tipifarnib vs BSC) for overall survival was 1.02 (P value by stratified log-rank test, .843). The complete response rate for tipifarnib in this study (8%) was lower than that observed previously, but with a similar median duration of 8 months. The most frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were cytopenias in both arms, slightly more infections (39% vs 33%), and febrile neutropenia (16% vs 10%) seen in the tipifarnib arm. The results of this randomized study showed that tipifarnib treatment did not result in an increased survival compared with BSC, including hydroxyurea. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT00093990.